Sunday, January 20, 2008
JZ's Letter as President
LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT (TRANSLATED)
http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/2008/text/at02.txt
The voice of the ANC must be heard
(because we've lost some control of the SABC)
When this journal was first published seven years ago, in January 2001, we (I) said
that it would make an important contribution towards filling a void in South
Africa's media landscape; a landscape in which the voices of the majority of our
people (me) remain largely unheard (thank god).
As we noted at the Polokwane conference in December, this situation has not
changed much in the intervening period (2+2=5).
What we said in the launch edition of ANC Today remains true today: "We are
faced with the virtually unique situation that, among the democracies, the
overwhelmingly dominant tendency in South African politics, represented by the
ANC, has no representation whatsoever in the mass media (because Thabo has stolen the SABC from me!).
"We therefore have to contend with the situation that what masquerades as
'public opinion' (bullshit propaganda), as reflected in the bulk of our media (more propaganda), is in fact minority
opinion informed by the historic social and political position occupied by this
minority." (don't ask me to explain this shit, I like most South Africans don't hold a matric)
There are many examples we can cite to illustrate this point (like Zapiro, that little bastard). Every day brings
fresh instances of a media that, in general terms, is politically and
ideologically out of synch with the society in which it exists (it's not under my control - yet).
This phenomenon is most starkly illustrated at those moments in our political
cycle when the people of South Africa get an opportunity to elect parties and
individuals they want to represent them in government (I am so loved... and I need to wear a condom).
In both the 2004 national and provincial elections and the 2006 local elections,
the views of voters were shown to be sharply at odds with the 'views' emanating
from most media (that we, the ANC would not win?).
To an uninformed reader, listener or viewer, following media coverage in the
months and weeks leading up to these elections, it would have appeared patently
obvious that the leading party in government, the ANC, was heading for a hiding (in which dimension).
Though unlikely to be defeated (ever), most media commentators concurred, the ANC would
see its support drop significantly in the face of an electorate that had become
disenchanted (with luxury cars). We were told that only the ANC's "struggle credentials" and the
lack of a credible opposition would save it from outright defeat at the polls (a.k.a. racial voting).
The election results proved these reports wrong. In both 2004 and 2006, not only
did the ANC's share of the vote increase, but also the actual numbers of people
who voted for the organisation increased. Voters did not desert the ANC, and
instead gave it a stunning 70% mandate (to write a blank check on every corruption capacity available)!
The outcome of the 52nd national conference in Polokwane is a most recent
example of the media yet again becoming a victim of its own propaganda and
manipulation (they should know, I'm really a genius, and if I say 2+2=5 it does). Some are correctly asking themselves: "how did we get it so
wrong?", while others now use every opportunity to "prove" that there is
something that was seriously wrong with ANC delegates at Polokwane (2+2). Granted
there are some journalists who report fairly and leave it to the readers to make
their own judgements about issues and individuals, without pushing certain
agendas. We must acknowledge and applaud their professionalism (and lack of integrity about seeing future dictators).
These are not merely examples of faulty analysis of public opinion surveys, or a
simple misreading of the mood. They indicate a general trend within most
mainstream media institutions to adopt positions, cloaked as sober and impartial
observation, that are antagonistic to the democratic movement and its agenda for
fundamental social, political and economic transformation (waffle...).
To understand why this is the case, we need to consider the role of the media in
society in general and the specific circumstances of the media in South Africa,
both past and present (who gives a fuck?).
In a discussion document entitled 'Transformation of the media', circulated as
part of preparations for the ANC National Policy Conference in June last year,
we said:
"The reality is that the media - in South Africa as in every other society -is a
major arena in the battle of ideas. All social forces are therefore engaged, to
varying degrees and with differing success, in efforts to ensure that the media
advances their ideological, political, social, economic and cultural objectives (propaganda, not debate).
"Throughout its history the ANC has engaged in the battle of ideas,
understanding that the achievement of its objectives of a united, non-racial,
non-sexist and democratic South Africa is dependent on its capacity to convince (make them believe)
the people of the correctness of its positions, policies and programmes.
"The media is consequently one of the sites of ideological struggle with which
the ANC - like other social actors - has sought to engage (by controlling)."
Contrary to what some may claim, the media is not simply a product of the work
of disinterested observers - professionals who are able to detach themselves
from their personal views, interests, prejudices and social position and present
the world as it objectively is (they say I'm an unprotected nut).
