PDA

View Full Version : Gun grabbing in South Africa


smarter
02-10-2010, 6:10 PM
http://cnn.com/video/?/video/international/2010/02/09/inside.africa.gun.amnesty.bk.a.cnn

Another "gun free" country.

Shotgun Man
02-10-2010, 7:05 PM
The guy in the karate suit should turn in his gun if he's thinking of using them against himself or his family, as he states.

His main complaint is the dire economy. That would be a primary reason for him to hang on to his guns.

CNN offered no counter-point, just cheer-leaded the government's program.

Sad to see.

mstlaurent
02-10-2010, 7:11 PM
Yeah. I lived down there for two years, and I still have friends I talk to living down there. It's bad. After the elections the new government passed a law that revoked all existing gun licenses, then dragged their feet on issuing new licenses. So they got their defacto gun ban. Their only saving grace was that the police were so busy trying to keep themselves alive against gangs of thugs with AKs, they didn't have time to go after unlicensed gun owners.

It was truly amazing. The gangs would rob police stations. Ten guys with AKs would go into a substation that had one or two police officers on duty, put them down on the floor and take their guns and cash box. Unreal.

doug4747
02-10-2010, 7:17 PM
Over 8000 lost by law enforcement from their own supplies? Even Barney Fife could have done better. Amnesty for turning in illegal guns provided ballistics doesn't come back linking to a crime.
I have worked with a few guys from SA, and some of the stories are true about violence etc, but they also told me that if one stays away from the wrong areas, the violence is no different than here.

mbuna
02-10-2010, 7:33 PM
1. Apparently it's o.k. in South Africa to admit in a police station, in front of an officer, that you were considering killing not only yourself, but you have thoughts that your children might be "better off dead". Hopefully they made this man turn in his kitchen knives, rocks, table legs, pillow cases and toxic under sink cleaning solutions too.

2. Why do I have my doubts that a man would turn in a drum style shotgun because he was afraid someone might enter his house, steal it and harm somebody with it?

3.CNN diversity training at its finest + all talking points represented.

Dear South Africa,
Look north to the rest of your continent and consider a more balanced approach to your problem.

Seesm
02-10-2010, 8:01 PM
SA sucks safety wise... Serious

My old roomate was a Supercross champ from there... He lives here now... Not safe at all.. nThey should hand out guns to law abliding people.

bigstick61
02-10-2010, 8:07 PM
The minorities in South Africa knew this was going to happen when apartheid ended. The only reason it did not happen sooner was because the ANC wanted to avoid an uprising or coup attempt, as it would, with reason, be viewed as the beginning of an ethnic cleansing effort, like what happened in Rhodesia after the fall (another place where guns were banned after the Marxists gained power).

While petty apartheid was completely unjustifiable, grand aparthied is much harder to criticize. At the least, that country should have stayed under minority rule. Now the country is suffering the consequences. The international community and the UN certainly were not helpful (quite the opposite; South Africa was one of their whipping boys).

Suvorov
02-11-2010, 12:06 PM
This video is so sad on so many levels, from the plight of post apartheid SA to the gross media bias in advancing a globalist agenda.

7x57
02-11-2010, 12:27 PM
I didn't find the article, but Mas Ayoob and his daughter visited SA during Apartheid. They were classed as "colored," but had no trouble at all carrying. Much safer than after.

When a freedom-loving guy like Mas felt safer while treated as "second-class," you know things have really gone South.

7x57

vantec08
02-11-2010, 12:35 PM
The emerging african nations were better off under colonial rule. When the colonials left, they reverted right back to internecine tribal warfare.

GuyW
02-11-2010, 7:08 PM
marxist #$%^hole....my hope is that all the SA marxists and socialists get necklaced....
.

CalNRA
02-11-2010, 9:10 PM
I have seen all kinds of people leaving SA, every blacks, in droves.

No one wins when the Zulu and Xhosas get in a tribal war.

abusalim81
02-11-2010, 9:39 PM
Perhaps instead of Europeans coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, robbing and raping it, they should have stayed away and let the Africans be!
After all, thats how globalist agenda was born, minority dictating to the majority...

It's interesting to hear people say that Apartheid was a good thing... I wonder how many of these same people would be okay with United Nations coming to dictate over America?

I guess when the shoe is on the other foot then all of the sudden it becomes a patriotic duty of every red blooded American to fight the invaders!

Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!

:D <<< Better put one of those smiley faces so people dont get upset about my opinion.

