uw land schijnt een nest van misdadigers te zijn met een paar witte
mensen die orde vechten te houden. Medelijden zijn er verraders
eveneens tussen de witte mensen. De rest van de beschaafde wereld zal
hun ogen openen en dat zal ten gunste van de Europeanen in Zuid-Afrika
zijn.
‘Bosoorlog was noodsaaklik en die Boereoorlog was veel erger’
Jul 10 2008 07:08:55:317PM - (SA)
Herman Scholtz
Bloemfontein. – Hy wil nie die trauma, post-traumatiese stres “en
allerhande ander sindrome” misken nie, maar mense moet besef die Anglo-
Boereoorlog was baie erger as die Bosoorlog.
So het genl. Jannie Geldenhuys, voormalige weermaghoof, vandeesweek in
’n bespreking oor die oorlog op die Volksblad-kunstefees op die kampus
van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat gesê.
“Ek het baie simpatie met mense wat hul oog of ledemate verloor, of
geliefdes aan die dood afgestaan het, maar mense moet die Grensoorlog
in perspektief plaas.
“Daar is baie meer mense in die Boereoorlog se konsentrasiekampe dood
as wat in die uitgerekte oorlog in Angola die geval was.”
Dr. Louis Bothma, skrywer van Die buffel struikel, het aan die gehoor
van sowat 100 mense gesê hy ervaar dit anders.
Hy het gesê hy is as kind geïndoktrineer om te glo dat die wêreld uit
twee dele bestaan – “die bose Ooste, wat Bybels verbrand en die goeie
Weste, wat aan ons kant is”.
“Ons is met genadelose geweld deur ons eie mense behandel en ’n groot
groep veterane ervaar vandag nog trauma oor wat in Angola gebeur het.”
Mnr. Koos Greeff (56), ’n oorlogsveteraan van Bloemfontein, het ná die
bespreking gesê hy vind dit nog baie moeilik om sin te maak van sy rol
in die oorlog.
“Ek het mense geskiet en daar is op my geskiet. Ek het vriende in
Angola verloor.”
Hy wou by Geldenhuys weet of die oorlog die moeite werd was, waarop
Geldenhuys geantwoord het dit behoort nie eens ’n debatspunt te wees
nie. “Natuurlik was dit die moeite werd. Die oorlog was absoluut
noodsaaklik. As dit nie vir die oorlog was nie, sou ons vandag baie
slegter af gewees het.”
Geldenhuys het beklemtoon dat die Grensoorlog in die konteks van die
Koue Oorlog gesien moet word.
“Die (voormalige) Sowjetunie wou van (die voormalige) Suidwes ’n klein
Kuba maak,” het hy gesê.
Bothma het gesê dit is belangrik dat die veterane praat oor wat gebeur
het.
“Ons het destyds dokumente geteken wat gesê het ons sal nie uitpraat
nie, maar niemand het vir ons gesê wanneer ons daaroor mag begin praat
nie.”
Laat ons oor iets sinvols gesels. Met die brandstofpryse van vandag
en die rentekoerse, reken jy dit is sinvol om nou jou kar te verkoop
vir 'n nuwe ene? Wat sal gebeur met inruilpryse? Hoe gaan die
motormaatskappye voortbestaan? Diesel vs petrol?
Die skielike stilte het die NG beetgepak - Nou wonder ek net is dit die
stilte NA die storm, of is dit die stilte VOOR die storm
In elk geval kom ek vertel julle so ietsie in 'n ligte luim:
Vier jaar gelede het ek met 'n ding begin wat toe gedoop is "Vries Jou Gat
Af". Dit word in die winter gehou by 'n dam of rivier waar jy nog toegelaat
word om 'n groot vuur op die grond te maak. Dit is net vir die manne bedoel,
en geen vrouens mag saamgebring word nie.
Die idee agter vries jou gat af is om 'n klomp ouens bymekaar te bring en
hopelik sal die koue veroorsaak dat almal by die vuur sal saam kuier eerder
as om in klein groepies elders rond te staan. Dit bied aan die manne
geleenthede om te "network" en in die proses leer jy 'n vreendeling ken, en
gaan huistoe as vriende.
