Tuesday, February 5, 2019

Liam Neeson ... said he wanted to kill a Black person

https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=16P7p9P7tMk
This statement by Liam Neeson, during an open interview with a journo has induced widespread outrage.
Many have jumped onto their pulpits … frothed at the mouth … hollered, screamed, moaned, groaned … in righteous indignation and condemnation … of a man that had the courage and integrity to say what he did … what he felt … and that it was wrong … and that he deeply regretted it.
Now Please clear your mind and listen to Liam Neeson slowly.
This is an instance of a human being telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth … without seeking to be excused … only to be recognized as a human being … with human failings … and to be forgiven.
John Barnes
I do not share in any condemnation. I am with John Barnes, a legendary Black English soccer player who also declined to pontificate, vilify and condemn when interviewed at length on Sky News.
The starting point is to realize that we are all inherently prejudiced. We are prejudiced in favour of our family … or community … our village … our district … our race/ethnic group … our country.
It is as natural as breathing.
It is why we "automatically" side with and support our own in sporting events such as the Olympics.
So there is an “us” and “them” culture deeply embedded in our psyche. It is encoded in our DNA. It became encoded when we were still in a cave … huddled together … utterly dependent on our group … against man and beast out there.

If a hyena came and took a child, we would go out and slaughter any and all hyenas we could find.
If a member of another group killed one of us … we would go out and slaughter any members of that group that we could find.
We did this in terms of another deep-seated instinct. That instinct expresses itself as “fight … flight … freeze … and/or revenge”. All those elements have to do with our basic instinct of “survival” that Charles Darwin expressed as “survival of the fittest”.
Survival of the fittest necessarily encompasses a need for dominance.


The jump from being simply prejudiced to indulging in racism is a hair breath wide. It only needs a trigger .. and we have all made that jump at some time in our lives.
So understand that when one of our own … whom we love and cherish is attacked … all these instincts coalesce in our psyche as an attack on “us” by “them” ….
and a need to get revenge wells up as a very powerful driving force over which we might have little … marginal or no control … even when we know that what we then do is wrong. Thus it is that our laws have come to accept that there is a defense even to an apparently heinous killing as “sane automatism” … where we know that what we are doing … we know that it is wrong … but we cannot stop ourselves.


We are all potentially racist ... because we are naturally prejudiced. So if an Islamic fundamentalist bombs our family we will naturally want to kill any Muslims in the immediate aftermath.


At the heart of the reason why Donald J Trump is the President of the most powerful nation on the planet was that he leveraged human propensity to have "us" ... "them" ... and "others".

This culture informs his perspective, policies, operational culture and mode. Its astounding success was/is due to the fact that it accords with human nature and instinct to be dominant.

MAGA, i.e "Make America Great Again" is no more, no less, an expression of a human need for dominance, called "native nationalism". 

It is important to note that Liam was not out to gratuitously murder any so-called “Black” person. He was intent on killing if such person attacked or threatened him. So-called“Blacks” were now "them" and any more aggression on their part was going to be dealt with resolutely.
It is obvious that he regained his “normal sentient responsible” self. That is why he is horrified at his actions. That he is a very decent human being is proved by his complete honesty about the matter. It can be accepted that his remorse is 100% genuine.
Regrettably what “colours” public perception of the whole saga is that there is a “political correctness” that accrues when a matter involves so-called “Blacks”. This is because they are generally perceived as victims and generally perceive themselves as victims.

So please get off your pulpit if you are on one … stop frothing at the mouth if you are … cease your pontifical condemnation … and understand when a very good human being is admitting human failing and seeking forgiveness.

Friday, January 25, 2019

Facebook Hypocrisy

Facebook is a social media platform.
What this means, by definition, is that it is a cyberspace meeting place for human beings to discuss, explore and share.

It is perfectly proper and reasonable for Facebook to set “Community Standards” in this regard. It is perfectly proper for Facebook to impose a sanction if those “Community Standards” are violated.
What is improper, arbitrary and capricious is blocking a user for an arbitrary period while the alleged breach of a “Community Standard” is being adjudicated.

Certainly the allegedly offensive video clip that is the subject of the alleged breach can be taken down while the adjudication process is in progress.

But why block the member during this process??
In this case the video clip was an authentic recording of sadistic violence and brutality inflicted on human beings in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It was a visual and audio report of the truth of brutality by man on man.

