<p>Request Ms. Carmelita Raizenburg, Univ. of Capetown Official Comment on Free
Speech Legal Issue: American politician and author Dr. Brad Blanton accuses SA
Government of conducting a legal prosecution and persecution campaign against non-
violent civil disobedience Radical Honesty White Refugee Free Speech dissenter.
The Affidavit of Brad Blanton, Ph.D, evidencing
the legal, psychological, and socio-political
‘citizens privilege’, Nuremberg Principles skills
and competencies of Individual Responsibility,
required for acts of civil disobedience to
perceived illegitimate authority; and their
application to the common law ‘reasonableness
test’ (PDF), states among others, that:
Hon. Mrs. De Lille, and the NPA Senior
Prosecutor conducted a political and
legal prosecution and persecution
campaign against Johnstone.
If South Africa does not value non-violent
civil disobedience free speech dissent, as
one of its hallmarks, where ‘civil
disobedience’ is defined as: “a public,
non-violent, conscientious yet political
act contrary to law usually done with the
aim of bringing about a change in the law
or policies of the government”; then it is
not a democratic country.
The law of crimen injuria is a law so
ridiculous, it appears to date back to a
belief in curses from witchdoctors.
Confirms Johnstone’s culture and religion
as that of Radical Honesty; namely to
non-violently tell another the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth, so
help me God; with a commitment to
remaining in the conversation until
sincere forgiveness has occurred.
Johnstone’s defence of non-violent civil
disobedience political necessity defence
was justified and accurate.
Johnstone’s opinion that there is a
significant difference between posed
forgiveness and real forgiveness and that this difference is almost always avoided by politicians,
such as South Africa’s alleged Truth and Reconciliation politicians is entirely accurate.
Univ. of Capetown: Admin: Accounts: Debtors: Ms. Carmelita Raizen