Note to Readers:

Please Note: The editor of White Refugee blog is a member of the Ecology of Peace culture.

Summary of Ecology of Peace Problem Solving: The problems of poverty, unemployment, war, crime, violence, food shortages, food price increases, inflation, police brutality, political instability, loss of civil rights, vanishing species, garbage and pollution, urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, racism, sexism, Nazism, Islamism, feminism, Zionism etc; are the ecological overshoot consequences of humans living in accordance to a Masonic War is Peace international law social contract that provides humans the ‘right to breed and consume’ with total disregard for ecological carrying capacity limits.

Ecology of Peace factual reality: 1. Earth is not flat; 2. Resources are finite; 3. When humans breed or consume above ecological carrying capacity limits, it results in resource conflict; 4. If individuals, families, tribes, races, religions, and/or nations want to reduce class, racial and/or religious local, national and international resource war conflict; they should cooperate to implement an Ecology of Peace international law social contract that restricts all the worlds citizens to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits; to sustainably protect and conserve natural resources.

EoP v WiP NWO negotiations are documented at MILED Clerk Notice.

Monday, May 9, 2011

TRC Fraud Genocide Charges filed to ICC against: Mandela, Tutu, de Klerk, Nobel Committee, 88 SA media, New York Times, Telegraph & Algemene Dagblad







The Complainants hereby request the Office of Prosecutor (OTP): Luis Moreno – Ocampo, of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Hague to investigate the alleged Defendants and Accessories on charges of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, in terms of Art 5(1)(a) & (b), 6(c) and 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute.

The Complainants Request the ICC: Prosecutor’s Office to:

Initiate an investigation into the allegations that the respondents are to be held criminally culpable for their endorsement and concealment of TRC FRAUD, the consequences of which are genocide and crimes against humanity against white South Africans, and ethno-cultural legal and political persecution of Afrikaner/Boer and Radical Honesty cultures.

Complainants allege the Defendants cover up and censorship of the ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movements (i) Frantz Fanon/Black Consciousness (‘liberation by violence on the rotting corpse of the settlers’) (ii) Black Liberation Theology (‘violent elimination of ‘whiteness’); and (iii) Houari Boumediene/Black Power Breeding War (“The wombs of our women will give us victory”) inspired TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION FRAUD (“TRC FRAUD”) perpetrated against citizens of South Africa, and predominantly against white Afrikaner/Boer/Settlers; is committed in the context of endorsing the ANC’s institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by Africans over other racial groups, particularly Boer/Afrikaners and committed with the intention of maintaining the ANC regime.

Charges Filed Against:

  • Archbishop Desmond Tutu
  • Reverend Alex Boraine
  • Former President Nelson Mandela
  • Nelson Mandela Foundation
  • Former President F.W. de Klerk
  • F.W. de Klerk Foundation
  • Norwegian Nobel Committee
  • Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo
  • Dep. Ch. Justice Dikgang Moseneke
  • Justice Edwin Cameron
  • Justice Johan Froneman
  • Justice Chris Jafta
  • Justice Sisi Khampepe
  • Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng
  • Justice Bess Nkabinde
  • Justice Johann van der Westhuizen
  • Justice Zak Yacoob
  • SA National Editors Forum (SANEF)
  • Mondli Makhanya (SANEF Chair)
  • SA Press Ombudsman: Joe Thloloe
  • SA Press Appeals Panel: Judge Ralph Zulman
  • SA Dep. Press Ombudsman: Johan Retief
  • SA Press Association (SAPA)
  • Mark van der Velden (SAPA Editor)
  • Business Day
  • Peter Bruce (Bus. Day Editor)
  • Business Report
  • Jabulani Sikhakane (Bus. Report Editor)
  • Cape Argus
  • Chris Witfield (Cape Argus Editor)
  • Cape Times
  • Alide Dasnois (Cape Times Editor)
  • City Press
  • Ferial Haffajee (City Press Editor)
  • The Citizen
  • Martin Williams (Citizen Editor)
  • Daily Dispatch
  • Andrew Trench (Daily Dispatch Editor)
  • Daily Maverick
  • Brkic Branko (Daily Maverick Editor)
  • Daily News
  • Alan Dunn (Daily News Editor)
  • East Coast Radio (ECR)
  • Diane MacPherson (ECR Editor)
  • Eyetwitness News
  • Katy Katapodis (Eyewitness News Editor)
  • Independent Online (IOL)
  • Adrian Ephram (IOL Editor)
  • Mail and Guardian
  • Nic Dawes (M&G Editor)
  • The Mercury
  • Angela Quintal (Mercury Editor)
  • News 24
  • Jannie Momberg (News 24 Editor)
  • Pretoria News
  • Zingisa Mkhuma (Pretoria News Editor)
  • SA Star
  • Moegsien Williams (SA Star Editor)
  • Sunday Independent
  • Makhudu Sefara (Sun. Ind. Editor)
  • Sunday Tribune
  • Philani Mgwaba(Sun Tribune Editor)
  • Sunday Times/Times Live
  • Ray Hartley (Sun Times Editor)
  • 3rd Degree
  • Debora Patta (3rd Degree Exec. Prod.)
  • Beeld
  • Tim du Plessis (Beeld Editor)
  • Daily Sun
  • Themba Khumalo (Daily Sun Editor)
  • Die Burger
  • Henry Jeffery (Burger Editor)
  • Bun Booysen (Burger Editor)
  • E-News
  • Patrick Conroy (Head of News)
  • Financial Mail
  • Barney Mthombothi (Fin. Mail Editor)
  • Finweek
  • Colleen Naude (Finweek Editor)
  • The George Herald
  • Mandi Botha (George Herald Editor)
  • Independent on Saturday
  • Trevor Bruce (Ind. on Sat. Editor)
  • 702 Radio
  • Pheladi Gwangwa (702 Radio Prod.)
  • Rapport
  • Lisa Albrecht (Rapport Editor)
  • The Saturday Star
  • Brendan Seery (Sat. Star Editor)
  • Sowetan
  • Bongani Keswa (Sowetan Editor)
  • The Herald
  • Jeremy McCabe (Herald Editor)
  • Volksblad
  • Ainsley Moos (Volksblad Editor)
  • Rod Amner (Rhodes Journo Lecturer)
  • Robert Brand (Rhodes Journo Prof.)
  • Guy Berger (Rhodes Journo Prof.)
  • Harry Dugmore (Rhodes Journo Prof.)
  • Harold Gess (Rhodes Journo Prof.)
  • Jane Duncan (Rhodes Journo Prof.)
  • Anton Harber (Wits Journo Prof.)
  • Franz Kruger (Wits Journo Prof.)
  • William Bird, Media Monitoring Africa
  • Projourn Steering Committee
  • New York Times
  • Celia Dugger (NYT)
  • Arthur Brisbane (NYT)
  • The Daily Telegraph
  • Ainslinn Laing (DT)
  • Tony Gallagher (DT)
  • Algemene Dagblad
  • Casper Naber (AD)






INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, THE HAGUE

COMPLAINT ITO ART.15 OF ROME STATUTE


TO: International Criminal Court: Office of the Prosecutor
Information and Evidence Unit
Office of the Prosecutor
Post Office Box 19519
2500 CM The Hague
The Netherlands
Email: otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int ,
Facsimile: +31 70 515 8555.

FROM: Lara Johnstone, Member of Radical Honesty culture & religion

RE: Communication and Complaint under Art.15 of the Rome Statute: Charges of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity, in terms of Art 5(1)(a) & (b), 6(c) and 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute.



INTRODUCTION:

[1] Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; I, Lara Johnstone (married/separated: Johnson), member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion, hereby request the Office of Prosecutor (OTP): Luis Moreno – Ocampo, of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Hague to investigate the alleged Defendants violations of Article 5(1)(a) Crime of Genocide and (b) Crimes against Humanity; as defined by Article 6 (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its destruction in whole or in part; and Article 7(1)(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. Certain parties actions were/are also committed with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of SA’s population; committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.

[2] The respondents are alleged to be criminally culpable for their endorsement and concealment of “TRC FRAUD”, the consequences of which are genocide and crimes against humanity against white South Africans, and ethno-cultural legal and political persecution of Afrikaner/Boer and Radical Honesty cultures.


OVERVIEW: OBSTRUCTION & CENSORSHIP OF TRC FRAUD:

[3] The genocide and crimes against humanity evidence submitted to the ICC: Prosecutors Office, in complaints against: (i) the SA Government and (ii) African National Congress, and (iii) Julius Malema, by an anonymous farmer (F & F van der Walt Attorneys; OTP-CR-203/10) and the Verkenner Movement of SA on respectively June 2010 and 05 April 2011 is in the opinions of this Complainant a direct result of TRC FRAUD.

[4] Initially Radical Honesty SA believed the ANC TRC political, religious, academic and media elite’s TRC FRAUD to have been negligent; and consequently in good faith approached them to provide them the evidence of their TRC FRAUD, for their impartial professional enquiry.

[5] Their responses of obstruction of justice to deliberately and intentionally suppress, obstruct and censor the TRC FRAUD evidence from any impartial enquiry and from any public discourse, for its root cause problem solving resolution, have proved however that if their original TRC FRAUD conduct was negligent; their cover-up of their TRC FRAUD negligence is deliberate, intentional and malicious; with real life genocide and crimes against humanity consequences.


THE COMPLAINANT:

[6] I am the daughter of a former Kwa-Zulu Natal farmer (Farm: Gerizim near Utrecht). On 11 October 1997, I married African-American Demian Emile Johnson in Folsom Prison, California, where he has been serving a sentence of 15 to life since 1982 (separated, filed for amicable divorce). My original commitment to South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation process may be found in my Submission to ‘Register of Reconciliation’ and donation to Presidents Fund for Reparations to assist victims of gross violations of human rights dated 18 January 1999; which detailed my willingness to donate my entire Inheritance to facilitate sincere Truth and Forgiveness.

[7] I joined the Radical Honesty culture and religion in 1999, after reading Dr. Blanton’s book Radical Honesty: How To Transform Your Life By Telling the Truth, going to one of his workshops; and learning how to be specific about my anger, and to share it honourably face-to-face to the individual I was angry with; with the commitment of remaining in the conversation until sincere sensate forgiveness had occurred.

[8] I am the only member of the Radical Honesty culture and religion, in South Africa. The Radical Honesty culture and religion are founded upon the Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract: Being Specific About Anger and Forgiveness; as excerpted from: Practicing Radical Honesty. Radical Honesty is a powerful process by which people can make corrections in the minds distorted and only partly conscious map of the world. Our maps of the world are distorted by our repressed anger and resentment; the greater the amount of repressed anger and resentment, the greater the distortion. The key to individuality, integrity, individual freedom, and free societies, lies in providing people with the skills and capabilities to get over their anger, and experience sincere forgiveness. It is the way the statistics from Stanley Milgram’s experiments on blind obedience to authority get changed.

[9] Radical Honesty culture and religion was founded by Dr. Brad Blanton, who is: (1) President and CEO of Radical Honesty Enterprises Sparrowhawk Book Publishing and The Center for Radical Honesty, both dedicated to promoting honesty in the world; (2) former candidate for Congress in 2004 and 2006, on the platform of ‘Honesty in Politics’ ; (3) Pope of the Radical Honesty Futilitarian Church; i.e. “Dr. Truth” ; and (4) 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.

[10] In addition to Brad Blanton, Ph.D; founder of the Radical Honesty culture; I am also a former employee of (1) Ms. Peggy Noonan, former Speechwriter for President Reagan and G.W. Bush, Snr; at her home in New York City, NY; (2) HRH Princess Gloria Von Thurn & Taxis Family on their Private Yacht: S.Y. Aiglon; (3) Lord and Lady Glenapp, now Earl and Countess Inchcape, at their home in Swindon, Wiltshire. (PDF References)

[11] As a rule-of-law political activist, I endorse and have advocated for the rule-of-law for all, rich, poor, white, black, left and right, religious or atheist. I am separated (filed for divorce) from Demian Emile Johnson, who is, and has been, incarcerated in California Dept. of Corrections, for the entire duration of our marriage . In addition to Radical Honesty I have been involved in non-violent civil disobedience actions on behalf of my former husband, Greenpeace, Amnesty Int’l, Pacific Inst. for Criminal Justice, Jericho 98, Crack the CIA, The Disclosure Project, New Abolitionist, Justice for Timothy McVeigh, Alliance for Democracy, Boycott 2010 World Cup, Right of Return for African White Refugees, et al.

