Press Ombudsman Thloloe Refuses English Media Bias on Reits Appeal Articles Complaint as Spam

From: Joe Thloloe, Press Ombudsman
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:15 AM
To: Lara Johnstone
Cc: Khanyi Mndaweni; Johan Retief, Dep. Press Ombudsman
Subject: Re: Press Ombudsman: Complaint: SAPA: [1.1, 1.2] Reits Four Sentences Reduced

Dear Ms Johnson,

You will not be getting a response from this office - you take up the space and time of people who use this system for legitimate complaints.

You are not one of them.

I've previously asked you to stop sending your spam to this office and you continue to do so. Please desist.

Regards,

Joe Thloloe.


________________________________________

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 9:53 AM
To: Press Ombudsman: Joe Thloloe
Cc: Khanyi Mndaweni; Johan Retief, Dep. Ombudsman
Subject: Press Ombudsman: Complaint: SAPA: [1.1, 1.2] Reits Four Sentences Reduced

Press Ombudsman,

I have had no response to complaint filed on 24 June from the Press Ombudsman's office.

Lara Johnstone

________________________________________

From: Lara Johnstone
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 4:08 PM
To: Press Ombudsman: Joe Thloloe
Cc: Khanyi Mndaweni; Johan Retief, Dep. Ombudsman
Subject: Press Ombudsman: Complaint: SAPA: [1.1, 1.2] Reits Four
Sentences Reduced

Re: Complaint: SAPA, News 24, Sowetan, Mail & Guardian, Timeslive, IOL: Reits Four Sentences Reduced.

24 June 2011

Press Ombudsman,

COMPLAINT: Violation of SANEF Press Code of Conduct: 1.1, 1.2.

1.1 The press shall be obliged to report news truthfully, accurately and fairly.
1.2 News shall be presented in context and in a balanced manner, without an intentional or negligent departure from the facts whether by:
1.2.1 distortion, exaggeration or misrepresentation;
1.2.2 material omissions; or
1.2.3 summarisation.

Articles: SAPA: Reits Four Sentences Reduced, republished in News 24, Sowetan, Mail and Guardian, TimesLive, IOL.

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

‘Black African workers are retarded’ - Reits 4 State Prosecutor Johan Kruger

So, read between the lines; and don't expect an ignorant black African to be able to do so; is the message from State Pros. Johan kruger? Basically the Reits 4 State Prosecutor Johan Kruger says that if a white person in South Africa wants a ‘healthy’ relationship with a black person in South Africa; then in this ‘healthy’ relationship you must treat the black African like they are retarded.

Do not expect a black African to know what consent is. Do not expect a black African to take responsibility for thier consent and agreement to freely conduct a voluntary act; for which their was no pressure they participate in. Black Africans are moronically stupid, they do not know what consent is; because they are intellectually retarded. So it is your responsibility as a white person, to know that even if a black person tells you that they agree to do something; you are speaking to a retarded person, who is non compis mentis on the issue of consent. It is consequently your responsibility to be their adult (even if they are double your age; you as a young white person, are required to be their adult; because no matter how old a black African is; they are retarded and don't know what consent is; nor what a consensual honourable agreement is).

Not only do black Africans not know what consent is; or what it means to make an honourable consensual agreement; but they are also retarded in that they don't know what a joke is; or what satire is. Your ‘healthy’ relationship with a black person does not involve making a joke; because their retarded intellectual capacity does not allow them to be able to understand what a joke is. They will not understand your intentions to be a friend, to have a laugh together; that this is part of what in the rest of the world is considered a healthy relationship: to be able to laugh together and with each other.

So, the state Prosecutor implies that Black Africans are retarded; because they will never consider the possibility of the real motive of sincerity and friendship, when you joke with them; they will always conclude that your intentions are malicious. There is sweet fuck all you can do; it doesn't matter how honourable; or noble or kind your intentions were; they will interpret your intentions as the intent to insult them.

So, what you must do, is treat black Africans as if they are retarded; they are cognitively incapable of conscious consent; of making an honourable agreement; of understanding what satire and or humour contributes to a relationship.

