Opinion

  • Suspended Citizen Editor now Fired

    By Pinky Khoabane

    steve-motale

    The Citizen’s editor Steve Motale has finally been fired following an “internal disciplinary hearing” the newspaper’s publisher said in a statement released a short while ago. https://t.co/ntywtwEZ0d

    The statement said Motale had failed to follow “agreed-upon editorial procedures and to uphold his editorial duties”. The publisher would not elaborate on what these procedures which suggests this is simply a smokescreen for the articles he published shortly before his suspension.

    They inlcude allegations of former finance minister Trevor Manuel’s alleged irregular awarding of SARS tenders. We wrote about it here http://uncensoredopinion.co.za/shall-defend-citizens-editor/

    Motale responded to his dismissal with a tweet: I was today dismissed as editor of The Citizen without any hearing. My legal team is handling the matter.

    Was there a hearing or inquiry or is someone being economical with the truth?

    It’s clear Motale’s dismissal is political and has everything to do with the preservation of a specific narrative that protects white monopoly capitalists and their cronies from scrutiny in the state capture debate.

    Some responses from Twitter:

    It’s hard to survive mainstream media if you challenge the narrative like  did. So few ‘free’ editors

    ‘s failure to defend is proof it has morphed into a right-wing lobby group which defends media media inequality.

  • The cost of selling their souls – Bought Blacks forever “heartbroken” at injustices against fellow Black workers

    By Pinky Khoabane

    steve-biko-most-potent-weapon

    While his fellow Black workers face abysmal working conditions, the Affirmative Action appointee mixes with the apartheid-era bosses, is the darker shade in a sea of white oppressors in the boardroom and represents transformation in the New South Africa…later he mingles with his fellow Blacks to cleanse his soul and betrayal with financial help which doesn’t change the material conditions of his “beneficiaries”. 

    It is about cleansing his soul, his conscience and he has it all worked out. He will dish out a loan to a Black colleague and phone Black friends for validation of his generosity.

    For many like me, they are the perpetual irritant. They are complicit in the continued oppression and exploitation of fellow Black workers. They are forever trying to cleanse their conscience for doing nothing and turning a blind eye on the working conditions of their colleagues for fear of losing their fat pay cheques. Instead of challenging the status quo, they spend their time relating the gross injustices at their workplaces and how they are the saviours.

    We all have a friend who’s like this – the black brother bought by white monopoly capitalists to maintain the status quo. They used to be called tokens but we’ve gone past that term now. They hold executive titles and very little else…

    “I was so sad today,” the conversation always starts like this. “You know, Gladys, the receptionist came to ask me to lend her R100. I mean she earns only R3500 per month and when you look at her transport from Soweto to here, it breaks my heart.”

    He will then go onto give you a breakdown of Gladys’s expenses. “She has two children who attend school here in town. Oh, it breaks my heart!”

    He will rattle off Gladys’s expenditure as if it were his. He’s so deep in the world of debt that he doesn’t know his expenses at all and yet he does Gladys’s. With a giggle he will let you know that he gave Gladys the money and doesn’t expect it back. He does this for just about every Black person in his office.

    And each week, there will be his usual “heartbreaking story” to which he contributed R100 or so.

    The names of his “beneficiaries” change but the story is the same.

    It is the story of a black face and name with political connections that can open doors and extend in many cases, the sunset contracts of 40years or more held by the company that employed him. He holds a title of executive that includes Human Resources. Few positions for Blacks in the Rainbow Nation beat Human Resources, Corporate Communications and Social Responsibility. In fact, you need not have any qualifications for these jobs – in the New South Africa, Blacks with their skin colour and surnames make the grade for these jobs.

    These are Blacks who represent the transformation brought about by the negotiated settlement we have today. They fear doing the job for which they were supposedly employed to do….to engineer a new environment in the workplace where Gladys can have a living wage instead of waiting for the crumbs from the AA appointee when he can get cash from the bank.

    As we speak about radical economic transformation, the key question is what to do with this person – who is too fearful to take our country forward and address inequalities of the past, because he hangs onto his 4×4 and luxury home in the suburbs.

  • Where are media freedom advocates in Motale’s case?

    free-speech

    One of our readers, Khothatso says…It’s all silence from our proponents of free speech and media freedom when it comes to the suspicious suspension of the Citizen’s Editor, Steven Motale. Details of his suspension are sketchy but he was suspended following articles on allegations of  wrongdoing by Deputy Chairpesron of Rothschild financial dynasty, Trevor Manuel.

    Where is Sipho Pityana, lips with masked tape brigade, Jackson Mthembu, SANEF, FUL, Helen Suzman Foundation? Don’t raise your hopes. Remember what happened to Vusi Mona at the Hefer commission for daring to go against the instructions given to the establishment media by Bulelani Ngcuka (Obviously by his handlers).

