Monday, October 28, 2013

‘We don’t listen to homophobes’: AgangSA’s Gay pride shout out in response to public criticism ...

‘We don’t listen to homophobes’: AgangSA’s Gay pride shout out in response to public criticism of their statements!




On Saturday, I raised some concerns I happen to have about legal inaccuracies that AgangSA were portraying on their twitter and in public.

A question of legal accuracy.



AgangSA claimed that ‘gay rights are human rights’.

As I pointed out to the organisation, human rights apply to all human beings whether they are straight or gay.

These are a specific set of legal rights which are universally accepted as existing. Those with an interest in the field, understand these rights to be centred on the right to religion, the oldest human right, as well as on life, liberty, dignity and so forth. In the international law field, it has consistently been rejected, that so-called gay rights are part of human rights. Civil rights certainly are not human rights, nor are many other rights which people accrue via the political system.

A somewhat left-wing constitutional court system in South Africa, with judges appointed because the Supreme Court of Appeal was seen as too Conservative, certainly has allowed the left-wing of the African National Congress to push homosexual civil unions through, just as they pushed the unpopular abortion on demand model, amongst other unpopular and controversial Western-based ideas, which some of late: allege are imperialism. The reason institutes such as the South African Constitutional Court appear to play such a vital role in this scheme for the westernisation of South African morality, is because the populous by in large agree with our neighbours Up North.

This conservative African way of thought: is especially the case among the black poor and middle-class, the people that many opposition parties claim to be going after. Oddly, much campaigning seems to focus on interests exactly mirroring Today's American foreign policy, rather than the mores of the voters which parties claim to be attempting to woo.

Agang, a political party operating in South Africa, was misunderstanding the point our editor was making: In fact attacks violating human rights, are just that, attacks violating human rights: gay rights are a separate concept altogether:


AgangSA has decided to alienate the South African electorate.

Most other African nations do not endorse the Western idea of ‘gay rights’, or gay pride. Most of our neighbours in fact outlaw such practices, or deeply frown upon them. South Africa is no exception, so far as the population is concerned. The most recent survey on the matter by the government found that about 80% of South Africans consider homosexual acts to always be wrong. A more recent questionnaire into the matter, asking the separate question of whether homosexuals should be accepted by society, still found massive opposition.



A better way forward?

It would seem that a Western obsession with homosexuality among other controversial activities, has if anything increased violence against homosexuals and encouraged legislatures to further outlaw such activities.

AgangSA, responded to my concern about their claiming that gay rights were human rights , by pointing to the rate of anti-homosexual assaults and murders. I spoke some time ago about the concept of hate crime, in relation to the white population of South Africa. It is where crimes cannot be explained by crimes of convenience, and by interpersonal crimes, or crimes committed by the mentally unstable. By this definition there are certainly many hate crimes committed against homosexuals that are also residents or South Africans. Such a crime is a deplorable act of vigilantes' intentional injustice, and cannot be condoned.




I do not approve of homosexual sex acts, and I do consider the much, much media promoted homosexual lifestyle to be both dangerous and profligate given the high coincidence of disease, utilisation of narcotics, high suicide rate even in accepting cultures, and so forth. I do not believe in typing a person by their sexual preferences. I might disapprove of behaviour, but I’m very unlikely to type a person solely based on their sexual preferences.

Where I do have homosexual friends, I tend to trait them, that is to type them: by their loyalty, disloyalty, likes, dislikes: the normal things by which people type their friends. Gay pride however tend to have the effect of typing homosexuals simply by their sexual lifestyle. As a Roman Catholic I do not approve of condoms, I do not approve of extramarital sex whatsoever. I don’t approve of it when a friend engages in such activities, but that tends not to be the ultimate type I assign such a friend. Likewise, with my homosexual friends: I do not approve of their sexual preferences, or of extramarital sex that they might engage in: but I do not type them by these activities of theirs.



If such political parties were to focus not so much upon typing a person by their sexual preferences, and instead upon reducing hate crimes against all categories of persons: that might in fact reduce hate crimes against the homosexual population of South Africa. I think this would be a much better use of the time of such political parties, if indeed they were aiming at the best interests of homosexuals and South Africa. It seems odd that instead of going with the demographic polls related to South African voters: such political parties are aiming at a nonexistence demographic. Such much deferred to, powerful vacuum of a nonexistence demographic: perfectly correlates with American foreign policy at the moment.

Especially concerning, statements by both the Democratic Alliance of Helen Zille, and of AgangSA which is founded by Mamphela Ramphele: that any people who might be homophobic, do not deserve to be listened to whatsoever. Again, this is an attempt to type people based on one or other aspect of that person: it is a sort of activity which I think breeds intolerance rather than tolerance against the people AgangSA so publicly claim they support. Encouraging the typing of people based on one or other aspect of that person, encourages division, polarisation, hate crimes, and gives the majority of South Africa something massive to lose, if they determine that they will tolerate a different type of culture and lifestyle. If anything such activities by AgangSA and the Democratic Alliance, are counter-productive if the aim is to truly protect the human rights of the homosexuals in South Africa.



AgangSA continues to Subscribe to our editor, Marc Evan Aupiais on the social networking site Twitter, where our objections relating to legal accuracy were raised. It is uncertain what other responses to their gay pride tweets were received by the organisation. It would nonetheless be preferable if politicians such as Mamphela Ramphele, were to listen to the electorate of the country, and address their concerns, perhaps through debate: rather then refuse to speak at all with those who disagree with their viewpoint. Especially in a country, where the views of Mamphela Ramphele are not those of the majority of the population.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

South Africa's head of Competition Commission: resigns over spending + R 100,000 of government money on pornography

According to the newspaper, Business Report (a subsidiary of Independent Newspapers South Africa), Competition Commissioner: Shan Ramburuth is in big trouble. Shan Ramburuth, according to the publication: used work resources to aid and abet his pornography habit. While abroad he used his work 3G card, approximately 2 years ago: in what one gleans must have been an extensive visit to a pornographic website, it has, basing one's self upon the report: come to be known. In his job as Competition Commissioner, he is supposed to ensure fair competition in the South African market and protect consumer rights.