I have gone through the Community Standards and, as a highly experienced Advocate, cannot see in what way they have been breached.
The video clip was to draw attention to the fact that similar brutality was being perpetrated in Zimbabwe and needed to be condemned and stopped.
How this can be considered a violation of anything is incomprehensible.

Apparently it was considered a violation of “Community Standards” because of how visually graphic such brutality actually was.
So it is apparent that the “Community Standards” insist that truth must be censored if it is visually powerful.
So perpetrators are to be exempt from exposure on Facebook if what they do is really bad.????

Please note that in so many other instances what Facebook does is to “cover up” the video clip with a warning that it is visually disturbing. Excellent!!
Now, why not in this case??

In this case, the posting of a “disturbing” video clip led to me being blocked for 24 hours.
Why?
Why could the clip not have been simply covered with the warning about its contents?
Why the 24-hour block?

Most importantly, why the block while my representations on the matter, on an express invitation by Facebook to make such representation, was being considered?

Such action is mindboggling.
It is equivalent to a Court imposing punishment on an accused while it is deciding whether or not the punishment is merited.
Such an operational culture and mode is highly objectionable.
It smacks of arrogance and hypocrisy. It is hypocritical to posture that an accused person might be found innocent after his/her representations have been considered while still imposing a punishment.

So why is Facebook doing this?
It is another example of the arrogance and hypocrisy of big business.
Ultimately Facebook cares tuppence about how it treats individual members … provided the majority are kept on board and profit is served.

So it is part of the Facebook business model that anything that might offend other members must be suppressed even if an individual member is treated with arbitrary contempt.
The individual member can lump it or like it as long as the equilibrium regarding keeping the majority on board the profit train is not disturbed.

The whole world saw this culture betrayed when Mark Zuckerberg gave evidence to Congress. It was obvious that Facebook had been aware of Russian trolling to interfere in the USA elections and did precious little about it.

The reason for doing precious little about this was the same as we are seeing here. Acting in a principled manner might have prejudiced the extent  to which Facebook was being used and ultimately this would have been prejudicial to the generation of profit.

It is a highly unprincipled stance.
So to as regards the matter at hand here.
In effect what Facebook is saying is that, even if 100% true; the brutality by man on man must be censored if that brutality is extreme. If extreme it must not be shown and discussed on their platform, even though it is a social media platform.

How Facebook members are to know when a video clip crosses their line of acceptability is impossible to define.

Holocaust Children Skeletons
It is not rocket science to realize that this attitude means that video footage of the horrors of the Holocaust would have, and must still be, impermissible on Facebook. It means that video clips of mass genocide are anathema to Facebook …

and the reason is … ??

these reports ultimately set up a dispute between the perpetrators and the victims.
Both sides have members ... in significant numbers.!!!

Facebook does not want to lose membership on either side as this ultimately impacts on profit generation.

As said, it is the arrogance and hypocrisy of big business that cares tuppence about human rights and only serves at the altar of profit.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS: I was originally blocked for 24 hours.
I filed a protest and request for review.
Within 3 hours Facebook responded adhering to their ruling, but lifting the block.In addition, I was invited to file a request for another review.
I did this.
Back came a message confirming that the matter was under further review.
However the block was reinstated.  ????????
That message states "please let us know if you think that this is a mistake".      When you click on the message you are presented with an input field to make your representation and "submit".
On submitting you get this message --- "
We could not process your request. Please try again later."
PPS: Then I get a message on my profile page from Facebook saying ...  "4,380 people want to hear from you ....... please post something...."  