7.62x54R
02-11-2010, 10:32 PM
Not my fault SA is full of savages who cannot control themselves.

bigstick61
02-11-2010, 10:46 PM
Perhaps instead of Europeans coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, robbing and raping it, they should have stayed away and let the Africans be!
After all, thats how globalist agenda was born, minority dictating to the majority...

It's interesting to hear people say that Apartheid was a good thing... I wonder how many of these same people would be okay with United Nations coming to dictate over America?

I guess when the shoe is on the other foot then all of the sudden it becomes a patriotic duty of every red blooded American to fight the invaders!

Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!

:D <<< Better put one of those smiley faces so people dont get upset about my opinion.

If you want to know how it feels to have the UN try to come over and dictate, just ask a South African. In this case the UN was actually backed by most of its members. Ultimately, under apartheid, there was dramatically lower crime, more order, less violence and strife, more economic prosperity (in spite of sanctions), more national prestige and power, more territory, better resource management, more freedom for minorities, and in some areas even more freedom for Africans, and less corruption. The main issue were the racist aspects of petty apartheid, which were done away with ater 1994, but of course discrimination now has simply turned the other away around (which was predictable). There was certainly less gun control and the use of force laws were such that they would be the envy of nearly every State in the Union (it even preserved the right of retaliation when it came to defensive use of firearms; the attacker fleeing did not mean he was out of the water).

And Europeans have been living in South Africa for a few centuries now, and the area they settled in was actually either unoccupied, or only occupied by bushmen, which the Europeans got along with. Eventually the Bantu speaking peoples move south through Rhodesia and then into South Africa, and given their warlike nature, clashes were inevitable, and the Europeans won fair and square. When it comes down to it, apartheid was a result of the Afrikaaner nationalism which spawned out of their mistreatment by the British during the Boer Wars and the atrocities committed by the British against them, and also by the advent of the British policy of NIBMAR (No Independence Before Majority Rule) along with rapid decolonization, the aftermath of which was very predictable, especially given the NIBMAR policy.

CalNRA
02-11-2010, 11:12 PM
For a future version of South Africa, See Zimbabwe.

bigstick61
02-12-2010, 12:28 AM
For a future version of South Africa, See Zimbabwe.

Pretty much. They just won't get there quite as quickly. I remember Jeff Cooper referencing a poll in his Commentaries that was taken in Salisbury (Harare) in the late 1990s where the majority of those living there, blacks included (they were the predominant ethnic group in the poll), said they would prefer for Ian Smith to come back to power than to stay under the rule of Mugabe and his party.

CCWFacts
02-12-2010, 5:29 AM
I have a picture of me in front of a nightclub in Joburg with a "gun check" area, just like clubs here might have a coat check.

Their new leadership is determined to bring SA into equality with its starving neighbors.

7x57
02-12-2010, 5:44 AM
Mmm. Merits aside, recall that we're big-league now. Do you guys want the news report to be "California gun nuts support apartheid"? I don't think you do.

The story here is not the success of apartheid, it is the abject failure of the ANC to govern. And, some might say, the abject failure of their ideology to permit them to do anything other than fail.

7x57

GuyW
02-12-2010, 6:59 AM
Perhaps instead of Europeans coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, robbing and raping it, they should have stayed away and let the Africans be!




Absolutely! Those African natives were so much better off when they lived in mud huts, engaged in constant tribal warfare, and were robbed and raped by warlords...

Damn Europeans screwing up Sangri-La...

(this is not to be construed as supporting apartheid...)
.

CCWFacts
02-12-2010, 8:19 AM
Mmm. Merits aside, recall that we're big-league now. Do you guys want the news report to be "California gun nuts support apartheid"? I don't think you do.

The story here is not the success of apartheid, it is the abject failure of the ANC to govern. And, some might say, the abject failure of their ideology to permit them to do anything other than fail.

Yeah, Apartheid was bad, but it was better at running their economy than the ANC's socialist thugocracy system. That's not an opinion, that's an objective fact. SA's economic situation was better for everyone under Apartheid than it is now under the ANC, and the ANC's policies have also succeeded in driving out the most capable and productive people from the country.

They went from one system (Apartheid) that was soul-crushing, but ran a fairly good economy, to another system (thug-socialism) which is also soul-crushing and is lousy at running an economy and has no reluctance to let a million of its people die of AIDS by denying them medicines and so on.