It does not appear to be part of his job description: to wantonly view naughty material online. Economic Development Minister, Mister Ebrahim Patel, received and accepted Mister Shan Ramburuth's resignation. Business Report based their report on a fellow subsidiary of Independent Newspapers South Africa: the Sunday Independent newspaper. Independent Newspapers South Africa, were recently sold to an African National Congress linked consortium.

The source of the information, that Shan Ramburuth has resigned and that the resignation has been accepted, is, in essence, a ruling party appointee: Manelisi Wolela, who is spokesperson for the Department of Economic Development. A LinkedIn account, under the same name, of Manelisi Wolela, belongs to an individual who attended the University of Zimbabwe. Wolela is spokesperson for the department. Shan Ramburuth, however is reported in another newspaper late last night as saying he had not yet finalised a resignation. The minor point is exhausted below for the interests of accurate reporting. Business Report does not mention such denial, in their story published Today.

The usage of pornography, in the work environments, but not for work purposes, has recently also come under investigation in the United Kingdom: where it has been reported that parliamentarians have made extensive use of the Parliament's Internet facilities in the United Kingdom, in an unfettered addiction to pornographic content online. Studies have linked pornographic usage, to changes in the brain, which are of a similar nature to drug addiction.

Business Report, does not cite a reply to the allegations, from alleged pornographic connoisseur, Mister Shan Ramburuth, who has allegedly resigned, due to such misconduct and the misuse of government funding for the commission.

Mister Shan Ramburuth's reported habit is part of what the report calls a 120,000 Rand charge for international roaming. It is uncertain how much pornography Mister Shan Ramburuth allegedly viewed to accumulate such expense for the Department. The percentage of the about 120,000 Rand bill that was utilised in pursuing the seedy alleys of the online world, is not mentioned, however it seems unlikely that such a charge would be accumulated by ordinary usages, or that the pornography would be so noticeable if a good portion of the expense were not the pornography perusal by the Commissioner.

The New Age, a newspaper linked also to the Ruling Party, has a different story however, saying that Shan Ramburuth denies such resignation, based on Western linked Opposition Party friendly, The Sunday Times:

'"As far as I'm concerned, I'm still talking to him [Economic Development Minister Ebrahim Patel] about it...I have in my discussions with him, discussed various options," Ramburuth told the newspaper.

'"I would like to conclude that [discussion] with him before making any statement."

'Patel's spokesman Manelisi Wolela, however, said following complaints "relating to acts of misconduct", an investigation by Patel had ensued. "Earlier this week, Ramburuth resigned as commissioner and as an employee of the Competition Commission," he said.

'Wolela said the resignation would take effect on October 21.

'The Sunday Times referred to a forensic report by Paul O'Sullivan and Associates which detailed how Ramburuth apparently visited 25 pornographic sites between August and November 2011. His data bill in October that year - while using a government issued sim card overseas -came to a total of R123,000.

'The report suggested he had visited "inappropriate sites which were of an explicit pornographic nature"'

(SAPA 'Competition commission head Ramburuth denies resignation' The New Age at 19 October 2013 21:51)

A copy of the update on Business Report's Facebook, which is Published, Today, Sunday, is available below:

'Business Report

'Competition Commissioner Shan Ramburuth has been forced to resign after he visited a pornographic website using his work 3G card two years ago, contributing towards a R120 000 bill for international roaming, the Sunday Independent reported.

'Department spokesperson Manelisi Wolela confirmed last night that Economic Development Minister Ebrahim Patel had accepted Ramburuth's resignation, the newspaper added.'




(Business Report 'Update', Sunday, 20th October 2013, at 10: 15 AM.)

ASIA/SYRIA - Maronite Bishop: With regard to the conflict in the Middle East, Western Christians are poorly informed

(Article from Agenzia Fides: the Vatican official Missionary News Service)

ASIA/SYRIA - Maronite Bishop: With regard to the conflict in the Middle East, Western Christians are poorly informed

Latakia (Agenzia Fides) - With regard to the events in the Middle East and in particular the tragedy of Syria "The West is poorly informed including its churches, despite good intentions".

This is what Bishop Elias Sleiman, head of the Maronite Eparchy of Latakia, in an interview just re-launched by the U.S. section of Aid to the Church in Need, said with regards to the processes taking place in the Middle East that in his opinion are likely to weigh negatively on the moves of the international community concerning the Syrian conflict. "The problem of so many media" specified the Syrian Bishop "is that they really do not grasp the real picture of the situation. The Arab Spring has been depicted as this clear push for liberty and democracy, but the actual results in Libya, Egypt and Yemen, for example, proving otherwise".

The region of Latakia in northern Syria, has so far been largely spared from the conflict. In the territory Christians continue to live peacefully with the Alawites. According to Bishop Sleiman, the only way out of the conflict is to increase international pressure in order to establish "a dialogue between the regime and moderate elements of the opposition". The world’s big players must get involved in earnest and put pressure on the various parts "to come to the negotiating table", considering that "the big challenge is religious fanaticism" and that now "the moderate rebels and Islamists have begun fighting each other".

(GV) (Agenzia Fides 19/10/2013)

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Windows 8.1 and the Surveillance State: Don't give away your privacy rights: OPT OUT!

I just downloaded Microsoft's 'Free update' from Windows 8.0 to Windows 8.1. Except, it wasn't really too Free.

Automatically save my 'camera roll' to Sky Drive where espionage agencies can access it? Give Microsoft my internet browsing history... send information to Microsoft? Send my files for Microsoft to look at? Just some of the settings and agreements you have to opt out of. Yes, much of it is hidden, go through opt out options one by one. Also, default Sky Drive saving? Concerning. Give Microsoft my location? Is Microsoft my new girlfriend? Would I trust a girlfriend with such information? Can I trust a corporate giant to be trustworthy?