Thursday, November 29, 2018

Trumpism ... Alt-Right ... Dominance and Jesus Christ

Daily, on social media, we discuss human issues under the general banner of politics. Humans have been doing this from time immemorial seemingly without ever reaching success at resolving human issues to everyone’s satisfaction.
Now we have what can be dubbed as “Trumpism” that has shaken up, disturbed and even violated the status quo once again creating strife, division, confusion and political chaos in hearts and minds.
Why?
Why has Donald Trump been so successful at challenging established norms … debasing behavioral codes … rubbishing rules of conduct … glorified mendacity … trampled over professed culture and values … discredited State institutions … attacked and subverted human rights … and invented the notion of a "deep State" ... with so much approval?
Alt-Right at Charlottesville, Virginia
Why are millions of human beings avidly supporting a grotesque debunking of the path that humanity had set itself on. Why, in particular, is America proving so susceptible to abandoning the road it was making sure and steady progress on after the iconic I have a dream” speech by Dr Martin Luther King Jr. Why is there so much support for abandoning its hitherto professed culture of equality, brotherly love and cooperation that it has been busy exporting across the planet?
Why is this atavistic culture receiving so much support across the planet in the phenomenon known as the Alt-Right
The answer is actually quite simple. It has to do with our DNA encoding.
You see, we were once in a cave, huddled together, fearful of just about everything out there. The
world was big … it was confusing … and it was dangerous. Darwin’s law of survival of the fittest was very much at play. It was very much a case of kill or be killed … eat or be eaten.
Note that just about all creatures were in the same situation … and reacted in the same way.  That is why we have a herd of elephants …. a troop of baboons … a flock of birds … etc. Survival has always involved banding together as a species … no question whatsoever.
Note that successful survival is not purely passive. It is not just an issue of self-defense. It also involves … and this is key … active dominance. Man, as a species, has proved most successful and become dominant because he was best at banding together to leverage collective strength.
Thus it even became the norm to invade, conquer and subjugate even other members of the human species. Until Adolph Hitler took this now entrenched culture of invade, conquer and subjugate to diabolical levels it was the universal culture across this planet.
The horrors of Hitler’s War, especially the Holocaust, induced a paradigm shift in man’s culture. For the first time in history humanity had the concept of human rights and the commitment to equality … all set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”), signed off at the United Nations after the last world war in 1948.
From that day mankind, with the exceptions of Russia, South Africa and Saudi Arabia, professed to set itself on a new path of equality, not dominance.
Mankind was repudiating what had been encoded in its DNA over the centuries of its existence as a species. It was repudiating the culture of dominance. It was abandoning what now part of its natural instincts. 
Perhaps it is to state the obvious that such repudiation of a natural instinct, so deeply embedded, was always going to be very problematical. This is so especially as we have continued to fuel this instinct in so many other respects. Our socio-economic model is absolutely geared for the achievement of dominance at all levels, personal, sectorial and nationally. The concept of achievers and under-achievers is deeply embedded. Sporting events, that thrill us to the very core, are the embodiment of this culture. Sectorial achievers enjoy iconic status be they Michael Jackson, Mohammed Ali, Meryl Streep, Bill Gates or Tiger Woods.
So the reality … the hard reality is that our genetically encoded instinct of dominance is still with us and has been available for leverage by the likes of Donald J Trump, Idi Amin, Robert G Mugabe, Vladimir Putin and the other skunks of the planet.
Common to all these skunks is a narrative, promise and commitment to dominance over “others”. “Others” comprise anybody and anything that stands in the way of that dominance.
As regards Trump this even includes established State institutions like the FBI and the CIA and the media.
Dominance is intoxicating. It is an appeal to the very core of one’s sense of being, worth and validation. Its attractiveness is as natural as breathing. It is why bullying is a never-ending problem. Ditto abusive relationships.
It is what drives racism and tribalism. It is why we have genocides. It is why we have gangs and cartels.
It is why in South Africa the reform model is to replace White dominance with so-called "Black" dominance.
So our instinct of dominance has always been there for exploitation and leverage … and Donald J Trump has succeeded quite spectacularly to date.
If you are in any doubt about this please consider the story of Jesus Christ.
Think it through.
When you do you will arrive at the point where you have to resolve His central counsel, admonition and insistence that – “Love thy neighbour as thyself … and do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.
He was repudiating the culture of dominance.
At that point He was doomed.
The Pharisees, arch protagonists of the culture of biblically based exclusion and dominance, found it all so very easy to have Him crucified.
Donald Trump's "lock her up ... lock her up" is simply his version of a crucifixion.

Tuesday, November 6, 2018

Trumpism … Native Nationalism … Nazism

I have a terrible sense of foreboding.
If the Republicans win today in the Mid-Terms there will be no check on Trumpism. In fact, it will gain impetus, flourish and threaten the whole planet.

This is because, like Nazism it is an ideology. It is an ideology of dominance, like Nazism.
Hitler also trumpeted “the Fatherland First” as does Trump bellowing “America First”.
With both these leaders we see the claim that other countries are taking advantage of them; laughing at them; cheating them.

