Hennie van Deventer

(Klik hier vir oorspronklike brief in Afrikaans)

Hennie van Deventer retired some years ago as CEO of NASPERS’ Newspapers, following a distinguished career as editor-in-chief of the influential daily newspaper “Volksblad”.

His authoritative contributions to newspapers and his social media posts have, to this day, commanded respect for him as the personification of a newspaperman in the revered and classic sense of the word. From as long back as his student days, as editor of the campus newspaper, throughout the commanding positions he held in newspapers, until retiring as top-executive, his sharp mind and salient interpretations and responses have always rendered his writings on any topic, must-reads for news-hunters.

In 1976/77 he was a Nieman Fellow at Harvard University in the USA, the most prestigious fellowship for journalists in the world.

In 1997 he received the highest NASPERS award, the Phil Weber Gold Medal and upon retirement, he became the first member from Afrikaans media ranks to be awarded honorary membership of the Association “Print Media SA”, declaring: “Hennie van Deventer holds a reputation of great stature, both within the local industry and the newspaper publishing fraternity across the globe. He is recognised for his wisdom, his diplomacy and naturally for his contribution to print media in South Africa over a considerable number of years”.

While fully bilingual, Hennie is renowned both for his gripping story-telling abilities and for his exceptional command of the Afrikaans language. These special abilities have been his hallmark as a professional journalist, but also makes each of the nineteen books he has so far written, a most entertaining reading experience, crowned with sheer enjoyment of his language craft.

When the now thoroughly discredited book “The Lost Boys of Bird Island” was published from the stable of Hennie’s erstwhile employer in August 2018, Hennie immediately and relentlessly started expressing his disapproval and demand for its withdrawal, through letters to the editors of NASPERS newspapers and on social media.

As a man of integrity, his tireless and convincing efforts over almost two years, undoubtedly made a very substantial contribution to NASPERS’ decision to withdraw the book from all its platforms.

What follows, is a chronological sequence of Hennie’s letters and one of his blogs:

		Letter No. 1
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspaper(s)	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Date(s)	2018/08/10	2018/08/09	2018/08/10
Heading(s)	VB & B: "Magnus besmirched with forgotten gossip".
	DB: "Such slander is deplorable".

“The uproar over allegations against Magnus Malan in the book ‘The Lost Boys of Bird Island’ has continued since Sunday morning. I have not read the book. Nor do I intend to.

However, I am closely following the reporting in the news media. I have thus far searched in vain for a single shred of evidence against the ex-minister of Defence that has not been fancifully concocted from loose threads.

The theatrical interview with co-author Chris Steyn that was broadcast on KYKNET on Monday evening also did not contribute any credibility to the onslaught by her and former detective Mark Minnie on the character of a respected man who played a solid role in the history of South Africa.

Ms. Steyn was here offered the opportunity to convince the unconvinced like myself.

However, her show then degenerated into emotion and melodrama. Where are the answers to the who, what, where and when’s that should have been imprinted on her as a former journalist: essential questions if your purpose is to serve the truth. But alas, tears alone are insufficient.

I write as a contemporary journalist with much respect for Magnus Malan’s integrity of character. While I had not always agreed with what he said or did, those differences had not detracted from my respect for his integrity.

For me and others it is deeply regrettable that someone of his character should be so cruelly defamed after his death, based on forgotten gossip that was hauled out, dusted off and presented as the gospel after being lavishly spiced up.

This kind of reckless sniping is on the level of social media. It does not befit a respectable publisher like Tafelberg.

Ms. Steyn herself acknowledges that her own newspaper, the Cape Times – no friend of the NP government! – had not wanted to fall for her stories. Even a newspaper like Vrye Weekblad, which had not hesitated to take the bull by the horns, had remained silent although its former editor Max du Preez had, according to his own testimony, been aware of rumours along those lines.

Nothing new had come to light in two decades. Apparently, the market has just become much more susceptible to sensational revelations.

