Archive for the ‘News and politics’ Category
The #Afrikaner nightmare: #Genocide, #Xenophobia or #ANCracism?
November 3, 2013
This week an interesting debate about how Afrikaners perceive their current struggles in South Africa – ensued.
It is actually an ongoing discussion that started during the #RedOctober campaign, held on October 10, 2013 during which thousands of people rallied to support a protest by white South Africans against many perceived threats. Many came out in support against brutal farm murders, while others stressed the current political situation of oppressive regime legislation, geared at curbing white influence and control of the Southern African economy.
Afrikaners (and white South Africans in general) feel that the ANC’s program of redress and transformation is nothing other than black racism dressed up to look respectable. The Afrikaner Journal, has over the years written extensively about the result of current government legislative intervention, to address so-called imbalances of the past, and have re-blogged many stories, to support this claim of politically designed injustice.
But how should we perceive this ongoing onslaught against our tiny minority?
Should we address it as criminal racist injustice, or should we describe it as a serious attempt at genocide?
This week a new, alternative approach raised its head on social platforms that may influence the future perspective of both victims and supporters of minority rights in South Africa – that, of the possibility that Afrikaners may also be the victims of xenophobia at the hands of black South Africans.
It may come as a surprise to many readers that xenophobia is actually a huge problem in South Africa. We often read about xenophobic attacks by black South Africans against other foreign blacks, most notably people from our neighboring countries, as well as Somali and Ethiopian traders in the various townships. In many cases these people are killed and/or driven from their homes, and their businesses torched by marauding local black looters.
This is then the backdrop for this discussion: “The #Afrikaner nightmare: #Genocide, #Xenophobia or #ANCracism?”
I’m copying the original article here, as well as selected commentary that contributed to the discourse about this very interesting topic.
Feel free to join in with your perspective at the end of the article.
Please leave your comment on the Afrikaner Journal Facebook page featuring this link, to facilitate the debate in real-time, as comments on the blog are queued for approval.
Black-on-White violence vs Xenophobia! Sx.
Source: Sunette Bridges News page
There was ‘n huge outcry after the Red October protest marches and gatherings that highlighted the plight of the White Ethnic Minority in South Africa… Apparently it is racist to take a stand against the brutal torture, rape and killing of white people by black attackers… but somehow the brutal murders aren’t?
I have record of 178 White People who have already been murdered by Black attackers this year… and hundreds more that were attacked, raped and tortured, but survived.
136 of the Victims were male.
42 of the Victims were female.
80 of the Victims were older than 60.
On average 18 White people are murdered by black attackers every month… that is more than 4 a week!
While Black-on-White murders are labeled “Normal Crime”, the opposite is true for what is considered “Xenophobic” attacks. These are defined as:
“A racially charged attack of one group on another.”
…although the attackers and victims are of the same race but different nationalities…
In a special report on Xenophobic attacks in South Africa, the Human Rights Commission stated the following:
“It has been five years since 2008, when co-ordinated attacks exploded across the country and led to the deaths of 64 people.” …that is over a period of 5 years!!!
During that same period more than 800 White South Africans were murdered by Black attackers. Yet this is considered “normal”?
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) released figures showing that three incidents of Xenophobic attacks (NOT MURDERS) a week were reported in 2012.
The figure for Black-on-White attacks for the same period were 10 attacks a week.
There are special task forces dealing with Xenophobic attacks, while the murders of White South Africans by Black attackers are disguised as “normal crime”. Race is no longer mentioned in police reports but ethnicity is? Why is the fact that we are also an “Ethnic group” being ignored?
noun – a group of people with a particular race or nationality living in a country or area where most people are from a different race or nationality.
(Definition of ethnic minority noun from the Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus Cambridge University Press)
Ms Bridges then published a list of all known Afrikaners murdered since the beginning of this year (2013) (available after the story, at the given link).
Commentary and discussion:
The first comment (by myself) stressed the similarities between the xenophobic mindset of local black South Africans towards Afrikaners:
You could, in addition to the above, have mentioned that the white (Afrikaner) minority are also labeled as non-Africans, despite our citizenship, by ANC propagandists and members of the executive. We are marginalized and “mentally stripped” of our citizenship by these very same wanna-be génocidiares. In essence “African nationalism” is “racism” enacted against áll people (of all races) who are not perceived to be a “South African black”.
They are openly calling for foreign-looking people (like us) to be murdered.
Another commentator then elaborated by stating that the victims of xenopbobia and genocide are treated very differently, although he outcome in many cases is the same:
Johan PB Prinsloo:
Thing is that the xenophobic attacks on African foreigners thus far have been violent and war-like, not torturous, inhumane, dehumanising, accompanied by rape, skinning them alive, dragging them behind bakkies, placing them in boiling water after having raped them, forcing family members to watch as the rest of the families are being raped and tortured to death, etc.Genocide is the combination of rape, torture, the vicious inhumane nature of the killings, together with destroying culture and banning them from the economy and job-market. That is not xenophobia, that is genocide!Xenophobia and genocide are often closely associated. Xenophobia leads to genocide. One nation, tribe, group, trying to annihilate another group which is seen as a threat, as someone stealing their work, food or women.
Neither xenophobia, nor genocide need be related to race. In fact both xenophobia and genocide are often same race, different tribe, religion or nationality related.Genocide and xenophobia should not be confused:”Xenophobia is the irrational or unreasoned fear of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.”Genocide is often confused with Mass Killings, which simply are the later, more drastic and more dramatic stages and forms of genocide. Xenophobia can lead to genocide, but that does not make genocide mere xenophobia.Refer to this article for a clear definition of genocide:
Johann Theron The genocide as xenophobia argument is as valid as the genocide as social justice argument, because we do not live in a western context but indeed an african context. The remaining white churches, businesses, and civil organizations are all in social justice danger resulting in all presenting defensive posturing. Therefore the genocide as such is of a “special” kind where it is imbibed in a “dark” tribal culture as social justice that applies to immigrants and special white people. However, it is possible to confront it because this “special” kind of genocide and the accompanying ubuntu has a fatal flaw.
While Margaret Barnard insists that this [genocide] ….”is a well orchestrated strategy”… [by the ruling African Nationalist regime.]
All statistics point towards it. It is very easy to see what is happening in our country. Of course the government won’t admit it.
The fact that white South Africans (Afrikaners) are suffering (just like foreigners) at the hands of South African blacks who have adopted the dark mindset of “blackness” as national identity and more specific, “South African blackness” – coupled with an “entitlement mentality” has led to behaviour by blacks that is reminiscent of the feelings and behaviour expressed by the German population, just before the nazi takeover and eradication of the local jewish population, during the second world war.
This mindset clearly absolve all black South Africans, from any responsibility for their own racist behaviour, and allow them to act in public with impunity against any foreign-looking person or group, who are perceived to be “exploiters” of the official “protected” group.
