The anti-traditional family values camp gains 2 victories: Kenyan Constitution, Gay marriage ban overturned in California

(Scripturelink Voter's Guide)

Article by Marc Aupiais

The left, or The Destruction: (the camp of those opposing the status quo and in this case traditional values) as they were known in post-revolutionary France, has gained another 2 victories:

"In the United States, a federal judge overturned California's gay marriage ban yesterday in a case which might end up in the country’s Supreme Court."

Vatican Radio (Catholic; Independent; Vatican Based)

05 / 08 | August / 2010

"As we expected, Judge Vaugh Walker has decided to overturn Proposition 8 (which re-established traditional marriage in California) and has ruled that efforts to retain the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman are “unconstitutional.” [CVA AMP provide the full judgement, click on the link at the date to see their article].

It will be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (which I expect to agree with Judge Walker), and then onto the Supreme Court, where the question of the legality of same-sex marriage could be decided in a more definitive fashion. [...]

[...]

Cardinal Francis George, the President of the USCCB has issued an immediate statement:

“Marriage between a man and a woman is the bedrock of any society. The misuse of law to change the nature of marriage undermines the common good,” Cardinal George said. “It is tragic that a federal judge would overturn the clear and expressed will of the people in their support for the institution of marriage. No court of civil law has the authority to reach into areas of human experience that nature itself has defined.”

Joining Cardinal George in his criticism of the court decision was Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage. Archbishop Kurtz noted that “Citizens of this nation have uniformly voted to uphold the understanding of marriage as a union of one man and one woman in every jurisdiction where the issue has been on the ballot. This understanding is neither irrational nor unlawful,” he said. “Marriage is more fundamental and essential to the well being of society than perhaps any other institution. It is simply unimaginable that the court could now claim a conflict between marriage and the Constitution.”

I have had a chance to briefly scan Judge Walker’s decision. Here are some interesting quotes [my {Thomas Peters', not ours} comments in brackets]:

“Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage; marriage under law is a union of equals.” (Page 113) [What we see here is a complete deconstruction of gender.]

“Indeed, the evidence shows beyond any doubt that parents’ genders are irrelevant to children’s developmental outcomes.” (Page 127) [This view is simple absurd. The Ruth Institute (and other organizations) have demonstrated in study after study that parents' gender matters enormously to child development.]

“Because of Proposition 8, same-sex couples are not permitted to engage in sexual activity within marriage.” (Page 128) [More absurdity. After all - also not allowed to have sex within marriage? Siblings. The Judge has already decided, after all, that marriage is a union of equals. And who can be more equal than two people born of the same parents? Again, this is horrible logic.]

A friend [of Thomas Peters] pointed out this passage – which gets to the heart of the Judge’s argument:

“The evidence shows that the movement of marriage away from a gendered institution and toward an institution free from state-mandated gender roles reflects an evolution in the understanding of gender rather than a change in marriage. The evidence did not show any historical purpose for excluding same-sex couples from marriage, as states have never required spouses to have an ability or willingness to procreate in order to marry. Rather, the exclusion exists as an artifact of a time when the genders were seen as having distinct roles in society and in marriage. That time has passed.” (Page 113)"

Catholic Vote Action American Papist (Catholic; Independent; American; Pro Traditional Values)

04 / 08 | August / 2010

"Kenyans overwhelmingly backed a new constitution, according to preliminary results announced Thursday.

The Catholic bishops and other Christian leaders had opposed the constitution, because of its abortion language and the special status it gave some Islamic courts."

Vatican Radio / Radio Vaticana (Catholic; Independent; Vatican Based)

05 / 08 | August / 2010

The Kenyan Constitution was backed by both sides, for whom election violence was committed at Kenya's last election: it supports Muslim courts, a possible expansion of special interests and homosexual agendas, has land clauses which could further create hostilities or further hostilities on tribal and ethnic grounds, and takes the start of life in Kenyan law from conception, to birth.

"The Secretary of the National Council of Churches of Kenya, Peter Karanja said: "The Constitution has many good things, but the good is mixed with the evil that may influence the moral life and rights of this country in its foundations." This position was reiterated by Cardinal John Njue, Archbishop of Nairobi, who in opening the ecumenical prayer service said: "There have been improvements in the draft constitution, but the good has been mixed with some bad points that affect the moral life and rights. There are people who think that only a small percentage of the draft constitution is bad. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Evil, no matter how small it is, is like a bad yeast that transforms and corrupts the entire dough from within." Over 63,000 security agents across the country were mobilized to ensure safety, particularly in the Rift Valley, where the greatest number of deaths occurred in 2008 as a result of post-election violence. The UN has sent 50 observers to monitor the conduct of the vote in the “hot-spot” areas of the country. Observers will also be particularly attentive that there are not people who will incite hatred. It has also created a center to verify that messages sent via SMS do not contain incitement to violence. In the crisis of 2008, several text messages were sent inciting violence. "

Agenzia Fides (Catholic; Independent; Vatican Based; Subject to the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples)

03 / 08 | August / 2010

South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Gillard running scared

(Scripturelink Voter's Guide)



View Larger Map

[Near Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Australia]


Political Analysis Editorial Article by Marc Aupiais

"Prime Minister Julia Gillard has used a campaign stop in the marginal western Sydney seat of Lindsay to promise to increase family payments for some students by up to $4,000 a year if Labour is re-elected.

The address to students at McCarthy Catholic College in Emu Plains came after Ms Gillard promised to "throw away the rule book" following a Newspoll showing the Coalition drawing level with Labor on the two-party preferred vote."

ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)[Secular; Australian; Governmental]

02 / 08 | August / 2010

In Australia, there is Labour and the Liberals, the latter's group referred to as the Coalition. In Australian politics, the Liberals/Coalition would be closer to a Catholic vote than Labour, a vast difference from Northern Hemisphere Liberals who have become more socially left at times due to the existence of Conservatives. Labour got rid of Rudd, for dragging down their vote: mostly with Mining Taxes... and not by supporting, or for that matter not supporting enough (as the left claims) Anthropological Global Warming theory in divided Australia, as some have possibly claimed, but now even Atheist Cohabiting with a hairdresser Gillard is not fairing too brightly. This should be interesting.

Abbott has not noted any plans to reverse anti-life policies, although Australian funding of anthropological global warming theory adoption programmes will be cut if he is elected. The Liberals are generally a safer bet for Christians policy wise, even the difference between the head of Labour, and that of the Coalition furthers the relative difference between the two parties.




South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

South Africa: Official Opposition (DA) responds to shelving of Judge Hlope impropiety investigation (Judge Hlope:a ruling party ally- accused of attempting to exert improper influence over the Constitutional Court)

(Also appeared at : Journey in a Broken World 01 / 09 | September / 2009; Kyk na hierdie artikel in Afrikaans; Voir en français)

Notation by Marc Aupiais

The Democratic Alliance, the Official Opposition party in the Republic of South Africa, has slated a choice by a divided JSC (Judicial Service [not "Services"] Commission) to drop investigations as to whether or not Judge Hlope, who as Judge President of the Western Cape High Court, was accused by the Constitutional Court- seemingly of illicitly attempting to influence Constitutional Court Justices (judges) into ruling in favour of ANC (African National Congress) and South African President Jacob Zuma- in a matter involving a corruption case against the president, is guilty or innocent of the charge against him, as a judge.

(The National Director of Public Prosecutions who attempted to Prosecute Jacob Zuma, was fired, the acting head dropped the case, leaving the public asking for details; the unit which had investigated Jacob Zuma, an anti-organised crime unit which had been known as the "Scorpions", was disbanded).

Even had the JSC found that Hlope was guilty, parliament, controlled via an ANC majority: by Jacob Zuma, would have to have been involved in any serious action against Hlope, the JSC investigation was- to the knowledge of our service- only advisory in status.

