It is not about Loughner or Palin, its about the Republic

Think back to the 2008 elections. How did Barack Obama, almost a complete unknown, become suddenly elevated to such a position that he could win the Presidency? The mainstream media and the political forces that underwrite Obama worked together and he was elected. A far left socialist mentored by extremists and with a political viewpoint that confronted the idea of American exceptionalism was made President. It was clear to any objective observer that Obama was elected by cultural Marxists to take America down the same road as Europe.

The realisation that Obama was leading an attack on America from within, and that the mainstream media were his troopers, led to the growth of counter forces. First of all, it was recognised that an objective and informative mainstream media no longer existed. It was gone and in its place was a leftist propaganda machine. The forces that arose to counter this perversion of democracy were the internet, talk radio and FOX News cable television. Most important of all, we got the Tea Party, a spontaneous uprising of Constitutional government mainstream Americans. These were the conduits for ideas the left would not otherwise allow into the mainstream.

These ideas were aimed at retaining and reinforcing America’s exceptionalism. They included a return to the importance of Constitutional governance. They emphasized the importance of the Republic. All ideas that run strictly counter to Barack Obama’s ideas for America to become just another social democracy in a UN controlled world. The people who spoke about these things were (among others) Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

The left seethed. There had to be a way for them to silence this strong opposition. To maintain and expand their otherwise complete control of the political debate. The success of the Obama plan, the conversion of the US from a Republic into a European style social democracy, depended upon it. The prize was slipping away.

A madman with a gun killed six people and injured 12 others in Arizona. The leftist propaganda machine leapt to use the event to attack the forces that threaten their control. The same forces that brought Obama from relative obscurity to US President now conspired and acted to bring down those who had become a serious impediment to their plans. The leftist power bloc of Democrats and media blamed Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and the Tea Partiers.

This is not about Jared Loughner or Sarah Palin anymore. This is a naked display of hostility towards America by traitors who have conspired to destroy the Republic from within. Recent widespread attacks on the Constitution have confirmed it. These traitors are asking that “the violent rhetoric” be stopped. There never was any violent rhetoric, except from them. Especially when they try to smear Conservatives as accessories to murder.

Roger Ailles (FOX News owner) asked that his presenters tone down the rhetoric. He’s wrong. Completely wrong. Because he is allowing traitors to frame the debate. The truth is there needs to be much more said and its needs to be said louder and it needs to be directed at those who are leading the campaign to close down political debate in order to destroy the Republic.

Wake up America. You are being defeated from within. Never has there been a more naked display of treason and treachery as the latest attacks on freedom of political expression and pro-Constitutional forces. You are on the cusp of losing your Republic. If you do not strongly confront the left right now, then you will loose it.

It is not time for toning anything down. It is time to speak louder and stronger and to step up to the plate and take your country back from a fifth column of traitors and treasonists who have converted the mainstream media and the Democrat Party into an insidious un-American force for evil. You absolutely must repel this force if you wish to retain your Republic. Do not under any circumstances, tone down your resistance. Rather, you must redouble your efforts.

By Redbaiter at TrueblueNZ

http://truebluenz.wordpress.com/2011/01/11/it-is-not-about-loughner-or-palin-its-about-the-republic/#comment-1235

For the Gantt Guy

Charlize....an angel of devine beauty.

Gratuitous Totty

Corrupt, corrupt, corrupt.

R44bn disappears

Three of the country's provincial education departments cannot explain what they did with more than R44-billion allocated to them in the past financial year.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/article705988.ece/R44bn-disappears

Most of the Education budget, R123bn, is allocated to the 9 provinces. The office of the Auditor General has stated that, of the nine, only three of the country's provincial education departments were given clean audits for the 2009-2010 financial year.

That R44bn could buy a lot of health care, housing and infrastructure maintenance and development.

South Africa 100 years old

On 31st May 1910 the Union of South Africa came into existence.

In the aftermath of the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902), Britain annexed the South African Republic and the Orange Free State, two hitherto independent Afrikaner Republics, and renamed them the Transvaal Colony and the Orange River Colony respectively. They were added to Britain's existing South African territories, the Cape Colony and Colony of Natal.

The Union of these British Colonies was the result of nine years of negotiations and represented a great victory for peacemaking following the destructive and bitter war. This Union was created by the passage of The South Africa Act of 1909 by the British Parliament. A bicameral parliament was created, consisting of a House of Assembly and Senate, and its members were elected mostly by the country's white minority.

