Opinion

  • Dear Comrade Reader

    WE’ve been hard at work in the past few weeks putting together a blog that will hopefully be more user friendly. We’ve improved the format, so so as to ensure you find more easily what you are looking for. There’s a whole host of smaller but important changes, all to make your experience that much better for you.

    Those who visit the site regularly will have noticed that we expanded the categories to include food, travel, art and culture. We will be adding more categories in the future.

    We hope that you enjoy the fresh look-and-feel of our updated website and find that it serves as a useful resource for you. There are many small changes we still have to make on the blog and these will take time.

    As always, we welcome your feedback. Navigate the new UnCensored and tell us what you think. Email: uncensoredopinion1@gmail.com

     

  • Kallie Kriel, You’re Wrong & Deceitful – Apartheid Was A Crime Against Humanity

     

    Siyanda Madikane speaks to the remains of his grandfather’s brother Lennox Madikane who was hanged in 1963 and buried in a pauper grave. (Alex Nitchley, News24)

    HAVING returned from a trip to the US to garner support for land expropriation without compensation and its trumped-up story about “white genocide”, Afriforum CEO Kallie Kriel didnt waste time dominating newspapers headlines for yet another piece of misinformation.

    This time, he reportedly said he didnt believe apartheid was a crime against humanity but acknowledged it was wrong.

    Now, Kriel knows apartheid was a crime against humanity. He knows it was declared so by the United Nations, a body which he recognises because his racist outfit Afriforum has been to the UN, with now DA Joburg Mayor Herman Mashaba in tow, to protest against South Africa’s policy of affirmative action.

    His remarks prompted an outcry but it was the response from Madeleine Fullard, on her Twitter account, that summed up the chilling and broad strokes of the inhumanity of apartheid, which she and her team find hidden in mass graves and pauper graves.

    “Digging in former Transkei cemeteries, we find heartbreaking pauper graves filled with hundreds of babies who died of malnutrition due to migrant labour, forced removals to homelands. I guess Afriforum wont count those as apartheid deaths since not killed by security police”. 

    “To see tiny plastic parcels twisted closed like maize husks, with tiny babies’ bones inside, packed by the dozen into a single coffin, is to understand how the land policy, forced removals and the homeland system cut a deadly swathe through rural children for decades”.

    “In the urban cemeteries, you will find the bodies of mine workers and migrant workers packed into pauper graves sometimes three to a grave. Their families too impoverished to take their crushed bodies back to the homelands. Apartheid policies killed thousands”. 

    One Twitter account holder dared to question Fullard’s claims, to which she responded with the most chilling answer: “I dig the graves myself. I see them with my own eyes. Do you want me to post photos of the small skeletons so small they look like birds?”

    The Missing Persons Task Team is both an investigative and forensics unit made up of investigators and forensic anthropologists who specialise in the human skeleton.

    There are many cases which have not been resolved from the Truth & Reconciliation Commission (TRC).  To this day there are families coming forward with legitimate cases of political disappearances. There are two types of cases the department investigates; freedom fighters whose bodies were taken and buried where only the perpetrators knew. Many of these cases could only be solved by the testimony of apartheid death squads who operated from places like Vlakplaas – people like Eugene de Kock and other such operatives. 

    The other cases are simply those of people who were killed and left in public spaces, eventually found and taken to mortuaries and buried with no identities.

    So no Kallie Kriel, apartheid is a crime against humanity and it is for this reason that the mass scale atrocities of apartheid should never be forgotten to ensure that you Kallie Kriel and your ilk can never erase its brutal history.

    Related Reading.

    https://za.investing.com/news/politics-news/10-pac-members-to-be-exhumed-in-mamelodi-506302

    https://www.iol.co.za/the-star/discovery-of-cadres-bodies-brings-closure-34-years-later-1341681

     

  • CONTROL OF THE WORLD THROUGH FOOD SUPPLY, ENERGY AND MONEY

    By Sam Ditshego

    “Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world”, Henry Kissinger.

    Kissinger is one of the bad guys who worked at the US State Department and belongs to sinister organisations and clubs that control the world. That foreboding quote is not said as a benevolent gesture to warn the people to beware of the nefarious intentions of those who control the world. That is what he and his fellow travellers who are proponents of “the new world order” are pursuing.

    These groups of globalists, in fact, control the world’s food supply through their companies that control the world’s food, beverages and agriculture production industry. They are:

    Associated British Foods

    Coca-Cola

    Groupe Danone

    General Mills (GIS)

    Kellogg (K)

    Mars

    Mondelez which came from Kraft Foods

    Nestle

    PepsiCo (PEP)

    Unilever Group

    This is what Oxfam said about this companies:

    “The agriculture and food production industry employed more than one billion people as of last year, or a third of the global workforce. While the industry is substantial, a relatively small number of companies wield an enormous amount of influence.

    “In its 2013 report, “Behind the Brands,” Oxfam International focused on 10 of the world’s biggest and most influential food and beverage companies. These corporations are so powerful that their policies can have a major impact on the diets and working conditions of people worldwide, as well as on the environment. Based on the report, these are the 10 companies that control the world’s food.

    “In an interview with 24/7 Wall St., Chris Jochnick, director of the private sector department atOxfam America, discussed the impact that these 10 companies have on the world. “If you look at the massive global food system, it’s hard to get your head around. Just a handful of companies can dictate food choices, supplier terms and consumer variety,” Jochnick said.

    Africa has massive land mass so why do we have to depend on Europe and America for our food supply to the extent of having to be forced to renew AGOA and import poisoned chicken which the American people themselves do not want to consume?

    Angola alone can supply Southern African countries with food if it can be completely demined. South Africa is also an agricultural country. Botswana is under-utilised in agricultural production, it relies heavily on diamonds. There is also Mozambique, Malawi, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Southern Africa can be self-reliant. Why do we have to be fed GMO’s that have the potential to alter our genetic makeup?

    These western food, and agricultural companies employ 1 billion people. We have high unemployment rates but we do not take advantage of the food producing industry to create the most needed jobs in that sector and the skills that go with it. Agricultural colleges have been closed and high schools no longer offer Agriculture as a subject. Instead useless subjects have been introduced. The government tried to introduce Mandarin in schools about two years ago. Are we going to eat Mandarin?

    Electricity is too expensive in South Africa and Eskom is indebted to the World Bank. The ANC borrowed $850,000 before it even formed a government. I remember an article I wrote discouraging them from taking that loan. What is the rationale behind taking a loan when the country is rich in minerals and other resources? The price of petrol is crazy. Petrol and electricity are energy whose prices are controlled from abroad.

    “I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the empire. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire and I control the British money supply”, Nathan Mayer Rothschild. This was said about two centuries ago.

    Those who own and control the South African Reserve Bank care not what puppet is placed on the throne of the Union Building. Those who control South Africa’s money supply control South Africa and the SARB controls South Africa’s money supply.

    I implore the reader to reread Henry Kissinger’s foreboding quote and Nathan Mayer Rothschild’s quote you will notice that that is what is happening in your own country yet opposition political parties in parliament have barely scratched the surface when it comes to European and American hegemony. Instead they focus on side issues and bark at one another like poodles.

    Anton Lembede died at the age of 33 and led the ANCYL at about 30. He was advocating Africanism and the liberation of the African continent. At the age of 24 at Fort Hare Robert Sobukwe’s message was clear. He was championing Pan Africanism and the liberation of Africa. Steve Biko was killed at the age of 30 and he spoke of mental liberation, unity and non-collaboration with the west before he was even 30. Onkgopotse Tiro shook the citadels of white supremacy from their very foundations, supported Pan Africanist ideas when he called for universal education and said, “Of what use will be your education (if it) is not linked with the entire continent of Africa (? It) is meaningless.

    Today’s politicians who enjoy fat cheques and perks in parliament have veered away from the liberation politics of these and other freedom fighters and Zeph Mothopeng expounded.

