Saturday, March 21, 2009

Answers to the questions

The identities of the handsome two elderly hunks

The answer to the question concerning the identity of the two handsome specimens is that the tall handsome individual with the Royal Air Force moustache, is Lieutenant General Denis Earp, who not only survived a communist prisoner of war camp in Korea after he was shot down in his Mustang, but also survived another ordeal of making a fighter pilot out of an 18 year old boy, fresh out of school। And I was that boy. The shorter, equally (or perhaps even more) handsome individual, without any moustache (because he shaves it off every morning), standing next to the General is your truly, me. The photograph was taken at Swartkops Air Force Base nearly 45 years after Lieutenant Earp and I boarded Harvard number 7171 for the first time. Despite his ordeals in Korea and at Central Flying School during his endeavours aimed at making a pilot out of me, General Earp rose to the position of chief of the air force. And he did so despite the fact that his home language was not Afrikaans. This meeting with General Earp came about during an open day for invited guests held by 17 Squadron. And the thing of beauty in which the General and took off more than 50 years ago, looked like those in the following photograph, taken on the occasion when I had the privilege of flying in formation with Spitfire TE566. I actually wrote an article entitled, “Dancing with Wolves, Running with Bulls and Flying formation with a Spitfire”, about the occasion and it was published in SA Flyer magazine.

After I qualified as a pilot and was commissioned as an officer I served as weekend pilot over a period of eleven years. In that time I served as a fighter pilot and transport pilot on three different Air Force squadrons.

The reason why the Spitfire fraternised with Harvards

My privilege to fly formation with a Spitfire came about as follows: I was commissioned by the editor of the aviation magazine, SA Flyer, to cover an air show in Newcastle and the Spitfire was one of the attractions on the occasion. Before we returned home from Newcastle I asked the Spitfire pilot and owner, a stockbroker by the name of Torr to join is in a formation and he agreed. But as we taxied out he was still battling to start his engine. We were airborne for quite some time before he informed us by radio that he is airborne but not long thereafter he joined us in formation.

Sadly the beautiful bird is no more because some time thereafter the Spitfire was sold to an attorney who crashed and killed the aircraft and himself.

After my adventure with the Spitfire I wrote an article entitled, “Dancing with Wolves, Running with Bulls and Flying formation with a Spitfire”, about the occasion and it was published in SA
Flyer magazine.

The identity of this 40 years old space-age type of instrument revealed

While I was serving on the various Air Force squadrons I also did a science degree, graduating with Chemistry and Mathematics as major subjects, and a post-graduate degree in Chemistry. I did scientific research at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and the Iscor research laboratory for ten years. My field of research was electrochemical methods in analytical chemistry and the instrument depicted in the image is the Cathode Ray Polarograph on which I did research for my M.Sc. thesis.

In due course I completed my research for a M.Sc. in chemistry but due to the fact that the University committed a gross breach of good faith I never submitted my thesis. The webpage, "My Master's Degree Saga" ( contains more particulars about that period of my life.

During my tenure at Iscor I was in due course employed as management consultant and was inter alia engaged in managing work study projects and consulting on organisational structures within the Iscor organisation. Since I was employed on the senior management level I was required to conduct lectures in management training to middle management personnel at Iscor While on the topic of lecturing I mention that I also conducted mathematics workshops at the Pretoria University and lectured for six years at technical colleges in Mathematics, Commercial Law, Handelsreg, and Company Law.

The lady with the sword with whom I have been having a plutonic relationship for the past 36 years

The female with a sword in the one hand and scales in the other is Justitia (also known as Lady Justice) and she became part of my life as follows: While serving as a weekend Air Force Pilot; doing occassional night-flying exercises during the week; lecturing after hours at the Technical College; and doing my M.Sc; I applied for special permission from the University senate to enrol for a degree in another faculty, being the law faculty. Permission was granted and in due course I obtained a law degree, soon thereafter went into law practice, and Jusitia has ever since been part of my life because I have ever since been active, ever since, as a lawyer, both in law practice, and as legal advisor. I am presently still retained as legal adviser of a corporation and employed, from time to time, as ad hoc legal adviser. I had a general law practice and did a fair amount of property transfers for the deceased estates department of Santam Insurance in Durban. I was appointed as a bond attorney by Saambou Nasionaal (as it was known at the time) and did the odd contract and will and also registered a few patents. But I specialized in litigation and in that regard it became clear to me that the illegal practices of certain judges of the Natal poses severe risks for clients that I represent and I decided to leave law practice. I have partly completed a book on that topic.

Since there is always the possibility of a question mark when a professional person such as an attorney, medical doctor (or the likes) leaves practice while still being able to practice, I mention that the only court that ever adjudicated on whether I am a person that is suitable to practice as an attorney, is the court that admitted me as such, being the Natal Provincial Division of the Supreme Court of South Africa (as the particular High Court was known at the time).

I have been retained as a corporate legal adviser by Cadhouse Design Enterprises CC for the past more than two decades and I have also been active as a forensic investigations lawyer specialising in litigation, a field  in which I have been active for the past more than four decades.

The reason why you have never seen one of the following motor vehicles before

The reason is simply that I only built one of the vehicles!