With both leaders we see the culture of “us”, “them” and “others”.
It is called “native nationalism”.

It seeks to posit a race/ethnic group in the land as unique and entitled to dominance over all others, internal and external, packaged as being in the “national interest”.
Others” become vilified, even demonized; first insidiously and then overtly. With Nazism the result was Polish and the Jews being targeted, that eventually led to the Holocaust.

With Trumpism we have seen the graduation of “immigrants”, i.e., foreigners being targeted with increasing intensity to the extent that an identifiable mass of desperate humans dubbed “the caravan” are being openly vilified and demonized.
Fox News is even trumpeting that these migrants are riddled with venereal disease.

To this we must add Trump’s repudiation of a culture of cooperation with other countries, even erstwhile allies. Other counties must be bullied into accepting dominance by America; one by one … just as Hitler sought to do.

Longstanding international agreements such as the TPP and NAFTA have been torn up with Trump then attempting to bully the countries into submitting to “America first” arrangements.
So, I have this terrible sense of foreboding. If the Republicans win these Mid-Terms Trumpism will receive a boost that will be to the detriment of world order.

Like-minded leaders like Vladimir Putin of Russia will welcome this culture and probably team up with Trump for the immediate future in any event. Tyrannical leaders like Rodriguez Duterte of the Philippines and Trump’s proxy Saudi Arabia will jump at the chance.
Rogue regimes will adopt Trumpism.

The world will change. It will be back to the pre-war era of each country for itself and “might is right”.
The World will degenerate to the situation we had at the boarding school I attended. That school had an all-powerful "Head-boy" and the rest of us divided into groups, gangs and liaisons of survival in terms of a culture of confrontation and dominance.
This Trumpism culture will inevitably endanger the whole planet and its creatures on every front imaginable.

The blood of millions shed in the last world war will have been shed in vain. That blood secured the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”).
The UDHR was a paradigm shift in the culture of mankind. For the first time mankind had the concept of human rights. For the first time countries accepted that they need to cooperate to the benefit of all humans.
For the first time it accepted that all humans are equal.
These sacred precepts will be torn to shreds in terms of native nationalistic dominance of man by man.

So please pray with me. Pray to your God. Pray with me that the Democrats win today.
The future of our children, and their children, is at stake.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS: -The Demicrats did win ... big ..... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2018/nov/06/us-midterms-elections-2018-latest-live-polls-news-updates-donald-trump-republicans-democrats

Wednesday, July 25, 2018

"Black" ... Dump the mantle of oppression !