[12] I am 44 years old. With the help of an IUD, inserted at age 19, Common Sense and a love for children, I have never been pregnant, nor had an abortion; nor brought any unwanted children onto the planet; nor contributed to local, national or international overpopulation or resource wars; nor advocated on behalf of population or economic growth; or materialist consumerism.



GENOCIDE: OBSTRUCTION & CENSORSHIP OF TRC FRAUD:

[13] Radical Honesty alleges the Defendants cover up and censorship of the ANC and Anti-Apartheid Movements (i) Frantz Fanon/Black Consciousness (‘liberation by violence on the rotting corpse of the settlers’) (ii) Black Liberation Theology (‘violent elimination of ‘whiteness’); and (iii) Houari Boumediene/Black Power Breeding War (“The wombs of our women will give us victory”) inspired TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION FRAUD (“TRC FRAUD”) perpetrated against citizens of South Africa, and predominantly against white Afrikaner/Boer/Settlers; is committed in the context of endorsing the ANC’s institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by Africans over other racial groups, particularly Boer/Afrikaners and committed with the intention of maintaining the ANC regime.

[14] Radical Honesty’s TRC FRAUD arguments in regard to Just War principles of honourable war are: (i) having just cause, (ii) being a last resort, (iii) being declared by a proper authority, (iv) possessing right intention, (v) having a reasonable chance of success, and (vi) the end being proportional to the means used.

[15] Radical Honesty’s TRC FRAUD information and evidence repeatedly submitted to Respondents clarified that Radical Honesty believed the TRC to have made grievous errors in its alleged enquiry into the origins of Apartheid and Apartheid violence; and its findings consequently erroneous and biased. Radical Honesty do not believe that the ANC had a ‘Just Cause’ to initiate acts of aggression, i.e. to launch their violent liberation struggle, against the system of Apartheid, when among others:
  1. The ANC had an honourable non-violent option for liberating its own people by ending its poverty pimping breeding war;

  2. The ANC had no right intention: Apartheid had raised black living standards to the highest in Africa; ANC true motives were, and continue to be, reasons of self-interest, greed, corruption, abuse of power and personal aggrandizement; as well as Black Liberation Theology racial black power hegemony: and the elimination of ‘whiteness’ on the rotting corpses of SA’s white settlers;

  3. The ANC had no proper authority: Black Africans did not want Black rule, nor did they voluntarily support the liberation struggle (Mandela’s decision to launch the violent liberation struggle, was not because it was a tragic ‘last resort’ of a peaceful non-violent campaign. The militarization of the struggle, was a result of the spectacular failure of the 1952 Defiance Campaign ability to mobilize the black masses to participate in the non-violent struggle: only 10 000 joined the protest, of which 8,500 were in prison);

  4. The ANC had no reasonable chance of success in eliminating whiteness and white rule, for the majority of blacks favoured white rule, who were aware they were better off under white rule, than any of their black brethren in the rest of black Africa ruled by despotic black liberation movements. They consequently decided the African people would need to be terrorized to support the ANC;

  5. The ANC did not use proportional force: It decided to adopt the People’s War of necklacing, street committees, to terrorize its own people to support its fraudulent ‘liberation struggle’; where any poor black Africans who even slightly objected to the ANC’s agenda, and who insisted on being a law abiding citizen by paying their rent or electricity, was labelled as ‘an enemy conspirator’; and worthy of the necklace;

  6. The ANC did not use proportional force on its own soldiers at its Mbokodo Quatro Torture Camps;

  7. The ANC did not use proportional force in its decision to target illegitimate targets: Its own people; by choosing to maximize not only the physical destruction of property, schools, libraries, community infrastructure, but additionally the psychological, intellectual and emotional destruction of children’s education, and relationships to their families, parents and future, as individuals with no regard whatsoever for the concept of personal responsibility, integrity and honour;

  8. The ANC did not adopt violence as a last resort; but as a first resort to liberate the African’s colonized mind of ‘whiteness’, because in their Fanon/Black Liberation Theology worldview ‘violence was a cleansing liberating force to restore the Africans self-respect on the rotting corpse of the settler’.

[16] Just Post Bellum: Subsequent to the cessation of the Apartheid conflict as a result of the ‘TRC Ceasefire negotiations’, the ANC did not choose to avoid imposing punishment on innocents and non-combatants. Instead 16 years later, individuals who had nothing to do with apartheid are still being punished for ‘apartheid’, by means of Affirmative Action policies; and every single other problem under the sun is blamed on ‘apartheid’. Neither have the ANC respected the rights or traditions of Boer-Afrikaner minority cultures. To the contrary, the ANC appear to be doing all in their power to facilitate the destruction of Boer-Afrikaner and other minority cultures, some of whom have absolutely no standing whatsoever in SA’s alleged ‘multi-culti’ courtrooms. Finally, the ANC reneged upon its promises of Political Amnesty in cases such as Eugene de Kock, Clive Derby-Lewis, Januzs Walus, and others, whose crimes were clearly politically motivated; while endorsing amnesty for their necklacing cadres; destroying any possible trust that could have been cultivated with minorities, by honouring their agreements.

[17] Radical Honesty believe if the TRC had been led by Impartial International individuals –- such as for example Dr. Brad Blanton; Judge Jason Brent, and Pastor James Manning -- committed to seriously enquiring into all the ecological, psychological, political, demographic, and spiritual causes of Apartheid violence, much of the information shared in the Radical Honesty Complaints Submitted to the Defendants before the SA Constitutional Court (CCT 23-10 and CCT 06-11) and Equality Court (07-2010 EQ JHB); and in the Boer Volkstaat 10/31/16 Theses Petition and Briefing Paper to EU Progenitor Nations and NATO (Audi Alteram Partem Notice to Defendants); would have been revealed as part of the Truth and Reconciliation process; which would have resulted in more impartial rainbow perspectives balanced TRC report. Such a report would have accurately identified the demographic, political and spiritual causes of Apartheid violence, and hence provided guidelines for addressing those root cause problems, and holding all parties accountable for refraining from continuing such breeding war or Marxist spiritual ‘violence on the rotting corpse of the settlers’ behaviour. Instead the TRC promulgated the ANC’s truth, and nothing but the ANC’s ‘Black Liberation Theology victimhood’ truth, as the one and only absolute truth, and designated white Afrikaners as the scapegoat for the ANC’s victimhood poverty pimping breeding war socio-economic problems.


LEGAL AND POLITICAL PERSECUTION OF MINORITIES:

[18] The Defendants endorsement, cover up and censorship of the legal and political persecution of the Radical Honesty culture; denying it any and all rights to honourably defend itself in the Public discourse.


BREEDING WAR AS ACTS OF WAR:

[19] Jason G. Brent, Former Judge East Kern Municipal Court, Mojave, California; author: Humans: An Endangered Species:
  1. “We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an act of war”

  2. “No one has the right to use his penis or her womb to destroy all of humanity. There is not a God given right to reproduce or to reproduce in a manner which results in the total and complete destruction of our species.” -- Humans: An Endangered Species



MEDIA: ABOVE THE LAW WORLDVIEW GOLIATH OPINION FORMERS:

“My former editor at the Sunday Times, the bibulous Mondli Makhanya, has frequently bragged over a long liquid lunch that his position as an opinion former puts him above the law. His theory is that a large newspaper is so mighty that nobody would dare mess with the editor. And to an extent he is right. When a newspaper such as the Sunday Times wants to put the boot in just for the hell of it you just have to accept it as an abuse of privilege disguised as freedom of speech.” -- David Bullard, Why A Media Tribunal is a Good Idea

“The fact that the media doesn't answer to anyone is the epitome of fascism, the media has become the single most influential institution in the world, I feel very strongly that the media should be accountable to someone.” – Steve Hofmeyr (Pat Stevens, Fiefdom of the Press)

“[T]he jealously guarded power of the media to regulate itself appears in some respects to enable it to transcend the law..[..] The fact that [Lord Wakeham] refers to the PCC’s historic decisions as ‘case law’ further reinforces the impression that the press maintain a transcendental position vis-à-vis the law, and that they view themselves as doing so. This transcendental role is not restricted to regulation; the media effectively plays judge and jury in people’s lives.” – Are the Media now Above the Law?, The Telegraph

“Mainstream media, of course, can't say Jack Diddly about this theater of the absurd, even though they’ve been cornered into asking a few pseudo-hardball questions. They are, after all, criminally culpable for the endorsement and concealment of something they damn well knew was a lie, murder, and high treason ten years ago.” – Michael C. Ruppert, The Ghosts of 9-11; author of Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil.

“In the old days we used to schnarf cocaine in the Summit TV editing room because we didn’t want anyone to know. These days you can find traces of white powder on the toilet seats on the 4th Floor” (The Executive suite). – David Bullard, “Yes it's dirty linen but it’s OUR dirty linen”….AVUSA’s day of shame.



MEDIA ROLE IN CENSORSHIP OF BREEDING WAR ACTS OF WAR:

[20] T. Michael Maher, Ph.D, Prof. & Head: Dept. of Communication, University of Louisiana:
  1. How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population Environment Connection (PDF)

  2. Written Statement by Consent of T. Michael Maher, Ph.D, to testify as expert witness for How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection and Media Framing and Salience of the Population Issue (PDF)

  3. “Population growth has been implicated in promoting water shortages, urban sprawl, global climate change, and most importantly for this court case, massive migration, social stress and resource scarcities that can lead to violence (cf Thomas Homer-Dixon, Environment, Scarcity and Violence).” (-- Written Statement of Consent by T. Michael Maher, to SA Concourt (PDF))

  4. “The evidence clearly suggests that population growth is bad policy. But in most countries pressure to change pronatalist or pro-immigration policies is light, which is explained by my next point. 2. In covering population-driven environmental problems, media seldom link the problem to its source in population growth.” (-- Written Statement of Consent by T. Michael Maher, to SA Concourt (PDF))



THE COMPLAINT: BRIEF CHRONOLOGY OF FACTS:


[A] TRC FRAUD COMPLAINT TO NORWEGIAN NOBEL COMMITTEE:

[21] On 06 June 2009 Johnstone filed a complaint to The Nobel Institute: Norwegian Nobel Committee: Notice of Legal and Political Request to: (I) Withdraw Nobel Peace Prize’s from Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, for (a) Intellectual Dishonesty & Hypocrisy; (b) Moral, Political and Religious Prostitution; and (c) ‘TRC-RSA’ Fraud and Betrayal; and (II) Accept Nobel Peace Prize Nominations for Dr. Albert Bartlett; Dr. Garret James Harden, and Dr. M. King Hubbert, for Intellectually Honest and Politically Honourable Ecologically Sustainable, Human Rights, Peace and Social Justice Advocacy (PDF).

[22] It included Notice’s to ‘TRC-RSA’ Nobel Peace Prize Recipients: Mandela, Tutu and De Klerk: Final Honourable Notice of Legal and Political Delivery: Elimination of ‘TRC-RSA’ Nobel Peace Prize Recipients Plausible Deniability, to allegations that your Human Rights Advocacy is guilty of (i) Intellectual Dishonesty and Hypocrisy; (ii) Moral, Political and Religious Prostitution; and (iii) ‘TRC-RSA’ Fraud and Betrayal.

[23] 09-06-06: TRC Fraud Complaint to Norwegian Nobel Committee (PDF), includes among others Annexures:
  1. Proudly South African/TRC-RSA Afrikaner Genocide Report: Censorbug Bear Blog Reports: (i) Alphabetical Listing of Farm Murders: A – Z; (ii) 2008 Farm Murders in South Africa: Brief Summaries; and (iii) Genocide Watch 2002 Report on Boer Farm Murders (PDF)

  2. 18 July 2006: PeakOilRSA Briefing Paper: Is Gross Mismanagement of the Nation’s Energy Policy an Impeachable Offense? (PDF)

[24] The Norwegian Nobel Committee, as well as Mandela, De Klerk and Tutu ignored the Complaint.