    Africans must through a concerted effort fight to get back their country and continent in order to determine their destiny as African people.

    As if that was not enough, there is this continuing petrol rip off.

    Petrol/gasoline prices are a rip off

    Petrol or gasoline is Dollar denominated – I don’t know why – and the average price per litre is $1.15. Maybe I’ll do the currency conversions later. The price of 95 Octane per litre in South Africa is R14.48. In Venezuela it’s $0.01. Think about it for a moment. They are an oil producing country like Angola, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia. In Angola the price of petrol per litre is $0.75, Nigeria $0.48, Iran $0.36 and Saudi Arabia $0.54. In the US it’s $0.75. In Sudan it is $0.34, Botswana $0.87, Namibia $0.99, Togo $0.94.

    Let’s look at European countries, Australia and New Zealand. Their mother UK it’s £1.21, France 1.57 Euro, Italy 1.56 Euro, Germany 1.37 Euro, Netherlands 1.57 Euro, Luxembourg 1.70 Euro, Liechtenstein $1.63, Switzerland 1.53 Swiss Francs, Canada 1.38 Canadian Dollars, Australia 1.38 Australian Dollars and New Zealand 2.14 New Zealand Dollar.

    In tax havens such as Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Luxembourg petrol is cheap. This is where the money from Africa and other regions of the world is stashed including the Vatican in Italy although it is a state within a state.

    In Asia we begin with China. 1litre of petrol is 7.26 Chinese Renminbi, Japan 140.52 Japanese Yen, South Korea 1.5556 South Korean Won, Malaysia 2.25 Malaysian Ringgit and in Singapore 2.12 Singaporean Dollar.

    If one looks at the petrol prices of some of these countries, especially Venezuela, one realises that they are sovereign states. Before the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, a gallon of petrol was about 18 cents or 5 cents a litre. I don’t know how much it is now since the figure are not available. In Europe there is uniformity of the prices. I don’t think the prices fluctuate as much as they do in this banana republic.

    The price of petrol in Botswana is half the price of petrol in South Africa but Botswana gets its petrol in this country. It sounds incredible or too good to be true but it is true. The storage facility from which Botswana petrol trucks collect the petrol are in Mogale City, I must know because I live in Mogale City and travel regularly to Botswana and always see these petrol trucks.

    These exorbitant petrol prices and the conditions of unemployment, skewed distribution of resources, unequal income distribution and poverty are indicative of capitalism in action. If anybody hasn’t understood Robert Sobukwe, Zeph Mothopeng and many other revolutionary intellectuals when they condemned capitalism they must be understanding them now. Onkgopotse Tiro condemned inequality especially in education and Steve Biko spoke in favour of the establishment of an egalitarian society. Does anybody see anything remotely resembling what these heroes gave their lives for?

    There is high unemployment in this country, unequal income distribution, skewed distribution of resources and poverty for petrol to be so expensive. In Venezuela an increase of a cent in the price of petrol sparks riots. Here in South Africa the people have become so docile that they give me the creeps. Political parties, social movements and non-governmental organisations don’t even care.

    As if that was not enough, there is this recurring petrol price hikes. In just three weeks’ time, the price of petrol has risen twice.

    The petrol cabal in South Africa is taking us for fools because the people of these country, political parties, trade unions and civil society organisations are doing nothing about it. There was an increase about two weeks ago and the Automobile Association of South Africa is complicit in this rip off by explaining away this patently exploitative price hikes. There are those who were implicated in squandering the fuel fund. Moreover, international currency conversions are also a rip off.

     Currency conversions

    If the following currency conversions are carefully studied, the reader would notice that there is something fundamentally flawed with the logic behind them. And it is obvious that the aim of these currency conversions is to exploit and get goods and services for nothing, especially from Africa and most of the countries of the south. It is not difficult to realise that countries that are allies of the West in general and the US in particular and those that stand their ground have better exchange rates or worse. CHF is Switzerland Franc. VEF is Venezuelan currency. However, the exchange rate figures are crazy. In South Africa we are able to tell the West that we fix our currency at one to one or go back to the gold standard and if they don’t like the idea then they can go to blazes. They need us more than we need them.

    $1 = R12.46

    1€ = $1.40

    1$ = CHF 0.96

    1Euro = $1.22

    1AUD = $0.76

    1NZD = $0.73

    1$ = CAD 1.27

    1$ = SGD 1.31

    1$ = MYR 3.90

    1$ = CNY 6.30

    1$ = South Korean Won 1.05

    1$ = North Korean Won 899.987

    1$ = United Arab Emirates Dirham 3.67

    1$ = Saudi Arabian Riyal 3.75

    1$ = Iranian Rial 37.80

    1$ = Sudanese Dinar 1.80

    1$ = VEF 49,550.00

     A look at the history of USD Rand exchange rate table below reveals the precipitous decline of the Rand as the end of the apartheid government rule was nigh and when the puppet black government had taken over. How does one explain this? We need answers because these are some of the issues that are arresting the development and advancement of the African people especially the youth. In 1974, for example, a gallon or five litres of petrol was about 70 cents.

     Rand vs the dollar: 1978 – 2016

    Year Rand vs Dollar

    1978 0.87 = $1

    1979 0.84 = $1

    1980 0.81 = $1

    1981 0.79 = $1

    1982 0.98 = $1

    1983 1.12 = $1

    1984 1.20 = $1

    1985 2.00 = $1

    1986 1.99 = $1

    1987 2.09 = $1

    1988 2.11 = $1

    1989 2.53 = $1

    1990 2.59 = $1

    1991 2.63 = $1

    1992 2.89 = $1

    1993 3.19 = $1

    1994 3.42 = $1

    1995 3.63 =$1

    1996 3.95 = $1

    1997 4.42 = $1

    1998 4.98 = $1

    1999 6.15 = $1

    2000 6.39 = $1

    2001 7.77 = $1

    2002 11.47 = $1

    2003 7.91 = $1

    2004 6.71 = $1

    2005 5.85 = $1

    2006 6.28 = $1

    2007 7.39 = $1

    2008 7.99 = $1

    2009 10.32 = $1

    2010 7.46 = $1

    2011 6.91 = $1

    2012 7.59 = $1

    2013 9.11 = $1

    2014 10.79 = $1

    2015 12.26 = $1

    2016 15.20 = $1

    2018 12.46 = $1

    How are exchange rates determined?

    One wonders if those who were installed in government by the west in 1994 are happy with this state of affairs. Don’t they see anything wrong with this currency manipulation? Do these puppets of the west know how exchange are determined and do they care? Can they explain what caused the Rand to deteriorate in value over the years and why was it valued more than all the currencies of the world during apartheid misrule and deteriorated when the African puppets were about to get in office through a rigged election?

    In the Sowetan’s sister newspaper, the now defunct New Nation of 16 August 1996, more than twenty years ago, when the exchange rate was R3.95: $1, I explained how currencies were manipulated through speculation. I mentioned an employee of Citi Bank bragging about how currency speculators were electronically trading in currency twenty four hours to determine and look and government policies the west does not like and force those governments to change them through capital flight to force those government to change their policies. He gave as an example, what he described as the socialist policies of France’s erstwhile Prime Minister Francois Mitterrand. This Citi Bank employee said currency speculators conduct what he called “a global plebiscite” on those governments through currency manipulation. In 1996 when I raised these issues and nobody in the ANC bothered and still today nobody bothers because they are impervious to advice especially if it does not come from one of their own. Or perhaps they do but there’s probably nothing they can do because they are stooges of the west. Only a revolt by the people will change these slave relations that obtain between South Africa and the west.

  • The PIC – Separating fact from fiction

    By ADRI SENEKAL DE WET via www.iol.co.za
    The Public Investment Corporation’s chief executive, Dr Daniel Matjila. File picture: Dean Hutton
    CAPE TOWN – Just last week, I wrote about speaking truth to power as an Afrikaner woman and editor, and about exposing hidden agendas and networks.
     