In an email dispatch sent out today: Helen Zille, the Leader of the DA (Democratic Alliance), South Africa's largest opposition party- slated the decision, saying of it:

"[The JSC's] decision is one of the most destructive early consequences of the Zuma administration's attitude towards our judiciary, and the consequences of a deferential and ANC compliant JSC. We now have a senior judge, and possible candidate for the Constitutional Court bench, who has a cloud of impropriety hanging above his head; a cloud that will not go away until the allegations are investigated and either confirmed or dismissed. Until such time as that happens, the integrity and independence of the judiciary will continue to be sullied"
In a statement the DA labled as:

"Helen Zille responds to the Judicial Service Commission's decision not to take the complaint against Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe to a full enquiry in her weekly newsletter, SA Today"

(Our two quotes of the Official Opposition and its Leader , are purely that, both speak in their own capacity. Quoting these figures does not mean that our service, or anyone associated with it in any way endorse or agree with the views we have here: quoted from a DA press release!)
Possible meaning of DA's statements involving Judicial Independence, may involve the following:

President Jacob Zuma has previously stated that the judiciary in South Africa act as though they are "God", and during his trials, his supporters threatened the public, and judiciary. Most notable among those threats which were against the public and others by Zuma supporters, were claims by the left- including trade unionists and leading ANC figures, that said persons would "Kill" for Jacob Zuma. During the rape trial against Jacob Zuma, which was said to be a weak case from the start, especially as the rape allegation was from an acquaintance of Zuma- Zuma supporters stoned a woman they incorrectly identified as Zuma's accusor. The woman who accused Jacob Zuma of raping her, has been informed by the National Executive Committee (NEC) of Jacob Zuma's ANC, that they will only guarantee her safety should she return from exile, if she withdraws the rape accusation against Jacob Zuma.

The statements in this article in no way whatsoever, in any way constitute any form of legal advice. They are provided for informative purposes, and are not legal advice.

Republic of South Africa: Top Ruling Party (ANC) politician- slams "Capitalists" opposed to proposed "communist" takeover of healthcare schemes by the government

(Scripturelink Voters' Guide; c.f. IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) via the Cape Times (Page 1) Monday 03 / 08 | August / 2009 ;  article from SAPA [South African Press Association] (Secular; Independent; South African) 26 / 07 | July / 2009 ; from SAPA 30 / 06 | June / 2009 ; from Cape Argus 20 / 06 | June / 2009 ; from Daily News 15 / 06 | June / 2009 ; from page 4 of Tribune 26 / 07 | July / 2009  ;  News 24 (Secular; Independent; South African) article by SAPA [South African Press Association] (Secular; Independent; South African) 08 / 06 | June / 2009 ; Mail and Guardian (South African; Independent; Secular; Liberal) article by Health-e News Service 02 / 06 | June / 2009 ; 15 / 09 | September / 2008 ; )

Article by Marc Aupiais

Blade Nzimande, the Republic of South Africa's: Minister for Higher Education and Training, and the General Secretary of the SACC (South African Communist Party), and a member of the National Executive Committe (NEC), of the ANC (African National Congress): which commands a majority in the South African parliament, and the Presidency- has slammed media bodies, and others, for criticizing the ANC's proposed NHI (National Health Insurance) bill- as the ANC continues to forge ahead with the controversial scheme ( IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) via the Cape Times (Page 1) Monday 03 / 08 | August / 2009 ). It has been reported, that there was speculation that World Renowned Barbara Hogan, was removed from the health Portfolio, due to Trade Union pressure, after she suggested that the bill be submitted to usual procedures and public scrutiny (Mail and Guardian (South African; Independent; Secular; Liberal) article by Health-e News Service 02 / 06 | June / 2009 ).

100 Billion Rand larger Health Budget?


According to Alex van den Heever, a health economist, who was quoted by HASA (The Health Association of South Africa), having spoken at their  Durban Conference: the NHI is a ""completely unworkable, unaffordable solution that won't improve health services despite massive increases in expenditure""(News 24 (Secular; Independent; South African) article by SAPA [South African Press Association] (Secular; Independent; South African) 08 / 06 | June / 2009). According to van den Heever: part of the proposal is to increase the Health budget by 100 Billion Rand, an astronomical and unrealistic figure, especially during a recession, and as the ANC has put forward other plans slated as unrealistic by financial experts.

ANC NEC member: those opposing the plan are "capitalists"

Speaking on the 88th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party, Blade Nzimande said:

""The capitalist classes have already started a huge campaign in the media to try to discredit this system, and we want to say to them as communists today, war unto you.

"Prepare for a huge battle because we are going to mobilise the workers and the poor of the country to fight against you so we can have a national health insurance scheme."

Nzimande said the national health insurance scheme "aims to ensure every South African has access to health services without having to pay up front".

Public and private health care facilities would be open to all who wanted to use them.

"Everyone must have access to affordable and quality health care. How is it going to work? Those that are rich, they are going to pay more for this scheme. Those who are unemployed and with no income, will pay nothing, but everybody will get the same quality treatment." "

(IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) via the Cape Times (Page 1) Monday 03 / 08 | August / 2009 )

Further Criticisms

According to IOL:

"Critics have argued that the scheme would be too costly to implement and would not work if problems in the public health service - largely stemming from poor management - are not sorted out first.

Under the proposal, medical scheme members would pay 85 percent of the contributions, irrespective of the option they chose, to a global fund that would pay public and private sector providers."

(IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) via the Cape Times (Page 1) Monday 03 / 08 | August / 2009 )

December: In the Pipeline

South Africa's public health system is under a state of collapse: with doctors underpaid, and many professionals either entering the private sector, or leaving the country.

A draft on the NHI is expected by December 2009, the ANC plans to implement the NHI within the next 5 years.  While the NHI is seen as- likely to go through; one possible reason that the head of the Communist Party, is so vehemently supporting his ANC allies- is that there have been rumours reported in the press last month- that some within the Communist Party, want to replace their General Secretary, or to oppose him in their December conference. The NHI proposal, like many other controversial legislative schemes now being put forward- has previously been pushed by now Zuma Allies. With a leftist president, it is much more likely to succeed.

Under ANC management- South Africa's previously world-class public health sector has collapsed under mismanagement and corruption. Some sources have asked that the ANC run Government firstly fix up the public health sector, before combining it with the private health sector. Others blame the move on covering up ANC incompetence and a lack of service delivery, which has caused violent rioting on the streets.

SADC Region: Republic of South Africa: Official Opposition in talks with strange bedfellows?

(South African Catholic)


Notation by Marc Aupiais

According to the Cape Argus, a member of the Independent Newspapers (IOL) news group: the Democratic Alliance (DA)- South Africa's Official Opposition: is in behind closed doors unity talks with several smaller parties- including ANC off-shoot: COPE (Congress of the People), the ID (Independent Democrats), and the UDM (United Democratic Front).

While the DA allows their Members of Parliament (MPs) to vote with their conscience, on matters deemed by the DA to be related to morality- the ID and UDM- have both pushed legislation and policies, which are seriously against the moral fibre set out by the Church- including on vitally important issues such as- what marriage should be, and legalising of and pushing of pro-abortion legislation by the state.

Much of the leadership of political fledgling- COPE- jumped ship from the ANC prior the last election- having seemingly been perfectly accepting of the ANC (African National Congress)- when it radically liberalised access to Abortion, and instituted "Civil Unions"- "Gay marriage". On the "Gay Marriage" issue- as our service noted in another article: earlier this year- the ID seemingly wanted to force marriage officers to "marry" gay couples- whatever their conscientious or religious objections.

Exactly what form of alliance would be formed if the alleged talks are successful- is not clear to our service at present.

Whether this would entail close co-operation on some matters between multiple parties, or a new political party- is not clear, although the evidence seems to lend towards the latter- as with the quotations the Cape Argus gives to back up its claims.

Reportedly: Helen Zille has noted a number of areas where the opposition parties could find common ground-

These apparently include: commitment to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996; creating an environment which would offer opportunities to everyone; a market-driven economy, opportunity and delivery and a safety net for the less privileged (c.f. IOL- as linked to below).

Representation of the DA had not replied to a media request from our service at the time of publishing.

C.F. IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 02 / 08 | 2009

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?from=rss_Twitter&set_id=1&click_id=79&art_id=vn20090802061851279C687881

ANC in provincial land grab?