“We have suffered and are still suffering, therefore we shall take what we think is rightfully ours”…. seems to be the call of the black victims. This compounds the issues of “victimhood”, because it defines the latter in terms of race and excludes anyone else from claiming the same ‘special treatment’ (sympathy) allowed for victims.
“Victimhood” has, very successfully been hijacked by black South Africans and used as a shield to hide their own racism.
Government is exploiting these stereotypes and continue to fuel the flames of discord, to divert attention away from their own incompetence and failure to address issues related to the living conditions of the black majority.
In the meantime, whites (Afrikaners) have to be content with living a nightmare life of official discrimination by government and continuous threats of violence against their person, family and community. In addition, they’re also not allowed to express outrage and publish comment about their “pain and suffering”, because they’re not really “victims” – and any attempt to do so will be met with outrage and may successfully labeled as “racism”.
Have your say. Give us your opinion and comment to this story, here:
Convicted Boeremag members, sentenced
29 October, 2013
Story compiled by Jacques Mare, for the Afrikaner Journal:
Boeremag leaders get long sentences
October 29 2013, 15:38
BOEREMAG leader Tom Vorster and five members of its bomb squad, which blew up numerous targets in 2002, were sentenced to an effective 25 years’ imprisonment by the high court in Pretoria on Tuesday.
Vorster shrugged and told reporters he had not expected such a severe sentence, as he had already been in prison for more than a decade.
Bombers Herman van Rooyen, Johan and Wilhelm Pretorius, and Rudi Gouws received the same sentences as Vorster.
The third Pretorius brother, master bomb maker Kobus Pretorius, was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment, of which 10 years were suspended.
This was because Kobus Pretorius had a change of heart during the trial, broke away from his past and expressed remorse for what he did.
The members of the bomb squad were sentenced to an additional 13 years’ imprisonment on charges of culpable homicide and conspiring to murder former president Nelson Mandela.
Soweto mother Claudia Mokone was killed in her shack by a piece of steel dislodged by a bomb the Boeremag planted on a railway.
Judge Eben Jordaan said Mr Mandela would have been killed by a land mine planted by the Boeremag bomb squad if he had not arrived by helicopter to open a school in Bolobedu, Limpopo.
This would have caused chaos and bloodshed in the country. He said the Boeremag’s aim had been to destroy democracy in South Africa.
How dangerous they were was evidenced by the fact that they carried on committing violent crimes some had said were incapable of being carried out.
The bombers already had five large car bombs ready for targets in the city centres of Pretoria and Johannesburg, and were planning further bomb attacks when they were caught.
Boeremag leaders Mike du Toit, Dirk Hanekom and the Pretorius brothers’ father, Dr Lets Pretorius, were each sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment, of which 10 years were conditionally suspended for five years.
Mike du Toit’s right-hand man, Andre du Toit, and Dion van den Heever were sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment of which 10 years were suspended.
Rooikoos du Plessis and Jurie Vermeulen, who also played important roles in planning the coup, got 15 years’ imprisonment, of which 10 were suspended.
One of the Boeremag’s most active members and the Boeremag chaplain, 74-year-old Vis Visagie, was sentenced to five years of correctional supervision.
Five of the Boeremag members who played a lesser role, including the youngest member Jacques Jordaan, walked out of the court free men after being given suspended sentences.
They are the Boeremag “weakling” Adriaan van Wyk and former defence force officers Giel Burger, Jacques Olivier and Pieter van Deventer.
The sentences were met with outrage by some, but acceptance by others.
Dr Lets Pretorius’s wife, Minnie, cried inconsolably. Friends shielded her from the cameras.
Van Wyk’s wife expressed relief that her husband would be coming home.
Revisiting the past; – The ANC’s own treason trial
(How the ANC killed people to achieve their political goals)
The Boeremag trial cannot be seen in isolation though. It is necessary to revisit the past to understand the motives and the reasons behind the treasonous acts of these Boers.
Why would anybody want to commit such heinous acts, in the name of freedom and struggle for human rights?
The Censorbugbear.org website gives us an idea of the atrocities committed by the current governing party of South Africa in their quest to “liberate” South Africa and institute communist socialism.
Throughout their campaign to destroy apartheid, they maintained that violence had been necessary to remove the illegitimate (and undemocratic) regime of the Afrikaners, oppressing the majority blacks. Now that Boers are expressing the same violent tendencies to oppose African nationalism – it is deemed an act of treason geared at destabilizing South Africa, according to the ANC government.
The pictures below (and in the attached links) are the work of sitting ANC parliamentarians …… in fact, some of the same violent criminals, who planned and implemented the following acts of violence, still form part of the current ANC executive. and some are honourary members – revered throughout the world and acknowledged as upstanding citizens and politicians.
Nobel Peace Laureate Nelson Mandela’s bombs – for the record
For the testimony submitted to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission by the [ANC] terrorists themselves about the war they waged against the peoples of South Africa, view the TRC website – but also note that Nelson Mandela has never personally had to testify about his role in approving of these atrocities:
However, in his book,” Long Walk to Freedom”, Mandela writes that as a leading member of the ANC’s executive committee, he had “personally signed off” in approving these acts of terrorism – the results of which can be seen below. So look at these scenes on the pictures and videos below to view exactly what Mandela had “signed off” for while he was in prison – convicted for other acts of terrorism after the Rivonia trial. The late SA president P.W. Botha told Mandela in 1985 that he could be a free man as long as he did just one thing: ‘publicly renounce violence. Mandela refused. That is why Mandela remained in prison until the appeaser Pres F.W. de Klerk freed him unconditionally. The bottom line is that Nelson Mandela never publicly renounced violence.
When Mandela was arrested on his Rivonia farm hideout near Johannesburg, the following munitions and bomb-making equipment were confiscated with him and his courageous comrades.
(Read his ‘Rivonia trial’ transcripts for all the details, starting with his heroic opening statement: “I am prepared to die…’ :http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/history/rivonia.html – clearly he didn’t care whether all those innocent civilians whose tortured and mutilated bodies can be seen below, died either)
- 210,000 hand grenades
- 48,000 anti-personnel mines
- 1,500 time devices
- 144 tons of ammonium nitrate
- 21,6 tons of aluminium powder
- 1 ton of black powder
Nelson Mandela had been found guilty, and rightly so, but not-withstanding his violent past became president of South Africa in 1994, without publicly denouncing violence, or apologising for the pain and suffering his terrorism has caused innocent victims. In fact, Nelson Mandela can be seen singing the “hate speech” song “Kill the Boer!” after his release, very clearly not convinced about his own supposed personal ideology of “peace and reconciliation”.
How should one interpret these actions of this icon for “human rights”?
Should we accept that violence is sometimes a justified method of bringing about change?
How should we interpret the new Boer threat to the stability of the South African state?
The new struggle for freedom
(When restorative intervention, becomes deadly)
“African nationalism” has become the new scourge, threatening the livelihood and existence of minorities in South Africa, according to activist from minority communities. The ANC had insisted (during the so-called struggle), that they were the only, real champions of “freedom”, “equality” and “basic human rights” for all South Africans, but what has happened to those noble ideals and principles since liberation?
