Free-speech muzzling law

Some people may be wondering why I shut down my “nkalangaunozwida” blog. Well, there are several reasons, most significant of which is the imminent tabling of a “cybercrime law”. This is a draconian piece of legislation. In the guise of outlawing criminal behaviour such as online child pornography, cyber stalking, cyber bullying, the law will effectively silence not only social media, but mainstream news media as well:

“A person who wilfully, maliciously or repeatedly uses electronic communication of an offensive nature to disturb or attempt to disturb the peace, quiet or privacy of any person with no purpose to legitimate communication, whether or not a conversation ensues, commits an offence and is liable to a fine not exceeding P20 000 or to imprisonment of a term not exceeding one year, or both.”

The strife that is expected to characterise the next general elections in 2019 as a result of the Government outlawing use of a paper ballot at elections, and replacing such ballot with an electronic voting machine (EVM), is the probable reason why draconian legislation has to be aimed at computer use.

A strange facet of the legislation is the recurring phrase “by means of a computer or a computer system…” It is as if the intention is less about outlawing criminal activity than it is about outlawing use of a computer.  For example, it has always been a crime to “insult another person on the basis of race, colour, descent, nationality, ethnic origin, tribe or religion” regardless of the method by which such insult is uttered. The proposed bill’s pronouncement:

“A person who, by means of a computer or a computer system, insults another person on the basis of race, colour, descent, nationality, ethnic origin, tribe or religion commits an offence and is liable to a fine not exceeding P40 000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both” 

clearly shows that the computer and not the act per se, is being targeted for outlawing by this law.

In this day and age there is hardly any human activity that is done without use of a computer or computer system. Cameras, phones, note pads all have computers embedded in them. The law proposes to outlaw taking of photographs at accident scenes, purportedly to protect families of accident victims from seeing their maimed or killed relatives on social media before they are “officially” informed by the police. What this means is that relatives will first have to apply for police permission to take photographs at accident scenes. If the supposed “police” were somehow implicated in the “traffic-accident” you can imagine how difficult it would be, especially for relatives, to get permission to photograph such an “accident” scene! In a continent where “Intelligence Services” routinely arrange the demise of opposition activists in “traffic accidents”, outlawing of cameras at “accident” scenes might be just what the doctor ordered; for the “Security Services” of course.

Some people may wonder why there seems to be little or no civil society opposition to the proposed draconian legislation.  Close examination reveals a carefully laid out plan by the ruling party to blackmail the parliamentary opposition into helping pass the bill with very few, if any obstacles. There has been a rumour doing rounds in the press, that some prominent ruling party political leaders are in possession of illegally acquired and highly compromising extra-marital sex videos of some prominent opposition political leader/s, which videos they are threatening to release into cyberspace just before the 2019 general elections. Given such a scenario it is understandable why the concerned opposition political personalities and their supporters would be keen to support the proposed “anti-cybercrime” draconian legislation. The ruling party has almost literally grabbed the opposition by the b…..ls.

And so dear reader, this blog “myikalanga.blogspot.com” hereby falls silent too.

Maybe it's all fake news.

Suppose Spain imposes direct rule on Catalonia and then "suspends" it! That is what my friend says seems to be in the pipeline. I just laughed at the suggestion. I mean we are looking at the possibility of people dying here, aren't we?

And so this blog falls silent for good.

If you look at my Introduction and my Interests on this blog, you will see that the blog has achieved its objectives:

I have gone far back into history and (hopefully) helped bring you and me closer together.

I have, I believe, successfully traced Tswana language back to its Martian past, and thus debunked the myth that Sumerian/Coptic/Sotho/Tswana language has been spoken by Earthlings longer than Kalanga language.

None of the above would have been possible had they not commanded that I fall (ndiwe); had they not protected me for close to seventy years. Their most cryptic act of course was to suggest "hey demigod, how about fulfilling your mission now?"

And so, this blog falls silent for good.

My apologies, technology is playing tricks on me; it's not this blog that has fallen silent, but "nkalangaunozwida.blogspot.com". The blog "myikalanga.blogspot.com" may continue for a while longer.

Tswana language is killing our nation

It is no secret that our people are no longer able to speak English fluently. This form of acquired illiteracy is most evident among Kalanga-speaking ministers or should I say "deputy ministers" as that is where most of the hand-picked Kalanga political surrogates end up.

You see, Kalangas have to contend with learning two foreign languages - Tswana and English, whereas Tswana speakers only have to learn English. The result is an unbearable load of an unnecessary language. There is nothing wrong in learning a national language such as Kalanga or Tswana or Mbukushu, as long as the aim is to be able to converse/communicate with fellow citizens in our country, but it is quite unacceptable to be required to master that language, unless it is your own language. What I am saying is that non-Tswana speakers should not be required to learn Tswana at all, unless they want to be professional linguists. There should most certainly be no requirement that to get a job at Botswana Television one should speak Tswana, let alone be "fluent" in Tswana!

We Kalangas can win this fight for our language, for our right to bring up our children under our cultural tutelage, by not only refusing to speak Tswana at official gatherings, but by speaking our language at any gathering where a Tswana speaker uses Tswana. If a Tswana speaker rises in Parliament and speaks in Tswana language, then let a Herero rise and address same Parliament in Herero, let N-Khwa rise up and address same Parliament in Tjikhwa, let a Subiya rise up and address same Parliament   in TjiSubiya. Let the people refuse to bow to this insane imposition of Tswana culture on them.

Why is it that in the South African Parliament one can speak Zulu or Tswana or Afrikaans without adverse repercussions? We non Tswanas must throw off this yoke. This is after all our land! We cannot, and we should not expect any political party to have the courage to advance this course on our behalf. It is our fight.