It is instead a product of the various political, social, economic and cultural
forces that exist within a society. It is a battle of ideas, and, as such, the
media is part of the battle for power. Those with power, particularly economic
power, are keen that the media serves to reinforce their privileged position,
while those who seek a more equitable distribution of resources campaign for a
media that serves the cause of a more equitable society.
The media, viewed in its totality, should be as diverse as the society which it
serves and reflects. This is clearly not the case in South Africa today. At
times, the media functions as if they are an opposition party.
In part, this can be explained by the structure, culture and values of the media
inherited from apartheid, and by the commercial forces that drive most media
institutions.
As we observed in the discussion document cited above:
"The freedom of the South African media is today undermined not by the state,
but by various tendencies that arise from the commercial imperatives that drive
the media. "The concentration of ownership, particularly in the print sector,
has a particularly restrictive effect on the freedom of the media. The process
of consolidation and the drive to cut costs through, among other things,
rationalisation of newsgathering operations, leads to homogenisation of content.
"Despite protestations to the contrary, there are an increasing number of
instances where the supposedly-sacred separation between management and the
newsroom is breached, where commercial considerations influence editorial
content.
"This takes place in a media market in which there is fierce competition for a
slice of the upper income market, where the most advertising revenue is to be
found. Given that this end of the market represents very particular class
interests (and is predominantly white) it stands to reason that media
institutions will tend to reflect the preoccupations, values and world view of
this small group of society. Even where management may adopt a hands-off
approach to editorial matters, they would certainly step in to prevent their
title from adopting an editorial stance that may antagonise their target market
or alienate advertisers. Dedicated professionals that they may be, most editors
still need to keep an eye on the bottom line."
This is one of the reasons why, though there may be plenty of newspapers and
magazines on our news stands, and a multitude of radio and TV stations occupying
our airwaves, the overall orientation of South African media is politically
conservative. There are few, if any, mainstream media outlets that articulate a
progressive left perspective - which is endorsed at each election by the
majority of South Africans and represented by the ANC, its allies and the
broader democratic movement.
It was to answer this deficiency that the 52nd National Conference called for
the movement to develop its own media platforms, making use of available
technology, to articulate its positions and perspectives directly to the people.
This needs to take place alongside the effort to transform the South African
media environment so that it becomes more representative of the diversity of
views and interests in society, more accessible to the majority of the people,
and less beholden to commercial interests.
During the course of the next five years, as has been mandated by Conference, we
will pursue the development of these media platforms. We will also continue to
develop ANC Today as a credible, popular and vibrant expression of the views and
perspectives of the African National Congress. The journal will remain at the
heart of the ANC's contribution to the battle of ideas.
Over the next few weeks and months, readers should expect to see a number of
changes in ANC Today, all intended to improve the relevance (of the propaganda), vibrancy and impact
of this weekly read.
The Letter from the President will now be published on special occasions only (because my head gets tired),
dealing with important themes and events during the course of the year. The
intention is to open up the journal to a diversity of voices, articulating ANC
positions. In this regard, there will be weekly contributions from ANC Officials
and NEC members.
As we introduce these changes, we will continue to encourage and value the
feedback we receive from readers, better to ensure that the voice of the ANC is
heard (you'll be able to see how we plan to destroy everything achieved since 1994).
ANC Today will be an authoritative online voice of the African National Congress
and a platform for the accurate expression of the policies and views of our
movement (instead of the SABC). We trust that the diversity of contributors will encourage more
debate, and promote better understanding of the movement and its programmes and
activities.
Jacob G Zuma
http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/2008/text/at02.txt
The voice of the ANC must be heard
(because we've lost some control of the SABC)
When this journal was first published seven years ago, in January 2001, we (I) said
that it would make an important contribution towards filling a void in South
Africa's media landscape; a landscape in which the voices of the majority of our
people (me) remain largely unheard (thank god).
As we noted at the Polokwane conference in December, this situation has not
changed much in the intervening period (2+2=5).
What we said in the launch edition of ANC Today remains true today: "We are
faced with the virtually unique situation that, among the democracies, the
overwhelmingly dominant tendency in South African politics, represented by the
ANC, has no representation whatsoever in the mass media (because Thabo has stolen the SABC from me!).