    Remember how Mathata Tsedu was bundled out of the Sunday Times for thinking he could transform it? Those who claim to be the custodians of tranaparency and freedom of expression showed the citizens the middle finger when the asked why Mathata was dismissed. Just in case we are told that the difference between the Sunday Times and SABC is that the Sunday Times is a private entity – That is a neo-con myth. The management of the Sunday times did not part with even a cent of their own money. It is our pension monies, insurance premiums, UIF contributions and so on that keep it afloat. It is the public sector advertisements that sustain their advertising revenues. Unlike the BBC which is the British government mouthpiece, the SABC gets no subsidy from Government.

    I am getting sidetracked. Consider how under Mondli Makhanya the Sunday Times published the following stories;

    1. An article by David Bullard claiming that when a black family loses a child, they get on with making another one without mourning for the dead one. It was only after a public outcry that Mondli Makhanya fired Bullard for the article that he had okayed as the editor. Bullard became the fall guy.
    2. Under Makhanya, Sunday Times claimed that former President Mbeki had received a R30m rand bribe from the Arms deal. Even today no evidence has been pubished to back up the claim.

    Makhanya retired from the Sunday with full honours.

    Can you imagine Motale becoming ANC MP?

    The former Financial Editor who once wrote in an Editorial that he would not want to be “served by a native with a finger in the soup and one eye on the clock”. He went on to become a DA MP.

    Dianne Kohler-Barnard who thinks that things were better under PW Botha than after 1994 moved straight from the SABC to a DA MP.

    Anyway, these are just my observations.

  • We shall defend rights of Citizen’s Editor to do his job. Media Freedom not exclusive to a few

    The days of sitting by while our African editors and journalists are persecuted by their white masters are gone. We shall voice our disgust in our writings, protest and march says Pinky Khoabane

     

    steve-motale

    Many of you will not know this, but The Citizen’s editor, Steven Motale was suspended a few weeks ago following  the publication of anti-establishment articles. By anti-establishment I mean articles which go against commercial media’s portrayal of their blue-eyed boys and girls as  squeaky clean.

    Motale, as you may or may not remember, broke ranks from SA’s media cabal a few years back when he penned a column in which he apologised to President Jacob Zuma for what he described as a media campaign against the President, the ANC and in favour of opposition parties.

    His claims sparked a furore in media circles so much so that he received an onslaught of attacks from commercial media editors who distanced themselves from the campaign. So much for freedom of speech! But this is the  problem with our media, it thinks we are so stupid as to not know there was a campaign. Motale just happened to mention it but most of us were well aware of it. I have stated quite frankly, that our media is anti-black.

    The commercial media is run along dictatorial lines where you either toe-the-line or are spat out. In the months and weeks that followed, he tried his best to remain within the boundaries that would safeguard his job but now-and-again he veered outside those borders and in recent times, he seemed pretty determined to play the role of an alternative media that gave two sides of South Africa’s story. He tried to do what the fallacious media is supposed to do – objective, fair, balanced, and all the good words that symbolise democracy and civility. In the real world, none of these words apply for media. Commercial media is a business run along commercial lines and is there to protect its bosses and advertisers.

    While his bosses had seemingly forgiven him for his expose’ of the anti-Zuma and anti-ANC campaign, he went too far when he published allegations of former finance minister Trevor Manuel’s alleged irregular awarding of SARS tenders.

    In the clip of the interview with a Citizen journalist on the matter, Manuel is heard saying: “Dont F@@@king bother me”.

    LISTEN: Don’t f***ing bother me, says Trevor Manuel

    None of the commercial media and our doyens of media freedom expressed any views on the matter.

    A few days later, Motale was suspended for apparently “violating Caxton’s code of ethics”.

    Motale’s sin was to do his job as a journalist without fear or favour.

    Contrast the response of defenders of media freedom, South African National Editors Forum (SANEF), Right-to-Know and others in Motale’s case compared to SABC journalists which included statements and protest marches. 

    I have surfed the Twitter account of SANEF and have found nothing on Motale.

    I have on Twitter asked SANEF, Right-to-Know and one of the leaders of media freedom and organiser of the Black Shirt protests (Black Wednesday or Tuesday) Yusuf Abramjee if they are aware and would be doing something around Motale’s suspension. Not unsurprising, nothing.

    The current situation in South Africa calls for Blacks to stand-up and move in unison to assert themselves. The Forum of Journalists for Transformation is organising a march in protest against Motale’s suspension.

    We at UnCensored, call upon everyone who’s available to participate in the march to do so.

    Those who cant must voice their disgust at Caxton through platforms such as this one.

