All men are not created equal. There is but one single explanation for the
6,000 years of strife, the spilling of an ocean of blood, the sacrifice of
light years of progress, and the basis for the current global power
struggle. All of this is the result of at least two unalterably opposing
types of souls, one vicious and animal like, the other enlightened and
human, fighting. Both are wrapped in an immortal struggle to dominate one
planet.
The goal of any confidence game is to create a sense of doubt about the
obvious.
Sociopaths, the leaders of more than three billion of the earth's people,
operate through the veins of nations, its political structure. But the
swindling of retirees out of their savings, or the smooth tongue needed to
motivate others to commit immoral or illegal acts is child's play compared
to the international drama currently being acted out on the world stage. Let
there be no doubt, the draw stings that open and close the intermission
curtain, the lighting to control perception (the media), the actors whose
lies boggle the mind, all hang from a ventriloquist's string. They want to
fool us all.
Even when the plot is hidden, the international players reveal enough for us
to figure out the motive, as well as who is pulling their strings. This
said, let us focus on Nelson Mandela, who recently emerged from retirement,
at 85-years-old, to play a pivotal role in yet another scrimmage between the
two great sides. Today the stage is set in the Middle East. The names are
only coincidental. In every age there was an American viewpoint and an Iraqi
viewpoint, with every man and woman in the world on one side or the other.
Mandela's job is to use his reputation as a persecuted black man, freed from
a dungeon in the dessert, in 1990. His very presence impugns a conviction.
White people, all white people, locked him away for 26 years of his life. He
was branded a hero for all the dark people of the world for opposing white
domination.
International brokers, his soul brothers in "high places," took control of
Africa's wealthiest nation, placed a living martyr on its throne to reign
over an idea far beyond the borders of South Africa.
People of color, in this case, the Iraqis, are said to be the perpetual
victims, Mandela implies, of nation-thieves, white, western Christians out
to rule the world, a desire of their own hearts.
Mandela was strategic. South Africa was merely the staging ground for the
false guilt used all around the world, for various scrimmages. Mandela's
impact on the rest of the world is psychological and works like a silent
weapon. When Mandela speaks, as he did recently, when he accused, "America
of introducing chaos in international affairs," it is a strategic chess
move. With little to no experience in politics, except the killing of whites
and rival Zulu tribesmen, Mandela has no legitimate claim to greatness.
There are no intelligent papers penned by Mandela. Others wrote all the
speeches he delivered. His thoughts belong to others. He solved none of
South Africa's internal problems. He is of average intelligence and has no
money other then what was given to him for his role in South Africa's fall.
So,how did he become a hero?
Mandela is called one of the world's "tallest" statesmen even before he
emerged from his prison cell. Fellow Marxists around the world who created
Mandela now want him to use his racial capital to influence President Bush,
who is smart enough to refuse to take Mandela's telephone call. It did not
take a lot of nerve for Mandela to show his face after reigning over the
destruction of South Africa's prosperity. To accuse America is his true
nature.
Like billions of his soul brothers, Mandela is incapable of creating and
building anything. His type waits for others to create and build. Then they
infiltrate and take over.
I believe apartheid, set aside in 1992, was a feeble, unjust and unworkable
attempt, on the part of white South Africans, to separate from the
dissimilar personalities obvious in the two rivaling types of humans.
South Africa is now the AIDS capitol of the world, with 55 percent of its
black population testing HIV positive, according to the U.N. South Africa
also leads the world in violent crime. There are more murders and rapes (per
capita) in South Africa than anywhere on the globe. To cover up, Mandela and
his successors have created new forms of censorship in order to hide the
mess. South Africa's Jesse Jackson, Desmond Tutu, recently asked for
American aid, following the mass exodus, since 1994, of more than half of
South Africa's commercial farmers. This has cut food production down by 60
percent. The reason for the mass fleeing is the near 1,500 murders of small
and large white farmers by black thugs carrying military weapons, possibly
distributed by the ANC.
The U.S. media is silent about South Africa's killings and rapes,
where white women and even small white children are intentionally infected
( RAPED !!! ) with the AIDS virus. To suppress the truth about their (
MARXIST ) brethren, world wide, is their job.
There are deep and vital reasons why the news is twisted by the elitists.