Having installed Windows 8.1, and opted out of these ridiculous conditions, I have the distinctive feeling I am being spied upon, eavesdropped on 24/7 by the Spy 'in the Machine'. I feel like my camera is turned against me. I feel like my keystrokes are logged. I feel like an exotic spectacle, brought from Africa to the West in a cage to be ogled at. I feel like I am endangered by corporate greed, which allies with a nosey foreign government. This is not paranoia, unfortunately. This is the reality we all might in fact easily face. I feel like if I warn enough people, I might land up like that person in China: Retweeted hundreds of times then arrested, except America does not arrest her suspects: she abducts them, she bombs them and considers family 'collateral damage', and she trusts electronic evidence when time and again it is utterly wrong. It is not a good idea to trust Silicon Valley, and their illicit paramour: U.S.A. Drones Are They!

I feel this way because Microsoft works with the American government as their major contractor, and Microsoft has been accused of selling user privacy to the same government which uses emails between people to order illegal kidnappings, drone strikes in other countries without the permission of the governments of those countries.

If Microsoft wants to recover from PRISM, why are they suddenly so snoopy?

And why are the journalists who were so critical of Windows 8, without just reason, and through basically lying about it, suddenly too poor in quality to realise that for Windows 8.1 you sell your privacy away unless you opt out. Are these journalists ravens? Are they some kind of bird which seeks the shiny things in life, regardless of the real value? Probably! They sold their security down the road for Android and IPhone, when Blackberry still protects her user-base. They sold yours too, ignoring the inherent weaknesses in those platforms, and the abuse of private data.

Remember, in the Age of Mass Unfettered Espionage, your Computer is like a child or animal, have it avert its eyes, or leave the room when it isn't meant to see something. Don't change in front of its camera: cameras can be hacked, but most importantly of all, don't 'legitimise' the invasion of you privacy by not opting out or worse: legitimise it by actively opting in. Opt out. These invasions are unnecessary. The same invasions power the cute tricks Microsoft added to impress the idiot 'journalists' who run device blogs. Pitty they never looked under the terms, conditions bonnet.

Run Rabbit Run!

Sunday, October 13, 2013

The Germans got it wrong... #SexTrade

It is the old tale of two cities... European countries.

One saw that prostitution was the sale not of sexual intimacy, but of what survivors called sexual abuse. The other thought it should be a regulated, ordinarily taxed profession. That the victims of this profession were often illegally in the country, often human trafficked slaves, was ignored.

The one country radically reduced prostitution, and almost eliminated human trafficking. The other, increased trafficking, and the abuse that accompanied it.

'The grim reality of prostitution and its inextricable links with trafficking were highlighted in a seminar organised by the European Women's Lobby (EWL) in the European parliament on 1 October.

'[...]

'[...]

'Examining EU member states, Sweden and Germany have developed opposite legislation on prostitution, with the same aim of tackling trafficking and organised crime. During the EWL seminar, police officers from both countries shared their insights into the effectiveness of the contrasting policy models in place in each country.

'Germany embraced a 'practical' approach in 2000, aimed at controlling the system of prostitution by decriminalising procuring and encouraging the integration of women in prostitution into the regular labour-market.

'The protection of the rights of prostituted persons while clearing the way for a targeted crackdown on organised crime was central to this stance. At the same time, Sweden, inspired by a more human rights-based analysis, viewed prostituted persons as victims entitled to specialised support, by mobilising political will to tackle demand (by banning the purchase of sex) to render supply redundant and eliminate the primary root cause for both prostitution and trafficking.

'According to chief superintendent Helmut Sporer, from Augsburg's criminal investigation department in Germany, the normalisation of prostitution has increased the vulnerability of prostituted persons, while transforming Germany into a popular sex tourism destination.

'The average woman in prostitution is between 18 and 20 years of age, trafficked from Romania, fearful of recourse to the police; pimps lead their 'businesses' like any other entrepreneurs, and the purchase of sex is just like any other trade market.

'Sweden meanwhile, has halved street prostitution in 13 years without increases in more hidden forms of exploitation; the numbers of men who purchase sex has dropped by almost half, and the population's support for the law, initially a meagre 30 per cent, has risen to 70 per cent.' Cécile Gréboval 'Policymakers show 'lack of political will' to tackle root cause of sex trafficking' TheParliament.com Parliament Magazine 9th of October 2013, accessed 13th October 2013 http://www.theparliament.com/latest-news/article/newsarticle/policymakers-show-lack-of-political-will-to-tackle-root-cause-of-sex-trafficking/#.UlrrPFDItwi

The fatal fluttering of a suicide bomber's heart in Iraq...

The fatal fluttering of a suicide bomber's heart in Iraq, can cause disastrous devastation to spread to the entire region.

Does Violence in Iraq still matter?

I don't report on the consistent, always climbing, slithering, growing: Iraqi death count from daily attacks and suicide bombings to the extensive extent I once had.

The pure mass of daily bombings however, determinedly build both resentment, and resilience in the heart of the Middle East.

The blasts strain ethnic tensions in a deadly vibration, and explode against religious harmony like the deadly vice of wrath. Civic stability is disturbed by the satanic touch of death.

Iraqi bombings thus destabilise the region around Iraq and act as a sandbox for aspirant and ominous, and infamous terrorists to practice slaying innocents with near impunity. It is the infamous nursery of terrorism, even more so than Somalia or Libya, or ill-fated Afghanistan.

That is not un-newsworthy.

