Why South Africa will never win the Cricket World Cup

Dear Cricket Lovers,
            Below is what I wrote in 2011 at the time of the previous Cricket World Cup. It is just as true today, if not more so. We'll never win this Cup when the selectors have a Government sponsored millstone of prejudice around their necks forcing them to selected players on colour first and ability second.

PHILANDER

            The Times reported today that fast bowler Vernon Philander, a coloured was selected for the Proteas semi -final World Cup match against New Zealand ahead of Kyle Abbott, a white who had been the team's most consistent bowler in the matches leading up to this game which South Africa lost.

            This was done, the paper claimed, because the selectors felt that they had to add to Hashim Amla, JP Duminy and Imran Tahir to ensure there were at least four players of colour in the team.

ABBOTT TAKES ANOTHER WICKET

            The really deplorable aspect was that Philander had missed a lot of the earlier games because of a hamstring injury and was not fully fit when he was picked for this, the Proteas' most important match. He managed to bowl eight overs for an expensive 52 runs without a wicket before his injury forced him to leave the field prematurely.
            Russell Domingo was the Proteas head coach, who is also coloured. His lack of confidence in his ability to produce a World Cup winning team was evident in the way he surrounded himself with almost a cricket team of specialist coaches and advisers. No other team at the tournament had as many.
           He said of Philander: "He is a hell of a good bowler and it's unfair to lay the blame on him or any other bowler."
            How right he was, the people to blame were those who picked Philander.

RUSSELL DOMINGO

            The whole world was very vocal about the apartheid policy of discrimination against Blacks practised by the previous Whites only South African Government. But now that the Black African National Congress is in power and is advocating it the other way round in sports team selection nobody is saying a word.
            The policy was given a serious bloody nose when South African born Grant Elliott hit a six to clinch the win for his adopted country. A cricket refugee he left South Africa because he feared that as a white the quota system would prevent him from becoming an international.
            He really got his own back when he was also the Man of the Match with an unbeaten 84 for the Black Caps.
            Not content with the way South African cricket has already been hamstrung by this iniquitous policy the Minister of Sport Fikile Mbalula is now threatening cricket and rugby (seen as essentially white sports) with all kinds punishments like "withdrawing national colours" if they don't meet transformation targets.

           Last year he blew his top and accused the mainly black national soccer team Bafana Bafana of being a "bunch of losers" when they were knocked out of the African Nations Cup at the group stage.

          Well Fikile my prediction is that you will have reason to say this a lot more often about our cricket and rugby players if you and your Government persists with this sports apartheid. And as nobody loves a loser we can expect sponsorship to drop and have these sports tumble down the world rankings, much like Bafana Bafana is in the habit of doing, until nobody really wants to watch them and all our stars are playing overseas.
           Regards,
           Jon

First Posted 21/01/2011

Dear International Cricket Council, 

          Have you ever tried playing cricket with one hand tied behind your back? Well that’s what the South African Proteas are expected to do.

          And what’s more they are supposed to go to Asia and win the World Cup with this rather debilitating handicap.

          Oh! by the way I’m not talking about the World Cup for paraplegics. This is for able bodied players. So you can appreciate that it is also giving the South Africans a major headache with so much riding on their performance back home.

          Their impediment that pretty well guarantees that they won’t be raising the winner’s trophy is so hush, hush that the South African media hardly ever mentions it.  But Stuart Hess made a passing reference to it in the Cape Times when he reported on our World Cup Squad.

          Out of the 15 players chosen he told us that there were six black players - one short of what is understood  to be the agreed figure. He didn’t say who the agreement was with or how the selectors, headed by Andrew Hudson decided who is black and who is white.

          My sources tell me that the selectors were all issued with unique spectacles. They enabled them to tell who had enough coffee in their milk to be put in this special category where colour is more important than ability.

          I’m not saying that there aren’t players of colour in the team that don’t deserve their place. But if you have a system like this nobody will ever know how many more talented Whites were left out so as to make up the Black numbers.