Western liberals claim that the leopard-like carnage we see in South Africa
is due to pent up rage, for years of apartheid. But I disagree.
I propose that humans are not created equal and that what we are seeing in
South Africa is the evidence that at least some men are endowed with the
souls of vicious animals. Like Saddam Hussein, billions of people are dark
in nature, murderous without flinching and seem gratified by horror. I
further propose that this is not based on race or national origin. In fact
more than half the world may belong to this race. Most are not black.
The real reason for the so-called third world is the mentality of the third
world. The left says that education; the removal of poverty and the
elimination of racism will make men equal in prosperity. But if that were
so, America and England would be a heavenly paradise. This is where the most
educated people in the world live, work and play. No, education is not the
key. Wealth is not it, nor is racial equity. It is spirit gifted with some
degree of illumination, without which one cannot see which way to go.
No, it is not IQ. It is Spirit. Entire continents like Africa, with 2,000
varieties of vegetables, roots, fruits, legumes and grains, to say nothing
of the immense wealth in minerals, diamonds and gold would not have a third
of population starving, continuously. Africa could be among the wealthiest
continents in the world. But it is not. The spirit is not there. It is here,
in America. And everyone knows it. Does that mean that we do not make
terrible political misstates? Certainly we do. Nevertheless, that has not
stopped heaven's gift basket from falling on us.
Mandela presided over great wealth earned by others and still he left South
Africa in chaos. He helped to reduce a wealthy nation to near poverty
status.
He stands next to Saddam and defends Iraq not because he believes so much in
Iraq's cause but because they are brothers in the truer sense that FOX, CNN
or ABC can comprehend. Saddam and Mandela are of the same heart and they
know it. All of the evil of this world know each other.
North Korea, China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, most of Europe, Asia, Syria,
and the majority of the UN Security Council, are all on Saddam's side, no
matter their rhetoric. This treatise is not entirely about Mandela. It is
about redefining the real nature of our current global conflict, with Iraq
in the middle at this time. All the political deviants know each other. It
is the people of good-will who are strangers. This is also about every other
conflict we have ever had, since a man with one world view bludgeoned his
brother, who had a different world view, to death. The friction is eternal.
The stakes are higher than ever. No more wooden clubs. Now comes the threat
of atomic weapons. Prophets predicted their use.
This is the time to know for sure, what side you are on.
Going over the cliff with eyes wide open
Xolela Mangcu
IT's a mess. A big mess. Look around you .
We have the highest levels of inequality in the world; we have the
highest incidence of HIV/AIDS in the world; we have half of our
population living in poverty and unemployment; our youths roam the
streets with no hope in hell; our public hospitals have been turned
into morgues; our public schools are falling apart; we go to sleep
with our eyes half open; the Senegalese president calls President
Thabo Mbeki's project  the New Partnership for Africa's Development Â
nothing but Âintellectual swindleÂ; and our national commissioner of
police is suspected of being a mafia don. We cannot say we are
governed by the best and the brightest.
And then there is the nauseating arrogance of the very people
responsible for the mess. Essop Pahad tells journalists they are out
of order, and that they can go and write that the minister in the
Presidency said so. The bantustan leader Lennox Sebe used to speak
like that. But whether Pahad likes it or not, the question of the
president's knowledge of the existence of the warrant of arrest for
Jackie Selebi will lead to questions of whether the president himself
is guilty of defeating the ends of justice. This is what Richard Nixon
faced during Watergate, and it took his successor Gerald Ford to
pardon him. Mbeki is probably acutely aware that one possible future
president, Jacob Zuma, would not be that forgiving. The arrogance
extends beyond Pahad. Selebi boldly pronounces: ÂI will never be
arrested'; and Mbeki suspends the nation's attorney-general, Vusi
Pikoli, and catches the next plane out of town.
Are we in cowboy territory, or what? In fact, I am surprised that no
one has been killed yet. Zuma's supporters have been sounding off that
they might just do that to those who do not support Msholozi. The
unfortunate Terror Lekota got a taste of that when he was booed by
Zuma's supporters. But surely he was not expecting red carpet
treatment after calling them izibhanxa (fools) recently. Even if they
don't kill anyone, they will kick butt once they get into power, going
after all those who persecuted their man.