Since coming to power in South Africa, the ANC has promulgated and signed into law 108 race-based laws, geared at infringing the rights of minority populations, like the Afrikaners and Boers, as well as the minority Indian, Khoi-san and coloured communities, in opposition to the social equality they purported to bring about in South Africa
These laws are designed to restrict Afrikaners in everything they do, and the way they live – from property confiscation, employment reservation, dissolving communities through spatial restrictions, language restrictions, school transformation, reigning-in of mother-tongue education, restricting welfare to vulnerable communities, and even creating life-threatening conditions by promoting “hate speech”, calling for the murder of Afrikaners in general.
As recently as October 10, thousands of Afrikaner protesters and international supporters protested the extreme violent nature of Afrikaner farmer murders, which is widely believed to be linked to ANC government transformation, and land redistribution policies. In order to popularize these policies,the ANC has created the fiction that Afrikaner farmers have “stolen the land” from blacks and therefore, it may be confiscated and redistributed to poor black South Africans. This has created conditions of immense distrust and tension, and has lead to increased incidents of friction in these rural communities. In addition, many rural supporters of the ANC (encouraged by ANC executives singing banned “hate speech” songs) feel justified in violently liberating the land, by killing the Afrikaner farmer and looting his belongings.
Afrikaners/Boers are asking themselves why this new dispensation of “codified government thuggery”, should not be seen as severe oppressive measures, designed to eradicate this community. Many activist are asking whether the ultimate goal of “African nationalism”, isn’t perhaps to bring about Afrikaner genocide under the guise of the ANC’s “transformation” agenda.
One activist, put is this way:
Apparently, Afrikaners do not have the right to protest against African Nationalist oppression because [according to popular opinion] there’s just, NOT ENOUGH:
1) Job reservation laws
2) Tortured and murdered victims
3) Spatial laws designed to dissolve their communities
4) Afrikaans schools transformed
5) Afrikaner businesses looted [of assets], by means of forced BBB -EE (Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment) shareholding
6) Poor and destitute Afrikaners
7) Hate Speech directed at this vulnerable minority.
The activist then ventures this question;
“When exactly will we reach that point where we qualify to be called victims?”
This question is indeed valid and important, in that it addresses the urgency of identifying human rights infringements in the current discourse about perceived “victimhood” in South Africa.
When does restitutive interventions of government, infringe so severely on the livelihood of minorities that it becomes oppressive and deadly?
When does the “legislating victim” – become the “oppressive monster”?
When does it become justified, to resist oppression … violently
FW DE KLERK FOUNDATION WELCOMES LABOUR COURT RULING ON EMPLOYMENT EQUITY
FW De Klerk Foundation
The FW de Klerk Foundation (the Foundation) welcomes a recent judgment handed down by the Cape Town Labour Court in Solidarity v Department of Correctional Services to the extent that the Court held that using national racial demographics as the only measure for determining and implementing affirmative action targets, was unfair practice.
In June 2011, the Department of Correctional Services (the Department) issued its latest Employment Equity Plan, which gave strict instructions for the attainment of equality targets throughout the service. The targets – 79.3% for black South Africans, 9.3% for white South Africans, 8.8% for brown South Africans and 2.5% for Indians – would bring employees into line with national – and not regional – demographics. This, despite the fact that brown South Africans comprise 54% of the population in the Western Cape. As a result, the Commissioner of Correctional Services prohibited the appointment or promotion of any more brown or white South Africans – despite the fact that brown and white applicants were often the best qualified and most experienced candidates for vacant posts.
The Foundation viewed the Department’s Employment Equity Plan as illegal, unconstitutional and simply unfair. Non-racialism is one of the founding values in the Constitution. In terms of section 9(3) the state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on the basis of race – among other grounds. Section 9(5) determines that discrimination is unfair unless it is established that the discrimination is fair. The Foundation accordingly helped a group of aggrieved employees to challenge the manner through pro-bono legal representation by Bagraims, a leading firm of labour attorneys in Cape Town. The case was subsequently joined with a similar case that was being conducted by Solidarity.
In this joined case, Labour Court Judge Hilary Rabkin-Naicker found in favour of Solidarity and nine of the 10 employees of the Department of Correction Services on whose behalf Solidarity acted. It accordingly held that the nine brown employees (excluding the remaining employee – a white man), had suffered unfair discrimination. The Court hence ordered that the Department must take immediate steps to ensure that both national and regional demographics are taken into account in respect of members of the designated groups when setting equity targets at all occupational levels.
Apart from dealing with the question of whether national and regional demographics should be taken into account, the Court was also asked to consider whether the Department’s Employment Equity Plan was compliant with the Employment Equity Act (the Act) and the Constitution; and whether the application of the Employment Equity Plan amounted to unfair discrimination. Not surprisingly, the Court, bound by the Constitutional Court’s judgement in Minister of Finance & Another v Van Heerden and the High Court’s judgement in SA Police Service v Solidarity on behalf of Barnard (and absent an argument that certain provisions of the Act were unconstitutional), held that affirmative action measures in conformity with the purposes of the Act were indeed aimed at achieving substantive equality. Judge Rabkin-Naicker hence rejected the notion that the restitutionary measures promoted by the Act by itself amounted to equal opportunity for designated groups. The Court was therefore unwilling, on a technical point, to declare the Department’s Employment Equity Plan (as such a restitutionary measure) to be in breach of the Act. In addition, the Court also failed to make an order as to the promotion or appointment of the respective individual applicants and refrained from making a cost order – despite the Court having found that the brown individuals were indeed discriminated against.
Section 195(1)(i) of the Constitution quite rightly requires that “public administration must be broadly representative of the South African people, with employment and personnel management practices based on ability, objectivity, fairness and the need to redress the imbalances of the past to achieve broad representation.”
The Department’s Employment Equity Plan, by contrast, aims at mathematical representivity down to the first decimal place – and not at broad representivity; it would not be representative of the South African people in the Western Cape; it is not based on recognition of ability, since it ignores the fact that the affected employees had been assessed as the most capable for the advertised posts; it is not based on objectivity but on the implementation of the ANC’s subjective racial ideology; it is clearly not fair since it once again entrenches race as the sole criterion for promotion and would require brown employees of the Department to move away from their communities if they want to be promoted; and it does not redress imbalances of the past because it creates new racial imbalances between the profile of the people of the Western Cape and the officials who are intended to serve them.
The Constitution, from the outset, recognises that equality in our society is yet to be achieved and that restorative measures aimed at achieving such substantive equality may be utilised. The Constitution, however, does not require demographic representation. Hence, although the finding in favour of the brown employees of the Department is a victory for the constitutional value of equality in this instance, the premise upon which the Act is seeking to find equality according to demographic representation, falls short of the constitutional values of non-racialism and remains to be tested in a higher court.