    I said that it might lose me many friends, especially in white circles. I was wrong. Overwhelmingly, white people have called to congratulate me and ask me to continue to speak truth to power.
    Well here I am again, except this time more disgusted and more concerned than ever, at some of my journalist colleagues who work for our competitors, who have thrown all objectivity out the window in their attempts to discredit Dr Iqbal Survé, Independent Media and Sekunjalo. Their target is the PIC, and therefore, I now unpack for readers the reality of the PIC investments and separate fact from fiction.
    The Public Investment Corporation (PIC) has come under scrutiny for its investment, or potential investment, in Independent Media, technology and platform companies Sagarmatha Technologies and AYO Technology Solutions, alongside companies in which Sekunjalo and Dr Survé, as a black entrepreneur, have invested significant risk capital over the last few years.
    Let me give credit where credit is due. The PIC under its current leadership of Dr Daniel Matjila, has grown its investment portfolio from R600 billion over the last decade, to approximately R2 trillion, putting it among the top asset managers globally. This is phenomenal growth and has resulted in a high return for its investors, including the GEPF.
    The PIC has had some notable successes, for example SAB Miller, Aspen and Naspers but, it has also suffered some setbacks such as Steinhoff. The PIC is the largest investor on the JSE with 12,5% (R1.6 trillion) of the market capitalization of all the companies listed on the JSE (R12 trillion) and one would argue, is the only investor that is capable of investing on a large scale for companies that have got ambitious plans to grow on the African continent. Some of those companies that require a capital injection are black-owned.
    The PIC has tried to assist black business largely through the private equity unlisted portfolios, but has not really had the opportunity to invest in many listed companies started by black entrepreneurs. (The PIC is also limited in how it approaches its investments set down by the mandate of the GEPF and other pension funds whose assets it manages).
    Recent reports have shown that the majority of asset management companies in South Africa remain mainly under white ownership and management, although there are exceptions.
    The bulk of assets under management are in companies such as Investec, Coronation, Absa, Sanlam, Allan Gray and others – many of these companies’ asset managers have built networks with predominantly white entrepreneurs, individuals and companies in South Africa.
    It is not just the technical valuations that prompt asset managers to invest in listed companies, but also the networks of these organisations that are developed over years, in many cases predating the new democracy, which give them social and economic currency.
    This network influences investment into JSE listed companies. Not all these investments in JSE listed companies are always successful and in some cases, many of the investments have failed spectacularly, but almost no one writes about these failures.
    As an example, household names, which failed to expand overseas (to Europe, America, Russia or Australia) and in the process, wiping off tens of billions in value to shareholders include: Standard Bank’s investment in Russia, Old Mutual’s investment in Skandia, Investec’s investment in the UK, Woolworths’ investment in Australia and so on.
    This loss of value of tens of billions of rands excludes the R200bn destruction of Steinhoff. Notwithstanding the above, there is a misconception that all these companies only have “successful” investment strategies.
    During the 2008 financial crisis, when the JSE stocks tumbled, in many cases it was the PIC that came to the rescue of many of these companies. Recently, with the resources slump, it is again the PIC that came to the rescue.
    Virtually in all instances, these companies are white owned and managed. The PIC did so in the national interest and to ensure jobs were protected and it did so with full cognisance of taking a long-term view of its investment strategy.
    Today, it is vindicated in this approach, in that most of these companies have recovered the values completely or partially, providing value to shareholders. Why then would the PIC’s decision to invest in two black-owned and managed companies instil such hostility and vindictive attitudes? What are the real issues at play here?
    The South African economy since 1994 has more than tripled to a GDP today of around R3.5 trln. This is evidenced with the ALSI index on the JSE, which in 1994 was in the region of 15 000 points and today, the All Share Index on the JSE approaches 60 000 points. This is a 400 percent increase in the value of the JSE ALSI.
    It is a fact that the PIC has provided the capital base for many of these companies that are listed on the JSE in the last few decades – pre and post-apartheid.
    Furthermore, the PIC continues to support many of these companies today, since the PIC with its R1.6trln makes up the bulk of the investments on the JSE (12.5 percent) and is the single largest investor on the local bourse.
    Who has benefited from all of this? Well, in the first instance the PIC and its pension funds. But in the second, it is also an array of individuals, corporate entities, family trusts, and consortia.
    A search into the founding controlling shareholders of the JSE listed companies shows that 99 percent of these beneficiaries happen to be white.
    It is correct to therefore conclude that the PIC’s money has been used in the last two to three decades, to create and further enhance white wealth in this country.
    As an example, prominent businessmen such as Stephen Saad, Johan Rupert, Christo Wiese, Jannie Mouton, Koos Bekker and many other family trusts have all gained significantly by the investments made by the PIC into their companies.
    Essentially these businessmen utilised the capital markets, including the capital of the PIC, to create family wealth for themselves. Now, there is nothing wrong with that, since that is how a capitalist market economy works and these businessmen were entrepreneurial (sometimes with a bit of help from the state, as with Naspers), hard working and took risks building their businesses over the years. They deserve the success they have now achieved and we acknowledge them for this.
     
    Conundrum
     
    Herein lies the current conundrum. Does the media highlight that they are very significant beneficiaries of the PIC’s investment into their companies? – NO.
    Rather than saying that the PIC has invested in supporting, for instance, the family trust of Koos Bekker, and the fact that their family trust controls these investments and are then seen to be unduly benefiting, they report on the company.
    I am compelled to ask why it is that when the PIC invests in companies on the JSE that are controlled by white families, individuals, entrepreneurs or corporates, it is okay to talk about the organisation, but when the PIC invests in companies where black entrepreneurs are in the driving seat, or that have black control, ownership and management, the PIC is interrogated and the personalities themselves are targeted and their motives questioned?
    This is a fact – the evidence is clear and incontrovertible, played out in the mainstream media many times over, and particularly in the past three weeks.
    People such as Patrice Motsepe and Dr Survé have built their businesses with entrepreneurship and hard work and have given exceptional returns to investors over the years.
    This criticism of black entrepreneurs is not just hypocritical, but has the tendency to lean towards strong racial overtones. As a citizen of South Africa – no matter my race, gender or age – I find this unacceptable and against the Constitution.
    Recent reporting – packaged as “news” – by Independent Media’s competitors, have failed to uphold the Constitution and also the media code of ethics, that talks to balanced and fair reporting.
    They have failed to tell their readers that the biggest beneficiaries – in terms of family trusts and entrepreneurs – of the PIC and of the JSE, remain white South Africans. Black entrepreneurs are only supported by the PIC to the tune of R24bn out of R12trln. This is manifestly unjust.
    However, this media bias is unlikely to be corrected any time soon – I mean since when has the story of the hunt ever been told by the hunted? What then is the real agenda and what are they really hunting? Could it be the assets of Independent Media as our journalists suggested earlier this week?
    I have to believe that if Dr Survé did not own and control Independent Media, which has influence and provides an alternative narrative to the other media houses, his investment strategies would have been welcomed and supported, not vilified as they are currently.
    The JSE may argue that many pension funds beneficiaries are black, and they should be included in the calculation of black ownership, but this does not justify the lack of black entrepreneurs and their companies listed on the JSE.
    This needs to be pointed out because, if you believe Sam Sole, you will believe that the PIC investments have only benefited black South Africans.
    The PIC, of course, is trying to invest in black South Africans and has created a private equity fund, Isibaya, to do this, but the monies allocated to this fund and the processes to receive funding from that fund for black entrepreneurs, is not easy and the fund is small compared to what the PIC has invested in listed entities.
    The “listed” environment has historically been the domain of white companies, individuals, family trusts and entrepreneurs as mentioned before.
    The point about all of this is that there are two standards, one for white South African entrepreneurs and one for black South African entrepreneurs. These standards do not talk to the innovativeness or creativity of the people or companies themselves. They speak to the racial prism or lens which is used to identify these entrepreneurs and their companies.
    Let’s for the moment take Sagarmatha Technologies Ltd or AYO Technology Solutions Ltd (AYO). Had the founding shareholder of Sagarmatha Technologies and AYO been a white entrepreneur, the listing would most probably have been welcomed and feted and the PIC investment would be applauded.
    Hypothetically, if it was a Koos Bekker, Stephen Saad or Jannie Mouton, non-financial journalists would hardly question its valuation.
    If they did question the valuation, the first port of call would be the management teams to try and understand the company. Instead, a 212-page PLS document was distilled to only a few points – out of context and factually incorrect as a result.
    It does not help that afterwards those that had erred, admitted in print, radio and online they had made mistakes, having misinterpreted the financials and admitting (post fact), that they are not experts in this field and had incomplete information. Too late she cried.
    Basic journalism is to ask the person or company being written about – specifically the board or the management – for their point of view and to check facts.
    It is not enough to say that the PLS was public and fail to mention that global experts specialising in the valuation of technology companies, provided an expert, fair and reasonable valuation asked for by the JSE as a stringent listing requirement.
    They further fail to point out that a range of local and international investors subscribed for R4.2bn worth of shares in Sagarmatha Technologies, one of the largest subscriptions in recent years on the JSE. Furthermore, Sagarmatha had seven dollar billionaires as part of its advisory board. Why would internationally successful businessmen lend their names to such a company if they did not believe its valuation?
    In the case of AYO, it was oversubscribed by more than R1.2bn. AYO’s PLS is very clear – all funds raised are to be used for organic growth and acquisitions and not dividends to shareholders.
    AYO’s management has set out the profit forecasts for the next few years. Why not wait and see if they achieve these forecast?Is this not the way other companies that have listed are treated? Why seek to cast doubt on the company less than six-months into its listing?
    Why is AYO and its independent board and management team not accorded the same benefit of the doubt, as others? What has any of this got do with Dr Survé or Sekunjalo who are not even direct investors in AYO?
     
