Woolworths, die alles-Engels kettingwinkel gaan ‘n SEB-transaksie (Swart Ekonomiese Bemagtiging) doen, het die bestuur aangekondig. Dié winkel hou modes, kos en huisware aan en het takke oral in Suid-Afrika.
Die transaksie beloop 292 miljoen rand en sal aan swart vennote ‘n aandeel van 10% in die maatskappy verskaf. Woolworths is maar een van talle ondernemings wat nou in die rigting beweeg van die "erkenning van die sosiale en ekonomiese imperatief" van SEB. Hulle is ook van mening dat die "ongelykhede" van die "apartheid-era" aangespreek moet word en daarom moet die oordrag plaasvind.
Ongeveer 90% van Woolworths se personeel is swart en daarvan is 85% vroue.
These militia groups were guilty of some of the worst human rights abuses during the Democratic Republic of Congo’s long civil war.
The trading went on in 2005. A UN investigative team sent to gather evidence was obstructed and threatened.
The team’s report was buried by the UN itself to "avoid political fallout".
These events took place in and around the mining town of Mongbwalu, in north-eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
The Pakistani battalion of the UN peacekeeping mission deployed there in 2005 and helped bring peace to an area that had previously seen bitter fighting between the Lendu and Hema ethnic groups.
Locals welcomed them, but the lure of the rich alluvial gold mines proved too much to resist for some, recalls the head of the miners’ association, Liki Likambo.
"I saw a UN Pakistani soldier who came to buy gold in one of the gold negotiators here in Mongbwalu. I was there in the shop. I saw it with my own eyes."
Soon the Pakistani officers were doing deals directly with the FNI militia.
Evarista Anjasubu – a local businessman said he had known of transactions between Pakistani officers and two of the most notorious militia leaders called Kung Fu and Dragon who controlled the gold mines.
"They were already friends. I knew well. It was gold that was the basis of their friendship. So the gold extracted from the mines went directly to the Pakistanis. They used to meet in the UN camp in Mongbwalu, in a thatched house."
As the trade developed the Pakistani officers brought in the Congolese army and then Indian traders from Kenya.
Richard Ndilu, in charge of immigration at Mongbwalu airstrip, became suspicious in late 2005 when an Indian businessman arrived there and went to stay at the camp of the Pakistani peacekeepers.
Alerted to this illegal trade by her officials, the District Commissioner of Ituri, Petronille Vaweka, went to Bunia airport to intercept a plane from Mongbwalu.
She said her way was blocked by Congolese army officers, who refused to allow her to inspect the cargo.
"I knew they had gold because the price of gold increased when the Indians went to Mongwalu," she said.
"When we wanted to verify what was inside the plane the pilot refused to allow us to enter the plane – me who was the chief, he refused! It was a big scandal."
When the UN was alerted to the allegations of gold trading by Human Rights Watch in late 2005, they instituted a major investigation by the Office for Internal Oversight Services.
What they uncovered was even more explosive.
This is from a witness statement given to the UN by a Congolese officer engaged in the disarming of the militia in the nearby town of Nizi:
"The officer expressed his regrets over the malpractices of a Pakistani battalion under the auspices of Major Zanfar. He revealed the arms surrendered by ex-combatants were secretly returned to them by Major Zanfar thereby compromising the work they had collectively done earlier.
"Repeatedly he saw militia who had been disarmed one day, but the next day would become re-armed again. The information he could obtain was always the same, that it would be the Pakistani battalion giving arms back to the militia."
This evidence was backed up by an interpreter working with the Pakistani battalion at Mongbwalu.
On arriving at the Officer’s Mess, the interpreter found two militia leaders – known as Kung Fu and Dragon.
The interpreter said that the first question from Major Ali was to Kung Fu – asking him: ‘What about the weapons I gave you? What about the weapons Monuc gave you?’
A UN investigation team arrived in Mongbwalu in August 2006.
At first the Pakistani battalion there cooperated with them. But when they attempted to seize a computer with apparently incriminating documents on it a stand-off ensued.
The Pakistanis surrounded the UN police accompanying the investigators with barbed wire and put two armoured personnel carriers outside their living quarters at a nearby Christian mission.
Thoroughly intimidated, the investigators were airlifted out of Mongbwalu.
The Pakistani troops are replaced every six months and the BBC investigation concerns events that took place prior to the deployment of the current Pakistani battalion.
When we put the allegations of weapons trading to the head of the UN in Congo, Ambassador William Swing, he denied emphatically that any weapons have been handed by his troops to the militia.
"This I can categorically deny. What we have done is just the opposite. We have demobilised more than 20,000. We have taken in caches of arms. We have destroyed arms. We have done public burnings of these arms. And there is absolutely nothing to that allegation."
He says that the investigation into gold trading has yet to be completed.
The UN in New York has refused to explain what took place or why, nearly two years after the allegations first surfaced, the Congolese people have no idea what action – if any – has been taken to discipline the Pakistani soldiers concerned.
The election follows a crackdown on activists who had been calling for free elections. The BBC’s Bill Hayton, who in March was told to leave Vietnam by the government, has been investigating the prospects for democracy there.
The sight of a secret policeman forcing his hand over the mouth of a Catholic priest, Nguyen Van Ly, to prevent him shouting out an anti-communist poem during his trial seemed to sum up Vietnam’s attitude towards political dissent.