Hierdie jaar is dit Vries Jou Gat Af 4, en dit het van 'n aanvanklike
groepie van 12 ouens nou al gegroei tot 30. Hierdie jaar het ek ook spesiaal
hemde laat druk met die amptelike Vries Jou Gat Af logo en al daarop.
Net om dinge so klein bietjie interessant te maak het ons ook 'n trofee, wat
die Sondag oggend gegee word aan die persoon wat die naweek die meeste pret
gemaak het, deur of iets te doen wat snaaks was, of iets kwytsgeraak het wat
die ouens altyd aan Vries Jou Gat Af 4 sal koppel.
Hierdie jaar hou ons dit op 19 Julie, en soos die weer op die oomblik is glo
ek dit gaan vrek koud wees. Wie weet dalk sien ek een van julle manne nog op
een van hulle.
Wat is die verste wat die boog kan span,
hoeveel kan hierdie taai pees verdra…?
sal die vering van geloof
nou nog ‘n laaste pyl
laat spring en stort,
(waar konsentries-swart die sirkels van die brein
‘n klein heelal omspan),
en feilloos tot die kern dring….?
Raymond Suttner was voor 1994 'n leier in die UDF, SAKP en ANC. Hy was
ook 'n regsprofessor by Wits. Hy is onder meer in die 70/80"s deur die
Veiligheidspolisie gemartel.
As daar ANC blou bloed is, is hy een van hulle.
Hier is wat hy vanoggend in die Business Day geskryf het:
-----------------
Where are the alternatives to these harmful voices?
Raymond Suttner
WHEN Gwede Mantashe, who holds the key African National Congress (ANC)
position of secretary-general, attacked the Constitutional Court and
associated it with counterrevolutionary forces aiming to destroy ANC
president Jacob Zuma, he gave us a glimpse of what many already
feared.
Mantashe has been one of the less-strident voices in the new
leadership, and his decades of experience have shown in his attempts
to understand the public and the ANC base that goes beyond, and in
many cases has deep misgivings about, a Zuma presidency.
I spent a great deal of my life as an academic writing attacks on the
judiciary operating within the apartheid constitution. When the ANC
achieved the 1994 democratic breakthrough, it set in place not only a
new constitution, but also a Constitutional Court.
There are obviously problems with any notion of neutrality, especially
those that lawyers and courts tend to ascribe to themselves. But there
is also a need for something to stand above the ruling organisation
and, in SA's case, we have a very advanced constitution and a
Constitutional Court whose rulings are sometimes not what the ANC
would want.
This may be because of the preponderance of judges with one or another
background or political inclination, which affects their legal
insights. But these are factors that are built into any judiciary, and
the question is whether the advantages of having a judiciary  which,
as with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, sometimes makes
findings the ruling organisation does not like  is outweighed by
considerations that are deemed to be necessary by the ruling
organisation.
A Constitutional Court, like the constitution itself and unlike the
apartheid judiciary, reinforces values above any organisational
consideration and creates broad democratic confidence.
When the ANC decided to establish the truth commission and the court,
it understood that some decisions or findings would be contrary to
what the ANC knew (in the case of the commission) or believed should
be decided (in the case of the court). But it considered these bodies
necessary for healing (the commission), and for legitimacy (the
court).
The ANC leadership has until now appreciated that abiding by
Constitutional Court decisions has instilled public confidence in the
democratic system. Its respect as the strongest political force is
essential for stable democratic order. This does not preclude
criticism of decisions or individual judges or judgments, which are
not the same as impugning the integrity of the institution. Surely
someone as experienced as Mantashe ought to know that? Surely he
realises that few outside of the Zuma inner circle will buy his idea
that the judges are part of the plot against their leader?
Personally, I sought and gained nothing from the Mbeki presidency  or
should I say the MbekiZuma presidency for, until his dismissal, the
Mbeki vision was simultaneously a Zuma project. One never heard a word
in support of the poor emanating from Zuma, nor attempts to make the
ANC government more people-driven, nor similar sentiments that might
give credence to claims by South African Communist Party (SACP) and
Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) leaders that Zuma's
victory was a victory for the left, or a democratic gain.