That, instead, is most disquieting a concept to fathom. A concept we might want to tread upon lightly, or, in an attempt to ignore: 'I don't know', one might proudly say. That does not leave the psyche unscathed: imagine in comparison the psyche of those quite approximate to the ever climbing digit counter of death. I don't think our measurements have yet sunk to the bottom of the deep blue hole of death. I don't know if we can truly comprehend the devastation that consistent violence brings, wrought in fiery explosion, bladed weaponry, and blackest gunfire, cautiously delivered to the heart and lungs, on the angelic, shining wings of a devil disguised.

Opinion by Marc Aupiais (SACNS news editor)

WHO'S AFRAID OF THE BIG BAD SHUTDOWN? #America #Debt

Shut-down in America, is it so bad?


The American federal government has been shut down. As a negotiating tactic, US President Obama had park rangers shut down national monuments and tourist attractions.

Another almost spiteful shut-down was an animal camera in a zoo. Government contractors and the 48% Romney infamously referred to would be expected victims. Polls say only one in five Americans have been affected so far. Catholic media are upset about an alleged ban on mass for the military.

All newsworthy no doubt. However, much ignored is that while the Federal government and its strange pet projects shut down, local and 'state'/provincial governments did not.

There is fear America's ever burgeoning debts will not be paid by taking out more debt from geopolitical foes and bond holders. This debt is there due to America's extensive social spending. It also seems to be a debt America is increasingly unable to settle in full.

So the Shutdown came, and the debt default is feared? Feared by who though? Who expects the American government to continue to be able to pay massive debts day in and day out?

Granted I would not invest in America right now and a jumpy stock market could crash, but America is hardly acting like a trustworthy debtor. Rather they require debt for ordinary daily work, not infrastructure investments.

That is any way a bad investment.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

The hunt for the real #RedOctober movement in South Africa and abroad!

When I think of Red October, I think of the brilliant book and movie: The Hunt for Red October. I think of a Russian submarine, and yes, I think of a really awesome name. Yes, the Red October in which communism has a birth in Russia shares that name. In fact, it is possible the submarine gets named after that red October... just slightly possible... to use the British understatement.

Red October, is a movement that marched in October against crime, and against race based politics and a race based mindset of the government in treatment of the citizenry of South Africa.

From unflattering pictures, to outright defamation against and mockery of this movement: South African media have not been honest or truthful.

These are the allegedly racist demands of the Red October bunch?:

'1 Urgent attention to the lack of security on South African farms and the lack of attention to farm murders in general
'2 Urgent attention to the continuing violence against women
'3 Urgent attention to police action regarding murder and crimes committed against the people of South Africa by foreigners streaming across our borders
'4 Urgent attention to the lack of quality education for all our children, respecting their culture, language, religion and heritage
'5 Urgent attention to the lack of service delivery, the preservation of our natural water resources and the lack of control over the theft of electricity
'6 Urgent attention to the legal processes and lack of justice with regard to the detaining of prisoners without proper due course
'7 Urgent attention to expedient trials and harsher sentences of criminals found guilty of violent crime, i.e. murder and rape
'Nothing racist in that lot – no calls for return to apartheid, no we’re better than you, no bigoted name calling, no incitement to violence, no mention that 'this should be limited to white people in any way, shape or form!' (Claire Smith 'An eye opener' in MyNews 24 11th October 2013

The actual truth about crime stats: And yes, the stats suggest whites are targeted for hate crimes!

When I passed Forensic Medicine earlier this year, I was informed by the Forensic Service, that race based statistics were not too easy to come by. Coloured people were more likely to kill and to be killed, then blacks... the least likely to commit crime were also the least likely to have crimes committed against them: wealthy white South Africans. This is not a numbers game: the proportion of black South Africans who commit crimes and are victims of crimes, both exceed the proportion of the country that is black, likewise with coloured people. Less whites commit crime and less whites are victim to crime.

The explanation of the Forensic Service, is this: poor people across the world are more likely to commit crime, and crimes are more likely committed against people you are acquainted with or know well. Most crimes are inter-personal crimes. Friends of criminals are their most likely prey. This is how crime statistics work.

The problem is where crimes are not crimes of opportunity, and are not inter-personal crimes. The type of crime I speak of is called the hate crime. This is where violence in a crime is not directly related to the profit of the crime. This is where people are murdered due to their skin colour, religion, political beliefs, or other such attributes.

In France there are the extreme right which opposes immigration, and the anti-fa or extreme left who claim to oppose the extreme right, but are just as rightly categorised as extreme, and violent.

In South Africa, when we look at crimes against whites, we need to factor in the wealth, home areas, security, etcetera of white South African citizens. Whites are more wealthy, and thus will be subject to and commit a disproportionately less amount of crime. If however, that lesser amount is more than the factoring of wealth would imply, then such crimes need to be accounted for by hate crimes.

Crimes against whites are often more violent, not committed by people who know them, and often result in rape and murder where these are not necessary for criminal profit.

A 4 year old statistic of media purporting to show the amount of crime against whites is as concerning as government claims that most South Africans die from gun violence. According to the Forensic Service, most murdered people die from KNIFE violence, except in areas such as Gauteng, which still do not make gun violence the national most popular form of murder. The reason these statistics relating crimes against whites are concerning, is both because they are out of date, and because they tend not to be the sort of thing that is in the public domain. Also, there is a big difference between people killed by acquaintances, and those killed for their skin colour.

Okay, so we have the background which media ignored.

Are Red October 'white supremacists'?

If they are, any such rhetoric is missing. Their website quoted Edmund Burke and Martin Luther King. They are concerned about BEE, but as I will demonstrate below they have reason to be.

One media response was this:



So based on research not available, we are to condemn a movement as racist? A movement which did not use the old South African flag (not that that implies racism, a flag is a flag), did not make racist statements, and were largely concerned with crime.

Media called them racist for focussing on crimes against whites, on hate crime: not just interpersonal or opportunity crimes. Firstly, this hate crime spree is real and costs the economy a lot. The same sort of hate crimes also are committed against foreigners in South Africa, although our major political parties also seem not to be too concerned over that. This hate crime costs our industry base and agricultural base also: many farmers have and will leave the country, meaning jobs lost and our trade deficit increased.