During 1987, while we were living in Durban, I embarked on a project aimed at developing and producing a motor vehicle that would be immune to rust. I called it the Range Rider. The vehicle consists of a stainless steel body frame and chassis, fibreglass body panels, and aluminium beading. It is truly rustproof.

I was assisted in the project by one David Saunders, a man with a variety of talents, and we built two prototypes. Each vehicle passed the roadworthy tests without any problems, was duly financed by Wesbank, and comprehensively insured. While road-testing the two prototypes over a period of more than a year I was approached by a vast number of people who were interested in buying the vehicle.
I developed the vehicle in the days of the Old South Africa and at that time it became clear that there is going to be a new political dispensation, a black government, typical Africa-continent corruption, and a new dispensation as regards law and order and, and more specifically, labour law. I did some intense soul searching and finally realised that I would never be able to come to terms with being held to ransom by my labour force. At the time I had three businesses, two of which that were very dependent on labour. Some time thereafter my wife and I therefore decided to dispose of our businesses.

I may mention that in the Old South Africa there were substantial incentives for relocating to decentralised areas such as Isithebe on the Natal north coast and I was on the verge of relocating my factory to Isithebe. The labour at Isithebe was cheap, readily available, and the people particularly docile. When Mandela was released and the New South Africa started kicking in, Isithebe was the first to go up in flames, literary, not metaphorically speaking. As regards the motor industry, Mercedes Benz suffered substantial damages when workers downed tools, illegally occupied the factory, and ruined expensive upholstery material by using it as bedding. When I shelved the Range Ride project I sacrificed more than R200000, but when I saw the news footage of Isithebe burning, and the shambles at the Mercedes Benz factory, I felt particularly smug for having made the decision not to continue with the Range Rider project.

What gives with this stack of Bible?

The Bibles in the image are, from top to bottom;

New Living Translation
New International Version
Afrikaans Bible with Masoretic text as basis for the Old Testament
Afrikaans Bible with Lenengradenses as basis for the Old Testament
The New English Bible
English Standard Version
King James Version
Good News Bible
The Jewish Bible (The Torah)

The Bibles shown in the image are only nine of the plethora of books that all carry the title, “Bible”. But, lo and behold, they differ from one another! And the differences are profoundly significant. And each of the Bibles contains within themselves contradictory text on the same issue. The contradictions are of such an extent that it completely destroys the credibility and cogency of the particular narrative.

All the Bibles contain pornographic material such as the following words of God (no less) uttered regarding His two prostitute wives (I repeat: God’s prostitute wives – no error there):

“She was the whore for all the Assyrian officers …”. (Ezekiel 23:7)

“She was filled with lust for oversexed men with large sex organs and all the lustfulness of stallions.”

From God’s account it appears that when one them was a girl (as God put it);

“men played with” her “breasts”

and as young girls, both of God’s wives (and I once again quote God’s exact words)

“let their breasts be fondled and their virgin bosoms pressed”.

But the contents of all the Bibles also show a disgusting contempt for women with drivel such as the following:

“A man has no need to cover his head, because he reflects the image and glory of God. But woman reflects the glory of man”

" was not Adam who was deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and broke God’s law.”

“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For a husband has authority over his wife just as Christ has authority over the Church.”

“Women should learn in silence and all humility. I do not allow them to teach or to have authority over men; they must keep quiet.”

“It is a disgraceful thing for a woman to speak in Church.”

And in its final book the Bible states that 144 000 fortunate men would be “redeemed”: and that;

“They are the men who have kept themselves pure by not having sexual relations with women; they are virgins.”

You can read more about the mentioned disgusting drivel in the following extracts from my book:

Women Bashing in the Bible for an account (by God, no labout

The Bibles in the image are all similar in one respect and different in other respects. They are similar in that they are all Bibles of protestant Christians. As regards a discussion concerning how they differ from one another, that would require a discourse spanning over several book volumes. To give but one example, of many; the New International Version, the two Afrikaans Bibles, The New English Bible, the English Standard Version, and the Good News Bible states that Elhanan (referred to as, Elganan, in one Afrikaans Bible) killed Goliath, whereas the King James Version and the New Living Translation states that Elhanan killed the brother of Goliath. Incidentally, where was David at the time? Furthermore, the accounts contained in The New English Bible and the King James Version concerning the same incident were obtained from the same source, the Vulgate. And yet, they differ as regards the identity of the deceased in the matter, being Goliath in The New English Bible and Goliath’s brother in the King James Version. The crisp questions in that regard are: How can two Bibles developed from the same basic text be so different as regards such a material fact, and how did it come about that divine inspiration did not prevent the contradiction?
For the past more than 15 years I have been making a study of the Bible and wrote a book, “The Bible in Perspective”, that will in due course be published. It is a non-spiritual and purely academical treatise on the subject. In the process of creating perspective concerning the Bible I have approached the subject from a fundamentalist perspective. I should actually say that I approached the subject “legalistically”, because the only evidenced that I considered was the content of the Bible. Despite my scientific background no extrinsic evidence (scientific or otherwise) was allowed in my investigation. The same rule engagement would obviously also apply to any criticism of my book. If, for example, an argument is sought to be made up that a particular bit of nonsense contained in the Bible is allegorical then proof of that contention would need to be identified in the Bible. My reference in this discussion to “Bible” is to the Bible genre.