AND that may well be Mbeki's biggest fear. It looks like Zuma's intent
is simply to take care of business  which is to kick out Mbeki in
December  and deal with his own legal problems later. Mbeki is also
probably aware that he is running out of time, which may explain his
impatience with Pikoli. We often forget that Mbeki has only 18 months
before he steps down as president after the April 2009 elections. In
fact, his demise may even be sooner.
Six months before those elections, the African National Congress (ANC)
has to compile a list of its MPs, and, by law, Mbeki would not be on
top of it. Even though I have my doubts about it, some people say that
after December, the ANC could call a special congress in which it
recalls Mbeki from the presidency of the country. After all, he is
deployed to the presidency of the country by dint of his position as
president of the ANC. Remove him from the latter and he has no right
to the former. By this logic a great deal more than the party's
presidency hangs on December.
Business Day could not have explained Mbeki's behaviour better in
yesterday's editorial: ÂWhat is happening in our body politic is
unprecedented. All but the most die-hard Mbeki supporters now believe
that the race to win election as party leader in Polokwane in December
is Jacob Zuma's to lose. The more widespread that impression grows,
the more erratic Mbeki seems to become. There is, indeed, no one
quite as dangerous as a man in a corner. I often wonder what someone
like Nelson Mandela must feel, seeing the dream for which he and his
departed comrades sacrificed so much, falling into tatters. How could
Mandela possibly feel, having committed himself to obtaining freedom
in his lifetime only to see it being whittled away by his successor in
that same lifetime? It is truly sad that no one in the ANC has the
guts to stand up against the depredations of Mbeki and the problems of
a Zuma presidency.
It is like a group of people going over a cliff with their eyes wide
open. It is just absolutely amazing. Surreal is more like it.
Vir almal wat geinteresseerd is: nie alleen gaan ons
weg vir die Kanadese Thanksgiving na ons dogter
in Brantford nie, maar een van ons seuns is op die
oomblik hier by ons, en ek kan eenvoudig net nie
die tyd afneem om die Afrikaanse nuusgroep te
lees en vrae te antwoord nie.
Die seun waarvan ek praat, is die ou wat
in die VSA gewerk het, maar besluit het dat hy
nie meer daar wil bly nie, en nou in Engeland
gaan werk. Hy is hier om n werkvisa op te tel.
Ek weet Dave gaan uitwys dat ek net
probeer om moeilike vrae te ontduik. Hopelik
weet hy dis nie waar nie. Ons gaan altyd teen
hierdie tyd weg vir Thanksgiving.
Gloudina
Hoe kom 'n mens reg ná so 'n aanval?'
Oct 02 2007 09:59:28:763PM - (SA)
Hilda Fourie
Rowers het me. Amanda Swart (50) in die vroeë oggendure by haar huis
op 'n kleinhoewe, wes van Pretoria, met 'n klip oor die kop geslaan,
en gedreig om haar te verkrag.
Terwyl die bloed in die middernagtelike ure Sondag oor haar gesig
geloop het, het een van die rowers met sy vinger oor haar wang gevryf.
Hy het gesê sy moet vir hom geld en vuurwapens gee of sy word verkrag.
ÂEk het daar in my nagklere gesit. Ek het kaal en weerloos gevoel, sê
Swart terwyl sy die trane van haar wange afvee.
Nadat die rowers haar huis leeggedra het, het een van hulle haar met
'n mes op die voorkop gesteek. Sy moes vyf steke kry.
ÂWat het ek verkeerd gedoen? Ek het niemand seergemaak nie. Ek het net
geslaap, sê sy.
Swart, 'n manshaarkapper, het Saterdagaand omstreeks 20:00 met 'n
migraine in die bed geklim.
Volgens haar het die rowers by 'n sitkamervenster ingekom. Sy het niks
gehoor nie. ÂOmstreeks 00:30 was daar drie mans in my kamer. Een het
my met 'n klip (so groot soos 'n halwe baksteen) oor die kop geslaan.
Ek het begin bloei.
ÂEen van die ander het toe vir my 'n handdoek gebring om die bloed te
stop. Hy het oor my wang gevryf en gesê as ek nie vir hom geld en
gewere gee nie, gaan hy my verkrag.