"We therefore have to contend with the situation that what masquerades as
'public opinion' (bullshit propaganda), as reflected in the bulk of our media (more propaganda), is in fact minority
opinion informed by the historic social and political position occupied by this
minority." (don't ask me to explain this shit, I like most South Africans don't hold a matric)
There are many examples we can cite to illustrate this point (like Zapiro, that little bastard). Every day brings
fresh instances of a media that, in general terms, is politically and
ideologically out of synch with the society in which it exists (it's not under my control - yet).
This phenomenon is most starkly illustrated at those moments in our political
cycle when the people of South Africa get an opportunity to elect parties and
individuals they want to represent them in government (I am so loved... and I need to wear a condom).
In both the 2004 national and provincial elections and the 2006 local elections,
the views of voters were shown to be sharply at odds with the 'views' emanating
from most media (that we, the ANC would not win?).
To an uninformed reader, listener or viewer, following media coverage in the
months and weeks leading up to these elections, it would have appeared patently
obvious that the leading party in government, the ANC, was heading for a hiding (in which dimension).
Though unlikely to be defeated (ever), most media commentators concurred, the ANC would
see its support drop significantly in the face of an electorate that had become
disenchanted (with luxury cars). We were told that only the ANC's "struggle credentials" and the
lack of a credible opposition would save it from outright defeat at the polls (a.k.a. racial voting).
The election results proved these reports wrong. In both 2004 and 2006, not only
did the ANC's share of the vote increase, but also the actual numbers of people
who voted for the organisation increased. Voters did not desert the ANC, and
instead gave it a stunning 70% mandate (to write a blank check on every corruption capacity available)!
The outcome of the 52nd national conference in Polokwane is a most recent
example of the media yet again becoming a victim of its own propaganda and
manipulation (they should know, I'm really a genius, and if I say 2+2=5 it does). Some are correctly asking themselves: "how did we get it so
wrong?", while others now use every opportunity to "prove" that there is
something that was seriously wrong with ANC delegates at Polokwane (2+2). Granted
there are some journalists who report fairly and leave it to the readers to make
their own judgements about issues and individuals, without pushing certain
agendas. We must acknowledge and applaud their professionalism (and lack of integrity about seeing future dictators).
These are not merely examples of faulty analysis of public opinion surveys, or a
simple misreading of the mood. They indicate a general trend within most
mainstream media institutions to adopt positions, cloaked as sober and impartial
observation, that are antagonistic to the democratic movement and its agenda for
fundamental social, political and economic transformation (waffle...).
To understand why this is the case, we need to consider the role of the media in
society in general and the specific circumstances of the media in South Africa,
both past and present (who gives a fuck?).
In a discussion document entitled 'Transformation of the media', circulated as
part of preparations for the ANC National Policy Conference in June last year,
we said:
"The reality is that the media - in South Africa as in every other society -is a
major arena in the battle of ideas. All social forces are therefore engaged, to
varying degrees and with differing success, in efforts to ensure that the media
advances their ideological, political, social, economic and cultural objectives (propaganda, not debate).
"Throughout its history the ANC has engaged in the battle of ideas,
understanding that the achievement of its objectives of a united, non-racial,
non-sexist and democratic South Africa is dependent on its capacity to convince (make them believe)
the people of the correctness of its positions, policies and programmes.
"The media is consequently one of the sites of ideological struggle with which
the ANC - like other social actors - has sought to engage (by controlling)."
Contrary to what some may claim, the media is not simply a product of the work
of disinterested observers - professionals who are able to detach themselves
from their personal views, interests, prejudices and social position and present
the world as it objectively is (they say I'm an unprotected nut).
It is instead a product of the various political, social, economic and cultural
forces that exist within a society. It is a battle of ideas, and, as such, the
media is part of the battle for power. Those with power, particularly economic
power, are keen that the media serves to reinforce their privileged position,
while those who seek a more equitable distribution of resources campaign for a
media that serves the cause of a more equitable society.
The media, viewed in its totality, should be as diverse as the society which it
serves and reflects. This is clearly not the case in South Africa today. At
times, the media functions as if they are an opposition party.
In part, this can be explained by the structure, culture and values of the media
inherited from apartheid, and by the commercial forces that drive most media
institutions.