We don't accept the label "Kaffir” ... and yet the label "Black" and the label "Kaffir" were both invented in order to de-humanize us and oppress us. 
1.  The Label "Black"
The label “Black” was invented in the slave/plantation owning deep south of America to lump together all those with just “one drop” of African blood for the purpose of oppression even if they were as white as snow with green eyes.
Please check these links 
“Jim Crowe” and one drop rule”.
The label was then imported into Africa for the purposes of oppression and used for that purpose, taking dominance over the label “kaffir”.
If we review the struggle we find that there was a complete absence of any reference to “Black” and instead we have this about how the African National Congress, the oldest liberation movement in Africa, was started:-
“The organisation was initially founded as the South African Native National Congress
(SANNC) on 8 January 1912 by Saul Msane (Esq.), Josiah GumedeJohn DubePixley ka Isaka Seme and Sol Plaatje along with chiefs, people's representatives, and church organisations, and other prominent individuals to bring all Africans together as one people to defend their rights and freedoms”.
The primary reason why we fell in love with it is because, having been labelled “Black” we were all in the “one drop” camp and that camp united to mount a struggle against oppression led by the likes of Dr Martin Luther King in America and Nelson Mandela and others in Africa.
Certainly, it is useful to retain the label in America, because our brothers and sisters there are still suffering racial oppression. However, here in Africa, have we not overcome racial oppression?
It is like being made to wear a sack by a bully. You then rid yourself of the bully … but continue wearing the sack? It is really that simple. But we are creatures of habit and have become imprisoned by the habit. Man has done this throughout history. It is why we find it difficult to abandon culture, even if it is bad culture. However we no longer ask a medicine man dressed in skins and feathers to come and smell out who has bewitched our sick child.
Because we are a species known as homo sapiens, endowed with the power of 
reason we really do need to take stock, review and realize that we are still wearing the sack of oppression and dump it. 
It would be different if it was still useful, as it is in America, especially as that country now has an overtly racist President.
In reality it has no utility in Africa and actually has a number of bad outcomes.
2.  Exclusion. 
As indigenous Africans are the majority in Africa, labeling themselves as “Black” immediately excludes everybody else that is “not black”.
Example: I am 50% English and 50% Ndebele.
Anthropologically, genetically, visually I simply cannot be either “black” or “white”.
You have excluded me and so many others as our nations of Africa have long since comprised so many “others”.
Exclusion is very bad because it induces social exclusion with this result:-
“exclusion from the prevailing social system and its rights and privileges, typically as a result of poverty or the fact of belonging to a minority social group”.
Africa is a very rich mixture of many races, ethnic groups and tribes. No group should be in danger of feeling excluded.
3.  Nation Building.
Nation building becomes an unavoidable causality.  For humans to be a nation they have to first define and reference themselves as one. They have to have a shared culture. Self-definition and referencing is at the very heart of a shared culture. Persons who define themselves as French and English can never be part of one nation.
So we ensure that some/many of our people suffer from what is called “cultural exclusion”.
All human rights experts will confirm that this is a very bad thing, especially as it induces psychological alienation and this can and does precipitate problems on any number of levels.
4.  Hurting our children.
 (Confirm this with a psychologist)
From a very early age we progressively develop a self-image.
That image is either positive or negative or problematical.
There is a direct relationship between that self-image and our ability to develop to our full potential.
Confusion is the enemy here … a big enemy.
Confusion about self-image is most often a precursor to becoming an underachiever, a sociopath or even a criminal.
So, when your child looks at him/herself in the mirror he/she can see exactly what colour he/she is.
When you then insist that he/she is “black”, when the child can see that this not the case, you are confusing your child on a very precious commodity, i.e. his/her self-image.
In my life I have only met about 4 people who are actually black.
You are damaging your child psychologically in a very pernicious way. You are endangering your child as you are messing with his/her self-image and endangering the child’s development.
Perhaps this is why our African governments and societies are just not succeeding.
5.  Specific Proof of The Problem.
If you take Coloured folk as an example it is much easier to see the issues as set out above..Coloured folk are an admixture of many races and ethnic groups. Cape Coloureds, on their indigenous side, are mostly Khoisan. By no stretch of the imagination can it be said that the Khoisan were ever considered as part of the Nguni people, let alone “black”.
In addition Coloured folk range from “midnight black” to “snow white” in complexion.
So when you define yourself as “black” you are excluding this community. You are also really messing with the minds of their children when you enact policies and laws that say Coloureds are black. They are not. They are persons of colour.
6.  Ask yourself a question.
In this region do we think, imagine or suppose that the races and different ethnic groups are united?
Do we think, imagine or suppose that all the races and ethnic groups see themselves as one nation?
You only have to listen to an interactive radio program, on virtually any issue, to realize that the region is as racially and ethnically divided as Denmark is to Malawi.
Our politicians don’t mind this because they encourage the majority to see others as a problem and reason for the disadvantages they suffer to cover up government failure, corruption and ineptitude.
Now is it wise … is it prudent … is it smart to have our people divided?
Should we not prefer to have people that see themselves as one … all pulling together in one direction?
7.  Using myself as an example.
I started life in an institution for deprived children in racist Rhodesia. However I managed to make my life a success and rose to serve as a High Court Judge in two (2) different countries and an expert advisor to three (3) governments.
There is no way that I could have done this without help.
I received help from members of just about every race and ethnic group … indigenous African, Jew, Portuguese, Greek, Afrikaner and Asian in particular. I could NOT have succeeded without that help.

8. The Other
What all of the above also guarantees is the very regrettable social phenomenon of "The Other".
Please go here -- https://coginito.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-other.html?zx=98ff4fec55d145ae
9.  So how should we define and reference ourselves?
This is how -- in this descending order ...
a) as a human;
b) as African;
c) as South African or Zimbabwean;
d) as citizens;
e) as Shona, Kalanga, Zulu, Shangaan, Coloured, Portuguese, Hindu, Pedi, Venda, Muslim … etc.
In short we should be concerned with our race and ethnicity ONLY when this unavoidably arises and just dump this “Black” label of oppression.