(Scripturelink Voters' Guide; c.f. (IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 29 / 06 | June / 2009 ; (IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 07 / 11 | December / 2008 )

Article by Marc Aupiais

According to IOL in an article by Ainsley Daniels((IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 29 / 06 | June / 2009 ): Sicelo Shiceka, who is The Republic of South Africa's ruling ANC (African National Congress) Minister of the controversial Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs Ministry, has made claims of a report allegedly in which the ANC run South African State government, or officials in it are looking into reducing the number of provinces in South Africa. The provincial government of the opposition DA (Democratic Alliance) in the Western Cape (province) had previously alleged interference in provincial matters. The minister had claimed that even the Western Cape would be pressured by him. His ministry has certainly not eased tensions.

On December 07th 2008, when he, as a person, represented local government, involving the changes to the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa as they related to the contentious and at times violent Khutsong Township issue, he was accused of undermining the central government((IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 07 / 11 | December / 2008). This would certainly be am about turn, if those allegations are true.

During apartheid, there were much fewer provinces, reflecting the politics of pre-apartheid Boer and British colonies, which had formed the Union of South Africa, and the 1910 Union Constitution in compromise, after the Second South African / Boer War, seemingly won by the British.

Any amendment to having 9 provinces, as with a separate effort to get rid of vital aspects of Judicial -Independence,( the latter pushed by minister of Justice and Constitutional reform: Jeff Radebe:) would require amending the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. With the enlargement of the opposition, the ANC could not introduce any of these plans into practice: without the help of opposition parties' Members of Parliament.

If I am correct, they would also need the okay of provinces whose borders are affected to successfully legislate the prior. Acting without the confirmation of an applicable province, would require taking away the current Constitutional rights of the provinces to do so. To take away areas of provincial authority was apparently also suggested by the ruling ANC recently.

According to IOL(IOL (Secular; Independent; South African) 29 / 06 | June / 2009), critics of redrawing the provinces believe the ANC wants to redraw them to oust their DA opposition from the Western Cape province, where DA head: Helen Zille is premier.

Africa: SADC: South Africa: Corruption and Politics: Shaik (accused of a currupt relationship with ANC president) shakes off 15 year jail sentence

(Scripturelink Voters guide; Social Justice South Africa; IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 03 / 03 / 2009; Letters sent to IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) on the 04 / 03 / 2009; IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 04 / 03 / 2009; IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 04 / 03 / 2009; 03 / 03 / 2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Shabir Shaik: convicted of having a "Generally Corrupt" relationship with the Ruling (with a majority capable of changing the constitution of SA, which has changed said constitution numerous times) ANC (African national Congress) President Jacob Zuma, has just been "permanently" let off a 15 year jail sentence for corruption, 2 days after a press release by Jacob Zuma, that he would pardon Shaik on possibly becoming president of South Africa.

"Shaik was sentenced to 15 years in jail in 2005 after he was convicted on two counts of corruption and one of fraud. This was based on evidence of a corrupt relationship between himself and then South African and ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma.

At the time of going to press on Monday night, there was a lot of activity at the Inkosi Albert Luthuli Hospital in Durban, where Shaik had spent a good deal of his incarceration."

(IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 03 / 03 / 2009)

The ANC, largely backed by uneducated masses of South Africa, who suffer from lack of education, and basic resources: after over a decade of ANC rule, is mooted to win a majority, as usual in this year's elections. When a Constitutional challenge on election rules, preventing South Africans abroad from voting: hit: the ANC set the election date in April: this may well prevent the constitutional claim from succeeding. Millions of South Africans have left the country since 1994, due to openly racist business and other regulations set by the government: which has seen incalculable damage to South Africa's economy, due to a non-white skills shortage, and also the leaving of many South Africans due to crime, and a general perception among many: that whatever they want, the government will do as it desires.

Opposition parties have, in recent years, whether purposeful, or incidently: had the police used against them. DA leader Hellen Zille was arrested in Cape Town, by police, while objecting on crime. ANC offshoot: COPE, was prevented from taking to the streets, to campaign after a national congress, by Riot Police, as the ANC suddenly had a meeting nearby. No mention of Riot Police by the ANC talk was mentioned. With Voter intimidation in recent By-Elections, and ANC supporters alleged by the DA, to have been bussed in, and attempting to blockade a DA rally in a township, these are just some of the worries: not excluding murders in Kwazulu Natal; where IFP and ANC supports are alleged to have taken part in violence in previous elections. High ranking members of the ANC's Triparteid Alliance: have said that they will take up arms for Mr Zuma's cause, and there have been comments regarding what seems, for lack of adequate clarification like a physical annihilation of the DA (Democratic Alliance), South Africa's major opposition party.

According to the State, which has let Shaik off due to "depression", and "high blood Pressure", Shaik will not be sent back to jail, if these "symptoms" suddenly disappear. The State has also refused to release exactly what "terminal" condition Shaik has: only mentioning what could be signs of someone actually being in prison.

"It should be noted that in terms of section 75 (8) of the Correctional Services Act (Act 111 of 1998), the 'decision of the board is final' and can only be reviewed by the Correctional Supervision and Parole Review board, led by a judge," Wolela said."
( IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 03 / 03 / 2009)

As the law requires a prisoner to be terminally ill to be released, it seems odd, that a terminal illness has not been mentioned. In fact, unless Shaik kicks the bucket within days, or weeks, it raises the question on HIV Positive prisoners, who have been denied parole until their last legs. Perhaps Shaik needs a change in diet, having spent most of his time in hospital, over what many may see as symptoms of stress, and being in jail.

IOL, probably South Africa's most reliable news source, has more to say, by airing letters sent on the issue, which I think are an interesting read:


Like many South Africans: who have seen so much in the interesting way in which ANC supporters of high rank usually don't feel too discomforted when faced with "prison", many South Africans seem suspicious. Others want more details: some think that fraudsters should not go to jail.

(Letters sent to IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) on the 04 / 03 / 2009)

IOL notes that the state is refusing to review the choice, or to give it up to review, despite the fact that the ANC controls the government, and: "Shaik was sentenced to 15 years in jail in 2005 on two counts of corruption and one of fraud, which, among other things, related to an alleged bribe he negotiated between Zuma and a French arms company. - Sapa"IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 04 / 03 / 2009; IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 04 / 03 / 2009). Zuma is president of the ruling ANC.

The African National Congress denies ( IOL (Independent; South African; Secular) 04 / 03 / 2009) any influence in the release of Shaik, while the DA, among others is seeking some form of action over the surprise the release of Shaik, due to his "High Blood pressure" "etc".

IOL quoted a source, which tries to get prisoners rights insured, it was noted that 2500 prisoners die a year, it seems these did not get this parole. Many prisoners have been subject to denials of medical parole, and it is probably a unique case, that Shaik should get it for depression and high blood ( 03 / 03 / 2009: IOL) pressure, with possible "chest pains". Why the public has been denied so much information on this case is odd, especially due to the following:

"32. Access to information

1. Everyone has the right of access to
1. any information held by the state; and

2. any information that is held by another person and that is required for the exercise or protection of any rights.

2. National legislation must be enacted to give effect to this right, and may provide for reasonable measures to alleviate the administrative and financial burden on the state."

(Bill of Rights, Chapter II of the Constitution of the "Republic of South Africa" 10 December 1996)

Response of the Office of Helen Zille (DA Leader) on concerns over homosexuality statements

(Scripturelink Voters guide)

Introduction by Marc Aupiais

The following is an Email Response, by the office of Helen Zille, leader of the DA (Democratic Alliance) in South Africa, and Mayor of Cape Town, to concerns raised, over a press release, in which the ANC were lambasted, for not supporting a document, which in addition to the noble cause of decriminalizing Homosexuality, legally: also promoted, and seemed to attempt to legislate "Gender theory": which would insinuate support of Homosexual civil unions: "Gay Marriage", something the church considers to be irreconcilable with Catholic morality, and society.

Date: 19 January 2009 16:06
Email: Leader < leader@da.org.za >
Title: Response from the office of Helen Zille
Respondent: Tammy Evans

Large sections of the Contents of Email Response:

"Dear Mr Aupiais



On behalf of Helen Zille, thank you for your e-mail.



As indicated in the press statement you refer to, the DA supports the decriminalisation of homosexuality in line with our Constitution.



The DA’s position on civil unions is the same as it always has been. Like all issues of conscience, the DA gives its members a free vote to vote in Parliament as they choose.



Giving our members a free vote on civil unions is compatible with the belief that homosexuality is not a crime.



I hope that this e-mail has served to clarify your concerns.