The only question being debated is, did it go from bad to bad, or from bad to worse?

DavidRSA
02-12-2010, 8:34 AM
As a South African who experienced the worst of the violence and seeing how scary Soviet style revolutionaries can be FIRST HAND, and experienceing the violence and mayhem FIRST HAND and knowing what it is like to fear for your life and your family's every day, carrying a sidearm at all times because it was likely you would need it....I am appalled at some of the pro-apartheid statements expressed here.

Because the apartheid government was so brutal and inhumane; it deliberately ensured that the black population would not become a professional class by removing sciences and maths from education, and barely funding education. The apartheid government funded death squads that stirred up tribal warfare. The policy of apartheid was to move the black populations into tribal reservations and would forceably remove people from their homes and relocate them to these reservations. Mineworkers could not bring their families to the cities where they worked and lived in inhumane conditions. I could go on and on.

So for all posting how superior the apartheid government was for infrastructure, industry, etc, well...lets look to Germany under Adolf. Very well run. Efficient. Industrious. If that is the yardstick to go by then by all means the apartheid government was really great.

On another note....Imagine if the Chinese came to the US and overtook it and gave everyone health care and awesome highways without toll roads and no traffic jams and electrical grids that never failed and security that would never allow any terrorist into the country and got rid of crime and made tax rate 10%...( of course we wouldn't get to vote and have our freedoms...) if they could govern so much better than us in the hypothetical scenario, then by some previous posters' logic, their occupation of the US would be justifiable.

To quote the one guy who posted here that I wholeheartedly agree with....
"Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!"



Perhaps instead of Europeans coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, robbing and raping it, they should have stayed away and let the Africans be!
After all, thats how globalist agenda was born, minority dictating to the majority...

It's interesting to hear people say that Apartheid was a good thing... I wonder how many of these same people would be okay with United Nations coming to dictate over America?

I guess when the shoe is on the other foot then all of the sudden it becomes a patriotic duty of every red blooded American to fight the invaders!

Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!

:D <<< Better put one of those smiley faces so people dont get upset about my opinion.

stag1500
02-12-2010, 9:06 AM
Perhaps instead of Europeans coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, robbing and raping it, they should have stayed away and let the Africans be!

I couldn't agree with you more. I feel the same way about the Middle East. We should pull ALL our troops out of that region and let them go to hell on their own.

Glock22Fan
02-12-2010, 10:37 AM
After the elections the new government passed a law that revoked all existing gun licenses, then dragged their feet on issuing new licenses.


And this is why so many of us scream when some people say "Well, perhaps if we gave way on reasonable gun registration, then we might win on . . . ."

No licensing, no registration, no mass confiscations.
__________________________________________________ ___________

As far as apartheid is concerned, many of us hated apartheid, but hated even more the certain knowledge that there would be a bloodbath afterwards.

If a city/state in, say, mid America decided to ignore all the accepted rules of civilized behavior and started killing and eating each other, and the local officials and cops were a large part of the problem, would we say "It is their democratic right to live like that, it is not our place to interfere if that is what they want?"

I sure hope not. We would demand that the Feds move in and stop it happening. What's different when it is on a global scale, reading country for city/state and UN for Feds?

I'm not necessarily saying that people should be ruled for their own good, whether they want that or not, but I have a problem dealing with two conflicting desires here.

How should we move towards a global village?

7x57
02-12-2010, 10:57 AM
I'm not interested in a global village, because I don't belong to any political groupings that do not acknowledge the supremacy of the US Constitution. In this global village can I give a gun to a good person in another country threatened by crime or his own government? Never happen--we've even signed treaties to that effect.

The problem with the "the ANC is doing a worse job" argument is what that is supposed to prove. I'm sort of surprised to hear gunnies use the anti-gunner's "public safety justifies nullifying liberties" argument, or at least saying things that can be construed that way. While the ANC is certainly anti-liberty, so was apartheid, and I don't see the great value in attempting to quantify infringements or compare oppression. More importantly, I see the great political disadvantage in trying this in a public forum, just as the left was able to portray opposition to the ANC's disastrous ideology as support for racism. That isn't a winnable fight no matter who is right, so why fall into the other guy's trap?

The following anecdote implies a lot of what I I have to say about SA. A black woman once mentioned the physical hazards of slavery, and so I pointed out that being white wasn't always the advantage some imagine--Irishmen were often used for jobs too risky to do by slave labor (I seem to recall firemen on Mississippi steamboats tended to be Irish for this reason), because there was no disadvantage if the Irishman died. A slave's life had more value than an Irishman's. She thought about that and said she'd still rather be the Irishman, and I said "exactly, because independence and control of your own existence is more important than safety."