But at the same time as the country’s security forces are engaged in what Human Rights Watch has called "one of the worst crackdowns on peaceful dissent in 20 years", the Communist Party is experimenting with a degree of openness.
So what are the prospects for democracy in Vietnam?
At first sight Vietnam’s National Assembly looks like little more than a rubber-stamping body.
Ninety per cent of the members in the last session were members of the Communist Party and the 10% that were not all had to be approved by the party in order to stand for election.
The party maintains close control over what the assembly discusses and decides.
For example, although in theory the assembly elects the president and prime minister there is only ever one candidate on the ballot – the candidate previously chosen by the party.
But that is not the whole story, because the assembly is beginning to show some signs of independent thinking in the way it scrutinise laws and holds ministers to account.
In the past few sessions the grilling of officials seen to have failed in their jobs, live on television, has gripped the country.
Poor performances by the scandal-hit former minister of transport and the seemingly complacent head of the Supreme Court caused them to later lose their jobs.
However, some members believe that the current situation is not enough. Those such as Do Trong Ngoan want more.
"The vision and the knowledge of the National Assembly have to be developed," he says, "or the assembly will be left behind and if that happens we won’t be able to take the right decisions and that would lead to long-lasting backwardness of the country.
But while some parts of the communist system want greater openness – others do not.
The trials of dissidents in the past few months, including the priest Father Ly in March, was vivid proof.
Their crimes were to call for multi-party elections.
The Communist Party believes its role is to lead the country – and not necessarily to follow the wishes of the people.
This position is expertly articulated by the woman who is the assembly’s leading diplomat – often leading delegations to Washington and other countries – Madame Ton Nu Thi Ninh.
"I resist the idea that voters are always right," she says.
"I know that there are in any country enclaves of conservatism, look at what happened in South Africa with apartheid. What is right does not always coincide with majority rule."
Although any citizen can, in theory, stand for election to the National Assembly, they first have to be approved by the Communist Party.
There are two selection processes, both organised by the party’s umbrella organisation called the Vietnam Fatherland Front.
In the first hearing the prospective candidate must convince their work colleagues of their good character and in the second they must do the same with the people living in their neighbourhood.
This micro-control means that anyone with views outside what the party views as acceptable will not even get the chance to stand.
However, some parts of the party are keen to get more independents elected to widen the pool of talent in the assembly.
These would not be dissidents but something like a "loyal opposition". But even this, like other areas of political reform, is opposed by others.
No Vietnamese political analysts will comment on divisions within the party directly, but Martin Gainsborough, of Bristol University in the UK, keeps a close eye on the evolution of Vietnamese politics.
"Within Vietnam – both official Vietnam and unofficially – there’s a wide range of differing views about the speed of political change," he says.
"Some people within the system think the National Assembly should go further in asserting its role in the country. Others think that change is fast enough already and want to proceed more carefully. Part of the challenge, part of the ongoing debate in Vietnam is about working out those issues."
Political reform in Vietnam is slow but it is happening and so long as it does not challenge the supremacy of the Communist Party it is likely to continue.
Vietnam’s communist rulers are happy to experiment with openness to make the current system more efficient but any transition to a new system, a truly open and democratic system, is still a long way off.
Die Afrikaner hou hom nog net soos destyds, toe die HNP hom gewaarsku het teen wat aan die kom is, met beuselagtighede soos o.a. webwerwe en sport besig; ekself is in hierdie verband nie ‘n uitsondering nie. Die webwerwe word gebruik vir oefeninge in welsprekendheid waar allerhande raad uitgedeel word soos bv. die brief van Klaas Krissen. Wie wil u oortuig dat die Afrikaner "gatvol" is? Die ANC weet dit lankal en steur hulle hoegenaamd nie daaraan nie, miskien moet u in dié verband ‘n ope brief aan die DA rig, hulle weet dit dalk nog nie. Enigeen/organisasie wat die Bloubul-ondersteuners van Loftus af kan weghou, sal in die geskiedenis onthou word as iemand wat ’n wonderwerk verrig het. Die goeie nuus is: die regime met sy nuwe sportwetgewing gaan dit dalk regkry, nie omdat hulle wonderwerke kan verrig nie, maar omrede hulle die Bloubulle gaan vernietig.
Die "Powers that be", wie hulle ook al mag wees, het ‘n onfeilbare paddakookmetode ontwikkel, naamlik "praathuise". Hierdie huise neem verskillende gedaantes aan, bv. politiek en meer letterlik die parlement (dink maar net hoe die NP mense besig gehou het met nuttelose argumente en redenasies soos bv. wigte en teenwigte), Radio Pretoria, briewekolomme in koerante en op webwerwe, ens. Dit hou die Afrikaner besig met bespiegelings oor wat kan gebeur, gee hom plek waar hy drastiese menings kan lug en dien as weerligafleier vir sy frustasie deur by hom die illusie te skep dat hy besig is om iets vir sy volk se redding te doen. Die volk neem uit die aard van sy praat-baie-en-doen-niks-ingesteldheid entoesiasties deel, hou homself besig met voorstelle vir aksies (en dan en wan ‘n flouerige aksiepoging) en onbenullige welsprekende rubrieke, terwyl die vyand sy ondergang beplan en uitvoer.
