Julius Malema se setel in die parlement is veilig na SAID, in ‘n onverwagse wending, laat Maandag sy sekwestrasie-aansoek teen Malema laat vaar het.
Die Ekonomiese vryheidsvegters se leier is deur die Inkomstediens laat vervolg.
Die voorlopige sekwestrasiebevel, wat sedert Februarie verlede jaar reeds oor sy kop hang, is ook opgehef nadat die SAID-advokaat Nic Maritz gesê het hulle onttrek.
Geen redes is gegee aan regter Gregory Wright in die Noord-Gautengse Hooggeregshof nie, maar Maritz het gesê dit was nie ‘n “normale sekwestrasie” nie.
Vroeër het die hof verdaag om regsargumente te hoor.
Toe die hof hervat, het Maritz, tot die verbasing van die gepakte gallery, net gesê hy is aangeraai deur sy kliënt (SAID) om die aansoek, asook die voorlopige bevel wat vroeër toegestaan is, te onttrek.
Hy het geen verduideliking gegee nie en die partye het daarna geweier om met die media te praat.
Is dit my verbeelding, of ruik ek ‘n rot.
Hey wenna!! djew caal me ROT!!?? Me, I, JuliAss, I am thee commaraded, we, the effers, whee wheel win the next elektjion.
I for the waife of me, i can not be understandieng thees attitjude of thee whaaite rasaasts laaike djew.
My uncle form norf across the bridge of bait, I, was spending manienigie taaime wev hiem, we are plannieng the last of the last steppies to the revalaopetjion, chaise you whaaities by the see, soega, hamba!!
Whait four the revaloetjion!!! My aankle she wheel sent the troupers from Ziembambwe, yous whaities maast lern to swim.
Viva, no Esichkom Viva, Dakness my vriend.
My atha hero, Die Klek, father of hour liebaration, he has been spoking many a waaise wed from the monumant of the frontpullars, Me, I, JuliAss, I wheel be playcieng hes waaise weds here by the rasaast papas of Prage.
Afrikaans
identity under huge pressure – FW de Klerk
FW
de Klerk |
29
May 2015
Former
president says 1973 declaration of apartheid as a ‘crime against humanity’ was
a Soviet agitprop project
SPEECH BY FORMER PRESIDENT FW DE KLERK TO THE
BONDSRAAD, VOORTREKKER MONUMENT PRETORIA, May 29 2015
OUR FUTURE IS IN OUR OWN HANDS
It is a great
honour for me to address this important meeting of the Bondsraad at the
Voortrekker Monument - this national shrine which is so central to the
identity, the history and the soul of our people.
It is also an
appropriate time to address the Bondsraad. The AB’s predecessor played a
central role in the history of our people during the 20th century -‐ first in the
revival of Afrikaner nationalism after the First World War and then in the
political affairs of the Afrikaner people in the tumultuous years that
followed.
The AB played a
leading role as an intellectual sounding board in the construction of separate
development. When it became evident that separate development could not provide
a just resolution to our complex problems, the AB - particularly under
Prof De Lange - helped to prepare the way for a negotiated solution - a
solution that would protect the rights and freedoms of all South Africans.
It is now 21
years since the commencement of our new constitutional democracy. During this
period our Constitution has provided a framework for relative peace and
progress. We are once again a full member of the international community; we
can look our fellow South Africans in the eye as equals; our economy is three
times larger than it was in 1994; and most whites have prospered - more
so than any of our other communities.
There are many
critics of the decisions we took at the beginning of the 1990s. Some say we
should have clung to the old dispensation. Others claim that we could have
negotiated a better deal. Some think that we could have retained some or other
minority veto.
Let me state
quite clearly: if we had not reached a settlement as soon as possible - following
the collapse of the Soviet Union - the balance of forces would have
inexorably - and quite quickly - shifted against us. With each year
that passed, our ability to secure our core interests would have weakened - which
is exactly what happened to Ian Smith in Rhodesia.
Clinging to
power was simply not an option. We could probably have continued to rule South
Africa for another 15 to 20 years under increasingly grim circumstances. We
would have become completely isolated. Our economy would have been crippled. A
high percentage of the white population would have emigrated. Our young men
would have spent half of every year fighting on the borders or repressing
dissent in the townships. Inter-‐ racial animosities would have increased
to a level that would have made a mutually acceptable negotiated solution less
and less possible with each year that passed.