However one wants to compare apartheid with the disaster of the ANC dystopia, Americans of all people should not make the mistake of assuming that physical safety is the most important fact of existence. If that were so, the American revolution would be a lunatic act, and the rebels were quite open about that.

7x57

CalNRA
02-12-2010, 2:22 PM
To quote the one guy who posted here that I wholeheartedly agree with....
"Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!"

you are right. No one should be oppressing anyone in South Africa. Its post apartheid days are just fine.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7407914.stm

CCWFacts
02-12-2010, 2:37 PM
However one wants to compare apartheid with the disaster of the ANC dystopia, Americans of all people should not make the mistake of assuming that physical safety is the most important fact of existence.

No, but the ANC thugtopia is its own form of slavery. It's Apartheid reloaded, now with more poverty.

gun toting monkeyboy
02-12-2010, 2:48 PM
Wow. I didn't realize that people forget history so quickly. Saying "but things ran well under apartheid" sounds a hell of a lot like saying "But the trains were always on time and crime was low under Hitler/Stalin/Mussilini" Sure, some things ran smoothly. Because they would kill people who didn't go along with the program. And anybody who thinks that the majority of people were better off under a system that dehumanized a huge portion of the population needs to seriously re-examine their priorities in life. Apartheid was just as evil and vile as any other fascist or totalitarian state. And it is so incredibly inappropriate and stupid to stand up in a public forum and say "but it wasn't that bad" or "it was better for the blacks" or any other such mindless blather when the opposition would love nothing more to paint us as a bunch of knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, racist redneck @$$ho!es who are to dumb to give up our guns and join them in singing Kumbaya around their socialist campfires. Think before you post people! And read some of the first hand accounts of what people went through under that government before you try to look at it through the rose-colored glasses of Right versus Left history. Just because the apartheid government was against communism, Marxism and socialism doesn't automatically make the the guys in white hats. More like the guys in white, pointy hoods.

-Mb

Bhobbs
02-12-2010, 2:58 PM
They are slowly returning to their roots. The tribes with the weapons (police and government agencies) control everyone else. How is that any different than what it used to be?

Glock22Fan
02-12-2010, 2:59 PM
Apartheid followed by post-apartheid is a terrible situation superceded by a horrific situation.

Certainly in most parts of Africa now, I think they would/should welcome our constitution - but they don't have it. They are certainly not free from cruel and unusual punishments, not free to speak freely, not free from illegal search and definitely not free to pursue happiness, so what do they get out of it? The jackboots have changed ownership and become more repressive.

We should applaud that they are not being downtrodden by whites? Instead they are being downtrodden by their own kind.

I usually agree with 7x57, but here he criticizes gunnies who say "public safety justifies nullifying liberties" (incidently, I actually never said that, I don't think). But these people are getting neither at present; the current regimes in most African countries give them neither safety nor liberties.

Do I know what the answer is? No. But surely this is far from ideal.


Since the end of apartheid, migrants from across Africa have gone to South Africa, attracted by its relative prosperity.



Is this a coincidence?

IGOTDIRT4U
02-12-2010, 3:01 PM
S. Africa also gave up their nuclear weapons without hardly a fight. Guess they got soft after the second Boer war...

Hoop
02-12-2010, 3:52 PM
Apartheid guaranteed that whatever Gov't came afterwards would be hellish. You can't take a system that oppresses a large number of people, turn it on it's head, and expect it to keep "working."

I have friends and relatives from Joburg and some place called Kimberlay who have horror stories about living there. It is NOT "just like living" here.

7x57
02-12-2010, 3:58 PM
Certainly in most parts of Africa now, I think they would/should welcome our constitution - but they don't have it.


They will not get it, either. It would require winners who didn't want to just take over control themselves. Those who win do not generally create a system where no one will ever have as much power as those they defeated, because it isn't in their interest. I leave aside how this happened for us--suffice it to say that history shows it is extremely difficult to repeat, and absolutely impossible for socialist rebels.

I'm not sure it would be welcomed, either--our Constitution was written by and for men with a particular ideology of freedom and assumes its continued existence. It's not clear that we can retain enough of it to stay within the rule of the Constitution, so how could we expect someone with a different ideology to even want to make it work?


what do they get out of it? The jackboots have changed ownership and become more repressive.