Die Afrikaners sal weer saamstaan as hulle met die rug teen die muur gedwing word deur magte van buite en dit kom so seker as wat ek hierdie ellange nuttelose menings en/of inligting op u webwerf kwytgeraak het.
They said Washington fears the comments from the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency could undermine U.N. Security Council’s effort to pressure Tehran into fully scrapping enrichment.
The Americans apparently are concerned Mohamed ElBaradei’s statements could exacerbate traditional splits between Russia and China and the United States, Britain and France, the three other permanent Security Council members.
While the Western council members have traditionally pushed for tough sanctions on Iran, opposition by Moscow and Beijing has led them to settle for watered-down sanctions less rigid than they originally proposed since the first set was agreed on Dec. 23.
The U.S. mission to the IAEA had no immediate comment beyond confirming that mission head Gregory L. Schulte was in Washington for “consultations.”
Diplomats, who insisted on anonymity because of the delicate nature of the issue, spoke to The Associated Press before the release of a report from ElBaradei that could act as a trigger for a third set of Security Council sanctions on Iran.
Their revelations exposed a hardening of positions on how to deal with Iran’s enrichment program, which potentially could produce material for nuclear bombs. Iran denies that is its goal, saying it wants only to produce fuel for nuclear reactors that generate electricity.
In public remarks over the past two weeks, ElBaradei said he feels it is too late to force Tehran to scrap its enrichment program as demanded by the Security Council and argued instead for implementing inspection safeguards to prevent an expansion of the program.
“I believe that (U.N.) demand has been superseded by events,” ElBaradei told the Spanish newspaper ABC. Instead, he said, “the important thing now is to concentrate on Iran not taking it to industrial scale.”
Iran’s ultimate stated goal is running 54,000 centrifuges to churn out enriched uranium – enough for dozens of nuclear warheads a year.
Some members of the IAEA’s decision-making 35-nation board share ElBaradei’s view. But the U.S. and its closest board allies, including Britain, France, Australia, Canada and Japan, fear such comments could weaken Security Council resolve on punishing Iran for defying the U.N. demand.
Agency officials refused to comment on details of the report ahead of its release to board members and the Security Council. But it was expected to confirm information leaked over the past weeks that Iran has demanded the demand for a suspension of enrichment and expanded that work.
With the council’s deadline for Iranian compliance coming Thursday, the report could set the stage for further sanctions against the Islamic republic.
Despite Iranian insistence its nuclear program has only peaceful intentions, it has been hit with two sets of U.N. sanctions because of suspicions bred by nearly two decades of Tehran’s clandestine nuclear activities, including questionable black-market acquisitions of equipment and blueprints that appear linked to weapons plans.
The diplomats said Tuesday that the IAEA’s report would likely confirm that Iran has assembled more than 1,600 centrifuges at its underground facility at Natanz and is running about 1,300 of them, producing small amounts of uranium enriched to about 5 percent.
While that level is far below the 90 percent needed to produce weapons, the number of centrifuges running – and producing enriched material – is grounds for concern for the Security Council because it documents an expanding and functioning program.
The last report from ElBaradei three months ago put the number of connected centrifuges at around 1,000 and said no enrichment had begun.
One of the diplomats said the report would additionally likely suggest that Iranian experts had ironed out many of the glitches hamstringing enrichment efforts only a few months ago that had caused breakdowns in experimental, smaller-scale centrifuge operations.
“This is a program that is well on its way to full development,” he said. “And if they can enrich to 5 percent, there is no potential limit to how high they can enrich.”
Maybe they’re outside in the garden. They could be playing softball. Or perhaps they’re just plain bored.
In TV’s worst spring in recent memory, a startling number of Americans drifted away from television the past two months: More than 2.5 million fewer people were watching ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox than at the same time last year, statistics show.
Everyone has a theory to explain the plummeting ratings: early Daylight Savings Time, more reruns, bad shows, more shows being recorded or downloaded or streamed.
[…]
Scariest of all for the networks, however, is the idea that many people are now making their own television schedules. The industry isn’t fully equipped to keep track of them, and as a result the networks are scrambling to hold on to the nearly $8.8 billion they collected during last spring’s ad-buying season.
"This may be the spring where we see a radical shift in the way the culture thinks of watching TV," said Sarah Bunting, co-founder of the Web site Television Without Pity.
The viewer plunge couldn’t have come at a worse time for the networks — next week they will showcase their fall schedules to advertisers in the annual "up front" presentations.
The networks argue that viewership is changing, not necessarily declining. Some advertisers respond that they are no longer willing to pay full price up front to reach viewers that may not tune in later.
This fall, both sides will be watching what happens with families like Tony Cort’s. During prime-time, Cort, his wife and four kids tend to scatter to computers or other activities in different parts of their New Jersey home. (Not during "American Idol" or "Lost," though.) They’re definitely watching less TV, said Cort, who runs a Web site for martial arts aficionados.
"I remember when ’24’ was on, that was something there was a lot of interest and excitement about," he said.
News flash: "24" is still on. Its ratings are down, too, amid a critically savaged season.
More bad news abounds. NBC set a record last month for its least-watched week during the past 20 years, and maybe ever — then broke it a week later. This is the least popular season ever for CBS’ "Survivor." ABC’s "Lost" has lost nearly half its live audience — more than 10 million people — from the days it was a sensation. "The Sopranos" (a show that has earned broadcast-network-like ratings in the past) is ending on HBO, and the response is a collective yawn.