As we observed in the discussion document cited above:
"The freedom of the South African media is today undermined not by the state,
but by various tendencies that arise from the commercial imperatives that drive
the media. "The concentration of ownership, particularly in the print sector,
has a particularly restrictive effect on the freedom of the media. The process
of consolidation and the drive to cut costs through, among other things,
rationalisation of newsgathering operations, leads to homogenisation of content.
"Despite protestations to the contrary, there are an increasing number of
instances where the supposedly-sacred separation between management and the
newsroom is breached, where commercial considerations influence editorial
content.
"This takes place in a media market in which there is fierce competition for a
slice of the upper income market, where the most advertising revenue is to be
found. Given that this end of the market represents very particular class
interests (and is predominantly white) it stands to reason that media
institutions will tend to reflect the preoccupations, values and world view of
this small group of society. Even where management may adopt a hands-off
approach to editorial matters, they would certainly step in to prevent their
title from adopting an editorial stance that may antagonise their target market
or alienate advertisers. Dedicated professionals that they may be, most editors
still need to keep an eye on the bottom line."
This is one of the reasons why, though there may be plenty of newspapers and
magazines on our news stands, and a multitude of radio and TV stations occupying
our airwaves, the overall orientation of South African media is politically
conservative. There are few, if any, mainstream media outlets that articulate a
progressive left perspective - which is endorsed at each election by the
majority of South Africans and represented by the ANC, its allies and the
broader democratic movement.
It was to answer this deficiency that the 52nd National Conference called for
the movement to develop its own media platforms, making use of available
technology, to articulate its positions and perspectives directly to the people.
This needs to take place alongside the effort to transform the South African
media environment so that it becomes more representative of the diversity of
views and interests in society, more accessible to the majority of the people,
and less beholden to commercial interests.
During the course of the next five years, as has been mandated by Conference, we
will pursue the development of these media platforms. We will also continue to
develop ANC Today as a credible, popular and vibrant expression of the views and
perspectives of the African National Congress. The journal will remain at the
heart of the ANC's contribution to the battle of ideas.
Over the next few weeks and months, readers should expect to see a number of
changes in ANC Today, all intended to improve the relevance (of the propaganda), vibrancy and impact
of this weekly read.
The Letter from the President will now be published on special occasions only (because my head gets tired),
dealing with important themes and events during the course of the year. The
intention is to open up the journal to a diversity of voices, articulating ANC
positions. In this regard, there will be weekly contributions from ANC Officials
and NEC members.
As we introduce these changes, we will continue to encourage and value the
feedback we receive from readers, better to ensure that the voice of the ANC is
heard (you'll be able to see how we plan to destroy everything achieved since 1994).
ANC Today will be an authoritative online voice of the African National Congress
and a platform for the accurate expression of the policies and views of our
movement (instead of the SABC). We trust that the diversity of contributors will encourage more
debate, and promote better understanding of the movement and its programmes and
activities.
Jacob G Zuma
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
The Future of SA?
An interesting article by David Masondo could clarify the ANC's future position on ownership of any kind in South Africa's future.
NDR = National Democratic Revolutionary
"What they want is a good Native Fit to Govern according the dictate of white monopoly capital and its lumpen-bourgeoisie. At the risk of simplifying the complexity of intra-media and intra-class dynamics within the historically oppressed, it is worth pointing out that international and local media is also used as one of the arsenals to mount a campaign for certain lumpen-bourgeoisie elements found in the liberation movement. White monopoly capital and black lumpen-bourgeoisie are enemies of the NDR, finish and klaar."
From Masondo's version it seems that if you are anti-revolutionary and you're white or you work for so-called white money, you are the enemy...
Source:
ANC.org.za
http://www.anc.org.za/youth/
August 2007
NDR = National Democratic Revolutionary
"What they want is a good Native Fit to Govern according the dictate of white monopoly capital and its lumpen-bourgeoisie. At the risk of simplifying the complexity of intra-media and intra-class dynamics within the historically oppressed, it is worth pointing out that international and local media is also used as one of the arsenals to mount a campaign for certain lumpen-bourgeoisie elements found in the liberation movement. White monopoly capital and black lumpen-bourgeoisie are enemies of the NDR, finish and klaar."
From Masondo's version it seems that if you are anti-revolutionary and you're white or you work for so-called white money, you are the enemy...
Source:
ANC.org.za
http://www.anc.org.za/youth/
August 2007
Monday, January 01, 2007
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Monday, April 24, 2006
Not so Bright Matonga
"Our policy was not to drive out white commercial farmers. Its never been our policy..."