Secondly, the Black Lawyers Association, or Black Business Forum, are not subjected to the same scrutiny, when they do in fact focus ostensibly seems to be to purely, more or less, look out for: advancing people based on the colour of their skin.

Thirdly, is it not acceptable for demographic groups to combat hate crimes aimed at that group? Is that not allowed? Are we not allowed to speak if people who happen to share our ethnicity are attacked, and if by that same ethnicity we would be targeted if in same place, time as they were?

The BEE Problem

White South Africans don't carry around pass books. The pass book, though should more rightly be called a passport book. Black and white areas were not randomly selected. The South African government granted independence and 'independent' government to multiple states which it considered to be independent of South Africa: the TBVC states. People who lived in these states would thus by the logic of the government require passports to enter another country. The current belief is that the states in question, and their similar case of North Cyprus, were not really other states. However, the pass idea was not some special torment dreamed up, but rather an attempt to justify something which is now widely condemned: apartheid: the dividing of South Africa into about 6 or 7 countries, each purportedly governing their own land area.

The problem with this, is that the division of the land was race based. It was based on classing people by their race. Not their culture, not their efficacy, not their education level, not their likes, not their dislikes, not their morality: their race.

What was behind this is race-based judgement. What was behind this was a Maxist sort of workings. The Nationalist Party was a left wing Socialist party, just as Hitler's National Socialists (NAZI party) were left wing and Marxist. Just also as Starlin and Lennin were marxists.

BEE follows the same premise: that people are not the individuals who walk the earth, but must be judged based on their skin colour.

BEE as a tax.

I by no means mean to say that black people are less competent than white people at business. I do believe however that competent black people should in any case be able to get a job without government help: unless we are to consider every white person racist: which would frankly be a racist thing to attempt.

A white person who builds up their business, is taxed by the government, in that they have to give 50 % of that business or whatever the industry based demand is, to someone who did not work for, build, care for: that business, often someone who is not educated or skilled in running businesses, and often someone who is linked to the Ruling Party. A company must hire a black person even if they are incompetent to do their job, over a white person who based on their education level, efficacy, skills, person skills, etcetera: would certainly be profitable, and effective in bringing in money for a company? A person who is incompetent to do their job is a liability for a company, they cost that company money they would otherwise have made off a competent candidate. If a person must be paid and cannot do the job they are paid to perform, because the government wants them to have money, then likewise this is a tax. Also, this is marxism.

BEE positive?

So, criticising BEE is probably a rational thing to do, given that rather than create true equality through better education, better policing, better infrastructure, which would allow black candidates alleged not to have an equal footing: the actual equality to get a job... government wants people who do not have the same footing or benefit to a company to be paid for the job which could have brought more profit for a company.

What happens if BEE is taken away? Will these people who are paid for jobs they did not earn on the merits ever be hired again? Can South Africa compete with countries who allow businesses to hire the best people for a job, rather than the one who happens by the 'accident'/'chance' of ethnicity to have darker skin?

Instead of letting Churches and temples and Mosques care for the poor: the people who for thousands of years have, we spend our taxpayer money on social grants. Infrastructure suffers, police are underfunded and often not hired on merit. Our judges are often not the best for the job but the right gender or colour to satisfy pea counters. We thus create that environment where more crime exists, and black people being often poorer, are hit harder by crime, because there is not policing to protect their communities. Without safe communities, schooling is more difficult. The cycle continues.

So what is the solution? The Lynching of scapegoats: foreigners burnt alive? Xenophobia? Blaming whites for things the whites you know probably didn't do?

Or is the solution to take recognizance of the truth: to realise that there is a problem: that racism, the blinding to truth due to skin colour, rules the system? To realise that BEE and socio-economic rights, and telling people the rich are bad: causes job losses through unreasonable strikes? Causes people to believe that they are 'economic freedom fighters'? Causes people to be prepared to die to gain a raise by force rather than by becoming a more profitable asset to a company? If I wanted a raise, should I not have wanted it because I earned it? Not because I won't work unless I am paid a massive raise that drives a company out of business? I would not be an asset to a company then, but a liability, a tax, enforced through a system that is not friendly to business, and thus not friendly to people who want to work.

So, what do Red October have to say?

To quote one of the protesters:


