Apartheid South Africa was an odd place in many ways. We had no real journalists, most were government parrots working for a salary and I know, since I spoke to many former intelligence officers, that many of them were impimpis (Zulu, a slang word for police informer) too. Well, it was expected and to be honest, they were under great scrutiny from the State. Simply put, you heard what you were told and what you were told were what the State decided is good for you.
Don’t get me wrong, censorship is a good thing under certain circumstances, there is a need for it despite what many think. There are things you don’t need to see or to know - take for instance during a time of war, what will happen if an attack schedule leaks out or if national security really is involved which is not often. Then the need for secrecy can be reasonable and no one will have a problem with that. Of course, we grew cynical with the years, we know the turd brigade (politicians of all sides, they float in what they talk) are known liars with a great desire to look good in history, what you read in their autobiographies are often not exactly true and you would be wise to investigate further, they are all the same, take my word.
Since 1994 we had many changes in this country, some for the better and some for the worse but all in all, the legal system became an admired one, yes, admired. The Bill of Human Rights, a curse word in Apartheid South Africa, became the guiding light and is very progressive in terms of gay rights, equality for all (except if white, obviously, then Affirmative Action will get you for the reasons they give and make peace, it will never change) and especially in freedom of speech. You have a lot more but what you see and read today is still being manipulated, make no mistake. You would be very foolish to think that the days of “mass distortion” is over – my mate George M James wrote about this in his intelligence briefing – freely available in his excellent books and on the internet. Let me quote and you should read all those 41 pages, your eyes will pop out of your head:
“A few years ago we had a rare confession of the way liberals are changing views. Richard Berke, a long time and respected New York Times correspondent apparently said: “There are times when you look at the front page meeting and literally three quarters of the people deciding what’s on the front page are not so closeted homosexuals.” Mr Berke is gay and so he should know and so it is, his statement was denied, and yet, what are you reading? You are reading mostly liberal crap from newspapers, slanted to suit their views and I include watching television, Internet, books and movies when I say “newspapers.” Some call this phenomenon “a weapon of mass distortion” and if you think about it, what is really left to shock you today? When I was a younger man, quite a lot of things we take for granted today and shrug off would have been shameful. For instance, being gay or lesbian is old news now, no one cares except them who feel the constant need to explain why as if we are interested to know. We see female musicians, not really gifted but influential, semi naked doing convulsions which would have been public indecency in my day, on stage and live television, and without any shame. We don’t even care when the US President lies about sexual relations nor smoking marijuana in his youth, we dismiss it as what? Not serious? Normal behaviour from the turd brigade? Expected nothing better anyway? And yet, they are supposed to be the “leaders of the free world” and give leadership, a serious job. They want our men in uniform to salute them and they want the Secret Service to take a bullet for them? Really?
I ask again, what do we find in newspapers today? We find relentless attacks, verbal, media, legal, and physical on Christians by atheists and liberals. If you believe these people, you should be very ashamed to be born white (as if you had any choice) and Christian or what a man like Mr Eisenhower would have seen as decent, it is a sin! Even taking an oath of loyalty to your country is seen as wrong, why I would not know. Demanding that illegal immigrants leave and go home, is all of a sudden immoral, scandalous and racist! What utter crap, yet, it is happening, ceaselessly. What is the pattern here? Let me surprise you - among the “Christian” nations on this earth, Russia is doing more to combat radical Muslim terror than any other country and they are succeeding and they are feared, unlike the NATO nations. They invaded and sorted out all such countries around them, and were condemned by the Western Press as a joke military wise.
Yet, in 2016 the Pentagon reluctantly admitted, against White House policy I am sure, that the Russian Air Force did more in a few months in Syria than what NATO could achieve in years...”
