Suid-Afrika nie meer mededingend nie

Kenners het hulle skok uitgespreek oor ’n verslag wat verlede week vrygestel is en wat toon dat Suid-Afrika met twaalf posisies op die kompetisiewêreldranglys gedaal het. Hierdie drastiese daling word aan die bevoordeling van swart werkers voorgeskryf.

Volgens die World Competitiveness Yearbook, wat 55 lande beoordeel op grond van hulle vermoë om ’n gunstige klimaat vir besighede te skep, het Suid-Afrika se posisie van nommer 38 verlede jaar tot nommer 50 hierdie jaar gedaal. Dit verteenwoordig die grootste daling op die lys.

“Dit is skokkend,” het Sello Mosai, uitvoerende bestuurder van kennisontwikkeling by die Suid-Afrikaanse Nasionale Produktiwiteitsinstituut (NPI), gesê. “Enigeen kan slegter doen, maar as daar so ’n groot daling plaasvind, laat dit mens regtig sprakeloos.“ Die NPI het die Switserse Internasionale Instituut vir Bestuursontwikkeling bygestaan om die plaaslike ondersoek uit te voer.

Volgens die verslag word Suid-Afrika laaste geklassifiseer wat diskriminasie in die werksmilieu betref. Mosai meen dit is nie net aan regstellende aksie toe te skryf nie, maar dat diskriminasie oor die hele werkspektrum in die land plaasvind en dat dit ook ouderdom en godsdienstige oortuigings insluit.

Die Suid-Afrikaanse ekonomie se groei is ongeveer 5% per jaar, met goeie resultate wat toerisme en direkte oorsese beleggings betref.  Die hoë werksloosheidsyfer, erge misdaad en streng arbeidswetgewing word egter in die verslag as hindernisse vir ekonomiese ontwikkeling bestempel.

“Dit is nie ’n kwessie van Suid-Afrika wat slegter doen nie. Dit is wel ’n geval van ander lande wat beter doen,” aldus Mosai.

Twee derdes van die verslag word gebaseer op ekonomiese statistiek en een derde op meningsopnames onder staatsamptenare en sakelui. Suid-Afrika is een van vyftien lande wat die afgelope paar jaar al swakker vaar.

насадка на керхер пескоструйДанильченко Юрий отзывы

Oliemaatskappy kan dalk Irak skeur

Det Norske Oljeselskap, oftewel DNO, een van Noorweë se kleiner oliemaatskappye, sal een van die eerste buitelandse spelers wees om Irakkese olie te begin ontgin. Hulle het vandag afgeskop met ‘n klein hoeveelheid olie vanuit Koerdistan se Tawke-olieveld in die noorde van Irak aan die wêreldmark, 35 jaar nadat olieproduksie in die land onder staatsbeheer gebring is. Dié veld is in 2005 ontdek.

Die streek wat omtrent so groot soos Denemarke is, het ‘n reserwepotensiaal van tussen 12 en 45 miljoen vate, het die Koerdiese olieministerie gesê. Dit is gelykstaande aan ‘n derde van Irak se erkende reserwes en die wêreld se vierde grootste bron, volgens die IEA (Internasionale Energie Agentskap).

Die Koerde wat gedurende die laaste paar jaar van Saddam Hoessein se bewind onder beskerming van Amerikaanse vegvliegtuie nie hul soewereiniteit prysgegee het nie, het miljoene uit Saddam gemaak deur olie aan Turkye te smokkel in weerwil van internasionale sankies wat die VN teen Irak afgeroep het.

Toe sanksies opgehef is, moes hulle inderhaas ‘n nuwe manier vind om op te maak vir die verlore inkomste. Een so ‘n manier is om kontrakte te sluit met onafhanklike oliemaatskappye sonder die goedkeuring van Bagdad. Turkye het reeds so ‘n elektrisiteitsooreenkoms met Koerde aangegaan in ‘n ander olieryke gebied.

DNO se vordering word met belangstelling deur groter maatskappye dopgehou wat tot dusver nie kans gesien het vir die afwesigheid van enige juridiese raamwerk in Irak nie. Na wat verwag word sal DNO se deelname spanning skep tussen Koerdiese plaaslike owerhede en die sentrale regering in Bagdad.

Die noorde van Irak is taamlik rustig en vreedsaam in vergelyking met die res van die land en die toekenning van oliekontrakte aan buitelandse maatskappye kan veroorsaak dat die geweld wat reeds elders woed, uitgebrei kan word na die noorde. Indien die Koerdiese owerhede ‘n onafhanklike bron van inkomste  gebruik om hul mag te konsolideer kan dit verder beteken dat die eenheid van die Irakkese staat in gedrang kan kom.

DNO sal aangewese wees op padvervoer om die olie te verskeep aangesien Bagdad nog nie toestemming verleen het om die uitvoerpyplyn te gebruik nie. Die uitvoerende beampte, Helge Eide, is nietemin optimisties oor die vooruitsigte omdat sy maatskappy “nooit verwag het” om binne twee jaar op dreef te wees nie.

DNO is of was ook in Mosambiek bedrywig waar hulle in 2004 aangekondig het dat hulle gaseksplorasie in die Sofala-provinsie gaan onderneem. Alhoewel die waarskynlikheid op net 20% geraam is, het woordvoerders aangedui dat hulle hoop om olie ook daar te vind.

‘n Ander Noorweegse speler, Statoil, het ‘n samewerkingsooreenkoms met die Suid-Afrikaanse Sasol gesluit om natuurlike gas na brandstof om te skakel mbv die uiters winsgewende Fischer-Tropsch tegnologie. Noorweë hoop om een van die grootste leweraars van energie aan Europa te word. Tans word Rusland se Gazprom bevoordeel deurdat die oormatige regulering in die EU Noorweegse mededingendheid kortwiek.

кардиганыданильченко юрій броніславович

Bush doesn’t want detente

In the next few days an unprecedented meeting between US and Iranian officials is expected to take place in Baghdad; both sides have insisted that discussions are limited to Iraq. Could this first official encounter since the Islamic revolution herald detente between Washington and Tehran?

At the moment nothing suggests that is likely, as each country continues to try to mobilise the states of the region. The US vice-president, Dick Cheney, has been touring the Arab world, reiterating Washington’s determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, is visiting the UAE, the first by an Iranian leader since independence in 1971 and all the more important because of a serious territorial dispute. Responding to the threatening noises from Cheney, President Ahmadinejad declared: "The US cannot strike Iran. The Iranian people can protect themselves and retaliate."

Although the US administration’s current priority is Iraq, it has not given up on Iran. Silently, stealthily, unseen by cameras, the war on Iran has begun. Many sources confirm that the US has increased its aid to armed movements among the ethnic minorities that make up about 40% of Iran’s population. ABC News reported in April that the US had secretly assisted the Baluchi group Jund al-Islam (Soldiers of Islam), responsible for a recent attack that killed 20 Revolutionary Guards. According to an American Foundation report, US commandos have operated inside Iran since 2004.

President Bush categorised Iran as part of the "axis of evil" in 2002; the following year he said the US "would not tolerate" an Iranian nuclear weapon. It is worth recalling the context in which these statements were made. Tehran had actively helped the US to overthrow the Taliban. At a meeting in Geneva on May 2 2003 between Javad Zaraf, the Iranian ambassador, and Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush’s special envoy to Afghanistan, the Tehran government submitted a proposal for general negotiations on weapons of mass destruction, terrorism and security, and economic cooperation. The Islamic Republic said it was ready to support the Arab peace initiative tabled in 2002 and help to transform Hizbullah into a political party. And in December 2003, Iran became one of the few countries to sign the additional protocol to the non-proliferation treaty, which strengthens the International Atomic Energy Agency’s supervisory powers.

However, the US swept all these overtures aside since its only objective is to overthrow the mullahs. To create the conditions for military intervention, it constantly brandishes "the nuclear threat". In 1995 the director of the US arms control and disarmament agency said Iran could have the bomb by 2003; Clinton’s defence secretary William Perry predicted 2000, a forecast repeated by Israel’s Shimon Peres. Yet last month the IAEA considered that it would be four to six years before Tehran had the capability to produce the bomb.

What is the truth? Since the 1960s, Iran has sought to develop nuclear power in preparation for the post-oil era. Technological developments have made it easier to pass from civil to military applications. Have Tehran’s leaders decided to do so? There is no evidence that they have. Is there a risk that they may? Yes, for obvious reasons.

During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against Iran, but there was no outcry in the US, whose troops are now deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Two neighbouring countries, Pakistan and Israel, have nuclear weapons. No Iranian leader could fail to be aware of this situation.

So how is Tehran to be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons, a move that would start a new arms race in an unstable region and deal a fatal blow to the non-proliferation treaty? Contrary to common assumptions, the main obstacle is not Tehran’s determination to enrich uranium. Iran has a right to do so under the non-proliferation treaty but has always said it was prepared to impose voluntary restrictions on that right and to agree to increased IAEA inspections.

The Islamic Republic’s fundamental concern lies elsewhere. Witness the agreement signed in 2004 with France, Britain and Germany, in which Iran agreed to suspend enrichment on the understanding that a long-term agreement would "provide firm commitments on security issues". Washington refused to give any such commitments and Iran resumed its programme.

The EU chose to follow Washington’s lead. The proposals of the five members of the UN security council and Germany in June 2006 contained no guarantee of non-intervention in Iranian affairs. In response, Tehran suggested "that the western parties who want to participate in the negotiation team announce on behalf of their own and other European countries, to set aside the policy of intimidation, pressure and sanctions".

Without such a commitment escalation is inevitable. Ahmadinejad’s election as president in 2005 has not made dialogue any easier, given his taste for provocative statements about the Holocaust and Israel. But Iran is a big country rich in history, and there is more to it than its president. There is much tension within the government, and Ahmadinejad had severe setbacks both in the local elections and in elections to the Assembly of Experts last December. There are substantial challenges, economic and social, and forceful demands for more freedom, especially among women and young people. The only strong card the regime has to win their loyalty is nationalism, a refusal to accept the kind of foreign interference Iran suffered throughout the past century.

Despite the disaster in Iraq, there is no indication that Bush has given up the idea of attacking Iran. The insistence at the weekend by Gordon Brown that there would be no attack on Iran seems unwarranted optimism rather than objective assessment. The idea of an assault against Iran is after all part of the Bushite vision of a "third world war" against "Islamic fascism", an ideological war that can end only in complete victory.

The demonisation of Iran, aggravated by the attitude of its president, is part of this strategy and may well culminate in yet another military venture. That would be a disaster, not only for Iran and the Arab world, but for western, and especially European, relations with the Middle East. Europe’s newest leaders – Nicolas Sarkozy and Brown – would do well to remember that.