    Full statement by Forum of Journalists for Transformation

    Forum of Journalists for Transformation media statement on a march to Citizen Offices

    Date: 17/11/2016

    The Forum of Journalists for Transformation (FJT), in collaboration with the Communications Workers Union (CWU) will march to the offices of Caxton-owned Citizen newspaper on Wednesday 23, 2016.

    The march, which is part of the FJT’s media transformation campaign, is in support of suspended Citizen Steve Motale and other Caxton journalists who are victims of the company’s wanton exploitation, editorial interference, institutionalised racism and an anti-black corporate culture, among others.

    Details of the march are as follows:

    Date: 23/11/2016

    Time: 10:00

    Venue: Citizen Offices, No 9 Wright Street, Industrial West, Johannesburg

    The march will begin at 10:00 at Bosmont Park, Albertina Sisulu Road, next to the Cemetery where Albertina and Walter Sisulu are buried.

    Protesters will then proceed to the nearby Citizen offices where a memorandum will be handed over at 12:00, to highlight the following concerns:

    *Editorial interference;

    * Racism;

    * Media freedom and freedom of speech;

    *Exploitation, harassment and victimisation of journalists;

    * Racialised salary disparities;

    * And an anti-black corporate culture.

    Motale has been at the helm of the publication since 2013 and has been one of the few black voices in the industry who upheld the principles of diversity and impartiality in this largely untransformed industry, The Citizen included, where blacks continue to face widespread discriminatory harassment in the newsrooms.

    The FJT finds it strange that the editor was suspended after a damning investigation about former finance minister Trevor Manuel, current finance minister Pravin Gordhan and ANC chief whip Jackson Mthembu was published in the paper a few weeks ago.

    During this period, The Citizen ran a series about a Hawks probe into Manuel for his alleged role into the irregular awarding of SARS tenders and reportedly responded in unbecoming manner to the journalists who called him. Manuel allegedly approved a contract on modernisation at SARS worth R100 million, currently standing at R1 billion, without following due process.

    It appears that Motale has been accused of having a personal vendetta against Manuel, and of running a campaign against him. These allegations are unfounded considering that it is the duty of all newspapers in South Africa to publish stories reflecting all spheres of our democracy and to enquire without fear, favour of social standing.

    Another factor, it appears, that led to his sacking was affording SABC boss, Hlaudi Motsoeneng a platform to share his side of the story when the latter was facing heavy criticism from Mthembu and other ANC leaders. We understand that one of the executive directors at Caxton instructed a publisher to fire him ostensibly for violating Caxton’s code of conduct.

    The FJT further understands that the same executive director, then instructed the publisher to offer Motale a golden handshake to leave because his “services were no longer needed”. An undisclosed monetary offer was then made to Motale on condition he walked away silently. Motale refused this offer and its condition, saying he could not be bought to keep quiet about these unsavoury developments.

    The company then puts him on immediate suspension pending an inquiry. Based on these sickening allegations that have been uncovered by the FJT, we call for Caxton to reinstate Motale immediately if they are genuine supporters of free speech, media diversity and editorial independence.

    The tale and fate of Motale is nothing new in the media industry in South Africa. The moment Motale broke ranks with the mainstream media narrative and introduced diverse perspectives and even apologised to President Jacob Zuma for some of the malicious reports that were prevalent during in his endless trials, the FJT knew he was a goner.

    It was only a matter of time before the incorrigible white cabal and their lackeys who control the media in South Africa got rid of him. He was side-lined and avoided by most of his mainstream media colleagues for thinking differently.

    Ends

    For enquiries contact

    1. Piet Rampedi (President)

    0726509650

    2. Denvor de Wee (Deputy President)

    083 238 5870

    3. Sonnyboy Morobane (Secretary)

    082 855 1897

  • Why are media reports on Zuma’s so-called Kitchen Cabinet not part of State Capture investigation?

    By Pinky Khoabane

    PRETORIA, SOUTH AFRICA – JULY 14: Public Protector Thuli Madonsela announcing her findings on scandalous lease dealings at the National Press Club on July 14, 2011 in Pretoria, South Africa. (Photo by Gallo Images / Foto24 / Liza van Deventer)