[B] HC-WC APPLICATION FOR REVIEW: HC-WC #19963-09:

[25] Application for Review #19963-09 was filed in the High Court, Western Cape on 23 September 2009; Respondents: (i) Hon. Patricia de Lille, MP, ID (3rd); (ii) Mr. Thabo Mbeki, Former President (4th); (iii) Mr. Bulelani Ngcuka, Former NPA Nat. Dir. (5th); (iv) Mr. J.S. Selebi, Former SAPS Comm.(6th); (v) Mr. BM Skosana, Former Min. Corrections (7th); (vi) Mr. Nelson Mandela, Former President (8th); (vii) The Nobel Institute: Norwegian Nobel Committee (10th).

[26] The Application for Review objected to the Magistrate’s endorsement of the State and Complainant (De Lille’s) legal and political persecution of Defendant (Johnstone); by (i) the Magistrates refusal to enquire into the State’s irregularities and illegalities of unlawful arrest of Defendant without any valid Arrest warrant; and detention of Defendant for 33 days in Pollsmoor without any court appearance or bail hearing; (ii) the Complainant’s and State’s attempts to illegally in violation of the Criminal Matters Amendment Act; have the Defendant certified as insane; to attempt to coerce the Defendant into silence about her allegations of TRC FRAUD submitted to State and Complainant; (iii) the Magistrate’s refusal to abide by his agreement to allow the Defendant to invoke her Political Necessity Defense, thereby robbing her of her ability to defend herself.

[27] The application noted for the record the state of South Africa’s criminal justice system as reflected in the case against the Defendant, as:
“[10] For the Record: State of Effective Emergency: South Africa’s Unrepresented White Refugees: The Tyranny, Disorder, Crime and Corruption of the State, has effectively resulted in a state of anarchy, where fundamental rights of due process, natural law, administrative law, safety and security, etc have been effectively intentionally, deliberately and maliciously suspended, as a result of corruption, incompetence and indifference. South Africa is heading towards a socio-economic, political and military failed state of Zimbabwefication.”

[10.g] While South African Legislative, Judicial and Executive authorities have, and continue to, refuse to confront, enquire into, or acknowledge the reality of the tyrannical Disorder, Crime and Corruption of the Failed State, and its effective nullification of the Truth and Reconciliation Social Contract, which has effectively resulted in a state of anarchy, where fundamental rights of due process, natural law, administrative law, safety and security, etc have been effectively intentionally, deliberately and maliciously suspended; a foreign court/tribunal has finally had the courage to impartially enquire into, and courageously confront, the reality of this evidence. In the State of Ontario, Canada, on 27 August 2009, Board Member William Davis of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (“RPD”), in file number MA8-04910, found white South African, Brandon Carl Huntley to be a Convention Refugee”

[..]

“[10j] The ZimbabweFication Future for Whites in South Africa: Since the Zimbabwe land seizures began a decade ago, some 4,000 owners (virtually all white) of Zimbabwe’s most productive farms have been forced out, along with their 320,000 workers (almost all black) and their families, amounting to 1m-2m people. Although around two-thirds of the land has been allocated to 140,000 poor black families, the rest has gone to Mr Mugabe’s relatives and comrades, most of whom have little or no interest in farming. Vast tracts of fertile farmland now lie fallow; agricultural output has slumped. One of Africa’s biggest food exporters is now one of its main recipients of food aid. Of 6,500 white commercial farmers in 1980, when Mr Mugabe came to power, only about 500 remain. ..[..] According to exiled Zimbabwean businessman, Mr. Mutumwa Mawere, former CEO of Shabanie Mashaba Mine Holdings (SMMH), Mugabe does not believe that a white person can own land in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, many leaders within the SADC, share Mugabes views that white persons cannot be African and do not have a right to African land. Of legal matters, before Mugabe Judge’s, which involve a white person or farmer: he says “the outcome would be known before trial.” Mr. Mawere states that the biggest mistake that African governments made at independence was the failure to resolve the citizenship issue regarding whites. Finally, Mr. Mawere states that African leaders who fought alongside Mugabe in the 1960s, such as President Jacob Zuma, are no different from Mugabe; “President Jacob Zuma you see today is not different from Zuma the freedom fighter you saw during the liberation struggle and therefore, you should not expect him to support [white farmers] cases at the SADC summit.” For a white person to “trust someone [in Africa], with state power to be good to [them], then you must be living in another world.”


[28] Annex B: Application for Review #19963-09 (PDF) Enclosures include among others:
  1. [FF.01a] Why We Are White Refugees, Afrikaner Genocide Report, includes (a) Alphabetical Listing of Farm Murders: A – Z; (b) 2008 Farm Murders in South Africa: Brief Summaries; (c) Genocide Watch 2002 Report on Boer Farm Murders (PDF); [FF.01b] FF.01a was submitted to Respondent Eight in June 2009; c/o Respondent Ten, as an attachment to: Nobel Institute: Nobel Peace Prize Committee: Notice of Legal and Political Delivery (PDF)

  2. [FF.05] The Great South African Land Scandal, by Dr. Phillip du Toit, which documents the Zimbabwefication of South Africa’s Food Security, and includes Ch. 16: Slaughter -- The Farm Murder Plague (PDF): the murder rate of South African commercial farmers, is highest for a specific group in the world – 313 per 100 000.

  3. [HH]: Affidavit of Dr. Brad Blanton, 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’ (PDF).

  4. [JJ]: Founding Affidavit of Lara Johnstone; in support of Notice of Intention: Application for Leave and for Judicial Review (PDF).

[29] The Magistrate and Prosecutor simply ignored the application. The media ignored the Magistrate and Prosecutor’s irregular conduct.



[C] RADICAL HONESTY AMICUS CURIAE: CCT 23-10: CITIZEN V. MCBRIDE

[30] On 23 March 2010 Radical Honesty filed an Application (PDF) to proceed as Amicus Curiae in Citizen v. McBride before the Constitutional Court. It informed the court that:
[20] Allegedly the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act (“the Act”), was setup to among others: (a) provide for the investigation and establishment of as complete a picture as possible of the nature, causes and extent of gross violations of human rights committed… emanating from the conflicts of the past, granting of amnesty to persons who made full disclosure…, affording victims opportunity to relate violations suffered; ….. rehabilitation and the restoration of the human and civil dignity of victims of violations of human rights; reporting to the Nation about such violations; the making of recommendations aimed at the prevention of future gross violations of human rights; (b) establish the truth in relation to past events as well as motives for and circumstances in which gross violations of human rights have occurred, to prevent a repetition of such acts in future; and because the Constitution stated that (c) the pursuit of national unity and the well-being of all South African citizens and peace required reconciliation between the people of South Africa and the reconstruction of society; and (d) there was a need for understanding but not for vengeance, a need for reparation not retaliation, a need for ubuntu not victimization.

[21] All of the original Appellants, the Respondent, and all the Supreme Court of Appeal Justices, including those dissenting, all appear to assume that the Act meant what it said, and that those entrusted to implement the law applied the law in the Act, as if the law meant what it said.

[22] The Applicant does not share their assumption that the Act meant what it said, nor that those entrusted to implement the Act even applied the law to the extent that the Acts law meant what it said.

[..]

[23] Consequently the Applicants In Forma Pauperis Amicus Curiae submission shall argue that:

[24] The TRC was a fraudulent PR publicity stunt negligently conducted by SA’s political, academic, media and legal elite: Both Appellants and Respondents legal arguments are negligently or intentionally furthering the politically correct -- and financially and public relations convenient -– political, psychological and legal fraud conducted by South Africa’s political, academic and media elite, upon South African citizens.

[25] TRC’s fraudulent representation to victimizers and citizens: TRC would provide ‘closure’: The TRC implied that alleged sincere and serious ‘closure’ was possible, and would occur, via the legal processes of what I shall refer to as the “TRC’s Religious Circus” of using victims and victimizers as a form of ‘Circus Monkeys’ on the world stage; to promote their fake two-faced hypocrisy Intellectual Forgiveness Rainbow Nation.

[26] TRC’s fraudulent representation to victimizers, victims and citizens: TRC would make impartial enquiry to “establish the truth in relation to past events, as well as the motives for, and circumstances in which gross violations of human rights occurred, and to make the findings known, in order to prevent a repetition of such acts in the future.” The TRC’s enquiry can only be considered a ‘Flat Earth’ enquiry, which totally and perhaps intentionally and deliberately ignored population policy factors which contributed to the motives for implementing apartheid. Imagine if blacks had chosen to adopt a cultural trait of personal responsibility and concern for their children, whereby they refrained from procreation until they could provide for a stable and loving environment for their offspring in a small committed family environment. If so, South Africa would currently be populated by 10 million predominantly educated citizens, 50% white & 50% black and coloured, most of whom had grown up in loving small family homes, with responsible parents.

[..]

What role did population growth factors play in South Africa’s Apartheid violence? If understanding demographic roots is a prerequisite for understanding their subsequent symptomatic political violence, and hence preventing their future re-occurrence, why was this not a priority for the TRC to enquire into?

What role did the ANC play in contributing to the Population Explosion of Cannon Fodder and Resource War Violence? Why was the ANC not required to take responsibility for their population production of poverty stricken cannon fodder? …

Why was the media silent about the role population growth demographic factors played in South Africa’s Apartheid violence? If the Media are serious about their commitment to ‘Reconciliation’ and prevention of future hostilities, why were they silent about how the TRC, and subsequently the ANC are deliberately indifferent to abiding by the laws of sustainability ? How are the ignorant masses suffering from the resource war consequences of overpopulation colliding with scarce resources ever going to wake up, if their media and political leaders are too gutless to start telling these truths, and educating people on these issues?

Is Martin Luther King Jnr. the only black leader to have ever expressed a sincere concern for the plague of overpopulation, and the need to Educated to Liberate the poor from their cultural prison of ignorant poverty production procreation?

[31] On 03 May 2010 the Concourt approved the Application. On 18 July 2010 Radical Honesty submitted Heads of Argument (PDF), in support of Radical Honesty Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995. It was supported by the expert witness statements of Dr. Brad Blanton (PDF) and Dr. T. Michael Maher (PDF).

[32] The Amicus argued among others that:
Mainstream Access-to-Discourse-Gatekeeper Editors censorship of nonviolent political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a pressure cooker socio-political reality for their ‘If it Bleads, it Leads’ corporate propaganda profits, in knowledge application of:
  1. ‘As long as there is some possibility of getting results by political means, the chances that any political group or individual will turn violent are truly radically small, or maybe vanishingly small’ ;

  2. ‘The exposure in the media is what gets people’s attention. People follow what is happening in the news, not what is happening in the courts’ ;

  3. ‘[Editors] abuse of media power, by means of strategies whereby they abuse public discourse/free speech resources; by providing certain parties with preferential and special access to such public discourse, and severely restricting or denying others any access to such public discourse ;

  4. Mainstream media avoid addressing or enquiring into root causes of problems as reported in How and Why Journalists Avoid Population – Environment connection; and censor non-violent root-cause problem solving activism .

[33] Founded on among others Population Policy and Just War theory principles it argued that TRC was a fraud, and that the TRC’s ‘crime of apartheid’ conclusion was a falsification of history, because:
  1. The TRC Negligently or Intentionally Avoided Key Concept Definitions for which there are Multiple Different cultural and religious meanings

  2. The Amnesty Meaning was changed without Due Process

  3. Truth and Reconciliation was not only not done; but was not Seen to be Done

  4. Liberation Struggle: No Just Cause or Right Intention: ‘Evil Apartheid’ raised Black living standards to Highest in Africa

  5. Apartheid was not a Crime Against Humanity; but a Just War for Boer Demographic Survival

  6. The Nature & Causes of Apartheid prove that Apartheid was A Just War for Demographic Survival of Boer Afrikaners

  7. Farm Murders are not a Rainbow TRC Peace; but a Racial Hatred War Reality

  8. The Amicus also provided evidence for 40 SA media editors endorsement of legal and political persecution of Radical Honesty as a white refugee; and that Radical Honesty culture was not recognized (effectively banned) in SA’s alleged Multi-Culture courts.

  9. The Application requested the Concourt to rule whether Radical Honesty was a recognized culture or a refugee status.

[34] All other parties, the applicants, respondents and other Amicus Curiae’s totally ignored the Radical Honesty Amicus Curiae, as if it simply did not exist.