укладкаФильчаков

AOB vergader in Shanghai

Nadat die Afrika Ontwikkelingsbank 13 Afrikalande se skuld van ongeveer 50 miljard Rand onlangs afgeskryf het om as voorbeeld te dien vir skenkerlande, het die Bank vir die tweede keer in sy geskiedenis buite die kontinent vergader.

Die Algemene Vergadering sal hierdie week heel simbolies in Sjanghai, China se ekonomiese hoofstad, plaasvind. China is toenemend bedrywig in Afrika en dit sal die eerste keer wees dat die byeenkoms in Asië plaasvind.

‘n Fototentoonstelling van Chinese leiers is prominent by die vergaderplek uitgestal en dien as agtergrond vir die talle hooggeplaastes se persontmoetings. Van Mao tot Hu Jintao se belangrikste oomblikke pryk  in swart-en-wit teen die moderne mure.

Die Chinese minister van Buitelandse Sake het benadruk dat dit vir sy land ‘n belangrike gebeurtenis is. Die handelsverkeer tussen Afrika en Asië het gestyg tussen 2001 en 2005 na sowat 700 miljard Rand volgens beskikbare syfers.

Tweeduisend mense word Woensdag en Donderdag by die Algemene Vergadering verwag, waaronder lede van die Spesiale Fonds vir Nigerië. Die byeenkoms volg op die spitsberaad in Beijing in November waar 48 Afrikalande teenwoordig was. China is duidelik daartoe verbind om nie net ekonomies nie, maar ook polities op die vasteland betrokke te raak.

Chinese investering in veral die oliebedryf het aansienlik gestyg en ook handel tussen die twee kontinente het vyfvoudig toegeneem.

Die Afrika Ontwikkelingsbank sien die skuldverligting as ‘n navolgenswaardige stap vir skenkerlande, soos die G-8, omdat dit die 13 lande volgens hulle in staat sal stel om ekonomiese groei aan te moedig. Die lande waarvan die skuld in April afgeskryf is, is naamlik Benin, Burkina Faso, Etihopië, Ghana, Madagaskar, Mali, Mosambiek, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzanië, Uganda en Zambië.

China beskou tans die Afrika-vasteland as ‘n bron van stemme om besluite by die VN te bekragtig, benewens die olie, minerale, hout en landbouprodukte wat die kontinent ook voorsien. Die Asiese reus word daarom dikwels van neo-kolonialisme deur die Weste beskuldig. Dieselfde kritiek is egter afwesig by die meeste Afrikalande.

Een so ‘n geval waar China onder Westerse druk staan, is Soedan, omdat China 60% van die olieproduksie opslurp en die huidige regering daarom teen die VN se verkose strafmaatreëls soos sanksies, beskerm.

China het nietemin toegegee dat Darfoer groot aandag internasionaal geniet. Hulle het ook aangekondig dat ‘n spesiale pos geskep sal word vir ‘n afgevaardigde om voltyds aandag te skenk aan die gebied om sodoende “’n nuwe soort strategiese bondgenootskap te vestig”. 

“Die meeste Afrikane beskou die rol wat China speel as positief,” sê Peter Draper van die Institute for International Affairs in Johannesburg, “want hulle het al genoeg lesse gehad van die Weste oor hoe hulle behoort te ontwikkel.”

Die tema van die byeenkoms van die AOB in Sjanghai is trouens “Afrika-Asië, Bondgenote van Ontwikkeling” waar die Afrika-afvaardiging van 53 “inspirasie gaan put uit die voorbeeld van Asië om armoede te verlig”.

купить детскую шапочку для новорожденногоАлександр Фильчаков

Klaargepraat

Politiek is eintlik maklik. Daar hóéf nie ‘n algehele ineensmelting van die land se strukture te wees nie. ‘n Algemene bloedstorting is nie onafwendbaar nie. Thabo Mbeki kan dit in een oomblik voorkom. Al wat hy hoef te doen is om, hoed in die hand, saggies aan die Afrikaner se deur te gaan klop en vir hom te vra om ‘n deel van die land uit te soek vir ‘n Afrikaner Republiek. Daar kan die Afrikaner doen wat hy wil: Hy kan ‘n welvarende, veilige land bou wat ‘n bate is vir die streek om hom. En die Bantoe kan doen wat hy wil: Hy kan die res van Suid-Afrika na smaak afbreek en ‘n las vir die streek en die wyer internasionale gemeenskap word.

Of Mbeki kan dinge ‘n eie loop laat neem en die uiteinde van dit alles sal wees dat die Afrikaner hom tog in sy eie Republiek sal vestig en die swart regeerders van die Res van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika sal die land tog uiteindelik mugabe. ‘n Afrikaner Republiek is ‘n onafwendbaarheid en by PRAAG hoop ons om dit deur vreedsame maar robuuste verset te bekom deur met veral ekonomiese druk die A.N.K. se gorrel toe te druk. Anders gaan hierdie vryheid deur die loop van die geweer van kom – ‘n nagmerrie-opsie wat ons glad nie voorstaan nie. So, dis die Rand of dis die Roer. Al wat ons moet doen om ons vryheid en veiligheid te vier, is om die regmatigheid van ons saak en die haalbaarheid van ons doelwit te verkoop aan ‘n miljoen mense: Almal van hulle Afrikaners.

Daar is wel ‘n swaksinnige spannetjie Afrikaners wat teen logika, ervaring en die getuienis van hulle eie oë in nog aandring dat ‘n Afrikaner Republiek nie haalbaar of gewens is nie. Vir hulle is die Afrikaner se oorlewing nie in die Roer óf die Rand nie maar, en om ons “R”-rympie voort te sit, in die Rede. Hierdie is die naïewe narre wat nog in die utopie van die Nuwe Suid-Afrika glo. Hulle – mense soos Max du Preez, Tim du Plessis, Antjie Krog en Ton Vosloo– reken ons kan alle rasseklosse uitpluis as ons net met mekaar práát. Hulle het ‘n oordrewe vertroue in onderhandelinge met die Bantoe, nugter alleen weet hoekom, want elke keer wat die Afrikaner dít probeer het, is hy verneuk en verraai en het die son as’t ware sy gebeendere aan die voet van ‘n Aasvoëlkoppie gebleik.

Maar miskien lees hierdie slappols Afrikaners wel die komende uitdelging in hulle private dolosse raak maar, in ‘n eiesoortige interpretasie van die Stockholm Sindroom, is hierdie voorstaanders van onderhandelinge vas oortuig dat hulle die tipiese Afrika bloedfees kan vryspring dat deur net met swartes te praat en hulle kultuur na te doen. As jy praat van “isi-Zulu” in plaas van “Zoeloe” en as jy Madiba-hemde dra, dan is jy mos ‘n Afrikaan? En hoekom sal die swart massas jou harspan dan met ‘n tradisionele wapen inmekaar wil slaan? As hulle passasiers op die Titanic was, sou hierdie arme simpel drommels geredeneer het dat al wat hulle moet doen om hulleself van verdrinking te red, is om ysberge na te boots. Hulle het ‘n oordrewe vertroue in onderhandelinge.

Inderwaarheid durf ons nooit weer met die A.N.K. en hulle kultuurgenote onderhandel nie. Wanneer die tyd kom, sal ons hulle inroep en vir hulle instruksies gee. Ons is, in elke opsig en op elke manier, klaargepraat.

Om die swart revolusioniste van ons tyd in ‘n debat te betrek, is om jou eie posisie te ondergrawe. ‘n Sinvolle debat vereis die vooropstelling van reëls en die Westerling en die Afrika-inboorling kom na die podium met uiteenlopende waardes wat hulle aan riglyne heg. Die Westerling het erg aan logika, ontwikkeling van gedagtes, sinvolheid van gevolgtrekking, nougesetheid in die uiteensetting van feite en ontsag vir die waarheid. Die Bantoe kan nie minder deur enige van dié waardes geroer wees nie. Vir hom is daar net een sinvolle opvatting – sy eie –  en dit is sy metode en sy gemeenskapsplig om hierdie standpunt so driftig, ongekompliseerd, luidkeels en aanhoudend uit te blaker dat sy opponent uit pure radeloosheid sal bes gee. Die Westerling sien die debat as ‘n arena waarin ontsag vir ‘n ander se standpunt geld. Die Afrikaan beoordeel sy vertoning volgens die volume en stemtoon van sy aanbieding en die verbetenheid waarmee hy by sy opvattings staan en sy debatsgenoot s’n ignoreer.

‘n Volkekundige en Afrika-spesialis – ‘n professor wat sy naam verswyg wil hê uit vrees vir ‘n ander Afrika-debatsmetode: Die uitwissing van jou teenstander en sy gesin – verduidelik die meganiek van onderhandelinge in die tradisie van Afrika: “Dit is konsensus deur uitmergeling. Dit gaan nie oor die begrip van jou teenstander se opvatting en oor om saam te stem iewers op ‘n kontinuum van redelikheid nie. Wat letterlik gebeur is dat die voorstaanders van verskillende opvattings in ‘n stam mekaar die stryd in onderhandelinge sal aansê. Die oorwinnaar word nie bepaal deur die gehalte of logika van sy argumente nie maar, letterlik, deur wie die langste aanhou. Hierdie indaba kan oor weke strek. Soos wat ‘n onderhandelaar se ondersteuners moedeloos word, dros hulle eenvoudig uit die gesprek uit totdat sy posisie so uitgekalwe is dat hy heeltemal sonder verwyt en heeltemal klakkeloos oorslaan na ‘n ander onderhandelaar se posisie by wie hy dan aansluit. So word die groepe uitgedun totdat net die mees verbete onderhandelaar staande bly. Hy is dan die wenner, ongeag van die inhoud of gehalte van sy standpunt of posisie.”

Vir die Westerling, vir wie tyd deel is van die formule waarvolgens prestasie uitgewerk word, is hierdie styl van onderhandeling ‘n ondeurkruisbare moeras. ‘n Oom van my, onlangs oorlede, was in die tagtigs ingesleep in so ‘n proses. Hy het vir die destydse “administrasieraad” aan die Oos-Rand gewerk. Die gedagte was om algemene bestuur van die swart woongebiede aan die inwoners daarvan te oorhandig. ‘n Skikking rakende verantwoordelikhede, bevoegdhede en pligte moes met die nuwe bestuur uitgetrap word. Die swart raad is verteenwoordig deur ‘n span van twaalf gesiene inwoners onder aanvoering van ‘n bonkige, selfversekerde Venda uit die vakbondbeweging. 