The Reits-4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus:

1. Introduction: Politicians, Editors & Lawyers: Kangaroo Court Actors
   

2. Media Timeline of Events - Ignoring Anti-Lynching Voices
   

3. Ubuntu Kangaroo Court Justice – Evidence is Irrelevant
   

4. The Reasonable Initiation Satire Legal Fraud – Who cares about Evidence?
   

5. The Dolus Eventualis Legal Fraud – The Multiculti Boiling Frog
   

6. The Reconciliation Religious Fraud – Censoring TRC Fraud
   

7. What is Oprah's Position on Black Liberation Theology TRC Fraud?

A lynching is the practice of killing people by extrajudicial mob action, where a mob is generally considered to be more than five persons. The mob generally act under the pretext of service to justice, their race or tradition. They use lynching and other terror tactics to intimidate a particular racial, religious or cultural group into political, social or economic submission. A legal lynching has other names such as Stalin's Political Show trials, or Kangaroo Court Justice, etc.

The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial. The term was first recorded in the 1930s. There is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant and that the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. Show trials exhibit scant regard for the principles of jurisprudence and even for the letter of the law. Defendants have little real opportunity to justify themselves.

Reits 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus: What is Oprah's Position on Black Liberation Theology TRC Fraud?

Sent to Ms. Oprah Winfrey at: Oprah.com on 03 June 2011 @ 15:50 hrs (GMT+2)

Radical Honesty SA to Oprah Winfrey; CC: Maya Angelou, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings; Eric Phelps, Vatican Assassins; UFS: J. Jansen; Pastor James Manning

Req. for Info: What is Oprah's Position on the Black Liberation Theology TRC Fraud Documentation filed by Maya Angelou's Nephew: Demian Emile Johnson's South African Wife; in SA Courts and the International Criminal Court; including in the Reits Four Matter? (PDF)

Kind Regards

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

******************

Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 12:02 PM
To: Wheeler, Kimberly
Subject: Dr. Maya Angelou; c/o Lordly & Dame, Inc.: Re: Maya Angelou's Nephew: Demian Emile Johnson's South African Wife

Dr. Maya Angelou
c/o: Lordly & Dame, Inc.

The Attached letter references Dr. Maya Angelou.

Please would you be so kind as to forward it to Dr. Angelou, as a matter of transparency; so that she is aware of the allegations and statements.

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

******************

Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 3:58 PM
To: Jonathan Jansen, UFS
Subject: Att: Jonathan Jansen, UFS; Re: Oprah Winfrey's Perspective to RH-SA Black Liberation Theology TRC Fraud Allegations

TO: Ms. Oprah Winfrey
TO: Ms. Maya Angelou
TO: Eric. Jon Phelps
TO: UFS Rector: Jonathan Jansen
TO: Pastor James Manning, ATLAH

Please find attached PDF:

Req. for Info: What is Oprah's Position on the Black Liberation Theology TRC Fraud Documentation filed by Maya Angelou's Nephew: Demian Emile Johnson's South African Wife; in SA Courts and the International Criminal Court; including in the Reits Four Matter?

Respectfully,

Lara Johnstone
Radical Honesty SA

UFS Black Liberation Theology's 'Reconciliation' successfuly destroyed Reitz-4's ‘Whiteness’, by cultivating their ‘White Guilt’?

06 March 2011
Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

The Reitz Four's 'Reconciliation' was conducted in accordance to the official defined “Reconciliation” policies of the University of the Free State's: International Institute for Race, Reconciliation and Social Justice; of whom Allan Boesak, former ANC provincial chairman is the dean.

For ignorant Reitz Four and/or Calvinist Christian readers: Please take note: Your Calvinist defintion of “Reconciliation” is not the definition of University of the Free State's: International Institute for Race, Reconciliation and Social Justice.

Their definition of Reconciliation is that of Black Liberation Theology. What is Black Liberation Theology and how do Black Liberation Theologists define “Reconciliation”?

Since they avoid defining what they mean by 'reconciliation' in the UFS International Institute for Race, Reconciliation and Social Justice constitution (PDF); the only option is to observe whom they appoint to implement their policies, and how they go about implementing their policies.

Alan Boesak is the Dutch Reformed Black Liberation Theologian, who instigated the World Alliance of Reformed Churches to declare apartheid a heresy. Mr. Boesak is the author of the Black Liberation Theology book: Farewell to Innocence: A Socio-Ethical Study on Black Theology and Black Power.