    JSE records
     
    It needs to be stressed that the Survé family are NOT direct investors in AYO and have only invested via AEEI, which only owns 49 percent of AYO.
    I have checked the JSE records and I can’t see that Sekunjalo has ever sold any shares in AEEI in 20 years and they have reinvested all profits to grow the company and create jobs.
    The Sekunjalo Group has invested in more than 200 other investments and I doubt that the company needs dividends from AEEI or AYO, other than in the normal course of business.
    For any journalist reporting on this to omit these facts is dishonest and is misrepresentation.
    There is a further problem here. We can argue whether the “attack” on Dr Survé has merit or not, but the fact is that Dr Survé’s family trust is a shareholder in Sagarmatha, AEEI and through AEEI, into AYO – not directly.
    He is not part of the management or on the board. Therefore, to ask a single shareholder their views or to provide answers to questions, is somewhat disingenuous.
    It also undermines the integrity of those management and boards – some have proven their success in the numbers they are posting and others are yet to be given the opportunity to provide the results.
    But if we are to focus on one person, what has been conveniently disregarded is the fact that Dr Survé is a shareholder and board member participating in 12 multinationals in Africa, serving on many of the World Economic Forum boards, serving in Task Teams of the G20, and in numerous multinational organisations, including as chairperson of the Brics Business Council.
    He has also been the recipient of several business excellence awards, including being the first black businessman to receive the “Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut Sakeleier Van Die Jaar”.
    It seems strange that outside of the borders of this country he is highly regarded – professionally and personally – yet at home he is regarded with deep suspicion, because of his connections and success.
    I thought we always enjoyed a rags-to-riches story. Oppression to succession. But it appears that champion acknowledgement is selective. Dr Survé came from a humble background, is a self-made entrepreneur who has never had access to established networks.
    He is a medical doctor with South African and American qualifications (three degrees, an alumnus of Harvard and UCT and, has won many prestigious business awards for his acumen and success).
    He should be applauded for his innovation, hard work and for taking the entrepreneurial risk to get to the top, rather than being castigated because the PIC took a decision to invest in some of his companies.
    Aside from this, Dr Survé is often taken to task for his networking. He has long-standing relationships with many individuals, institutions and unions, who all have the common goal of creating a sustainable economic democracy.
    South Africa actually needs more of such socio-economic constructs (between business and the unions and civil society), not less.
    Over the years there have been numerous attempts to discredit him, particularly around the time of the Independent Media deal. The attempted listing of Sagarmatha Technologies has stirred things up again. There has been an attempt to portray Dr Survé and his family as self-enriching. Nothing could be further from the truth.
    Yes, if the management performs and the investments grow, Dr Survé as an investor, would benefit, as would all other shareholders, including the PIC.
    To infer otherwise, is mind boggling. In fact, it is quite the contrary. Dr Survé through his various companies and his family Trust, has invested his own capital into the likes of Independent Media and a number of other companies in which he has shareholding. In so doing, has increased the ‘value’ of these companies. In addition, Dr Survé is known to be a significant philanthropist of seven foundations. (Just last week, he was the recipient of a global award for his commitment to philanthropy from Queen Sylvia of Sweden, who hosted the World’s Children’s Prize for the Rights of the Child).
    One explanation for the media’s current almost unhealthy obsession to paint Dr Survé and the various businesses in which he has a stake in a poor light, is held in the idea of this being an intimidation campaign.
    It has a clear agenda designed to stop the PIC from supporting black businessmen today and in the future. The message is simple, cut off access to the capital markets.
    By denying black businessmen and entrepreneurs (or only allowing those that meet media approval), access to the PIC or to similar capital markets, you force them to come with a begging bowl to the “establishment” and then, South Africa repeats the cycle of the first 20 years of black economic empowerment, where black companies don’t really benefit meaningfully, since the “Golden Rule applies, in that those who have the gold make all the rules”.
    In this case, it is still predominantly white-owned companies that make the rules for any black company’s participation in the economy.
    The current narrative being peddled seems to infer that black-owned and run companies will only be permitted access to meaningful capital to scale, at the behest and grace of the majority white-controlled capital.
    This doesn’t seem equitable or fair, but then I guess, business rarely is. So, is it a case of those who shout the loudest will remain at the top?
     
    Strategies
     
    The “noise” around the PIC and its investment strategies could be easily mistaken for an attempt to subvert economic and social justice redress in South Africa.
     
    That being the case, I urge the PIC to resist such attempts and to invest in black-owned companies. We do not need fewer investments in companies such as Sagarmatha Technologies and AYO, we need more investments with black entrepreneurs.
    At present though, this seems like a pipe dream, as when black companies go directly to the source of capital for the capital markets such as the PIC, whose policies actually include transformation, they are criticised.
    This access has to be disallowed by the establishment, because if it allows black companies to have access to the capital markets, it permits black people to shape their own independent future in South Africa.
    Economic independence is a dangerous concept for those who wish to monopolise economic power, as it would mean they would no longer have leverage. No leverage means no economic participation and a dilution of control.
    Today, the intimidation is against Dr Survé and the companies he is involved in such as Sagarmatha Technologies and AYO. Tomorrow it will conceivably target other black companies supported by the PIC.
    Corporate bullying, economic thuggery, crude racism, monopolistic agendas – are they aimed at denying access to capital to black companies in the listed capital markets? You decide.
    We need more black entrepreneurs to have the conviction to list their companies on the JSE. The way in which the media has treated Sagarmatha, AYO and others can be described as a means to shatter the confidence of black companies so that they will never think of listing on the JSE.
    This dichotomy is what is dividing this country and it must stop.
  • Has SA Buried The Use Of “Kaffir” In Public?