Please feel free to remain in touch with our office.



Sincerely



Tammy Evans



Political Assistant

Office of the Leader - Democratic Alliance

2nd floor, Marks Building, Parliament

Cape Town 8000"


This email (contact details somewhat excluded)

is in response to another by ourselves: to the DA:

"A DA objection, to not voting on a UN proposal by France has caught my attention. My objection, is not the protection of homosexual rights, but the same, as that given by the Vatican, when apposing such a proposal. The proposal promotes Gender theory, and therefore gay marriage. Yes, South Africa should have stated, they supported the principle of freedom from persecution, but support of that proposal means indirectly, seeming: support for Gay marriage (something that the SA populace does not in majority support): an issue that he DA has been neutral on previously. I would like a clarification from the DA: on their neutrality on this issue, as it will affect both my vote, and many others. This does affect moral issues, as the DA is in fact, willingly or not: making a stance on this issue!"
(to: leader@da.org.za;
date: 16 January 2009 15:39;
subject: Clarification needed, I represent a media initiative (3 days ago);
mailed-by gmail.com)

Israel keeps her word: unilateral ceasefire, which Hamas has vowed to ignore

(Social Justice South Africa; Scripturelink Voters Guide; c.f. (thanks to a dear friend) CBSNEWS (Secular; Independent; American) 17 / Jan / 2009; c.f. BBC World News (Reliable; Secular; British; Government) 18 / Jan 2009; Archive 15 / Jan / 2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Israel said it was all about missiles, and considering the more cautious governance, of the ruling political forces, this seemed believable, and appears to be the case. Israel, has declared it would, and seems to have: unilaterally withdrawn offenses on the Gaza Strip, it plans to retain troops for ten more days, however, it will not launch fresh offenses, even as it has vowed that troops will defend themselves if and when Hamas believes it can attack. Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement), which the BBC suspects, could be funded by Iran, along with fellow terrorists: Hezbolla in their suspected funders: has itself, as Hamas, vowed to continue fighting, even as Israel has stopped offenses, resulting in a quite night, after about three weeks of fighting.

Israeli troops, remain, so that they and Egypt, can arrange security, to prevent Hamas from smuggling in weapons, to restart offenses. After the Unilateral Ceasefire, Hamas, which still has the destruction of Israel, which they do not recognize as a state: as their goal: still wanted bloodshed. At least one missile was launched against Israel after the truce went into effect, according to CBS, quoting a source called "Bergers".

1200 Palestinians have died in this conflict, as well as at least ten Israelis. What a child and woman is in this conflict is hard to determine. Being under the age of 18 makes one a child: but in Islamist conflicts, women have been suicide bombers, and perhaps could be militants, and children have become militants.

Facilities, and resources of many humanitarian, or relief groups, have been casualty to air-strikes in this conflict, and the UN is worried about the state of hospitals. Israel was accused of disproportionate force in protecting her borders, but countered that their civilians were being hit.

A probable reason for Israeli speed, and proportions; is that the Bush administration is set to leave soon: even with a proportionate response, it is much less likely, that Israel would get away with defending their borders under the Democrat Obama, who in this issue, said, via advisors: he would not cause two authorities, but who has spoken up on almost everything else. It seemed an odd statement to make. Barak Hussein Obama: voted to euthanise abortion survivors, and wants to get rid of parental consent for abortion. He has not, during the fighting: commented on the deathly situation in the Gaza Strip.

This entire conflict, could probably, have been done, and likely would have been done in a smaller, more civilized manner: if Israel knew it could rely on international support, as it protected its borders. Humanitarian casualties, and the entire situation, would probably have been low key in such a situation, whereby those currently in power in Israel, had previously been extremely soft, even to the point of endangering their political future: on the Gaza Strip situation. They only launched offenses: after a period of daily attacks on civilians.

This is not to justify the offensive; it is however to state what appears to be fact: Israel thought this proportion of force was utterly necessary. Considering stances of those in power in Israel, previous stances before this conflict: should they have believed there was an easier, less collateral spewed manner to protect Israel, they likely would have taken it. Before the counterstrike was launched, Israel, had already given up hope of international solutions. Also, efforts by the international community, as we, and any astute analyst would have predicted, and as we did predict: were not the ones to end this conflict: as we predicted, it was ended purely at the whims of Israel, as would be obvious.

As long as the world shows such blatant bias in judging conflicts, rather than realizing the root cause of these, and realizing who started what: civilian casualties will remain high in situations such as this one. If no-one else will look after Israel, Israel will: the problem is, the manner in which they now can: in that a smaller attack would have had as much backlash, and no attack, would mean allowing terrorism against their innocent civilians.

Blame for collateral damage: must be placed equally on Israel, and on Hamas: and on every biased voice which misrepresented this conflict. Refusal to reason by Hamas, and outright provocation, cannot be ignored. The Hague should be consulted on this issue. From all appearances, it appears as though the Israeli hand seemed almost forced: forced by fear of reprisals when Bush left, and by political pressure, by their own women and children, and rabbits, and dogs, and boys and men: and even an infant: by those facing daily terror attacks: in a war between hateful extremists, and civilians: in which a military chose to intervene.

Before the world says "Never Again", and then forgets they have: one must look at the core of the issue: the reason this tragedy has occurred: lies squarely on the arms of the international community: on the international hatred and bias: so evident (Archive 15 / Jan / 2009) in France recently: which had, when this situation was minor: completely ignored the plight of Israel: so that Israel did, as they always had: and put on a display, which cost, in this case, in a way: 1200 or more or less lives.

Our Contact point: at the Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference, has seen, in the press: the recent judgement on the arms deal curruption case

(Scripturelink Voter's Guide)

Article by Marc Aupiais

I, and others on their press releases list: have received an email basically showing that representation of the Bishops, has heard the recent judgment, and seem to be watching events unfolding in the press. We have not, however, had therein: a direct statement clearly on a perspective. So far, they simply brought attention to the verdict, to us, and others who were emailed by our contact there.

I do not endorse the following link, but a source in the hierarchy, sent it to me, so I thought it likely is somewhat accurate (The article), the full judgment (linked to in the article, and indirectly in the email), also: I do not guarantee, nor does this mean that our contact guarantees such.

To my knowledge, they have yet to make any statements as to the current judgment. Representation of the hierarchy, certainly has seen, and is clearly interested in it's importance. It means Jacob Zuma can be retried in court.

On our own analysis, this is ours, not theirs:
It also puts into question the disposing of previous President Thabo Mbeki, who was made to resign, by a Zuma lead ANC, and has implications for the upcoming elections: expected this year.

I do not endorse the following links to the Secular, and Independent : South Africa's "Mail and Guardian": We have not vetted these for accuracy, nor can we guarantee content: These are based on communication with a source within the Hierarchy in South Africa: who simply wanted to alert us and others as to the goings ons occurring, and so: we cannot say either us, or them endorse this source: as we do not have enough information to know how they feel about it. We ourselves do not endorse such, our view is in our article on this: we have not yet read this other article, and therefore cannot endorse it: however, we generally trust much of the accuracy of the facts, in the Mail and Guardian, due to their history, even though we do not guarantee such, nor endorse them, or any of their articles, whatsoever: Also, their world view, and perspective, is not always in line with ours; nor do we endorse their columns nor do we endorse their columnists, or credibility via this:

Mail and Guardian Article (not an endorsement):

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-01-12-court-opens-way-for-new-zuma-charges

Full judgement: Mail and Guardian (not an endorsement):

http://www.mg.co.za/uploads/zumajudgement.pdf

We do neither endorse article content, nor can we endorse these perspectives and views. They are purely the views of those expressing them, and we cannot be held responsible for them. They are not ours, and do not necessarily reflect our views, nor can these perspectives be said to represent those of the Bishops, or any affiliated with them. Nor can we as yet give you their perspective, we can only speculate, which we may do later, and did in (Bloemfontein; South Africa: Zuma Trial Back On: NPA wins: previous judge had no right to submit his "political" opinions 12 / Jan / 2009 ).

Should they desire a press release: we will of course inform you of this: however, there does seem to be interest in this issue: and they do seem to be watching events, as a church hierarchy should be doing in such circumstances.