(Talking on BBC World News - 24 April 2005)
Bright is your average Mr. Nice Felon. Here are a few fantastic articles on the great buffoon:
White woman joins eviction mob
Focus on Zimbabwe Crisis
PETA THORNYCROFT
In a bizarre twist to the forced removals of Zimbabwe's farmers, a white woman, believed to be British, took part in the eviction of a farm couple this week.
The woman, Anne Matonga, in her early 30s, screamed at Monica Schultz: "We are taking back the land you stole from us!"
Matonga is married to Bright Matonga, 35, a Zimbabwean propagandist. He worked as a sports reporter in London for the BBC but was recently recalled to Zimbabwe at the behest of Information Minister Jonathan Moyo to work for the state-controlled Herald newspaper, then the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation before being put in charge of the national bus company.
Vincent Schultz had been wrongfully arrested as the seizure of his farm had been ruled invalid on a legal technicality. Nevertheless, he was still in prison, pending a bail application, and his wife was alone on the farm on Sunday when the Matongas arrived and began hurling abuse at her.
"She [Anne Matonga] was rude, saying we had stolen her land. I thought it strange as she was white, and looked and sounded British," Monica Schultz said on Thursday.
Schultz was released without charges being laid on Monday when a magistrate ruled that he had not defied an eviction order to leave his farm by August 8, as decreed by President Robert Mugabe's government.
Then on Tuesday, Bright Matonga returned to the farm - this time with members of Mugabe's militia. "He told us he was pissed-off, very pissed-off, to find us still at home," Schultz said. "He threatened to return with a battalion. The police advised us to leave."
Police had a list of wanted farmers at a roadblock on Thursday, and Schultz feared, after his eviction in the morning, that he would be picked up again. The final straw for the distraught couple came when notorious militant, Joseph Chinotimba, who together with "war veterans" invaded foreign companies in Harare last year, arrived on the farm with Matonga and told workers they no longer worked for Schultz.
Schultz, 57, and his wife fled the farm in terror and are sheltering at neighbours. They both wept as they wondered what the future held for them.
Schultz said: "We will have to leave. I want peace. Out of Africa. Somewhere where Monica and I can relax and lead a family life, without our ears being tuned for vehicles, for shouting. It's madness, it's a nightmare.
"Living on a farm today is stressful . . . You are the head of the family, the head of the farm, you have to show your face, but when there are 300 people at your gate . . . Do you know how terrifying it is to walk down to your gate?
"I want somewhere I can go with my family, and have law and order."
Monica Schultz, who was born on the farm she has been forced to leave, said: "If peace prevailed we would love to stay on the farm, to grow old and die there. And we have a lot of workers there, some lovely people who worked for my mother, have been there for 50 odd years. Now they have literally nothing."
Forced to stop growing crops nearly two years ago by Mugabe's supporters, the farming couple were restricted to growing roses in greenhouses.
The 11 million roses annually exported to Amsterdam won't be picked again.
Some of the 135 permanent workers have fled the farm.
Matonga, who has a BSc (Hons) in Media Production and Technology from London's Greenwich University, has left militia to guard his new farm.
The Matongas were not available for comment.
--
Bureaucratic heart of darkness
By Marian L. Tupy
April 16, 2006
Sometimes even the most pessimistic observer of African affairs is forced to admit to being surprised just how low a particular African regime has sunk in its treatment of its own people. The latest chapter in the tragic story that is Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe has all the usual ingredients: incompetence, callousness, greed and barefaced lies.
Zimbabwe's economic meltdown has been so impoverishing that the women of Zimbabwe can no longer afford to buy even the most basic hygienic products. Poor substitutes lead to infections that can be fatal in a country where health care has collapsed. International donors have tried to provide relief, but they have encountered a major obstacle: Zimbabwe's officialdom.
In 2000, Robert Mugabe embarked on a course that led his country to economic ruin. By expropriating Zimbabwe's farmers, he destroyed his country's ability to feed itself. Famine rages in the countryside, despite efforts of international aid agencies. Mr. Mugabe's evisceration of private property rights in agriculture fatally undermined other sectors of the economy, such as manufacture and financial services.