ÂSy gesig was hier by myne. Ek het in sy oë gekyk toe hy dit vir my
sê. Hulle het my beursie gekry en my huur- en kosgeld gevat.
ÂEk het nie eens meer geld om vir my kinders kos te koop nie. Hulle
het die bietjie wat ek gehad het, gevat.Â
Die rowers het haar hande vasgebind en weggeloop. Een het teruggekom
en haar met 'n mes gesny.
Hulle het toe deur die venster gevlug. Swart het haar dogter, wat
sowat 25 m van haar af bly, geroep wat die polisie ontbied het.
ÂHoe kom 'n mens reg ná so iets?
ÂMy seun, Marius (32), se been is in Augustus geamputeer. Ná alles
waardeur ek is, hoekom het hulle nie net die huis besteel nie. Hoekom
is ek seergemaak?Â
Insp. Paul Ramaloko, polisiewoordvoerder, het die voorval bevestig.
THE notion of being "part of a collective" seems to answer many questions
when one attempts to make sense of President Thabo Mbeki's reality
employment game called Political Survivor: South Africa.
With the exception of his former vice- president Jacob Zuma who faced
serious criminal charges at the time of his sacking, the rest of Mbeki's
impressive - and growing - list of axed (political) victims were well
respected work horses.
But this did not prevent any of them from taking the walk of shame the
moment Mbeki and his survivor game's Tribal Council decided to snuff out
their flame. His latest victim, National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) head
Advocate Vusi Pikoli, followed closely in the footsteps of the Deputy
Minister of Health Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge (August), the National
Intelligence Agency director-general Billy Masetlha (October 2005) and
Mangosuthu Buthelezi (April 2004).
The official reasons advanced by Mbeki for some of the dismissals appear
dodgy. In Pikoli's case Mbeki said in New York on Thursday that he believed
his decision to suspend the NPA boss was the best way to deal with the
conflict that had arisen between Pikoli and the Minister of Justice,
Brigitte Mabandla.
And all of this took place before the world learnt that the Scorpions have
been planning to arrest national police chief and Interpol head Jackie
Selebi with Pikoli's blessing. This was what on the cards before Mbeki
stepped in to protect his "untouchable" friend.
Another victim in Political Survivor: South Africa Madlala-Routledge, fell
foul of the president because of what he referred to as her inability to
work as "part of a collective". Ironically, the accolades have yet to stop
for her achievements in the Health Department.
Among the other survivors thus far is Health Minister Manto
Tshabalala-Msimang. One would certainly think there would be more than
enough credible reasons for Mbeki to vote a drinking and apparently thieving
contestant off his survivor island, yet she retains her indemnity necklace
as one of Mbeki's "untouchables".
So too does her predecessor, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, who spent R14 million
on the Sarafina 2 disaster while still health minister.
Our own barefoot Premier Nosimo Balindlela has also "miraculously" survived
incredibly shaky tenures - first as MEC for Education and later as MEC for
Sport, Arts and Culture, only to go on to win the surprise reward from
Mbeki - premiership. Despite being voted the worst performing Premier in
South Africa in a 2004 SABC/Markinor opinion poll, Balindlela retains an
indemnity necklace.
Why the double standards?
The answer seems to lie in the ANC's "principles and procedures for the
nomination and election of members of the (ANC's) National Executive
Committee" for the event responsible for so much of South Africa's current
political turmoil - the ANC's party leadership elections in Polokwane in
December.
The principles stipulate that "cadres should respect and uphold the
'collective' decisions of the ANC membership as reflected in the resolutions
and outcomes of National Conference ... The ANC has long been characterised
by its ability to combine diversity and unity".
If being "a team player" carries more weight than "individual flare" on
Mbeki's performance appraisal clipboard, then performance will never be a
significant measuring tool. Instead, the ability to dance in unison around
the same fire will be much more important.
United Democratic Movement leader Bantu Holomisa adds to this line of
argument by linking Pikoli's recent suspension to the ANC's succession
battle.
Holomisa believes "the problem with the ANC's deployment policy of
appointing cadres to key state positions is that when (the ANC's) infighting
becomes endemic, as it is now, then there is pressure from certain factions
to act against certain people who occupy important positions in the state".