Others would
have liked us to carve out a white homeland somewhere in the country. However,
there is - and was - nowhere in South Africa where whites are close
to being in a majority. There was no possibility that whites would have given
up their comfortable livelihoods in our cities and trekked into the far-‐flung areas to
establish a new state.
Others who think
we could have secured a minority veto are deluded. Such an outcome would have
been completely unacceptable to the vast majority of South African citizens - and
would never have been accepted by the international community.
As it is, we
negotiated a Constitution in which all sides have to make painful compromises.
As Ngoako
Ramathlodi conceded a few years ago, the balance of forces at the time of the
negotiations forced the ANC to make vast concessions. He complained that while
the ‘regime’ had given up elements of political power to the black majority,
substantial power was also migrated away from the legislature and the executive
and vested in the judiciary, Chapter 9 institutions and civil society. As a
result, “the black majority enjoys empty political power while forces against
change reign supreme in the economy, judiciary, public opinion and civil
society.”
He went on to complain how ‘white economic interests’
had used litigation to curtail initiatives aimed at introducing fundamental
changes.
At the same
time, there can be no doubt that the Constitution is under increasing pressure.
On all sides we see the steady and deliberate erosion of the rights and
freedoms.
It is not my
intention to speak today about the decline of the new South Africa since the
2007 victory of the SACP and COSATU at the ANC’s national conference at
Polokwane. I spoke at some length about the threats that we now face in my
panel discussion with former President Motlanthe on 21 May. My speech is on the
website of the FW de Klerk Foundation for anyone who might want to know my
views about the situation in which we now find ourselves.
Suffice it to
say that the situation is very serious.
I would much
rather talk today about the future and about what we will need to do if we wish
to secure our position in our beautiful country. The message that I would like
to leave you with is that our future is once again in our own hands -‐ as it has so
often been during our tumultuous history.
Firstly, I think
that is essential for us to define who exactly we are. We all have multiple
identities:
I am FW de
Klerk, an individual human being.
I belong to the
De Klerk, Coetzer, Van Rooy and Fouché families.
I am a member of
the Gereformeerde Kerk.
I am an
Afrikaner.
I speak
Afrikaans -‐ so I am also an
Afrikaanse.
I am a South
African.
I am an African.
I am also a
member of the great Western European culture.
I am a citizen
of the world.
None of these
identities is mutually exclusive. All of them enrich me and make me who I am. I
am proud of all of them and ashamed of none.
These identities
are all acknowledged and protected by our Constitution. They are all central to
my human dignity which is perhaps the foundational value from which all of the
rest of the Constitution devolves.
The problem is
that two of these identities - my identity as an Afrikaner and as an
Afrikaanse - are under enormous pressure.
The ANC/SACP
Alliance has been trying to make me feel ashamed of being an Afrikaner:
Our President
tells us that all the problems of South Africa began with the arrival of our
ancestors in the Cape 363 years ago.
The President
and leading members of his government increasingly refer to us as
“colonialists” - as though we are recently arrived interlopers with no
historic rights or claims;
At every
opportunity the ANC government blames its own failures on the policy of former
Afrikaner-led governments;
The ANC lets few
opportunities slip by without claiming that the policy of former Afrikaner-led
governments were “a crime against humanity”;
Everywhere they
are increasing their attacks on our national symbols and heritage. They would
like to hide away statues of our heroes in some kind of “Boerassic Park”. And
when I speak of heroes I am not referring to typical politicians, I am
referring to the Paul Krugers and the Christiaan de Wets.
Afrikaans is no
longer being treated equitably or with parity of esteem despite the clear
requirements of the Constitution. English is being imposed upon the country
everywhere as the single de facto official language.
Our Minster of
Higher Education and Training is telling us that there is no place for an
Afrikaans-language university.
The Gauteng
Education Department is trying to force parallel medium education on non-racial
Afrikaans single-medium schools. They know full well that whenever a regional
language is forced to compete with a world language in educational
institutions, the world language eventually replaces the regional language.
Unfortunately,
many of our people have been strongly influenced by this deluge of
criticism - to the point where they are now ashamed to call
themselves Afrikaners.
This sense of
guilt is deeply corrosive and often prevents us from standing up for the rights
that we negotiated in the Constitution.
In the ongoing
debate on the future of the former Afrikaans-language universities, well-meaning
Afrikaner intellectuals have frequently sided with the ANC’s version of
transformation;
Many have bought
into the ANC’s constitutionally unfounded view that all institutions should
reflect the demographics of the country;
In Nedlac we
find that big companies - some of them led by Afrikaners - frequently
go along with the ANC’s ideological programme. Few ever dare to speak out
against government initiatives - despite the damage that it can or will
inflict upon their own interests. Recently they approved the controversial Expropriation
Bill. In so-‐doing they may
have consented to the design of a system which might one day possibly destroy
them, and their property rights.