My arme oom se lewe het in ‘n nagmerrie verval. Sy opdrag was eenvoudig maar, getrou aan die aard van Westerse instellings, was daar die verwagting dat hierdie beraadslagings afgehandel sou word in ‘n “redelike tyd.” Die Bantoe het geen erg aan rede of tyd nie en die proses wat gevolg het, was die burokratiese weergawe daarvan om soos ‘n brommer in goue stroop te swem. Elke lid van die swart afvaardiging het ‘n lang uitgebreide relaas oor elke item, ongeag hoe beuselagtig, op die agenda. Elkeen van hulle se  verklarings moes noukeurig genotuleer word en elkeen van hulle het daarop geregtig gevoel om sy standpunt uit suiwere wispelturigheid ter enige tyd aan te pas of selfs heeltemal mee weg te doen. Waarna dít weer opgeteken moes word. Met die volgende vergadering was dit nou nie net die agenda nie maar die notules wat tot in die uitputtendste besonderheid fyngemaal is, wat natuurlik langer notules vir die volgende vergadering veroorsaak het wat dán weer in fyn besonderheid uitgepraat moes word en… en voor die blanke onderhandelaars se oë het ‘n eenvoudige proses uit beheer uit getol en ‘n kolossale, onontknoopbare kraaines geword.

Hierdie span onderhandelaars het voorts geensins uit een mond gepraat nie en het die forum aangegryp om breedvoerig met mekaar te verskil. Alliansies binne hierdie party is aangegaan en verbreek. Die Administrasieraad se onderhandelaars durf ook geensins ongeduldig met die proses geraak het nie. Die swart span was oorsensitief aangaande protokol en enige pogings om hulle aan te jaag, is as ‘n belediging gesien wat tot ‘n krisis opgekook is.

Na amper twee jaar van hierdie proses, uiteindelik!, is ‘n konsepskikking bereik. ‘n Datum is bepaal waarop hierdie ooreenkoms met ‘n sekere feestelike formaliteit onderteken sou word. Alles was gereed en in plek… behalwe… die oorspronklike span onderhandelaars van die dorpsgebied. Dit was nie hulle wat by die plegtigheid opgedaag het nie. In hulle plek was daar twaalf spiksplinternuwe onderhandelaars. En hulle weier om ‘n ooreenkoms, by die opstel waarvan hulle nie betrek was nie, te onderteken.

Die moderne Westerling het nie pantser teen hierdie slinkse aanwending van tyd as ‘n wapen nie. Die oomblik wat die veelparty onderhandelinge by Kempton Park aan die tirannie van ‘n sperdatum vir afhandeling onderwerp is, het die Meyer-de Klerk stoeispan klaar verloor. Naderhand was hulle so onbehoorlik oorhaastig om tog net om vadersnaam nie van sloerdery beskuldig te word nie, dat hulle die land en veral die Afrikanervolk nie vinnig genoeg verraai kon kry nie.

In die post-verraad era van 1994 af, het proponente van “deelnemende politiek” en ander onderhandelaars en debatteerders geensins beter gevaar nie. Die Bantoe en die Marxis en veral die marxistiese Bantoe, het die polities nuttige vermoë om sy eie propaganda te glo. Hulle onderskryf deesdae, met ‘n gulsige soort pathos, hulle self-ontwerpte geskiedenis as die adel van Afrika – die wêreld! – wat voorheen onderdruk is. Hulle beskou nie net meer die Suid-Afrika wat deur Afrikaner skranderheid gebou is as ‘n ontsaglike meevaller wat wonderbaarlik in hulle skote geval het nie. Nee, al het hulle nie ‘n sweetdruppel gestort, ‘n handboek oopgeblaai, ‘n vouer geliasseer, ‘n rekenaar aangeskakel nie, is die land en die volheid daarvan hulle swaarverdiende oorwinnaarstrofee en weë die arme sot wat met dié opvatting sou stry. Baie blanke redevoerders, ernstige en opregtemense, het met selfvertroue feite, statistieke en logika na ‘n debat met hierdie comrades gebring en is met verleë grinnike daar weg. Selfs Steve Hofmeyr.

Ek beskou meneer Hofmeyr as die beste Afrikaanse demagoog in die land, selfs wanneer hy nie sing nie. Hy het ‘n slag met woorde, ‘n aanvoeling vir ‘n sekere gevoelsgedrewe metrum en ‘n instink vir klem wat van hom ‘n formidabele spreker maak. ‘n Wyle terug het hy, apropos die Pretoria-naamkwessie, homself sterk en doeltreffend op een van sy konserte uitgespreek:

“Jy vernoem ‘n stad na iemand wat iets daar gebou het,” rasper hy, na wat vertel word, in daardie sinkplaat-wat-oor-klippe-gesleep-word stem van hom. “Jy vernoem dit nie na iemand wat daar verbygetrek het met drie bokke en net gestop het om teen ‘n boom te pis nie!”

Hei! Nou luister, hiérdie is taal wat ‘n swart debatteerder teen die bors sal stuit, wat maak dat hy na jou luister en, na dit alles, dat hy respek vir jou sal hê.

Maar sny die toneel na:

SABC televisie-ateljee. Twee spanne debatvoerders gluur rondom ‘n aanbieder na mekaar, reg om mekaar te pak oor dieselfde vraagstuk van Pretoria se naam. In die een hoek: Kallie Kriel van Afriforum en Steve Hofmeyr, albei gewapen tot die tande met feite, lyste, statistieke, uitsprake, aanhalings en wat nog, alles ter verdediging van die naam “Pretoria.” In die ander hoek, ‘n onbekende swart regsgeleerde met die venynige arrogansie van ‘n kaalwangvalk en saam met hom ‘n onbeduidende swart lid van een of ander obskure naamgewingsliggaam van die nuwe regime. Tussen die twee van hulle het hulle nie een soliede, samehangende geskiedkundige of geografiese feit om in hulle slingervelle te laai nie.

Dit was ‘n ongelyke stryd. En die wenners, en nog steeds onbetwiste debatskampioene van Afrika – die swart span! Terwyl Kriel en Hofmeyr ewe beleefd en stemmig, vol ontsag vir protokol, hulle netjiese en intellektueel verantwoordelike argumente aangebied het, het die swartes hulle aangekyk asof hulle iets onwelriekend en giftig is. Met hulle beurt was dit asof hulle die rakke vol breekware in ‘n eksklusiewe winkel omgooi. Hulle het twee punte en net twee punte in die gesprek ingedra: Hulle (die swart mense) was die eerste daar (in die Pretoria omgewing) en daar is meer van hulle (as van Kriel en Hofmeyr se bleek, beleefde soort.)

Daarom mag hulle, kan hulle en sál hulle Tshwane van Pretoria maak. So, voeg hulle by sonder om dit hardop te sê, moer weg! En Kriel en Hofmeyr kry daardie wasige uitdrukking in die oë en daardie verbysterde grinnike van mense wat met harde en onaanvegbare feite oor die streep op die grond getrap het en wat toe aangeveg en verslaan is deur opponente sónder feite, sónder logika en sónder redelikheid.

Steve sou baie beter gedoen het om sy berugte moer te strip en hulle brutaal in die rede te val met: “Luister julle vir my! Stil! Julle het duidelik nie die vaagste benul waarvan julle praat nie, so gee aandag: Iets kan nie ‘n naam kry voordat dit gemaak is nie. En die een wat dit maak, sê wat die naam daarvan is. Óns het Pretoria gebou en terwyl óns dit gebou het, het júlle ‘n entjie daarvandaan ‘n paar takke op mekaar gepak en dit ‘n kraal genoem. Nou ek gee nie om as julle elke takkraal wat julle al ooit gemaak het, van hier tot in Lagos, ‘Tshwane’ noem nie maar ons, omdat óns Pretoria gebou het, sal besluit wat sy naam sál wees en sál bly.

En as julle nie van die naam ‘Pretoria’ hou nie, die goeie nuus vir julle is dat daar nie meer ‘n groepsgebiedewet nie en julle het die volste konstitusionele reg om nie naby die Afrikaner-stad Pretoria te kom nie!” Sy “drie-bokke-en-pis-teen-‘n-boom” toespraak sou soveel meer effektief as al sy beleefde argumente gewees het.

Selfs Eddy von Maltitz, regse politieke osdrywerstok van die Vrystaat, kan by tye te beleefd wees ten koste van ‘n geldige standpunt. Die uitsaaibedryf was nog nooit in die Nuwe Suid-Afrika so opgeblase van selftoegedeelde belangrikheid as tydens die Spitskonferensie op Volhoubare Ontwikkeling wat in 2002 in Johannesburg aangebied is nie. Tim Modise het die A.N.K. se voete gewas met sy radioprogram deur elke oggend ‘n polities geheiligde ateljeegas te hê. Een oggend was dit ‘n swart historikus met ‘n onuitspreekbare naam uit ‘n onbenullige diktatorsdom iewers uit Wes-Afrika. Hy het gerapsodieer oor die Bantoe se plig en geleentheid om “sy eie geskiedenis” te maak en oor te vertel in die utopie van die Nuwe Afrika waar net sensitiewe, skrander, diepsinnige Bantoes in woon sonder ‘n anaal-retentiewe bleeknerf insig.

Von Maltitz bel toe in en vra, o so beleefd, of die waardige gas Keith Richburg se “Out of Ameria” gelees het. Dis ‘n goeie vraag. Richburg se boek gaan na alles oor sy persoonlike ontnugtering as swart Amerikaner wat Afrika geïdealiseer het totdat hy daarheen oorgeplaas is en hy gekonfronteer moes word met, onder andere, die duisende en duisende lyke wat rivieraf dryf uit Rwanda toe dié sensitiewe en diepsinnige Bantoes hulle bure met die grootste uitgelatenheid uitgedelg het.

Modise se ateljeegas sou moes bontstaan om te verduidelik hoe hierdie boek in sy visie van ‘n nuwe Afrika historiografie moontlik geakkommodeer sou kon word. Maar, getrou aan die redenasiestyl van die Bantoe, het die ateljeegas nie eers die ordentlikheid gehad om te bevestig of te ontken of hy die boek gelees het nie. Hy het bloot ‘n rits titels van boeke deur skrywers uit die skool van Afrika nasionalisme afgerammel en gevra of Von Maltitz dít gelees het. En Eddy, baie beleefd en eerlik, val in die strik deur te erken hy het nie. In die tradisie van die Afrikaner stel hy homself onderhewig aan reëls wat hy nie van ander verwag om na te kom nie.