Issued by the FW de Klerk Foundation
19 October 2013
#Solidarity wins affirmative action (#AA) case against #DCS
Oct 18, 2013
The Cape Town Labour court this morning ruled in trade union Solidarity’s favour in its affirmative action lawsuit against the Department of Correctional Services (DCS). The court found that using the national racial demographics as the only measure for implementing affirmative action was an unfair practice.
Dirk Hermann, Deputy General Secretary of Solidarity, said Judge Hilary Rabkin-Naicker ruled that the DCS’s unfair practices should be revised immediately. ‘The DCS must therefore revise its affirmative action processes. The ruling will not only affect the DCS, but also the rest of the public service.’
Solidarity indicated, however, that it would appeal against certain aspects of the judgment. ‘Certain constitutional issues were not dealt with by the judge. We can’t expect the Labour Court to pass judgment on important constitutional matters and therefore we still want to go to the Constitutional Court. This victory is significant, but it’s not the end of the road,’ said Hermann.
The judge moreover, among other things, ruled that Peter Davids, the only white applicant in the case, was not included in the judgment, as white men are not part of the designated group. ‘The judge based this decision on the Labour Appeal Court’s ruling in the Renate Barnard case. The Barnard case is due to be heard in the Supreme Court of Appeal on 6 November. In the meantime we will make the necessary arrangements to appeal against certain aspects of today’s judgment.’
#RedOctober Protest March: – #Afrikaners Protesting against evil
The day a small, vulnerable minority stood up to be heard
The Red October Protest March took place at several locations in South Africa, and many others, all over the world on October 10, 2013.
These pictures in the attached gallery, was taken by The Afrikaner Journal at the Pretoria venue of the march. It tells the story of the march in pictures.
The organizers explained the reasons for their activism on their webpage, given as a source at the end of their statement, which I will publish here in full:
What is Red October?
“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter.” - Martin Luther King
On 10 october 2013 We called on people across the World to raise their voices against the oppression of and violence against White South African minority!
We staged marches and gatherings across South Africa and the World to let everyone know that we have had ENOUGH!
No longer will we be silent about the oppression of White South Africans! No longer will we endure the killing of our people on our farms and in our towns and cities!
We can no longer be silent about the brutal torture of the elderly and defenceless people of our Ethnic Minority!
We are tired of Corrupt Governance, Racist Black Economic Empowerment and Affirmative Action policies. We can no longer tolerate the destruction of our infrastructure, our filthy government hospitals, our pathetic educational system, dirty dams and rivers, uninhabitable parks and public areas, dangerous neighbourhoods and filthy streets! The list is endless and we say it’s ENOUGH!
SOURCE: Red October Web Page
Red October – The Fall-out
Since the succesful march, similar photo’s have been streaming in from all over the world, while the South African media had a field-day in demonizing the event as “racist”, because it highlights only the concerns of the small white community of South Africa. It is mind-boggling however, how this can be so, when the same is NEVER BEING SAID about blacks protesting for constitutional rights, which they very often do – and rightly so.
The organizers made it clear that the white minority (Afrikaners) are protesting ‘violence against their own’, which is not only seen as disproportional and brutal, but show clear signs of extreme torture in many cases.
In addition to these perceived ‘hate crimes’, we were also protesting the following treatment at the hands of their government as published by The Afrikaner Journal on October 12, 2013:
Exclusively addressing social problems on the base of ethnicity
Enacting legislation to economically deprive a minority
Barring minorities from employment by quota systems etc. and plummeting a significant amount into abject poverty
Redirecting the functions of state and security, away from service to a vulnerable community, thereby leaving them open to attacks by looting gangs from the majority population?
Driving minorities from their schools and attacking their use of mother-tongue education?
Singing hate speech songs and calling them “outsiders”?
vilifying any defiance action, however peacefully achieved, as “racist”?
Invading and destroying their communities through “spatial planning” legislation, clearly aimed at driving them from their traditional homes?
Looting their cultural heritage, by changing names of towns, cities and areas originally named and settled by them.
Destroying their national identity by denying their existence, unless of course it is employed to vilify them.
Destroying their symbols of national pride through neglect, like historical graveyards, battlefield sites etc.
Not protecting members of their community, who are farming in very dangerous conditions, to feed ALL South Africans
Media Bias and the muzzling of the minority voice
Most media houses and press agencies in South Africa couldn’t wait to publish articles vilifying this protest of Afrikaners, but there have been some exceptions to the rule, too.
In order to allow you to make up your own mind up about these events, I’ve selected some articles related to the Red October march, published soon after the event.
Red October articles:
- The irony of Red October | News24
- Red October protests white ‘oppression’ – Politics | IOL News | IOL.co …
- iafrica.com | news | sa news | ‘Red October‘ slammed
- South Africans debate #RedOctober protests – The Stream – Al Jazeera
- Activists and academics square off over Red October march | The …
- Let’s hijack ‘Red October‘, shall we? | TIA MYSOA
- The experience and thoughts on Red October of a Brit married to a …
- #RedOctober in nine Instagrams | News | National | Mail & Guardian
- The ‘Racist’ Red October Event | TIA MYSOA
- Red October March: George to Victoria Bay 10 October 2013 …
- Red October – An Eye Opener
We’d like your opinion on this matter and have created this poll, to probe public opinion about the event.
Your feedback is appreciated. Please add your voice as well:
Slow-motion genocide: Hiding genocide in modern times.
By Jacques Mare -
Pretoria, South Africa
12 October, 2013
Man have been murdering man, en masse since time immemorial.
Most mass deaths had generally taken place in ancient times on the battlefield. The victor, in many cases would then carry over this murderous rage from the battlefield, to slaughter the civilian population (of the vanquished enemy) in acts of flash genocide.
In modern times however the perpetrators of mass murder, almost exclusively make use of the functions of state to achieve these horrible outcomes, and usually it is directed at a vulnerable minority in times of peace.
That in short, is the nature of the modern beast.
It is very clear that the perpetrators in all successful modern cases, had been cognizant of the wrongfulness of their intentions and the results of their actions, and yet they continued with their horrible plans by successfully propagating their political ideology to the masses, using very effective means, like advertising.
It is also notable how the modern demon will try and camouflage its murderous policies, by garnishing it with idealistic, positive nation building terminology usually containing some form of patriotic rhetoric- but the devastation of the target group, is always the outcome.
Slow-motion genocide is not a widely accepted phenomenon, because it is very difficult to distinguish between normal population change dynamics and carefully engineered techniques to drive populations or ethnic groups away.
It is also difficult to label it as an atrocity if there aren’t visuals available to show the dead of the target group piled up in heaps.
“Time-lapse reporting” may be helpful to track changes in population migration, demographic history of areas, legislation imposed and the effect it has on target groups.
Regularly (and accurately) updated lists of murdered community members, are also very helpful and this method is very successfully employed by the #Afrikaners of South Africa to compile a database of victims.
Very few international genocide watch groups keep track of these long-term changes however, and even fewer will publicly acknowledge that negative (devastating) changes to target communities are due to political intervention – especially, if the country or territory in question, is widely perceived by the international community to be stable and peaceful.