Some Afrikaners
go along with anti-white ANC policies because they are afraid; others because
they are crippled by their sense of historic guilt.
The first thing
that we have to do to secure our future as Afrikaners will be to achieve a
balanced view of our past and to escape this burden of guilt that makes many of
us ashamed of being who we are.
Let me say at
the outset that - when I say these things - it is not my intention
to justify apartheid.
Apartheid
severely limited the political rights and freedoms of non-whites and was an
outrageous affront to their human dignity. It restricted their ability to
participate in economic activity; it led to the forced removal of more than
three million people; and more than 17 million people were arrested for pass
offences.
In May 1996 I
made a sincere apology before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission for all
the injustices caused by apartheid. More important is that fact that six years
earlier it was the National Party that initiated the process that abolished
apartheid and that took the lead in establishing a non-racial constitutional
democracy.
But was
apartheid a ‘crime against humanity’ as the ANC so frequently insists?
The Institute
for Justice and Reconciliation reported earlier this year that 52.8% of whites
still think so - but are they correct?
First we have to
look at the origins of the charge:
In November 1966 the UN General Assembly declared
apartheid to be a crime against humanity - and in 1973 it adopted the Convention
on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid.
Both the
resolution and the Convention were political initiatives of the Soviet Union - which
had itself committed real crimes against humanity that involved the slaughter
of millions of people. In 1976, when the Convention came into force, 23 of the
31 signatories were, according to Freedom House, “not free”. Six were “partly
free” - and only two were “free”. Ironically, South Africa was classified
as “partly free” - and had a better human rights score than 27 of the
signatories.
The 109 states
that subsequently joined the Convention included none of the core democracies - not
even staunch supporters of the ANC like Sweden and Norway. According to the
United States delegate:
“Deplorable as
it is, we cannot, from a legal point of view, accept that apartheid can in this
manner be made a crime against humanity. Crimes against humanity are so grave in
nature that they must be meticulously elaborated and strictly construed under
existing international law…”
The idea that
apartheid was ‘a crime against humanity’ was, and remains, an ‘agitprop’
project initiated by communists to stigmatise white South Africans by
associating them with genuine crimes against humanity - which have
generally included totalitarian repression and the slaughter of millions of
people.
By contrast, 23
000 people died in South Africa’s political violence between 1960 and 1994 - of
whom fewer than 4 000 were killed by the security forces. Most of the rest of
the deaths occurred in the conflict between the IFP and the ANC. In Kenya, the
British interned more than 320 000 people during the Mau-‐Mau uprising and
hanged more than a thousand Mau-Mau members. In Algeria the French killed more
than 140 000 people in a war that claimed some 700 000 lives.
Also, it is not
usual - where genuine crimes against humanity are involved – that
The share of the
oppressed in national income almost doubles within 25 years -‐ from 28% in
1970 to almost 50% in 1994;
Far-‐reaching reforms
- including trade union rights - enhance the power of the
oppressed;
The oppressed
are given enclaves - including a third of their population -‐ where they are
free of the oppressor’s laws;
Education levels
of the oppressed improve rapidly - with more than 12 times as many blacks
passing matric in 1994 as in 1980 - and with more blacks at university
than whites by 1994; or that
65% of the
oppressors’ tax is spent on social services for the oppressed.
None of this is
meant to whitewash the injustices that were undoubtedly committed under
apartheid. Rather, we need a balanced understanding of our past - not one
based on a simplistic black/white, good/evil framework - but on a
framework that reflects the infinite shades of grey that actually characterise
our history.
Apart from the
injustices perpetrated under apartheid we should bear in mind
The complex
history that created the situation in which white South Africans found
themselves in the 80s;
The well-founded
existential fears and concerns of former governments – including the
Afrikaners’ struggle for self-determination; the future of minorities; the
fragility of democracy in Africa; and the dominant influence of the SACP within
the ANC;
The substantial
– but never sufficient -‐ socio-economic
progress made by black South Africans during the 70s and 80s;
The far-reaching
-‐ but
contemptuously dismissed -‐
reforms introduced by PW Botha; and
The courage of
white South Africans in seeking to come to an equitable solution by putting
their faith in our non-racial Constitution.