'So, let’s answer the criticisms leveled at Red October.
In 2009 white people represented 1.8% of murder victims, but make up 8% of the population.
By this statement E news is trying to indicate that white people, especially Afrikaners, are not victimized and are, in fact, nice and safe and complaining about nothing. Anyone fearing ‘white genocide’ is clearly a delusional fantasist.
Up until this point, any figures quoted by groups worried about the degree of violence focused on white populations were discredited as the South African Police Service does not routinely collect data on the ethnicity of victims and perpetrators of murder. Obviously that doesn’t make nice convincing TV news, so E has gone through the archives until they found a 4 year old statistic gathering dust in a corner. Want to disprove groups who spend an awful lot of effort trying to document murder rates through the devotion of their time to collating anecdotal reporting? Then where is your carefully researched analysis of murder over the past 19 years? Where is your statistical analysis of last year’s crime statistics that were released last month? Where is your evidence of the reliability of your single snapshot statistic from 2009?
So, let’s leave statistics aside – as Benjamin Disraeli reportedly said: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
What is verifiable is the horrific brutality and savagery of farm murders in South Africa; if you have a strong stomach, Google it. Torture, rape, murder and mutilation are a legitimate and reasonable part of robbery or a wage dispute? I didn’t think so.
This march is ridiculous as it only focusses on crime against white people
I refer you back to the motivation for the protest above. This was against all crime, all murder, all rape, all violent attacks. No one in this country should have to live in fear. Yes, the focus shifted towards white victims of brutal farm attacks, but these were the people who could be bothered to get off their backsides and make a stand.
If all those who criticised the march on that basis stood up and arranged a protest against the complete lack of control that the ANC government has over crime in this country, then we’d attend that one too. But you haven’t, so we can’t.
The additional demand to scrap racial quotas such as Affirmative Action, Black Economic Empowerment, etc, etc, proves that Red October is a front for racists who wish to return to apartheid.
It has escaped reporting, but organisers and speakers took great pains to point out that this is by no means a call to return to apartheid and that the system was fundamentally wrong.
All forms of discrimination are fundamentally wrong. None of them are positive. The ANC, however, insist on applying racial quotas and conditions on all areas of commerce and employment. How will it ever be fair that someone has to hand over large percentages of the business that they have worked hard to establish and make successful, just due to their skin colour?
The motivation for this protest also highlights the issue of education, asking for quality education for ALL children in this country. The ANC has had 19 years to focus on education, ensuring that every person can compete for jobs based on their abilities and qualifications rather than the melanin content of their skin. They have failed spectacularly – the government can’t even get textbooks into schools for the start of the school year! In order to cover for their incompetence and lack of motivation in this area, they impose employment quotas to give a thin veneer of success.
In the face of a difficult and hostile job market, many white families have had to rely on their entrepreneurial abilities to make a living. If you can’t get a job, you have to work for yourself in order to survive. The new focus of the government has now been to attack white ownership of business, to demand that anyone who has worked hard to establish a successful, profitable company now hands over a percentage of what they built up to black ownership.
There is one group determined to keep race a flashpoint in South Africa and that is the ANC. The ANC are just as obsessed with race as apartheid was, possibly more so.
As the title of this piece indicated, this experience has been a real eye opener. Caricatures mindlessly spouted by the media are being used unfairly to silence people’s concerns. I guess there are none so blind as those that refuse to see, and deaf as those that refuse to hear.
From a Brit living in South Africa – Claire Smith'

Claire Smith 'An eye opener' in MyNews 24 11th October 2013

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

The King and Queen of the tiny kingdom of Lesotho met the pope.

The Vatican has given this release about that tiny country within a country. Lesotho is entirely landlocked by South Africa.


Stop Blaming Apartheid: ANC former leader bellows to the government!

A former member of the Ruling Party's National Executive Committee, and former Treasurer General of the African National Congress has demanded the government take responsibility for its own actions. The old communist playbook of blaming your predecessors, could no longer fly.

That said, another statement of Phosa's in an interview later the same day suggests he is taking a swipe at ANC leadership, possibly for political purposes.




Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Is Pope Francis mentally competent to do his job?

I feel uneasy over Pope Francis statements and actions: not just because what the catechism defines as sin he seems to brush aside: but saying lonely old men and unemployed youths are the Greatest evils... Is Pope Francis competent in his position? As a bishop he was not so unpredictable. Can anyone explain his unplanned imprecise words, is there some explanation which justifies his behaviour? Is he saying nuclear war, rape, and countless evils are not as bad as lonely old men? Is he lonely? Is that it?

His statements of an obsession with abortion, gay marriage, etcetera: that is not what I experience in parishes: if anything moral issues are not covered at all. He speaks of nuns needing to not be too spiritual: point me to a spiritual nun, because I don't know any. Nuns are deeply secular in behaviour and outlook. The type of nun who prays all day, as the saints desired nuns to be, is near non-existent, and as a result nunneries are dying. Pope Francis has seen no need to have clarifications made of his statements. He signs off on very bad translations of speeches. He doesn't read what he signs off on according to Vatican officials. And his very public 'humility' seems to be the opposite of humility and aimed at attention getting. Perhaps the Pope is lonely? Is that it? But he seems somewhat unpredictable.

For instance he says the Church must stop obsessing about things, and the next day he strongly condemns the things he said the Church obsessed about in that the Church condemned these things.

At first one reasons the pope like a leader in the Arab World: as speaking in hyperbole, but he is not speaking an embellishing language when he makes multiple strange unvetted statements,

As you know I am not one to respect personages, I treat everyone with the same respect, and I do follow procedures of respect where requisite such as respecting someone with power over me, or court etiquette: I believe the faith and what it says of papacy, but I will be honest if I am concerned. I am deeply concerned about Pope Francis. If he were a political leader I would call for resignation due to the loss of competence to fulfil a job satisfactorily. But he is the pope, and only he can determine his fitness for office. Whatever the reasons, I would like to hear explanations, thoughts to explain this.

The pope need not be impeccable, and is only infallible in certain circumstances, but a pope who has so little concern for the deep spiritual damage to the flock is something I am concerned by if that inference is fair and true.

The responses I have been subject to so far, range from acknowledgement of my concerns, to requests we pray for the pope, to people attacking my article as diabolic, to people believing the pope is a humanist who will destroy the faith. The Catholic Church has survived deeply evil popes, and the gate of hell will not overcome it. Jesus saying that suggests that there will be times when we think the gates of hell will submerge us in the devil. I do not believe this pope is evil. He was amongst the most faithful and orthodox and outspoken moral focussed archbishops. I respect what he has said. At the same time I think he may have lost touch with his surroundings. I am concerned he may not be functioning in fine form, and if so, then why is he not allowing others to vet his words to make sure they fit the position of a widely followed world leader? I have also been told that the Holy Spirit chooses the pope, though I do not see that in the dogma of the church: The Holy Spirit guides ex Cathedra (From the Chair) statements of the popes: of which only a few have been made: such as on the assumption of Mary, and possibly on women not being able to (notice: this is about impossibility not what ought to be, the church teaches that the process of anointment there does not work) be priests: both of which I believe were ex cathedra and followed the processes, and thus join Vatican II as dogma. On women priests, it relates to priests needing to be like Jesus in as many ways as is possible: this is also why priests tend to be celibate, and straight if the Canon Law has its way: to as closely channel Jesus Christ as possible. If Jesus had been a woman there would likely be the same dogma but against male priests.