As far as Mark Minnie is concerned, very little is known about his police career. How does the label of ‘master detective’ apply to someone who left the country for China as far back as 2007 to go and teach basic English to little Chinese?

I encourage enterprising journalists to consider following his trail and asking senior officers both in the police and the detective services whether and how they remember him.

I am guessing that a journalistically inspired criminal investigation could yield enlightening facts.

(In political circles, the story surrounding John Wiley at the time was that he had shot himself because he had cancer. I have no authority to present that rumour as a fact. Perhaps someone else could express a more informed opinion.)”

ooooo00000ooooo

		Letter No. 2
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspapers	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Dates	2018/08/16	2018/08/15
Headings	VB: “Cross-question Mr. X about Barend allegations”
	DB: “Mr. X has numerous questions to answer”

“The mysterious Mr. X finds himself in the convenient position that he can tell a one-sided story. It was recorded by reporter Maygene de Wee, who appears to be the person who had access to him. The daily newspapers of Netwerk24 and Media24 published it, with the commendable exception of Beeld.

There are questions about the remarkable recollection, after three decades, of the route taken by the blue Volkswagen Combi (with the curtains). It is time that Ms De Wee, a senior journalist or someone with experience of cross examination, conducts a critical conversation with Mr. X.

Does he recall the setup of the ‘house at Tsitsikamma’ in as much fine detail as the route in Port Elizabeth? Where exactly is the house of horrors? What does it look like both inside and out? How big is the bedroom where he was expected to entertain the ‘Uncle’? Was the bathroom where he was kindly allowed to take a bath, en suite?

What is its proximity to the sea or to other houses? Would he be able to point it out? Where were the vehicles parked?

Blue Combi’s were abundant in those days. I had one myself (at least without curtains!). What makes Mr. X so sure that the one he noticed years later in the parking area of military intelligence, was the same one in which he was ‘kidnapped’? Only the curtains, it seems; because for someone who recalls streets and buildings in much detail, it is strange not to have noticed the registration number. Or had he?

According to him, a firearm had been poked into his side. Years later he could identify it as a military .38 Special. The frightened boy must therefore have had the opportunity to scrutinise it in detail, or at least what was visible of it in the attacker’s hand, in order to be able to recall such detail from memory.

Who could the five men in the combi have been, as well as their helpers who showed up at the filling station? Members of military intelligence who went and caught little boys on instruction of the minister for him? Were they in uniform, were they young and did they all speak Afrikaans? Had they been masked, or why could he later not recognise them in the same way as he did the revolver and combi?

He tells of a delectable luncheon, saying that he had never before seen so much and such delicious food. It is rather astonishing to imagine the macabre situation of a feast that the victims could so companionably partake of, with people whom they later could point out as ‘kidnappers’ and ‘rapists’.

Who would have prepared such a delicious meal – one or more chefs in the kitchen who, like all the others present, had not noticed any of the happenings right there under their noses?

The list goes on.

It should however be clear to all that Mr. X’s sensational stories dare not be told untested any longer. In the interest of responsible journalism, he should be confronted with the vagueness, the improbabilities and the untrustworthiness of his story”.

(Click for link to Witelsbos visit by Ms de Wee and Mark Minnie)

ooooo00000ooooo

		Letter No. 3
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspapers	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Dates	2018/10/18
Headings	DB: “Sudden Silence surrounds Bird Island”

“Two months have now passed since the Bird Island bomb exploded. It trickled away in the sand as swiftly and suddenly as it had appeared on the national agenda. Are we any wiser than we were?

Obviously ‘no’. Nothing has yet come of the ‘more disclosures’ that were promised by so many (amongst others by the publisher, Tafelberg, and the co-author Chris Steyn).

None, not a single one, of the victims of the alleged ill deeds has been traced, notwithstanding passionate pleas and detective campaigns (like those by the late Mark Minnie and a reporter shortly before the death of the former).