The recurrent revolutionary situation often ends with the pigs being more repressive than the farmer ever was. But somehow the politics of envy and a very strong feeling of "at least they're *our* tyrants" makes people more accepting of this than one would wish. Animal Farm isn't such a bad analogy--it doesn't deny that the farmer was a tyrant, only that the pigs were the right answer.

Or consider present-day England. Not a country with much in the way of liberty, only more comfort. I expect Britons would still fight for her against foreign invaders, though, in spite of the slow train-wreck of their internal politics. I'm sure plenty of the ANC's supporters feel the same way--I hope the price of that victory is not unbearable now.

Note the quote by Orwell in my .sig--he was one of us, in spite of some of his politics. Also note the context was his work with the Home Guard in WWII, so his wish for the future was utterly and completely denied. It isn't easy, and we can't feel smug about doing better yet.


We should applaud that they are not being downtrodden by whites? Instead they are being downtrodden by their own kind.


Understand that this is precisely what the left believes should be applauded, and in the court of public opinion they have won. We can't really change that. The clear pattern is that more oppression by a liberal protected class is superior to less oppression by a deprecated class. (Not saying there is overall more now than before--I have no way of judging. But if there is it would not affect their opinion.)

It's also possible that the majority of South Africans still agree, just as the arabs will fight for the right to suffer under their own tyrants rather than be "liberated" by contemptible "Christians" and Westerners. And I suppose that is their right--I don't think much of nation-building or doing good for people by force. I never understood how people could so misunderstand an honor-shame culture as to believe that we'd be terribly welcome in Iraq, and it wouldn't surprise me if many in SA also feel the dishonor of being a second- or third-class citizen under apartheid was worse than the physical danger of crime. Our founders agreed, BTW.


I usually agree with 7x57, but here he criticizes gunnies who say "public safety justifies nullifying liberties" (incidently, I actually never said that, I don't think). But these people are getting neither at present; the current regimes in most African countries give them neither safety nor liberties.


It seemed implied in what some said, but I didn't intend to name names or point fingers specifically.

At some point perhaps South Africa had a way out that would have genuinely created more liberty instead of reapportioning the misery, but if so I don't see how it could happen now.

7x57

CCWFacts
02-12-2010, 6:16 PM
Good post there 7x57. You make some good points which I hadn't thought through.

7x57
02-12-2010, 11:51 PM
Good post there 7x57. You make some good points which I hadn't thought through.

Thanks. I thought more afterwards and realized I hadn't pushed the conclusion quite through, which is why I was not satisfied when I wrote it. What I think my argument leads to is that the ideology of the American revolution says being classed as a second-class citizen gives you the moral right to rebel, which would certainly apply to the non-white South Africans. And since the founders were still classical thinkers in many ways who believed that honor and courage were objective virtues, they would have also said that only a coward would refuse to exercise the right--a man worthy of respect would resist and accept an honorable death if the opportunity occurs. So if we accept the morality of the American revolution, we have to also accept the morality and even necessity of resisting apartheid by force, though on different grounds than most people would argue.

History shows that the ANC's ideology was not something to put any faith in, but we can't expect the South African masses to understand that when apparently Americans do not either. And the socialist/communist alliance was (so far as I know) the only group which offered a realistic possibility of fighting. So to be consistent I think I must say that it was better and more honorable to resist and trust the throw of the die than be a coward and bend the neck to the yoke. Unfortunately, the universe seems to have kicked a lot of people in the teeth for doing the courageous thing. That is unfair, but then only children and liberals think life has to be fair.

The converse of having the courage to risk rebellion by your own free choice is accepting the consequences of freedom.

Now I don't have an uneasy feeling of not having finished the argument, at least. :D

7x57

nrakid88
02-13-2010, 12:00 AM
Wow...

"Half of all murders are caused by guns"

Didn't even try to hide it, she just came out right off the bat with her bias... wow... Guns cause crime, clocks cause my aging, and a spoon is why oprah is fat.[/CNN] (please god)

crin63
02-13-2010, 6:48 AM
It seems to me that all they want to do is take the guns away from good folk otherwise they wouldn't be running ballistics tests on the guns that are turned in. The ballistics tests pretty much insure that bad guys wont be turning in their weapons. In the end it leaves guns in criminals hands and disarms average citizens. The Liberal dream fulfilled.

turbosbox
02-13-2010, 11:48 AM
As a South African who experienced the worst of the violence and seeing how scary Soviet style revolutionaries can be FIRST HAND, and experienceing the violence and mayhem FIRST HAND and knowing what it is like to fear for your life and your family's every day, carrying a sidearm at all times because it was likely you would need it....I am appalled at some of the pro-apartheid statements expressed here.