Dump EVM case; take to the streets.

I am a computer, dear Reader; so are you. We both follow a logical process to arrive at decisions that we make. Almost daily we are "hacked" by those who successfully deceive us, albeit temporarily. Sometimes we need external inputs (leakers of otherwise inaccessible information) to recover from such hacks. Sometimes other recovery algorithms kick in to raise enough doubt to force us to investigate and "plug" the hack-hole. And yet we are the most sophisticated computer known to man, i.e to us!

So if the Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) is a computer (and only Gabriel Seeletso thinks it is not) there is no  disputing the fact that it can be hacked. There is no need to prove that fact. A computer made by man is infact a hack into the brain of man! And if it is a hack into something more sophisticated than itself, it stands to reason that that something will not have any problem whatsoever hacking it (the computer) as long as access to the computer by the brain is provided.

Access by the brain to the EVM is fundamental to the "correct" functioning of the EVM. Left on its own, the EVM would probably not know that Jack has voted and that the person now waiting to vote is Jill and not Jack again! Some human input will have to constantly tell the EVM to "reset and get ready for next voter". Therein lies human access to the EVM; therein lies a potential hack opportunity. Even if it was to be assumed that the EVM will be so sophisticated as to be hooked to face-recognition software, there is still the human access necessary to extract the vote tallies. That is an opportunity for a hack.

That a computer can be hacked is not reason enough for a judge to rule that the EVM may not be used in the 2019 elections. Why this is so, is quite obvious. If the litigants manage to get hold of the exact model of EVM that is going to be used during 2019 elections; get hold of an expert who successfully hacks the EVM; then the EVM manufacturer can simply assure the judge that come election time, that particular "hole" in the EVM software will have been "plugged". And once revealed, that particular hole will most certainly be plugged. But that does not mean that there are NO other holes left. Most importantly, a judge may want to know if litigants would not want to fly in an aircraft with autopilot installed, just because such autopilot is controlled by a computer and is therefore susceptible to hacking.

What I am saying here is that no further effort should be expended in trying to "show" that a computer can be hacked. That would be wasted effort. The litigants' effort should instead be applied to show that the use of EVM would be unconstitutional in other ways. For example, the EVM is going to eliminate the "problem" of spoilt ballots.

To my recollection spoilt ballots have always been a feature of past elections. They were counted and reported.  A  ballot is not always spoilt unintentionally. Given a list of candidates, all of whom are unacceptable to the voter, a voter "abstains" by spoiling his/her ballot. It is a legitimate act by the voter, and therefore it is constitutional. How then is the EVM going to elliminate spoilt votes without infringing on the constitutional rights of voters?

I know next to nothing about the intricacies of our constitution. However, I believe that our contitution has to be constitutional. Contradiction? No. You see, our constitution, i.e. the real (unwritten) one was forged in the streets of Francistown and Mochudi in the late 1950's - early 1960's. Some of us are old enough to have witnessed that struggle; -bo- P.G. Matante; -bo-Podiephatshwa; -bo-Tumelo; -bo-Bobby Mack (who later became a judge in Zambia). They marched in "Sotoma". They sang; they got whipped; they were incacerated. Those were our parents fighting for our freedom, for our independence.

If, as seems to be the case now, the written constitution subsequently veered off from the expectations of those who sacrificed so much for its attainment, then the people should take to the streets once again to reclaim their freedom, to kick out the EVM and its proponents.

As I have pointed out before, there could be a well calculated, sinister motive behind the rulers' insistance on the use of EVM in 2019. They could just be buying time; buying time so that none is left for implementation of the recommendations made by the African Union Election Observer Mission, following the 2014 general elections. Whether or not that is the real motive of the ruling party is open to debate. However, the legal route (and not a political one), that was embarked upon to fight the EVM debacle, played right into the hands of the enemies of our democracy! Now all they have to do is wait while the legal route saps the nation's energy to protest and resist.

Russians, more appropriately

I have posited before that what differentiates Bahurutshe from Bakhurutshe is that the former remained in Southern Africa, when the latter accompanied their Queen to Ethiopia or Egypt. Subsequently those who remained in Southern Africa morphed from "gatherers of lutshi" to "supervisors" in the digging/mining process.

The correctness of my thinking is reinforced by the Russian King's name - Czar. The name Czar is a corruption of the Kalanga word "tsha", meaning "dig". Thus the Russian King was the head digging Supervisor and was accordingly named according to the commands he shouted - "Dig!".

So Russians stayed in Southern Africa and are thus more appropriately referred to as Bahurutshe, rather than Bakhurutshe.

What were Arabs called at their origin in Africa?

It has been shown that the Coptic/Sotho/Tswana language is essentially the Sumerian language. The Arabic language is very closely related to these languages, if not one of their major dialects.  The word "Arab", in those languages means "one who boldly/loudly answers". The caller was the Anunnaki god "Ra", and the respondents became characterized as the Arabs, suggesting that those who refused to answer became non-Arabs.

But Kalanga language predates Sumerian/Coptic/Arab/Sotho/Tswana languages in ancient Egypt.  So, if the people we today call Arabs existed in Kalanga-speaking ancient Egypt, as we know they did, what were they called?

I have been puzzling over this for a long time. The answer hit me like a meteor last weekend as I watched a documentary of African history on TV. The presenter's name  is a Kalanga word - Badawi, and it means the same thing as "Arab". Let's unpack the phrase "Ba-da-whi". It is composed of a verb "ku da" meaning "to like/love", and the noun "whi" meaning "voice". Thus "Badawhi" means "those who like the voice".

And so Badawhi is what the Arabs were originally called, before the Sumerian/Coptic/Sotho/Tswana language hit the African shores. My apologies to Zeinab!