It is for that reason that terms like:
*Long-period outcomes based eradication
*Broad-based marginalization – rarely makes it into the discourse about mass atrocities.
Here are some very disturbing trends in genocide propaganda terminology, that have lead to mass atrocities in the past, or may very soon:
*Social engineering, etc
Soon to be on the same list?:
*African Nationalist Transformation (in South Africa)?
For those who doubt the validity of this discussion, or that of the terms describing slow-motion genocide, consider the case of the West Papua community. rnzi.com reports the following:
An Australian academic says West Papuans have been subject to a slow-motion genocide and the United Nations should step in.
Jim Elmslie, of the University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, is the co-author of a just-released report titled ’A Slow-Motion Genocide – Indonesian Rule in West Papua’.
Dr Elmslie says the report concludes the Indonesian Government has intentionally carried out genocidal policies for the past 50 years.
Under the United Nations Genocide Convention, the classification of an act as ’genocide’ requires proven intent.
Amelia Langford asked Jim Elmslie about the findings of the report [in an interview]
JIM ELMSLIE: We believe that a slow-motion genocide is and has been occurring in West Papua. It’s a very deep-seated and difficult problem for everybody involved, including Indonesia. And it’s a problem I think needs a lot more attention because it’s festering away, getting worse, and the Papuans are suffering quite badly now, or they have been for many decades.
AMELIA LANGFORD: What do you mean by ’slow-motion genocide’?
JE: Well, it’s a term that was first used by a man called Clemens Runawery, who’s deceased now, who was a West Papuan who thought about what was happening to his country and his people, and he compared it with disasters like had happened in Rwanda, where a large number of people were killed quickly in a sort of turmoil, a catastrophic series of events. In West Papua, the situation has gone on for decades, and over that period, cumulatively, many thousands of people have died, but not in a short, sharp burst that many people tend to associate with the word ’genocide’. So that’s why we’ve used that term, that it’s a process that’s unfolded over decades, but it’s a genocide in the sense that the killings fall within the definition of the UN convention on genocide.
AL: And tell me about the paper’s findings and what you set out to find or explore.
JE: Well, we set out to explore the whole issue of genocide, really, that many West Papuan people – leaders right down to the grassroots people – often describe what’s happened to them since the Indonesians took over the place as a genocide. And that word has a pretty specific meaning under the international convention. And there’s various acts that fall into the definition of ’genocide’, including the intentional killing of members of a group or conflicting conditions that make life difficult. And most of those acts have been carried out there, people would agree they’ve been carried out. But then the other aspect of fulfilling the criteria of being called a genocide is there’s some element of intentional government policy or there’s intent – the word ’intent’ is the critical word.
Jim Elmslie says parties to the Genocide Convention have a responsibility to look into genocide claims.
Is this slow-motion genocide?
Moreover, ask yourself whether the Afrikaner community of South Africa isn’t also experiencing similar treatment by their government.
Is it racist, and an act of genocide:
*To exclusively address social problems on the base of ethnicity?
*To enact legislation to economically deprive a minority?
*To bar minorities from employment by means of quota systems etc. and plummeting a significant amount into abject poverty?
*To redirect the functions of state and security, away from service to a vulnerable community, thereby leaving them open to attacks by looting gangs from the majority population?
*To drive minorities from their schools and attacking their use of mother-tongue education?
*To sing hate speech songs and calling them “outsiders”?
*To vilify any defiance action, however peacefully achieved, as “racist”?
*To invade and destroy their communities through “spatial planning” legislation, clearly aimed at driving them from their traditional homes?
*To loot their cultural heritage, by changing names of towns, cities and areas originally named and settled by them.
* To destroy their national identity by denying their existence, unless of course it is employed to vilify them.
*To destroy their symbols of national pride through neglect, like historical graveyards, battlefield sites etc.
Will the Afrikaners soon be eradicated from South Africa like the white Zimbanwean from Zimbabwe?
When does “social engineering” for the greater good, amount to slow motion genocide?
Inspiration for this story comes from this article about the slow-motion genocide of the West Papua community:
Life stinks for these families
Timeslive article on Afrikaner poor in Daspoort Pretoria
SIPHO MASOMBUKA | 26 February, 2013
A nauseating stench spews out of the dilapidated house on Charl Cilliers Street, in Daspoort suburb, about 11km north of Pretoria.
Dog faeces, dead rats and trash lie everywhere in the yard. A heap of rubbish stands in the backyard, where at least six creaky wooden shacks stand.
This is home to pensioner Nicolaas Krugel, for which he and about eight others pay between R700 and R1000 a month.
“No one deserves to live like this. Look around you: it is a sea of filth. There’s no electricity,” says Krugel, a retired motor mechanic.
The divorced father of three said he moved into the “rubbish dump” in November. His R1200 state pension goes to his R700 rent, leaving little for food.
“I am starving. It is hard,” he said, struggling to get up from his makeshift bed in the tiny shack he shares with three others.
His 58-year-old shackmate, Arther Coetzee, ekes out a living as a car guard at Pretoria Garden Church. Coetzee became homeless after his mother died.
Life is an uphill struggle for these backyard squatters but car guard Henry Venter says they have nowhere to go.
On average, the 37-year-old makes R60 a day and has to pay R50 for transport to and from a Centurion mall.
Venter’s unemployed wife, Lynette, 49, says they get food from a local grocery store once a week.
The couple pay R1000 rent a month. Venter said: “We are not proud to be living here but it is better than the streets.”
The couple are on the waiting list for an RDP house in Danville, Pretoria West.
Tenants say they share a “dirty” toilet in the house and at night they use buckets.
Isabel Potgieter, the owner of the property, said food, beverages and cigarettes were included in the rent but tenants dispute this.
She threatened to sue The Times if the story were published and said she would dump the “people at your offices . if you damage my name in the newspaper. I have a very f*** good lawyer”. She later apologised for her comments.
- Magda Stroebel, founder of the Angels At Work welfare organisation, said there were about 5000 destitute people squatting in backyards in the suburb.
“These are poor people who have lost everything,” she said.
About 26 families live in her back yard – in wooden shacks and a camping tent. She said “they pay a small amount”.
Why I joined AfriForum
05 February 2013
Rabelani Dagada says the organisation provides a platform for those who wish to fight against new forms of racism
I have little respect for racially based organisations like the Black Management Forum and the Afrikaner Boerderbond, especially during this era of a democratic dispensation. Be that as it may be, few months ago I joined the AfriForum, which is wrongly perceived as being a white, and specifically an Afrikaans, organisation.
If AfriForum was truly an exclusively white organisation I wouldn’t have joined; never! I joined AfriForum because the ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), and its government, have abandoned their non-racialism principles.
They have betrayed the ideology that propelled Nelson Mandela to fight for liberation: “I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination”. It is sad to note that today, South Africa is not “a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony with equal opportunities” as Mandela had cherished.