With private sector production rapidly declining, Zimbabwe can no longer sell enough goods overseas and earn the foreign currency it needs. Most imported items, including gas, have become nearly impossible to obtain. The government has also lost most of the revenue it needs to pay the wages in the public sector. It therefore resorted to printing money. Inflation runs at 600 percent, and doctors, nurses, lawyers and businessmen are fleeing in droves. More than 2 million Zimbabweans found a new home in South Africa alone.
One of the more mundane, but telling examples of skyrocketing poverty in the country is the fact even the most basic everyday necessities, such as feminine hygienic pads, have become a luxury most Zimbabwean women can no longer afford. The country has 80 percent unemployment. People who are lucky enough to work earn a meager salary that averages $21 per month. A month's supply of pads, unfortunately, costs $5.
Use of unsanitary substitutes has spread disease. The Zimbabwean Congress of Trades Unions has requested, and secured, donations of free hygiene pads from donors in South Africa and Great Britain.
In a farcical twist, the Zimbabwean authorities refused to award the shipments duty-free treatment, demanding the cargo first be quality-tested. It may seem astonishing that government officials in a country undergoing social and economic implosion should think twice before exempting the much-needed products from an import tariff or that they should have the nerve to demand quality-testing for imports from a comparatively affluent and well-run country like South Africa. But bureaucrats have no shame and in Africa doubly so.
After all, Zimbabwe is a country where life expectancy fell from 56 years in 1993 to 30 years in 2005, yet where the government taxes foreign medicines at an average rate of 22? percent.
No doubt, greed also plays a role. Africa has an army of customs officials, whose job it is to collect import duties. With wages low and deteriorating rapidly in real value due to inflation, customs officials rely on bribes to speed shipments through or look the other way altogether.
Thus, when a group of South African churches and nongovernmental organizations raised money to purchase emergency aid for the people of Zimbabwe in the winter months of 2005, the Zimbabwean customs officials demanded that import tariffs be paid. South African blankets and food languished at the Johannesburg airport for weeks.
Worse, the government's Propaganda Ministry is in full swing denying that anything out of the ordinary is happening in Zimbabwe. The deputy minister of information, Bright Matonga, told the BBC's "Focus on Africa" that people were "creating a crisis that does not exit."
"The Zimbabwe government won't sit back and let women suffer. We care about our women," Mr. Matonga said. Perish the thought. In fact, Zimbabwe's government must hold a record for barefaced lying.
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Thursday, March 30, 2006
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Sunday, March 26, 2006
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Saturday, March 04, 2006
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Friday, February 24, 2006
Playing Dirty?
DA investigation reveals ANC food/house for votes scandal
Statement issued by: Douglas Gibson, Chief Whip
Thursday, February 23, 2006
[NOTE: ALL DETAILED EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON REQUEST]
I have today submitted four cases of suspected electoral fraud to IEC Chief Electoral Officer Advocate Pansy Tlakula.
The DA has concrete evidence that suggests that the ANC is in contravention of the Electoral Code of Conduct (Schedule 1 of the Local Government Municipal Election Act 2000). Section 9 (2) (iii) of the Schedule states: “No person may offer any inducement or reward to another person to vote or not to vote, or to vote or not to vote in any particular way.”
The DA can reveal four cases, with supporting evidence, that the ANC is using promises of food and houses to win votes in the 2006 local election.
1. Western Cape
In the Western Cape, the DA has evidence that the ANC is using the politically-sensitive issue of housing to trick voters into voting for the ANC. The DA has in its possession sworn affidavits from voters that have been promised a house if they vote for the ANC. They include the following sworn testimonies:
[Voter X] from Bishop Lavis:
“Washeilah Arendse from ANC told me that I can get a house by 2007 if I vote for ANC – She said this on the 9 February at Valhalla Community Centre. She was sitting with the housing list forms.”
[Voter Y] from Valhalla Park:
“They promise me. Mr Hendricks at Elsie’s River Civic that if I bring the necessary documents I will get a house in 2007.”
[Voter Z] from Valhalla Park:
“The ANC promised me a house if I vote for ANC they said they will give it to me in one month. A person who told me this was at Parkville Primary School on Sunday at 16h05 afternoon. This person was working with the housing waiting list forms.”
2. Limpopo
A DA councillor in Limpopo reported that on February 17, an ANC councillor was confronted by frustrated residents of an informal settlement in the area. Some of these people had been waiting for a house in the area for ten years. The next day housing application forms were circulated in the area with the instruction that they were to be completed and returned the next day. A copy of the form is available on request.