As Christians we
should acknowledge our transgressions – but there is no requirement for us
to feel morally inferior to anyone – and least of all to the
Marxist-Leninists who have traditionally played a prominent role in the
approach and the policies of the ANC.
The second
problem that we must overcome if we wish to ensure a positive future for
ourselves and for all the people who live in South Africa is to realise that we
are not powerless.
We too
frequently fail to claim our rights because we are convinced that we are too
few and too weak to make a difference.
This is wrong.
The Constitution
endows us all with substantial powers to protect our rights. It gives us the
power of free expression.
We must use all
the media at our disposal to tell the world that we reject new forms of racism
in the guise of unbalanced affirmative action and demographic representivity;
We must expose
the growing influence of the South African Communist Party within the ANC
Alliance. Without having won a single vote in a free election the SACP is fast
becoming the most powerful element in the Alliance.
We must warn our
fellow South Africans of the catastrophic implications of the ANC’s current
assault on property rights and their incomprehensible land reform proposals.
The Constitution
gives us other important powers:
We have the
right to assemble, to demonstrate, to picket and to present petitions. We
should make use of these rights to give visible and audible expression to our
grievances and to our determination to insist upon our rights.
We have the
right to strike to defend our interests.
We have the
right to free political activity. We should use it to join the political
parties of our choice and to support NGOs that champion the causes that we
support.
We have the
right to access the courts. We should fight unconstitutional legislation in the
courts at every step of the way. This task should not be left to a few
dedicated NGOs. We should all become involved in supporting litigation in
defense of our rights and of the Constitution.
However, it is
not only from the Constitution that we derive our power:
Our skills and
economic resources give us very real ability to influence the course of
affairs.
Apart from this,
we will be able to count on increasing support from the international community
and from South Africans from all races who share our concerns.
So we are far
from powerless -‐ provided only
that we have the will to use the power at our disposal in pursuit of our
constitutional rights.
For this reason
we need to strengthen and mobilise our will.
We must all
understand the absolute necessity of taking action to defend our rights and our
legitimate interests.
The hour is
getting very late. We must inform ourselves about the nature of the threat -‐ the threat that
the ANC and the SACP have spelled out in detail in their Strategy and
Tactics documents and in the South African Road to Socialism. Why do
we imagine that they are not serious about achieving their publicly proclaimed
goals?
We must
understand that the goal of the ANC’s “radical second phase of the National
Democratic Revolution” is progressively to limit our property, our companies,
our employment prospects and our cultural heritage to the shrinking percentage
of the population that we represent. This will be regardless of our skills, the
contribution that we make and everything that we have built up in the past.
We will maximise
our will if we are convinced of the rightness of our cause.
We must
rededicate ourselves to the values that underlie the Constitution;
We must work not
only for the preservation of our own rights -‐ but for the rights of all South
Africans.
We must maintain
the moral high ground by taking our stand on the Constitution that we all
negotiated in good faith between 1990 and 1996.
We must protect
the institutions that the Constitution created -‐ including the independent courts and
Chapter 9 institutions -‐ not just for
ourselves but for the protection of the rights of everyone in the country.
I am confident
that we will be able to secure our position in South Africa for many years to
come:
If we can divest
ourselves of the guilt that the ANC continuously tries to instill in us;
If we can
achieve victory on the battlefield of ideas;
If we can use
all the powers with which the Constitution has endowed us;
If we can free
ourselves of our sense of disempowerment; and
If we are
certain of the rightness and the necessity of our cause.
As I mentioned
earlier the future of our people is once again in our hands -‐ as it has been
many times in our tumultuous history. It is for us to accept the challenge and
to determine whether we will maintain our place in South Africa -‐ or whether we
will apologetically bow from the stage of history to become a footnote in the
story of our continent.
We must remember
what our people have accomplished in the past:
How we set out
into the unknown to establish our own sovereign republics;
How we survived
the crises at Weenen and Blood River;
How for three
years we held at bay the mightiest empire of the modern era in the Second
Freedom War;
How we rose from
the ashes of defeat to secure our right to self-‐determination;
How we held the
line for 13 years against the Soviet and Cuban-‐led expansion in southern Africa; and
How we finally
succeeded in negotiating a fair and equitable Constitution for all South
Africans.
When measured against
such accomplishments should we really be so worried about our ability to
protect our rights against Jacob Zuma and his “second phase” entourage?
Of this we can
be assured: our future and the future of all South Africans is at stake.