We have become a country where some of those, who have recently become members of the elite, are also the new oppressors. The oppressed in this instance are our minority groups – coloured, white and Indian.
Due to our history, the ANC has correctly realised that there was a need for redress to balance out socio-economic anomalies amongst the racial groups. Unfortunately, the ANC has used affirmative action and black economic empowerment (BEE) policies, in some instances, to deny the minority groups educational, employment, and commercial opportunities.
Other than creating new forms of discrimination, these policies brought unintended consequences.
Firstly, BEE has made a small elite very rich while the majority of black Africans remain very poor. These ‘elites’ didn’t acquire wealth by engaging in entrepreneurship; but through gaining a shareholding in existing companies without adding any value.
Secondly, BEE has actually benefited those white experts who were involved in deal structuring as well as the banks that financed those deals.
Thirdly, affirmative action has led to unnecessary unemployment, early retirement and emigration of technically skilled white professionals.
Fourthly, these policies don’t create new jobs, but rather see a person from a designated group replacing a white person in an existing position.
This is not the right way of creating employment. If you appoint a highly experienced artisan, regardless of race, her contribution to innovation and economic development may create at least ten new jobs and previously disadvantaged people will benefit from these newly created positions.
The perpetuation of these policies has led to economic stagnation and disempowered the very people they intend to empower. Lastly, affirmative action has, mostly in government and state owned enterprises, put black African professionals in positions that require technical skills.
As a result, billions of taxpayers’ Rands are spent on consultants because these black administrators lack technical know-how. It is my strong view that genuine black empowerment can only be achieved through proper education and skills development.
It is heartbreaking to note that the standard of education in South Africa has plunged drastically under the ANC government and that there are many young people who leave the schooling system before they reach Grade 12. The provision of inferior education and the offering of subjects like Mathematics Literacy and English Second Language constitute the continuation of ‘bantu education’ under the ANC’s administration.
It appears that, both in the party (ANC) that Walter Sisulu and Oliver Tambo worked so hard for and in its government, only black Africans can occupy the positions of president and deputy president.
The possibility of Trevor Manuel, one of the ANC’s bright minds, becoming either a deputy president or president of the ANC or of the Republic is very slim indeed because he is not black enough. I am not putting up a fight for Manuel; he is a big man and can take care of himself. My problem is the treatment of the ordinary coloured people, the rank and file.
Look at how they were treated by the Department of Correctional Services which argued that coloured officers cannot be promoted because they were overpopulated in the Western Cape Province. You see? Jimmy Manyi, who once said coloureds were over concentrated in the Western Cape, has supporters in critical places.
In other words, if coloured officers wanted to satisfy the Department of Correctional Services’ Affirmative Action Plan, they would have to move to other provinces, in line with Manyi’s tirade. When Manuel lambasted Manyi for his racist utterances, he received no support from the ANC.
Actually, it was as if it was Manuel who was out of order. The disillusioned Manuel thus declined nomination to the ANC’s national executive committee (NEC) during the last congress in Mangaung. It is this discriminatory treatment of the minority groups that drove me to join the AfriForum.
The AfriForum provides a platform and voice for those who want to fight against new forms of racism by the ANC government. I want to encourage our black Africans to fight against new discrimination in our country. During the struggle against apartheid, there were many compatriots from minority groups who joined forces against the apartheid regime.
Amongst others, these include Helen Suzman, Neville Alexander, Ahmed Kathrada, Beyers Naude and Bram Fischer. We should all be appalled with the way the ANC’s policies have led to an increment in poverty amongst our people. Are we going to do nothing when the government lacks political will to prevent farm murders? The plundering and looting of our resources by a few of the ANC’s aligned elite requires us to engage in a new struggle. Aluta continua!
Dagada is a development economist based at the Wits Business School. You can follow him on Twitter: @Rabelani_Dagada.
An edited version of this article first appeared in the Sunday Times.
Afriforum is a South African civil rights organizations that fights for -, and promotes …”equal rights and responsibilities for the total population, including the members of minority communities”.
You can read their Civil Rights Manifest here
Source for the story:
Why I joined AfriForum
The Afrikaner Journal, News Digest – 13 January, 2013
Compiled by: Jacques Maré
Highlights of stories focusing on the plight of Boere-Afrikaners in South Africa.
- Cosatu’s communist insurgents continues “striking”.
- ANC body, threatens action against Afrikaans university.
- Vicious ANC sponsored murders of Afrikaner-elderly, continues unabated.
- Four Afrikaner men charged with conspiracy to set off explosives at the ANC’s Manguang conference, denied bail.
- Hate Speech demonizing Afrikaners, increase.
- Letter to Amnesty International
- Jacob Zuma threatens “unfair” expropriation and warns that inequality is bad for reconciliation.
- Destitute at the receiving end of ANC discrimination – NO food aid if you’re not an ANC member!
- Afrikaners defending themselves against murderous attacks, arrested for assault
- Twist in Boeremag trial – case postponed to 24 January 2013
Cosatu’s communist insurgents continues “striking”.
The year started ominously and violently in the Western Cape province of South Africa. Communist insurgents, belonging to the African Nationalist governments labour alliance, COSATU, continued destabilizing the province. This comes in the wake of promises by the union that they will make this province “ungovernable”.
The Western Cape province is the only province, not run by the African Nationalist government. The Democratic Alliance (DA) governs this province and it has been a thorn in the side for the ANC ever since the DA took power, several years ago. Embarrassingly, the DA is making a huge success of delivering services, in contrast to the ANC who is home to at least two failed provinces under its administration, that of the Limpopo province and the other, the Eastern Cape – where service to the public has all but disintegrated.
Union secretary general Tony Ehrenreich and Western Cape ANC party leader, Marius Fransman has taken it upon themselves to amass hordes of “fake” farm workers to protest a wage dispute, and at the same time, high-jack the real concerns of farm workers for their own political agenda. It is clearly a blatant attempt at disrupting a fully functional province in the way the ANC is handling the issue.
Wage negotiation in South Africa is based on the principle of supply and demand – just like in other countries. Agreements between employer and employee is furthermore governed by legislation – promulgated and enforced by the state through its Labour department. The department is tasked with setting minimum wages for the different industries. They do this through consultation, by convening meetings between stakeholders to ascertain the needs of both employers and employees – before publishing minimum wages that employers must follow.
It is crystal clear from the above that COSATU’s actions in the Western Cape, amounts to much more than striking for wages. It is also very disturbing that the government is allowing the situation to continue and the violence to spread when it is IN THEIR POWER TO STOP THE ANARCHY AND CALL A HALT TO THE DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY AND THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY OF THAT PROVINCE – which leads us in turn to the only reasonable conclusion for the governments ambivalence – that it is in fact, part of the ANC government’s plan to violently disown Afrikaner farmers, by means of communist anarchy and thuggery.
The ANC government has issued a call (in the meantime) to suspend the strike, but it has allowed its lackeys to run amok on a very long leash, to do serious damage to the industry and the local economy.