          In South Africa’s new branding process you are considered Black when it comes to choosing the National cricket team if you are slightly brown of Indian origin; Coloured of black and white decent or completely Black from one of the indigenous tribes like the Zulus. If you happen to be any other colour you probably won’t be considered never mind how good you are because there’s no category for you.

          Here’s the team and I’ll leave you to guess their colour in the Comments section of this blog. Greame Smith (capt.), Hashim Amla, Jacques Kallis, Johan Botha, AB de Villiers, JP Duminy, Faf du Plessis, Colin Ingram, Morne` Morkel, Wayne Parnell, Robbie Peterson, Dale Steyn, Imran Tahir, Lonwabo Tsotsobe and Morne` van Wyk.

          This colour coding applies essentially to the white dominated sports in South Africa. Nobody says a thing about mixing more colours in the virtually all Black National soccer team Bafana Bafana  which is ranked nowhere in the world. And who else would want to play for them anyway because they haven’t won anything of note for as long as even the most ardent fans can remember?

          Back to the cricket. The teams competing in this World Cup will be playing in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. How many of them are forced to included players who are not necessarily the best available just because they have the right coloured skin? Other than South Africa my bet is the answer is; None.

          So to even things up my proposal is that the Proteas should have 30 runs added to their score in every match to level the playing fields as it were.

          The countries where the games take place are a paradise for spin bowlers which is another factor counting against the South Africans. Brought up on hard, fast wickets more suited to quick bowling the Proteas haven’t got a spinner worth anything and most of their batsmen struggle again this kind of bowling.

          So even without having to play with one hand tied behind their back the team was probably onto a hiding to nothing. The only fair thing to do is to even the odds.

          I know this will invite some colourful headlines, but nothing in this life is ever just in Black and White.

          Yours truly

          Jon, an anthropologist of note.

P.S. Should a team chosen on apartheid lines be allowed in the World Cup just because South Africa now has a Black Government? In the old days the English team called off its tour to this country because the all White Government refused to accept a team that included Basil D’Oliviera, who was coloured.

IS "UP TO" PERCENTAGE MARKETING OKAY?

Dear Consumers,

DISCOVERY'S  GORE

         It’s amazing how many top South African companies use the words “up to” when promoting their products or services. This is particularly prevalent among firms like Discovery; Momentum and various banks that have extensive rewards programmes.   

         Say an insurance company advertises that it will give you back “up to” 50% of the total of the premiums you have paid after two years. What would that mean to you?

         My interpretation would be that they could be giving you a lot less than 50%, but the figure sounds impressive and it makes the claim correct for any amount from just over 0% to 50%.

         A high percentage is a bait to get customers on the hook when the truth of the offer is so variable that it can be extremely suspect. That’s my belief.

         However in a confusing part of its Code of Conduct the Advertising Standards Authority of South Africa (ASA) says this type of advertising should not be used, but only if certain obscure conditions apply.

         Clause 4.5 states: “Claims, whether as to price or performance, which use formulas such as ‘up to 10 kilometres per liter’ or ‘prices from as low as R5’ are not acceptable where there is a likelihood of the consumer being misled as to the availability of the benefits offered. Such claims should not be used.”

          In Clause 4.5.1 it adds that this should only apply “where the price or other advantage claimed bears no relation to the prevailing level of prices or benefits, and in particular where it does not apply to the goods or services actually advertised or to more than an insignificant proportion of them.”

         My question is: “How is anybody who sees this kind of adverting supposed to know what this last clause means exactly?” 

         The ASA’s view is that it’s up to the customer or client to find out by looking at the firm’s Terms and Conditions – a curse of modern advertising. But I doubt that there is any company website that explains the ramifications of this at all, let alone clearly.

         About four years ago Capitec, one of South Africa’s youngest and most innovative banks tore up its Terms and Conditions (See “Brilliant Trail Blazer’s new Consumer Standard”). Unfortunately there is no sign of other businesses following suit.

         After my admittedly rather short investigation my guess is that the Discovery Group uses “up to” with at least one “as much as 14%” as a variation possibly more than anybody else.