__________________________________________________________________________
Note that in the United Kingdom our people are always referred to as “black”. Then Meghan Markle arrived and was set to marry into Royalty. Not one news house, print or broadcast, would refer to as “Black”, even though like me, she has African blood. Right there we see the proof that “Black’ is the stinky label of oppression. The British media know it. Why don’t we?
And note that Caucasians do not define and reference themselves as "white". They will say "I am an Englishman" ... or "I am a Russian" .... never "I am White". 
__________________________________________________________________________

Yes, it is difficult to change that which we are accustomed to. However please understand that man would have never advanced as a species if the status quo had remained unchallenged. Change started for the advancement of man when we were still in a cave and one of us came in with burning embers from a forest fire, started by lightning, and said – “Let us cook this meat instead of eating it raw”.
At every stage we only advanced as a species when there was change.

___________________________________________________________________________


Interesting also was what happened in many cases involving the issue of identity. An indigenous African witness is asked to describe who he/she says committed the particular offence in issue. The witness is pressed on the issue of identity –
Prosecutor: How can you be absolutely certain that it was the accused in the dock?
Witness: Because he is ugly
Prosecutor: What do you mean when you say that he is ugly?
Witness: Because he is black

As said, colour based prejudice is simply not the sole preserve of any particular ethnic group. 
Extract from my book  -- http://proudlyzimbabwean.orgfree.com/The%20Other%20-%20without%20fear,%20favor%20or%20prejudice.html
_________________________________________________________________________

I should add that the most beautiful female I have ever seen was actually black, I mean black ... coal black.
My daughter and I met her in a lift in what was then Salisbury.
My daughter, who never wanted to be black, turned to me and gasped- "Dad, did you see that lady .. sooo beautiful.!!!"
Till today we both agree that she was the most beautiful woman we have ever seen.
She was from Ethiopia.

___________________________________________________________________________


And this "Black" thing leads to this ---- "Whites and Indians will be barred from new pro-Zuma political party"
 https://www.timeslive.co.za/amp/politics/2018-07-26-whites-and-indians-will-be-barred-from-new-pro-zuma-political-party/?__twitter_impression=true
... proving betond all doubt that my plea/appeal is well founded.

___________________________________________________________________________

And this is what we then get as at 26 July 2018  --- a diabolical different standard for us "Blacks" that equates to pernicious racist bigotry ... as supported by the African Union and SADC .... 


__________________________________________________________________________

Sunday, July 15, 2018

Betraying our people of Zimbabwe

The 14th July 2017 was a very auspicious day for me.
It was when I met one of those incredible human beings who simply refuses to succumb to inhumanity, cruelty, persecution and to all those pernicious ways that those with power treat the powerless and ultimately render them homeless.
He is sitting next to me in this picture taken outside the Holy Trinity Church in Braamfontein, Johannesburg, South Africa.
He is Bishop 
Paul Verryn. He is sitting next to a bronze figure of “Homeless Jesus”, lying on a nondescript bench as his home, covered only by a theadbare blanket.
Please be reminded that it is this human being that opened the doors of his Church to provide sanctuary, safety, sustenance, comfort and love … love … love to our brothers and sisters who had been rendered homeless by a diabolical oppressor in whose grip was/is our Zimbabwe.
For this Paul, it is what he insisted I call him, was vilified, threatened and persecuted by local politicians, staunch supporters of the corrupt Robert Mugabe regime of systemic terror and violence.
In my extraordinary life I have met “important” people such as Julius Nenyere, Samora Machel, Robert Mugabe, Festus Mogae, the Chief Justice of New South Wales and others. None of these meetings moved me as this meeting, because Paul is a man who is powerful of spirit, and is “extraordinary” despite being “ordinary”. He epitomizes that fundamental exhortation that He gave the world … “Love thy neighbour as yourself and do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.
We spent the rest of the day listening to stories, evidence and submissions from some of the oppressed … some of the refugees … some of the tormented … some of the now “homeless” from our beloved country, Zimbabwe.
I have spent most of my life in the Courts of law and justice listening to stories of human suffering.
Here I was feeling like starting a swim in a beautiful pool, then being pulled under by some unseen force …
walking in a beautiful forest, then struggling to avoid sinking into quicksand …
looking at a beautiful painting, only to see it start to smudge and crack …
climbing up a beautiful mountain, only to feel it start to wobble and break up …
sitting down to a mouthwatering meal, only to see it turn into dog’s vomit …
holding a beautiful baby, only to see it sprout fangs and blood red eyes …
walking in a beautiful park, only to see it turn to a desert ...
floating on a cloud of happiness, only to see it turn into a bed of thorns ... 