[35] The Concourt Justices also ignored the contents of the Radical Honesty Amicus; as if it had never even been filed, and its TRC FRAUD argument and international expert witnesses were absolutely irrelevant; and unworthy of any thoughtful response; let alone enquiry and discussion.

[36] All SA media publications wrote numerous articles and some indepth reports on the main parties arguments (Citizen and Robert McBride), including the other Amicus Curiae arguments (SANEF, FXI, Mxenge, etc). Not one newsarticle was written including any information about the Radical Honesty Amicus arguments. The media acted as if it did not exist.

[37] The media censorship response occurred irrespective of a complaint filed by Radical Honesty with the South African Police (CAS # 823-08-2010) against twenty-two Media Editors for their: Bribery Conspiracy to Censor Ecolaw TRC fraud evidence before Concourt from Public’s Right to Know, to (a) enable TRC elite to retain TRC-PR benefits & (b) obstruct administration of Ecolaw Concourt justice.(PDF)
  1. Conspiracy: SANEF editors have conspired to aid or procure the commission of, or to commit the following offences: fraud, bribery and corruption, which amount to conspiracy to the obstruction of justice.

  2. Fraud: SANEF editors by word and conduct made the following unlawful and intentional misrepresentations or perversions of the truth: (a) In SANEF’s 08 June 2010 Amicus to Concourt they imply that they oppose the suppression of expression and the truth and object to the impediment of a search for the truth1; (b) in their 08 August 2010 Auckland Park declaration to people of SA, they allege that they oppose the suppression of expression and the curtailment of freedom of expression and the free flow of information and will join hands with all South Africans, from all cultures and religions who value their freedoms. Both these representations are perversions of the truth, since SANEF editors repeatedly endorse (i) censorship of Radical Honesty Amicus curiae from the people of SA; and (ii) the legal and political persecution of individuals from the Radical Honesty culture, and perhaps other cultures they despise. SANEF’s fraudulent representation can lead to actual or potential disadvantage or prejudice to Plaintiff, Radical Honesty culture members, and other individuals and cultures.

  3. Bribery (as a briber): SANEF editors conspiracy to censor the details of the Radical Honesty SA Amicus before the Concourt from the people of South Africa, are an unlawful and intentional indirect offer to State Officials (the Concourt Justices, and other SA TRC elite politicians whose reputations would prefer the contents of the Radical Honesty SA Amicus to the Concourt to remain censored) to pressure and/or bribe the Justices with the opportunity to ignore the Radical Honesty SA Amicus in their deliberations, as if its arguments and allegations do not exist, because it’s contents have been censored from public discourse; in return for such officials consideration in return for action or inaction in their official capacities.

  4. Corruption: SANEF editors are directly or indirectly giving or agreeing or offering to give to other SA elite the gratification of censorship of the Radical Honesty SA Amicus, for their TRC-PR benefit, in order to influence such persons so to act, in a manner that amounts to the illegal, dishonest, unauthorized, incomplete, or biased; exercise, carrying out or performance of their power and duties or functions arising out of constitutional, statutory, contractual or any other legal obligations. These actions amount to the abuse of their position of authority, a breach of trust, the violation of legal ecological management duties and sustainable management corporate decision-making, and are designed to achieve an unjustified result; by the unauthorized or improper inducement to TRC Justices’, Political et al elites, to endorse a conspiracy of silence censorship, and are hence guilty of the offence of corruption. (S.3 of Prevention and Combatting of Corrupt Activities Act, 2004)

  5. Obstruction of Justice: SANEF editors conspiracy of silence is unlawfully and intentionally defeating or obstructing the administration of justice

[38] Documents filed: (I) Application to Proceed (PDF); (II) Heads of Argument (PDF); Expert witness statements of Dr. Brad Blanton (PDF) and Dr. T. Michael Maher (PDF); and (III) Submissions on Forced Apology (PDF).



[D] RADICAL HONESTY APPLICATION FOR DIRECT ACCESS: CCT 06-11: RADICAL HONESTY V. SANEF & OTHERS

[39] On Friday 28 January 2011, Radical Honesty SA filed an Application for Direct Access for a Writ of Certiorari/Review and Habeus Mentem (Right to your Own Mind) with the Constitutional Court. The Respondents being 88 SA National Editors Forum media organisations and editors, including the SA Press Ombudsman, and Press Appeals Panel. [Notice of Motion (PDF); Founding Affidavit (PDF); Condonation: Representation (PDF); Order: Dismissed (PDF)].

[40] Among others the Application for direct access requested the Constitutional Court to review the media’s censorship of the TRC FRAUD arguments argued in the Radical Honesty Amicus Curiae in Citizen v. McBride:
[B] South African Press Council and SA Press Appeals Panel (SAPAP) [1] lack of transparent administrative decision-making, and secrecy of complaints statistics; [2] 24 June 2009 ruling by Ombudsman: Joe Thloloe, [3] 11 October, 3 and 4 November 2010 rulings by Deputy Ombudsman: Johan Retief, and [4] 17 and 24 November 2010 rulings by SA Press Appeals Panel Judge Ralph Zulman; and

[C] SA Media and Journalists Respondents (“SA Media”) endorse: (a) Media Corruption and legal, political and cultural persecution of minorities, and (b) Media “Rainbow-Rule-of-Law Reasonableness” Intellectual Incompetence ; and preference for propaganda smear campaigns, and repudiation of scientific journalism i.e.: [5] ‘SA Media’s’ Deliberate Indifference to Radical Honesty/White Refugee legal and political persecution; [6] ‘SA Media’s’ endorsement of media corruption (negligent and/or deliberate intellectual incompetence), and [7] repudiation of scientific journalism : censorship of root cause “the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb problem solving, as per their endorsement of censorship of issues raised in Dr. T. Michael Maher’s study: How and Why Journalists Avoid Population – Environment connection; and Dr. Brad Blanton’s Radical Honesty About Anger and Forgiveness expert witness affidavit as to how sincere forgiveness vs fake forgiveness affects the common law ‘reasonable reader’; as per orders applied for as set out below.

[41] The writ of Habeus Mentem – the right of a wo/man to their own mind and culture -- was invoked in accordance with the Constitutional rights to invoking cultural law in S. 15 (3), 30, 31, and 185, and psychological integrity in Section 12; the former which may require the application of choice of law rules.

[42] The title of the writ -- Habeus Mentem - was borrowed from Aldous Huxley’s A Brave New World Revisited; where he describes the insidious conspiracy to manipulate the masses by propaganda and lies, so as to make them controllable under the “steadily increasing pressures of over-population and of the over-organization imposed by growing numbers and advancing technology”
It is perfectly possible for a man to be out of prison, and yet not free -- to be under no physical constraint and yet to be a psychological captive, compelled to think, feel and act as the representatives of the national State, or of some private interest within the nation, want him to think, feel and act. There will never be such a thing as a writ of habeas mentem; for no sheriff or jailer can bring an illegally imprisoned mind into court, and no person whose mind had been made captive by the methods outlined in earlier articles would be in a position to complain of his captivity. The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him, the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective.

[43] The writ of Habeus Mentem requested the Concourt to confirm – for the record:
[a] First and Second Respondent are members of the Radical Honesty culture, who provided Respondents with the opportunity to resolve these matters, out of court, upon the Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract: Being Specific About Anger and Forgiveness ; as excerpted from: Practicing Radical Honesty.

[b] Radical Honesty SA is founded on Radical Honesty Social Contract and Ecolaw principles: (a) A psychological integrity environment of philosophical courageous truth searching honesty and sincere forgiveness is a sine qua non for healthy, transparent relationships that result in the co-creation of a code of conduct that enables non-violent honest sincere resolutions to disagreements; (b) A healthy ecological environment, with due regard for carrying capacity laws of sustainability is a sine qua non for all other constitutional rights .

[c] Radical Honesty SA’s working hypothesis: First to Eighty-Eighth Respondents are imprisoned in their minds distorted and only partly conscious maps, but who are too psychologically incompetently unconscious – Dunning and Kruger Effect - to be aware of their mind-slavery. They are mind enslaved/imprisoned by their fragile ego’s, which are under the false impression that they act on their own initiative, but who are emotional and psychological slaves to their suppressed anger, resentments and politically correct ideologies. Their minds maps of reality are distorted by their repressed anger and resentment, their fake forgiveness and fake relationships, marketing character shame ; the greater the amount of suppressed anger, resentments and sincerity, the greater their distorted view of reality. Radical Honesty SA invites all respondents to liberate themselves from their Flat Earth intellectual, psychological and legal ego prisons of political correctness and denial.

[d] Radical Honesty SA definitions of the word ‘Kaffir’, relevant to this matter:

[i] ‘Kaffir Behaviour’: Cultural Beliefs and Procreation Behaviour Definition: Individuals who either independently or as a result of their cultural value systems, are incapable of, or unwilling to, practice sexual restraint and procreation responsibility; who consequently breed cockroach-prolifically without personal financial or psychological responsibility to, or emotional concern for, their offspring; and/or who abuse women and children as sexual or economic slaves procreated for such purpose; and/or whose cultural ideal of manhood endorses non-consensual sex (rape) as their sexual slavery entitlement, etc.

[ii] ‘Kaffir Etymology’: Original Etymological Definition for ‘Kaffir’: The word kāfir is the active participle of the Semitic root K-F-R “to cover”. As a pre-Islamic term it described farmers burying seeds in the ground, covering them with soil while planting; as they till the earth and “cover up” the seeds; which is why earth tillers are referred to as “Kuffar.” Thus, the word kāfir implies the meaning “a person who hides or covers”; To conceal, deny, hide or cover the truth.

[iii] ‘Kaffir Legislation’ = Inalienable Right to Breed’ Poverty, Misery and War legislation; pretending it advocates for ‘peace’ and ‘human rights’. Kaffir Law/Legislation provides citizens with the Inalienable ‘Right to Breed’, but demands that Citizens need a Licence to Own a Gun, a Licence to Drive a Car, a Licence to Practice Law, a television licence, a credit licence, a licence to earn a living, a university exemption licence, a licence to fish, a licence to hunt, a liquor licence, a business licence, a marriage licence, etc, etc. Kaffir Legislation covers up that an ‘Inalienable Right to Breed/laissez-faire birth control policy + No Social Welfare policies or practices provides for an equilibrium carrying capacity; whereas Inalienable Right to Breed/laissez-faire birth control within a welfare state, results in Runaway Growth, and ultimately greater misery, poverty and war.

[44] On Monday 01 February 2011 the Justice’s returned from their Christmas vacation and within less than 5 hours of receipt of the application, the entire bench of the Constitutional Court unanimously dismissed the application as ‘not in the interests of justice’.

[45] Among others, the Application detailed the misery, poverty and resource war ecological footprint consequences of corrupt corporate personhood by comparing it to results that can occur under a Media whose principles are founded on Ecological Footprint of Transparent Scientific Journalism. The former encourages social trap behaviour, and denial of responsibility and consciousness of such behaviour that results in overpopulation colliding with scarce resources resource wars; the latter encourages responsibility, transparency and honesty to confront the root causes of poverty, misery and resource wars, so as to avoid them and live and breed ecologically sustainably.
[63] The documentary, The Corporation, based on The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power shows the development of the contemporary business corporation, from a legal entity that originated as a government-chartered institution meant to effect specific public functions, to the rise of the modern commercial institution entitled to most of the legal rights of a person. One theme is its assessment as a "personality", as a result of an 1886 case in the United States Supreme Court in which a statement by Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite led to corporations as "persons" having the same rights as human beings, based on the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The film's assessment is effected via the diagnostic criteria in the DSM-IV; Robert Hare, a University of British Columbia psychology professor and a consultant to the FBI, compares the profile of the contemporary profitable business corporation to that of a clinically-diagnosed psychopath.