         On its website for the five arms of its empire that extends to Medical Aid, Life and Short Term Insurance, Credit Cards and the Vitality Wellness Awards scheme these two words are mentioned “up to 300%” of the time, or is it “up to 60%” or “up to 30%”?

       Any of these could be right because they cover such a wide guess.

         Discovery also uses them in its Television advertising and possibly elsewhere.

FOR INSURING YOUR CAR WITH DISCOVERY

         Here are some samples of the many examples and at least one variation that you can find on the Group’s website. The * comments are mine.

Medical Aid: “Our plan contributions are as much as 14% lower than those of all South Africa’s medical schemes.” * Does this mean 0.1% lower, 10% lower or what?

“Executive Plan: Guaranteed full cover in hospital for specialists on payment arrangement and up to 300% of the Discover Health rate for other specialists.”

There are various other “up to” percentages for less costly plans.

Life Insurance: “Up to 60% of your premiums can be paid back to you depending on how well you manage your health.

“Receive up to 28% off your premiums up front.

“Up to 30% of you premiums back every year.”

Various “up to” percentage discounts are given if you have the other services provided by the group. * So it’s up to you to sign up for as many as possible to get a percentage of that juicy carrot that may or may not be much more than a pittance.

Short Term Insurance: “Up to 50% back on your BP fuel spend each month for driving well.”

Another version given is, “Get up to R800 of your fuel spend back each month.”

* This implies that you get money back wherever you buy your fuel, not just at a BP station.

Vitality: “Get up to 25% cash back on HealthFood items at Pick n Pay or Woolworths.

“Get up to 25% cash back on HealthGear at Sportsman’s Warehouse and Total Sports.” * Is this a lucky dip? Does it mean that today you could get say a 3% discount, tomorrow 8% and perhaps very occasionally when the stores want to get rid of excess stock 25%? Why is this so vague? Surely there should be a definite percentage discount if there is one.

“Save up to 80% on monthly gym fees at Virgin Active or Planet Fitness.”

I emailed the above to Adrian Gore, Discovery’s founder and Group Chief Executive and invited him to comment if he wished. I was told he had seen it although he was in London. The job of replying then tumbled down the ranks from Hylton Kallner, the Chief Marketing Officer who is also a director to Rene Vosloo, Head of Corporate Communication and Media Relations.

According to her I had got it all wrong if I thought Discovery had done anything amiss, so you readers will have to be the judge.

This is what she told me: “At Discovery we take our commitment to our clients and our abidance of the ASA Code of Conduct very seriously. Discovery doesn’t utilise the phase ‘up to’ unless our clients can and do obtain the values quoted under reasonable scenarios – for certain of the products quoted, clients receiving less than the benefits listed are in the minority (*by giving “up to” percentages no specific benefits are given), with the majority of clients in fact obtaining maximum ‘up to’ benefit. This is in line with our own principles of fairness and honesty as well as the FSB’s (Financial Services Board) Treat Customers Fairly legislative framework under which our products operate and are regulated.

“We are therefore confident and comfortable that all our material is developed within the ASA Code of Conduct.”

The FSB lists six requirements as part of its Treat Customers Fairly code. One of these is that: “Customers are provided with clear information and kept appropriately informed before, during and after front of sale.”

*But how clear is any “up to” a certain percentage at the “before” stage?

         One of the largest financial groups in South Africa MMI Holdings, more commonly known as Momentum is in a similar, if not quite as extensive an area of business as Discovery. It’s into Medical Aid, Life and Short term insurance; Fitness Promotion as well as Investments.

         The Proteas Cricket team is covered by Momentum Health.

         I don’t know which one, out of these two groups, first started this “up to” marketing, but Momentum’s is remarkably similar to Discovery’s.

         My guess it that there is an “up to” 100 chance that Discovery started it but then again the probability is “up to” 100% that Momentum got in first.

         On its website and in a Television advertising campaign during the World Cup cricket on DSTV Momentum tells us: “Get up to 60% off your Momentum life insurance; up to R5 400 paid into your Health Saver Account; join Virgin Active or Planet Fitness gyms for R99 and save up to 80% of your membership fees; up to 20% off your golf and cycling equipment at The Pro Shop or Cycle Lab and up to 50% off Mango flights.”