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus [IV] The Reasonable Initiation Legal Fraud – Who cares about the Evidence?

Ubuntufied Legal Lynching in Rainbow Hypocrisy SA

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus

02 March 2011
Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

“All law is interpretation. A lawyer uses words, which are inherently imprecise, and when a law is applied to the fact of a new situation what lawyers do is interpret the code words to deem them appropriately or inappropriately applied to the case at hand. To view the law means to understand interpretation. Law has more to do with critical literacy studies than it probably has to do with anything else.” -- Professor David Skover, Professor of Law at Seattle University.

‘Lawyers are either social engineers, or they are parasites. Social Engineer Lawyers aim to eliminate the difference between what the laws say and mean, and how they are applied; whereas legal parasites aim to entrench their parasitism from the difference between what the laws say and mean, and the application of such differences to their parasitic benefit.’ -- Howard Law School, Professor Charlie Houston, the primary legal mentor of U.S. Supreme Court Justice
Thurgood Marshall; as quoted in Simple Justice: The History of Brown v. Board of Education, by Richard Kluger

This series shall consist of:

1. Introduction: Politicians, Editors & Lawyers: Kangaroo Court Actors
   

2. Media Timeline of Events - Ignoring Anti-Lynching Voices
   

3. Ubuntu Kangaroo Court Justice – Evidence is Irrelevant
   

4. The Reasonable Initiation Satire Legal Fraud – Who cares about Evidence?
   

5. The Dolus Eventualis Legal Fraud – The Multiculti Boiling Frog
   

6. The Reconciliation Religious Fraud – Censoring TRC Fraud

A lynching is the practice of killing people by extrajudicial mob action, where a mob is generally considered to be more than five persons. The mob generally act under the pretext of service to justice, their race or tradition. They use lynching and other terror tactics to intimidate a particular racial, religious or cultural group into political, social or economic submission. A legal lynching has other names such as Stalin's Political Show trials, or Kangaroo Court Justice, etc.

The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial. The term was first recorded in the 1930s. There is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant and that the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. Show trials exhibit scant regard for the principles of jurisprudence and even for the letter of the law. Defendants have little real opportunity to justify themselves.

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus [III] Ubuntu Kangaroo Court Justice – Evidence is Irrelevant

Ubuntufied Legal Lynching in Rainbow Hypocrisy SA

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus

28 February 2011
Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

“...freedom of expression is an essential process for advancing knowledge and discovering truth. An individual who seeks knowledge and truth must hear all sides of the question, consider all alternatives, test his judgment by exposing it to opposition, and make full use of different minds. Discussion must be kept open no matter how certainly true an accepted opinion may seem to be; many of the most widely acknowledged truths have turned out to be erroneous. Conversely, the same principles applies no matter how false or pernicious the new opinion appears to be; for the unaccepted opinion may be true or partially true and, even if wholly false, its presentation and open discussion compel a re-thinking and re-testing of the accepted opinion. The reasons which make open discussion essential for an intelligent individual judgment likewise make it imperative for rational social judgment.”
T Emerson, The System of Freedom of Expression at 6-7 (1970)

“In determining whether or not the [crimen injuria] act complained of is wrongful the Court applies the criterion of reasonableness “the algemene redelikheidsmaatstaf”. This is an objective test. It requires the conduct complained of to be tested against the prevailing norms of society. (i.e. the current values and thinking of the community) in order to determine whether such conduct can be classified as wrongful. To address the words to another which might wound his self-esteem but which are not, objectively determined, insulting (and therefore wrongful) cannot give rise to an action for injuria.” -- Maithufi v Minister of Safety & Security of the Rep. of South Africa (20382/05) [2007] ZAGPHC 163

This series shall consist of:

1. Introduction: Politicians, Editors & Lawyers: Kangaroo Court Actors
   

2. Media Timeline of Events - Ignoring Anti-Lynching Voices
   

3. Ubuntu Kangaroo Court Justice – Evidence is Irrelevant
   

4. The Reasonable Initiation Legal Fraud – Who cares about the Evidence?
   

5. The Cultural Satire Legal Fraud – The Multiculti Boiling Frog
   

6. The Reconciliation Religious Fraud – Censoring TRC Fraud

A lynching is the practice of killing people by extrajudicial mob action, where a mob is generally considered to be more than five persons. The mob generally act under the pretext of service to justice, their race or tradition. They use lynching and other terror tactics to intimidate a particular racial, religious or cultural group into political, social or economic submission. A legal lynching has other names such as Stalin's Political Show trials, or Kangaroo Court Justice, etc.