Events like "American Idol" on Fox (which is owned by News Corp.) and "Dancing With the Stars" on ABC (owned by The Walt Disney Co.) are doing the most to prop up the industry. But still, in the six weeks after Daylight Savings Time started in early March, prime-time viewership for the four biggest broadcast networks was down to 37.6 million people, from 40.3 million during the same period in 2006, according to Nielsen Media Research.
Missing money
Millions of missing viewers could translate into millions of missing dollars for the networks heading into the up-front sales season.
Advertisers don’t believe that the drop in viewership is as dramatic as the numbers suggest, but they’re no longer willing to spend what they once did in the spring market, said Brad Adgate of Horizon Media, an ad buying firm. Johnson & Johnson and Coca-Cola sat out the spring market last year — betting they could get lower prices later — and it’s likely other companies will do the same this year, he said.
The early start to Daylight Savings Time has hurt ratings. Prime-time viewership traditionally dips then as people do more things outside, and this year folks had a three-week head start to get into the habit of doing something else. More network reruns during March and April dampened interest, too.
"We let them get out of the habit of watching television a little bit, and it’s going to take some time to get these people back in front of their television sets," said David Poltrack, chief researcher for CBS (owned by CBS Corp.).
Strategic decisions to send some popular serial dramas on long hiatuses appeared to backfire. NBC’s "Heroes," CBS’ "Jericho" and "Lost" lost significant momentum when they returned. Besides HBO’s "The Sopranos," there are no lengthy countdowns toward the end of very popular series, unless you count "The King of Queens."
[…]
This year, for the first time, Nielsen is measuring viewership in the estimated 17 percent of homes with digital video recorders _ but it only counts them in the ratings of a specific show if they watch it within 24 hours of the original air time.
If you recorded "Desperate Housewives" this spring and watched it two days later, you’re not counted in the show’s ratings. And you’re not counted by Nielsen under any circumstances if you downloaded a show on iTunes and watched it on your iPod or cell phone, or streamed an episode from a network Web site.
Since last year’s Nielsen sample contained no DVR homes and this year’s sample does, logic dictates that fewer Nielsen families are watching TV live this year, deflating ratings.
"People are not consuming less television, they’re watching it in different ways, and the measurements haven’t caught up," said Alan Wurtzel, chief research executive at NBC (owned by General Electric Co.).
The numbers can be significant. When "The Office" aired on NBC on April 5, Nielsen said there were 5.8 million people watching. Add in the people who recorded the episode and watched it within the next week, and viewership swelled to 7.6 million, a 32 percent increase, Nielsen said.
"The Sopranos" is another interesting case study. For its first four episodes this season, the show averaged 7.4 million viewers for its weekly Sunday night premiere, down from 8.9 million at the same point its last season.
But HBO shows each new episode eight times a week. Between the multiple plays and DVR viewing, each episode this spring gets 11.1 million viewers, down from 13 million last year. And these figures don’t count people who watch on demand.
Numbers for "The Sopranos" may be down because people can watch whenever they want. They may not be as interested in the show as they used to be — or it could be a combination of both.
Television has made billions based on how many people watch a show at its regular time. That idea may already be obsolete. So should the industry use DVR viewing when setting ad rates? If so, how quickly must people watch the shows — within two days? A week? What about people who watch shows on their cell phones or on network Web sites, which Nielsen doesn’t measure yet? Later this month Nielsen will begin measuring how many people watch commercials. Should those be used to compute advertising costs?
Right now, none of those questions have answers.
However, "if we continue to do business assuming people will watch television as they always have," said NBC’s Wurtzel, "it’s a dead-end game."
’n Artikel wat ek in die afgelope vier jaar meer nageslaan het as enige ander een, is een wat Dan Roodt geskryf het in die Rapport, 18 Mei 2003. “Meimaand is geskiedenismaand”. Op die 19de Mei 2003, het ons van vroegdag af bibberkoud op die Paleis van Justisie se trappe gestaan en koes vir kameralense. Rondom ons was ’n atmosfeer van afwagting, ’n energie vreemd aan enige iets anders in ons ervaringsveld. Strate was afgekordon, sirenes het geloei, daar was blou uniforms net waar jy kyk, TV-kamers het gerol, gewone kameras het geflits, ’n helikopter het bo ons oor die plein gesirkel – ’n hele Hollywood movie… Net, ons was nie filmsterre nie. Hoewel ’n klompie van ons wel die erns van die saak deeglik besef het, het gode sy dank, nie een van ons daardie dag geweet wat nog op ons wag nie.
Ek het vroegoggend op hierdie herdenking van daardie dag weer Dan Roodt se artikel gelees. Toevallig verwys hy juis in die laaste paragraaf na die sogenaamde Boeremag met al die toevallighede daarom heen – die Paleis van Justisie, die Rivonia-verhoor, die prokureur betrokke met die naam van Paul Kruger, die juridiese aspekte.
Min het ons daardie dag geweet dat Meimaand ook ons geskeidenismaand sal bly.
Op 3 Mei 2006 kry Herman van Rooyen en Rudi Gouws dit reg om uit die Hooggeregshof te ontsnap en agt maande soek te bly.