The question in law is where is hate speech and where is freedom of speech when relating to each other? There is a fine line and the above, by the way, is in no way hate speech, ask me, I know the law and worked at a famous Human Rights Law Firm when I started off as an attorney in 1998. In Apartheid South Africa, there was a famous censorship case which is used as how idiotic a lack of knowledge can become. The children story called “Black Beauty” which is about a horse, a black horse of magnificent looks, was banned because they, the censors, thought wrongly that the story was about a black girl, and in those days, sadly and wrongly, there was no such thing as “black and beautiful” unless you meant the camouflage cream on your face. Yes, many laughed bitterly about the “Black Beauty” fiasco. This morning I got a warning from BING, the Microsoft search engine where I advertise my legal consultancy including my books, that the following two words “terrorist takedown” was disapproved for certain countries – why? “Hate speech content (Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand).”
I have to laugh and think of Black Beauty, are you flippen insane? This is the name of a book I wrote in how to protect yourself against a terrorist attack, there is nothing remotely hate speech like inside it. I went out of my way in that book to explain and let me quote from the first pages where this is made very clear indeed:
“This is not a book with a political motive behind it but one of self-defence. There is no accusatory finger pointing at anyone or any group of people or specific religion here and the statistics at the back of the book will probably shock you. I am a former attorney that practised law at the most famous human rights law firm in Africa as a younger man, I know what hate speech is and I hold such people in deserved contempt. Don’t come to me with a racist attitude or religious intolerance if you contact me, you will not like my response. So take good note that I am not saying the attacking terrorists will be without any doubt Muslim extremists, nor do I say they may be from African heritage, or Japanese or Arab or whatever or any specific religion. It is neither here nor there to me what they are or what their beliefs are or what they expect to achieve by attacking innocents, frankly, I don’t care.
There is a saying which I am giving to you right in the beginning of this book as a warning: “It is the tamest dog that bites the worst.” Always remember that and you will survive in the world of counter terrorism where you own shadow is closely inspected for any threat. You can either take my book, 1 of 28, seriously or you can dismiss it, but don’t let your prejudices in life kill you because you were observing the wrong people. Forget everything you see in Hollywood, it is crap and will not save your life. Be always aware that the face of terrorism is indistinguishable until the deed is underway and it can come from any direction at any time by anyone around you, even a woman, or a team of attackers. Your enemy is not wearing a specific uniform, he is not carrying any specific weapons either and you have to react instantly if you wish to survive. He will not show mercy and unlike a criminal, he has no desire to escape justice except to fight again another day. That means he will come after you - the major difference between the two groups, he will attack, strike first and unexpectedly so, there are going to be fatalities when that happens. He is not a coward and he is ready to die for his cause. Nor is he insane, show some respect to your enemy. Every rated research document on terrorists, profiling if you wish, shows a dedicated man or woman, not insane, able to work in small groups and or alone. I assure you, no terrorist group wants a loose cannon around them, really not, they want someone able to function in society, to fit in and to obey orders above all – no person with mental health issues can do this and hence are rejected as a recruit or used as a suicide bomber. Of course, from your view and mine, the fellow may well be insane but it is not a clinical diagnosis at all, that comes later when defence lawyers are desperate to explain why he did what he did. Frankly, most terrorists are proud of what they did. They know their cause, whatever it is, may well be damaged if they are found to be insane in a court, they don’t want that, it is bad PR if a terrorist is found to be insane, then he is just another criminal, a looney. Always remember, it is always a PR exercise, urban terrorism. It is never done for no reason at all, always to gain maximum publicity and therefore at places which will cause outrage (aka publicity, to create fear, to terrorise). Take my word, most terrorists are compos mentis, always remember that, there is logic in his madness and there is logic to this book.”
You have to wonder where we are going with this new politically correctness of us where everything is being watched by big brother. And yes, I explained the two words in question to BING, perhaps they will now wake up and smell their coffee is cold and allow the words in those countries also, if not, I don’t care really, their loss. But to show what I think of censorship, I will now give this book for free to anyone needing it, contact me at email@example.com. Microsoft, you are welcome. K
Koos Kotze is a former member of the South African Police Force. He served between 1985 and 1991 primarily as a sergeant in the Pretoria Flying Squad. After leaving the Police Force he obtained the law degrees B Iuris & LLB at the University of the Free State (Bloemfontein, South Africa) and was a practicing commercial law attorney for eight years. He also wrote several books on business, law, counter terrorism and security issues. He is a widower and lives in Bloemfontein, South Africa.