The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial. The term was first recorded in the 1930s. There is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant and that the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. Show trials exhibit scant regard for the principles of jurisprudence and even for the letter of the law. Defendants have little real opportunity to justify themselves.

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus: [II] Ignoring Anti-Lynching Voices

Ubuntufied Legal Lynching in Rainbow Hypocrisy SA

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus

27 February 2011
Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

“There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history..., as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

“The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men.

“We are intellectual prostitutes.”

-- John Swinton (1829-1901), editor at New York Times, New York Sun and John Swinton's Paper, remarks at a banquet in his honour in response to a toast to the independent press. (Labor's Untold Story, Richard O. Boyer & Herbert M. Morais. Published: United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, NY, 1955/1979.)

This series (shall) consist of:

1. Introduction: Politicians, Editors & Lawyers: Kangaroo Court Actors
   

2. Media Timeline of Events - Ignoring Anti-Lynching Voices
   

3. Ubuntu Kangaroo Court Justice – Evidence is Irrelevant
   

4. The Reasonable Initiation Legal Fraud – Who cares about the Evidence?
   

5. The Cultural Satire Legal Fraud – The Multiculti Boiling Frog
   

6. The Reconciliation Religious Fraud – Censoring TRC Fraud

A lynching is the practice of killing people by extrajudicial mob action, where a mob is generally considered to be more than five persons. The mob generally act under the pretext of service to justice, their race or tradition. They use lynching and other terror tactics to intimidate a particular racial, religious or cultural group into political, social or economic submission. A legal lynching has other names such as Stalin's Political Show trials, or Kangaroo Court Justice, etc.

The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial. The term was first recorded in the 1930s. There is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant and that the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. Show trials exhibit scant regard for the principles of jurisprudence and even for the letter of the law. Defendants have little real opportunity to justify themselves.

Ubuntufied Legal Lynching: The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus

Ubuntufied Legal Lynching in Rainbow Hypocrisy SA

The Reitz 4 TRC Fraud Prostitution Circus

27 February 2011
Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

“The commission also said that there could be no healing without truth, that half-truths and denial were no basis for building the new South Africa, that reconciliation based on falsehood would not last, and that selective recollection of past violence would easily provide the mobilisation for further conflict in the future. If these are its criteria for the role of truth in promoting reconciliation, it has failed to meet them.”
-- John Kane Berman, the Head of the SA Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), The Truth about the Truth Commission, by Anthea Jeffery

This series shall consist of:

1. Introduction: Politicians, Editors & Lawyers: Kangaroo Court Actors
   
2. Media Timeline of Events - Ignoring Anti-Lynching Voices
   
3. Ubuntu Kangaroo Court Justice – Evidence is Irrelevant
   
4. The Reasonable Initiation Legal Fraud – Who cares about the Evidence?
   
5. The Cultural Satire Legal Fraud – The Multiculti Boiling Frog
   
6. The Reconciliation Religious Fraud – Censoring TRC Fraud
   
7. UFS Black Liberation Theology's 'Reconciliation' successfuly destroyed Reitz-4's ‘Whiteness’, by cultivating their ‘White Guilt’?

Introduction:

A lynching is the practice of killing people by extrajudicial mob action, where a mob is generally considered to be more than five persons. The mob generally act under the pretext of service to justice, their race or tradition. They use lynching and other terror tactics to intimidate a particular racial, religious or cultural group into political, social or economic submission. A legal lynching has other names such as Stalin's Political Show trials, or Kangaroo Court Justice, etc.

The term show trial is a pejorative description of a type of highly public trial. The term was first recorded in the 1930s. There is a strong connotation that the judicial authorities have already determined the guilt of the defendant and that the actual trial has as its only goal to present the accusation and the verdict to the public as an impressive example and as a warning. Show trials exhibit scant regard for the principles of jurisprudence and even for the letter of the law. Defendants have little real opportunity to justify themselves.