         Unlike Discovery Momentum does not state specifically that it abides by the ASA Code of Conduct but its Group Chief Executive Nicolaas Kruger had this to say in his introduction to the firm’s Code of Ethics.

         “Momentum is committed to do what is right, fair, reasonable and lawful.”

         There’s a heading entitled Speak Up, which could apply to me. It says: “We encourage people to speak up against any breach of our values and standards and have zero tolerance policy on retaliation as it is our belief that speaking up is always the right thing to do.”

        

KRUGER

When I asked Nicolaas Kruger Momentum’s Group CEO for his view he passed the job to Zureida Ebrahim the CEO, Client Engagement Solutions who replied on the letterhead of Momentum Multiply, which is its wellness and rewards scheme.

         She maintained that “client-centricity” was the heart of their business and they “demonstrated this in the ease and transparency in which our clients can take advantage of the various levels of benefits (hence the use of ‘Up to…’) available to them.”  *It’s hard to fathom how ‘up to’ percentages can be at all transparent. I would say they are the complete opposite to this. They hide the true picture.

         Zureida went on to say: “As the conditions of the ‘Up to …’ offer cannot be contained in the limited space of an advertisement, all our advertisements provide a website address where clients can view the terms and conditions of the offer.

         “Our sales process also provides a further opportunity for clients to gain more information on how the programme works as well as the benefits available to members.”

         She included a ruling made by the ASA in 2012 when somebody had evidently complained about the use of “up to” in ads. So I am not the only person who thinks this kind of advertising should not be allowed.

         Below is the ASA’s complicated ruling that “up to” ads are perfectly okay.

         Well I bet that if a survey was done there is "up to"a 90% chance that the majority of people would think this is certainly not alright.

         Based on my experience of the ASA’s decisions the chances are “up to” 100% that this decision was taken to appease all those companies that would have to go to considerable expense if they were ordered to change their “up to” ads to something more plausible.

         The ASA claims to be an impartial, independent body set up by the marketing and communications industry to ensure that its system for self-regulation works in the public interest.

         Only the industry knows how it can impartially enforce its Coded of Conduct when it is regulating itself. It’s like appointing your own judge at your trial.

         HOW CAN THAT POSSIBLY BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST?

         It’s dubious impartiality and bias towards big business was glaringly exposed in the way it dealt with various complaints that I made, the results of which you can read on my blog.

         Here are some of the worst examples: citizens aladdins cave of dubious ads ; ridiculous advertising standards authority and bungling advertising standards authority 

         Yours faithfully,

         Jon, your Consumer Watchdog, who does his best to get big business to come to heel.

P.S. I will be sending the link to this post to Leon Grobler, the ASA’s Manager Dispute Resolutions just in case he might one day say he knew nothing about what the advertising industry has really been “up to.”

SOUTH AFRICA'S BRAINLESS CRICKET

 Dear Cricket fans,

AB DE VILLIERS

         Facing their first serious hurdle at the Cricket World Cup, the Proteas as they some how got called after previously being the Springboks, had to make 308 to beat India. It was a formidable task but not impossible.

         They had almost a cricket team of expert coaches and consultants to advise them so you would have expected, at the very least, that they would have done nothing stupid.

         That’s where you would have been wrong, terribly wrong.

         They batted as if most of them had not got a brain between them.

         Opener Quinton de Kock started with a wild swing at a ball that could easily have had him caught behind the wicket. After a few innocuous shots he sent a soft one into the hands of the opposition and was gone for seven.

         Mr Reliable Hashim Amla, one of the best batsmen in the world in all formats, skied a short ball onto the leg side where he was caught on the boundary for 22. Somebody of his experience should have seen that trap a mile off.

         Faf du Plessis, in at three, who has been out of form lately, played sensibly with wickets falling around him. At 55 off 71 balls he had a brain storm, ran down the pitch and gave the Indians an easy catch.