Not a shred of evidence has been produced to link the ‘third minister’ to a ‘paedophile network’, except that he had been transported to Bird Island by military helicopter for the official opening of a ghwano quay – with the full knowledge of his office and family.

Regarding Magnus Malan, there has been no progress in finding evidence for what has, in a collective response by defence force generals, been rightly referred to as ‘malicious speculation, circumstantial evidence and far-fetched conclusions’.

Key characters, like the boy who had allegedly been shot in the lower part of the body, the doctor who is said to have been responsible for his miraculous recovery and the matron who was supposedly bribed to nurse him in secret, have evaporated like phantoms. You hear about them, but you do not see them.

Insinuations that there had been something more behind Minnie’s death than the obvious – the desperate deed of a confused soul – have remained wild guesses. No forensic or other investigation has yielded anything suspicious.

There is reason to be grateful that this immemorial saga is now as dead as a doornail.

It is however concerning that the injustices committed against innocent persons have apparently also been buried and forgotten.

A remorseful apology for the reckless besmirching is the least that can be expected of each party who was involved”.

ooooo00000ooooo

		Letter No. 4
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspaper	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Date	2019/02/05	2019/02/06
Heading	DB: “How far is the ‘Bird Island’ investigation?”
	VB: “Bird Island, what now?

“If I understood the publisher of the controversial book The Boys of Bird Island correctly, it was written and published in the hope that it would lead to the first proper investigation into the malicious allegations.

All kinds of investigations were in fact announced. The Human Rights Foundation, the forensic expert Dr David Klatzow, a private investigator and, last but not least, the police unit against family violence, sexual offenses and child protection also jumped in. The latter initiative had already commenced on 6 September 2018, prompted by Tafelberg Publishers.

The Bird Island uproar over an alleged pedophile network at cabinet level erupted exactly six months ago. It is probably not unfair, then, to expect some feedback from those investigators by now.

What ‘new disclosures’ or watertight evidence has been unearthed against the ministers whose names have been dragged through the mud? How many credible victims have been ‘traced’? Why is everything so quiet on that front notwithstanding claims that ‘much new information’ has been handed over to the police?

While simple questions like the above remain unanswered, the validity of the book still remains highly questionable. One can then only guess what the mysterious motives were for the publication of so many unverified whisperings and why it has been lauded in the media as gospel truth.

A gnawing theory is that we may be looking at an act of malicious feministic revenge on strong male figures from the past. However, what then about one Mark Minnie’s ignominious role? Others wonder if it may have been an overzealous act of leaning over backward to satisfy a misplaced urge for political correctness.

After six months it looks to me more and more as though a respected publisher, seasoned reviewers and reputable media so slackened their standards in a collective attack of contagious night blindness, that they were caught in a trap by people with malicious intent and their own agendas”.

ooooo00000ooooo

		Letter No. 5
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspapers	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Dates		2019/04/10	2019/04/09
Headings	B & VB: “Oh Dear, now ‘Bird Island’ is crumbling”

“There are now four, no five, nails in the coffin of the ‘Bird Island’ book.

Three independent investigations have come to the same conclusion: there is no evidence against the slandered former ministers and at the same time there are serious questions about the integrity of the slanderers.

The investigations were conducted by respectively a senior former detective, Wouter de Swardt, on behalf of the Foundation for Human Rights, leading investigative journalist Jacques Pauw in Vrye Weekblad, and seasoned TV presenter Derek Watts of the probing M-Net programme ‘Carte Blanche’. Not lightweights by any means. ‘Beeld’ editor Barnard Beukman described the book as ‘probably an all-time low in the South African publishing industry’. Sela.

Ironically, the fifth nail was an ‘own purpose’ one. ‘We have no concrete evidence that any of the three ministers sexually abused any victim’, the now deceased Mark Minnie, a self-acknowledged gangster, admitted in an e-mail to his collaborators four days before publication.