"Increasingly we see that problems in government are a reflection of the
ruling party's problems," he added.
With "Polokwane December" approaching swiftly, Eastern Cape ANC stalwarts
are increasingly reluctant to share their views on Mbeki.
One thing that is certain (and made very clear) is that Mbeki's employment
practices have irritated some of his long-time supporters. ANC Nelson
Mandela Bay regional chairperson Mike Xego has already indicated that his
region are unlikely to support Mbeki's bid to win a third term as the ANC's
national leader.
While it is unclear who the Nelson Mandela region will support - there are
rumblings that it could be Tokyo Sexwale - at least one other Eastern Cape
region, OR Tambo, has indicated that it will abandon its support for Mbeki
and, for now, favours Zuma.
A branch representative said they don't believe that Mbeki's goals are
aligned to those of the people anymore. Asked about Mbeki's rationale for
hiring and firing, the OR Tambo representative said: "We just don't
understand it anymore."
Both this and Holomisa's arguments brings us full circle to the notion of
being "part of a collective".
When French social theorist Ãmile Durkheim coined the collective doctrine to
describe how an entire community comes together to share similar values, his
intention was to explain how a group of people can be motivated by at least
one common issue or objective.
It now seems Mbeki's collective
objective in his game of Political Survivor: South Africa is more focused
on the hidden agenda of his own
untouchable tribal council than on the common objectives of the people at
grassroots.
Reageer eers op die skrywe.
Ek wil 'n voorstel maak maar wil eers seker maak
of ek al jou aandag het - of jy met ore gespits luister
reg om te antwoord.
> Nou wat het met julle nuusgroep gebeur? Hier het julle verkeer sonder
> ophou.
> Op ons nuusgroep het ek 'n tyd gelede gepraat oor hoe die moslems
> die wereld deur infiltreer waar hulle nie welkom is nie. Toe tref dit
> julle nuusgroep! Dit is hulle natuur. Miskien moet julle maar oor
> skuif na ons toe. Moet hulle net nie saambring nie:-)
> Ek sien Ta'Hessie sê die demokrasie lyk nog veilig in SA.
>
> Ek wonder nou, hoe definieer sy demokrasie. Is dit regering deur die
> meerderheid, of wat?
Die Westminster model van demokrasie soos
gepraktiseer deur die Britte ook in hulle koloniale
areas was die eerste deur die wenpaal-model.
Dis wat ons nog op die oomblik in Kanada het.
Maar in die volgende provinsiale verkiesing, soos
ek vertel het, gaan ons n referendum hou om te
besluit of ons provinsiaal ons stemstelsel sal
verander deels na die model wat julle het.
Waar mens die party se stemme tel en die
partye die aantal verteenwoordigers kry wat
hulle stemme weerspieel.
Torreke, kyk weer na die vraag wat jy
hierbo stel. Wat bedoel jy met die of wat
aan die einde. Jy klink so, soos die Engelse
se, belligerent. Laasgenoemde woord
beteken dat jy oorlog wil maak. Hoekom
wil jy oorlog maak.
Nee, ek wil nie oorlog maak nie. Met "of wat" wou ek gewoon vra of jy dink
daar is meer aan demokrasie as bloot die wil van die meerderheid?
1) Die Westminster stelsel was beslis nie die eerste wenpaal-model nie. Die
Antieke Grieke het demokrasie (afgelei van die Griekse woorde "demos" (volk)
en "kratos" (regering)) uitgedink.
2) Die Griekse model was stadstate! - waarin elke stad de facto onafhanklik
was! Jy onthou seker die klassieke stryd tussen Sparta en Athena?
3) Die Grieke het demokrasie as die swakste vorm van regering beskou! - met
goeie rede! - en het outokrasie verkies!
4) Die Grieke het gestem deur te skreeu! Die groep wat na die oordeel van
die voorsitter die hardste geskreeu het se voorstel is aanvaar.
5) Die Romeine het demokrasie verder gevoer. Hulle het, nadat hulle van
hulle koningshuis ontslae geraak het, twee konsuls aan die hoof van die
regering gehad wat jaarliks verkies is. 'n Senaat het wette gemaak en die
konsuls het veranderwoording gedoen aan die senaat.