         Captain AB de Villiers, the top ranked One Day International batsman in the world in 2014, also showed his lack of sensible thought. After a couple of narrow run out escapes he evident believed his speed made him invincible. One risky run too many and he was out for 30 when his team so badly needed a big innings from him.

         JP Duminy, who made a century in the previous match admittedly against lowly Zimbabwe, played possibly the most brainless shot of all. With his score at only six he decided on the most risky shot in cricket – a reverse sweep. As a left hander he was playing the shot as if he was right handed.

         The result was the last of the Proteas' recognised batsmen was back in the pavilion.

         David Miller, one of the top six, who had come in just before Duminy, followed his captain’s bad example and was run out for 22.

         That was effectively the end of the Proteas scoring because the last five players, you couldn’t call them batsmen as the commentators do, made a total of only 28 runs.

         How the South Africa selectors expect to win a world cup with so many players who can’t bat I don’t know. They badly need at least one good all rounder who can bat and bowl reasonably well.

         As it was in this game they relied on Wayne Parnell to fulfil this role. His bowling was hammered for 85 runs at almost 10 an over, nearly twice as many as the next worst bowler. His solitary wicket didn’t alter the fact that his figures were shocking.

         He made 17 not out off 28 balls when the game was already lost. But if he is the best all rounder the Proteas have got it will take a miracle for them to win the Cup.

         To cap this match of brainless play the Proteas were fined 10% of their match fee with captain De Villiers being penalised 20% for badly overrunning the three and a half hours allowed for a side fielding to complete their overs.  

         The Proteas' 130 thrashing was by far their worst performance at a World Cup and the first time they have ever been beaten by more than 100 runs.

         So what was the point of all those advisers? Where were they when the Proteas batsmen lost their minds?

Where were they when the Proteas, named after a hardy wild flower, faded so badly?

         Apart from the Head Coach Russell Domingo they had fielding coach Adrian Birrell; specialist bowling coach Allan Donald; specialist spin bowling coach Claude Henderson as well as former South African batsman Gary Kirsten who was the coach of the World Cup winning Indian team four years ago. He was there as the batting consultant.

THE A TEAM FEATURED IN THE TIMES

         You would think they had enough experts to keep any team on a winning high. But no they had to add retired Australian batting star Mike Hussey as the finishing consultant, whatever that is.

         My suggestion is that this think tank team should play in the next match with some of the best of the Proteas to make up the numbers and we’ll see if they are any good on the field because in the Indian game they were as useless off it as the Proteas were on it.

         Watch out for the West Indies on Friday Proteas. You might have beaten them easily shortly before the World Cup started, but if Chris Gayle and some of their other hard hitting batsmen get going there will be no room for any more mindless cricket.

         Your avid cricket fan

         Jon, who would very much like to see De Villier’s prediction that “We’ll win the World Cup” turned into fact. But on the showing during the India match it will be very much against the run of play unless there is a superhuman improvement.

    

TELKOM SCUPPERS ANOTHER KEVIN PEARMAN GET-RICH-QUICK SCHEME

Dear Readers,

         Hundreds of people promised lucrative jobs in another of Kevin Pearman’s get-rich-quick businesses have been left without them.

         And what happened to the money South African investors might have given him is anyone’s guess. 

         HIS INVESTORS ARE TIRED OF HIS EMPTY PROMISES.

         A Facebook page has recently been set up headed “Kevin Pearman Scams Ntyre Itmakescents.” It has nothing to do with me but claims to have been founded by “a social group dedicated to getting all the people together that Kevin Pearman has taken money off.”

  

         Last month in a Sunday Times advertisement he was telling would be investors that he could turn their R50 000 into R200 000 in a year. It was “the best passive income opportunity ever,” he claimed.

         He has given similar undertakings before.

         It was dependent on the success of the contract to market mobile airtime that his The World Loves a Winner company trading as It Makes Cents (IMC) had with Telkom.

         The only problem was that after IMC signed up 4 532 agents in only three months up to December last year, if the website is to be believed, and “created 6 288 jobs since 1 September 2014” Telkom terminated the agreement. This was confirmed to me by a Telkom spokesman.