Farm workers may now be faced with a very unsure future and many may lose their jobs. The ANC hasn’t called any of the perpetrators to book about the violence, intimidation and damage to property and we don’t expect that it will ever happen.
In related news, the Cape secessionist party (Cape Independence) has called upon the citizens of the Western Cape Province, to rally together behind the idea of independence, reject the failed administration of the ANC and secede from the republic to form their own independent nation. It is a call that seem to have found a lot of willing ears on social networks such as facebook and Twitter.
These are the links to the stories describing the clashes between police and insurgents,most of whom hails from the failed neighboring province of the Eastern Cape.
Also notice how the South African media plays along with the notion that these anarchist are ”farm workers” when they are actually Xhosa “seasonal invaders” following orders of their ANC masters.
ANC body, threatens action against Afrikaans university.
The Afrikaner Journal copied an article published by Times Live, describing the bizarre attack on the newly established Afrikaans language University, Akademia by the Higher Education Transformation Network.
According to the Network the university “potentially discriminates against students who wish to study in other languages and is therefore “unconstitutional”.
The Solidarity Movement’s Dirk Hermann said in response:
“Even though Akademia teaches in Afrikaans, it does not mean that only Afrikaans students are allowed to attend.”
The Solidarity Movement and many other pro Boere-Afrikaner organizations, view this as a direct assault against the Boere-Afrikaner nation, their language, their culture and their people.
It is inconceivable that an association related to government, should be so concerned about NOT allowing a minority to exercise their constitutional rights, that they would actively seek to stop these rights, because it “MAY POTENTIALLY HARM THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE BLACK MAJORITY” – however bizarre that may be.
You can read that story here:
Vicious ANC sponsored murders of Afrikaner-elderly, continues unabated.
Four Afrikaner men charged with conspiracy to set off explosives at the ANC’s Manguang conference, denied bail.
Lani Fouché reports for OFM:
Bloemfontein – Closing arguments and verdict of the bail application of the four alleged right-wingers, accused of plotting to kill top ANC officials during the Mangaung Conference in December last year, has been postponed in the Bloemfontein Regional court.
The state alleges that they planned “The Battle of Mangaung” which involved eliminating the country’s top leadership. The men have denied the claims as well as alleged meetings that took place during which the plot was conceived.
The investigating officer claims to have a strong case against the four.
OFM’s Lani Fouché reports that the families of the accused are frustrated at the postponement and that it was once again an emotional day in court. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=412915618782925&id=100001934720901&refid=48
Hate Speech demonizing Afrikaners, increase.
Letter to Amnesty International
Censorbugbear posted this letter to the international human rights watch group, Amnesty International, written by Adriaan Parker.
The letter is a very well written argument explaining the reasons why Afrikaners feel that they are at the receiving end of genocidal policies.
This is not the first letter of its kind sent to Amnesty International and will in all likelihood, not be the last. Most responses from the organization have been dismissive, thus far.
AI basically denies that the ANC is acting with deliberate intent to destroy Afrikaners and refuse to link evidence presented to them, as possible proof of such events taking place.
Judge for yourself:
Jacob Zuma threatens “unfair”expropriation and warns that inequality is bad for reconciliation.
The ANC president made a lot of controversial statements last week.
At the ANC policy conference he proposed that the “willing buyer, willing seller” approach be dropped as it was too costly and slow, according to the Independent Online.
It (the ANC) also agreed that expropriation of land with “just and equitable” compensation was the preferred alternative.
The ruling party would “not have to” change the constitution, as it makes provision for “expropriation with compensation in the public interest”, according to IOL.
The nature of the compensation offered, will show whether the government is expropriating fairly. If the compensation is not based on current market value, it will be unfair and cause for legal challenge. Unfortunately the regime will be the judge of what is fair, and we can expect expropriations of property for ‘way below’ the real value as a unilateral decision by the Africanist regime, with no recourse or possibility for appeal except maybe, via the courts.
I foresee that Afrikaner-farmers will face many exhaustive legal battles for many years to come. Battles that will ultimately result in the loss of their ancestral land and in many cases – their only means survival.
Should the constitutional court however find in favour of farmers – it will signal the end of the honeymoon period (of equality for all in the New South Africa), as the ANC will be “forced” to adopt many “qualifying amendments”, to give effect to their land policy.
This will eventually change the constitution from “free” to ”totalitarian” – making way for a communist ANC dictatorship.
In addition the head of the ANC said that “inequality is bad for reconciliation”, a statement that seems agreeable to most people who agrees that the gap between rich and poor are indeed a huge problem in South Africa.
The problem with this statement lies in the way the ANC has attempted to narrow the divide over the years. These attempts not only failed, but in retrospect, clearly amounts to acts of genocide against the vulnerable minority Afrikaner population.
They have literally done everything in their power to marginalize Afrikaners (and whites in general) by:
- barring them from the certain jobs,
- restricted access to the labour market,
- trying to restrict access to services like charity,
- complained about Afrikaner attempts to start a Afrikaans university,
- barring Afrikaans students from certain study areas at state universities,
- complained about Afrikaans as a medium of education in schools,
- refusing to investigate incidents of hate speech against its own members,
- making themselves guilty of hate speech,
- refusing to investigate charges of genocide against Afrikaner-farmers,
- initiating expropriating policies to turn Afrikaners into internal refugees,
- denying Afrikaners the status as a minority group,
- refusing to declare farm murders a priority crime
- and a host of other, overt measures pointing to African Nationalism as a racist genocidal instrument.
It is in the light of the above that Zuma’s statement of, “inequality is bad for reconciliation”, should be read. It is not as benign as one would have hoped.
This statement is a threat – a declaration of intent to intensify the murderous policies of dehumanization of Afrikaners that will lead to their ultimate demise.
Destitute, at the receiving end of ANC discrimination – NO food aid if your not an ANC member!
Afrikaners defending themselves against murderous attacks, arrested for assault.
Intimidation has taken on a new form in South Africa.
The south African police are locking up both the victims, as well as perpetrators of violent crimes together. The practice has been going on for a while and it is suggested that it may have come about, because most perpetrators of crime realize that they can influence the outcome of the judicial process, if they lay counter-charges against their victims, and - also because the SAPS must give effect to the constitutional rights of detainees as well, by complying with their wish to lay counter charges, should they wish to do so.
This action then forces the police officers to act against both parties, sometimes locking both up together in the same cell, where the victims trauma is extended for days and months, afterward.
These innocent citizens then have to endure physical abuse at the hands of their aggressors, while the guards sometimes, may turn a blind eye.
In desperation, and as a way to escape physical harm, victims would then drop the criminal charges against the perpetrators hoping that it will secure their release.
In some cases this blackmail, accompanied by a fat bribe will do the trick.
It is unacceptable that the legal system in South Africa will allow a victim to be victimized twice – first, by the perpetrator, and a second time by the legal apparatus and the perpetrator, together.
Victims of violent crimes now know that “defending yourself”, has become a sure way of ending up being treated like a criminal and landing up with a conviction, yourself.