6) Selfs toe die Romeinse Republiek (afgelei van die latynse woorde "res"
('n saak) en "publica" (openbaar), letterlik dus: die publiek se saak)
vervang is met die Keiserryk het die Romeinse Senaat voortbestaan.
7) Die Franse het lank voor die Britte 'n demokratiese konstitusie
aanvaar! - met die Franse Rewolusie! - en 'n Republiek opgerig.
8) Selfs die Afrikaners was die Britte daarmee ver voor. Nadat die Kaap van
1802 tot 1806 onder die Nederlandse Bataafse Republiek sorteer het - 'n
skepping van die Franse rewolusie! -het die Afrikaners die demokrasie en
republikeinse staatsvorm hulle eie gemaak. Toe die Britte in 1806 die Kaap
teen die sin van sy inwoners inval en oorrompel, het die burgers van
Swellendam 'n vrye Republiek uitgeroep. Dit het natuurlik nie lank oorleef
nie! - want die Britte het dit eenvoudig nie toegelaat nie.
9) Op daardie stadium was Brittanje nog self gewoon 'n monargie - en het die
stryd om demokratisering van Brittanje skaars begin.
10) Die Westminster stelsel is 'n kompromie!!! - tussen outokrasie en
demokrasie! - soos die Romeine se Keiserryk 'n kompromie was. Die laerhuis,
"house of commons", het volksverteenwoordiging gebring - en natuurlik is die
eintlike mag nou daar geleë! - maar die hoërhuis, "house of Lords" (senaat)
bestaan steeds uit die sg adel wat hulle posisies erflik bekom of deur die
Koningin tot ridder geslaan word. Tot vandag toe het die Brise volk nie 'n
sê oor wie hulle staatshoof is nie - selfs of hulle 'n koning wil hê nie!
11) Die Westminster stelsel volg gewoon 'n "wenner-kry-alles" benadering.
As die regerende party 51% steun het, kry dit 100% mag! - en die ander 49%
moet gewoon buig! Ek dink nie dis vergesog om te beweer dat 51% van die
bevolking waarskynlik net 51% van die tyd reg sal wees, en die ander 49%
behoort 49% van die tyd reg te wees. Tog moet die minderheid - reg of
verkeerd! - gewoon voor die meerderheid buig! Dis tirannie!!! - netso seker
as wat een tiran outokraties vir almal besluit!
12) In die huidige SA kan jy nie eers seker daarvan wees dat die wil van die
meerderheid deurgevoer word nie. Die ANC het gewoon nog nie 'n enkele keer
sy lede toegelaat om volgens hulle eie gewete/opinie te stem nie.
Verteenwoordig die aborsie-wetgewing, of die afskaffing van die doodstraf,
of nou ook die verbod op lyfstraf vir jou kind die wil van die meerderheid?
Ek glo nie!!! Die ANC sal nie 'n referendum toelaat oor die doodstraf nie,
want hy weet hy sal dit verloor. Ek twyfel of ons enige referendum oor
enige kontroversiële saak onder die ANC sal kry. So 'n klein minderheid is
eintlik besig om sy wil op die meerderheid af te dwing terwyl die minderheid
skuil agter die skyn van meerderheid. Netso skuif die ANC regering
provinsiale grense soos dit hom pas - of die inwoners van Khotsong nou by NW
wil wees of nie! Die oorloop-wetgewing in SA maak van demokrasie en die
wil van die bevolking 'n bespotting - die ANC het dit geskryf met die
bulhond-taktiek in gedagte, d.w.s. maak dit eintlik ontmoonlik vir jou eie
mense om te loop en baie moontlik vir die ander om na jou toe oor te loop -
dus vat net altyd meer! - totdat jy de facto 'n eenpartystaat het! Daar is
maniere om die proporsionele stelsel en die setel-stelsel volledig met
mekaar te versoen en die beste van albei wêrelde te hê; ek weet nie wat
staan in Van Zijl-Slabbert se verslag daaroor nie, maar ek sou dink dat
briljante brein wat hy is, sou sy voorstel presies net dit wees - 'n
voorstel wat die beste van albei stelsels daarbring. Waar is die verslag?
Dit lê en stof vergader, want so 'n verandering pas die ANC nie!