         Had Kevin’s “tarnished image” caught up with him once again?

         Telkom was the second mobile phone provider to sign a marketing agreement with Pearman only to cancel it. He had a another one with Cell C which was revoked three days after I asked the then Chief Executive Alan Knott - Craig if the scheme had Cell C’s blessing.

         At the time Pearman was told that Cell C believed his marketing plan was a “get-rich-quick pyramid scheme” which he denied. 

         Pearman maintained that by selling Cell C sim cards his agents could “easily make R800 000 per annum or get there quicker.” Agents had to pay R600 to get started and Pearman had recruited 140 of them before Cell C reneged on the agreement.       

         Many of those recruited for Telkom were poor people lured by Kevin’s pie in the sky predictions that his firm would sponsor and train agents to start their own businesses in which they could earn “at least R300 000 per annum.”

         The firm’s website, which was effectively taken down soon after I began making inquiries, stated that the business had two sides: the Passive Income-Opportunity Participants (PI) and the agents who were responsible for bringing in the money by selling Telkom airtime.

         For every PI there were to be five agents contracted to meet an “easily obtainable, minimum performance.” After IMC took its cut the money earned would be split between the agents and paying the investors.

         He also undertook to pay the agents and his PI investors monthly, something that hasn’t happened.

        

        Keith Buncombe, who became an agent in August last year and who has 60 subagents under him told me, “Nobody has got paid any money yet.”

         Buncombe, a pastor at a small Port Elizabeth church, was trying to boost his income. He said that in September last year he received 3 000 Telkom sim cards after he and other agents had been on a two day Telkom training course. These went quickly and in December he got another 3 000.

         When I spoke to him on 11 February this year Pearman had not yet let him know that IMC was no longer an authorised Telkom vendor.

         Buncombe was one of the praise singers in a video competition on the IMC website extolling the virtues of the business and Pearman’s expertise. He described Pearman as an “absolute genius.” But I don’t think he is so convinced of this now. He won second prize of R2 500.

FIKISWA MABANDLA

         First prize of R5 000 went to Fikiswa Mabandla from Port Elizabeth. She said It Makes Cents would change so many people’s lives “especially in the Eastern Cape where there’s so much unemployment.”

         The third prize winner was Wally Scholtz who told of how he had signed up 41 distributors in just nine days. “I have a goal to become financially free,” he added.  

         The IMC January 2015 news letter revealed that Xybanetx, a leading management advisory firm had become a “shareholder/partner.” Its impressive pedigree doesn’t fit with the Kevin Pearman image. It has done consultancy work for firms like Absa bank, Nedbank, Standard Bank as well as Daimler Chrysler, Ster Kinekor Theatres and various other blue chip companies.

                

Craig Lutwyche

In an effort to verify the News Letter’s claim I sent emails to both Craig Lutwyche and Carlo Mariani, Xybanetx’s founding directors. They never replied although their PA Jennifer Sagnelli assured me she had alerted them to my inquiry.

         Pearman was just as elusive.

Carlo Mariani

         The News Letter disclosed that IMC would be applying for a license as a Financial Services Provider (FSP) and would be adding life insurance and funeral policies as well as medical aid schemes to the portfolios of its agents.

         The PI will cease with the inclusion of the new partners and will be replaced with an Investment Opportunity that will provide a fixed, guaranteed return for a year. This will form part of the financial services offered when the company gets its FSP license. But it will provide nowhere near the income available from the current PI model.
          If Pearman or any of his companies gets an FSP license it will be a disgrace.

FROM THE FACEBOOK PAGE

         Kevin specialises in get-rich-quick offers through advertisements in the Sunday Times and possibly other papers. It is doubtful however whether anybody who has invested with him has got the returns promised or even had their money back.

         The first one I came across was for a shareholding in his N-tyre Solutions that owns his a tyre monitoring invention for trucks. This was said to have an enormous tyre saving potential. So much so that Pearman told me that one of the world’s largest tyre manufacturers offered him $10-million for the rights so they could prevent it coming on the market.  Inexplicably he turned this down to market his baby himself.

