After reading Doberman's comment on my previous post regarding the latest brutal home invasion, I thought I would write a piece on just how savage these rat bastard biped simians are when it comes to their disgusting, barbaric practices, complete with a couple of pics.
So I went and had a look. Too stomach churning for me though to carry on.
If you are brave enough, check out these links.
Maybe you will begin to understand the African mind.
http://www.africancrisis.co.za/Article.php?ID=47276&
QUESTION OF THE DAY: WHO SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?
-
Seems this administration has been very busy releasing information that had
no businesses being released, to put it mildly. The past week has been
filled w...
43 minutes ago
26 Opinion(s):
Precisely. Good choice of words. "Too gruesome for words..." It would be a fair day in hell when these pics are flashed across the TV screens of the world with the same fervour that news of a few pranksters pretending to piss in food was broadcast. But alas, that would unsettle the liberal applecart of portraying whites as violent and oppressives and blacks as victims and defenceless.
I'm sorry, but I can't get to this link.
Try this one Dachshund.
http://www.africancrisis.co.za/Article.php?ID=47276&
I do not see what pictures you refer to Albeus unless you are refering to the ones from gruesome farm murder scenes that have been on africancrisis since 2006. These are indeed gruesome scenes which show the acts of people that one can only describe as savages. However, it does not show the "African mindset" anymore than picture of Charles Manson's victims or the victims of the white guy who shot people in a Northwest province squatter camp would reveal the "European mindset." That said, I believe everyone has a right to self-defense against criminals. Google how Soviet special forces (Speznaz - a special division of KGB) dealt with terrorists after some of their diplomats were kidnapped in Lebanon in 1985. There are lessons to be learned from that on how to deal with terrorists and criminals.
@BC. Ordinarily I would say you are correct, but Charles Manson was one perpetrator as was the guy in the squatter camp. When you have thousands of crime scenes that depict the same levels of violence a pattern emerges, and from this we can make a posteriori inferences.
I found the murder pics after scrolling to the bottom of the page. They aren't new, no, but they are still terrible.
Slightly off the subject but still talking about murder:
Have you seen this new book on the murder of Chris Hani yet? I always suspected Thabo Mbeki but it was Joe Modise that had him killed after Hani confronted him with knowledge of Modise's corruption.
Modise was a township thug and murderer and Nelson Mandela's bodyguard. Takes one to know one.
Hani not yet laid to rest
JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA 29 Mar 2009 06:00
Mail & Guardian
A new book by political commentator RW Johnson is likely to rekindle the long-simmering controversy about the assassination of Chris Hani -- and the alleged role of Thabo Mbeki protegé and former defence minister Joe Modise.
At the SACP's 2007 congress newly elected chairperson Gwede Mantashe joined in the song "Thabo Mbeki, Tell us Who Killed Chris Hani". The Young Communist League has repeatedly called for the investigation into Hani's death to be reopened.
In South Africa's Brave New World: The Beloved Country since the End of Apartheid, released this week, Johnson says that Modise, head of Umkhonto weSizwe in exile, had most to gain from Hani's elimination and was most likely to have had the means to support silently the right-wing plot against Hani by Janusz Walus and Clive Derby-Lewis in 1993.
Johnson says that Mbeki may not have known about the Modise plot but that he protected Modise -- especially in relation to the arms deal that vastly enriched the latter. Modise is shown as an Mbeki ally in his rise to the top of the ANC and in his rivalry with Hani.
Johnson writes that in the 1950s Modise was a "township thug", a leader of the feared Spoilers gang in Alexandra township. He later became Nelson Mandela's bodyguard and a founder member of MK.
Former MK operative Sibusiso Madlala told Johnson that both Hani and Joe Slovo distrusted Modise and thought he was an apartheid agent. "Whoever got in Bra Joe's way tended to get caught by the Boers' security police on their next mission … Everyone in the ANC was frightened of him. They knew he had killed people himself, that he was completely ruthless and that he had presided over mass torture and executions in the MK punishment camps like Quatro."
In 1968 Hani wrote a famous letter to the ANC leadership complaining that, while MK soldiers suffered in the camps, leaders such as Modise, whom he mentioned by name, lived the high life.
Modise was known for his extravagant lifestyle in Zambia, partly financed by a racket in stolen cars, which he ran with ANC treasurer Tom Nkobi, Johnson writes.
Modise's response to the Hani letter was to demand the execution of Hani and his co-signatories. They were saved only by Oliver Tambo's intervention.