13) Vergelyk daarteenoor die Switserse kanton stelsel - die enigste
demokrasie wat, sover ek weet, werklik vir minderhede voorsiening maak. Die
groep kantons is nie vas nie. Indien 'n bepaalde groep mense in 'n bepaalde
streek 'n eie kanton wil skep, word 'n referendum daaroor gehou - en die wil
van die meerderheid seëvier. In Switserland word die wil van die bevolking
gereeld d.m.v. referendums getoets.
Vir my is die toets van demokrasie tot watter mate die wil van die ganse
bevolking tot uitdrukking kom - nie net die wil van 'n 51% meerderheid of
van 'n minderheid wat skuil agter die meerderheid nie.
'Pikoli was op Selebi-spoor'
Sep 27 2007 09:54:27:497PM - (SA)
Msimelelo Njwabane, Pieter du Toit
'n Deursoekbevel vir die huis en kantoor van komm. Jackie Selebi,
nasionale polisiehoof, is glo verlede week uitgereik en dít het tot
die skorsing van adv. Vusi Pikoli, hoof van die nasionale
vervolgingsgesag (NV), gelei.
Beeld het by 'n uiters betroubare bron na aan die NV-ondersoek verneem
die lasbrief is verlede Donderdag al uitgereik.
Dit behels glo die deursoek van Selebi se kantore, sowel as 'n
lasbrief vir sy inhegtenisneming.
Selebi het glo hieroor by pres. Thabo Mbeki gekla en dit het volgens
inligting tot Pikoli se skorsing gelei.
Pikoli is vandeesweek deur Mbeki geskors nadat daar glo 'n
Âvertrouensbreuk tussen hom (Pikoli) en me. Brigitte Mabandla,
minister van justisie, ontstaan het. Nie die presidensie of die
departement het al verdere duidelikheid hieroor verskaf nie en 'n
ondersoek duur voort.
Die NV wou nie gisteraand die bewerings bevestig óf ontken nie en het
met Âgeen kommentaar volstaan.
ÂDit is nie ons storie nie. Dit is nie ons inligting nie. Die posisie
van die NV is een van geen kommentaar. Vir die res van die dag is dit
hoe dit gaan bly, het mnr. Tlali Tlali, woordvoerder van die NV,
gisteraand gesê.
Nie mnr. Themba Maseko, kabinetswoordvoerder, óf mnr. Mukoni
Ratshitanga, Mbeki se woordvoerder, was vir kommentaar bereikbaar nie.
Hul selfone was af.
Dir. Sally de Beer, Selebi se woordvoerder, het gesê Selebi is nié
gearresteer nie.
ÂEk is nie bewus van 'n lasbrief nie en verwag nie dat hy gearresteer
gaan word nie.
ÂSake gaan voort soos gewoonlik. Hy (Selebi) het vandag (gister) soos
gewoonlik met sy werk voortgegaan. Ek het hom vandag gesien en hy lyk
nie te ontsteld nie. Hy is 'n sterk persoon. Ons (die polisie se
topbestuur) is al saam deur baie dinge, het De Beer gesê.
Dr. Johan Burger, 'n senior navorser by die Instituut vir
Sekerheidstudies (ISS) in Pretoria, het gesê die president se kantoor
moet so gou moontlik duidelikheid oor die kwessie gee.
Volgens Burger moet die presidensie uitsluitsel gee oor of daar 'n
verband tussen Pikoli se skorsing en die beweerde lasbrief is.
ÂHulle moet sê of daar waarheid in die gerugte is. Indien dit waar is,
moet hulle sê wat verhoed die NV om die lasbrief uit te voer.Â
Hy het ook gesê dié bewerings kan die moreel van die polisie baie
skade doen.
ÂDit is sleg vir polisielede op alle vlakke as hulle hoor 'n lasbrief
is vir hul grootbaas uitgereik. Dieselfde geld vir die moreel van die
NV. Is daar dan net sekeres wat vervolg mag word?Â
Hy het gesê gebrekkige inligting oor Pikoli se situasie lei nou tot
die deurfiltering van sulke brokkies inligting.
ÂDie publiek verdien dit om behoorlik ingelig te word.Â
Supertaal
Blog
Soek
Hulp
Lede
Registreer
Teken aan
Tuis
RSS