This Act, which essentially brought into being the South African state as it is known today, served as the South African constitution until 1961, when South Africa became a Republic and left the Commonwealth. The basic structure of the 1909 Act continued to live on in its replacement, the Republic of South Africa Constitution Act (1961).

This was again replaced by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act (1983) in which a tricameral Paliament was constituted, essentially done to give the Indian and Coloured (mixed race) population the vote. The Black population were to exercise their vote through independent Black States created on a tribal basis.

Following the unbanning of the ANC and the PAC, and the release of Nelson Mandela in 1990, in a referendum held on March 17, 1992 the white electorate voted 68% in favour of dismantling apartheid through negotiations.

After protracted negotiations under the auspices of the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA), a draft contitution appeared on 26 July 1993, containing concessions towards all sides: a federal system of regional legislaturs, equal voting-rights regardless of race, and a bicameral legislature. In April 1994 the South African population voted in the first universal sufferage general election.

In 1996, after considerable debate, and following submissions from advocacy groups, individuals and ordinary citizens, the Parliament enacted a new Constitution and a Bill of Rights.

The killing of Eugène Terre'Blanche

If you want to understand the ramifications of the murder the AWB leader Eugène Terre'Blanche (ET), this release by the SAIRR will put it, and the current state of the political scene in SA, in perspective.

ET was a racist who had a very small following and who had the unrealistic ideal of a separate Afrikaner or Boer 'homeland'. However the tension between the races in SA has been increased over the last few weeks by the president of the ANC Youth League's continual use of the song 'Kill the Boer'. This was taken to Court where it was ruled to be hate speech. Subsequently the ANC came out in defense of its use.

The SAIRR was an ardent critic of the 'Apartheid' government.


The South African Institute of Race Relations Press release

The Institute desisted from issuing a formal statement in the immediate aftermath of the killing of Mr Terre'Blanche in order to first gauge the broader social, political, and international reaction to the killing. The Institute is now in a position to make the following points.

Racial tensions in the country appear to have increased significantly in recent weeks. This appears to be chiefly as a result of incitement by the ruling African National Congress to ‘shoot and kill’ the Afrikaner ethnic minority in the country. The anxiety around this incitement may well have influenced opinions across the broader white community. What appears to be the case is that much of the racial rapprochement that characterised the first 15 years of South Africa’s democracy is being undone. This rapprochement saw both black and white South Africans come to occupy a middle ground on race relations upon which the maintenance of future stable race relations depends.

Since 1994 the number of white farmers and their families murdered in South Africa is conservatively put at around 1 000. It may very well be much higher. There are currently an estimated 40 000 commercial farmers in the country. Over this same period in the region 250 000 South Africans out of a total current population of approximately 47 million have been murdered. Criminal violence can therefore be described as ‘rampant’ and has done considerable damage to the social fabric of the country. However, this is not to say that all murders in the country are a function of simple criminal banditry. In an environment where law and order has largely collapsed the consequences of incitement by political leaders to commit murder must be taken seriously.

Over the same period the policy measures put in place by the Government to raise the living standards of the black majority have failed to meet expectations. The key interventions of affirmative action and black economic empowerment have been exploited by the African National Congress to build a network of patronage that has made elements of its leadership extremely wealthy. The party also appears to have been so overwhelmed by corrupt tendencies that it is no longer able to act decisively against corrupt behaviour.

It has also through incompetence and poor policy been unable to address failures in the education system which are now the primary factor retarding the economic advancement of black South Africans.

At the same time the party is acutely aware that its support base of poor black South Africans has begun to turn against it. Violent protest action against the ruling party is now commonplace around the country.

In order to shore up support in the black community the ANC increasingly appears to be seeking to shift the blame for its delivery failures onto the small white ethnic minority, which today comprises well under 10% of the total population ofSouth Africa. Here parallels may be read to the behaviour of Zanu-PF in Zimbabwe when that party realised that its political future was in peril. The ANC Youth League’s recent visit to Zanu-PF which saw it endorse that party’s ruinous polices are pertinent here.

In such an environment it is plausible to consider that the ANC’s exhortations to violence may be a contributing factor to the killing of Mr Terre'Blanche. Certainly the ANC’s protestations to the contrary seem ridiculous as the party is in effect saying that its followers pay no attention to what it says - this from a party that routinely claims that it is the manifestation of the will of all black South Africans. This is not to say that a labour dispute or some other matter could not have inflamed tensions on the Terre'Blanche farm. Rather it is to say that a number of different matters should be considered in determining the motivation for the crime.