    By Pinky Khoabane

    620x349

    Vicky Momberg sentenced to three years for calling a cop a kaffir 

    WRITING in the Sunday Independent four years ago, I asked why South Africa didnt follow in the footsteps of other countries like Britain and prosecute racists. I recounted the story of my failed attempts to have a group of young men, Kenneth Sinclair and friends, held accountable for one of the most racist vitriol I’d read on social media. At the time, I argued that the Chapter 9 institutions set up to address racism in South Africa were completely useless.

    In the two years I had attempted to have these racist brats even appear before some hearing, I had gone to every institution that was meant to do something. The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), Equality Court, South African Police Services and when they did nothing, I reported them to the Public Protectors Office. It was only then that the SAHRC held a hearing with a little slap on the wrist as punishment. Sinclair had to do some community service but till this day the SAHRC would not tell me how long it would be and what exactly it entailed. I was at least able to put enough pressure on the technical college where these boys studied to have them suspended. They apparently didnt return as a result of the backlash of their racism.

    Today, in a first for South Africa, a court sentenced Vicky Momberg to three years in prison with one year suspension for hurling racist insults at Constable Clement Mkhondo and swearing at other police officers and a 10111 operator after she was a victim of a smash-and-grab incident. She called them Kaffir 48 times.

    “Respect for one another is sacrosanct, we are all human beings,” said Magistrate Pravina Raghoonandan, while handing over her sentence.

    “This case has become public interest, some may think the sentence is harsh … It must send out a clear message for people who use the k-word.”

    Despite the sentence we must never delude ourselves that racism which plays itself out in public spaces is gone. We live in a racist society and Momberg is just a symptom of a bigger problem in our society. However, racists have been emboldened and more brazen in their aggression and insults in recent months, with a spike in racial incidents in which Black people are beaten at night clubs, pubs and restaurants. The sentence will go a long way in sending a message to racists that the South Africa where you could simply hurl racist slurs and get away with it is gone.

    Why Do We Not Prosecute Racists – The Article I wrote on Kenneth Sinclair 

    Afriforum chief executive Kallie Kriel addresses the media outside the Johannesburg High Court after Judge Colin Lamont ruled against the singing of the struggle song Dubul iBhunu by Julius Malema, in favour of Afriforum. The author charges Afriforum with being selective in its objections to hate speech. Photo: Antoine de Ras

    This country seems unable to deal with hate speech and demeaning comments, writes Pinky Khoabane.

     

    When South Africans go to the polls on May 7, it will be exactly two years and four days since Kenneth Sinclair unleashed his hateful vitriol against black South Africans on Facebook – and was able to get away it.

    His utterances, and the resultant response of Chapter 9 institutions, bring sharp scrutiny on this country’s inability to deal with racism.

    Unlike England, for example, where racism is criminalised and those who dare to rant publicly are dealt with speedily and with efficiency, South Africa – as with almost everything it negotiated during Codesa – has accommodated racists by developing institutions which neither have the will nor the inclination to deal harshly with those who inflict the pain of racism and undermine the dignity of others in the process.

    On May 3, 2012, Sinclair, a student at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, opened his tirade thus: “Seriously, seriously, seriously had enough of the blacks in this country. Arrogant f****** swines, and I will make it my Facebook status because I want THEM ALL to know. You are all f*** all without whites, you would still be in your little mud huts…”

    He didn’t stop there, making his hatred against blacks very evident on a platform which would allow him the reach: “If you aren’t a racist, go spend a day at Cape Tech, in town, you will wanna join the KKK when you are done. F****** brain dead monkeys.”

    Sinclair’s reference to the Ku Klux Klan – a far-right extremist group that advocates white supremacy and has historically expressed its views through terror attacks on and the murder of black people in the US – stood to incite violence against blacks and constitutes hate speech.

    In fact one of those responding to Sinclair’s update, a certain Michael Kallis, responded: “Sometimes I just wanna pull out a f****** pump- action shot gun and do the deed. F***.”

    It will also be two years and a few months since members of the extremist far-right Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging chanted “Bobbejaan klim die berg” at blacks who were outside court during the murder trial of the organisation’s leader, Eugene Terreblanche.

    This was a few months after Judge Colin Lamont had ruled against the singing of the struggle song, Dubul’ iBhunu (Shoot the boer), in favour of Afriforum, another racist formation that masquerades as a civil rights movement.

    Interestingly, the same Afriforum didn’t lodge a complaint against AWB, even though in an e-mail to me, Kallie Kriel, its leader, confirmed that the chants were racist.

    The DA, which had also been vocal and had previously lodged hate speech complaints against ANC representatives, was unsurprisingly quiet.

    A question I lodged on their website, asking whether they would be laying a complaint against the AWB, was not even answered.

    I lodged complaints of hate speech against the AWB and Sinclair with the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and the Equality Court.

    I also lodged a case of crimen injuria against Sinclair with the SAPS.

    I’ll deal with the case of Sinclair first, to indicate the ineptitude of the Chapter 9 institutions tasked with addressing this evil crime.

    As in all cases lodged with the SAHRC, I was requested to provide the evidence and motivate why the utterances fitted the crime of hate speech.

    Now, let’s for a minute think of an illiterate person who was a victim of racism and his or her ability to posit such an argument.

    The requirements necessary for SAHRC to deal with the matter immediately rule out this person. I needed the assistance of attorneys to postulate an argument that showed hate speech.

    On June 27, 2012, the SAHRC invited me to a meeting with “two respondents”.

    Their names were withheld and the venue was not given.

    I heard from the SAHRC Western Cape region only when I complained to the commission’s chief executive, Kayum Ahmed.

    The SAHRC referred me to a media statement on the matter and informed me that Sinclair had “to date not come forward to engage with the commission”.

    The letter referred me to the provincial manager and chief executive if I wasn’t happy with the response.

    The press statement spoke of two respondents who had shown remorse, and their penalty was community service.

    I was the complainant in the matter and I had not been given this information before the press statement.

    In my response to the letter, I asked for details of this community service – what it entailed and for how long. Those details were not forthcoming.

    The commission has failed to date to expand on the community service.

    A year later, Sinclair racially attacked an elderly lady.

    I wrote to the SAHRC commending them for their wonderful work in dealing with Sinclair and his racism.

    Only then did I learn that Sinclair had finally come forward and the commission had imposed community service, the details of which were not forthcoming.

    Once again, I was told to appeal this decision if I wasn’t happy by engaging with another process of the SAHRC.

    It is important to note that I had until that moment not been informed of any of the processes against this racist, a requirement of the commission.

    The Western Cape region of the SAHRC promised to send me an official letter and this has not happened.

    In the Equality Court in Randburg, the court initially complained that it could not serve the complaint on the accused because I was in Johannesburg and he was in the Western Cape.

    I offered to pay for the courier service, but this did not compel the court manager, Natasha Naidoo, to send the complaint. Naidoo ignored my e-mails and telephone messages until I turned to the Constitutional Court.

    There I spoke to advocate Holland Xolisani Holland. Within hours of receiving an e-mail from the Concourt requesting an explanation, Naidoo told me that she had sent the complaint to the Western Cape’s Equality Court.

    She assured Holland she would do a follow-up and revert back with feedback.

    A year later, having ignored the public protector to whom I turned when my correspondence to the Concourt, the Department of Justice and Naidoo went unheeded,

    Naidoo now says she is not dealing with this matter because the SAHRC is dealing with it.

    Didn’t Naidoo initially say she had sent the complaint to the Western Cape?

    The public protector’s Zingisa Zenani, who had since October last year not bothered to give me feedback on the matter, suddenly informed me of this new development from Naidoo this week.

    The SAPS has not bothered to take up the matter either.

    In the matter of the AWB, the SAHRC had initially demanded proof which comprised the media statements, which I duly submitted.

    Six months later, having complained to chief executive Ahmed, they attributed the delay to a complaint lodged by another right-wing group which was supposedly similar, but was against blacks.