In truth no programme, linked to any plot, was defeated at Polokwane.
It was a battle for loot, between those who sought to benefit from
continued Mbeki rule and those who had been ditched by Mbeki or sought
to benefit from a Zuma presidency. There was no programmatic
difference; or what left inflection the Zuma election platform may
have had was deflected by pictures of the Cosatu and SACP leaders
dogging his heels to share the applause that greeted Zuma the
ÂdelivererÂ.
What Mantashe and other members of the Zuma leadership have had to
confront is that the man they protect and fall under stands more
disgraced than any other ANC president in history. We can recall how
JS Moroka betrayed his comrades after the Defiance Campaign and other
moments of shame. But no ANC leader has been charged with rape and
escaped conviction on such sexist grounds. No leader has previously
stood trial for such a range of corrupt practices, and had to engage
in such protracted efforts to prevent evidence being heard.
Despite not supporting the desirability of a Zuma's presidency, I,
like many others, believe the ANC is bigger than any individual and
that we owe it our support and assistance to try to reverse some of
the setbacks and recover some of its legacy.
Now that task is made inordinately difficult, with ANC and Communist
Youth League figures and adult leaders throwing around the word
ÂrevolutionÂ. In reality, some of these people were nowhere near the
battlefield when danger was present. The only battlefield they know is
that for loot, and they believe they can gain this through devaluing
the words revolution and counter-revolution.
Where do we go from here? Are the views of Mantashe, Julius Malema ,
Blade Nzimande, Zwelinzima Vavi and Zuma himself those of the whole of
the ANC, SACP and Cosatu and, if not, where are the other people in
this leadership? Do they approve of the SACP displacing the police in
investigating a fraud allegation against their general secretary and
purging those who made the claim? What has happened to analysis and
political understanding? There are some who claim to bear this mantle.
Where are they and where do they stand?
It is all very well to say that one must be inside to prevent the
worst excesses, but what has been prevented and what is there that is
still to come?
# Suttner is a former political prisoner and part of the ANC/SACP
national leadership. He is a professor at Unisa and the author of the
forthcoming book, The ANC Underground (Jacana)
Het SA nóú onafhanklike regbank? Nie voorheen!
Jul 07 2008 04:51:47:413PM - (SA)
ohn Horak, Hatfield
Beeld se hoofartikel (“Regbank”, 7 Julie) praat van die
“onafhanklikheid van die regbank”. Die vraag is: Wás ons regbank al
onafhanklik?
In 1985 was ek voorsitter van ’n stratkom-subkomitee in die
Staatsveiligheidsraad se sekretariaat.
Daar was baie beperkings op koerante. Veral die Argus-groep (vandag
Independent Newspapers) het dié regulasies bly betwis.
Die groep bring verskeie aansoeke voor die Natalse regbank omdat
regter John Didcott daar telkens die regulasies ongeldig verklaar.
Mnr. P.W. Botha se regering raak gefrustreerd met die “liberale
Didcott” en mnr. Kobie Coetsee, die minister van justisie, roep ’n
vergadering in sy ampswoning byeen.
Ek verteenwoordig die nodale punt van die polisie se veiligheidstak en
my komitee.
Daar was twee advokate, een van Natal, die ander van Johannesburg.
Hulle is albei vandag gesiene regters in ons land.
Die vergadering beveel die Natalse advokaat om na regter Broome te
gaan, wat ’n paar dae later ’n soortgelyke aansoek in die Suidkus-
afdeling van die hooggeregshof sou aanhoor, om hom te vra om vir die
regulasies uitspraak te gee.
Regters Broome en Didcott sou dan teenstrydige uitsprake lewer in
dieselfde afdeling van die hooggeregshof. Die appèlhof in Bloemfontein
sou dan dringend moes besluit wie van die twee regters reg is. Dit sou
dan wet wees.
Coetsee het gesê hy sal verseker dat die “regte” uitspraak in
Bloemfontein gelewer word.
Alles het toe só uitgewerk. Soveel vir ’n onafhanklike regbank.
Supertaal
Blog
Soek
Hulp
Lede
Registreer
Teken aan
Tuis
RSS