In blind perseverance, the fabrications were nevertheless published.

A few days later Minnie shot himself after evidently trying to hang himself.

The so-called police investigation is now being used as a smoke screen by people involved with the book. But what police investigation? Only one ‘suspect’ is still alive: Barend du Plessis. In eight months, no-one from the police has yet looked him up to hear his side of the story.

Oh dear, Chris (Barlow)-Steyn. Oh dear, Maryna Lamprecht”.

ooooo00000ooooo

		Letter No. 6
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspaper	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Date				2019/04/14
Heading	R: “Questions and reactions after reports on ‘Bird Island'”

“A lot of water has passed under the bridge in the eight months since Rapport published its notorious lead story under the banner ‘Magnus Malan was ‘n pedofiel’, about the book ‘The Lost Boys of Bird Island’ by the late Mark Minnie and Chris Steyn.

Since then the credibility of the book has been shot down in flames. The ex-investigator Wouter de Swardt (appointed by the Foundation for Human Rights), the investigative journalist Jacques Pauw in Vrye Weekblad and the M-Net programme Carte Blanche, spearheaded by Derek Watts, have found that the malicious allegations against Malan and other ex-ministers are fabrications.

Sharp questions have been asked about Tafelberg Publishers’ stubborn insistence to publish and keep defending the book on such loose screws, as well as about the integrity of the two opportunistic authors. The breakdown of Mark Minnie, who shot himself several days after the publication of the book, must have been devastating when he was compelled to write an e-mail to the publisher four days before publication (according to Pauw’s report) to confess the following to them and his co-author: ‘We have no concrete evidence that any of the three ministers sexually assaulted any victim’.

The editor of Beeld, Barnard Beukman, rapped Tafelberg Publishers over the knuckles sharply with his damning statement that the book probably represented an all-time low in the South African publishing industry. He is quite right.

The malicious book and reckless media reports cast Malan’s frail widow and his family into a deep crisis. At age 78, the life of the innocent and respectable Barend du Plessis was drastically disrupted. The ball is now entirely in Rapport’s court. In the interest of truth and justice, Rapport should swallow its words and apologise – not only to those involved and implicated, but also to all its readers for shamelessly misleading them”.

(Link to Barnard Beukman’s article in Beeld)

ooooo00000ooooo

“Veteran Newspaperman Hennie van Deventer Writes on his Blog”

“Rapport Sees the Light”
(16 April 2019)

“The ‘mea culpa’ by Sunday newspaper Rapport – to its readers who had been misled, the family of the late ex-minister Magnus Malan and ex-minister Barend du Plessis – about its handling of the deplorable Bird Island book and the malicious fabrications about an organised fiddling with little boys, represents an unprecedented watershed moment thus far in the regrettable saga. In media history a public apology of this nature in a newspaper’s leading article is extremely rare.

Eight months down the line the Big Lie by ex-policeman-turned-criminal Mark Minnie, and ex-journalist Chris Steyn, has now largely been laid to rest by that guilt admission and unconditional apology. Probably the only ones to now persevere in their defence of the indefensible book, are the publisher, Tafelberg, and the surviving author, Chris Steyn. The truth is however fast overtaking them.

From my inside knowledge as a newspaper editor, of the people, systems and values of my era, the claims made in the book were for me instantaneously far-fetched, absurd and rejectable. I furthermore attached value to significant statements like the one made by Gen. Constand Viljoen on behalf of the generals: a piece of evidence that was sadly underestimated to their own detriment, by those who were over hasty to get at former ‘apartheid ministers’. Therefore, fingers were badly burned.