[64] A critic of corporate personhood, Thom Hartmann argues in Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights , subsequent editions: Unequal Protection: How Corporations Became "People" - And How You Can Fight Back that there was an intentional misinterpretation of the Supreme Court case on behalf of Corporate Personhood inserted into the Court record by reporter J.C. Bancroft Davis. The Secret of Life: Corporate Personhood provides a brief description of Hartmann’s argument: Bancroft Davis had previously served as president of Newburgh and New York Railway Co. According to Hartmann in the May 10, 1886: Santa Clara County vs. the Southern Pacific Railroad Company - Supreme Court Case: The entire case was not even decided by the Supreme Court Justices, what happened was that the headnotes, which are not legally binding and which were written by a clerk of the court (not a Justice) said that the case had decided the issue of corporate personhood in the favor of the railroad company, even though it had not. This decision however, influenced future court cases for many years to come. Once it had been embedded in the US court system, there was no turning back. So what was the case about, that ended up being decided by headnotes from a clerk of the court? One, aspect of the concentration of wealth that worried Jefferson and most American legislatures in those decades was that with enough wealth, a corporation can keep trying in the courts for centuries (literally centuries, because they don't die), no matter how much it costs until they get what they want. And ultimately that's what happened... In the decade leading up to this May Day in 1886, the railroads had lost every Supreme Court case that they had brought seeking 14th amendment rights. To this day there has been no Supreme Court ruling that could explain why a corporation -- with its ability to continue operating forever -- a legal agreement that can't be put in jail and doesn't need fresh water to drink or clean air to breathe -- should be granted the same constitutional rights American founders explicitly fought for, died for, and granted to the very mortal human beings who are citizens of the United States [and the world] to protect them against the perils of imprisonment and suppression they had experienced under a desperate king. See also documentary: Thom Hartman vs. Corporate Personhood.

[65] In Green Candidates call for end of Corporate Personhood, Greenchange report that over 110 Green Party Candidates have endorsed “stripping [corporations] of artificial ‘personhood’ and constitutional protections,” along with “revoking the charters of corporations that routinely violate safety, health, environmental protection or other laws.” Among others, Democratic Congressional Representative Dennis Kucinich, former Candidate’s for U.S President Ralph Nader and Mike Gravel, the non-partisan group Reclaim Democracy have all called for the abolishment of corporate personhood, due to corporate personhoods toxic effects on republican democracy.

[66] In When Corporations Rule the World, David Korten critiques current methods of economic development led by the Bretton Woods institutions and asserts his desire to rebalance the power of multinational corporations with concern for environment sustainability. Korten criticises consumerism, market deregulation, free trade, privatization and what he sees as the global consolidation of corporate power. Above all he rejects any focus on money as the purpose of economic life. His prescriptions include excluding corporations from political participation, increased state and global control of international corporations and finance, rendering financial speculation unprofitable and creating local economies that rely on local resources, rather than international trade.

[67] In his award winning 2002 documentary for the BBC, The Century of the Self, Adam Curtis describes how Sigmund Freud's family, exerted a surprising amount of influence on the way corporations and governments throughout the‭ ‬20th century have used Freuds theories to psychologically engineer and manipulate citizens into the false illusionary belief that the power is finally in their hands, that they live in a ‘democracy’; that they are in charge, while their sense of identity has been subconsciously manipulated from that of citizen to consumer, fueling the massive growth of the mass-consumer society, and the corporatist Orwellian dictatorship.

[68] In Michael Tsarion’s documentaries, The Age of Manipulation, and Architects of Control Program: he deals extensively with the evidentiary information on the role of media, advertising and public relations as a psychic dictatorship to manipulate the masses by psychological warfare brainwashing techniques to destroy citizens identity’s as patriotic rational citizens, and mould their identities into psychologically insecure, dumbed-down, consumerist mind-enslaved automatonic zombies. One of Tsarion’s conclusions being that the Soviet Union was a massive experiment in social control; and how many of the methods for social control perfected under the Soviet Union are used by the West in more subtle ways. Psywar – The real battlefield is your mind, also provides background information on this phenomena.

[69] Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov (also known as Tomas David Schuman; 1939 – 1997) was a journalist for RIA Novosti and a former KGB informant from the Soviet Union who defected to Canada. After being assigned to a station in India, Bezmenov eventually grew to love the people and culture of India, while, at the same time, he began to resent the KGB-sanctioned oppression of intellectuals who dissented from Moscow's policies. He is best known for his interview with Edward G. Griffin: Deception was my Job: Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press , wherein he explained the psychological warfare methods used by the KGB to secretly subvert the democratic system of the United States.

[70] In The CIA and the Media, Carl Bernstein, from the Washington Post, writes about how “Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up”.

[71] In The Persuaders Douglass Rushkoff of PBS explore’s what’s going on in today’s marketers and advertising businesses; how the Public Relations industry has been given the responsibility to maintain the entire system of meaning, through which consumers get their sense of consumer identity and understanding of their role as a consumer in the world of consumerism identity. What are the new and surprising methods the PR industry is using to decipher who citizens are and what they want and how to manipulate them. How the study of cults was adapted to marketing brands, to manipulate a brand’s consumers into blind consumer obedience, in the same way cults manipulate their cult followers, and what the future holds.

[72] In Douglass Rushkoff’s book Life, Inc: How the World became a Corporation and How to Take It Back Rushkoff takes a look at physical currency and the history of corporatism. Beginning with an overview of how money has been gradually centralized throughout time, and pondering the reasons and consequences of such a fact, he goes on to demonstrate how our society has become defined by and controlled by corporate culture. Douglas Rushkoff’s philosophy views everything except for intention as media, he frequently explores the themes of how to make media interactive, how to help people (especially children) effectively analyze and question the media they consume, as well as how to cultivate intention and agency.

[73] Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky , is an analysis of the news media as business. The title derived from “the manufacture of consent” by essayist–editor Walter Lippmann (1889–1974) in his book Public Opinion (1922).

[75] In Flat Earth News: An Award-Winning Reporter Exposes Falsehood, Distortion and Propaganda in the Global Media, Nick Davies writes that “journalism without checking is like a body without an immune system”. He “uncovers an industry awash in corruption and bias”, where “commercial forces are the main obstacle to truth-telling journalism”. In Our media have become mass producers of distortion: An industry whose task should be to filter out falsehood has become a conduit for propaganda and second hand news, he writes:
I commissioned research from specialists at Cardiff University, who surveyed more than 2,000 UK news stories from the four quality dailies (Times, Telegraph, Guardian, Independent) and the Daily Mail. They found two striking things. First, when they tried to trace the origins of their "facts", they discovered that only 12% of the stories were wholly composed of material researched by reporters. With 8% of the stories, they just couldn't be sure. The remaining 80%, they found, were wholly, mainly or partially constructed from second-hand material, provided by news agencies and by the public relations industry. Second, when they looked for evidence that these "facts" had been thoroughly checked, they found this was happening in only 12% of the stories.

The implication of those two findings is truly alarming. Where once journalists were active gatherers of news, now they have generally become mere passive processors of unchecked, second-hand material, much of it contrived by PR to serve some political or commercial interest. Not journalists, but churnalists. An industry whose primary task is to filter out falsehood has become so vulnerable to manipulation that it is now involved in the mass production of falsehood, distortion and propaganda.

[46] Issue: Ecological Footprint of Transparent Scientific Journalism, argued:
Once a culture becomes advertising friendly, it ceases to be a culture at all” “Advertising and Propaganda are antithetical to real journalism. In a democracy people have to have access to unbiased factual information to make rational reasonable decisions” -- Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Media Ecology, Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, New York Univ., author: Mad Scientists: The Secret History of Modern Propaganda

[76] In Don't shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths, The Australian, December 08, 2010, Mr. Julian Assange writes: “WikiLeaks coined a new type of journalism: scientific journalism. We work with other media outlets to bring people the news, but also to prove it is true. Scientific journalism allows you to read a news story, then to click online to see the original document it is based on. That way you can judge for yourself: Is the story true? Did the journalist report it accurately?”

In Andy Greenberg's Forbes Interview of Assange, Greenberg asks Assange: What do you think WikiLeaks mean for business? How do businesses need to adjust to a world where WikiLeaks exists? Mr. Assange proceeds to describe how Wikileaks restricts corrupt corporations or governments from abusing a commons, what psychologists refer to as the social trap , such as for example: overfishing. In this case the exploitation of the ‘corporate trust and responsibility citizenship commons’, the erosion of which leads to anarchy and a total breakdown of the rule of law:
WikiLeaks means it’s easier to run a good business and harder to run a bad business, and all CEOs should be encouraged by this. I think about the case in China where milk powder companies started cutting the protein in milk powder with plastics. That happened at a number of separate manufacturers.

Let’s say you want to run a good company. It’s nice to have an ethical workplace. Your employees are much less likely to screw you over if they’re not screwing other people over.

Then one company starts cutting their milk powder with melamine, and becomes more profitable. You can follow suit, or slowly go bankrupt and the one that’s cutting its milk powder will take you over. That’s the worst of all possible outcomes.

The other possibility is that the first one to cut its milk powder is exposed. Then you don’t have to cut your milk powder. There’s a threat of regulation that produces self-regulation.

It just means that it’s easier for honest CEOs to run an honest business, if the dishonest businesses are more effected negatively by leaks than honest businesses.

That’s the whole idea. In the struggle between open and honest companies and dishonest and closed companies, we’re creating a tremendous reputational tax on the unethical companies.

No one wants to have their own things leaked. It pains us when we have internal leaks. But across any given industry, it is both good for the whole industry to have those leaks and it’s especially good for the good players.

[47] It alleged that the ecological and socio-political results of Corrupt Corporate Personhood were encouraging a worldview paradigm of Denial about, & Cover-up of, Ecological Overshoot, which was promoting Instability & Anarchy:
[78] In Stalking the Wild Taboo, by Garrett Hardin : Part 4: Competition: (20) Competition, a Tabooed Idea in Sociology; (21) The Cybernetics of Competition; (22) Population, Biology and the Law; (23) Population Skeletons in the Environmental Closet; (24) The Survival of Nations and Civilisations, he deals with the concept of Competition, a process that is inescapable in societies living in a finite resource world. He proves that the end result of perfect laissez-faire, competition’s end result reduces all competitors until there is only one left. The monopolist will try to manipulate the machinery of society in such a way as to extend his powers everywhere, without limit. The same applies to labour monopolies. Under these conditions it is important to seek the boundary conditions within which the rule of laissez-faire can produce stability. An Act that may be harmless when the system is healthy and strong may be quite destructive when the system is stressed near its limits. To promote the goal of stability, a law must take cognizance not only of the act but also of the state of the system at the time the act is performed. Ben Bagdikian described the systemic process of corporate media cannibalism in Media Monopoly. In that legal context, corporations who do not promote the goal of ecological stability, but who abuse the planet, should be denied any legal standing, and the law should take cognisance of the actions of corporations who promote the destruction of ecologically stable systems, including the state of the ecological system at the time of such corporate actions.

Denial about & Cover-up of Ecological Overshoot Encouraging Instability & Anarchy: To promote the goal of stability, a law must take cognizance not only of the act but also of the state of the system at the time the act is performed.

[81] If the State of the System is ‘Brink of Ecological Overshoot into Anarchy and Collapse’; and the media’s ‘act’ is (a) censorship of root cause problem solving, while (b) encouraging the factors (population growth, resource consumption) towards Anarchy and Collapse; then the conclusion is that the Media’s Actions are deliberate and intentional on behalf of Anarchy and Instability.

[82] Where is Society in the Act of Understanding Exponential Population Growth colliding with Exponentially Declining Resources? What is the role of the Media in Society’s Ignorance? What is the role of the media in deliberately keeping Society Ignorant, by means of Environment Population Connection censorship? Where is Ecological Societal System, in terms of Exponential Population Growth colliding with Exponentially Declining Resources? Is the Media Aggravating Instability by encouraging Population Growth and Increased Resource Consumption? Is the Media Encouraging Stability in favour of Population Stabilisation & Reduced Resource Exploitation?