Bloemfontein; South Africa: Zuma Trial Back On: NPA wins: previous judge had no right to submit his "political" opinions

(Scripturelink Voters Guide; c.f. E News (South African; Secular; Independent)12 / Jan / 2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

The judgment of a previous Judge : had dethroned South Africa's president: and caused a political crisis. Now the prosecution's case against ANC president Jacob Zuma, by the NPA, has been allowed to proceed. Many of Zuma's actions have been called into question, as well as the previous judgment. Shabir Shaik, Zuma's financial advisor was sent to prison: for a "Generally" "Corrupt" relationship it is alleged he has had with Jacob Zuma. Following this, and recent evidence, as well as Zuma's chances of becoming president heightening: the NPA (National Prosecuting Authority) decided to prosecute Zuma, a choice which had been overturned by a lower court, and was upheld today.

Accusations against South Africa's President, at the time, and others of conspiracy against Zuma (discounted as baseless in legal terms: by the overruling judge in the case), during a previous proceeding, under a judge in a lower court, by a certain Judge Nicholson, who had ruled to curb proceedings at the time: of prosecution, had been used by Zuma allies to purge their party of Thabo Mbeki, the president of the country at the time, and of his supporters, even resulting in By-Elections, in which the ANC lost many wards, despite voter intimidation, in areas where they took it apon themselves to register late, and in areas: where they competed for wards, where ANC leaders had once been voted in.

A woman was stoned during other previous proceedings against Zuma, allegedly by his followers, in a case of mistaken identity, when they believed it was the woman (Now in Exile), who accused the current communist affiliated ANC president of rape. If she retracts her statements, and only then, according to local news: will the ANC guarantee her safety in South Africa.

Zuma supporters, have also called for the "annihilation" of the DA, South Africa's current main opposition, also: ANC members have been accused of threatening, or intimidating voters, of political violence, and have said they are prepared to seemingly take up arms and "Kill for Zuma", statements promptly mimicked by Afrikaners, who said they would take up arms to protect the Constitution of South Africa. A judge was accused of meddling in the Zuma trial, by approaching two different judges, and new political Party: COPE, found it odd, when police would not allow them to take to the streets in promotion of their conference: after the ANC, suddenly decided to hold an event nearby: riot police turned up to keep COPE in check.

COPE, gets much of its support, partly from supporters of dethrowned ANC president Thabo Mbecki: who had been resident president since previous elections, in which he got into power: until such time, as Polokwane, when Zuma supporters Voted Jacob Zuma as ANC preident: the officials of the elected ANC, where often replaced.

Many of the members of COPE, like those of the ANC: were previously staunch ANC members, under Mbeki: and perhaps prior this: what is interesting: is that we have not been able to find any objection by leading current members of COPE, such as "Terror" (nicknamed for soccer performance: former defense minister) Lekota, when the ANC forced all Members of Parliament in their party to vote for allowing mass, and radical legal abortion, which violates the "rights" of conscientious objectors to object to partaking in abortion, and they also were not vocal enough, if vocal or absent at all to even be heard by Scripturelink, should it have been possible: when the ANC forced through "gay marriage", if they objected at all: we have no record of such: and which we have no record of, has not had any major statements to the contrary, from these men, as far as we have heard. 9 in every 10 South Africans appose abortion, and 4 out of every 5: consider homosexual acts to always be wrong.

The ANC recently disbanded the Scorpions; in a time, when several ANC members were under investigation for serious crimes. The Constitutional Court of South Africa: recently upheld the move to disband the Scorpions: South Africa's FBI: as constitutional.

All my facts are based on proceedings aired on E Television, and local secular news sources: ETV is South Africa's independent news, and entertainment channel (i.e. the other three are government controlled; while DSTV, is satellite and paid audience). Contact them for any errors, but tell me also.

A South African Bishop, recently also said that due to the actions of men: in which he included the Zuma scenario: that South Africa was on the slide to "Sin and Ruin", this was by Archbishop Buthi of the Archdiocese of Johannesburg.

Gaza Strip Situation, Middle East: Lebanon Factor: Hezbolla may have entered the fray: at least 3 missiles, maybe five: launched against Northern Isra

(Social Justice South Africa; Scripturelink Voters guide; C.f. BBC World News (Secular; British; Government) 08 / Jan / 2009; CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07 / Jan / 2009; CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07/01/2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

BBC World News is reporting that the Israeli and Lebanese authorities confirm the launching of three missiles from southern Lebanon, into Northern Israel: creating a situation: where Israel is now being attacked from both sides: complicating the war: as Egypt, and France, are still attempting a ceasefire between Hamas, and Israel. While three are confirmed, some reports, are said to put it at five, according to the BBC.

The attacks (BBC World News (Secular; British; Government) 08 / Jan / 2009) wounded two Israelis, and shell-shocked others. They follow a rise in anti-Israeli rhetoric, by Hezbolla, and 60 Israeli air-strikes on Hamas in the Gaza Strip, as well as renewed Israeli interest in a ceasefire.

The Previous war between Israel, and Hezbolla: happened on the back of a conflict between Israel, and Hamas: according to BBC World News. Hezbolla, recently became a major threat to Lebanon again, threatening civil war, over objections to spy networks they had amassed.

Hezbolla, like Hamas: is an obstacle to democracy: in the country in which they are based. Both have as a final goal: the annihilation of Israel, and the destruction of her people. Both: have gained what they have: via brute force, and propaganda. Neither group: is a state: both are known terrorist groupings: whose methods almost always involve the actions of terror tactics, and brute force, or calls for violence, and or propaganda: or political maneuvering, or the like.

Meanwhile the president of Indonesia (according to CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07 / Jan / 2009), has called the Israel-Hamas conflict: not religious, but political: a move by a largely (about 88%) Muslim nation, which is a statement, and move of aid, or rather: benefit, and advantage: to Israel: who have been made to face protests by Muslims, which have dotted, or cross-hashed across many nations within the the Global Scene: Canadian versions of such protests, were met by pro-Israeli Protests, meaning that those protesting, represented the two different sides independently: however: protests in the Islamic world have largely been anti-Israeli. This move by Indonesia, which is another move by an Islamic nation: saying that the conflict is political: also is of aid to any peace process, as Israel, whatever their methods, are attempting to protect their sovereignty, something which is endangered by protests and condemnation: which: if aimed only at Israel: further complicate the entire situation.

A new, tougher stance; by Israel's previously more moderate government: may have been shown recently: whether or not the Lebanon missiles were launched by Hamas, or Hamas sympathizers, or by Hezbolla, seems unclear. Further attacks, by terrorists, on the sovereignty of Israel: could result in an even worse situation, within the region as a whole. The humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip is said to be severe: either caused by efforts, at propaganda: for the world: by Hamas, or by bombings, lack of water, and supplies, and the situation around deaths, and bombings: or by both.

Israel, recently accepted a peace agreement, which Hamas rejected: because Hamas desired open borders. However, since this attack, Hamas has become increasingly open to negotiations: something not apparent in a long time. Condemnations of Israel, out of highly partisan, and politically motivated: pro-Hamas nations, and notably out of South Africa: have done nothing to improve the situation much, rather: diplomacy: is credited with every advance gained for the people of Palestine: with Israel claiming: they will listen to their friends: a hinting that nations which distort the situation as purely their fault: will not be heard.

A reported: high level "Vatican" delegation to the Area, according to Catholic World News: is a myth: the only visit currently, by high level church representation, was already scheduled: and is thought not to be anything in addition. In fact, they say: this is an annual trip (CWNews (Catholic; American; Independent) 07/01/2009), and nothing more.

(Gaza (Israel/Hamas conflict)) Political solutions: both sides becoming more open as conflict continues: expect statement from SA Bishops on on issue

(Scripturelink Voters Guide; Social Justice South Africa; c.f. CBS News (American; Secular; independent) 07 / 01 / 2009 )

Article by Marc Aupiais

A peace agreement: accepted by Israel, the Palestinian State ("Authority"), Egypt, and France, and proposed by Egypt and France: to halt the catastrophe in the Gaza Strip: has been rejected by Hamas: who are still waiting for borders to open, and sanctions to be dropped.

Hamas, and Israel: are at this point: both open to viewing non-combative solutions, according to CBS: however: any solution must stop Rocket fire on Israel, and Israel apparently wants assurance Hamas will not rearm. Hamas: wants open borders: so that they can communicate with the world, and trade with it.