Wat hy moes gedoen het was om in wese te sê: “Hei, luister, jý is die ateljeegas. Ek is nie. Jy is daar sodat ék vir jóú vrae kan vra. As jy vir mý iets wil vra, wag totdat ék die ateljeegas is en dan vra jy vir my net wat jy wil en ek sal die ordentlikheid hê om jou eerlik en volledig te antwoord. Intussen tyd, wees darem net gemanierd genoeg om te antwoord, ja of nee, het jy “Out of America” gelees en indien jy het, wat dink jy daarvan?”

Die beste is om natuurlik nie vir die opponent vrae te vra of antwoorde te verskaf nie. Ons is dikwels te ordentlik vir ons volk se beswil. Die enigste hoop vir ons oorlewing is om onsself in ons eie Republiek te regeer. Ons gaan dit nie deur goeie maniere bekom nie. Jy sê nie asseblief wanneer jy vir iemand skree om uit ‘n brandende huis te hardloop nie. Onderhandelinge met ‘n Bantoe-regering sal enige oplossings net uitstel. Dit het Afriforum, die DA, Vryheidsfront + en ander gelowiges in deelnemende politiek reeds vir ons tot vervelens toe gedemonstreer.

Nee, sê ek. Kom ons laat die Tien Plae op die Nuwe Suid-Afrikaanse regime los en wanneer hulle ons die dag skuifelvoet benader, dán praat ons en ons praat net genoeg om instruksies uit te vaardig. En dan vat ons wat ons s’n is.

игрушки лунтикаtopcargo отзывы

Iraq murders soar

The US military surge in Iraq, designed to turn around the course of the war, appears to be failing as senior US officers admit they need yet more troops and new figures show a sharp increase in the victims of death squads in Baghdad.

In the first 11 days of this month, there have already been 234 bodies – men murdered by death squads – dumped around the capital, a dramatic rise from the 137 found in the same period of April. Improving security in Baghdad and reducing death-squad activity was described as one of the key aims of the US surge of 25,000 additional troops, the final units of whom are due to arrive next month.

In a further setback, the US military announced yesterday the loss of an entire patrol south of Baghdad, with five soldiers dead and three others missing, after they were ambushed by insurgents in the town of Mahmoudiya.

The new figures emerged as the commander of US forces in northern Iraq, Major General Benjamin Mixon, admitted he did not have enough soldiers to contain the escalating violence in Diyala province, which neighbours Baghdad and has become the focus of the heaviest fighting between largely Sunni insurgent groups and the US army, which has seen casualties increase by 300 per cent. Sixty-one US soldiers have been killed in Diyala this year, compared with 20 in all of last year.

Mixon, interviewed by The Observer earlier this year, has not made a secret of his frustration at the declining situation in Diyala and has already reinforced the area around Baqouba – the centre of the heaviest fighting – with additional troops.

Ironically, the violence in Diyala has been exacerbated by an influx of both Shia and Sunni fighters displaced from Baghdad by the surge and also from Anbar province who have relocated to Diyala to join a series of jihadi and nationalist groups already based there.

Mixon, who was speaking in Tikrit, said: ‘I’m going to need additional forces, to get that situation to a more acceptable level, so the Iraqi security forces will be able in the future to handle that.’ He was also highly critical of Iraqi government in Baghdad, charging that it was riddled with corruption.

Mixon’s request coincided with yet more bad news from Iraq – a draft US government report claiming that between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq’s declared oil production may have been siphoned off through corruption in the past four years.

Iraqi and American officials have long contended that oil smuggling from fields controlled by Shia militias in the south is costing Iraq billions of dollars – funds that, it is feared, are going to armed groups.

 

игрушки подвески на кроваткулобановский александр фото

Trees worsen greenhouse effect

A leading expert in Germany has spawned a major scientific debate by claiming that trees put millions of tons of methane into the atmosphere every year exacerbating the greenhouse effect. Amid controversy, Dr Frank Keppler of the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry has reaffirmed findings by his team in Mainz, Germany, in January 2006 that they had detected methane exhaled from living plants.

"I am 100 per cent confident that plants emit methane," he told Chemistry World magazine, insisting that as yet unpublished research would confirm his findings once and for all.

Keppler’s unexpected discovery has caused heated debate among biologists and atmospheric chemists. Though bacteria in soil or decaying matter produce methane in anaerobic conditions, there seems to be no reason or mechanism for living plants to emit the gas in an oxygen-rich environment.

The implications of the findings are worrying: on a global scale, Keppler estimated, methane emissions from plants and trees could amount to hundreds of millions of tonnes a year, throwing scientists’ understanding of the greenhouse gas’s sources and sinks way off kilter.

But many researchers have queried the global impact, suggesting that Keppler’s scale-up calculations, based on methane emission per unit of metabolically active mass of plant, were a gross overestimate.

Yet until recently, no published research has questioned Keppler’s central discovery that plants can emit methane in the first place.

Recently, however, rival researchers reported that plants emit virtually no methane whatsoever.

Tom Dueck, of Wageningen University in the Netherlands, says his team’s independent investigations are the first published results to show that plants’ methane emissions are negligible or zero. That means their contribution to the global methane budget, and potentially to climate change, simply isn’t worth worrying about.

The Dutch group did not repeat Keppler’s experiment exactly, Dueck said, "because it was not methodologically sound." Instead, his team boosted the sensitivity of their methane measurements by growing plants in an atmosphere saturated with a heavy carbon isotope, 13C.

If the plants subsequently emitted methane (13CH4), it would be easy to spot above the background of light (12CH4) methane in the air. Photo-acoustic spectroscopy (a laser-based measuring technique) was used to detect the gas.

Dueck said it showed that even a large mass of plants produced negligible methane emissions – at most 0.3 per cent of Keppler’s values.

So if Dueck’s team is correct, where did Keppler go wrong? Dueck suggests that Keppler’s team might have forgotten that gas trapped in plants’ intercellular spaces, and in air pockets in the soil, could diffuse out and be counted as "emitted" by the plant in their experiment.

But Keppler rejects this, saying that this sort of methane desorption could only be partially responsible for the amounts of gas he found.

Indeed, he suggests that Dueck’s use of heavy isotopes may have actually changed the plants’ metabolic preferences, killing off their methane emissions. Dueck counters that no literature reports suggest this might be a problem.

кэкФильчаков Александр Васильевич

Pakistan on brink of disaster

Chaos gripped the streets of Karachi yesterday as gun battles left at least 31 people dead and hundreds more injured, threatening a complete breakdown of law and order in Pakistan’s largest and most volatile city.

With plumes of black smoke billowing over the city of 12 million people, there were extraordinary scenes as gunmen on motorbikes pumped bullets into crowds demonstrating against Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf, while police stood by and watched.
    
In images more reminiscent of Baghdad, bloodstained corpses lay where they had fallen in the streets and bodies piled up in hospital morgues. As the sense of crisis deepened, a crisis meeting between Gen Musharraf and the prime minister, Shaukat Aziz, resolved to send in paramilitary troops to restore order, and to place the army on standby. The men agreed that a state of emergency would be imposed if the first two options failed.

It was the bloodiest escalation of the two-month long saga which began when the president attempted to sack the country’s chief justice in March. The ensuing challenge by lawyers and opposition parties to Gen Musharraf’s eight-year rule has left the president – a key Western ally in the "war on terror" – desperately clinging to power.

Opponents believe he had hoped to create a compliant judiciary ahead of elections which he has promised to hold later this year. But what started as a political confrontation has now lit Karachi’s tinderbox of ethnic rivalry.

Many of the 15,000 police and security forces deployed in the city stood idly by as armed activists from Karachi’s ruling party, Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), a coalition ally of Gen Musharraf, blocked Mr Chaudhry’s exit from the airport and took control of the city’s central district.

The movement’s leader, Altaf Hussain – who lives in self-imposed exile in London – co-ordinated opposition to Mr Chaudhry’s arrival and addressed crowds gathered on the streets of Karachi in a mobile phone call relayed by loudspeakers.

He called on supporters to be peaceful but to show whose city it was. Instead, violence reigned.

Gunmen tore off on motorbikes after brazenly firing AK-47 rifles at opposition supporters. One report described MQM gunmen exchanging gunfire for an hour with activists from the exiled former premier Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party.

Road blocks, including trucks with deflated tires, prevented most of Mr Chaudhry’s supporters from reaching the airport to greet him. But a few dozen lawyers who reached there on foot chanted, "We are with you. Down with Musharraf." Dozens of vehicles and petrol pumps were set alight by the angry mobs.

Inside Mr Chaudhry’s intended destination, Sind’s high court, hundreds of lawyers, some of them bloodied after being beaten up by MQM supporters, milled about chanting slogans and receiving news on their mobile phones about the trouble engulfing them. Outside, MQM activists with pistols tucked into their jeans, blocked the entrance.

Lawyers railed against the government. "This is a shocking attempt by the government to suppress the people," Iqbal Haider, a human rights lawyer and former senator, told The Sunday Telegraph. "Musharraf is making all sorts of mistakes to save himself from sinking."

As fans stirred the humid air, news poured in of unrest spreading to other parts of the country. Convoys of buses, cars and rickshaws festooned with flags of political parties careered through Karachi’s main thoroughfares.

Tension has been simmering in Karachi for the past week, with rumours swirling round that Mr Musharraf had allowed conflicting rallies to go ahead to create the requisite level of disorder to justify the declaration of an emergency. The prelude to violence was familiar to Karachi, where hundreds of people were killed in ethnic violence in the 1990s.

Exacerbating the political furore in Karachi over the sacking of Mr Chaudhry is a decades-old and simmering feud between the MQM, a movement supported by the city’s mohajir population who migrated from India at Partition in 1947, and ethnic Pathans, who were originally from Pakistan’s North West Frontier province.

Opponents of the MQM claim that its actions yesterday were ordered in micro-detail by the movement’s autocratic leader, via telephone, from Edgware in north London.

Altaf Hussain wields great influence from afar over Karachi, a city of 15 million. Amid the chaos and bloodshed, the MQM chief addressed tens of thousands of his followers gathered along one of Karachi’s main streets.

As his speech echoed over its audience, in other parts of the city gunmen from both heavily armed factions took up positions on rooftops and sprayed streets with automatic gunfire. Dozens of wounded were treated in hospitals.

Last night paramilitary troops were preparing to be deployed in the city as the possibility of a curfew being imposed grew.

купить инструмент в ложементахФильчаков прокурор отзывы

‘Tsotsi’-akteur is ‘n tsotsi

Image

‘Tsotsi’, Madiba en aktrise

In die film "Tsotsi", wat ’n Oscar gewen het, ontferm die pikareske held hom oor ’n ontvoerde baba. Maar die akteur Presley Chweneyagae wat die rol gespeel het waarin misdadigers uit Soweto in ’n positiewe lig gestel word, is in die werklike lewe minder begaan oor sy eie sewemaande-oue baba.