The pope in general is speaking from a personal perspective not infallibility. And the pope's actions are personal acts of a human being. The man who becomes pope is still physically there. The pope is not God, and bad popes have been elected in the past. There is no great promise that the electors will choose the perfect candidate, only that God will protect certain statements and certain aspects of the Church.

The ageing population problem is certainly a great evil: our societies are undergoing under-population: not enough youths to replace the elderly retiring. Immigrants therefore come in to fill the vacuums as nature hates a vacuum, but immigrants are often not well adapted, and locals feel threatened and thus become xenophobic and violent. Lack of education and experience does leave unemployed youths, a result of ageing population. And in China and India bare branches: unemployed youths caused all the major revolutions, and unemployed and unmarried youths to be precise are dangerous. Bare branches is one example, gangsterism is another coincidental. Elderly if they opt for suicide, undermine the fabric of society, and make it seem that those without economic value are worthless. Perhaps the Pope's words could be stretched here and there, to be in line with reasoning. What I say of ageing population is me, not the pope. Also, if that were the case he would need to have said that it were the source of many an evil, not the greatest evil itself. Surely death and torments are the greatest evils, not unemployed youth and sad elderly populations. Maybe he doesn't want lazy nuns. Maybe he wants media to be kinder to the church and is reaching out to make headlines better... But is this how he acted as a bishop? Is this what a younger version of the man did? If he meant the things I would like him to mean, or if he is playing media or whatever else as some might want him to being, so be it. However, he doe not issue clarifications like other popes did. He seems almost obsessed with his own image and closeted off away from the de facto world. It seems as though he might have lost his inhibitions, and his firm grounding upon good faculties. This is not an unorthodox leader, but the man who was exiled from the Jesuits for standing up for the dogma of the Church. My worry is if he has lost his faculties, in a world where the faithful have learnt to rely heavily of a Vatican lead.

Gay Paris to host #GayGames2018: Evidence that ‎even people the French statistically dislike love France.

‎Even people the French statistically dislike love France. The British know this well. Anyone who speaks English knows to speak a foreign language first and wait for the French to ask for English: that way the French are more polite. Just don't speak the language of the Roma peoples.

Gay people are to excitedly head to gay Paris in 2018 to play games with one another.

London, the rainbow flag's fanatic fan, is most Britishly disappointed the gay game players wont come to play there. This is all to do with the surprisingly contested for: #GayGames2018.

Just Great for Britain: All her delighted embassies were so gaily excitable about the gay games, bragging about being a pink stiletto in... the door of course. Somehow, however, my beloved, statistically deeply 'homophobic' France won. Britain took a whipping.

Vive La France, one assumes one must say: but no one must change that into Ass You Me (Or translate that into French, where it is statistically deeply frowned upon). The Ménage à trois games would be better placed for France, if that fetish had a sporting fandom. Even people the French statistically dislike love France, though certainly the gay athletes will enjoy the city of lights and love. Indeed, it is but an epic fail for Britain and Cameron there: they were so hoping that their British modern affection and bright many coloured intolerance of foreigners would lure the gays into their beds and breakfasts.

Perhaps it was the Eiffel Tower, or the Arc De Triomphe that overcame the fact that the locals would be most restless about the presence of the gay games, after all, the world values survey found France to be the least tolerant of homosexual lifestyle in all Western Europe. This has been widely reported this 13th year of the second millennium.

As the British have found, even if the French hate them, they do love Paris! Who in Britain could blame their national emblems, men and women who play for the other team, for feeling the same. The straight streets of Paris, erected so the French could defend against a foreign invasion, shall be invaded by étranger visitors in 2018.

As a perfectly straight gentleman, I cannot help but attempt to keep a straight face, when thinking of the Great French Republic, and her not subtle response to visitors in the past. A Parisian man waving a French flag to bellow that Justin Bieber shut up and leave town, is one example of what might await the intrepid gay men, who long to play games in the city of lights, and mountaineer the third floor of the Eiffel Tower.

The gay man who imitated the President of France, M. François Hollande at Israel's gay pride will no doubt be proud. The French Socialists must be gaily ecstatic.

The French may even bring out the welcome wagon, for the strange visitors: granted, likely in May Day fashion, not the parades the gay players will be accustomed to. Some of those who come out to greet the gay athletes may however be paraded by the Gendarme before a court of law, however. Parisians can be over-enthusiastic in their enjoyment of protests. Protest is an art and a lifestyle in my beloved France, whatever is being protested against, just being there is considered as much being present at a good time, as a street party attendance is for the Brits.

The moral of the story is simple: everyone loves France, even if the French are statistically not enamoured with their aspirant paramours.
The rest is yet to come.

No doubt Homen will show the gays their topless theatrics, and when protesters chant in French, perhaps the visitors will not realise that they are being protested against: But the bright lights of Paris are enough to make anyone choose Paris, France over another destination for an event.

Especially if British embassies were as forward as they were, as enthusiastic to host the games. Alas... for Cameron... it seems their love of the gay games was unrequited affection. Who can compete with the city of lights, even if the populace of France will not welcome the competitors? Not David Cameron. That is for sure. But what can Cameron compete for anyway?

Saturday, October 5, 2013

Hassan Rouhani, the present, 7th President of Iran, as yet undead, but self-endangered.

Rouhani, the moderate voice of Iran, so moderate he still has stated disquieting statements about Israel. Still, his statements on Israel hardly endanger him. Speech in the Middle East tends to be utterance of hyperbole. The long patrimony of Islamic, Arabic poetry has insured the flowering of rhetoric which is extreme but of far less drama than it implies.

What endangers Rouhani's life is his outreach to Western Powers, and the unfortunate incidence that the West has been unimpressed by his efforts.