holding a beautiful woman, only to see her turn into Satan himself ... 
I was being shaken, moved and violently disturbed at the very core of my being.
We are all aware of the diabolical machinations of the Mugabe ZANU-PF regime. But when you hear about it from the mouths of those who experienced it … it freezes your brain … chills your heart … suffocates your spirits … in indescribable ways.
Can you even start to imagine what it is like to hear an eyewitness depose to the slaughter of everyone over the age of 18, just because a plastic toy pistol was found in a village ... leaving all the children without parents???

Monday, June 18, 2018

Professors Richard Christie and Dennis Robinson … of Rhodesia – Zimbabwe.

Please SHARE ... SHARE ... SHARE ....
Image may contain: text


Today I want to honour these two great Zimbabweans who headed the Law Faculty of the University in my country of birth, Zimbabwe.
The starting point is to recognize that, after two (2) World Wars and the Holocaust, the World signed off on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”) in 1948, except for then South Africa, Saudi Arabia and Russia.
The UDHR gave mankind the sacred concept of there being “Human Rights” for the first time. It was only then that the dogma of all of us being “EQUAL” was adopted.
These concepts were entrenched as being unalienable and fundamental … to replace the previous universal culture of dominance and “might is right” that had spawned much evil, including slavery.
This proposition that “all are equal” is both fundamental and resolutive. Its implications include: –
a) the law confers equal rights on every human, being whatever their race, ethnicity, tribe …
b) and conversely no person can be disadvantaged on account of such differences …
c) laws much be such as to enable humans the right and power to enforce their rights and seek redress for infringement of such rights …
d) by full seamless access to Courts and tribunals that are truly independent and empowered to enforce human rights and force redress
e) with even the lowliest of subjects able to challenge even the President of the country as an equal on any issue
f) and the judgments and orders of the independent Courts fully enforceable.
However, let us all agree that these noble aspirations of law are meaningless, wholly or in part, if ordinary human beings are unable to enforce them. They become a cruel joke if the administration of justice does not guarantee that these rights are enforceable by even the poorest of the poor.
Justice must not be a commodity that is directly accessible in proportion to one’s means.
Justice cannot be available only to the highest bidder.
Again, let us all agree that currently, in this region, justice is all too often a matter of only being available to the highest bidder. The gap between rich and poor, in this region, is just about the highest in the free world.
The legal profession locates within the rich sector and charges accordingly.
Most humans in this region cannot afford a lawyer.
It is that simple.
Professors Christie and Robins were moved to something about this. They set up a “Legal Aid Clinic”. I am so proud to have been involved.
We secured sponsored premises in Jameson Avenue (now Samora Machel Ave) in Salisbury (now Harare).
Just about all lawyers and Advocates signed up. We put them on a roster.
Poor people came to the clinic.
If they did not have means, and had a case, we allocated a law firm from the roster to act for that person free of charge.
If the other side had an Advocate, we allocated an Advocate to our client.
The reason why it was called a “Legal Aid Clinic” was because law students were involved from start to finish.
In this way law students became schooled in the practice of law and justice under supervision, mentorship and tutorship of experienced legal practitioners at every level.
We scored some very impressive victories on behalf of those who would have otherwise been denied justice.
I put this to Namibia, via a publication in "The Patriot" of that country. Apparently it has done nothing about this.
I am now putting it to South Africa.
There is no good reason why this model should not be adopted and implemented in South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Namibia … NO GOOD REASON WHATSOEVER!😨😨
We should actually be ashamed ... ashamed that justice is denied the poor as a matter of routine.🤢😫
How can we crow about our “World-beating Constitution” when its sacred provisions are out of reach for most?.
We need to STOP being HYPOCRITICAL.🤢🤢🤢
We do have a serious problem of justice being denied to so many because they are poor.
Denying it is crass hypocrisy … ignoring it is just as bad.
So can we now PLEASE embrace the Christie/Robinson model of equality under the law?
PLEASE!!!
I am astounded that the so-called Human Rights Commission simply ignores this fundamental defect in our system.
But, in truth, I am not at all surprised.

So PLEASE bombard the HRC with this? 😵🤢
Free counters!