    The Mail and Guardian in 2014 reported that a team comprising of playwright Duma Ka Ndlovu, owner of Mvelase and Associates Vusi Mvelase, and businessman Sandile Zungu, influenced President Jacob Zuma’s decisions and appointments.
    The three were said to have been instrumental in the appointments of Riah Phiyega as national police commissioner, Thuli Madonsela as public protector and Sbu Ndebele as transport minister.
    Somewhere at the bottom of the article mention is made of the influence of the Gupta family on the President. In fact the article describes the family as political advisors.
    Although Ndlovu, Mvelase and Zungu all denied having had any influence on Zuma’s decisions, UnCensored has been reliably informed that Madonsela was part of the “kitchen cabinet” and that a fallout could have been the cause of the acrimonious relationship between the former public protector and the President.
    Read the full M&G article here: http://mg.co.za/article/2014-05-22-kitchen-cabinet-helps-jz-to-rule
    But why didn’t the reports of the influence of these three, the Guptas and others elicit a similar response to the one that led to the State Capture narrative and the report that followed? Part of the former public protector’s investigation dealt with”
    “a) Whether President Zuma improperly and in violation of the Executive Ethics Code, allowed members of the Gupta family and his son, to be involved in the process of removal and appointment of various members of the Cabinet”.
    The article above says the appointment of cabinet ministers including Madonsela herself were influenced by external members.
    Lest we forget, the State Capture investigation was based on complaints which emanated from media reports claiming that the Guptas had offered Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas and Vytjie Mentor, cabinet posts.
    The State Capture Report says, the first complainant among others, wanted an investigation into “all business dealings of the Gupta family and government departments to determine irregularities, undue enrichment, corruption…..”and based the quest on media reports.
    The second complainant also relied on similar media reports, the State Capture Report says.
    Why didn’t the former public protector include this particular report in which her post was supposedly influenced by the so-called “kitchen cabinet?” As one observer remarked: “Seeing that phone records are the latest investgative instrument, would Advocate Madonsela’s phone records and visitors book at the Presidential residence place her as a regular visitor before and shortly after her appointment as a public protector?”

  • Why SA media is dangerous to Blacks

    proxy

    By Pinky Khoabane

    By now we’ve seen the video of the African been forced into a coffin while alive. It was a picture which lasted with me for a long time and I asked those who sent it to me if its veracity was confirmed. No one could tell me.

    I had to get the real story from Washington Post. And it goes like this:

    “Victor Mlotshwa was just walking along, minding his own business, when the unthinkable happened.

    “There was a footpath there, and I decided to use it,” he said. “The next thing, there was a grave and then a coffin. There was nothing I could do because the other man had a gun.”

    Two white men suddenly approached him and accused him of trespassing on a ranch. Before Mlotshwa could escape, he says, they forced him into a coffin nearby. Then he says they threatened to pour gasoline on him and light him on fire. One of the men captured part of the assault on video.

    Toward the end of the video, which was taken down from YouTube on Tuesday but is preserved on social media accounts, one of the men tries to close the coffin over Mlotshwa’s head while he helplessly wails. It is unclear what happened after that. But the resurfacing of the video has given Mlotshwa a chance at justice for his tormentors, almost three months after he says the incident took place|”.

    Why do we hear the story from Washington Post when we have media in this country?

     

  • Desperate Oppenheimers will use anything to get port of entry into SA, Why?

    By Pinky Khoabane

    unnamed

    The Oppenheimers rank among the top two or three wealthiest families in South Africa having made their ill-gotten money off the blood of Africans here and surrounding countries in diamond mines….But they want more…a porous international entry point into South Africa for the rich that puts this country at risk of illicit diamonds, human trafficking, armaments, drugs and much more…says Pinky Khoabane

     

    If the Sunday Times report on the battle over an international terminal at OR Tambo International is anything to be believed, the Oppenheimer’s Fireblade Aviation (Pty) Ltd already knew about the Gupta’s interest in their business at the time of filing court papers against Denel’s objection to its application for an international entry port.

    Fireblade lodged a court application against Denel in the Gauteng High Court in February 2016 and said nothing about a Gupta-link and yet its Director, Robert David Irons, is reported in the Sunday Times as having met a pilot in November 2015 who allegedly relayed a message from one of the Gupta family members asserting their interest in the 7-star operation.

    The Sunday Times article, again if it is to be believed, claims that Irons said “the first Gupta pilot had come to see me in November 2015 bearing a message he said he had been asked to relay by Tony (Rajesh) Gupta”. The paper says the message from Tony was simply that Fireblade needed to change its BEE partner and the family would ensure that the international port of entry would be approved. This BEE partner, according to the pilot’s understanding was or had to be “associated to the Gupta family”.

    In its application against Denel’s objection to Fireblade’s non-compliance to security rules guiding a National Key Point, Irons is emphatic in his replying affidavit and I quote point 10:18:

    “Prior to receipt of a telephone call on 9 February 2016 from the DHA (Department of Home Affairs) advising that Denel had (completely contrary to its stance in its 12 January 2016 letter) again objected to the Application, Fireblade held the reasonable view that finalisation and granting of the Application was imminent (I emphasise that once again, Denel raised no issue with Fireblade before renewing its objection). As such, contrary to the picture painted by Denel in its answering affidavit, prior to 9 February 2016, there was no reason for Fireblade to launch its urgent application. It did so within a reasonable time after 9 February 2016”.