         That was 12 years ago shortly after he won three design awards for his invention. Ever since then he has been struggling to get what was described as a “brilliant concept” on the road to make him and his shareholders the millions he believes it is worth.

         In the Sunday Times he promised that an investment of R100 000 in N-Tyre would be worth R2-million in four years.  

         I once told him that although he believed his schemes were great investments he still resorted to very dubious advertisements in the Sunday Times. He replied, “The ST is rudely expensive and I simply must do whatever I can to get to talk to people.”

         Pearman’s next advertisement enticed people to doubled R50 000 in a year. This was in his Heat in a Click venture that sold reusable gel heating pads for muscle pain relief.

         He told me he went into this towards the end of 2012 to raise sufficient money to “finalise my N-Tyre business and to rectify my already tarnished name.”

         His The World Loves a Winner company was offering licensing agreements at R300 000 (a favourite number of his) a time.

         Not long afterwards he said he had cut ties with Heat in a Click because of a disagreement with the other partners.

        

         The Blue Bulls rugby club was persuaded to allow its logo to be used on the pads. But the club never made a cent out of this.

         Darryl Kroll the club’s brand promoter told me that they cancelled the contract and although they were owed a lot of money they could never get in touch with the people involved despite “months and months of trying.”

         Last year Pearman said he started as a Cell C reseller “out of necessity to raise the R2-million I need to launch N-tyre myself as the potential is now better than ever with the strong possibility of the insurance industry embracing it.”

         His efforts to find a large company to back his tyre invention had proved fruitless.

         At this stage he stated he had 450 N-tyre shareholders, although none of them appeared to have had any return for their money.

          The world does love a winner but so far Kevin Pearman has proved he is not one of them. And it’s extremely doubtful if anybody who believed in any of his get-rich-quick promises ever became one either.

         If any of you put money in Kevin’s latest project don’t say I didn’t warn you.

         Yours faithfully,

         Jon, the Consumer Watchdog that tells you about people like Pearman when the main stream Media doesn’t bother and happily takes his advertisements.

P.S. See:
Blog that nobody reads
Cell C's strange dealings
Big Business turns on little man

WHO IS THE CHARLIE NOW?

Dear Charlie Hebdo,

         Watch out the shooting or perhaps it could be bombing for a change is not yet over if you continue mocking religions like Islam.

With almost your entire staff wiped out who is the Charlie now?

         Your publication kept pushing the boundaries of freedom of speech to the extreme so it was not surprising that you stirred up extremists of a different kind.

         With your blinkered view you never stopped to think of the wider ramifications of taking the mickey out of what millions hold dear. You were so stupid it never occurred to you that what you were doing to sell a magazine could result in innocent people being taken out when the inevitable back lash occurred.

         Or worse still you didn’t care.

         Who is the Charlie now?

         In 2006 you thought it was funny to include the infamous Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that resulted in 250 people being killed in world wide protests. Your cover then had a crying Mohammed saying: "It’s hard being loved by assholes."

         Who are the assholes now?

     

A BLOODY HARD LESSON

    You learnt nothing from the 2011 fire bombing of your offices. Threats to the life of Charb your editor in chief did not stop your anti Islam slander campaign. You were no doubt emboldened by the policeman consigned to guard him. Tragically he suffered the same fate as Charb and the others when the AK 47 wielding gunmen walked in.

         You frightened the whole of France and sent waves of terror through many other countries as well. 

         You were too stupid to realise that this kind of school boy humour was not a bit funny and hit the Muslim fraternity where it hurt most, although perhaps the French have a more basic type of wit than the rest of us.

         Will you Frogs think this old war joke is funny: "The Germans took France in three days. But that was only because it was raining."

         Who is the Charlie now?

         You were also too stupid to realise that by far the majority of people are unsophisticated and as such are not equipped to appreciate most jokes, especially ones aimed at their religion. The only way they know how to react is with violence.