So for all posting how superior the apartheid government was for infrastructure, industry, etc, well...lets look to Germany under Adolf. Very well run. Efficient. Industrious. If that is the yardstick to go by then by all means the apartheid government was really great.


To quote the one guy who posted here that I wholeheartedly agree with....
"Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!"

Perhaps instead of Europeans coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, robbing and raping it, they should have stayed away and let the Africans be!
After all, thats how globalist agenda was born, minority dictating to the majority...

It's interesting to hear people say that Apartheid was a good thing... I wonder how many of these same people would be okay with United Nations coming to dictate over America?

I guess when the shoe is on the other foot then all of the sudden it becomes a patriotic duty of every red blooded American to fight the invaders!

Can anyone say: HYPOCRITES!

:D <<< Better put one of those smiley faces so people dont get upset about my opinion.

I think the hypocrites are the ones who come over HERE to live, then try to turn it into a sh#thole like the place they hold in high regards. If it is good in your mind, go live there. Where are you posting from?
There is nothing like seeing firsthand African tribal rule, or Arab Muslim rule and realizing the lifestyle it brings. It would be more valuable than 6yrs of our current education to take our schoolkids on a field trip to several foreign countries and study their government, individual rights and economic situation. And be honest, don't overlook the fact women's rights even to an education are zero. The only right you have is what's given by the tribal leader or cleric.
Now starting the countdown until some ignoramus calls me a racist. It has nothing to do with race. If you prefer to live in that culture, go do it. I'm not stopping you. You like to live in a third world environment? Please do.

bigstick61
02-13-2010, 1:00 PM
Thanks. I thought more afterwards and realized I hadn't pushed the conclusion quite through, which is why I was not satisfied when I wrote it. What I think my argument leads to is that the ideology of the American revolution says being classed as a second-class citizen gives you the moral right to rebel, which would certainly apply to the non-white South Africans. And since the founders were still classical thinkers in many ways who believed that honor and courage were objective virtues, they would have also said that only a coward would refuse to exercise the right--a man worthy of respect would resist and accept an honorable death if the opportunity occurs. So if we accept the morality of the American revolution, we have to also accept the morality and even necessity of resisting apartheid by force, though on different grounds than most people would argue.

History shows that the ANC's ideology was not something to put any faith in, but we can't expect the South African masses to understand that when apparently Americans do not either. And the socialist/communist alliance was (so far as I know) the only group which offered a realistic possibility of fighting. So to be consistent I think I must say that it was better and more honorable to resist and trust the throw of the die than be a coward and bend the neck to the yoke. Unfortunately, the universe seems to have kicked a lot of people in the teeth for doing the courageous thing. That is unfair, but then only children and liberals think life has to be fair.

The converse of having the courage to risk rebellion by your own free choice is accepting the consequences of freedom.

Now I don't have an uneasy feeling of not having finished the argument, at least. :D

7x57

I wouldn't say there was much honourable about what the majority of those in the ANC did; many of them lived and died without honour. And they hardly limited themselves to targeting whites; they also targeted coloureds, asians, and blacks who did not go along with their Marxist vision (contrary to the beliefs of some, the ANC's support among blacks was hardly universal). They committed acts of torture, rape, mutilation, thievery, vandalism, and terrorism, often against innocent people and non-combatants. Their behavior was disgusting, several orders of magnitude greater than that of the apartheid regime; their ideology was similarly terrible.

Yes, you have the right to rebel when you are treated as second-class (although I think a modern definition of this would differ significantly from that of the Founders; for example, being denied the vote was perfectly acceptable if it was for the right reasons, like one did not own property or meet similar qualifications) and oppressed, although I think it must be a last resort. During the War of Independence, the colonies really lacked much recourse, although it could easily be said that both sides had legitimate grievances. As for revolution, if we mean it in the modern sense, no one has a right to do that (and that, and not simple rebellion, is what the ANC was after and what it got; also, our War of Independence was also NOT a revolution).