Hani later became MK second-in-command and Modise's rival for the top job, as well as being vastly popular in MK and in South Africa. He was viewed as Mbeki's most plausible rival to succeed Tambo.
Johnson considers the evidence that Modise was a double agent "overwhelming", citing former apartheid security policemen he interviewed.
Modise returned to South Africa in 1990 "determined to become the first ANC defence minister" and "began to meet with foreign arms dealers now swarming the country in search of the inevitable post-sanctions arms deal".
Johnson writes that in 1993 Hani confronted Modise with the knowledge that he (Modise) had sold off an ANC arms cache for R2.5-million and pocketed the money. "Two weeks later Hani was shot dead."
Johnson argues that the intelligence services of the ANC and the white Nationalist government, which were already cooperating, got wind of the assassination plot by Walus and Derby-Lewis -- and one or both rendered invisible assistance.
They then made sure the assassins were caught. Walus "carried out the hit in full sight of a white woman, who was able to give a description of him, his … car and its registration -- and yet [Walus] himself had not seen her."
The witness vanished and Walus was arrested 10 minutes after driving away from the scene.
The M&G reported in 1997 that a double agent called Ramon Laher told his National Intelligence Service handler, Eugene Riley, of a plot to kill Hani days before it took place. Laher later told the M&G that "operatives on both sides of the spectrum", ANC leaders and ANC intelligence were involved.
Laher "went to ground" after the Truth Commission sought to interview him. He gave Riley documents supporting his view, but Riley was mysteriously murdered eight months after Hani's death.
Mathews Phosa, who conducted the ANC's internal investigation into the assassination, told the M&G there was a "wider conspiracy", writes Johnson. Further, he says KwaZulu-Natal leader Sifiso Nkabinde said a policeman, Leonard Radu, who investigated Hani's death, was murdered. Nkabinde was assassinated soon afterwards.
According to Johnson journalists attempting to follow up the story about Hani's death have been threatened.
Thinking about New Zealand? I found this great site with loads of info at http://www.emigratenz.org.
@BC:
"However, it does not show the "African mindset" anymore than ... the white guy who shot people in a Northwest province squatter camp would reveal the "European mindset."
and @VI:
"When you have thousands of crime scenes that depict the same levels of violence a pattern emerges.."
I totally agree with VI regarding this comment. It is indeed a pattern.
As for you, Black Coffee, you can not compare one incident in Swartruggens of 4 murders (or two incidents, if you want to add Barend Strydom's killing spree in 1988 where 8 Blacks were murderd) to thousands of deliberate acts of torture (not summary executions, by the way) on specifically white Arikaner farmers.
There is no comparison.
Exactly how big is the hole you permenantly have your head shoved into???!!
I am a white Afrikaner and proud to be one.
Two idiots taking their hatred of blacks all the way in ONLY 2 INCIDENTS of 12 (yes, only 12) MURDERS 19 YEARS APART does not define a nation.
And it most certainly does NOT compare to thousands of people being tortured, mamed, raped and murdered for no reason, as you seem to suggest.
WHERE ON EARTH DID YOU LEARN TO DO COMPARATIVE MATHS???!!!
3000+ deaths (1000+ incidents) in 15 years vs 12 killings (2 incidents) in 19 years, and you do not see an African mindset, but a similar, comparable situation?
Apart from being willingly ignorant of blatantly obvious facts emerging daily, you now also proved yourself to be as blind as a bat.
Congratulations.
Scorpion - I am aware of the differences in the numbers. I did not even know about the incident you wrote of in 1988, I wonder how many other incidents have occurred that I do not know about. Also, this can be a long discussion, but how many blacks did apartheid kill directly and indirectly? None of this justifies any farm murder, but as I have said before, it puts into context the hate that hate produced. As for 3000 murdered farmers can you attest that all of these were murdered by black criminals, or were some of these results of white-on-white domestic violence?
@BC, “None of this justifies any farm murder, but …it puts into context the hate that hate produced”
You are not in a position to comment on hate in SA. The context from which you are viewing things as an American differs from South Africans.
@BC what part of " ONLY 2 INCIDENTS of 12 (yes, only 12) MURDERS 19 YEARS" do you not understand?
Joe King - I was and am questioning whether indeed it was only two incidents of 12 murders in 19 years or whether there are more. Fish Eagle - I acknowledge your point, there probably are some things I still do not understand or know about SA. But the impression I got after six months there is that race relations are very similar to what we have in US, more so than I expected before my trip. But perhaps it is different in the rural areas.