Op 16 Mei vanjaar sterf Herman Scheepers, beskuldigde nr. 5 in die saak. Hy is vandag(19 Mei) op Piet Retief begrawe. Hy het maande lank stukkie vir stukkie gesterwe aan die gevolge van ’n breinvirus. As gevolg van die erns van sy siekte het hy darem borg gekry en sy vrou en dogters kon hom sy laaste dae in hul eie huis versorg.
Net laas week het die 138ste getuie begin getuig. ’n Senior Superintendent (hanteerder van die eerste getuie) is in terme van artikel 204 van die Strafproseswet gewaarsku dat hy slegs vrywaring kan kry van moontlike strafregtelike vervolging indien hy die hof kan oortuig dat hy die waarheid praat. Die klagtes: besit van ’n onwettige vuurwapen, besit van plofstof en meineed. Meineed: oor getuienis wat hy in die onderskeie borgaansoeke van beskuldigdes 1 tot 4, wat steeds in aanhouding is, gelewer het.
Dan Roodt se artikel het my daardie tyd al daarop gewys, dat toevallighede in geskiedenis verander en ek het daardie dag op die trappe besef dat ons midde in die geskiedenis staan. Sy aanhaling van Andrè Malraux het aan my kom klou:
“Vir my het die politiek nog nooit bestaan nie. Wat wel bestaan, is geskiedenis.”
Anita du Plessis is een van die “Boeremagvrouens” wie se mans tans aangehou word en op aanklagte van hoogverraad verhoor word.
Die aanslag op Bok van Blerk in onlangse uitgawes van Beeld en ander koerante het betrekking. Die feit dat Naspers besluit het om Bok te verguis, verbaas my geensins nie. Om die waarheid te sê, dit verstom my eerder dat dit hulle so lank geneem het om daarmee te begin.
Naspers bevind hom in ’n geweldige dilemma. Terwyl daardie mediahuis die ANC en lg. se beleid vooropstel moet dit terselfdertyd sy koerante aan sy oorwegend Afrikanermark verkoop. Die krisis waarin Naspers verkeer, is dat sy ideologiese sentrum, nl. die ANC, aktief die blanke, maar veral die Afrikaner, probeer ondergrawe. Soos wat Afrikanernasionalisme te midde van die groeiende anargie in die NSA ontwaak, word hierdie tameletjie toenemend taai.
Aangesien die mediagroep nou volledig onder die beheer van ’n handjievol bruin Marxiste en (eertydse?) Broederbonders staan, is daar geen voorneme om die Afrikaner se belange te bevorder nie. Inteendeel, Naspers het ’n renons in Afrikaners en sou seker, as hulle kon, eerder vir die swart mark publiseer. Die probleem is egter dat die swart mark nie so winsgewend soos die Afrikaanse mark is nie. Die bruin Marxiste in Naspers haat die Afrikaner met venynigheid, soos wat keer op keer in hul skrywes en optredes na vore kom. Die Broeders en kie. is egter soos gewoonlik manteldraaiers wat daarna sal streef om enige regime, ongeag hoe immoreel en korrup, te ondersteun solank hulle sake kan doen. Dit is dus uiters belangrik vir hierdie paradoksale bende van Marxistiese fanatici en die geldgierige bloedsuiers (die Broeders) om die kroon op die ANC se kop te hou. Sodoende voldoen dit aan eg. se ideologiese oortuigings en lg. se ekonomiese vereistes, want solank die ANC nie uitgedaag word nie, is dit business as usual sonder enige magsbalansversteuring.
Vir Afrikaners om dus nou ontevrede te wil raak met die NSA en boonop hul trotse identiteit te herontdek, is ’n gevaarlike onkruid vir beide Naspers en hul politieke base in Lethuli-huis, wat ten alle koste uitgeroei moet word. Soos sydissels brand die nuwe Afrikanernasionalisme hulle genoeg om op te tree. Die laaste ding wat Naspers nou wil hê, is dat ’n nuwe geslag kunstenaars met ’n trotse nasionale gees die ou (en afgeleefde) proteskunstenaars van die tagtigerjare as die volk se keuse vervang. Dit is dus baie belangrik vir Naspers dat die Afrikaner bv. eerder na Anton Goosen as na Bok van Blerk luister, dat ons eerder Max Du Preez as Dan Roodt lees. Die tagtiger jare se hasbeens sal ten minste ons voortdurend bewus maak van ons “skuld” en “agterlikheid” en hoe “wonderlik” dit in die ANC-SA is.
Vir Bok en andere om nou die mense die kans te gee om hul diepgesetelde emosies uit te druk en te voel, pas nie in die Naspers-agenda nie. “Nee, hierdie Bok moet doodgeskiet word. Hy moet vrek! As ons nie sy musiek onpopulêr kan maak nie, kom ons pleeg dan karaktermoord op hom. As niemand van hom hou nie sal hulle ook nie na sy musiek luister nie…”so werk die Naspersbrein. Dus neem hulle ’n paar gerugte oor hoe “moeilik” Bok kwansuis is en oordryf dit tot die mag 100. Noem hom dan sommer ook ’n Diva en siedaar! dis bok-in-die-pot. Dat Bok soos alle populere kunstenaars oorval word deur promotors en organiseerdes wat allerhande leë beloftes maak en dikwels ondergemiddelde diens lewer, word verswyg. Dat Bok bloot daarna streef om uitmuntende vertonings aan sy ondersteuners te lewer en dus organiseerders wat ondergemiddelde diens lewer en ander kansvatters moet vasvat, is immers ’n goeie vermaaklikheiskunstenaar se plig.
