RESPONSE TO MACS LETTER DATED 28 JUNE 2007

Hi Mac,

Thank you for responding to my original comments as send to you on 5 February 2007.
Let me at the onset make it clear that I do not associate myself with any of the personal
attacks directed at you, especially if it comes from people who were not at Cassinga
and/or have not read the thesis. Any arguments for or against your findings, comments
and conclusions must be based on facts and not hearsay. It remains my wish that all who
were involved at Cassinga will read and respond to your thesis.

I accept that we will never reach consensus on all our differences regarding your thesis,
and therefore wish to conclude with this response to your comments regarding my
original input. I will not respond to all your comments, but wish to focus on the
following key issues:

Going public with the issue.

The minute you published your thesis on the internet, you made it public. I merely
responded to a thesis which is available to all members of the public, interested
academics and historians. It therefore created a situation that left your thesis
uncontested and undisputed in the public domain unless there was a response in
public to your deductions and findings as contained in the thesis.

For almost 30 years I have been fighting my own fight against the perception created by
politicians and radicals that Cassinga was a massacre of civilians. I have had to
convince my children and family that I did not partake in the massacre of civilians. I
have been treated like a leper by the so-called verligtes whenever we discuss the
Cassinga raid, and finally, the Government of the day, as well as Military commanders of
the day (you were one until recently) has banned the participation of all active members
of the Defence Force in participating in any parade or memorial service that openly and
unashamedly commemorates Cassinga day. I am fucking fed up with being associated
with an alleged massacre that never took place.

Was Cassinga a military target.

Firstly nobody expects of you to act as an apologist for Paratroopers simply because we
do not need one. What we do need is for somebody, who was not involved with
Cassinga, to have the balls and tell the real truth to the world, warts and all, regardless of
the potential political consequences that will most definitely follow.

You quite correctly point out that nowhere did you say that Cassinga was not a legitimate
military target. But you also nowhere state that it was. It is what you, when one
evaluates all the evidence as presented by you, fail to say that causes me problems.
You repeatedly state that the hypothesis was not about whether Cassinga was a legitimate
military target or to confirm whether there was a massacre or not. You are right. But yet
you make deductions and comment about other matters that also fall outside the ambit of
the hypothesis. Why not be consistent in your approach? Why then no deductions or
comments regarding the legality of the massacre claims by SWAPO? What does your
evidence proof- did Cassinga conform to the international definition of a refugee camp?
Is it accepted practice to house refugees in a military camp and to recruit soldiers from
them? It is accepted practice to store ammunition and other military equipment in a
refugee camp? Why was the refugee camp not under United Nations supervision and
control?

Regarding your reference to Dresden that was during a world war, and not a low
keyed insurgency war with little or no impact on the way the worlds future will be
shaped. There is no comparison.

The alleged massacre of civilians.

The problem I have is that your extensive research into the raid has shown that Cassinga
was a legitimate military target. You have also, in your response to my letter, confirmed
that you do regard Cassinga as having been a military target. You put a lot of emphasis
on quotes from sources that claim that it was a refugee camp. Yet nowhere in your thesis
do you categorically state that your evidence has disproved SWAPO claims that it was a
bona fide refugee camp. You have given so much exposure, quite rightly, to the refugee
and massacre claims, but you, in my opinion erred by leaving it open to debate. To what
conclusion does your collected evidence lead? Mac, you quite rightly, made deductions
on other issues within your thesis, even though it does not relate directly to your stated
hypothesis, then why not on this burning issue?

There is no comparison between refugees being kept in a military camp and civilians
within a bona fide military base. Civilians housed in military towns or establishments are
there on their own free will and are aware of the associated risks. Oshakati and Katima
are good examples. They were legitimate military targets, and therefore civilian deaths a
reality and accepted risk. But you do not keep refugees in a military camp! You are also
aware that many if not most of the refugees in Cassinga were actually abducted by
SWAPO from Owamboland. You remember the bus load of Owambos that were
abducted by SWAPO as well as the approximetaly119 children that were abducted from
St Marys mission? We found them in Cassinga. As what should they be classified-
abductees or refugees?
In your second last paragraph on page 5 of your response you still maintain that there
was a massacre albeit a non deliberate massacre and that because it was a non
deliberate massacre the Citizen Force soldiers never spoke out. What utter nonsense! A
massacre is a massacre whether it was deliberate or not! Nobody said anything because
there was no massacre!! Why do you not want to acknowledge that there was no
massacre? Until such time that you in a clear and unambiguous manner state your
position regarding the alleged massacre, I remain of the opinion that you have dealt our
reputation as paratroopers a devastating blow. None of the evidence as presented in your
thesis even suggests a massacre-yet you conclude that there was a massacre!!!! Look at
the photos of the mass-grave in your thesis-the majority of the corpses are military. It
even shows the barrel of an AA gun. Why is there no photographic evidence of the
masses of refugees that were allegedly killed on the parade ground during the bombing?
On my way to the trenches and the AA guns, I passed by the parade ground. I am
categorically stating that there were only a few dead (less than ten) on the parade ground.

As a paratrooper I do not expect of you to adopt a populist approach. I do not expect of

you to put SWAPO in a bad light simply because they were the enemy. But I do expect
honest condemnation of both sides, based on factual evidence, when necessary.

What happened to the CF.

What happened to the dedicated CF paratroopers after 1994 is simple to explain:

1. There no longer was a military threat. Therefore there was very little justification
when applying for military leave to attend camps and courses. If granted, it
would most likely have been unpaid. The priority quite normally shifted from
country and safety first to my career first.
2. We became unwanted. A threat to the stability of the new dispensation simply
because the military power was still in white hands. Commando units were
disbanded. CF unit budgets were cut to the point that they could not operate in a
meaning full manner. The emphasis shifted to the demobilization of MK and
others.

3. We had to fight for our jobs as the BEE and affirmative action process kicked in.

Who do I regard as Paratroopers.

When I fight for the integrity of paratroopers, I do it for the brotherhood of

paratroopers, regardless of colour as you are implying. I have not stopped currently
serving paratroopers from attending the Cassinga day memorial parade. Those in
command of them did. For me there is no race, colour or creed, but only the integrity of
past, present and future paratroopers.

Conclusion

Yes, you are right. Because of my involvement in the raid, I, and others like myself, run
the risk of loosing our objectivity when it comes to Cassinga. It is because of this that
any truth we speak will be regarded as tarnished. Maybe because of this, my
expectations of your thesis were too high. I most definitely did not expect of you to say
only good things about the Cassinga raid. That things went somewhat wrong is correct. If
we do not learn from these mistakes we can not call ourselves professional (Do you
remember the booklet lesse geleer that was issued to us during the border war?). I also
most definitely did not expect of you to portray SWAPO as villains and the root cause of
everything bad. But you can also not just focus on what we did wrong.
What I did expect to find was, a paratrooper who based on the evidence that he presented,
and not having been involved, saying to other academics/historians/radicals that might
read the thesis that:

1. Cassinga was a legitimate military target.

2. That, even though civilians died, there was no massacre of civilians.

The evidence that you present in your thesis, to me, clearly confirm the above 2 points.
But yet you still concluded that there was a massacre. I believe that you, as a military
person, or academic or historian, missed an opportunity to, based on the evidence
contained in your thesis, condemn the guerilla tactic of using civilians as human shields
against attacks on their bases.
Regards
Tommie Lamprecht.