Black Coffee,
We all know how the media and the world just loooove to point out the terrible injustices committed on blacks by whites.
The Swartruggens incident was all over the news. Barend Strydom dominated every local news headline for weeks and months on end in 1988. Every South African of any color alive at the time will remember the day.
This event was made public even before Mandela was freed, by the way. Made public by a white government. Oops.
Now you want to suggest that there are many more of these incidents 'you don't know about' and being kept secret by a black government???
The farm murders are not covered by the news at all. They are not made public because it will point out the AFRICAN MINDSET you deny so religiously. It will also point out the gross incompitency and complacency of the government. We can't have negative publicity on the wonderful people running the country now can we?
And what kind of selective media do you suggest will keep secret 'all the countless' attacks of whites against blacks, but only report Swartruggens?
There are single incidents, sure. No one will deny them, and I certainly prefer them exposed.
I do not have a problem with blacks killing whites. I have a problem with people killing people, and no one doing a thing about it.
I'll be the first to string up white murderers 6 aside at every sunrise.
But let us not start comparing murder stats in the Apartheid era with murder stats under the blind eye of our current black government that affects all races in all societies of South Africa.
The farm murders are a small drop in this bucket of blood.
So, big boy, go dig as deep as you want for every unjust murder under a condoning apartheid regime, and I will point to current, underestimated statistics on the murder rate of modern day SA.
Lets make it fair. Scrape together all you can find from 1961 to 1991 (30 years) and I will focus on 1994-2004 (10 years) and let's see who's numbers still overshadow who's.
I dare you, I double dare you.
Dunno why you guys bother with Greg.
His head is so deep up his arsehole that when you provide him with irrefutable evidence he ignores it and continues his deluded mantra of white man evil, black man good.
I agree with AEC on debating with BC / Greg. There will always be a hidden agenda with this person, as there normally is with white-guilt, liberal, leftist people.
BC, I think Scorpion’s suggestion is brilliant. Then would you be prepared to expand on your statement, “race relations are very similar to what we have in US..” in terms of the hatred you spoke about in SA. But facts first, opinions later.
FE - watch him disappear...and then make a come back arse creeping post...lol!
One of his sources for his "doctorate" is the Sowetan. Says a lot about him and his porch monkey university.
@ Scorpion and FE, having deliberated with BC extensively, it is very evident that his real knowledge of South African history and current affairs is extremely limited. What he knows is derived from black liberation theology and anti-apartheid propaganda. He cannot begin to conceive how wrong those "facts" are because it would mean the years he has spent 'studying' about South Africa was all based on falsehoods. He can't debate because he simply does not have the proper information. And hence why he comes across as ignorant and/or uncaring. I believe he wants to know the truth but he simply cannot marry the two truths he is being told. That's why he'll harp on about the Sharpeville 'massacre' in detail down to the inth but cannot tell you the history of the opposing party and what positives it did. If he intends lecturing and working in South Africa one day, he'd better hurry up and start getting the facts sorted out because life as it really is versus what he thinks it is, is going to be a cold slap to the face.
Doberman - I see that in some of your other posts you have started to justify apartheid. The fact that a black here and there also justifies apartheid, especially when his memory may be skewed by fact that he is now unemployed, does not mean it was a good system. So pray tell what are the "facts" I have wrong. Fifty + black South Africans having personally told me about injustices under apartheid (I am including a few Indians in my definition of "Black South African" here) could not all be wrong. Either they were lying, inflating the "facts" or whites who are apologists for apartheid are already busy skewing and revising the history of that brutal, oppressive regime. I believe that the latter is the case. Fish Eagle - what I referred to is the fact that from what I saw for most part hatred of whites is absent from black South Africans. Sure there are some who hate whites, as is case with black Americans, but not the majority from what I saw. I could tell on minibus taxis which I rode every day. A couple times I got hostile stares, but only twice out of thousand times. I think the majority of black South Africans - once they walk past you on the streets, in the malls or whereever - even in taxis, aren't even thinking about you they go about their business. Some whites, evidently, can not stand that. A black friend of mine from SA told me on phone last year that many blacks do despise whites, without hating whites, because many whites still refuse to face the evil effects apartheid had. From posting here, on SAS, even some of the comments one may read from whites on iol.co.za it is self-evident that he is quite correct.