Karaktermoord kom egter natuurlik vir Naspers. Weens die mediahuis se fanatiese oortuigings en die moeite wat dit verg om op gereelde basis die immorele ANC-regering te regverdig, is dit somtyds baie makliker om bloot net teenstanders uit te wis. Aangesien Naspers se argumente nie opgewasse is teen andersdenkendes nie, speel hulle dikwels die man eerder as die bal. Max du Preez is sekerlik die een wat die mees bedrewe is met karaktermoord (of ten minste pogings daartoe). In eg Stalinistiese styl voer hy pogroms teen sy teenstanders se karakters sodat lesers moet glo dat sy opponente ongeloofwaardige en illegitieme skurke is.
Om iets van Max se eie taktiek te volg, wil ek darem byvoeg dat dit sekerlik te verstane is dat daar so ’n daling in Naspers se joernalistieke standaard sou plaasvind. Deurdat Naspers die Marxistiese opdrifdels van die tagtigerjare (soos Max du Preez, Koos Kombuis, Jakes Gerwel e.a.) in beheer van hul “Propagandadepartement” gestel het, lyk Nasperskoerante deesdae meer soos die ou Sowjetkoerante, Prawda (“Die Waarheid”) en Isjwestia (“Nuus”). So het die Sowjetpubliek dan ook gereeld gespot met: “In Prawda is daar geen Isjwestia nie en in Isjwestia is daar geen Prawda nie”. Ek dink egter dat Naspers se koerante aan beide nuuswaardigheid en die waarheid ontbreek. Voorbeelde is Max se holocaustontkenning van die Britse verkragtings van Boerevroue, terwyl lesers tot vervelens herinner word aan die kamstige “wonderlike demokrasie” waarin ons leef.
Onwillkeurig begin mens jouself afvra waarheen Naspers met die Afrikaner op pad is. Wat is die strategie en toekomsvisie te Heerengracht 40? Hul propagandablaaie poog gedurig om die Afrikaner se bestaan te ontken, om sy selfbeeld af te breek en om sy huidige swaarkry weg te redeneer, asook enige vorm van Afrikanernasionalisme te beveg. Die Afrikaner word tot ANC-onderdanigheid gebreinspoel. Die sinistere waarheid is egter dat die komplot in alle waarskynlikheid heelwat verder gaan as onderdanigheid aan die ANC. Deur die Afrikaner se identiteit te probeer ontken en aktief te probeer ondermyn, gaan dit ook daaroor om die Afrikaner se etniese karakter so te ruïneer dat hy homself nie meer herken nie. Wanneer die Afrikaner sleng praat, sosio-ekonomies in die Afrikamassa wegsmelt, met ander rasse ondertrou, geen unieke karakter of bewussyn meer het nie en nie meer aandring op sy regte nie, dan het Naspers sy doel bereik. Dan is die Afrikaner ’n Afrikaan en sal hy doelloos in ’n Afrikadiktatuur voortleef sonder om die magsbalans te versteur. Dan is die Afrikaner (altans diegene wat nie die land verlaat het nie) die onintellektuele, ongekultiveerde en ondergeskikte ghwar wat geen weerstand bied nie.
Vir ’n tyd lank het Naspers baie hard gepoog om met die ultra-linkse kwasi-intellektuele tydskrif, Insig, die Afrikaner met halfgebakte argumente te oortuig om met die swart massa te versmelt. Daardie projek het met die geleidelike ontwaking van die Afrikaner so liederlik gefaal dat Insig sy deure moes sluit. Nou slaan Naspers ’n ander koers in. Die teenoorgestelde word nou aangewend deur op die Afrikaner se mees basiese instinkte aanspraak te maak. Die weg word voorberei vir daardie doelwit deur die sistematiese loodsing van ’n hele flotilla poniekoerante wat die Afrikaner se verghwarring moet fasiliteer. Hierdie tipe publikasies sal dan ook eendag Naspers se hoofbesigheid raak. Die koste verbonde aan die uitgee van sulke koerante is baie laer, omdat dit aan geen nuuswaardigheids-, joernalistieke of taalkundige gehaltevereistes hoef te voldoen nie, terwyl uit-die-duim-gesuigde stories soos “Non verwag ruimtewese se baba” dan die trant van die “nuus” word.
Wanneer die Afrikaner se identiteit dood is en hy deel van ’n smeltkroes is, dan sal hy ook elemente van homself aan die Afrikamassa oordra sodat dit ’n totale mengelkultuur word. So ’n mengsel sal ’n baie meer toeganklike mark vir Naspers wees as die huidige etnies en taalkundig seksionele mark. Ek het egter nuus vir Naspers. Selfs die dinamiese VSA se sogenaamde melting pot kon tot vandag toe met bitter min sukses die onderskeie rasse in daardie land versmelt. Hoe meer jy mense van hul karakter probeer ontneem, hoe meer veg hulle vir die behoud daarvan en gevolglik ontwaak hul nasionalistiese sentimente. Hierdie visie, nl. Afrikaneroplossing in ’n “groter Suid-Afrika”, wat blyk dié van Heerengracht 40 te wees, sal nooit verwesenlik word nie. Lord Milner het die Afrikaner probeer verengels en liederlik misluk. Naspers wil die Afrikaner verafrikaan en gaan nie alleen misluk nie, maar iewers in die toekoms, saam met die ANC, net so gehaat soos Milner wees.