[84] What shall be the Consequences of Refusing to Confront and Plan for Mitigating Ecological Overshoot?: Anarchy and Resource Wars:

[85] Military Predictors: According to Major Ralph Peters, The Culture of Future Conflict, US Army War College, Parameters, Winter 1995-96, pp. 18-27.
““Resource scarcity will be a direct cause of confrontation, conflict, and war. The struggle to maintain access to critical resources will spark local and regional conflicts that will evolve into the most frequent conventional wars of the next century. Today, the notion of resource wars leads the Westerner to think immediately of oil, but water will be the fundamental need of some states, anti-states, and peoples. We envision a need to preserve rainforests, but expanding populations will increasingly create regional shortages of food--especially when nature turns fickle. We are entering the century of "not enough," and we will bleed for things we previously could buy. [.. ] Gross overpopulation will destroy fragile possibilities for progress in much of the non-Western world, and much of this problem is the West's fault. Our well intentioned introduction of relatively crude concepts of sanitation and disease control, combined with our determination to respond generously to local famines, has allowed populations to explode. [..] Basic resources will prove inadequate for populations exploding beyond natural limits, and we may discover truths about ourselves that we do not wish to know. In the end, the greatest challenge may be to our moral order.”

[86] According to the Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon Officials in Nightline, 2000 documentary with Ted Koppel; politicians refusal to confront reality, and the lack of political will, to act on exponential population growth colliding with declining resources, are the root causes of current resource wars over oil; which shall soon be manifested as resource wars over water, soil, arable land, etc.

[48] It also asked the Constitutional Court to address the issue of “Deliberate Indifference” to Media Corruption; i.e. how the media Manipulate the Habits & Opinions of citizens in favour of Consumerist Ecologically Destructive Society, for Profit:
[94] The issue of Deliberate Indifference by journalists and media editors to their own media corruption (intellectual dishonesty, hypocrisy and deception and fraud) is found by all Respondents to varying degrees in this chronology. While the Nazi Party, ‘evil Apartheid’ and corruption on steroids ANC have individuals who are willing to risk their careers to expose ANC corruption, the only professional journalist who publicly spoken out about media corruption in South Africa is David Bullard (The Hollow Men of Journalism , and A mosquito buzzing in the dark * ).

[95] Mr. Bullard describes how Mondli Makhanya (Second Respondent) submitted forged documents into the court record during court proceedings; and how all SA media editors informed hereof refused to publish this information. If those allegations were made against General Beki Cele or Helen Zille, the same media editors would be acting like starving vultures; but when it is one of their own, in fact the Chairman of SANEF, they cover it up; and remain silent. When it comes to media corruption, SA media’s editors, professors and Ombudsman don’t think the public have a right to know; that SA’s self-righteous editors are as corrupt, if not more corrupt than the politicians and civil servants they publicly flagellate and condemn for their own financial profit.

[96] Except for David Bullard, it appears that there are no journalists or editors with the Milgramesque skills and capabilities to either (a) resist the temptation from participating in the dominant media corruption paradigm, and (b) cross the yellow journalism line of silence to expose their fellow colleague’s corruption. The media editor and media elite respondents herein cited, are as ideologically obedient to their code of silence about fellow media editors corruption, as Adolf Eichmann was to Nazism; they lack the capabilities to cross the yellow line and expose their own.

[97] According to John Pilger: “It is not enough for journalists to see themselves as mere messengers without understanding the hidden agendas of the message and myths that surround it.”

[98] In a Guardian article: Why Are Wars not being Reported Honestly; John Pilger describes journalists and editors confirming their role as censorship agents, along similar lines of reasoning as detailed in Dr. T. Michael Maher’s report: How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population – Environment Connection, Pilger writes:
"I am perfectly open to the accusation that we were hoodwinked," said Jeremy Paxman, talking about Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction to a group of students last year. "Clearly we were." As a highly paid professional broadcaster, he omitted to say why he was hoodwinked.

Dan Rather, who was the CBS news anchor for 24 years, was less reticent. "There was a fear in every newsroom in America," he told me, "a fear of losing your job... the fear of being stuck with some label, unpatriotic or otherwise." Rather says war has made "stenographers out of us" and that had journalists questioned the deceptions that led to the Iraq war, instead of amplifying them, the invasion would not have happened. This is a view now shared by a number of senior journalists I interviewed in the US.

"Does that make journalists accomplices?" I asked him.

"Yes... unwitting perhaps, but yes."

What is the value of journalists speaking like this? The answer is provided by the great reporter James Cameron, whose brave and revealing filmed report, made with Malcolm Aird, of the bombing of civilians in North Vietnam was banned by the BBC. "If we who are meant to find out what the bastards are up to, if we don't report what we find, if we don't speak up," he told me, "who's going to stop the whole bloody business happening again?"

[99] John Pilgers The War You Don’t See Pilger traces the motivations for such censorship back to the father of public relations: Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud.

[100] In Bernays’s 1928 book Propaganda, he described the conspiracy of manipulating the public with ‘public relations news’ to behave as psychologically insecure, dumbed-down, automatonic zombie consumers, instead of educating them to be rational self-sufficient ecologically responsible citizens.

[101] In How and Why Journalists Avoid Population-Environment Connection, Dr. T. Michael Maher writes:
As we have seen, both land development economists and environmental experts acknowledge population growth as a key source of environmental change. But journalists frame environmental causality differently.

Why? Communication theory offers several possibilities. First is the hegemony-theory interpretation: reports omit any implication that population growth might produce negative effects, in order to purvey the ideology of elites who make money from population growth. As Molotch and Lester (1974) put it, media content can be viewed as reflecting "the practices of those having the power to determine the experience of others" (p. 120). Since real estate, construction and banking interests directly support the media through advertising purchases, this interpretation seems plausible. A number of media critics (e.g., Gandy, 1982; Altschull, 1984; Bennett, 1988) have suggested that media messages reflect the values of powerful political and commercial interests. Burd (1972), Kaniss (1991) and others have pointed out that newspapers have traditionally promoted population growth in their cities through civic boosterism. Molotch (1976) even suggested that cities can best be understood as entities competing for population growth, with the city newspaper as chief cheerleader.

Certainly most reporters would be incensed at the suggestion that they shade their reporting to placate commercial interests. But Breed’s classic study of social control in the newsroom (1955) showed that news managers’ values are transmissible to journalists through a variety of pressures: salaries, story assignments, layout treatment, editing, and a variety of other strategies that effectively shape news stories in ways acceptable to management.

[103] The Radical Honesty SA Amicus before the Constitutional Court, in The Citizen v. McBride – totally censored by all the SA media -- makes this point very clearly in paragraph 7:
Equity will not allow a statute to be used as a cloak for fraud: Mainstream Access-to-Discourse-Gatekeeper Editors censorship of nonviolent political grievances and problem solving activism facilitate a pressure cooker socio-political reality for their ‘If it Bleads, it Leads’ corporate propaganda profits, in knowledge application of:
‘As long as there is some possibility of getting results by political means, the chances that any political group or individual will turn violent are truly radically small, or maybe vanishingly small’, NYT;

‘The exposure in the media is what gets people’s attention. People follow what is happening in the news, not what is happening in the courts’, PWC;

‘[Editors] abuse of media power, by means of strategies whereby they abuse public discourse/free speech resources; by providing certain parties with preferential and special access to such public discourse, and severely restricting or denying others any access to such public discourse; (PDF)

Mainstream media avoid addressing or enquiring into root causes of problems as reported in How and Why Journalists Avoid Population – Environment connection; and censor non-violent root-cause problem solving activism .

[49] The Concourt application was reported on by SAPA; with not very subtle insunuations that Johnstone was insane. No psychological evidence or expert whatsoever was provided for the journalist’s insinuation. Johnstone was not asked for comment. On 15 April 2011 Jeni O’Grady of SA Press Association (SAPA) wrote another report on the Constitutional Courts dismissal of the Radical Honesty application, again published by various publications . Both articles totally excluded any mention about the allegations and evidence of media corruption, or any detail about the TRC fraud allegations and evidence. None of the applications who published their biased smear articles provided their readers with a copy of the original Radical Honesty Application filed to the Court for their readers to determine whether the news publication’s report was an accurate or biased depiction of the legal documents filed with the Constitutional Court.

[50] An excellent example of how far the corporatist fascist elite goal’s of using the media as a psychological warfare brainwashing tool to destroy citizens identity’s as patriotic rational citizens, and mould their identities into psychologically insecure, dumbed-down, consumerist mind-enslaved automatonic zombies; was provided to me; when I nominated the Constitutional Court ruling dismissal of the Radical Honesty case, against 88 media respondents, as a World Guinness Record “of Judicial Incompetence – i.e. refusal to apply their minds to the evidence before them, to make such an impartial enquiry into such evidence; in accordance with the Rule of Law.” Guinness World Records declined to accept the submission stating that gross corruption was not of great interest to the worlds citizens.

[51] Concourt 06-11: Radical Honesty SA v. SANEF & 87 others, filed 28 Jan 2011.
  1. Application for Direct Access: Notice of Motion (PDF)
  2. Application for Direct Access: Founding Affidavit (PDF)
  3. Application for Condonation – Representation: Notice & Affidavit (PDF)
  4. Chief Justice’s Order Dismissing Application issued 01 February 2011 (PDF)



[E] RADICAL HONESTY AMICUS CURIAE: 07-2010 EQ JHB: AFRIFORUM V. MALEMA

[52] On 19 April 2011 Radical Honesty filed an application to proceed as an Amicus Curiae in the ‘Kill Boers’ Hate Speech Equality Court case of Afriforum v. Malema (PDF). The Amicus application requests the court to “admit the attached Heads of Argument as the Radical Honesty Culture and Religion’s Official For the Court Record Objective Reasonable Perspective in this matter: Heads of Argument of Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty Culture; ‘Boer/Settler’ descendant of Dutch, French Huguenot and British ‘Settlers’: Hermanus Bosman, Andreus Lutgerus Kolver; Jacques de Villiers and James Augustus Johnstone; In Support of ‘Political Necessity French Riddle of the Kaffir Lily Pond’ Application of the Radical Honesty Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of ANC’s ‘TRC Social Contract Fraud’; Recommendation to Constitutional Court to Resolve ‘Kill Boer/Settler Hate Speech’ Descartian v. Ubuntu Conformist Cultural Friction by Implementing: (A) 23 April 1994 Accord on Afrikaner Self-Determination to provide Boers with a ‘Kaffir’ Free Speech Volkstaat; and/or (B) Jus Sanguinis Repatriation of ‘Settlers’ to European Progenitor Nations.”

[53] The Founding Affidavit clarifies that Johnstone has various SA Court convictions for calling three different persons ‘Kaffirs’ in accordance with her Radical Honesty culture definitions of the word ‘Kaffir’; and that the courts ruled her cultural definition, cultural intentions and cultural expert witnesses to be irrelevant in their determination of the meaning of the word “kaffir’:
[12] ‘Kaffir’ Contempt in Facie Curiae: Prison Sentence: One Year:

[13] On 31 January 2003 I was convicted of ‘contempt in facie curiae’ for calling a black prosecutor (Sipoyo), and a white magistrate (ADS Meyer) respectively black and white ‘kaffirs’. The Prosecutor wanted to have me certified as insane, but she knew absolutely nothing about psychology. She did not know who Sigmund Freud is, let alone Karl Jung or Thomas Szaszz. She also had not the foggiest clue what a Forensic Psychologist is, or does; but she wanted to use her official authority as a prosecutor to have me certified as insane. I filed complaints with the NPA asking for her to be removed from my case; but instead I was arrested without the required arrest warrant paperwork and transferred to Lentegeur [Mental Institution] in the middle of the night. I escaped and hitch-hiked to Pretoria, to go and see the American Embassy. A US Embassy USAID Official called the Forensic Psychologist to enquire her reasons for my admission to Lentegeur. When I returned to George court, the same Prosecutor was still on my case. I told the Magistrate during court proceedings, that I did not want the corrupt black kaffir (deceiver) prosecutor on my case. He ordered me to apologize to her. I refused. He demanded I apologize, or he would convict me of Contempt of Court. I responded with ‘Fuck You, white Kaffir (deceiver)’ and your Two-Faced Gatkruiping Rainbow Hypocrisy and showed him the middle finger. He convicted me of three counts of contempt (2 x 3 months, and 6 months, served consecutively). I was denied parole, and served every single day of that prison term.

[14] The NPA and Chief Justice Hlope refused to place the Appeal (HC-WC: A 696-04, leave granted on 16 February 2004, by Regional Magistrate VA Botha ), on the roll for hearing in the High Court, Western Cape.

[..]