    The conclusion therefore is that: Until 9 February 2016, Oppenheimers despite allegedly knowing the Guptas alleged interest in the operation, didn’t mention it.

    Fireblade, through Irons states again, very emphatically in his replying affidavit Point 11: “The trigger event for this application is patently the telephone call from the DHA on 9 February 2016 in which Fireblade was advised of a further objection to its Application by Denel, in clear breach of the contractual obligation”.

    Again its application didnt have anything to do with the Pilot (1 or 2).

    The issue of contractual obligations will have to be finalised in a court of law.

    But, why not use Pilot 1’s claims to prove there is something beyond Denel’s Objection which has to do with another rival’s interest in the business?

    The timing of bringing-in the Guptas into the case is curious. Until the State Capture Report whose basis into an enquiry was based on media reports, Fireblade was hamstrung. But it is a field day now. Make assertions in the media and hope the Commission into State Capture picks up that media article (and it definitely will) and have your unsubstantiated claims “investigated”

    My Questions to Denel & Fireblade which went unanswered at the time of filing this report:

    To Denel’s Chairman;

    (1) How was Fireblade chosen to become the operator of this business?

    (2) Was there a tender issued and if yes, who were the other contenders for the operation?

    (3) If there was no tender, what criteria was used to award the business to Fireblade?

    (4) In the original heads of arguments, Fireblade had solely blamed Denel but it emerges they are now blaming the Guptas, according to a Sunday Times report. What’s your comment?

    (5) Denel has always maintained Fireblade had not complied with security measures and minutes of meetings and emails at which the issue of security was raised were attached in court papers. What is your comment?

    (6) One of the curious questions was always why Fireblade wasnt taking the Minister of Home Affairs to seek relief but rather Denel, which had no powers to approve the application. What is your comment?

    (7) The Sunday Times story speaks of a BEE partner of Fireblade’s, surely in appointing Fireblade, the BEE status of a company should be taken into consideration. Who are the BEE partners of Fireblade?

     

    To Fireblade:

     

    (1) How was Fireblade chosen to become the operator of this business?

     

    (2) Was there a tender issued and if yes, who were the other contenders for the operation?

     

    (3) If there was no tender, what criteria was used to award the operation to Fireblade?

     

    (4) In the original heads of arguments, Fireblade had solely blamed Denel but it emerges they are now blaming the Guptas, according to a Sunday Times report. What’s your comment?

     

    (5) Denel has always maintained Fireblade had not complied with security measures and minutes of meetings and emails at which the issue of security was raised were attached in court papers. As at 25 October 2015, Fireblade had still not complied with security requirements. To this effect I refer to you email to Diedericks’s email:

     

    “As per our discussions this morning, kindly be advised that we acknowledge the new security criteria presented to you by Denel security. Please assure your colleagues at Denel that Fireblade will endeavour to comply (as it is always our policy to do so), but it is a process (internally noting) the exorbitant cost implications involved”.

    (6) As per point (5) indicates and as you would have known, there were many incidents in which the issue of your non-compliance was raised in meetings. Did you raise this point with the Sunday Times and if not, why not?

    (6) You mention the exorbitant amount for security compliance. Kindly give me a break-down of this amount.

     

    (7) How many staff members do you have working for Fireblade and have you now complied  with security measures as required by the National Key Points Act?

     

    (8) Why have you only now served papers on Minister of Home Affairs when Denel questioned why you didnt in February? In their court papers it questioned why you served papers on it, when only the DHA had the powers to approve Fireblade’s application?

     

    (9) Who is Fireblade’s BEE partner?

     

    (10) Please confirm details of the Sunday Times story on the two pilots. Are these details contained in your court application against Denel?

     

    (11) In court papers against Denel, you mention that “Fireblade received a strong indication from the DHA that the application had been approved’. Can you elaborate on this. What is the “indication?”

     

    (12) Is an “indication” the same as an approval?

     

    (13) Clarify this please regarding your affidavit:

     

    13.1 – You received a message from pilot 1 from a Gupta family in November 2015 and in January 2016, Denel had “unreservedly confirmed its support for the FBO Project and invited the DHA to grant the application”.

    13.2 The understanding of the approval was “confirmed at its meeting with the DHA on 28 January 2016”

    13.3 In 11, in your replying affidavit you say “the trigger event for this application is patently the telephone call from DHA on 9 February 2016 in which Fireblade was advised of a further objection to its application” – Did the message of November 2015 from the Pilot not concern you

    1. In your application, lodged when you already had information from the pilot 1 (if the Sunday Times story is accurate), you dont mention it at all. Instead your reasons lie purely in  Denel’s objection to the application for an international port. Why didnt you use this information as proof of a sinister motive behind Denel’s Objection?
    1. Do you agree that by the time Fireblade launched court papers against Denel, the DHA had not made any final decisions. Yes or no?