@BC. Frankly I find it very tedious that you use tautological or redundant arguments ad nauseum. Have you no ability to think intelligently? Are you incapable of developing a good argument? My God man, you should be ashamed of yourself. You unabashedly proclaim to be studying towards a Ph.D and yet your abilities to reason and research are atrocious. Recently you used a few white on black attacks as "proof" of a mindset, then you do an about turn and criticise that a few dissenting black voices is not proof that Apartheid was less oppressive. Do you make it a habit to cherry pick your anecdotes to match your hypothesis? In other words, do you make your data fit your fucked up ideology? You actually are clueless. I am not even going to enter the debate as to whether Apartheid can be justified or not, not with you. I am extrememly liberal, and was a supporter of you having a platform, but I do not suffer fools gladly and frankly I think we need better quality "house skeptics". I vote we boot BC.
Why does BC always turn the issue into a racial, black and white debate? Perhaps for many like myself, it is a cultural issue. I love my Western heritage. I love being a descendant of Aristotle, Plato, Copernicus, Newton, Galileo, Hume, Descartes, Darwin, and many others far too numerous to mention. I am deeply proud of being at the thrust of the renaissance, the enlightenment, the idustrial revolution and the scientific method. I celebrate this CULTURE, this paradigm, and to accuse me of racism when I scorn the crass superstitions, the tribal squabblings the devaluation of human life, the appalling lack of innovation, the proven disaster that is Africa and of Africa, is just too much. Whatever ills the legacies of the West have brought on the world, I am proud to be a Westerner. I will never capitulate. I left Azania 3 years ago and in doing so, I gave back to Africa what belongs there in order that Africans can have their place. I was very magnanimous about it. Don't ask me now to grovel and wallow in "white" guilt. People like BC will never understand the depth of this pride.
I second the motion.
OK, I also second the motion.
Good on you, Vince R.
I couldn't agree more. We have to stop this nonsense of bending over backwards. I am so sick and tired of all the little lies, facts skewed or omitted to prove absurd statements, character attacks, etc, etc from liberal whites and racist blacks, I can stick my thumb up my own arse. I think that would be less uncomfortable and irritating.
You have to wonder who the real racists are. People who stand tall for their beliefs, culture and heritage - or those who have to attack the heritage of others, lie about history and conjure up the biggest load of nonsense to "support" their heritage?
Why is it that the overwhelming majority of blacks have to express their beliefs and pride in terms of negative statements about whites and other races? What does that say about them?
But did we not have a prime example of exactly that with old Showerhead - I might have done wrong, but others have done more wrong!!
And Africa wonders why civilization surpassed it at the speed of light. Must be difficult to progress when everything you do is a function of your negative perceptions of others.
Vanilla Ice - that's too bad as I was hoping we could actually have a discussion on the state of the police in SA. And I did not say that white-on-black attacks indicate the white or "European" mindset, I said that gruesome farm attacks do not indicate African mindset and I stand by that. It is a small minority of black criminals who are doing these attacks and terrorize whites and blacks. Most blacks are not criminals and are not running around killing whites and I think you know this. Justifying apartheid or trying to say essentially that "it was not that bad" in my opinion is no different than justifying Nazism, or Stalinism and reminds me of people who nowadays try to deny that Holocaust took place. Now you come along and place a video by Hansie - are we supposed to believe that he or she knows more about apartheid than Beyers Naude did, and Joe Slovo, Raymond Suttner, Allister Sparks, Donald Woods and Jeremy Cronin? I just cited some white South Africans who acknowledged what apartheid really was. Add to that voices of historians Bernard Magubane, Sifiso Ndlovu, or Albert Lutuli back in 1950s and 1960s. Anyone justifying apartheid has zero credibility. Instead, the thing to do is acknowledge that apartheid was an evil system, and then also that there are all these problems now - crime, service delivery, poverty, problems with health services, etc. I also stand by what I said earlier that there should be zero tolerance for violent criminals. However, the multitude of problems today does not mean that we need to inflate and justify some "golden yesteryear" which never really existed except for a small, privileged white minority.
@Fish Eagle. See how the Burping chimp ducks your challenge and alters the debate? ROTFLMAO!
Par for the course. Just ignore the doos.
I again repeat - nothing you say will change his mind. His racist, Stalinist mind will reject anyhting you say, even when provided with proof.
Black man good, white man evil.
Wonder how he justifies his religion's beliefs that they may not marry out of the faith? Or would he marry a floppy if he converted? The floppy, I mean. :-)
Post a Comment