Die Duitse Kanselier, Angela Merkel, huidige president van die EU sowel as tans van die G-8, het Dinsdag in Berlyn die "onaanvaarbare" politiek van die Zimbabwiese president Robert Mugabe skerp gekritiseer tydens die agtste Forum vir die Vennootskap met Afrika (APF).
"Ons volg die situasie in Zimbabwe met groot kommer. Niks kan die intimidasie van politieke opponente regverdig nie, die stokke in die wiele van ‘n onafhanklike media, die dreigemente teenoor landelike inwoners en die vernietiging van krotbuurte nie," het sy verklaar.
Die grootste opposisieparty in Zimbabwe, die MDC, het Vrydag ‘n veldtog geloods om druk op president Mugabe te plaas om parlementêre verteenwoordigers en aktiviste wat in Maart vir terrorisme gearresteer is, vry te laat.
Die aanhoudings het gevolg op die inhegtenisname en aanranding van Morgan Tsvangirai, MDC-leier, en ‘n dosyn van sy ondersteuners tydens ‘n biduur wat deur die opposisie, kerke en menseregteorganisasies georganiseer is.
Regtigwaar, ons behoort nou vir Max du Preez uit te los. Selfs al is hy een of ander spesie van joernalistieke masochis wat blykbaar skryf vir die perverse vreugde om karwats te kry, moet ‘n mens een of ander tyd sê, genoeg is genoeg. Om hom skriftelik pak te gee is ‘n minderwaardige uitdaging. Dit is soos vir die Bulle om teen die Queensland Reds te speel: Net te maklik. Die waarheid is, as daar een iemand is wat nie naby ‘n pen toegelaat behoort te word nie, is dit Max du Preez. ‘n Pen in sy hand is soos ‘n skerp mes in ‘n baba se hand – baie gevaarlik vir homself.
‘n Groot deel van die skuld is Henry Jeffreys, regstellend aangestel as kleurlingredakteur van Die Burger, s’n. In plaas daarvan dat hy vir Maxie as’t ware ‘n skoon vel papier en ‘n paar vetkryte gee sodat hy in die hoek kan sit en met tongtippie wat by sy mondhoek uitsteek in konsentrasie, stokmannetjies teken en uit almal se pad uit bly, gee Jeffreys vir Max gereeld morge se kolomsentimeters om ‘n gek van homself in te maak.
Ja, ons moet nou regtig vir Max begin uitlos. En ek sal, ek sal, ek belowe ek sal. Nog net hierdie een keer. Asseblief. As ek soos vanoggend lees wat die arme, simpel drommel weer te skrywe het – ek kan myself nie help nie; ek is ‘n swakkeling – dan helder sy sotlikheid ‘n reeds helder dag verder op en ek moet – móét! – hom eenvoudig net nog ‘n keer afransel.
Eintlik sal dit beter wees om daarvan te praat om Max te “rol.” Dit is hoe ons as kinders vir mekaar ‘n ellende belowe het: “Ek gaan jou rol.” Maar in hierdie geval het dit nog ‘n sterker toepassing. Sien, Max is van daardie spesie wat ons vandag ‘n “liberalis” noem. Maar dit is ‘n onbevredigende uitdrukking want ons is almal, in ‘n klassieke of ander sin, liberalisties. So moes daar ‘n ander benaming vir Max se soort gevind word. My voorstel is om hulle “hoepels” te noem; mense wat so ver weg van die waarheid af probeer agteroorleun dat hulle met hulle koppe in hulle agterwêrelde opeindig sodat hulle so hoepelvormig staan. Wanneer dit te donker en bedompig word, trek hulle hulle koppe uit en daar is ‘n klapgeluid soos ‘n sjampanjeprop wat losskiet. Max du Preez is ‘n hoepel en gemaak om te rol.
In hierdie naweek se By in Die Burger, sien ons die hoepel in aksie. (Die naam van die rubriekskrywer word aangedui as “Max du Preex,” maar dit help niks. Jy kan die regte Max du Preez en sy gebrekkige logika nie wegsteek nie.) In sy tipiese deurmekaar hardopmymerstyl – meer verwarrend vir homself as enige iemand anders – wonder die voorsitter, president en penningmeester van die Max du Preez-bewonderaarsklub of hy ‘n Afrikaner of nie ‘n Afrikaner is nie. Wat hom so verwar is dat hy blykbaar nie weet wat ‘n Afrikaner is nie. Hy bied aan om homself as Afrikaner te skors maar, sê hy, hy moet “net gou uitwerk wat dit is waaruit ek geskors word”. (Let op na Max se gekondisioneerde behoefte om ‘n slagoffer wees. In die vorige sin bied hy aan om homself te skors en dan – kul jou hier, kul jou daar – nou wórd hy geskors – seker deur daardie onbedagsame Afrikaners, ás daar so ‘n iets soos ‘n Afrikaner bestaan.)