As Edmund Burke
noted more than two centuries ago: “All that is necessary for the triumph of
evil is that good men do nothing.” If we do nothing the “second phase”
forces will prevail to the immense detriment of all South Africans. If we stand
together; if we have the will; if we are assured of the rightness and necessity
of our cause there is every reason to be confident that we will succeed.
Issued by the FW
de Klerk Foundation, May 29 2015
He forgot to mention that he, FW de Klerk is also a traitor.
FW moet op die treinspoor loop speel.JULLE het ons in die gemors gedompel vir ‘n sogenaamde “oorlog” wat julle glo sou gebeur – toe bring julle die oorlog in ons huise in.
Die mense wat so “agter die skerms” “werk” – AB/Bondsraad – by watter verfoeilike naam julle julself ookal noem. Ek spoeg op die idee dat hierdie “geheime dinge” vir enige iemand buiten julleself tot voordeel is. GAAN WEG ons het nie julle en julle tipes nodig in ons samelewing nie.
Hey wenna!! yous can swiem? When we take Azania beck, we makes you swiem.
The train she dos not run by the see.
Thee only seecrat ees that Djakop she ees raan by thee seekrat Brieteesh.
Verseker – Hy word nou ‘n tweede Zuma – maak wat hy wil sonder enige nagevolge.
Geen verbeelding nodig nie … ek ruik hom ook!
Ja-nee, Malema het baie magtige vriende agter die skerms.
Aangenaam om jou as kommentator raak te lees.
Onthou hoe Malema eers oorsee is, en direk daarna toe stig hy die EFF? En waar op aarde kry hy die miljoene rande om vir al die gratis rooi hemde, barette ens ens te betaal, en vir verkiesingsveldtogte? Waarskynlik oorsese geld wat hom help
Hey squeeza, How you can not be nouwieng that the miessies by thee big kaya of Bucksingham she ees my sposa?
Where you have been? Huh? Slieping? Why? but Why you not ried the news, my atha assiestance she ees from my aankle Bob, sieflaas, Moegabe.
You send me adras of your kaya, I for sends you a barrat. Soonest of soonest, all of azania, she wheel be whearieng the red univorms of Effers. My atha monies she ees from the whaaite gel from the wood of hollyness, SharlienFerron and, but also, I can gets manieingie mulla from that aaglie jew from khaazakstan, she name ees Sorries, George Sorries, see when we, Effers we become roelars of Azania, Soprries he wheel be taking thee mienieraals. Are you whaaoties all stoepad? hey, isch, hau.
You, you maast eet KFC by brekvis time. Viva!, Viva for viva.
Haai JuliAss ek kon nie my oë glo dat n swarte so eerlik kan wees nie.
Hey, wenna, lethar striengs, why the race fing? thee only kalla we mechion ees red, she ees RED!! You, also, in the new Azania, shee wheel be RED!
Me, I, JuliAss, evverytaaime I say the fing, we do the fing. If I say Mach, we mach.
Im shorest of shore weeth name like Leatha Striengs you maast be resaaiding by the Orange State of Freedom. We wheel change that name also, to: “Red State of zero Friedom”
Like squueza Hendriketta above, you also send postal adras, I send red Barrat. How you whaaities always they say:”We paint the town red” Lieberattjion she ees always only red. Soonest after Ankle Sieffalas Moegabie she send weapons, the revaloetjion she starts, we only spare the piepels weef red barrat
I am thee only Onest politiesjan, evan SRS they smake sheet for themeselves when I, JuliAss appears by kot, they shievvar, cause why, they nouw, I am new dictator of azania. Viva. Hey squueza for you I make red shet like my commoraide Che, but only I put my bietifoel face ontop of shet.
Nou vir wat voor moet Mugabe gewere stuur? Wat hy waar kry?
Van die UN? Of van die gewere wat julle gekry het saam met ons land? EN wat
dink jy – gaan jy ons Afrikanermanne verras? Dink nog n keer ou rooie.
Hau you maast be stoepaad, are you whaaite?
Thee kalar of thee UN she whel also be of red., they not the friend of the Afrikanir, they make like me, beeg show of evariefing., somefing like, “Big poep, no tjief”, or “Bieg poep, no pirformance”.
What you can finks that man weef the bom of Magossie in Deban, that man that he ees alaways karrapt from Oupad. McBommer hee ees biezie weef? Huh? Fink!! soega!! you maast fink!! bleddie Baas Ted!!
You maast ienvest in KFC, eet gives brains, lots.
Lekker baantjies vir boeties, ANC styl.
Hierdie land raak al meer en meer absurd.