Die 21-jarige moeder van die kind, Neblungu Somfula, is besig om hom vir onderhoud te dagvaar omdat sy tot dusver net twee paaimente van R500 van die Tsotsi-akteur wat Hollywood verower het, ontvang het.

“Wat kan ek met R500 doen?” vra Somfula. Sy het ’n tweejaarlange verhouding met die Tsotsi-ster gehad wat haar swanger gemaak het terwyl sy ’n graad 11-leerling op die skoolbanke was, nie lank voor hy Los Angeles toe gevlieg het en internasionaal beroemd geraak het nie.

Volgens Somfula was hy die eerste wat geweet het dat sy swanger was, selfs voordat sy ’n swangerskaptoets ondergaan het. Die Tsotsi-ster wou egter gehad het dat sy ’n aborsie ondergaan, iets waarteen sy minnares gekant was.

Intussen het die akteur se ma ’n vaderskaptoets aangevra om te bepaal of hy werklik die vader van die kind is.

Chweneyagae was voorheen in die nuus omdat hy met ’n vervalste Ivoriaanse bestuurderslisensie motor bestuur het. Hy is aan bedrog skuldig bevind en is ’n vonnis van R5000 of ses maande tronkstraf opgelê.

Die ‘Tsotsi’-akteur wou nie met die pers praat nie. Sy agent het bloot gesê dat Chweneyagae hom tans iewers op ’n filmstel bevind.

компрессор для пескоструйкиданильченко юрий брониславович прокурор

Afrikaner-eendrag is belangrik

Geagte Gustav,

Ek aanvaar jou verduideliking en verskoning, dankie, dit is belangrik dat ons as ware Afrikaners nie langer mekaar as vyande teiken nie; daar is genoeg werklike vyande.

Ons sal altyd met mekaar oor politieke sake verskil, maar die HNP is altyd oop vir politieke debat. Daarom dat die HNP ook met dr Dan Roodt en ander Afrikaners in Die Afrikaner of persoonlik in debat tree.  Die feit is dat ons pyle op die vyand, die ANC en sy meelopers, gerig moet bly.

Daar is feite wat jy sekerlik weet, maar dalk is dit goed om weer mekaar se geheue te verfris.

Die HNP staan 38 jaar in die politieke stryd om die belange van die Afrikaner te beskerm en te bevorder. Die geskiedenis het ook reeds die HNP reg bewys. Daarom dan die slagspreuk, Om reg te wees, is om ’n mag te wees. Oor die 38 jaar was daar maar altyd die Max du Preez’s wat eerder met hulle eie mense swaarde kruis as met die vyand en juis dít, het die vyand die politieke stryd laat wen en is dit diegene wat die politieke mag goedsmoeds aan ons vyande oorhandig het.

Suid-Afrika is aan die verval; ons is die misdaad-mekka van die wêreld en die rede daarvoor is alles politiek.  Die toestand kan slegs reggemaak word deur politieke mag. Of dit nou wet en orde, of hospitalisasie, die onderwys, of die gat in die pad is, die regering van die dag is verantwoordelik vir die herstel of instandhouding daarvan. Dit bly politiek.

Daarom is die rol van die HNP belangrik – ook in ons strewe na Afrikaner-eendrag binne die Afrikanerfront (die Blanke volksfront). 

Ons het veral twee sake waaroor ons met mekaar kan praat:

1.                  Hoe laat ons die regime misluk sodat die internasionale wêreld dit duidelik kan sien, en

2.                  Hoe beweeg ons op die pad na die herwinning van die politieke mag?

Wat die eerste betref, is die mislukking van Sokker 2010 ‘n besliste moontlikheid. As die byeenkoms in 2010 nie hier plaasvind nie, het die ANC misluk. Ons moet die druk hou op FIFA om die byeenkoms elders te reël.

Die herwinning van die politieke mag is meer ingewikkeld, maar daaroor sal die HNP binnekort ‘n DVD beskikbaar hê vir verdere debat.

Onthou die woorde van dr Tobie Muller: “Misluk ons pogings en moet ons ondergaan, dan is dit is elk beter om te sterf as eerlike stryders op die slagveld, as om te versink in ‘n bedwelmende luilekker eentonigheid van niksdoen.”   Die tyd is min, maar die HNP probeer steeds om ‘n aandeel te hê aan die redding van ons volk in dit wat hy as belangrik beskou. Ek glo dat dit ook jou siening is en dat jy die stryd volwaardig sal help stry.

Stryd is Lewe!! детектор лжи москваалександр лобановский класс

Konsensus is dood: konfrontasiepolitiek is al uitweg

Toe Piet Retief Dingaan se kraal vir die laaste keer binnegegaan het, was dit met die naïewe verwagting dat daar ’n ooreenkoms staande gemaak is wat sowel sy afvaardiging as sy trekgeselskap sou respekteer en beskerm. Waarmee Retief nie rekening gehou het nie is dat hy onvoeldoende kennis van die swart kultuur gehad het om te aanvaar die ooreenkoms sal staande bly. Retief, met sy Calvinistiese waardes, sou sekerlik ’n ooreenkoms met dieselfde tipe toewyding en dissipline toepas as wat hy in alle ander terreine van sy lewe sou nastreef.

Piet Retief se aanname en tragiese finale besoek aan die Dingaan-kraal omvat die kern van die Westerling se onvermoë om die Afrikaan te begryp. As Calvinis het die rasionaliteit daarvan om ’n ooreenkoms toe te pas sin gemaak, want alleen deur ’n nuwe ooreenkoms suksesvol en met toewyding te implementeer sou ’n vertrouensfondament tussen trekker en inboorling tot stand kom. So ’n verhouding sou dan vrede en samewerking moontlik maak. Retief se naïewe geloof in die inboorling se begrip van kontraktuele verbintenis sou tot die gewelddadige lewensverlies van onskuldige mans, vroue en kinders lei.

Die Afrikaan wat in ’n pre-historiese samelewing was, het geen ervaring van ’n objektiewe regstelsel en dus ook geen etiese konsep, wat in enige vorm van kontrakreg beslag sou vind, gehad nie. Toe Retief en sy manskappe hul wapens buite die kraal laat, het die kontrak verval. Vir die Afrikaan wat nie kan onderskei tussen die begrippe respek en vrees nie, sou daar geen rede meer wees om die kontrak te respekteer nie. Die afwesigheid van die witman se vuurwapen, lei tot ’n afwesigheid vir vrees en dus respek teenoor hierdie “indringer”. Daar is dus geen rede om die blanke langer te duld nie… Deur onrealistiese verwagtinge t.o.v. die Afrikaan te koester, sou die witman op die mees dramatiese wyse betaal. Die ontnugtering was ontsaglik. Dieselfde ontnugtering as wat Afrikaners toenemend vandag beleef.

Afrikane verstaan hul eie kultuur en sou anders as Retief handel. Geen Afrikaan sou ’n ooreenkoms sluit en dan sonder wapens in ’n (eertydse) vyand se teenwoordigheid verkeer nie. Geen Afrikaan sou in so ’n deursigtige strik gelei word nie. Dingaan het die Westerling se swakheid gouer besef as andersom. In die stamverband van die primitiewe mens waar geen onafhanklike regstelsel bestaan nie, is die stamhoof die wet. Hy is die sterkman, die een wat sy leiersposisie deur oorerwing en die vertoon van mag verkry en behou. Dingaan wat self van die heersende familie was het immers sy posisie behaal deur Sjaka te vermoor.

Helaas, die Westerling se gevorderde denkwyse, sy onderskrywing van die etiese en die voortreflike, sy formulering van ooreenkomste en wette, dit is wat tot sy naïwiteit lei. Dit is sy kennisstelsel wat daartoe lei dat hy die prehistoriese, die eties gebreklike, met vertroue omhels. Hoeveel vertrouende boere, werkgewers, sendelinge, simpatiekes en verskeie ander weldoeners het al hul laaste asem uitgeblaas aan die gewelddadige hand van die Afrikaan? Te veel… “Goedertrou”: Die Westerling beskou dit as ’n deug , maar die Afrikaan beskou dit as swakheid.

Goedertrou is die witman se swakheid. Dit is die basis vir konsensuspolitiek.  Goedertrou: dit is wat die Afrikaner in die Kemtonparkse kraal laat val het en dit is wat maak dat die Afrikaner vandag nog aan statutêre politiek deelneem. Daar bestaan ’n naïewe geloof in die redelikheid van die sisteem.  Is goedertrou ’n Christelike beginsel? Is dit die rede waarom die Joodse staat nooit soos ons die pad van oorgawe sal loop nie? Is dit die etiek van medemenslikheid en vergifnis wat maak dat ons die onbetroubare vertrou? Ek is nie ’n teoloog nie, maar wat ek wel weet is dat die kerk in die tagtigs tot vandag nog van die Afrikaner verwag om die Afrikaan as medemens te omhels.    

Tog, die Afrikaan van vandag is nie die Afrikaan van 200 jaar gelede nie. Of is hy? Het die Afrikaan verander? Sou dit moontlik wees dat hy in die tweede helfte van die vorige eeu Westerling geraak het? Sou die karige blootstelling wat hy aan seep, paraffien, geblikte kos, derdeklastreinwaens, sendinggenootskappe, etniese televisie en Bantoe-onderwys gehad het, van hom ’n Westerling maak?  Is hy ’n nuwe aankomeling in die ontvangslokaal van Westerse moderniteit? Of nie? Was sy blootstelling daaraan nie dalk te yl en te kort nie?

En indien die vorige eeu nie die verskil gemaak het nie, wat van die bemagtigende nuwe millenium van die “medemenslike” Nuwe Suid-Afrika?  Wat van vandag se nuwe swart middel- en elite klasse? Sou hierdie hoofsaaklik ondergemiddelde presteerders met bedenklike (of geen kwalifikasies) wat “bemagtig” word tot posisies wat hul karige vermoëns oorweldig, nou reeds Kitswesterlinge wees?  Sou ’n lewe van statuur, hoë posisie, Mercedes-Benz, Gucci, Rolex en Hennessey beteken dat hy nou die rug keer op die slagding in die agterplaas, die gebrek aan betroubaarheid, die wil om te neem wat nie aan hom behoort nie en voortplanting by verskeie vroue?. Of is dit eerder ‘ n geval van die Rolex en die vrypostige seks, die slagding en die Hennesey, die hoë posisie en lang vingers, statuur en onbetroubaarheid wat eklekties en sinkretisties met mekaar vermeng word?