On Sunday 5 August 2018 Rapport came out with the following banner heading on its front page: ‘Magnus Malan was a paedophile’. My first letter on the topic was published in the three Afrikaans dailies on Friday 10 August, with the heading ‘Such defamation is deplorable’. I subsequently wrote several letters, amongst which ‘Mr. X has a number of questions to answer’, ‘How far is the Bird Island investigation now?’, ‘Five nails in the ‘Bird Island’ coffin’ and ‘Oh dear, just look what is happening to ‘Bird Island’ now’.

The massive response since Sunday, coming from people across the entire spectrum – especially from those involved and their loved ones, Defence Force ranks, as well as the ranks of a former generation of Naspersers, suggests that there is appreciation for those letters and their role, big or small, in the final discrediting of the book by Minnie and Steyn.

For me as an ex-editor who places a high premium on the pursuit of truth and justice, it was a matter of conscience. My own response is that I feel good about what has been achieved.

At age 78, I experience deep gratitude that I still had the opportunity to make my modest contribution. Rapport also deserves a pat on the shoulder for its honesty and magnanimity.

Despite all the unfriendly, insulting and even abusive remarks that during the last eight months have been levelled at me, I will refrain from gloating. Rather, these words by Churchill resonate with me: ‘I have not always been wrong.’

Many of the responses were in the form of private telephone calls and e-mail messages. I regard them as personal and confidential. Some were public on Facebook, as well as other web pages. I have extracted a representative selection of them, because they shed light on the opinions of honourable people. The comments have been edited to somewhat conceal or omit embarrassing personal remarks.

It will be a pity if readers of the blog nonetheless regard the collection of comments negatively and see them as a sign of lacking humility. To those I apologise in advance. All said”.

I herewith call on a few other persons to speak:

Barend du Plessis: It is one of the most beautiful things I could have experienced in my life. Thank you very much.

Gen. Gert Opperman: You were pillar of strength throughout; I salute you, personally, as well as on behalf of the Malan family.

Frans du Randt: Right from the start you took a strong stance against the notorious book. Many of my ex-military colleagues and I have great appreciation for your continued stance against the polution of the legacy of a person for whom we had great respect.

Inus Aucamp: Hennie, from me also a warm pat on the shoulder. Having known Magnus well, and still being in close contact with Barend, the saga upset me severely. Not many things can be more destructive to someone’s image. Thank you for your fearless action. Maybe an unreasonable thought: should the editor not have considered resigning?

Guy Robertson: Congratulations, ex-pressman Hennie van Deventer, on your continued pressure and persistent call for the truth and for responsible journalistic reporting on “Bird Island”. Keep on writing, Hennie – for as long as you can see. Tula Bula.

Tom Moodie: Thank you for all you have done, and congratulations on a neat letter in Rapport on Sunday. But what about Tafelberg Publishers? Are they going to come off scot-free? In the final instance they should after all be accountable for the facts in the book. Are they going to foot the “slander claims”?

Faan Hancke: True newspaperman to the core. Helping to keep the pillars of democracy standing. Well done!

Theresa Papenfus: Wonderful letter. Thank you, Hennie! What you have done, is indeed courageous. And of course, right. One is quite relieved.

Marius Britz: I almost want to say: “Oom” Hennie was right all along, even if he was verbally abused by some! It just goes to show that there is no substitute for experience and journalistic skill.

Erdee van Huyssteen: Yes, Hennie – there is no substitute for well-considered insight. Compliments to you.

Kammie Strydom: Well done, Hennie. I believe in the Dutch proverb that says no matter how swift a lie is, the truth will surely catch up with it.

Peet Simonis: Those who want justice and truth to triumph, owe you many thanks for continuing to focus the light on the defamation that was committed in “Bird Island”. Someone needed to keep voicing the growing pile of evidence in favour of the men’s innocence, and you took that task upon yourself. As one of your ex-colleagues, I thank you. You make us feel better about our career, which has been contaminated by the publication low point of “Bird Island”.