     

     

  • The current ANC, ANC Veterans & stalwarts, Rupert, Oppenheimer, UDF and Save South Africa

    By Mxolisi ka Nkomonde

    The ANC adopted the Reconstruction Development Plan(RDP) as a blueprint to liberate the Black majority from the chains of colonialism and apartheid in 1994, but that revolutionary spirit to liberate the people was short lived.

    The Apartheid state was a socialist state but only for the white minority and RDP was an instrument to extend the social and industrial benefits to Black majority while re-integrating the South African economy to the global economy at a measured pace.

    A faction within the ANC largely from United Democratic Front and exiled ANC leaders decided to turn against the people they claimed to represent with the imposition of a policy called Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) through cabinet without any consultation with ANC, the Alliance and NEDLAC.

    GEAR, later dubbed “the 96 class project”, was essentially colonialism and apartheid 2.0 without the racist ideology hence South Africa still has 10% of the population, mainly White, that controls 90 – 95% of the wealth and receives 55-60% of all income.

    The imposition of GEAR was no accident as the history behind it goes back to the beginning of institutionalised racism called Apartheid ·

    • The National Party(NP) got into power in 1948 (same year the state of Israel was established with British assistance) with the help of the British through the NP’s Cape “verligte” faction to introduce Apartheid
    •  In 1958 the Transvaal “verkrampte” faction of NP dominated and took over leading to Henrik Verwoerd becoming prime minister
    • Verwoerd was a pure Afrikaner Nationalist but his racism was no different to the “verligte” or liberal faction of the NP. They only differed on economic policy with Verwoerd’s faction advocating for dirigist economics (state intervention to uplift Afrikaners) while the verligte were advocating for “free market” fundamentalism which is a code for the state subsiding British & emerging Afrikaner capital
    • The “verligte” faction of NP and the British founded South Africa Foundation (SAF) in 1959 as a counter force to the Verwoerd government and dirigist economics. The main focus was  to promote Apartheid as paradise to the global community in order to quell sanctions and global resistance in trading with the Apartheid regime while consolidating British & emerging Afrikaner capital through Oppenheimer and Rupert within the South African economy
    • South Africa Foundation together with Royal Institute of International Affairs also called Chatham House or Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) moved the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIR) in 1960 to Wits University to concentrate on influencing the Transvaal faction of the NP on various policy issues with major emphasis on economic and international relations
    • The South African founders of SAF namely Ernest Oppenheimer and Anton Rupert then joined forces with Rick Menell to establish Urban Foundation in 1977 to pursue their economic objectives on the “Urban Black” population and later within the Apartheid government since it had refused to be linked to this shadow unelected government for more than 30 years
    • Ernest Oppenheimer from SAF then funded United Democratic Front(UDF) after it was founded in 1983 since efforts to change policy direction of the NP were not happening at the required pace. He then identified the oppressed Black majority as a useful tool and major force in changing the economic trajectory for British and Afrikaner capital through a select group of leaders from UDF and exiled ANC leaders educated in Europe
    • Soweto Committee of Ten was founded in 1977 at the same time as Oppenheimer founded and funded Urban Foundation. This Committee of Ten sought to elect a new community board that would have total autonomy in Soweto including the powers to levy taxes and to control education, the police and local elections.  But it was merely a ploy to test SAF and Urban Foundation policy objectives on the Black population through collaborators. The Apartheid regime rejected this programme outright and kept the Bantu Administration Board as the authority
    • In 1986, select leaders and members from the UDF and the Committee of Ten formed an initiative called South African Centre for International Co-Operation (SACIC). They joined forces with an Israeli group called the Israel Centre for International Co-Operation(ICIC) and their objective was to increase anti-Apartheid activities in the Middle East, United States and South Africa with the aim of “training” future leaders for post-Apartheid South Africa. This clandestine initiative was funded by USAID and it trained 600 graduates who later occupied positions as members of parliament, NGO activists, trade union leaders, mayors and the cabinet under ANC government
    • Within a month after former president Nelson Mandela was released, the ANC, led by OR Tambo issued a report on 14 March 1990 called “Report of the Commission on the Cabal” which stated the following: “The problems of disunity within the ranks of the Mass Democratic Movement(MDM) due to the manipulating role of certain Indians and Whites regarded as leaders in the struggle, has reached a level of seriousness that it is clear that we need to address it immediately and decisively.” It went on further to say: “We firstly discussed the effect of the existence of the cabal within the UDF and were unanimous in our belief that it manipulates strategy, lacks democratic practices and stifles free and open debate necessary for the advancement of the struggle”
    • The ANC adopted the Reconstruction and Development Programme as an election manifesto and Economic Policy for the 1994 elections. The RDP was based on dirigist economics where the state would drive economic policy to uplift the Black majority since Blacks had no capital to begin with. It was therefore agreed upon by the dirigist economics faction within NP, ANC and the Alliance (COSATU and SACP)
    • South Africa Foundation together with Old Mutual publishes an economic policy document called “Gowth For All” which drives the same policies that the Apartheid regime refused to implement for 36years because they would impoverish Afrikaners and escalate the racial conflict which was already in place due to their evil Apartheid system
    • Growth For All later appears in cabinet through UDF and exiled ANC leaders as GEAR then imposed by the Mandela led government with Thabo Mbeki saying “Just call me a Thatcherite” since he was actually the head of government while Mandela was busy implementing the “rainbow nation” project which was a political programme to to soften Black rage and quell White fears at the same time
    • After Mandela retired Mbeki took over the reigns as state president. And soon thereafter, the South Africa Foundation was rebranded Business Leadership South Africa (BLSA) with new fronts such as the Oppenheimer founded and funded Brenthurst Initiative
    • Thabo Mbeki was re-elected in 2004 and be began a programme that dismantle GEAR because Blacks were getting worse-off . He therefore selectively answered the call of the ANC and the Alliance for a Developmental State which requires state intervention. Soon after taking this stance Mbeki became the demon in the white controlled media largely controlled by BLSA
    •  Mbeki was ousted as President of the ANC in December 2007 by a united force from SACP, COSATU, ANC “leftists” and ANC “reformers” who had gained substantially from Mbeki led GEAR which came with mega BEE deals but these “reformers” were unhappy with Mbeki’s inability to impose GEAR in full since their shares depended on it otherwise they sat with massive debt
    • Jacob Zuma takes the reigns as ANC president in 2009 then halts further implementation of GEAR but not without Trevor Manuel advancing some aspects of GEAR. Trevor Manuel then leads a Planning Commission which produced the National Development Plan(NDP) chaired by Cyril Ramaphosa who is a product of Urban Foundation
    • NDP is basically GEAR 2.0 so the Zuma administration has not implemented most parts of it besides the massive infrastructure programme and has chosen to implement elements of the dirigist policies inherited from Mbeki administration and improved by cabinet which has a lot of SACP and COSATU influence. This has created a situation where the Zuma administration has been demonised by the SAF controlled media using self inflicted scandals such as Nkandla and lately the Gupta allegations to conceal the real agenda. The demonisation of the Zuma administration has increased since the ANC held a National General Council in 2015 which outlines the ANC’s policy direction for its next policy and elective conference in 2017
    • A new initiative called Save South Africa has been established with support from ANC veterans and stalwarts who are largely beneficiaries of GEAR through BEE. Leaders of SaveSA & ANC veterans such Cheryl Carolus and Mavuso Msimang serve on the boards of Rupert’s World Wild Fund which is another front linked to Council on Foreign Relations and South Africa Foundation since the 60s. The Save South Africa campaign is the reincarnation of the UDF which OR Tambo raised an alarm about as early as 1990. So who should we Save South Africa From If We Want Prosperity for ALL irrespective of which political party governs.
  • Lessons for the DA: ANC unlike EFF, is not for sale