    Two years later, the proof required from me has shifted to the ridiculous. I was given 14 days to provide names of court officials, among others, the failure of which led to the closure of the case.

    And in the usual dismissive approach of the SAHRC, if I’m not happy, I can appeal.

    Sinclair’s statements are unlawful, hateful, hurtful and propagate the belief that his race is superior to Africans, all of which is clearly in violation of sections of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000.

    The AWB’s racist chants are hate speech, as demonstrated by Judge Lamont’s judgment against the then ANC Youth League leader, Julius Malema.

    In another country, where racism is criminalised, these racists would have served time behind bars.

    Not in South Africa, of course, where despite the history of institutionalised racism, racists are allowed to roam freely.

    * Khoabane is a writer, author and columnist.

    ** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Newspapers.

    Sunday Independent

     

  • Can The ANC Cleanse Itself?

    By Pinky Khoabane

    AS the African National Congress (ANC) discusses the much talked about renewal of the party, there are calls from many platforms, shared by its leaders, to look deep within and cleanse itself from the systemic entrenchment of corruption from its ranks.

    In an interview with Spanish daily newspaper El Pais, former President Thabo Mbeki joined the chorus of former and current ANC leaders who are speaking-out against corruption. Mbeki spoke of a “Zuma phenomenon” in which  corruption became endemic within government and society at large.  He said this phenomenon was now called state capture in which “a particular business family had become so important that it took decisions on behalf of government”.

    The “Zuma phenomenon” he said started from as far back as the advent of democracy whereby people had joined the ANC or even old members stayed in the ANC to get into government and use their positions for self enrichment.

    This problem of the corruption of members of the ANC has accumulated over a period of time. He said the ANC had to look at itself and say; “who are genuine members and who are people here simply to steal….the crooks…”

    At a Nelson Mandela Lecture in Tembisa yesterday, Regional Secretary Teliswa Mgweba delivered a hard hitting speech calling on members of the party to speak-out against corrupt leaders. She said the ANC was the leader of society and yet the corrupt practices of its leaders had condemned many members of society to despair. She said this was a “leadership of selfish, self-serving people” who joined the ANC for self enrichment. “You can’t keep quiet about corruption,” Mgweba advised the crowd of ANC faithful, who together with the South African Communist Party (SACP), had organised the event. The ANC regional secretary in Ekurhuleni lambasted those who looted state coffers saying their actions impacted on service delivery and resulted in the high rates of rape and murder, among many other ills that confronted the country. “We have normalised corruption…we are messing up the revolution..” a scathing Mgweba said.

    Speaker after speaker, the message was the same – “address the rampant corruption sweeping through the corridors of power which, when questioned, leads to intimidation of whistleblowers both physically and through the legal courts”.

     

    There’s a general view that the ANC ought to look within and cleanse itself of the corrupt element in the party. But can the ANC rid itself of the influence of business in a capitalist state, which ultimately creates an environment which opens it up to corruption? This debate has been ensuing for many decades within the party with very little results.

    In the document, “Revolutionary morality: The ANC and Business”, the party reflected on “the impact of aberrations such as careerism, personal enrichment and corruption on the revolutionary morality of the ANC has also been observed and debated”. The call for a New Cadre by the 2000 National General Council held in Port Elizabeth was the first comprehensive political response to the challenge posed by the erosion of the moral values of ANC members. Reflecting on this matter in the May 2006 issue of Umrabulo, the NEC Political Education Committee argued that the ANC “should forge a cadreship through programmes that relate to actual challenges that these members face in their daily lives”.

    There have over the years been many efforts meant to “provide political and moral guidelines to the ANC as a whole, particularly the leadership, on the issue of involvement in business”. http://www.anc.org.za/content/revolutionary-morality-anc-and-business

    But the rampant corruption which has taken hold of the party and government shows that the ANC has failed to stop the corrupt influence of business people on its cadres. We know the power of money in determining the outcome of elections or the ability to sway the minds of the people through powerful media outlets which are owned by business people. With the ANC seeking to stay in power come 2019, what will be its response to the donors who as we know, donate for nothing else but to sway policies and government tenders in their favour?

     

  • SOLIDARITY WITH THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE

    Screen Shot 2018-03-19 at 07.58.04

    By Dr Lehlohonolo Kennedy Mahlatsi

    Each year, Israeli Apartheid Week takes place across the world. It aims to raise awareness about Israel’s ongoing settler-colonial project, Israel’s apartheid policies, and to build support for the growing campaign of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel.

    The protracted occupation of Palestine must be located within the context of expansion which is at the heart of capitalism and is the imperative for the accumulation of capital. The role of imperialism has always been, inter alia; -to preserve the interests of the American, British and French oil millionaires; to overthrow progressive governments, to secure the territorial aggrandisement of Israel and the return to colonialism-or ruthless expropriation of Arab populations.

    In the 1950s and 1960s the imperialist powers, particularly the USA and West Germany, launched a new assault on the national liberation struggle. The renewed imperialist penetration into Africa required large infusions of capital, but because of the general distrust towards the US and West Germany, who were thoroughly discredited in Africa, Israel was employed as a conduit or intermediary for such penetration. Many Israeli firms have been doing business in Africa, many of them financed by US and Western European corporations.

    The existing ‘non-Jewish communities’ were the Palestinians. They constituted 94% of the population and were not consulted when their land was given away. This was a typically colonial British act of the time. Balfour declaration has laid a foundation for the establishment of apartheid Israel. The two-state solution which was endorsed for the past 30 years has become increasingly impossible with every passing day. As long as the state of Israel continues to be celebrated and rewarded, rather than held accountable to universal standards for its continued violation of international law, it will have no incentive to end the occupation.

    Every year Palestinians mark the Nakba when in 1948 around 750,000 Palestinians were forcibly expelled from their homes during the creation of the state of Israel. Five-hundred villages were destroyed in a premeditated campaign, and their inhabitants never allowed to return. Zionist militias, who later became the “Israel Defence Forces” (IDF), committed massacres in the villages of Deir Yassin, Lydda, Tantura and dozens of other Palestinian communities.

    The Nakba (Arabic for ‘catastrophe’) refers to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and destruction of Palestinian communities that took place with the establishment of the State of Israel on 15 May 1948. The Nakba came just thirty years after the Balfour Declaration. The overriding reason for the evacuation of hundreds of Palestinian villages in 1947-’48 was a combination of force and fear, something long maintained by Palestinian historians. Massacres by Zionist forces – of which there were at least two dozen – played a key role in fomenting terror amongst Palestinians. Deir Yassin, where 100-120 villagers were killed on April 9, 1948, is the most famous atrocity, but there were many others in al-Dawamiya, in October 1948, more than 100 villagers – men, women, and children – were killed.

    There is no formal definition of ethnic cleansing in international humanitarian law. The long-term goal of a “policy of ethnic cleansing” can be defined as “the creation of living conditions that make the return of the displaced community impossible.” The first formal move towards the recognition of a right of return was in UN General Assembly Resolution 194 passed on 11 December 1948 which provided (Article 11):

    “Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

    Palestinians also refer to an ‘ongoing Nakba’, in the sense that Israeli policies of forced displacement and colonization have continued, and even expanded, over the decades. During the 1967 Israeli conquest of the Gaza Strip and West Bank, for example, some 300,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled. Of those who left the West Bank, less than 8 per cent were allowed by Israel to return. It is in the psyche of every Palestinian that the Right of Return is a sacred right and that there can be no peace without it. It is also a basic right derived from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and all international and regional covenants. It is an individual right derived from the Principle of Self-Determination. It has no statute of limitation and cannot be extinguished by a treaty or the establishment of a state.

    UN Resolution 194 has been repeatedly confirmed by the international community in the last 50 years. The Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC) calls on people of conscience the world over to further intensify Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaigns to end academic, cultural, sports, military and economic links of complicity with Israel’s regime of occupation, settle-colonialism and apartheid. This is the most effective means of standing with the Palestinian people in pursuing their inherent and UN-stipulated rights, and nonviolently resisting the ongoing, intensifying Nakba.