Now, I don't think anyone here was trying to justify or apologize for petty apartheid, which was what laws discriminating based on race (and those which made blacks second class citizens) were a part of. Grand apartheid is not so easily comdemned, considering the tribal majority in the country and the lack of experience with civilization. Contemporary events elsewhere in Africa certainly were not encouraging. But the fact remains, except for the blacks when it comes to discriminatory laws, the country is not freer. In fact, I'd say the net freedom in the country has significantly decreased in the country.

In the end, though, Apartheid could have been avoided had the British had a far more sensible decolonization policy. The South Africans were essentially pushed into their policies; they were not inevitable (and it should be noted that whites were not universally in favor of apartheid). When it comes down to it, South Africa should have been allowed to transition from apartheid to minority rule, to perhaps broader rule, over the period of a decade or two, rather than what actually happened. The country would probably be much better off.

Big Jake
02-13-2010, 5:19 PM
The crime rate would never be what it is today if Apartheid was still in existence!

My 2cents anyways!

DavidRSA
02-15-2010, 3:57 PM
I think the hypocrites are the ones who come over HERE to live, then try to turn it into a sh#thole like the place they hold in high regards. If it is good in your mind, go live there. Where are you posting from?
There is nothing like seeing firsthand African tribal rule, or Arab Muslim rule and realizing the lifestyle it brings. It would be more valuable than 6yrs of our current education to take our schoolkids on a field trip to several foreign countries and study their government, individual rights and economic situation. And be honest, don't overlook the fact women's rights even to an education are zero. The only right you have is what's given by the tribal leader or cleric.
Now starting the countdown until some ignoramus calls me a racist. It has nothing to do with race. If you prefer to live in that culture, go do it. I'm not stopping you. You like to live in a third world environment? Please do.

I live right here in the USA after growing up in South Africa and experiencing FIRST HAND the evils that existed on both sides and still exist. Why do some folks like this poster resent immigrants who espouse any viewpoints contrary to theirs? I do not want to live in South Africa, most my family are American, and I choose to live here because this is the greatest country in the world to live in. HOWEVER - just because I am an immigrant American citizen does not mean I cannot criticize, whether it be my former country (a lot of criticism) or this one (hardly any).

However some like our poster above feel the strong urge to suggest that the expressing of views contrary to his own means I should "go home" and that I am trying to make this country into a "Sh#t-hole". Wow.

abusalim81
02-16-2010, 3:59 PM
I think the hypocrites are the ones who come over HERE to live, then try to turn it into a sh#thole like the place they hold in high regards. If it is good in your mind, go live there. Where are you posting from?
There is nothing like seeing firsthand African tribal rule, or Arab Muslim rule and realizing the lifestyle it brings. It would be more valuable than 6yrs of our current education to take our schoolkids on a field trip to several foreign countries and study their government, individual rights and economic situation. And be honest, don't overlook the fact women's rights even to an education are zero. The only right you have is what's given by the tribal leader or cleric.
Now starting the countdown until some ignoramus calls me a racist. It has nothing to do with race. If you prefer to live in that culture, go do it. I'm not stopping you. You like to live in a third world environment? Please do.

I will agree with you on African tribal rule but you are dead wrong about middle eastern countries!

I'm middle eastern and know what an Arab country is like and it's not what your media shows you on television! Most arab countries are safe to live in unless you go against your family and culture, then you are sh*t out of luck and should move out of the country...

As far as women rights go in Arab countries, well our beloved United States had a feminist movement... How did that work out for ya?

I'm not saying that women shouldn;t have rights, but there is a double standard that exists in our world, like it or not!
THIS IS THE NATURAL ORDER...

Because of our feminist movement, we now have a country of teenage girls running around having underage sex without being married... CAN ANYONE SAY ABORTION.

HMMM lets see last time I can recall the so called civilized countries have children running up and down the school yards shooting everyone, serial killers, homosexuals, gangs, huge violance, etc... DID I MISS ANYTHING FROM THIS LIST.

It's sad to see what happend to our beautiful country... All you have to do is just look about 70 years ago and see the culture in the united states and how clean it used to be... With an exception of slavery.

Arab countries have a little bit of problems but in a different way... Most of it is political and has to do with Israel and the west.

BTW: DON'T THINK THAT I AM ANTI-AMERICAN CUZ I DO CONSIDER MYSELF AN AMERICAN, LOVE MY COUNTRY AND WOULD DIE FOR MY COUNTRY!