    By Pinky Khoabane

    anc

    The Democratic Alliance (DA)’s regime change campaign failed once again this past Thursday.

    It was always expected that unless there was a major split in the ANC, the chances of the DA and the EFF, with 22% and 6.5% respectively, could never have pushed through the motion of impeachment in the National Assembly even with the latest theatrics involving demands for the ANC to vote in a secret ballot.

    In their desperation to unseat the President, the opposition had pleaded for ANC MPs to vote in line with their conscience. But why would ANC MPs, mandated by 62% of the population in 2014, assist the opposition in going against the wishes of the electorate?

    The lesson, which the opposition doesn’t seem to be getting is that the ANC, unlike the Economic Freedom Front, will not assist it in taking power. The DAEFF project will have to go to the polls and win elections there.

    The other lesson the DA must learn is that when the ANC publicly criticises itself, it doesn’t mean it will allow the opposition, more so the DA, to gang-up against it and effect regime change. On the contrary, the DA’s interference in internal processes of the ANC has helped bring-about unity albeit short-lived.

    There are many disgruntled members of the ANC, and the local government elections of August 2016 have sent a clear message to that effect but the DA should never think those ANC faithful will help it usurp power from a legitimately and democratically elected party. As the DA saw in those elections and in the vote of no confidence, ANC faithful would rather not vote than vote for or with the DA.

    Buoyed by the preliminary findings of a hurriedly-put-together State Capture report and utterances by ANC-insiders like Jackson Mthembu and Mathole Motshekga, the DA thought it could use them to overthrow a legitimately and democratically elected president.