South African Church to probably lament humanitarian situation; but not condemn either group

Expect a statement from the South African Catholic Bishops Conference, likely in accordance with other groupings: on the dire humanitarian situation on the ground. Despite talking with sources within the church, we remain, and will continue to remain independent. However, we may start publishing articles: covering some statements released by the local bishops, in as independent manner as we always do so: saying when things are us or others. We will however, either vet this, or do as with our emails from VIS, and Fides. We cannot reveal any source as to our statement about the local bishops likely releasing a statement. If our source is accurate, then you will see a statement. This is not due to a request, but due to certain parts of good practice.

Gaza Update; and viewpoint: a perspective; and some statistics

(Social Justice South Africa; Scripturelink voters Guide)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Israel claims that Hamas is a terrorist group. This is easily verifiable: any group, which is not a Nation, which takes a territory from a legitimate government, chases away observers, and both fires rockets on civilians, killing indiscriminately, and willfully: injures noncombatants: well: it sounds like a terrorist grouping.

It is claimed that there are large civilian casualties. As verified on the ground, by a Canadian Newspaper; this seems true, as with what they claim: that there are militants in the areas. The UN, however, claims that the attack on the UN school: is unjustified: and denies claims of militants in the area. The UN; being UN representation. Certain representatives of the UN, have periodically done things which are classified as Genocide by the Nations represented in it, again, it has a voice, but International journalists, and an investigation needs to be conducted, before clear facts are established.

Israel is stopping bombing of Gaza for three hours a day: to allow humanitarian aid in. It is thought by some to be due to pressure.

Israel's claims of minimization of Civilian casualties? Well: again; Gaza is densely populated, and Israel claims that Hamas is attempting to get cover from shooting from civilian areas, basically using Palestinians as Human Shields: and at Israeli civilians.

Hamas seems to have the goal of wiping Israel off the map; and does not recognize Israel as a state. A bit of Insider Information, from the anti-apartheid campaign: when someone is arrested: you make as much noise as possible: as it is how to get them out. The same goes for any political source. Exactly what is occuring: is still doubtful: as often: both sides will get as much support as possible from any side viable. In South Africa we have seen organizations supporting "human Rights"; as within the UN itself: being utterly partisan, and seemingly ignoring abuses of such. The UN recently awarded two high level pro-abortion campaigners: awards for their "contribution" to humanity. The UN, is not infallible, and is as partisan as its local structures.

Israel: has of course pointed to other wars, of Western Nations: including that in Afghanistan; and in Iraq: and the what sounded like the Falklands: in attempting to justify attacks.

They still claim: that the moment Israel is safe from rocket-fire: is the moment they withdraw. Their battle is increasingly gaining bad press in some nations: due to a lapse in publicity campaigns: and their propaganda war. When America invaded Iraq: their propaganda war was highly successful: papers across the world: aired their propaganda about "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in Iraq. Israel could have made wiser decisions: the 72 hour truce suggested: to allow in humanitarian aid: an allowance of the BBC or the like of EuroNews: into Gaza: may have done much: maintaining only air-strikes: could also have been more politically wise.

Some politicians: in Israel: desire the annihilation of Hamas from the scene, but the largely "moderate" government in power: still: is only claiming to be attempting to stop rocket fire.

The fact remains: Hamas; is not a government, not democratically elected, not a state, and not sovereign. They have seized the Gaza Strip: by force: from a legitimate government. They have smuggled in weapons, and are attacking civilians daily. An Israeli infant has been reported as a casualty of a terrorist strike. Hamas has chased away international observers, which were meant to watch smuggling: and consistently there is propaganda spewed throughout the Gaza Strip.

Israel itself, either out of distrust, or as they claim: for their safety; or to cover up what is happening: is not allowing in International Journalists.

Israel, has decided to invade a highly populated area: choosing war: rather than sanctions; and limited tactical bombings, or Police work; with Egypt, which could have aided the situation.

This could be partly due to the unfair partisan way in which many nations have treated Israel: this attack: could well be giving them the same press: as sanctions would have had: in many nations.


If Hamas is a terrorist group which they are, and if they are holding the people of Gaza, as media material, or "Human Shields", then this situation, is much the same: as though terrorists had taken a school: how do governments deal with this: via negotiations; via snipers, via tactical force: which is sure: not to hit civilians, if possible, or via arrests, and court appearances, if possible.

I know of; indirectly (I would be ashamed if they were my friends): many people, including South African politicians: who went to Iraq to be human shields, during the Second Gulf War. It is still the duty, of a civilized authority, not to hit human shields: if viable; at least: I don't think they are combatants: even if they are extremely foolish; after all: companies can't saw environmentalists chained to trees apart.

None the less: an immediate ceasefire by Israel: may be impractical, if not politically impossible to achieve.

Diplomacy and a desire to impress, has seen Israel allow humanitarian aid in, has created suggestions of three hour breaks daily, and has resulted in America largely ignoring the current war. This same desire to impress: is being followed by authorities: which were seen as too weak in their positions on Hamas; and have now regained some "credibility", with their constituencies: something which cannot be ruled out: as a cause of their invasion: their counterstrike.

Until an international non-partisan, independent force is allowed to investigate this situation: it is impossible to know where, when or if each side is breaking international law. Yes, direct terrorist attacks do break the law: Hamas: is a terrorist group: but Israel, is like the owner of the house which is attacked: they too, can be justly arrested if they abuse burglars.

An international tribunal needs to do something about Hamas, they must be Isolated, funding must be cut off, they must be disbanded and arrested. They are the cause of this situation: but if Israel, has mistreated the little child Hamas has brought with: to rob their house: then something must be done. There is no question that what Hamas is doing is both illegal, and terrorism, and unjustifiable evil. Only groups, like South Africa's Communist Affiliated: ANC controlled: government can ignore this. The question is: how legitimate are Israeli claims, that they are acting either as best as possible in extenuating circumstances: or obeying international law.

The real question is not whether Hamas is justified: they are not. The question, is whether or not Israel is obeying international law: and how Israel can act in the right way to sort this situation out. Hamas cannot be expected to do so: they are terrorists, and criminals: if we understand international law. The question: is not whether or not Israel has the right to defend themselves: there is always muttering about them: even when they do something good: the question: is as to their choice of methods in doing so.

A way to withdraw from this war: pride intact: must be given to Israel: or at least, a manner in which some victory (I am not speaking of military, but in general)may be won, by the group. Either, a win-win situation must be gained, or a win-lose: where the loser thinks they have also achieved what they can. Israel: is only doing so, in evidence of how sick the Israeli people are of living in war, in terror.

In the same way: as police brutality is something which is lamented: Israel; could be abusing its position, and going beyond the rights which the International Community gives them, but while any rational person should express worry over statistics; until the fog of war clears, it is unclear what we are dealing with at all.

It was just as unclear in the Russia-Georgia conflict recently; where it is now though by many: that both nations had broken international law.

As it is, the high casualties experienced: must be investigated: and leaving the situation, as is: can no longer be tolerated: the International Community: must force through, even quietly: a way for permanent peace.

Gaza situation: analysis

(Scripturelink Voters Guide)

Article by Marc Aupiais

There is another possible reason for the current Israeli strikes, one not perhaps overly covered. America is entering a Democrats: presidency next year: under a person who has promised to be softer on international relations: this could be bad for Israel: American support ensures they are not conquered by the Arabic Nations around: and Bush is always helpful: he is one international leader who has read the definition of Terrorist; even if he's extrapolated a bit at times: he has condemned Hamas for reopening hostilities with an Israeli government, which has so far been viewed as too soft on the issue: and too friendly to Hamas: who continues to launch terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians.

Hamas has political insurance out of fighting, as does the other group: to an extent: Hamas has no interest in the welfare of their people, nor in peace: but Israel: if the International community can make them feel safe: perhaps by funding missile defense systems, or other defensive aids: and by finally taking war crimes to trial: if Israel were to be made to feel safe: the entire situation would begin to end.

As it is, every Israeli attack: while seeming not to end the Catastrophic situation, is motivated by a desire to secure Israeli people's lives. Hamas: is so defiant: because their survival depends on an enemy to fight.