Rouhani wisely avoided clasping hands with Barack Obama, but then made a telephone conversation with the US president. He supports peaceful nuclear research, but not nuclear weapons. He seems on the whole a diplomatic flirt with Iran's long-standing foes. All this from a man who does not control Iran's army, from a man who in fact is standing brazenly against the current of Iranian thought, to stand deadly still in front of the American Bison, and pray to Allah that it does not charge him. The shoe is instrumental in Middle Eastern culture. In biblical times it was the symbol of trade and barter. Today, the throwing of a shoe: that which protects the feet of an Arabic man from the hot desert surface, is the ultimate slight. Throwing of eggs and rotten fruit does not quite compare to the throwing of a shoe. It is the throwing of a shoe that Rouhani was subjected to for his outreach to the West.

When the Green Movement arose, western media were enchanted with their charm, or with the charm of what they desired to will into existence into this movement. Interviews with the members of the movement however struck some. The Green movement supported a Nuclear Iran even more durably than the supporters of the 6th President of Iran. The words of that President were understatements of public opinion, grand standing to a radical crowd that he knew he needed the support of.

Rouhani has consistently made advances upon America's virtue, and consistently been brushed aside. He has already negotiated from a position far removed from public opinion in Iran. If America had acknowledged this and rewarded him, perhaps he could be convincing the real powers in Iran of this strategy, of tactical advantage. John Kerry, America's secretary of state (not to be confused with America's gay ambassador to Australia: John Berry), has hardly played the game. John Kerry has refused to allow even public victory for Rouhani. Any nuclear program, even to the extent of that currently in South Africa, is not to be aspired to according to the Americans. Loss of great political cloud, much pomp, much circumstance spent, and Rouhani has not a lot to demonstrate his virtues.

With threats by America to strike Shia linked Syria, and the ethnic cleansing of Shia there and elsewhere, Shia majority Iran has seen damage dealt to the majority of its peoples' ethnicity in the area. It has seen Russia stand up for its ally Syria and America withdraw after a veiled attempt to destabilise it from Syria. The cleric president Rouhani, has found his efforts at reconciliation to be mostly publicity operations for a White House looking for political clout. It has pushed towards Western liberalisation of the Internet, or rather Rouhani has. The silence has been notable, in some forms.

Even as the mixed Western inaction has met eavedropping ears in Iran, the shifting of geo-politics has made it less of a gain to seek Western assurances. Israel, the ally of America, in their newspapers, as well as their political halls, have watched with nausea as the West half reached out to Rouhani, enough to terrify them, but not enough to assure Iranian powers.

Like the often noted iconic French leader: Charles de Gaulle, Rouhani in his outreach to enemies of his nation, in his soft bargaining position and eyelash batting to foes, risks much. Charles de Gaulle was often subject to assassination attempts for a similar process. Rouhani has the added disadvantage of a sceptical West glaring down on him. His advances are looked at sparingly and with distaste by those he seeks to seduce.

Rouhani is out of step with Iranian opinion, purposely so, but his charm attempt has not soothed the Western cobra.

It was a calculated strategy of the 6th President of Iran to unite Iran around the common Western enemy. Rouhani however exists in a more precarious region than that President had encountered. If he does not play his strategy carefully, he risks the powers of stakeholders within Iran.

The French might speak of a Zombie, the Americans of a Dead Man Walking. The more literary world: speak of a man yet undead. A man who brazen and steadfast treads a path at odds with his society. The sort of path Kennedy trod, the kind of route De Gaulle advanced. One aspires that the President of Iran will wisely guide his ship, and focus both on enemies abroad and in his own backyard, his own entrance hall. There are many snakes which need charming if he is to survive the status of as yet undead.

Jaguar Land Rover announce they will assassinate the iconic Land Rover vehicle (67 years old) in December 2015. Why?

It wasn't born in World War II, but it birthed shortly after, made from the aluminium of British pots and pans that the government wanted. It was better than a Jeep. While American boys might have imagined their selves in a Green little Jeep in their adulthood, most of us across the Pond, would have dreamt of Land Rovers and game safaris.




'Production of the iconic and globally recognised Land Rover Defender will cease in December 2015' Is what Jaguar Land Rover stated to the Telegraph of Britain.

'So two years from now you will no longer be able to buy yourself a brand new Land Rover, a proper Land Rover, latterly known as the Defender. The last time there were no Land Rovers, George VI was in the Palace, Attlee in Downing Street, Independent India was just a year old and Harry Truman was about to approve the Marshall Plan.' The Telegraph writes a death note.
Farewell old chap might have been better.

'With sales a consistent 18,000 a year, reports in the past of its death have been exaggerated, but this time it is for real; the last Landy will roll off the line on December 20 2015. It’s not through lack of demand, nor that Land Rover’s engineers have tired of adapting it to meet 21st-century safety or emissions legislation. In a world of connected, hybrid cars in whatever shape or size you want them, the Defender just no longer fits. ' They continue to spin the tale of confused reasoning at the Telegraph.
Yet, without just cause the iconic vehicle, produced by the same mother factory, the same pool of industry, the same plant for 67 years,  is to be assassinated. Perhaps the Eugenics it narrowly avoided, which drafted the German soldiers into berserk ethnic cleansing is behind this assault on sentiment... 'no longer fits'.

Yes, you can buy a Range Rover... the vehicle that looks a lot like a Land Rover, and is bought in the place of a Mercedes Benz by accountants. No Land Rover however. That has gone the way of the Dodo... after the ship's cat of hybrids and eco-friendly butterfly vehicles charged its piece of African savannah, and intimidated the Jaguar Land Rover Owners into being more Paris Hilton like poodle than Growling Manly Jaguar in defending the honour of that old chap against the runts of eco-friendly cuteness of a woman dominated thought-stream.

Popular Posts - This Week

Popular Posts This Month

Popular Posts | All TIme