         Many Muslims consider any portrayal of the Prophet Mohammed as blasphemous. But you were determined to provoke them as far as possible by drawing him in the nude.

         Try this freedom of speech exercise. Go into a pub anywhere and verbally attack the nearest group for something as mundane as making too much noise. Then see if you are lucky enough to come out with just a bloody nose.

         Try telling racial jokes in a loud voice next to a table of people of a different colour to you. But first make sure you have a very good medical aid.

         Who is the Charlie now?

         Well this is exactly how Charlie Hebdo has been playing fast and loose with freedom of speech on the world stage. The result was as inevitable as the pub examples I have just given.

         Free speech can be terribly costly if you don’t have the brains to exercise it with discretion. And that puts you in the same category as the people you believe don’t appreciate the funny side of your extremely malicious cartoons.

         Even your own Foreign Minister in France at the time Laurent Fabius asked: "Is it really necessary or intelligent to pour oil on the fire?"

         Who is the Charlie now?

         As you know your reporter Laurent Leger, one of the survivors of the massacre at your offices, told CNN in 2012: "We want to laugh at the extremists. They can be Muslim, Jewish, Catholic. Everyone can be religious, but extremist thoughts and acts we cannot accept."

         As it turned out the two gunmen who left 12 members of your staff in a bloody heap had the same philosophy. They were not prepared to accept your "extremist thoughts and acts."

         When you published again after the shooting he came out with these laughable remarks: "I want a magazine to fight against idiocy, against human stupidity."

         Well if you don’t mind me saying so he and the rest of you survivors should start the fight in your own office, because that’s where it’s needed most.

         How about a cartoon to illustrate this?

         Apart from the fact that 17 people died in France almost immediately before and after the raid on your offices there were other deaths in protests in different parts of the world. Yet you were not at all contrite.

         Once again all you thought about was your magazine and to hell with the fact that your Charlie hate speech was now pretty well out of control spreading death all over the place much like the Ebola virus.

         Encouraged by being hailed as heroes by the narrow minded free speech media across the globe your front page was again designed to provoke Muslims. This time it had Mohammed crying and saying: "All is Forgiven."            

Renald Luzier with the cover he
is so proud of

Renald “Luz” Luzier its creator stuck his neck out when he told a press conference: "It’s not the one the terrorists wanted us to draw. I’m not worried at all (Who is he kidding). I trust people’s intelligence, the intelligence of humour."

         If ever this was misplaced trust this must be it. I can’t see any life insurance company in the world giving him a policy.

         Who is the Proper Charlie now?

         As if that was not enough to stir the hatred pot even further your sick jokes inside the magazine showed jihadists saying: "We shouldn’t touch Charlie people – they would look like martyrs and, once in heaven, the bastards would steal our virgins."

         The cover was reproduced in the media in Western nations and Latin America. However a lot of them were either wise or too scared to do this.

         Not surprisingly it did not appear in Arab and other countries where Islam is prominent.

         Alright the shooting enabled you to up your normal 60 000 print run to 5-million. When a joke goes too far you might be in the money but it doesn’t help if you are dead.

         Your misguided media supporters are still clinging to the old saying: "The pen (in this case the pencil) is mightier than the sword." Well you had the best practical lesson that this is complete fiction.

How Argentinian cartoonist Bernado Erlich saw it

         It’s ironic isn’t it that your magazine started life named Hara-Kiri. That’s an honourable Japanese way of committing suicide. There’s nothing honourable about the way you are doing it – taking innocent people with you.

         To then rename it after Charlie Brown, the main character in the lovable Charles Shulz comic strip to get round a banning order, was a travesty.

         Below are a couple of Charlie Brown cartoons that sum up your stupidity perfectly.

         Rosemary Page’s comment in Rochester’s Democratic & Chronicle was even more to the point when she stated: "The staff of Charlie Hebdo is being hailed as journalistic heroes, but to me they are foolhardy hatemongers."  

You are undoubtedly the complete asshole and the only Proper Charlie now.

         Regards,

         Jon, a former newspaper journalist who believes in free speech that is censored with a reasonable dose of common sense before it gets published.