Certainly the ANC’s exhortations to violence have created a context where the killings of white people will see a degree of suspicion falling around the party and its supporters.

It is of concern therefore that the police’s senior management are on record as saying that they will not consider a political motive or partial motive for the killing of MrTerre'Blanche. This suggests an early effort to cover up the ANC’s possible culpability for inciting the crime.Should any allegations of a political cover-up arise in the pending murder trial of the two young men accused of the Terre'Blanche murder the political consequences could be significant.

Should evidence be led that the two young men acted with what they understood to be the tacit backing of the ANC, and a causal link between their actions and incitement by the ANC be established, then the possibility of charging the ANC’s senior leadership in connection to the murder arises. Equally plausible is that the Terre'Blanche family and the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging could bring a civil suit against the ANC and the Government.

It is possible that the killing of Mr Terre'Blanche will greatly strengthen the hand of a new hardened right wing in South Africa. In life Mr Terre'Blanche attracted a small, uninfluential, and extremist following. He will not be mourned for what he stood for. However, in death he may come to represent the experiences of scores of minority groups in the country who perceive themselves as being on the receiving end of racist and now also violent abuse from the ANC. In effect therefore MrTerre'Blanche may be seen as having been martyred for a minority cause in the country.

The implications of a resurgent right wing will be numerous. It is most unlikely that this right wing will take the form of camouflage clad henchmen on horses in shows of force. The ANC has also often, wrongly, identified groups including the political opposition, Afriforum, agricultural unions, and even this Institute as ‘the right wing’. This silly ‘red under every bed’ attitude in the ANC saw it lose the trust of many civil society and political groups. These groups could all be defined first and foremost by the common belief that they had to act within the bounds of what the Constitution prescribed.

But the ANC belittled and undermined them. It also undermined parliament, the national prosecution service, and the various human rights and other organisations that were established under the Constitution. It may yet usurp the independence of the courts and the judiciary. The result was a shutting down of many of the democratic channels that were created for citizens in the country to make the Government aware of their concerns and circumstances.

The resurgence of a new political consciousness among minorities could drive an altogether different political force. Such a movement will draw its strength chiefly from a hardening attitudes in the white community but perhaps also in the Indian and coloured communities. These will be views that in the main have come to subscribe to some or all of the following points:

1. That the Government has corrupted and debilitated many of the country’s internal democratic processes for political or civil expression that were established under the Constitution

2. That cooperation with the current Government of South Africa is therefore fundamentally unfeasible and therefore futile

3. That the Government is unable to restore law and order in the country

4. That the Government is therefore unable protect its citizens

5. That the Government has a hostile agenda against minority groups

However it is equally, if not most likely, that many minorities who subscribe to the five points above may simply get so fed up that those who can will pack up and go. Here they may take the advice of President Zuma to remain calm as they pack up their businesses and their families and calmly board aircraft for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and Great Britain. With the exodus will leave much of the tax and expertise base of the country.

Should the ANC, however, find itself facing increased political resistance it will in many respects have a tiger by the tail. Firstly, the ANC depends greatly on the tax income paid by white South Africans to balance South Africa’s books. Secondly, it depends entirely on the food produced by a small number of white farmers to feed the country. Thirdly, white South Africans still dominate the skills base of the country. Finally, and most importantly, much white opinion since the early 1990s has been moderate. White South Africa has been willing and often eager to cooperate with the Government in building an open, non-racial, and prosperous South Africa. Losing that cooperation will to an extent put an end to any serious chance that the ANC has of leading South Africa to become a successful and prosperous democracy.

While the ANC will be inclined to blame whites for this, and may even take drastic action to confiscate white commercial interests as they are currently doing in agriculture, these actions will be ruinous for the economy. The result of such ruin will be to drive a deeper wedge between the ANC and its traditional support base and thereby hasten the political decay of the party.

When General Constand Viljoen decided to throw his lot in with democracy in the early 1990s the right wing in South Africa was a spent force. So it should and could have remained. The ANC could have taken advantage of white expertise and tax revenue to realise their own vision of a better life for all. Things have however gone badly wrong for the party. Corruption has destroyed its ability to meet the demands of its constituents while racial bigotry has now seen it defending its image against what should have been an insignificant and dying neo-Nazi faction in the country.

The failure of sensible South Africans to take back the racial middle ground in the country will be serious. Polarisation will beget further racial conflict and a hardening of attitudes on all sides. This is perhaps the greatest leadership test that the current Government has faced and it is one that they cannot afford to fail.