[www.guerrylla-law.co.nr] David vs Tutu Goliath's TRC Fraud & Ecolaw Corruption

[Concourt #23-10: Citizen v. McBride] :: [Concourt #06-11: Radical Honesty SA v SANEF & 87 Others]
[Bloemfontein Mag. Crt: State v. Reitz 4] :: [UK Westminster Mag. Crt: RSA v. Shrien Dewani]
[Scientific Journalism Ratings]

Concourt #23-10: The Citizen v. Robert McBride

Radical Honesty SA Amicus Curiae in Support of Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, 34 of 1995

Concourt 23-10: RH Amicus:

• 26 Mar 2010: Radical Honesty Application to Proceed as Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court)
  
• 18 July 2010: Radical Honesty Amicus Heads of Argument
  
• Expert Witness Dr. Brad Blanton: Practicing Radical Honesty and Futilitarianism; i.e. Radical Honesty about Anger and Forgiveness; and Paradigms and Contexts: The Revolution of Consciousness
  
• Expert Witness Dr. Brad Blanton: The legal, psychological, & 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’
  
• Expert Witness Dr. T. Michael Maher: How and Why Journalists Avoid Population – Environment connection
  
• Radical Honesty Amicus Curiae Heads of Argument: [Population Policy Common Sense Interpretation of TRC Act] :: [Legal Principles Addressed and Relied Upon] :: [Truth and Forgiveness Social Contract Principles] :: [Population Policy Common Sense Principles] :: [TRC Fraud: ‘Crime of Apartheid’ Falsification of History] :: [Radical Honesty: Culture and Religion, or Refugee Status?]

Radical Honesty - SA Appeals to Judge Zulman, Press Appeals Panel; for Review of Press Ombudsman City Press/Reitz Four Ruling

Press Appeals Panel: Judge Ralph Zulman
Notice of Application for Review
04 November 2010

Review and Set Aside 03 November 2010 Ruling & Retraction, by Dep. Press Ombudsman Johan Retief: RE: 30-07-2010: Rightwing group tries to scupper Reitz trial, Khadija Bradlow, City Press: referral from SAPS/NPA.

The judge began to take Steven’s guilty plea: “You know you have a right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself,” he said. Do you waive that right?”

“Yes, I do,” answered Steven.

“You have a right to call witnesses in your behalf. Do you waive that right?”

“Yes, I do.”

“You have a right to a jury trial, a jury of your peers. Do you understand that right?”

“If I had a jury of my peers, I would be found not guilty,” replied Steven.

There was a pause as the judge stared at the defendant. “What do you mean?” he asked.

“If I had twelve people who were really my peers they would understand my action,” Steven answered.

The Judge leaned forward, his eyes piercing into mine. “This is not a guilty plea. Counsel, I thought you told the court this was a guilty plea?”

I had been taken completely off guard by Steven’s statements. .. The judge motioned to the U.S. marshals. “Take the defendant and his lawyer, and put them in the holding cell until they straighten things out.”

For half an hour Steven and I sat in the cell behind the courtroom as once again I explained my idea of a political, psychiatric defence. Once again he refused, feeling it was hopeless. He said he would plead guilty and answer all the judges questions the way the judge expected. We returned to court and went through the litany of rights one waives when one pleads guilty. But when the judge got to the part about a jury of peers, there was only silence. Then Steven spoke out clearly and strongly. “If I had a jury made up of people from Ellis and Fillmore Streets I would be found not guilty!”

Judge Weigel was seconds from exploding. “This is not a guilty plea. I refuse to accept the plea. You are going to trial!”

-- Black Rage Confronts the Law, by Paul Harris, pg 42-43

10-11-03: Press Ombudsman Ruling: Radical Honesty White Refugee vs City Press; RE: CityPress article: “Rightwing Group Tries to Scupper Reits Trial”

City Press knuckles rapped on Reitz Four

Nov 3, 2010 12:14 PM
Sapa & TimesLive

City Press newspaper has been reprimanded by the Press Ombudsman for not giving the subject of a story relating to the "Reitz Four" the chance to comment.

The Radical Honesty White Refugee (RH) group had complained about an article published in July headlined "Right-wing group tries to scupper Reitz trial".

RH lodged a complaint against the newspaper saying the headline was misleading and that it had made no attempt to contact Lara Johnstone, who was representing the group, for comment, deputy press ombudsman Johan Retief explained in his findings.