The only way to peace: is to ignore Hamas' desires: and focus on the needs of the people, and not what they have been propagandized into believing they want. With the entire situation: an international force needs to be deployed, and to ensure the Human Rights of both sides: the time for tit for tat negotiation is over: the time for human rights has begun. Negotiations: must have a goal: not simply squabbling: and a reason to negotiate: must be given: even if it is the threat, or realization: of international troops: and the Hague.

Soft solutions: are often the cause of fear: which, along with the feeling of injustice: these create: creates hatred: and a desperation which leads to war: and only results from a lack of hope. Both sides have become desperate: and all the condemnation in the world: cannot release Israel: from their justified fear: even if their methods may not be justified. Politics, and games must end in this conflict: there must be a final solution: one which unlike the Nazi campaign: does not involve wiping persons of a certain political or religious, or cultural group out: there must be international: armed intervention: via peace keepers; as happens everywhere else: and there must be at least the threat of international prosecution in the International Criminal Court: for all involved in crimes.

There must be a reason to negotiate, and a hope for justice and final peace from it: which only comes from a higher power, and I am not Referring to either of the religions, of the two groups: rather I refer to the United Nations.

Only by justice, can concord be restored, and by concord, shall peace largely be regained. At least those who ordered illegal actions: these at least must be prosecuted: unless extenuating circumstances can be proved... and not simply assumed.

I am not saying that peace keepers must fight Israeli troops: what I am saying is that these must be deployed, perhaps after fighting, or maybe in some ingenious manner. Also, why is it that Egypt continually closes their border? would this not help the situation, if it were opened: would it not begin to release Hamas' grip on Palestine?

Helen Suzman Dies: about a month ago she was still taking a stand: this time against crippling corruption in South Africa

(Scripturelink Voters Guide)

Article by Marc Aupiais

She was a Jewish woman, and a hero.

My Grandfather, whose life helped lead me back to the Catholic faith, stood for her party in the Freestate, but never got more than about 10% of the vote. Often, she was the only voice of reason in parliament: and considering what they attempted with my family: I can assure you: it took courage to stand. Without her: many on Robin Island: would have been much worse off: as an MP; she could go there.

I was speaking to someone who knew of her: the amazing thing is: about a month ago: she joined those calling for an Inquiry into the infamous "Arms Deal". Currently the head of the ruling ANC: is constantly managing to prevent this from going to trial: despite the arrest, and conviction of his financial advisor: for having what the judge termed a generally corrupt relationship with the current president of the communist friendly ANC.

Since Apartheid ended: for many South Africans, nothing has changed: instead: foreigners get their government sponsored houses: out of corruption: leading to attacks such as in the Xenophobia; much as it was in Apartheid. White South Africans: have to face discrimination: a company is only allowed to hire so many white people: meaning that due to a shortage, companies used to hire foreigners: until the ANC closed the net. On exiting government: ANC officials, often become successful "Blackchip" CEO's: in that companies have to do a certain amount of business with companies: which are majority black, and large companies must have large percentages of "Black" ownership: resulting in shares often basically being given away: so as to comply with racially motivated laws. Does this change the socio-economic landscape: unfortunately for the worse: while a few politicians and others become rich: and while the standard of business has decreased, and many businesses have collapsed: or hired persons in token positions, the ANC's leaving politicians: often become rich. In fact, the ANC: has taken a co-operating society, and once again resorted to engineering a society, as Apartheid did: more than this, are other results of ANC power: not only causing social tension: and making it harder for those standing for equality, and non-racialism: intimidation, threats of genocide, and annihilation, against political, and legal opposition: resulting in South Africa's version of the FBI: the "Scorpions", being shut down on investigating ANC politicians, and many other issues: including voter intimidation in previous by elections: have made for a landscape of fear, and often made those who stand for non-racialism: have to shut their mouths, for fear of being ridiculed, or shouted down.

Helen Suzman: was brave at all to still be making a stance: those she was apposing, had changed: but she still stood for South Africa: and is a credit to our Jewish brothers.

Gaza Strip, Palestine: Israeli attack a "Christmas Present": citizen of Gaza strip

(Scripturelink Voters guide; c.f. Catholic News Service (independent; professional; don't always give full picture) 31/12/2008)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Israel's attack, so near to Christmas: is considered as a Christmas present, by one person interviewed in Gaza: who said that it was his opinion, that most people there hate Hamas, but are to scared of them to voice it. No name for this source was given.

Israel has been in contact with foreigners in the West Bank, extending short periods of permission to again exit the area. Another source said that they didn't talk about politics, rather: only about their immediate situation.

It seems likely that the source of all this information is Catholic people there. The accuracy of it is questionable, as to Hamas being despised, as there is only one source for this: someone who himself seems to dislike a group which he considers as abusive towards Catholics and Muslims in the area.

Condemnation of Israel, by lay Catholics in the Gaza strip, however: is something I personally have not seen since the start of the conflict. It seems, many in Gaza, just like many in Israel: are exhausted of the politically motivated impasse. Hamas continues defiance, and has at our last check: continued terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians: despite heavy losses. Heavy civilian losses, can be ascribed to a sort of human shield method used by the terrorist group: Hamas: which purposely places installations, and launches rockets also: intentionally: in and from heavily populated civilian areas.

As to whether or not this advance is justified: many sources would prefer a peaceful solution, at least: those outside of the Gaza strip, but other than supporters of Hamas: this invasion, seems viewed as relief from terror by some.

In the end, condemnations from Catholic sources fear greater hatred being caused by these battles: how justified this war is: will only be determined, after fighting has stopped. The Israeli government has launched this counterstrike: after hundreds of missiles were launched at Israeli civilians: an embarrassment: to a government; which has risked looking too friendly to Palestine.

The war itself: is a result of the failure of the International Community: in the peace efforts: embarrassing an Israeli government which actually co-operated with such: to the extent of being looked down on by Israeli people. A government, which seems to be fighting its war: for political survival: seen as having been too soft in securing Israel: now, spurred on by the opposition: the Israeli government is making a gesture to its people: a gesture, which has cost hundreds of lives: and which would not have been made, in the case: that this government had not been made to look foolish.

Israel: has decided to lift the corpse from its doorway: for years, it has been condemned for Palestine: often wrongly; it certainly is not implementing Apartheid: it is Palestine, which has taken a territory from Israel, and these are two separate states. The result of consistent calls for her destruction: Israel, has decided to finally rid the world of one of the causes of these.

This recent war, proves: not a failure in Israel, but in the International Community: simply continuing to Condemn Israel, while ignoring hundreds of Missiles launched at it: is a mistake; isolating Israel: despite the fact, their enemies: openly advocate terrorism: has only caused the Jewish nation to go it alone. As long as the International Community condemns violence: it is good publicity: but I have yet to see a real solution given: peace needs hope, and justice: but because Hamas could not survive it: the International Community has not once suggested an international Tribunal: to try members of both sides, and force through peace.

The words of the Israeli people: ignored by the world, as they daily face terror attacks; and endless threats: are so much more poignant in the eyes of their politicians: than a thousand protests, and condemnations. Until Israel is given the voice it deserves: it will continue to insure its safety in the only sure way it knows.

The civilian losses in Palestine are huge: but it needs to be noted: that these losses were intended by Hamas: should there be an attack: they have always used civilian deaths as a banner: and have not withdrawn from heavily populated ares.

This said, while I think there must be a better, peaceful answer to this: as long as the International Community continues to prevent Israel from having this option: by allowing her people to call for blood: out of constant fear: we will not see a solution. Any clever politics mean nothing: when Israel's people: are those forcing this war through: the International Community needs to look sincerely into this situation: rather than simply advocating peace: without giving a way to create it.

Both Israeli, and Palestinian needs: need to be put on the table: and those who are obstacles: unjust obstacles: not perceived ones: to a lasting peace: need to be taken down by the United Nations. Clearly, as seen in their strikes, and pointless fighting: Hamas: has it in their best interests politically: to insure fighting continues, and as long as terrorist attacks continue to hit Israel: any Israeli politician, also has it in their best interests to continue fighting: both sides also only lose face in hearing international voices.

Until the political necessity is reversed on both sides: there is no point in simply condemning fighting: because neither side will edge towards peace: until they think it is of benefit to their personal political interests.