Roelf Meyer en FW de Klerk het geglo in konsensuspolitiek. Of altans dit is wat hulle die Afrikaner wou wysmaak. Was dit werklik in goeder trou of eerder blatante verrraad vir een of ander vorm van vergoeding? Wie sal ooit weet…? Wat ons wel weet, is dat met elke gesin wat aangeval word, pa wat voor sy gesin doodgemartel word, vrou wat verkrag word, kind wat vermink of vermoor word, met al die vorme van trauma wat die Afrikaan op die blanke laat manifesteer, elke keer, verloop Bloukrans en die vele ander moorde stukkie vir stukkie, weer van voor af. So gebeur dit, oor en oor, totdat daar nou al ’n hele aantal Bloukranse se bloed gevloei het. Meyer en De Klerk se vertroue in die Afrikaan het ons onderwerp aan ’n Afro-fascistiese regime waar ons taal en kultuur verdruk word, ons uit die ekonomie gewerp word, geen politieke mag meer het nie, die land uitgedryf word en sistematies uitgemoor word. Dit is die resultaat daarvan om die wapens buite die kraal te laat en op die Afrikaan se goeie voornemens te vertrou. Dit is wat gebeur omdat ons die mag, polities en millitêr, aan die onredelike en venynige oorhandig het.

Ons het konsensuspolitiek bedryf, ons het goedertrou die ooreenkoms binnegegaan. Vir baie blankes het dit die “regte boodskap” aan die swarte gestuur wat dan toekomstige vrede en samewerking sou waarborg. “Elkeen kry sy plekkie in die son…” Die boodskap wat die Afrikaan ontvang het, was egter heel anders as die blanke se voorneme. Vir die Afrikaan was dit die blanke wat aan sy eie swakheid, nl. om te vertrou, oorgee. Dit is vreemd dat so baie Afrikaners na minder as 200 jaar weer ’n ooreenkoms met die Afrikaan goedertrou sou aanvaar. Mens sou verwag ons weet van beter, maar miskien moet ons so ongeveer elke  tweede eeu daaraan herinner word dat ons in Afrika en nie in Europa leef nie. Soos Retief en sy mense het ons onsself deur Meyer en De Klerk ter slagting laat lei.

Laat ons nooit weer hierdie fout begaan nie. Laat ons nooit weer die Afrikaan vertrou nie. Vir eens en vir altyd moet ons besef dat die Afrikaan alleen die vertoon van mag verstaan. Laat ons finaal ons rug op konsensuspolitiek draai. Vir eers sou dit beteken dat ons deelname aan alle gesprekke met swartes staak. Ons sal onsself ’n guns bewys deur van alle forums (bv. die parlement), waar die Afrikaan domineer, te onttrek.

Die Afro-facsistiese regime respekteer glad nie ons menswaardigheid nie. Dit soek geen konsensus met ons nie en forseer sonder huiwering hul wil op ons af.

In hierdie situasie maak dit geen meer sin vir ons om konsensus met die regime te probeer voer of enige ander vorm van samewerking te bied nie. Konsensus kom nie net van een kant nie. Konsensus is dood!

Die regime voer konfrontasiepolitiek met ons, want hulle het geen rede om anders te doen nie. Ons deelname en gekruipery in die raadsale gee vir hulle alleen rede om ons met disrespek en veragting te hanteer.

Die Afrikaner sal nou ’n ander strategie moet volg as hy in Afrika wil oorleef. Geen meer mooi woordjies nie, geen meer kruipery nie, geen meer konsensus nie. Voortaan moet ons die Afrikaan alleen d.m.v. konfrontasie benader. Laat ons hom konfronteer met vreedsame protes, met konfrontasie in die ekonomie, in die nie-statutêre politiek, in sportadministrasie, kulturele en taalsake, onderwys, letterlik oral waar ons kan. Laat ons die regime verneder op sportstadions, in die kuberruim, in die buiteland, in die gedrukte media, op geselsforums,  in die werkplek, op straat, op skouterreine en oral denkbaar.

Alleen konfrontasie sal die regime in sy spore stuit.

оборудование для автосервисалобановский депутат

Fred Nel se grappie

Dat " Die Afrikaners nog nooit so vry was soos die afgelope 13 jaar in die NSA nie" is maar net ‘n ou grappie mense, niks om so opgewonde oor te raak nie. Dit kan mos nou niks anders wees as ‘n gekskeerdery nie. Toegegee, Vryheid vir die Afrikaner is ‘n baie sensitiewe en ernstige saak en behoort iemand met die statuur, verantwoordelikhede, en aansien van Fred Nel darem nie so ligtelik en onverskillig daaroor te spot nie, netnou dink die Afrikaners wat vir die DA gestem het, en wou stem, dat sy siening van Afrikaner Vryheid die amptelike siening en standpunt van die DA is en dit, mense, kan nogal ‘n lollery afgee.

Vat nou maar net een van die "Vryhede wat deur die grondwet gewaarborg word" en "die Afrikaner kultureel en andersins ‘n bloeitydperk laat beleef het" as byvoorbeeld naamlik taalregte, en waarby, en ek is seker Fred Nel sal saamstem, Afrikaans as taal ingesluit is. Fred Nel is reg, nog nooit het Afrikaans so gebloei soos gedurende die afgelope 13 jaar in die NSA nie en bloei gaan hy nog bloei Fred, die bietjie wat daar nog van hom oor is moet doodeenvoudig weg en ek praat nou nie van al die gedigte, feeste, musiek ens waarna jy verwys nie maar dit waarna jy nie verwys nie soos byvoorbeeld Afrikaans in staatsinstellings, skole, universiteite (akademiese literatuur), openbare instellings, munisipaliteite, op SABC ens, ens. Daar waar dit vir ‘n taal saak maak om te ‘oorleef’ en nie net ‘n kombuis- fees of boektaal te word nie.

Indien Fred se opmerking " solank as wat die Afrikaner vry is om sy kultuur uit te leef en dieselfde vryhede te geniet as enige ander landsburger " Engelssprekendes as landsburgers insluit  beklemtoon hierdie opmerking doodeenvoudig net sy ongevoeligheid met wat tans met die Afrikaner, sy taal, kultuur, geskiedenis ens in die NSA gebeur en die aanhoudende aanslag wat daar van owerheidsweë en instansies is om dit, en spesifiek sy taal en erfenisgoedere, uit te wis.

Baie Afrikaners is deel van die globale gemeenskap en wys in die buite wêreld wat in hulle steek waar hulle as leiers na vore tree in die wetenskaplike, tegnologiese en besigheidsomgewing, nie omdat hulle dit in die buite wêreld noodwendig wil doen nie, maar omdat hulle net doodeenvoudig nie in die NSA die geleentheid gegun word om dit hier te doen nie. Nie net kry die Afrikaner nie erkenning vir wat hy in die verlede in hierdie land opgebou het nie, maar word hy vir alles wat sleg was en is beskuldig en soos ‘n derderangse landsburger wat nie hier tuishoort nie, behandel.

Aangesien die Afrikaner die aanpassing sal moet maak om ‘n politieke beweging te steun wat eens is met sy/haar politieke beginsels wat waarskynlik beginsels sal wees wat sy/haar taal, godsdiens, kulturele en gelyke regte ens sal steun en beskerm en ‘n multikulturele party soos die DA meer Afrikaners verteenwoordig as enige ander party in Suid Afrika sal ek, om hierdie aanpassing te maak, graag wil weet wat die amptelike standpunte van die DA is tov onder andere:

a) Taalregte met spesifieke verwysing na die rol van Afrikaans en Engels in die NSA.

b) Die behoud / verandering van plekname.

c) Die reg op eie skole, universiteite en ander instellings wat taal en kultuurgebonde is.

Indien die stellings en standpunte, soos wat Frek Nel dit in sy skrywe stel, die norm is waarvolgens die "Vryheid" van ‘n volk in die NSA gemeet word dan is dit vir my duidlik dat ons hier te doen het met ‘n heel ander betekenis van die begrip "Vryheid" as wat normaalweg nog altyd aanvaar is. Vryheid, Fred, het vir ‘n volk baie meer betekenis en lê baie dieper as die oppervlakkige klomp opmerkings en standpunte wat jy in jou skrywe maak en is dit ook geen wonder dat jy die absurde gevolgtrekking  maak dat die Afrikaner nog nooit so "vry" was nie.

Albert

 

липецк комплектующиелобановский харьков класс

Ek het gesonde eerbied vir HNP

Liewe Jeanette,

(Jy dui nie aan of jou aanspreektitel “mevrou”, “mejuffrou” of dalk ‘n professionele een soos “dokter” of  “doktor” is nie, so verskoon my vrypostigheid om jou op jou voornaam aan te spreek.)

Ek wil darem net die lug suiwer: Ek het net gesonde eerbied vir die mense van die Herstigte Nasionale Party, die enigste politieke party wat nog nie ‘n aks gewyk het van sy standpunte in al hierdie jare nie. Ek stem nie volkome saam met die HNP op alle gebiede nie, maar dit beteken nie dat ek hulle minag nie. Ek het goeie herinneringe van ‘n middagtee en onderhoud wat ek met Oom Jaap Marais gehad het, wat my beïndruk het met die helderheid van sy intellek maar ook met sy onbesproke hoflikheid. Hy het ‘n groot en goeie indruk op my gemaak. Ons het meer Afrikaners soos hy, en by uitbreiding, soos die stewige steunpilare in vandag se HNP, nodig.

Wat my by die paragraaf in my rubriek bring wat jou so ontstig het. Hierdie mening oor die HNP is glad nie my eie nie en is beslis nie bedoel om so verstaan te word nie. Ek het dit aangebied as die heer Du Preez se sieninge en ek sal baie verbaas wees as dit nié sy mening is nie. Ek het die vryheid geneem om die saak uit sy oë te probeer sien, met ander woorde ‘n aanpassing van die gesigspunt waaruit ek skryf. Ek is seker jy sal met my saamstem dat Max wél die rol van die HNP minag, net soos wat hy die Afrikaner in die geheel verpes.

Om ‘n persoon wat in ‘n storie behandel word se gedagtes aangaande ‘n bepaalde saak vanuit sy eie gesigspunt te probeer uitdruk, kan in die hande van ‘n meester wonderlik doeltreffend wees. Wanneer ek my aanmatig om dié tegniek te gebruik, nou ja, ek vra om verskoning vir enige onnadenkendheid en letterkundige lompheid wat vir jou soveel onnodige ergernis veroorsaak het.