    It is important to understand the similarities between the Apartheid Israel and Apartheid South Africa. In May 1948, the state of “Israel” was formed. The establishment of Israel required the destruction of Palestine. The majority of the Palestine people were forcefully expelled from their land by the fascist forces of Zionism. Geographically, the small country of Palestine was broken into pieces, the largest of which became Israel, or rather Occupied Palestine. The Palestine masses have since been involved in a struggle to assert their self-respect and basic human dignity as a people, and to return to their homeland.

    One of the founders of racism described it as a movement of “a people without land” in search of “a land without people”. Like their settler colonialist counterparts that came to South Africa, Zionists also claimed that they found the land unrehabilitated. Despite the many differences in the nature of these two societies, their histories and their economies, factors binding apartheid regimes of South Africa and Israel together were no secret. The minority governments of both countries found a common purpose in the suppression of the dispossessed majority. In Israel, it was the Palestinians who had been the majority until driven from their land, when most were herded into territorial enclaves or into neighbouring territories.

    They were confined to refugee camps, without security, and without meaningful existence. In South Africa the discrimination on grounds of ethnicity was more blatant and more complex. The Africans, indigenous to the country; the Coloureds, mostly the offspring of settlers; and the Indians, who had been brought into the country as indentured labourers, were all stripped of political rights — their political organizations mostly banned — and herded into urban or rural ghettoes. The brutal massacre of the unarmed Palestine children is not different from the brutal murder of innocent children in Soweto in 1976 and many parts of our country.

    The struggle for national liberation in the Middle East and Southern Africa have so much in common that it is only natural for the peoples waging these struggles to join their hands in their efforts. The commonness of these struggles derives not only from the identity of the principles they fight to assert, but also from the similarities, in character, of the regimes they were ranged against – Zionist Israel and apartheid South Africa.

    Like the apartheid regime in South Africa, the origins of the Zionist state of Israel is linked to the British imperial history of colonial expansion. In the early part of the 20th century, Britain was interested in securing the two principal routes of access to its domains in the Far East. It was however impossible to do this without controlling the two strategic points along these routes; the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of the African continent and the Suez Canal and other routes in the Arab East. It was thus not a coincidence that Britain later became the ruling colonial power in these regions.

    General Jan Smuts, then a member of the British Imperial cabinet and Prime Minister of South Africa, played a significant role in the formulation of both the South Africa Union Act and the Balfour Declaration, At the United Nations, Smuts argued very strongly for the partition of Palestine and the establishment of a “Jewish homeland,” It was thus not surprising that South Africa was among the first countries to recognise the state of Israel in 1948.

    There have always been the links between the counter-revolutionary and anti-communist efforts of Israel and the United States in Africa. A similar arrangement existed between the US and South Africa. South Africa and Israel by virtue of their geo-political positions, played similar roles, within their respective regions, in the world imperialist strategy. Both had a fair share in the military and intelligence activities against revolutionaries and progressive countries. In fulfilment of its surrogate role, South Africa has carried out subversive activities aimed at destabilising established governments in Southern Africa. It has intervened in various ways, including military actions in the affairs of these states. However, despite the difficulties which they have had to bear as a result of these barbarous invasions, the Angolan people and their government were as hard as a rock in their resolve to support the struggle for national liberation in South Africa and Namibia.

    Last year the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), issued a report documenting Israel’s apartheid policies towards the Palestinian people and encouraging support for the grassroots boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights and freedom. It is the first time any UN agency has established through a scrupulous and rigorous study that Israel has imposed an apartheid regime against the entire Palestinian people. Instead of engaging the report, US and Israeli resorted to their bullying tactics and pressurised the UN Secretary General to disown the report. This prompted Dr. Rima Khalaf of ESCWA to resign rather than succumbing to bullying by US-Israel axis stating: “I resigned because it is my duty not to conceal a clear crime, and I stand by all the conclusions of the report.” Israel and its apologists seek to deny the historical record, obfuscate what is happening on the ground today, and undermine strategies for change. By contrast, understanding events in Palestine, past and present, as a form of anachronic settler colonialism and apartheid, brings context, clarity, and a course of action.

    One of the most disturbing aspects of the chauvinist Zionist attitude is its complete disregard, in its sick national egocentrism, not only for the Arab populations of North Africa and West Asia, but also for the whole of the rest of humanity and the cause of world peace. The International Solidarity with the struggling masses of Palestine is gaining momentum. This struggle must be intensified until the people of Palestine are free. South Africa has experienced the demon of apartheid and colonialism. We must play a leading role in pledging solidarity with the oppressed masses of Palestine. The downgrading of Israel embassy by our government is long overdue. Our freedom, in the words of Cde Nelson Mandela, is meaningless without the liberation of Palestine.

    Dr Lehlohonolo Kennedy Mahlatsi is an SACP Free State PEC Member and ANC Member. He writes in a personal capacity

     

  • Internet Expropriation Without Compensation: Politics and Investment of Cryptos

    Written by Charles Sewela

    charles sewela

    Investing is an integral part of growing wealth over time. This is common knowledge. However, for the longest time, the space of investing has been left to pension fund managers, hedge fund managers and other financial managers in. While this has proven (somewhat) effective in growing the wealth of investors, ultimately those who manage these funds often make clients sign contracts that bind said client to making annual or monthly obligatory payments, subsequent failure of which could often see such investments “lapsing”. Others have seen clients place their money in the custody of commercial banks in mid and long term investment options. Most of which is then used as loans or as means of investing in property and other forms of income generation which ultimately benefits the bank far more than it benefits the investing clients, with the client seeing meager 4 to 8 percent returns annually, with all natures of added penalties/charges for early or emergency withdrawals of one’s OWN MONEY.

    Investing in cryptos, individually or as collectives could vastly reduce the amount of money going to Mr. Big Bank, and see more returns reverting back to the common man. How so? There are a number of possibilities, some of which have already proven successful within the conventional financial environment.

    From Stokvels, to pension funds, to buying income-generating property and assets offshore (as hedge funds do), to making investments in local businesses as investors and subsequent shareholders, to simply buying and holding cryptos and eventually selling them at profit when the value increases relative to the local currency. There are plenty of applications that can be applied to the generation of wealth within the cryptocurrency markets that can then translate to wealth in the common man’s pocket; with a lot more freedom to the investor to withdraw upon need, and deposit at will. This is not to say that cryptos are a be-all-end-all of financial markets. No, instead, the new and developing frameworks that have come to the fore with the advent of cryptos and crypo-driven business have opened up a pandora’s box of opportunities to make money (or be scammed of money) in a host of new-age ways that governments are yet to effectively regulate/stifle to the benefit of the oligopoly industries of global financiers and bankers.

    Modern governments regulate the means by which money is generated, the means by which money flows into the hands of the public (initially through bank loans at the genesis of the economy), the means by which that money flows back to the state (through taxes) and the means by which the value of that money is set, changed and maintained. Examples of this can be seen in the financial policies set by central reserve banks, which are, more often than not, private entities with private boards and shady, questionable mandates. These reserve banks are usually backed by a state’s monopoly on violence (state’s policing and military authority), and international consensus by markets which are ultimately regulated by both private and public agents of those reserve banks (think state treasury committees, entities responsible for setting financial regulatory policy, ratings agencies responsible for informing market sentiment, etc.).

    The decentralized and, often, pseudo anonymous nature of decentralized digital currencies means that money supply has, for the first time (quite possibly in all of human civilized history) been democratized. The establishment of market sentiment, value consensus and, most tellingly, money supply are all functions of the digital/internet public when it comes to the cryptocurrency sphere. This in itself is quite possibly one of the most sophisticated coups on financial markets ever perpetrated by the general public, subverted only by that same public’s lack of realization of the magnitude of this fact and situation. The financiers and state authorities of some nations (most notably China) have awoken to this reality and have begun to crack down on the cryptocurrency markets and the platforms that power them in the country (remember ‘state monopoly on violence’?). Others have been slower to react, relying on the public’s complacency and ignorance to the reality begging at the door.