Die rede hoekom die Afrikaner vir Max so ‘n enigmatiese element is, is omdat hoepels soos hy in die verlede die Afrikaner se aanspraak op erkenning, regte en ‘n selfstandige geskiedenis probeer omseil het deur… deur eenvoudig aan te voer dat daar nie so iets is soos ‘n Afrikaner nie! Hoekom sal jy, byvoorbeeld, Afrikaner-gevoelens oor die beoogde verandering van Pretoria se naam in ag neem as daar nêrens ‘n Afrikaner bestaan nie? En die hoepel se grootste vrees is dat die Afrikaner sy goed gaan vat, vir homself ‘n deel van die land gaan afbaken, daar gaan bly en vir Max en die ander hoepels uitlos om die vreugde van Azaniese verval alles op hulle eie te beleef. Maar daar kan nie sprake van Afrikanerselfbeskikking wees as daar nie Afrikaners ís nie! Terselfdertyd wéét Max goed wat ‘n Afrikaner is. Selfs al slaap hy alleen, is daar elke aand een in sy bed.
En net hier kry ons ‘n eienaardige verskynsel wat ons die “hoepelsin” kan noem. Ons kry dit wanneer ‘n hoepel iets sê wat hy vas glo maar wat dan selfs in sy eie oë heeltemal onsinnig is, waarna hy die teendeel aanvaar sonder om van sy oorspronklike stelling af te sien. So sal Steven Friedman selfvoldaan aanvoer dat regstellende aksie ‘n volslae sukses is en geen negatiewe invloed op dienslewering in Suid-Afrika gehad het nie. Dan onthou hy van kragonderbrekings, verkrummelde paaie, vervalle hospitale en ‘n vasgebrande onderwysstelsel, alles regstreeks terug te voer na regstellende aksie. Nou goed dan. Die rede hoekom regstellende aksie nie werk nie, verduidelik hy, is: blahblahblah… die Afrikaner… waflawaflawafla… armoede… piffelpiffelpiffel… rassisme… As jy Friedman se hoepelsin, wat die hoepel in een vinnige sin, eintlik in een lang woord, aframmel voordat hy sy kop terugstoot tussen sy boude, herkonstrueer, sê hy in effek: “Regstellende-Aksie-is-‘n-sukses-dit-is-‘n-mislukking-en-dis-die-Afrikaner-se-skuld.”
Max se hoepelsin van die dag is: “Daar-is-nie-so-ding-soos-‘n-Afrikaner-nie-ek-is-‘n-Afrikaner.”
Syne is darem nie die enigste hoepelsin van die dag nie. Hy haal ‘n prima een van “regsfilosoof” Loammi Wolf aan: “Om tot die etniese of kultuurgroep ‘Afrikaners’ te behoort maak jou tog nie eintlik ‘n ‘etniese Afrikaner’ nie, of hoe dan?” Plaas koppeltekens tussen die woorde en jy het ‘n klassieke voorbeeld van ‘n hoepelsin.
Want – gee nou aandag Max, Loammi – ja, as jy tot die etniese of kultuurgroep “Afrikaners” behoort, ís jy ‘n “etniese Afrikaner net soos, sou jy tot die etniese of kultuurgroep “Russe” behoort, jy ‘n “etniese Rus” sou wees of, as jy tot die etniese of kultuurgroep “Zoeloe” behoort… Julle kry die idee, vertrou ek? Nie? Kom ek help:
“’n Etniese groep of entnisiteit is ‘n bevolking van mense wie se lede met mekaar identifiseer, gewoonlik op grond van ‘n veronderstelde, gemeenskaplike herkoms of voorgeslag. Herkenning as ‘n afsonderlike etniese groep deur ander mense, is dikwels ‘n bydraende faktor om hierdie identifikasieband te verstewig.” (Vry vertaal uit Wikipedia.)
Hier’s ‘n eenvoudige toets: Wys foto’s van Geo Cronjé, Bryan Habana, Hasim Amla en Akona Ndungane vir enige inwoner van Suid-Afrika, vra vir hulle om die Afrikaner vir jou te wys en hulle sal – as hulle nie dronk, gerook, bedwelm, moronies of ‘n hoepel is nie – onmiddellik en sonder om kop te krap na Geo Cronjé wys.
Blykbaar het Max nie regtig ‘n probleem om ‘n Afrikaner te herken nie en om selfs te erken dat hyself een is nie. Maar sy kapasiteit om sy naam te nqakula het skynbaar geen perke nie: “Ek is dalk etnies gesproke ‘n Afrikaner,” sê hy in die tweede deel van sy hoepelsin, en kan homself dan blykbaar nie nog ‘n onsinnigheid ontsê nie. “Ek is beslis nie deel van die ‘Afrikanervolk’ nie – daaruit het ek al as jong man bedank.”
Ûmmm, ja… sien, Max as jy ‘n lid van ‘n etniese groep is, is jy – of jy wil of nie en of húlle wil of nie (en glo my, ons wíl nie) – deel van daardie groep. En jy en Kombuis en Landman en die res sal dit moet aanvaar. Ons wil julle net so min hê as wat julle deel van ons wil wees. Maar, soos ‘n boggel of ‘n haaslip, ís julle deel van ons.