Enige misverstand is my uitsluitlike skuld.

Ek vertrou jy aanvaar my verduideliking en my verskoning en ook my hoop dat julle by die HNP sal voortbeur in die tuig, ongeag die teenstand wat ons saam as Afrikaners ervaar.

купить липецк стойки трансмиссионныеФильчаков прокурор

Obliterating the History of the Whites in South Africa

The ruling black Marxist African National Congress (ANC) is steadily and deliberately obliterating the history of English and Afrikaans South Africans.

This is seen, in a very practical way, in the recent countrywide “renaming” process.  Most of South Africa’s cities and towns were planned, laid out, and built by English and Afrikaner South Africans – the two “white tribes”.  It is not surprising, then, that the cities and streets and buildings were for the most part named after various white leaders and heroes of the past.  Even so, however, South Africa has always had beautiful place names in the black languages as well.  But this is not good enough for the ANC.  They have embarked on a deliberate policy of what they call “transformation”: the process of “transforming” SA’s cities and towns by deliberately erasing the monuments to English and Afrikaans South Africans, renaming the cities, and renaming the streets after predominantly ANC terrorist “heroes” and others.  The plan behind this is to obliterate the history of the whites in SA, to make it appear as if they never came to these shores and never accomplished anything.

  Thus, for example, SA’s capital city, Pretoria, named after an Afrikaner leader, has been renamed “Tshwane”, after some black chief who, we are told, lived in the area long ago.  The ANC likes to tell us that it is not Pretoria itself that has been renamed, but rather the entire “megacity”, which (according to the ANC’s new demarcations) includes Pretoria and various other towns and townships; but in practice, Pretoria is already being referred to as Tshwane by ANC leaders and the State-controlled SA Broadcasting Corporation.  In this way, one of the world’s great capital cities has all but disappeared off the map.  It is a deliberate slap in the face of Afrikaners, a huge number of whom still live in and around Pretoria.

  And other cities and towns have had their names changed as well.  Pietersburg became Polokwane,  Stanger became KwaDukuza, and so on.  And not only cities and towns.  Dams, buildings, airports and streets have all been renamed.  In Pietermaritzburg, for example, some nineteen streets were renamed, mainly after ANC revolutionary “heroes”.  Johannesburg International Airport, the main gateway to South Africa, has been renamed “O.R. Tambo International Airport”, after the late ANC leader, a Marxist terrorist who oversaw the ANC from outside the country and directed its terror campaign against the State. 

  White South Africans are feeling like tourists in their own country, so rapid has been the “transformation”.

  And the latest city to come under the assault of the Marxist re-writers of history is Durban, SA’s famous holiday destination and the busiest port city in Africa.  But in Durban, the massive attempt at rewriting history in the ANC’s image has met with huge and angry opposition, from English, Afrikaans, Zulu and Indian South Africans.  The sheer scale of the renaming process in this city, and also the kinds of people whose names are being attached to the streets and buildings, have the residents of Durban up in arms.  In the words of the leader of the opposition Democratic Alliance, Tony Leon, the choice of the new street names is “a rogue’s gallery of Third World revolutionaries”, which ruthlessly celebrates only one narrow version of the country’s history – the ANC’s version.

  181 name changes have been proposed by the ANC-dominated city council!  Most of them commemorate ANC “struggle activists” as they are called (their true name: terrorists), but in addition, the names of certain monstrous Marxists and terrorists from other countries are proposed.  As John Steenhuisen, the opposition Democratic Alliance’s Metro caucus leader, said: “This ‘kick sand in your face’ kind of approach from the ANC cannot go unchallenged.  They are using their majority in council as a blunt instrument to push their will and narrow party political interests.”  He said there should be wider community participation instead of decisions being taken by officials behind closed doors.  True – but this is of course ever the way of Communists.

  As previously stated, it is not only English and Afrikaans South Africans who are incensed at the proposed name changes.  Zulu supporters of the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) are up in arms over the plan to rename the Princess Magogo Stadium (named after the mother of IFP leader, Mangosuthu Buthelezi) after Dumisani Makhaye, a late ANC housing minister.  It is also proposed that the Mangosuthu Highway, named after Buthelezi himself, be changed as well.  This further enraged IFP supporters, who (rightly) said that only ANC “heroes” were being honoured.

  Durban’s notorious Point Road, for decades a centre for prostitution and drugs, has been renamed Mahatma Gandhi Street.  This has incensed many Indian residents of Durban, saying Gandhi’s name should not be associated with the most notorious road in the city.

  The proposed new name for the Durban Metro police headquarters is Umkhonto weSizwe Building.  Umkhonto weSizwe, known as MK, was the name of the ANC’s vicious armed wing during the years of its revolutionary terror campaign.  It was the precise equivalent of the PLO, or the IRA.  It was responsible for terrible terrorist atrocities throughout the country.  For decades, conservative, anti-Communist South Africans warred against this evil organisation.  But of course, the ANC is in power now, and MK was incorporated into the SA Defence Force.  The Defence Force today, in fact, is MK, for all practical purposes. 

  Church Street, in the Durban CBD, could soon be renamed after Steve Biko, the Black Consciousness leader who died in prison.  Another road that may bear his name is Umgeni Road.  Or possibly the Botanic Gardens Road.  Field Street could be renamed after Joe Slovo, a sinister leading light in the ANC before his death, believed to have been a KGB colonel.  Old Fort Road may be named after the late Chris Hani, the leader of the SA Communist Party, a terrorist leader.  Or otherwise, he might get North Coast Road, Parkhill, named after him, or even West Street, a major CBD street.

  Smith Street, one of Durban’s most important central streets, may be renamed M.A. Adelaide Tambo Street.  She was the wife of the ANC’s Oliver Tambo.  Another road which may bear her name is Currie Road, Musgrave.  The proposed change for Musgrave Road is to Walter Sisulu, one of the top ANC leaders and a fellow-terrorist with Nelson Mandela.  And the famous Marine Parade may be renamed O.R. Tambo Marine Parade. 

  NMR Avenue (named after the Natal Mounted Rifles) has already been changed to Masabalala Yengwa Avenue.

  The proposed new name for the Jan Smuts Highway, Dawncliffe (Smuts was one of SA’s Afrikaner prime ministers, and a world political figure in his time), is Denis Hurley Highway.  Hurley was a Roman Catholic archbishop, based in Durban, and one of the top “liberation theologians” (“Catholic-Communists”) who used his considerable influence to throw support behind the ANC during its revolutionary campaign.  It is also possible that Queen Street might be named after him instead.

  Another leading “liberation theologian” was Beyers Naude – and Umhlanga Rocks Drive might be renamed after him.

  Old Main Road, Hillcrest, could soon be renamed after Govan Mbeki, a terrorist comrade of Nelson Mandela and the father of SA’s present president, Thabo Mbeki.  And the Durban City Hall, it is proposed, should be renamed the Madiba Building, after the name by which Nelson Mandela is well known.

  Then too, there is the plan to rename Edwin Swales VC Drive after one Solomon Mahlangu.  Who was Edwin Swales?  Was he a Nazi-like white racist, as the ANC loves to portray all whites, past and present, in this country?  No.  He was white, yes, and he was one of only three South Africans to be awarded the Victoria Cross in World War Two, a war fought against Nazism.  But the recognition given to white South Africans is the very thing the ANC wants to wipe out. 

  A somewhat amusing name change, providing a bit of comic relief in the midst of all this, is that proposed for Cowey Road.  The proposed new name is Problem Mkhize Road.  Mkhize was a former MK commander.  In SA, people understand that many blacks are given such names at birth, often according to something that happened during or shortly after the birth, and the man could not help having the name his parents gave him; but to any foreigner, unaware of this, a road named “Problem Mkhize” will be extremely amusing – and bewildering.

  These name changes are all shocking, and disgusting to the sensibilities of all decent-minded people; for many of these people were terrorists.  But certainly one of the most shocking of all, because of how “close to home” it is for the people of the area, is the proposal to rename Kingsway Road, in Amanzimtoti, as Andrew Zondo Road, in honour of a terrorist bomber who killed five people.  He was sentenced to death in 1986 for planting a bomb in a rubbish bin at the Amanzimtoti centre the year before, which killed two women and three children and injured many more.  The DA’s caucus leader in Durban, John Steenhuisen, said, “We will be mobilising people to object.  The process and choice of many of the names is deliberately provocative.”  Speaking about the call to rename Kingsway Road after Zondo, he said, “”It’s almost akin to renaming a street in New York after Osama bin Laden.  It’s highly insensitive.”  And Tony Leon said, “To append the name of Andrew Zondo to a highway in Amanzimtoti, where this saboteur killed five people in a bomb attack during the 1980s, looks like a calculated slight to the families of his victims.”

  The South African Communist Party (SACP), however, voiced its support for renaming the road after Andrew Zondo.  It said: “The SACP… regrets the loss of life in the Amanzimtoti bombing.  Comrade Andrew Zondo was a member of MK and part of the armed struggle and he undertook his activities at the height of apartheid repression… [He] sacrificed his life in the cause of the national liberation and is to many a hero.”  It called on the municipality to educate the public about the “meaning of his activities as contribution to coming to terms with our past.”  It added: “We believe there is a need for those who benefitted from apartheid, to reciprocate the generosity shown by those who suffered under apartheid.”  What deceivers and doublespeakers Communists always are!  They say they regret the loss of life caused by Zondo – yet they call him a hero who gave his life as a “sacrifice”.  He didn’t sacrifice his life, he was executed because of his crimes!  He murdered five people – and now we’re to believe that he is the hero?  What “generosity” did he show to his victims?

  Another proposal, to honour a notorious armed robber, murderer and rapist by renaming a road after him, has been met with shock and anger by opposition parties in Durban.  His name was S’bu Mkhize, SA’s most wanted man at the time, who carried out a reign of murder, robbery and rape.  Although the ANC at the time distanced itself from his crimes, he was particularly brutal when attacking members of the Inkatha Freedom Party, the ANC’s main rival in the province.  He and his gang were cornered in a house in Isipingo in 1992.  When he was called upon to surrender, he lobbed grenades at the police and his gang opened fire with machine guns.  The police brought in armoured vehicles to demolish the house, and he and his gang were killed.  At the time of his death, the police had more than 10 warrants of arrest out for him.

  And now the ANC in Durban wants to rename the R603 road through Umbumbulu after this gangster – the very area in which he committed most of his crimes!  In the words of the IFP’s caucus leader in the Duran municipality, Thembi Nzuza, the IFP is “sickened” by this proposal.  “He killed a lot of our people and our supporters, that one.  He was a common criminal who preyed on the weak and the old.  He was a murderer and a criminal and a robber.”