    The size of the network that drives a digital currency is a measure of the robustness of a currency, while the number of transactions that take place on that network is a measure of the public’s support and adoption rate for that currency, this is what we can alternatively refer to as the value consensus (the publicly and generally agreed upon value). Where a currency has the support of a community, that currency has power. As opposed to power by monopoly on violence, such a currency has power by community adoption and confidence; living and dying by market consensus, rather than living and dying by the gun of the state.

    Some of the concepts that make crypto currencies so attractive include the ease of transfer from one account to another, the ability to divide a currency unit into fractions for trade and exchange purposes and the low cost of transferring a unit or its relative fractions. However, one of the most telling and most important value propositions to date is that of anonymous transactions. The idea of being able to safely and anonymously exchange value between two parties is important. This serves as a means of firstly, protecting parties to a transaction from traceability and economic persecution. It also serves to ensure transactions are private and the digital assets of an individual or entity are safe and cryptographically secured. What this suggests is that a holder of digital assets need only secure the address of their wallet (where their value is held) and the password that grants access to that wallet. They need not provide individually identifying information that would ultimately compromise anonymity. The reverse side to this is that transactions can in most cases with most currencies be traced back to an address but the owner of said address does not necessarily need to be public knowledge.

    This implies that one can found, for argument’s sake, a stokvel group (some or other form of investment or community fund), with group participants from anywhere in the world. The finances of that fund group could be managed by a trusted third party such as a reputable online platform that will dispense the contributions to recipients according to agreed, transparent schedules, with beneficiaries stating accurately their receiving addresses. Checks and balances around how to successfully, safely and confidently implement business policies with regards to such applications would simply be a matter of formality.

     

  • Defend VBS Against A Hostile Take Over & Put Your Money Into Their Bank

    By Pinky Khoabane

    kycu2nevse27pdocplom

    WHAT happened at VBS Mutual Bank is nothing short of a hostile takeover. It illustrates, once again, how regulations by governments working in cahoots with the big boys of business simply kill the smaller players. When VBS lent former President Jacob Zuma a loan and came into prominence, it’s dealings came under scrutiny.

    On Sunday, Governor of Reserve Bank Lesetja Kganyago placed VBS under curatorship. VBS had apparently flouted mutual bank laws by accepting deposits from municipalities in violation of the law. In the  letter by VBS Chairman Thifhiwa Matodzi to Kuben Naidoo of treasury,  it is clear that once the bank became aware of the possible violation, it approached treasury for clarity. Treasury instead of responding simply ignored them while on the other hand, it kept instructing municipalities to withdraw the money from that bank. This caused a liquidity problem for the bank, to which it sought to find a solution by writing letters to treasury.

    Treasury if it was acting in good faith, could have asked the municipalities to withdraw the money over a period of time to allow for sustainability of the bank. But it didnt. It wanted the bank to crash.

    It could have even issued a commercial licence to ensure the developmental agenda of our country is met – safeguarding a small bank whose shareholding is Black from collapse. That is what radical economic transformation requires – bold moves which are meant to bring Blacks into mainstream economy. The apartheid government gave their Afrikaner banks bailouts to help sustain them. Democratic SA wouldn’t, it wanted the bank to crash.

    But there’s also the puzzling case of Public Investment Corporation (PIC), which has a 27% in VBS, seemingly not being aware of the mutual bank laws. VBS’ growth strategy included seeking business from municipalities, why didnt PIC flag this as a violation?

    If stories going around that the curator was already known during the first week of March, despite meetings between the parties, seeking solutions to the problem, then this curatorship is forced – forced to ensure the bank collapsed allowing for new ownership.

    It is a sad day for Black entrepreneurship and flies in the face of the much talked about need to bring Blacks into the mainstream economy. A survey by 27four Investment Managers, which measures transformation in the financial sector, says that, of the R4.6-trillion industry assets, only R415.5-billion — or 9% — is managed by black firms. We ought not be deterred by this move by bullies but instead we ought to all boycott the commercial banks and take our money to VBS. We at UnCensored already have, in line with our decision to Buy Black and Bank Black. Imagine all those stokvels, if they could take their money to VBS?


    UnCensored is an independent, self-funded platform whose goal is to tell the stories that commercial media ignore.

    We give voice to the political views you won’t find in mass media. We focus on corporate corruption which is largely hidden, and the restoration of Africa’s historical and cultural place in the world.

    We believe that the only way Black people can escape the physical and psychological shackles of colonialism and apartheid is by restoring Africa’s distorted, maligned and obscured place in world history.

    If everyone who reads UnCensored, assisted in funding it, they would be helping in keeping alive the alternative view of the world. We therefore have a small favour to ask. That you keep this platform alive by contributing both financially and by submitting stories and other resources such as research.

    You can contribute here:

    Account Name: UnCensored Opinion.

    Bank: VBS Bank

    Account Number: 1011 961 8001

    Branch Code: 588000

    Thanking you in advance.


     

  • Dear Poland – Your Holocaust Law Fools No One. No One Forgets

    images

    A letter from Bradley Burston, Haaretz Correspondent, to Poland on a law passed by that country to fine or imprison anyone who accuses it of being complicit in Nazi crimes. Burston says “No One Forgets”. No matter how much revisionism, history stands to tell the tales of the horror suffered under the Third German Reich. A lesson for South Africa….no matter how many times we can be told to move on…history bears the heinous crimes of colonialism and apartheid. And those stories shall be told, over and over, so that, as former President Nelson Mandela said: “Never, never and never again shall it be that this beautiful land will again experience oppression of one by another and suffer the indignity of being the talk of the world”. 


    Dear Poland

    You really sure you want to go down this road?

    That law you passed this month. “Whoever accuses … the Polish nation, or the Polish state, of being responsible or complicit in the Nazi crimes committed by the Third German Reich shall be subject to a fine or a penalty of imprisonment of up to three years”.

    Who do you think you’re fooling?

    In country after country, Holocaust survivors make up the stories of those Ukrainians and Lithuanians and Latvians and, Russians and, yes, Poles, who proved themselves more enthusiastic than the Germans in hunting down and slaughtering Jews.
    No one forgets a thing. The survivors forgot nothing of what they went through. What was done to them. And by whom.

    They’ve told their stories. You can’t legislate away actual memories. This can’t be washed. It doesn’t go away.

    You can sentence the truth to three years, or 30 to life. The truth doesn’t change. Because, in the end, nobody forgets anything.

    Just as nobody forgets the thousands of Poles who saved Jews during the war, nobody forgets those Polish neighbors who ratted out the Jewish family next door. Or the thousands of Poles who aided the Nazis in other ways.

    Your prime minister can say there were Polish perpetrators, just as there were Jewish perpetrators. No one’s fooled, unless you are.

    There were survivors who returned home to find that the Polish neighbor who turned them in, had been only too happy to take over the Jewish family’s property and move into their home.

    Nobody forgets that after the war, when the few Jews still alive managed to make it home, Poles initiated and carried out murderous pogroms against survivors. No Germans involved.
    More than a full year after the war ended, in July 1946, a blood libel rumor spread in the Polish town of Kielce, which before the Holocaust had been home to 24,000 Jews. Fewer than 200 made it back alive.
    It took three days for the blood libel to spread, and then a mob of Polish soldiers, police officers and civilians shot or beat to death at least 42 Jews and seriously injured 50 more.

    Dear Poland, you really want to go there?
    You can pass all the laws you want. You’re fooling yourselves, and only yourselves, if you think this is going to change a thing.
    Because nobody forgets anything.

    Bradley Burston
    Haaretz Correspondent

     

Close
Close