Israel gathers tanks at the border of Palestine: offensive nears: could this be the end of Hamas? A look at the situation: as politically motivated!

(Scripturelink Voters guide ; c.f. See What We See News Archive)

Article by Marc Aupiais

In an attack involving hundreds of tons of aerial bombs, and lasting more than what seems one day; as though the closing word for the year: dropped on Hamas fortifications across Gaza: Israel has struck back: hitting military targets, and a police station, and Arabic university: in response to rocket strikes against Israeli civilians: launched by the same sort of organization: which holds Lebanon at gunpoint: Hamas. The Arabic group has vowed to send suicide bombers into Israel now: and launched many more rockets in response: killing at least one Israeli civilian.

Israel, according to EuroNews: has amassed an army of tanks outside of Palestine's: border. The Israeli leader seems to hint that they will definitely invade the area: it is not a question of if they will but when they will, if hintings are to be taken at face value.

Hamas was not part of a comprehensive peace process, and have been the first to attack: breaking a 6 month ceasefire between these two groups. While Israel has allowed aid through the border into Palestine: it is mostly seen as a political move. Israel has large support throughout the west in a move seen largely as aimed at combating terrorist attacks launched on Israel.

Hamas has not withdrawn, launching threats, missiles, and defiance into the air, as the Arab nations have called an emergency meeting to deal with what they will do, and unlike western Nations, such as America: which saw the attack as justified, and blames Hamas for the response they had been blamed for gaining: and only asked that Israel focus on Hamas, and not civilians: the Arab world has condemned the attacks.

This could see a war between Israel and certain other nations, or the end of Hamas in Gaza, or else continuing of the bloodshed already seen. In any case: it could be followed by some real peace: contrasted to the failed process already in action.

The hundreds of casualties taken against Palestine, in recent air-strikes: is very large as compared with one man dying in many retaliations, and perhaps small even compared with those dying in many terrorist attacks recently launched on Israel. The stance of Hamas in the situation: seems unwise, unless their's is some conspiracy to attack Israel from this: when a nation should be scrambling to the negotiating table, and offering up deals: Hamas is only inflating an already bad situation, caused by their own violation of a peace treaty.

Israel, has the media high ground: their attacks were against military targets, and their enemy has attacked civilians purposely, and also has vowed suicide bombing: clear terrorism.

With each statement by the Palestinian authority: outright invasion of Palestine by Israel edges closer.

Israel's attacks come before elections: and are by a government which needs support for re-election. Hamas itself faces opposition within Palestine, and Egypt, an Arab Nation: has closed their border to the nation: forcing tunnels to be dug to Egypt, for many supplies, and making Israel the main route for aid into the nation. Hamas supporters are protesting against Israel, and Egypt, where peace processes are hoped to be etched out.

Cosatu, has now called for a South African boycott of "Apartheid Israel", following their reprisal attacks. Below, we will explain, this is not wise in such a situation, and by a group which repeatedly makes controversial and dangerous statements.

COSATU is somewhat associated with the deposing of South Africa's previous President: Thabo Mbeki.

As the ANC has increasingly dismissed members thought to not be happy with party leadership, and members have repeatedly called for genocide against "Counter-revolutionaries", and as members of the Communist affiliated ANC party: in high positions in the ANC: have made remarks: including one involving a desire to "Annihilate" South Africa's most effective (Voting wise) opposition party: the Democratic Alliance.

The ANC, has also allowed members to call for a genocide if certain desires of the party are not met. The ANC, has for years: voted against what South Africans, including their support bases: have considered moral.

COSATU, the biggest suporter of the new section of the ANC, now in power: have repeatedly been involved in threats: including threatening a judge, and it is they, also, who have made statements: about a desire to "Kill for Zuma" in support of a controversial party leader: as rape (he was found innocent: ANC members in high office have said that they can guarantee the accuser's safety in South Africa: if she withdraws her testimony: another woman looking like her was stoned by ANC supporters, and the party has not collectively condemned violent acts by supporters), corruption, and other charges against the ANC leader have been increasingly caused anxiety about his possible leadership of the country. Many legal efforts against Zuma, have been kept out of court, by efforts, including legal procedure. Other attempts, sometimes seen as caused by COSATU, and seen by many as attempts open meddling in South Africa's justice system, via threats and protests, have aimed at forcing certain things to not be tried in court.

While the Islamic world, has condemned Israeli action, the European Union, has called for peace on both sides, and the "United States", has taken Israel's side. Important figures of COSATU: itself, have previously attacked, or kept silent during attacks by representation from an important part of the union: on the Ten commandments, and is universally controversial in South Africa. Following an attack on the Ten commandments: to justify what was seen as adultery, by Jacob Zuma, who already has many wives: many esteemed members of Cosatu: left. Others have been disheartened, after a man was proven as using union funds for his own purposes, and the whistle-blower, was dealt with, while the person guilty of such got to repay what was owed.

As to international Law, while Israel has reportedly broken it at many an event in past times: attacks aimed purposely at non-combatants by Hamas: probably mean dwindling western support. While the Catholic church generally defends the rights of Palestinians: we have not come into any commentary on this situation.

Those condemning the attacks in South Africa: are Islamic groups, and Cosatu. Most other voices seem neutral: or private on their views of the legitimacy of these reprisals by Israel.

Our own view: is that the issue in Israel and Palestine: should be brought in front of the International Criminal Court, and mediated once and for all: with perpetrators of crimes against humanity: being prosecuted. We firmly believe that as long as the peace process is focussed on negotiation, without a focus on justice: these continued attacks on both sides will proceed, or eventually: Israel, will further enforce their desires to occupy, and control Gaza: to protect their own citizens: which, due to the illogical leadership in Palestine: may result in definite harm to Palestinian people. International efforts, by those apposed to Israeli policy, have also yet to see any real impact on this policy.

The fact that terror attacks, are purposely perpetrated against Israeli civilians, rather than military targets: and from civilian areas: so that Israeli reprisals will hit civilians, seems manipulative. While we do not support either side: at least as far as journalism goes (I do have personal views): we do believe that Hamas is handling this situation: in such a way: as to only further hurt their people. Every response they give: is responded to by Israeli officials who need political support: except Israel can attack precisely, and professionally: and in a way which is pleasing to the west, and western media, while no-one with respect for the Geneva Convention, or Just War principles, can justify the aiming of attacks at known non-combatants. What Palestine needs is peace, not military leadership, which promises terrorist attacks on a more powerful nation, and breaks a peace agreement, which has been securing the lives of their people for six months. Such seems like political maneuvering: and while to the benefit of Israeli politicians, and of those wanting war: this is not in the interests of the Palestinian people.

Hamas, which often keeps their power by military, has caused problems in every nation where they have gained power. Possibly, the best solution to the situation: is for another Palestinian group to take to, or be placed into power: however, we are unsure of when the next Palestinian election will be, or if that would happen, whether an impeachment could occur, or even be possible in such a country, with such social dynamics: and propaganda, or how their state works. Certainly, they are strategically, only harming the dignity of their people: by bad, and foolish decisions: which will gain no long term, nor any short term victories for the group.

Either, these next weeks may show a new situation in the Mid-east, or else: worse of the same. Whatever occurs, the entire circumstance has to alter radically, and will continue to alter as the situation changes.

An Israeli invasion, has just become all the more real a possibility. With such crippling blows to Hamas: a real assault on the small Palestinian territory, could aim at a legacy of long lasting impacts. The lasting effects on the region, and on Palestine of the events following the breaking of a peace agreement by Hamas, and the response by Israel: could be catastrophic.

Both sides: could be well pressed to find other non-violent solutions to this issue. Especially, as it is widely realized: that the Israeli response is seen as a political necessity on the part of Israel's more peace-prone government: after missile strikes from Palestine actually hit civilians populations in Israel. An inadequate defensive network: has lead to a political solution: which involved attacking Palestine. Hamas has for some reason thought it prudent to cause a government which has been the most friendly to their people in a long time: to launch the greatest attack ever launched by Israel: since the Jewish nation was first established, causing an inevitable response from Israel.

On both sides: continuing of conflict, and opposition to a comprehensive peace process, seems largely to be for political give and take. While their people suffer reprisals: political groupings gain prestige, power, and funding from the continued threat of a conflict situation in Palestine.