  IFP leader, Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, is not one to whom the ANC listens.  This is a pity, for he has wisely cautioned what he calls a “gloating” and “disdainful” ANC to be careful about “airbrushing” certain groups, particularly the Afrikaners and the Zulus, out of history, so as to give prominence to ANC-affiliated people alone.  He said that name changes should only be done “with regard for the fact that a part of South Africa’s linguistic and cultural heritage traces its roots to white Africans”, namely the Dutch and British immigrants who started arriving at the Cape 350 years ago.  Wise words indeed.  As history shows with many examples, this kind of blatant cultural obliteration increases bitterness and resentment, and in time it so often leads to yet further uprisings and bloodshed. 

  But dictatorial leaders never learn from history.  When they come to power, they have an opportunity to make all the diverse peoples living within the geographical territory they rule feel welcome, feel as though they have a place in the sun.  But they never make use of this opportunity.  Instead, they inevitably advance only the interests of their own people at the expense of all others.  And as surely as night follows day, this leads to still further resentment, bitterness, animosity, anger, and eventually, bloodshed.  English and Afrikaans South Africans may have lost power in SA; they may at the moment be  a despised minority in the country they ruled so well for so long; but the resentment, bitterness, frustration and anger is building up all the time, as they see themselves marginalised, their history eradicated, their people murdered and raped.  And inevitably, there will be a backlash.  It may not occur this year, or next year, or a decade from now, or two decades.  But it will inevitably come.  This is the nature of men everywhere.

  With the Zulus, it may have already started.  After these name changes were proposed, thousands of Zulu protesters, wielding sticks, ran through Durban’s city centre, upending dustbins as they went, and causing minor damage.  One protester fired shots into the air.  Shops were looted.  By early afternoon about 10 000 protesters had converged at the city hall.  One of the placards read: “Stop naming our streets after your girlfriends!”  Another read: “We All Have Our Heroes.”  And another: “Who Are These People?”  On the same day, Zulu protesters barricaded the Mangosuthu Highway with dustbins and burning tyres.  Traffic lights were smashed.

  And then there are the proposals for certain streets and roads to be named after Communist revolutionaries and terrorists from other countries as well!

  The proposed new name for Kensington Drive, in Durban North, is Fidel Castro Street!  Yes – named after the ANC’s big buddy and fellow-Communist, the brutal dictator of Cuba. 

  Northway, in Durban North, could soon become Kwame Nkrumah Road, named after the brutal first president of Ghana after its independence. 

  Somtseu Road, it is proposed, should be renamed after Kenneth Kaunda, the Marxist president of Zambia who destroyed his own country, reducing it to ruin in every possible way.

  The Higginson Highway may be renamed after no other than Yasser Arafat, the Muslim terrorist leader of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, one of the ANC’s great allies during their revolution.

  Warwick Avenue, in Greyville, may be renamed after Julius Nyerere, the Marxist president of Tanzania whose foolhardy policies reduced that country to utter ruin.

  And Moore Road, in Glenwood, could be renamed after Che Guevara, Fidel’s big buddy and a revolutionary thug.

  Broadway could become Swapo Road.  Swapo is the acronym for the South West African Peoples’ Organisation, the equivalent in South West Africa (now Namibia) of the ANC in South Africa.  Swapo conducted its own terror campaign in South West Africa, until the United Nations saw to it that it became the new government of Namibia.

  The choice of street names is “a rogue’s gallery of Third World revolutionaries” indeed, in the words of Tony Leon.  And the ANC tells the world that SA is a democracy?  What a joke.  What we are witnessing daily is the sheer arrogance of the ANC, which knows it is in power for many years to come and which loves to throw its weight around, doing what it pleases when it pleases regardless of the consequences.  SA is a typical Marxist country now, honouring not only its own terrorist “heroes”, but those of such countries as Cuba, Namibia, and Ghana.  White South Africans would never have imagined it possible, back in the 1980s or even the early 1990s, that  the day would ever arrive when men such as Castro, Arafat, Biko, Hani, Mandela, etc., the enemies of South Africa and of everything the West stood for, would be honoured in the cities they built.  But it has come to pass.  The Communist revolution succeeded, not by winning a war, but by treachery, duplicity, and cunning.

  In all likelihood, not all of these proposed name changes will eventually be accepted.  But the ANC has been very clever.  They have deluged Durban residents with 181 proposed name changes.  They knew there would be an outcry.  But then, when they scale back somewhat, and only bring in, say, 100 name changes, or 130, it makes them look good.  It makes it appear as if they “listened to the people”.  In truth, however, they still will get their own way.  They will scrap a few proposals, but keep the rest, and still “transform” Durban thereby.  Yet they will do so in a way that looks (to the ignorant and uninformed) “democratic” and “consultative.”

  And as things stand now, other places could soon follow.  Will Cape Town, the world famous and beautiful Cape Town, eventually become iKapa?  Will Johannesburg (named after another Afrikaner) become “Jozi” or “eGoli”?  Will the entire country, in fact, oneday be renamed “Azania”?  It is entirely conceivable, for there are many within the ruling party who want it.

  There is only one good thing in all this.  At least now, as SA’s cities deteriorate further and further under ANC mismanagement, becoming increasingly like all other Third World African slum-cities, the names of those whites who worked so hard, and accomplished so much, in SA will no longer be associated with the disasters which these cities have become, or are in the process of becoming, under black Marxist misrule.  At least now, when people visit SA from foreign countries, they will see, on the street signs, the names of the very people who have brought such collapse and ruin to SA!  And then they will look around, at the filth in the streets, the crime and grime, the traffic lights that don’t work, the poor starving street children on almost every corner, the prostitutes and pimps, and all of this will be associated with the names of the ANC’s “heroes” on the street signs.  They deserve it.  The men who, once upon a time, built SA into the great country it was, and the English and Afrikaner peoples they represented, do not deserve to have their names associated with this degradation and mismanagement.

  In the city of Standerton, on direct orders of the ANC mayor, the Great Trek Memorial Stone was destroyed. This monument celebrated the 150th commemoration of the Great Trek, a pivotal event in Afrikaner and indeed South African history, when Afrikaners trekked away from the British-ruled Cape to establish themselves in new territory, and thereby contributed immensely to the opening up of the interior of South Africa and the coming of Western civilization to this barbaric part of the world.

  No wonder, then, that the ANC hated the monument!  At every turn, these black Marxists are faced with the evidences of the wonderful achievements of the English and Afrikaners in South Africa – and it fills them with envy.  They well know that nothing they have done equals or excels such achievements.  And this envy leads to anger and hatred.  They cannot stand these reminders of achievement and excellence.

  The mayor, a black woman named Queen Radebe-Khumalo, gave the order for the Memorial Stone’s destruction.  It consisted of a granite stone with tracks in cement on it, commemorating the Great Trek.  Her words were, “That piece of thing means nothing to us.  It is only a piece of cement with tracks on it.  I don’t even know where it comes from” (Freedom Front Newsletter 101, dalien@vf.co.za).  This reveals not only her hatred for Afrikaner history, but also her ignorance of history.  She should stop viewing history merely through the ANC’s lenses, and she might learn something.  Fat chance of that happening.

  On a national level, the ANC only reacted to the destruction after the Freedom Front Plus, an Afrikaner political party, criticised the ANC’s national leadership over their silence.  Smuts Ngonyama, the ANC’s chief spokesman, said in a statement that the ANC would be investigating the incident, “because the ANC is not here to destroy anyone’s history” (Freedom Front Newsletter 101).  If this were true, then the Memorial Stone would not have been destroyed on the orders of an ANC mayor!  But the real truth lies in the fact that the ANC is interested in preserving only the history of its own people, and of its Marxist terrorist campaign against the previous white government of SA.  In true Communist fashion, they use doublespeak, saying one thing for public consumption but quite another thing to their own followers and comrades.

  Dr Pieter Mulder, the Freedom Front Plus leader, said correctly: “President Mbeki and the ANC leadership’s silence, following the destruction of the Memorial Stone in Standerton, was seen by the Afrikaner community as passive approval of the actions.  If these kinds of actions are not condemned by leaders on a national level, such as President Mbeki, it could lead to reciprocal damaging of communities’ cultural goods.  It will be destructive for relations in South Africa.”  Precisely.  This deliberate destruction of the history, and the monuments to that history, of white South Africans, is only going to breed bitterness, resentment, and eventually – rebellion.  It is always so.  Instead of making SA a country where all its citizens feel at home, the ANC is concentrating solely on the black nations, and doing all it can to obliterate the two white nations.  It is accomplishing this through the marginalisation of whites in the workplace and in every other sphere, the destruction of all records of their great history, and the deliberate genocide of their farmers.

  The Freedom Front Plus also lodged a complaint with the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Language Communities about the destruction of the memorial.  “Irrespective of the reaction of the ANC, the FF Plus is continuing with its complaint.  We are convinced that the Mayor of Standerton and the provincial ANC have contravened the Constitution with the order to destroy the Great Trek Memorial Stone,” said Mulder.  To date, the FF Plus is disappointed with the way in which the Commission has undertaken its duties.  It is their work to protect communities’ language and cultural goods.

  It is not surprising that the Commission, appointed as it was under the ANC, is, like so much else emanating from the ANC, an organisation that operates according to double standards.  All these high-sounding commissions, all these pieces of constitutional legislation, look very good on paper, and give the impression to the outside world that the ANC is committed to a constitutional democracy, the rule of law, the equal and fair treatment of all citizens, etc., etc.  But the reality on the ground is far, far different.  Even if the Commission actually does something about this mayor and her destruction of a monument to Afrikaner history, no one should be fooled into believing that the ANC is really committed to such ideals.  They may indeed act this time, merely because there has been some focus on this and that is potentially embarrassing to them.  But if so they will act reluctantly, and only because they want to save face.  They do not have the interests of Afrikaners or English South Africans at heart, and they will continue with their insidious campaign to obliterate the history of the two white nations in SA. 

  Unless white South Africans wake up and take notice, and stand up for what is right, by making use of all legal methods, the process will continue.  All white South Africans need to stand up and be counted, and say to this Marxist organisation, “Thus far and no further!  We are citizens of this country, with as much right to be here as anyone else!”  If this is not done, very soon the records of our great past here at the southern tip of Africa will be gone, and we ourselves will be even more at the mercy of these Marxist thugs than ever before.  It is not too late, but time is running out.

Shaun Willcock is a minister of the Gospel, and lives in South Africa.  He runs Bible Based Ministries.

купить джинсы на подростка мальчикаалександр лобановский харьков класс