[26] ‘Kaffir’ Crimen Injuria: Prison Sentence: Six Months, Suspended 3 years:
I am currently serving a six month prison term, suspended for three years, on a conviction and sentence of ‘crimen injuria’ for calling a politician (Mrs. Patricia de Lille) a ‘kaffir’ in a private SMS. The Magistrate ruled that my Radical Honesty culture definitions of ‘kaffir’ were irrelevant; my sincere motivations for sharing my anger honestly face-to-face in order to focus on attaining sincere forgiveness were irrelevant. It was irrelevant if the Radical Honesty culture’s definitions and meanings for the word are different to the politicians, even if the politician knew the definitions of ‘kaffir’ were not the same. The only thing that was important and relevant was that the politician decided to interpret my use of the word ‘kaffir’ according to her definition of ‘kaffir’, not mine; and consequently to feel hurt and insulted. The Magistrate had no interest whatsoever in hearing the expert witness testimony of the leader – Brad Blanton -- of my culture: Radical Honesty, about how it was impossible for me to create the intention to insult, when my intention of sharing my anger honestly is the official Radical Honesty practice to share transparently and reach sincere forgiveness.

Although the Registrar approved my In Forma Pauperis application to appeal the conviction and sentence, the appointed In Forma Pauperis attorneys Braam Swart & Partners declined to represent me for alleged reasons of ‘complexity of legal argument’ .

[..]

[29] Truth and Reconciliation Fraud:

[..]

[33] There was a nagging problem I have always had, which nobody has ever been able to give me an answer to; regarding the ANC’s alleged ‘tragedy of being forced to turn to a violent liberation struggle’.

[34] “We must all understand that the most potent weapons of war are the penis and the womb. Therefore, if you cannot convince a group to control its population by discussion, debate, intelligent analysis etc., you must consider their action in using the penis and the womb to increase population an Act of War,” was the ‘Just War defence’ response by Former Judge Jason G. Brent, to an individual who disputed my statement that the National Party could rationally conclude that white South Africans would face extinction as a result of the ‘swart gevaar’; in the absence of implementing apartheid (the competitive exclusion principle).

[35] I have so far submitted official requests to the European, Netherlands, Swiss, UK Anti-Apartheid Movements: Could the ANC have won their struggle against Apartheid non-violently, by demonstrating their honourable Just War Just Cause Population Policy Intentions to end their Breeding War?
[i] Prior to the ANC’s M-Plan declaration of War against Apartheid: Did any EU Anti-Apartheid Organisation advise the ANC or any SA Anti-Apartheid Organisation to avoid/suspend the violent ‘liberation struggle ’campaign against the Apartheid Goverment, and to launch a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop the African ‘swart gevaar’ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate the ANC’s honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions?

[ii] If (a) it was abundantly clear that the major fundamental motive for establishing Apartheid was fear of the ‘swart gevaar’; (2) Apartheid Officials and citizens ‘swart gevaar’ population policy fears are not only legally and ecologically justifiable, but common sense; (3) the ANC and Anti-Apartheid movement were culturally honourably concerned with Just War practices; (4) why did the ANC not consider launching a non-violent cultural and political campaign to stop their African ‘swart gevaar’ breeding-war population explosion, to demonstrate their honourable Just War Just Cause Intentions to ‘swart gevaar’ Apartheid Officials and citizens?

[36] I have asked the following South African Anti-Apartheid Movement Organisations the same question: Nelson Mandela Foundation; Archbishop Desmond Tutu; President Jacob Zuma and African National Congress; Ms. Helen Zille and Democratic Alliance; Mr. Bantu Holomisa & UDM; Mr. Amichand Rajbansi and Minority Front; Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi and Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP); Ms. Patricia de Lille and Independent Democrats (ID); Letlapa Mpha-hlele, Pan Africanist Congress (PAC); Mr. Lekota, Congress of the People (COPE); Mr. Hlabirwa Mathume, African People's Convention (APC); Mr. Lucas Mangope, United Democratic Christian Party (UCDM); Mr. Jacob Dikobo, Azanian People’s Organisation; Mr. Kenneth Meshoe, African Christian Democratic Party; the religious signatories to the Kairos Black Liberation Theology document justifying the violent liberation struggle as a just war: General Secretariat, SA Council of Churches; Methodist Church; Catholic Bishops Conference; Anglican Church of SA, etc; Mr. Raj Daja, Law Society of SA; Ms. Janet Love, Legal Resources Center; Adv. Jacob van Garderen, Lawyers for Human Rights; Hugo van der Merwe, Center for Study of Violence and Reconciliation; Frans Cronje, SA Institute of Race Relations; Zwelinzima Vavi, COSATU; all editor members of SANEF who for the past 16 years have told SA’s directly and indirectly that the ANC’s resort to a violent liberation struggle was a last resort.

[37] Not one of these organisations has yet provided me with an answer for whether any member of the Anti-Apartheid Movement suggested that the ANC adopt a non-violent cultural and religions campaign to demonstrate their honourable Just War Just Cause Population Policy Intentions to end their Breeding War! And if not; why not? And if Not; how on earth they can justify the ANC’s adoption of violence as a last resort, when it is clear the ANC could have adopted a non-violent strategy which would have addressed the concerns of Apartheid politicians and citizens, and demonstrated their Just War Just Cause sincerity intentions.

[..]

[58] Consequently the Applicants In Forma Pauperis Amicus Curiae submission shall argue among others that:
[i] ANC’s ‘liberation struggle’ violated Just War (Military Honour) Theory Principles of International Law

[ii] The TRC negligently or intentionally avoided enquiring into evidence showing the ANC’s liberation struggle to have violated Just War Principles

[iii] The ANC’s TRC was a falsification of history, and is the source of SA’s political and ecological systemic collapse braintumour; of which ‘Kill the Boer Hate Speech’ is simply one of many symptoms.

[iv] The ANC’s actions of poverty pimping population production breeding-war acts of war; speak far louder than their verbal diarrhoea platitudes of ‘commitment to non-violence and peace’.

[v] Their psychological admiration for ‘liberation struggle violence’ is found in their masculine insecurity breeding war poverty pimping, and the psychological theories of Frantz Fanon (the native’s colonized mind can only be liberated through violence, he can only regain his self respect, on the rotting corpse of the settler) and Black Liberation Theology (Black Power advocacy of violent Marxist Elimination of Whiteness as the road to Salvation/Reconciliation)

[vi] Because Fundamentalist Black Liberation Theology ‘Anti-Whiteness’ Marxist Revolutionaries shall not rest until they achieve their Violent Marxist Cleansing Liberation / Reconciliation / Salvation on the Rotting Corpses of Boer/Settlers; the only way to enable Boer/Settlers to protect themselves is to:
[a] Implement 23 April 1994 Accord on Afrikaner Self-Determination, by endorsing and supporting the work of the Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie to establish a Boer Volkstaat; and/or

[b] Initiate a Program of Jus Sanguinis Voluntary Repatriation of ‘Settlers’ to European Progenitor Nations, for Persecuted Settlers/African White Refugees who prefer to return to their Settler motherlands.

[54] The Radical Honesty Heads of Argument Table of Contents (PDF):
I. LEGAL PRINCIPLES ADDRESSED AND RELIED UPON:
  1. Multicultural Conflict-of-Laws Substantive Due Process: Clarity & Impartiality
  2. Bolam Test: Common Law Reasonableness Test: Skill & Competencies
  3. Political Necessity: Freedom of Speech & Civil Disobedience
  4. Judicial Activism: A More Searching Judicial Enquiry: Search for Truth
  5. Ecolaw 101: Laws of Sustainability: Ecological Social Contract
  6. Law of Ecological Stability: State of System at Time the Act is Performed

II: RADICAL HONESTY TRUTH & FORGIVENESS SOCIAL CONTRACT PRINCIPLES
  1. Radical Honesty Overview: Being Specific about Anger and Forgiveness
  2. Stanley Milgram Studies on Obedience: Legal, Socio-political Implications
  3. Common Law Reasonableness Test: Skills and Competencies
  4. Rule of Law & Forgiveness: Individuality, Independence & Integrity

III: POPULATION POLICY COMMON SENSE PRINCIPLES
  1. French Riddle of the Lily Pond: State of the Eco-Cultural System
  2. Thou Shalt Not Transgress Carrying Capacity Prophets
  3. Eco-Numeracy: Exponential Functions and Carrying Capacity
  4. Tragedy of the Commons: Limited World, Limited Rights
  5. Overpopulation: Resources Scarcity and Resource War Violence
  6. Demographics and Violence: Youth Bulges
  7. Population Pressures, Resource Wars and National Security
  8. How and Why Journalists Avoid the Population-Environment Connection

IV: JUST WAR & TRAGEDY OF ANC’S BREEDING WAR COMMONS
  1. Apartheid: Crime Against Humanity; or Just War for Demographic Survival?
  2. ANC’s Liberation Struggle violated Just War (Honour) Theory Principles:
  3. No Just Cause: ANC Could Have Non-violently Ended their Breeding War
  4. No Right Intention: Apartheid raised Black Living Standards to Highest in Africa
  5. No Proper Authority: Did Black South Africans want Black Rule?
  6. No Proportional Force: People’s War Terror for ‘Liberation Struggle’
  7. No Proportional Force: ANC’s Mbokodo Quatro Torture Camps
  8. War No Last Resort: Violence a Liberating Force’ on Rotting Corpse of Settler

V: TRC FRAUD: ‘CRIME OF APARTHEID’ WAS FALSIFICATION OF SA HISTORY
  1. TRC Social Contract Maintains Legal Oppression by Avoiding Key Definitions
  2. Black Liberation Theology vs Calvinist Christian Concepts of Reconciliation
  3. Was Truth & Reconciliation Seen to be Done by Black Liberation Theology TRC?
  4. Nature & Causes of Apartheid: A Just War for Demographic Survival?
  5. Farm Murders: A Rainbow TRC Peace, or Racial Hatred War Reality?
  6. ANC’s Masculine Insecurity Poverty Pimping Population Production Breeding War

VI. A DESCARTIAN DIALOGUE: INTENTIONS AND DEFINITIONS OF ‘KAFFIR’?
  1. Existential Friction Theory Identities: Boer Descartian v. Ubuntu Conformist
  2. Radical Honesty Habeus Mentem Eco-Psycho-Cultural Definitions of Kaffir
  3. SA Courts: Radical Honesty Intention & Definitions of ‘Kaffir’ Irrelevant
  4. CCT: Radical Honesty Intention & Definitions of ‘Kaffir’: Not In Interests of Justice

VI. STATE OF TRC FRAUD’S SYSTEM: SYSTEMIC ECO-CULTURAL COLLAPSE
  1. 74% OF White South Africans: We Are African White Refugees
  2. Ethno-Nationalism is foundation for Democracy, not its threat
  3. Multi-culturalism is Impossible with Dysfunctional Cultures
  4. Peak Oil, Economic Collapse & Friction Theory Cultural Conflict
  5. Parallel Goals: Economic Relocalisation & Political Secession
  6. Boer Volkstaat in SA: Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie (VVK)

[55] Radical Honesty SA’s reasonable recommendation to the Parties and Court being:
[21] In the absence of a Truly Impartial Truth and Reconciliation Commission run by International Independents such as Dr. Blanton and Pastor James Manning to lobotomize SA’s TRC Fraud Political Tumour; the Eco-Cultural State of the Body Political System shall collapse from the pressure cooker masculine insecurity rage of perceived insults if ‘Kill the Boer’ and ‘Kaffir’ are both designated as Freedom of Speech.

[22] Unless they find the honourable courage to prove me wrong: Fundamentalist Black Liberation Theology ‘Anti-Whiteness’ Marxist Revolutionaries shall not rest until they achieve their Violent Marxist Cleansing Liberation / Reconciliation / Salvation on the Rotting Corpses of Boer/Settlers. ‘Kill the Boer’ is their Mascot, towards that ultimate ‘Settler Free Utopia’. Consequently, to enable Boer/Settlers to protect themselves:
[A] Implement 23 April 1994 Accord on Afrikaner Self-Determination for a Boer ‘Kaffir’ Free Speech Volkstaat, by endorsing and supporting the work of the Volksraad Verkiesing Kommissie, for a Boer Volkstaat; and/or

[B] Initiate a Program of Jus Sanguinis Voluntary Repatriation of ‘Settlers’ to European Progenitor Nations, for Persecuted Settlers/African White Refugees who prefer to return to their Settler motherlands.