Take the following incidents as disgraceful examples of this travesty of justice taking place:
In the first story, Gert Seegers (75) en Willie van Zyl (56) managed to apprehend a burglar, who then alleged that the two elderly Afrikaner men, “assaulted” him.
Needless to say, the police then arrested the two men as well, on a charge of assault.
They were given bail of R500 each, but must still appear in court to face charges of assault.
A perpetrator – who knows very well that the unlawfulness of his actions may result in harm to himself – takes revenge on his victims by laying a bogus assault charge, to get back at his victims and defeat the ends of justice in the process….
Let me spell it out for you….. a 75-year-old man, defending his home from a violent 25-year-old invader…..is charged with assault …??????
Has defending yourself become illegal in South Africa????
In the second story an Afrikaner woman Chrystal Grobler, who owns a gas station in Johannesburg, was attacked by a black man when she inquired about his strange behaviour.
Apparently, he was copying information on products stocked inside the shop – without Groblers consent.
In the argument that followed, Grobler sustained a broken nose when the aggressor kicked her in the face.
Again, the police arrested both parties on charges of assault.
Both will have to appear in court.
Even if you take race out of the picture, a man….. kicked a woman… in the face and broke her nose ….. and SHE IS ARRESTED FOR ASSAULT ????
Now put race and cultural identity BACK into the equation, and ask yourself whether the South African Police would have acted the same if the actors in the stories above, had been of the same race or cultural identity…….
We will leave you to decide what is universally accepted norms, values and practices and, whether the above amounts to gross violation of minority rights in South Africa, instead.
Twist in Boeremag trial – case postponed to 24 January 2013
Pretoria – Boeremag members found guilty of high treason could apply for their convictions to be overturned, the High Court in Pretoria heard on Monday.
They claimed new evidence of a police conspiracy against them had surfaced. Judge Eben Jordaan postponed the action by 20 Boeremag members to January 24 to give them time to seek the advice of a senior advocate.
Paul Kruger, who represents some of the accused, said a former policeman, Captain Deon Loots, had made statements about the alleged conspiracy which were published in a Sunday newspaper in October last year.
The Rapport published two articles which quoted Loots claiming police spies had planted evidence and enticed Boeremag members to commit crimes. He said crime intelligence eavesdropped on conversations between the accused and their lawyers while they were in custody.
Initial indications were that they might bring an application in terms of Section 38 of the Constitution, which deals with the right to approach a court concerning the violation of fundamental rights. He said he was only allowed to consult with Loots in the middle of December because he had to work through Loots’ lawyer, who initially did not want to let him talk to Loots. “I could not put a gun against the man’s head. I was in his hands,” he said.
Senior prosecutor Paul Fick objected to the trial being postponed. “The court has already made a finding and cannot review itself. The application will have to be made before another court.”
Defence advocate Bernard Bantjes said if there was substantial evidence, the men’s conviction would have to be set aside by another court. Jordaan started giving judgment in the nine-year trial in July last year. He convicted the last of the 20 accused – master bomb maker Kobus Pretorius – in August last year.
All 20 were convicted of high treason resulting from a far-right wing plot to overthrow the African National Congress-led government. The Boeremag’s bomb squad – Kobus Pretorius, his brothers Johan and Wilhelm, and Herman van Rooyen and Rudi Gouws Ä were also found guilty of attempting to murder former president Nelson Mandela.
In addition, they were convicted of murdering Claudia Mokone, who was killed when a piece of steel dislodged by a Boeremag bomb planted on a railway line was flung into her shack in Soweto in October 2002.
During his judgment, Jordaan rejected claims the State had taken part in planning a coup. Although the accused claimed they were involved in a legitimate war against a “racist regime”, Jordaan said they could not have believed that civilian structures, such as a mosque, were legitimate targets. – Sapa
If you are interested to read more about the story of the Boeremag trialists, you can get access to more information here:
Better still – why not befriend them on facebook, and learn why these young men (incarcerated for ten years and now waiting to be sentenced for high treason against the African Nationalist state) – would commit actions (similar to the ones Nelson Mandela had been convicted for) – in the name of freedom?
Let it be known that where there is injustice – there will be resistance
Pro-Boere Afrikaner news stories, related to the above, can be accessed at the following websites in Afrikaans:
For additional news sources in English:
Afrikaans university threatened with closure by ANC
Imagine the following scenario:
The US federal government decides that universities teaching exclusively in English, are racist because it will exclude Spanish speakers,
Or for an European example:
Imagine the Belgian government decides to ban a Flemish University because it discriminates against French speakers.
Well, read what the African Nationalist government’s attitude is toward Akademia, the only distance education university in the world, serving Afrikaans-speakers of ALL ethnic backgrounds.
Afrikaans institution against our constitution.
A year after its establishment, officials at a tertiary institution specifically targeting Afrikaans speakers have hit back at critics who have labeled the institute as “exclusive”.
Akademia, a private institution registered with the Department of Education, was criticised at the weekend over its language policy by the Higher Education Transformation Network.
“Akademia only admits Afrikaans students and thus potentially discriminates against students who wish to study in other languages,” said the transformation network’s chairman Lucky Thekisho.
The network wants the education authorities to “review the institution’s accreditation” and is even willing to take legal steps.
However, Solidarity Movement’s Dirk Hermann said: “Even though Akademia teaches in Afrikaans, it does not mean that only Afrikaans students are allowed to attend.”
Akademia uses distance learning and is an independent institution within the Solidarity Movement, said Hermann. It is registered with the Department of Education.
It is this registration that the Higher Education Transformation Network now wants to challenge.
“We wish to question the criteria and guidelines utilised by the Umalusi (Council for Quality Assurance in the General and Further Education and Training) and CHE (Council for Higher Education) granting provisional accreditation status to Akademia College.”
The transformation network believes Akademia’s Afrikaans-only policy is inconsistent with the constitution, the Education White Paper of 1997 and the Higher Education Amendment Act of 2011.
“Contrary to promoting the interests of a unified South African society to advance economic prosperity and fight poverty, Solidarity and Afriforum are playing a very divisive nefarious role in higher education by seeking to entrench the exclusion of blacks from higher education,” claimed the network.
But Hermann said that Akademia was founded to make higher education more accessible.
“If South Africa has a higher education landscape that is only English, then it would be exclusive,” said Hermann.
The country already has too many institutions teaching exclusively in English, he said.
“The constitution promotes multilingualism and it can only work in practice if there are institutions serving different language communities,” Hermann said, adding that the majority of Afrikaans speakers were not white and that Akademia is ideally suited to serve poor communities such as in the Northern Cape.
He said that the Solidarity Movement was willing to engage with other stakeholders to roll out the “Akademia model” for mother- tongue instruction in other African languages.
Higher Education South Africa acting CEO Jeffrey Mabelebele said it would be premature to comment as he had not seen Solidarity’s submissions to Umalusi and CHE or the reasons Umalusi gave for supporting the institute’s registration.