    The ANC has emphatically said that only its branches can overturn the mandate given to the person they choose to lead the movement.

    But beyond everything else, the ANC can see straight through the DA.

    IT was left to the Minister of Home Affairs, Malusi Gigaba to put it to the DA what they represent. He came out guns blazing: “Here we are again for a 05th frivolous attempt by the opposition since 2014 to win by stealth and cunning battles they had lost on the ground…..

    “For people who claim to respect democracy, the judiciary, rule of law and fairness to act in this fashion which demonstrates, on the contrary, their disdain for these fundamental Constitutional principles and values which our nation holds so dear betrays their disingenuity…

    “If the opposition believed in fairness and the rule of law, they would have welcomed the Public Protector’s Report in toto and instead of jumping the gun to call for a no confidence vote in the President, on the basis of an inconclusive report, they should have waited patiently for the Commission of Inquiry and what it will find.

    “However, the fact of the matter is that such patience does not exist among those eager to dispose of the ANC in order to defend racial privilege and supremacy.”

    But it was on the matter of the true battle in South Africa, an issue some of us have been making since the reshuffling of the finance ministers late last year – that Gigaba rammed into the DA. Our contention has always been that there’s a serious battle for South Africa’s economy wherein whites are desperately trying to hang-on to the wealth against a president who’s ruffling feathers by looking to the East and BRICS for partnerships.

    Gigaba adds:

    “The truth is that there is a bitter struggle in South Africa between the former oppressors and those whom they had oppressed, for the right and power to determine the political direction of this country as well as the ownership of its economic resources.

    “Throughout its existence, the system of white supremacy had been predicated on this very notion that in order to plunder South Africa’s natural resources, the white minority had to have the exclusive monopoly of political power in its hands.

    “At best, this motion is merely about political point scoring, but at worst, it is characteristic of the abhorrent ploys by the global empire and their local political hoodlums under guises of good governance and defending the Constitution and the rule of law to steal political power in order to defend, protect and advance their exclusive economic interests….

    “The CIA used this strategy in Iran in 1951 following a decision by the then Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh to nationalise Iranian oil, thus taking it away from a British company that was exploiting it and the Iranian people….

    “The modus operandi remains the same, driven by a cartel of global governments, local politicians, big global and domestic capital and corporations.

    At its heart, this is about the commercial interests of the rich and powerful who control the media and pay off local political actors, journalists and others in pursuit of their depraved agenda….

    Mossadegh’s crime in Iran was to reclaim their oil; Torijos’ crime in Panama was to reclaim the Panama Canal, Roldos’s crime in Ecuador was to defend their oil, and so were the crimes of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya and Saddam Husein in Iraq.

    In our case, our extensive mineral wealth, BRICS and the prospective nuclear power station in South Africa lie at the heart of the regime-change offensive we are subjected to.

    Accepting this agenda and not opposing it to the very death will be our biggest folly”.

    And then this parting shot:

    “We will oppose this vote, not because, as we have said it, we take lightly the issues of corruption, integrity and transparency, but because we cannot join the regime change and economic plunder campaign of your global and domestic masters.

    You may be their puppets, but we are not!”

    Here’s Gigaba’s full speech

    http://www.dha.gov.za/index.php/statements-speeches/890-speech-by-the-minister-of-home-affairs-malusi-gigaba-mp-during-the-vote-of-no-confidence-debate-in-the-national-assembly-on-10-november-2016

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Is it just a coincidence? You decide

    Reaction to Brian Molefe’s resignation captured social media last night but one which caught mine is this one from Sanele Sano Ngcobo

    is-it-a-coincidence

    Is it just a coincidence? You decide

    1. March 2015 Thuli Madonsela received honorary Doctor of Law Degree from Stellenbosch University and Johann Rupert is a Chancellor at this University

    2. In June 2016 University of Stellenbosch offered Adv Thuli a position as a chair in social justice at the Law Faculty

    3. 2016 Sunday Tmes Top 100 Companies Awards

    It was so interesting following Sunday Times awards. Minister of Finance Pravin Gordhan received Business Leader of the Year award, J Rupert received Lifetime Achievement award. The following people also delivered speeches there: Adv Thuli Madonsela, Rupert, Trevor Manuel & Hon Thabo Mbeki. Mcebisi Jonas was also there.

    4. State Capture report was first released on Sunday Times, before it was officially released

    5. Rupert family hosted Trevor Manuel’s wedding at one of their vineyards in Stellenbosch

    6. Thuli Madonsela independently announced in August 2011 that she would investigate of of Ciex’s Report claims, that implicated the Ruperts of more than R3 billion fraud and corruption. We are still waiting for her report

     

Close
Close