[56] Radical Honesty Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae in Afriforum v. Malema:
  1. Notice of Motion: Application of Lara Johnstone, Radical Honesty Culture & Religion, to Proceed as an Amicus Curiae; Founding Affidavit of Lara Johnstone; and Heads of Argument: Written Submissions of Radical Honesty – SA (PDF)

[57] Copies of the Radical Honesty Notice, Affidavit and Heads of Argument were provided to SA Media, Political Parties and NGO’s; as well as European ‘Settler’ Progenitor/Stamvader Nations, via their Embassies and other European Nations:
  1. Prime Minister Mark Rutte, c/o: Hon. Amb. Z.E. dhr. Rob de Vos; Koninkrijk der Nederlanden Ambassade
  2. President Nicolas Sarkozy, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Jacques Lapouge, Republique Francaise Embassy
  3. Ch. Angela Merkel & Fed. Min. of State, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Dieter W. Haller, Bundesrepublik Deutschland Ambassador
  4. Prime Minister David Cameron, c/o: Hon HC HE Dr. Nicola Brewer, British High Commission
  5. Pres. H. Inderkum, Council of States, c/o: Hon. Amb. H E Mr R Bäerfuss, Embassy of the Swiss Confederation
  6. Mr. A. Fogh Rasmussen, Sec. Gen. NATO, c/o: Office of the Defense Attaché, Embassy of Belgium in Pretoria
  7. President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, c/o: HE Mr Carlos Sersale Di Cerisano, Argentine Republic Embassy
  8. Prime Minister Heinz Fischer, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Dr Otto Ditz, Rep. of Austria Embassy
  9. Prime Minister Julia Gillard, c/o: HE HC Hon. Ms Ann Harrap, Australia High Commission
  10. Prime Minister Yves Leterme, c/o: Hon. Amb HE Jan F. Mutton, Embassy of Belgium in Pretoria
  11. Prime Minister Boyko Borisov, c/o: HE Amb. Mr Volodya Neykov, Republic of Bulgaria Embassy
  12. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, c/o: HE HC Ms Adele Dion, Canada High Commission
  13. President Vaclav Klaus, c/o: HE Amb. Mr Martin Pohl, Republic of Czech Embassy
  14. Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen, c/o: HE Amb. Dan Frederiksen, Embassy of Kingdom of Denmark
  15. Prime Minister Andrus Ansip, c/o: Hon. Consul: Ms Rena Knipe, Republic of Estonia Honorary Consulate
  16. King Juan Carlos I, PM José LR Zapatero, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Benavides Orgaz, Kingdom of Spain Embassy
  17. Prime Minister Mari Kiviniemi, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Tiina Myllyntausta, Republic of Finland Embassy
  18. Prime Minister Giorgos Papandreou MP, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Ms S Theocharopoulas, Hellenic Republic of Greece Embassy
  19. Prime Minister Viktor Orban; c/o & via: Hon. Amb. HE Emri Istvan, Embassy of Republic of Hungary
  20. President Mary McAleese, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Mr Colin Wrafter, Embassy of Republic of Ireland
  21. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Mr D Segev-Steinberg, State of Israel Embassy
  22. Pres. G Napolitano & PM Silvio Berlusconi, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Mr Elio Menzione, Italian Republic Embassy
  23. Pres. D Grybauskaitė & PM A Kubilius, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Ms I Skardziuviene, Republic of Lithuania Honorary Consulate
  24. Prince Albert II & Min. of State: M Roger, c/o: Mr Francis Kasasa, Honorary Consul, Principality of Monaco Hon. Consulate
  25. King Harald V, PM Stoltenberg, P Andersen, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Tor Christian Hildan, Royal Norwegian Embassy
  26. Prime Minister John Key, c/o: Hon. HC HE Mr Geoff J Randal, New Zealand High Commission
  27. Pres. A. Cavaco Silva, PM José Sócrates, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Mr Joao Ramos Pinto, Republic of Portugal Embassy
  28. Pres. Boris Tadić & PM Mirko Cvetković, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Dr G Vujicic, Republic of Serbia Embassy
  29. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, c/o: Hon. Amb. HE Anatoly A. MAKAROV, Embassy of the Russian Federation
  30. King Carl XVI Gustaf & PM F. Reinfeldt, c/o: HE Mr Peter Tejler, Ambassador, Kingdom of Sweden Embassy
  31. President Barack Obama, c/o: HE Mr DH Gips, Ambassador, United States of America Embassy
  32. Pope Benedict XVI & Pres. G. Lajolo, c/o: Holy See: Nuncio of the Vatican, HE Archbishop James Patrick Green

[58] On 05 May 2011, Johnstone requested the Press Ombudsman, Mr. Joe Thloloe to please provide the SANEF editors reasons for their censorship:
Please would you be so kind as to inform me exactly what the SANEF editors reasons are; why the TRC FRAUD arguments of the Radical Honesty NL-FR-DE-UK-CH 'Boer/Settler' Applic. filed in Afriforum v Malema (PDF enclosed as per email sent on Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:30:07 +0200); are determined not of interest to SA citizens.

The Registrar received the Radical Honesty SA application to proceed as an Amicus Curiae, served on 19 April 2011. The Registrar submitted the application to Judge Colin Lamont on 19 April 2011. Judge Colin Lamont noted as part of public court proceedings on 20 April 2011, that he had received the Radical Honesty SA Application to proceed as an Amicus Curiae. The application is still before Judge Lamont, who shall issue his ruling in due course.

Neither Afriforum, TAU-SA, Mr. Malema, or the ANC have yet filed any objections to the Radical Honesty SA Amicus application.

I am unclear as to what factors these SANEF editors use to determine what is and is not in the public interest; and how exactly these TRC fraud arguments and their Black Liberation Theology TRC ‘violence on the rotting corpses of settlers’ and population policy clash of cultures friction theory consequences detailed in this trial; are determined not to be in the interests of SA citizens.

[59] A subsequent request on 06 May 2011 to enquire whether Mr. Thloloe intended to provide a response, has simply been ignored.

[60] Respondents Ms. Celia Dugger of the Africa New York Times bureau, Ms. Ainslinn Laing of the UK Telegraph, and Editor Mr. Casper Naber of the Algemene Dagblad have also been provided with various updates on the TRC FRAUD legal applications filed to the Constitutional Court, as well as the TRC FRAUD arguments filed in the Boer Volkstaat Theses Briefing Paper (PDF) submitted to Boer/Settlers European Stamvader/Progenitor Nations, NATO and other EU nations. None of the SA Media Editors; nor the New York Times, Telegraph or Algemene Dagblad have provided any argument or evidence to contradict any of the TRC FRAUD arguments and evidence submitted to them; yet they refuse to publish the information or to allow for the TRC FRAUD argument to be debated in SA or International public discourse. The consequences of their censorship being their endorsement of the real life genocide and crimes against humanity consequences of the TRC FRAUD; such as for example:
Farmer: Andre van der Merwe murdered, dragged 1.2 km behind his truck (No English News Media reports found in online search; only Beeld & blog translations)

Farmer van der Merwe was unmarried, was dragged about 1.2 km behind his own Toyota truck by his murderers, who shot him in the back of his head, chest and cheek, said the NorthWest police.

“You did not want to see the corpse. The murderers tortured him terrible. He did not have a shirt on anymore and his shorts were torn apart. They dragged him behind the truck over loose wire and mud,” said a man who wished to remain anonymous, for fear of being persecuted.

04-09-09 to 10-06-01: Helen Lotter, 57 & Alice Lotter, 76, tortured to death; Kill the Boer in blood on Welkom farm house wall (Censored by English SA media; who were too busy reporting on the ‘racism’ of the Reitz Four satire video in Bloemfontein) (PDF attached)

Boer woman’s womb was carved from her body with a broken beer-bottle…

2010-06-09 Welkom, Free State. The unmarried 57-year-old farm woman Miss Helen Lotter was stabbed repeatedly with a broken beer-bottle – so fiercely and deeply that her sexual organs internally and externally were extensively mutilated – and her cervix and uterus were completely missing: ’ testimony by coroner.

“Most cruel, violent crimes I’d ever seen while on the Bench…’ said High Court judge S.P.B. Hancke

The gardener of the two unarmed, frail Boer women who were tortured to death on March 6 2009 was found guilty of their extremely cruel murders. The trial left many questions unanswered: why the women were tortured to death over a three-hour period; why the slogan “Kill the Boer’ was daubed on the farm house wall; why so little of value was ‘robbed’.

High Court judge S.P.B. Hancke ruled that it was proven beyond any reasonable doubt that gardener Joseph Hlongwane, 22, had tortured to death the elderly, unarmed Helen Lotter and her daughter Alice, 57, on March 6 2009. No explanation was given by the gardener as to why he had displayed such extreme cruelty, carrying out at least three hours of torture. He will be sentenced on Wednesday 9 June 2010.

Helen Lotter, 57 died of repeated, sharp trauma injuries to her lower body.

The frail, unarmed mother, Mrs Alice Lotter (76) died from multiple, deep stabbing wounds to her neck and throat on the night of 6 March 2009; her daughter Helen, left, succumbed to 'severe, repeated, sharp trauma injuries to her lower body administered with knives and a broken beer bottle.' A post-mortem examination by Dr Horst Bumba described that all of Helen’s front teeth were bashed out and that her entire body and face were ‘covered in severe bruises, chafing and stabbing wounds.’

Helen Lotter was tortured so extensively that her womb 'was completely missing', and 'slabs of human fat the size a man's hand were sliced off her body', according to the post-mortum examiner’s testimony.

[61] The 3000 farm murders have occurred in a country officially allegedly at peace, after having achieved alleged ‘reconciliation’, indicate that the “rainbow reconciled nation” is nothing but an illusion not reflected in evidentiary facts and reality on the ground. People who have forgiven each other, or are participating in such a conversation, collaborate to address and eliminate the root causes of their dispute, they don’t murder, rape and torture those they allegedly forgave, in order to rob them; unless their definition for ‘forgiveness’ is liberation and salvation ‘murder, rape and torture’ on the ‘rotting corpses of settlers’.

[62] The Complainants consequently Request the ICC: Prosecutor’s Office to:
Initiate an investigation into the allegations that the respondents are to be held criminally culpable for their endorsement and concealment of TRC FRAUD, the consequences of which are genocide and crimes against humanity against white South Africans, and ethno-cultural legal and political persecution of Afrikaner/Boer and Radical Honesty cultures.

Dated at George, this 08th day of May, 2011.

» » » » [PDF: Filing Sheet, Notice & Complaint]


No comments:

FLEUR-DE-LIS HUMINT :: F(x) Population Growth x F(x) Declining Resources = F(x) Resource Wars

KaffirLilyRiddle: F(x)population x F(x)consumption = END:CIV
Human Farming: Story of Your Enslavement (13:10)
Unified Quest is the Army Chief of Staff's future study plan designed to examine issues critical to current and future force development... - as the world population grows, increased global competition for affordable finite resources, notably energy and rare earth materials, could fuel regional conflict. - water is the new oil. scarcity will confront regions at an accelerated pace in this decade.
US Army: Population vs. Resource Scarcity Study Plan
Human Farming Management: Fake Left v. Right (02:09)
ARMY STRATEGY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT: Office of Dep. Asst. of the Army Environment, Safety and Occupational Health: Richard Murphy, Asst for Sustainability, 24 October 2006
2006: US Army Strategy for Environment
CIA & Pentagon: Overpopulation & Resource Wars [01] [02]
Peak NNR: Scarcity: Humanity’s Last Chapter: A Comprehensive Analysis of Nonrenewable Natural Resource (NNR) Scarcity’s Consequences, by Chris Clugston
Peak Non-Renewable Resources = END:CIV Scarcity Future
Race 2 Save Planet :: END:CIV Resist of Die (01:42) [Full]
FAIR USE NOTICE: The White Refugee blog contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to provide information for research and educational purposes, and advance understanding for the Canadian Immigration & Refugee Board's (IRB) ‘White Refugee’ ruling. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Copyright owners who object to the fair use of their copyright news reports, may submit their objections to White Refugee Blog at: [jmc.pa.tf(at)gmail(dot)com]