3. KwaZulu-Natal
In Kwazulu-Natal, ANC canvassers have been handing out ‘application for housing’ forms emblazoned with ANC insignia. The DA has in its possession such a form that was handed out in Phoenix. Similar forms were also reportedly dished out in Verulam and Chatsworth.
In KwaDakuza, KwaZulu-Natal, DA MP Mark Lowe laid a charge of election fraud against the ANC with the SA Police Services and has reported them to the IEC. This was after Lowe received reports of numerous instances of ANC officials handing out food parcels to voters in an attempt to bribe them to vote for the ANC.
4. Eastern Cape
In the Eastern Cape, DA councillor Annette Steyn reported that on January 24 food parcels were delivered to Venterstrand (EC144). An ANC campaign truck carrying ANC canvassers chanting “the ANC delivers” accompanied the arrival of the food parcels. The same thing happened in nearby Burgersdorp that same afternoon.
* * *
ANC intimidation often succeeds in deterring people from laying formal complaints or going public when the ANC offers a bribe in return for a vote. It is therefore more than likely that these four cases are the tip of a far bigger iceberg.
As it is, this evidence suggests that the ANC has realised that twelve years of failed service delivery will hurt it at the polls and has resorted to cheating. This is an insult to every South African voter and the very fabric of our democracy.
Source
Notes by Metuo Dedecus:
The ANC has promised houses to voters since 1994 and persons known to have not voted ANC usually have more difficulty in getting houses or benefits from local government.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
JZ in ya woman?
A few great stats on South African rape:
A woman raped every 26 seconds
40% of rapists known to victim
7% of reported cases lead to conviction
Source: People Opposing Woman Abuse
Check out: Friends of Jacob Zuma site
Monday, February 20, 2006
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Electrical Fault in Cape Town
Can somebody explain the bulls**t which was written reporting this:
Why don't they just say...
"...we have an overloaded system, because we give electricity away for free, and sponge off taxpayers..."
Or would that be wrong. Would it be wrong not to tell a lie?
The entire Western Cape was without power early on Sunday following faults on transmission lines because of misty conditions and residual pollution from recent fires.
Why don't they just say...
"...we have an overloaded system, because we give electricity away for free, and sponge off taxpayers..."
Or would that be wrong. Would it be wrong not to tell a lie?
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Zuma and the People who Support Him
In a country with a so called freedom of speech, South Africa, is declining into a commentary of noise and nonsense. With high levels of unemployment, crime and a pandemic of AIDS, the situation inside the country is not as rosy as it all seems to be. Tax payers are paying high taxes and paying extra costs to remain secure. The police are largely ineffective against crime, in certain parts of the country. And when you set up a budget with billions of rands spent on the “Renaissance Fund” you know somebody’s getting paid off, with money the police deserve. For a supposedly transparent government a great deal of information is incorrect.
Crime statistics are one of these failures.
Indeed, one has to wonder what the future holds for South Africa. Racism is on the rise. There is hatred by the government for many of its taxpaying population, whom seem to demand decent outcomes for their payments.
Corruption in country is on the rise. Government doesn’t seem that interested in removing bars to foreign investment, such as certain labour laws. South Africa could be the next Zimbabwe.
And if Zuma is guilty or not of rape, don’t you think the multitude present something more worrying in society when they harrass the woman trying to try Zuma of purportedly raping her? And don’t you think its worrying when judges refuse to sit a case, because of fear of being tarnished as honest citizens or as being white racists?
Perhaps I’m being pessimistic. Welcome to South Africa. Not as simple as it seems.
Crime statistics are one of these failures.
Indeed, one has to wonder what the future holds for South Africa. Racism is on the rise. There is hatred by the government for many of its taxpaying population, whom seem to demand decent outcomes for their payments.
Corruption in country is on the rise. Government doesn’t seem that interested in removing bars to foreign investment, such as certain labour laws. South Africa could be the next Zimbabwe.
And if Zuma is guilty or not of rape, don’t you think the multitude present something more worrying in society when they harrass the woman trying to try Zuma of purportedly raping her? And don’t you think its worrying when judges refuse to sit a case, because of fear of being tarnished as honest citizens or as being white racists?
Photograph modified from the Washington Post picture
Perhaps I’m being pessimistic. Welcome to South Africa. Not as simple as it seems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)