Ollie Olwagen: Right from the start, you smelt the foulness a mile away, Hennie, although there were a few wise guys on your Facebook page who were very “angry” with you for criticising the book “without reading it”, as though that would persuade you to believe the easily recognisable piece of trash. I wonder what they are saying now.

In closing: Like Ollie, I can also only wonder. Some people have remained silent in all languages since Sunday”.

ooooo00000ooooo

		Letter No. 7
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspapers	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Dates	2020/12/05	2020/12/05
Headings	VB: “But what about ‘Bird Island?”
	DB: “Bird Island fracas a disgrace”

“Willem Breytenbach was handcuffed pretty swiftly due to alleged sexual indecencies with young victims. This is in sharp contrast to the Bird Island affair.

After 16 months (if my calculations are correct), the ‘investigation’ by no fewer than ten policemen under the leadership of a brigadier, in this case, has not yet yielded a single victim, nor a single credible witness or even half a case that would justify taking action against somebody.

In fact, to my knowledge neither the brigadier, nor any one of her extended team or any other policeman or woman has to this day even paid a visit to former minister Barend du Plessis, who had been identified by the reckless fabrications in the unfortunate bestseller by Chris Steyn and Mark Minnie as the only suspect who was still alive.

The reason is obvious. Of course, no-one has been able to unearth even a grain of evidence that would stand in any court, and which would give the police any justifiable cause to even question Barend du Plessis about his movements and alibi.

Is it perhaps time for the media to confront the police about their abnormal dragging of feet with the Bird Island investigation – that is if any trace of an investigation still remains?

If you ask me, I would guess the police have long since trashed the whole lot – which is what should have been done by Tafelberg publishers before publication. This fact is probably being hidden behind a smoke screen to avoid embarrassment.

Meanwhile an honourable and innocent man must live with the slur on his name and the sword of an ‘ongoing investigation’ hanging over his head, while the publisher and the authors (Chris Steyn and the estate of the deceased Mark Minnie) rake in the cash and the book is still available everywhere – even in libraries worldwide.

What a gruesome injustice. What a shame for all involved”.

		Letter No. 8
	Author:	Hennie van Deventer
Newspapers	Die Burger (DB)	Volksblad (VB)	Beeld (B)	Rapport (R)
Dates	2020/03/10	2020/03/05
Headings	VB: “Book causes tsunami of damage”
	DB: “Damage is incalculable”

“I would like to refer Tafelberg Publishers to the apology that the Sunday newspaper Rapport published prominently on 16 April 2019, referring to its erroneous notions regarding the Bird Island saga.

“We made a mistake,” the newspaper openly admitted. Its apology was inclusive and regretful. It explicitly included both its readership and the next of kin of Magnus Malan and John Wiley.

In contrast, the apology of the primary transgressors (together with the opportunistic authors) was feeble, lacking and inadequate. The publishers acknowledge that the “statements complained of, could not be independently verified”.

However, in their apology, which was clearly meticulously phrased to be legally compliant, the apology was at the same time “limited to Mr Du Plessis only”.

The question immediately arises whether the “statements complained of”, regarding Malan and Wiley, could then have been “independently verified” in any way? If so, it is pretty well disguised.

Or would the “verification” rely solely on the vague allegations by the nameless Mr X who vanished into thin air after being front page news? How many more sworn statements from key persons do NB Publishers and Tafelberg need in order to convince them of their blunder?

But of course: unlike Du Plessis, Malan and Wiley are no longer alive.

Furthermore: do the publishers disregard the misleading of thousands of readers to the extent that, as opposed to their sister publication Rapport, they simply forget about them in their moment of remorse?

The withdrawal of unsold copies appears to be a fairly strong symbolic gesture of guilt admission. On closer scrutiny, however, it is extremely negligible in monetary value compared to the millions that have internationally been raked in. The book is still found on library shelves throughout the world, whilst millions of malicious words are live on the internet. What will NB Publishers and Tafelberg do to stem this tsunami of damage?”

ooooo00000ooooo