510dat
02-16-2010, 4:21 PM
As far as women rights go in Arab countries, well our beloved United States had a feminist movement... How did that work out for ya? (pun intended)

So what about Arab countries? Please do understand that there is a difference between Pakistan, Afghanistan and actual Arab countries.

In Arab countries the only violance is political and very small in numbers...
Perhaps you are brainwashed and yourself need to go on fieldtrips to other foreignt countries.

I don't know where you're from, but try this:

http://www.themuslimwoman.org/entry/rape-victim-ordered-200-lashes-and-prison-by-saudi-judges/
Rape Victim ordered 200 lashes and prison by Saudi judges

the Saudi Arabia’s Higher Judicial Council has actually sentenced a rape victim to receive 200 lashes and prison while the perpetrators of humanity’s most heinous crime were allowed to walk free.

The 19-year-old Shiite woman who was raped by six armed men was originally sentenced to receive 90 lashes for traveling in the car of an ‘unrelated male’ at the time of the rape. However after the woman had the temerity of not unquestioningly submitting herself to be tortured as punishment of being raped, the judges on Saudi Arabia’s Higher Judicial Council more than doubled her punishment for attempting to influence the judiciary through the media.

Her lawyer, human right activist Abdul Rahman al-Lahem, has been banned from carrying her case further. His license has been revoked and he has been called to appear before a disciplinary committee for challenging the judgment, which only punished the victim of the crime and not its perpetrators.

or:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3097728.stm
Fresh 'honour killing' in Jordan
Three brothers hacked their two sisters to death in Jordan in an "honour killing", one day after parliament rejected tougher sentences for such crime, officials are quoted as saying.

The unidentified sisters, aged 20 and 27, were killed with axes in the capital Amman on Monday, according to a report in the Jordan Times newspaper.

Officials told the paper the three brothers - who are in detention - admitted that they carried out the killing for reasons of "family honour".

On Sunday Jordan's parliament rejected a bill imposing harsher penalties for such killings, which are often carried out by brothers and fathers against women deemed to have soiled the family's reputation.

Getting off lightly

The 27-year-old left her family home nearly two years ago to marry a man without her family's consent, the paper says.


It was a brutal scene - one victim's head was nearly cut clean off
Her 20-year-old sister ran away three months ago to join her.

Tipped on their whereabouts, the brothers went to their home with axes, and hacked their sisters to death, the paper says.

"It was a brutal scene. One victim's head was nearly cut clean off," an official is quoted as saying.

The older sister's 10-month-old baby and her husband escaped unharmed, according to the report.

The killings bring to 12 the number of women reported killed for reasons of "family honour" in Jordan this year, the Jordan Times says.

Under the existing law, people found guilty of committing honour killings often receive sentences as light as six months in prison.

Yep, that sounds like a civilized place to be. Real peaceful, as long as you don't get raped.

abusalim81
02-16-2010, 8:44 PM
Believe me these are not good women. This is a classical case of prostitution in middle east... The only women who are in cars with men who they are not related to are prostitutes, because women in middle east do not have male friends and vice versa. They go with men and have sex for money and some times bad things happen to them, I'm not saying that anyone has the right to rape women but she is a prostitute and puts herself in this kind of position...

Much like in this country lots of prostitutes are killed and abused by "johns"! It's bad that the governemnt didn't punish these people but again these are extreme situations and frankly the victim is not an angel either!

Remember! In United States girls that turn to prostitution are usually from a bad family and a bad life, but in middle east, where women are taken care of and don't have to work single day of their life, the only women who become hookers are just bad examples of what a modest woman should be! If she wants to spread disease, corrupt the society and shame the whole family, then I dont feel sorry for her.

What would you do if you found out that your little princess grew up to be a prostitute?

Thats as far as the Saudi Arabian case goes...

The others are just cultural problems.. In middle east the worst thing you can do is to shame your family, and some people can't accept that and thus they become outraged and violent... SAME THING USED TO HAPPEN IN JAPAN, AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES WHERE RESPECT IS EVERYTHING. I dont agree with it but I understand that respect to family and shame can turn people into monsters!

All this could be avoided if the government actually followed Quran and Islam instead of ancient cultural practices of middle east! SHAME ON THE SAUDI and JORDANIAN GOVERNMENTS!

I never said that middle east is perfect, far from it, however everyday life is safer in Islamic countries of middle east compared to some of the neibhorhoods in united states and other countries, unless you are going against the grain of your own culture, which not too many people do because they respect their families.