Johnstone at the time had applied to intervene as a friend of the court in the Reitz Four trial.

RH was unhappy about the phrase "right-wing group" and the word "scupper".

The newspaper had argued that Johnstone's "abortive attempt at intervention in the Reitz matter was in itself a public event, on which City Press merely reported".

But Retief found that the newspaper should have approached her "precisely for this reason" as she was the subject of the story and should have been asked for comment.

"There was no acceptable reason for the newspaper to not ask her for comment," he said.

Complaint to SAPS against City Press, for Criminal Defamation & Fraud; RE: ‘Rightwing group tries to scupper Reitz trial’

Audi Alteram Partem: Complaint to SAPS against City Press, for Criminal Defamation & Fraud; RE: “Rightwing group tries to scupper Reitz trial” article

by Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

I filed a complaint with the South African Police (SAPS): Criminal Charges: Malicious Defamation and Fraud (CAS: 180-08-2010)

Accused:

1. City Press Newspaper: Charge: Defamation
   
2. City Press Editor: Ms. Ferial Haffajee: Charge: Defamation
   
3. City Press Journalist: Ms. Khadija Bradlow: Charge: Defamation and Fraud
   
4. City Press Alleged Anonymous Source Known only as: ‘Senior Legal Figure Present in Court’: Charge: Defamation

Plaintiff:

• Lara Johnstone, personal capacity; and on behalf of Radical Honesty – SA.

Defamation Publication Details:

• Rightwing group tries to scupper Reitz trial , published: 2010-07-30 12:45, by Khadija Bradlow, City Press

Complaint Affidavit states as follows:

I am a 43 year old adult female unemployed paralegal, who sells wormeries and organic compost to make a very simple living. (Additional Info in Annex F: Heads of Argument: para 2, 3 & 4).

Save where appears from the context, the facts contained in this affidavit are within my own personal knowledge and are, to the best of my knowledge and belief, both true and correct.

I am the only member – to my knowledge – of the Radical Honesty culture and religion currently living in South Africa (Annex: A: CCT 23-10: Concourt Chief Justice Order: 03 May 2010: Amicus Directions: Lara Johnstone: Member Radical Honesty Culture and Religion (p.2) (PDF).

‘Rightwing group tries to scupper Reitz trial’ - City Press

Brad Blanton, Founder of Radical Honesty (www.radicalhonesty.com), author of Radical Honesty books, and former 'Honesty in Politics' Candidate for US Congress from Virginia.

According to City Press journalist (sic) Ms. Khadija Bradlow, a culture that practices sincere forgiveness and root cause problem solving is 'right wing'..... Would that mean an acknowledgement that a culture that practices fake posed 'forgiveness' and bandaid to braintumour problem solving is left wing?

Ms. Khadija Bradlow:

Ms. Bradlow used to be the story editor for SABC's Special Assignment, but "she resigned after being informed that she would have to undergo a lie-detector test to prove her innocence," after the "SABC launched an internal probe and opened a theft case with the police" about stolen documents leaked to the Mail and Guardian, where Ms. Bradlow was an occasional columnist. (SABC Steps Up Pressure in 'Leak' Probe, 29 September 2009, Business Day & AllAfrica).

According to the Commission for Gender Equality a Mail and Guardian article written by Ms. Bradlow about the CGE was "vindictive, malicious and untrue" ('There's no ducking of responsibility', Dec 16 2008 Mail & Guardian).

According to Its Almost Supernatural, Ms. Bradlow's writing about the Israel-Palestine issue is sheer nastiness, as a result of Ms. Bradlow hating complexity. They conclude that "Simple is as simple does Khadija."

Radical Honesty - RSA Amicus filed in Reitz Four matter

by Andrea Muhrrteyn
Why We Are White Refugees

An Application was filed by Radical Honesty - RSA, to Chief Magistrate Mziwonke Hinxa, in the Reits Four crimen injuria matter being heard in Bloemfontein Magistrates Court Case # 21-709-08, in the State v. Schalk van der Merwe (1st), Johnny Roberts (2nd), RC Malherbe (3rd), Danie Grobler (4th).

Amicus Orders Requested from Court

The Notice Of Motion requests the following orders from Chief Magistrate Mziwonke Hinxa: