29 March 2013

South Africa: Concern over SA’s billions in DRC Inga project

The inept South African ANC government has done a multi-billion dollar deal with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) - one of the most corrupt governments in the world.

Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan has set aside R200bn ($22bn) for the 40,000MW Grand Inga hydroelectric project, set to be built at the Inga Falls on the Congo River, about 300km from Kinshasa.

The World Bank “tentatively” estimates the cost of the first phase of the project at $40m-$45m. The first phase is for the 4,800MW Inga 3 project.

Various watchdogs have warned that so much money finding it's way into one of the most corrupt governments will end in tears. Not so, says South African Energy Minister Dipuo Peters, who said that the DRC government should be given a chance to prove itself. They must be given the benefit of the doubt... 

Easy to say that when it's not your money, hey Ms Peters? It's only the tax payers who'll get shafted if it all goes south, so what's the worry?

She added that the project would be implemented in accordance with the rules and regulations of the DRC, and this would minimise the risk and perception of corruption.

Seriously? You think that running the project according to rules and regulations of the DRC will limit corruption? Take an affirmative action bow Ms Peters - you are officially an idiot - who will no doubt benefit from some of the missing money kickbacks that are sure to flow into the ANC coffers. Redistribution via Africa.

How sad that a country like South Africa, which under the Apartheid government could export electricity to most of Africa, today has to rely on electricity from the DRC, and that all the risk of the project is weighted on the South African tax payer. Blacks hardly pay for their electricity as it is, with most of what they use being subsidised paid for by the Whites who do bother to pay. And now another $22 billion of their money is to be "ANC-invested" into another shonky African state to provide them with electricity - and provide the ANC with more bribe money. The looting and stealing of South Africa continues under the money-liberation terrorist organisation known as the ANC - party of the terrorist and at-deaths-door Nelson Mandela. (Please Mandela, hang on a few more days - hell can wait - I need to buy my champagne for when you finally kick the bucket - the headache will be worth every sip)

Hmmmm.......I just wonder what could possibly go wrong with this project.

ANC + DRC + $22 billion = gone in 30 seconds.

No wonder Ms Peters is so "excited" about this project! I would be too were I a corrupt, unethical, immoral ANC politician.

Hat tip: Clarence W

Energy Minister Dipuo Peters. Picture: PUXLEY MAKGATHO
South African Energy Minister Dipuo Peters is "excited" about the project where she'll no doubt benefit from some kick-backs......yes, THIS is the SA Energy Minister!

THERE are concerns about investing billions in taxpayers’ money in a joint infrastructure project between South Africa and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), one of the world’s most corrupt countries.

Last month, Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan set aside R200bn for the 40,000MW Grand Inga hydroelectric project, set to be built at the Inga Falls on the Congo River, about 300km from Kinshasa.

Earlier this month, the two governments finalised a draft treaty on the project.

The World Bank “tentatively” estimates the cost of the first phase of the project — the 4,800MW Inga 3 — at $40m-$45m.

Some observers say this is a lot of money to entrust to a country with a less than shining reputation.

Transparency International’s latest corruption perception index ranked the DRC 160th on a list of 176 countries. It scored 21 on an index where a score of 100 indicates the least corrupt countries and 0 indicates the most corrupt.

In 2011, after a feasibility study on Inga 3 began, African democracy watchdog Idasa called for care to be exercised in funding the project.

“The various foreign investors plying the project with funding could reduce it to a minefield of corruption in a state infamous for state and political manipulation of contracts and tenders,” said Charlotte Johnson, then a researcher with Idasa.

But Energy Minister Dipuo Peters said in an interview with Business Times that she believed the DRC government should be given a chance to prove itself as the project had so many potential benefits for South Africa and the continent, and the DRC had been transparent with her team thus far.

“People must be given the benefit of the doubt,” she said. “If we worked in a transparent manner, we will continue to work in a transparent manner. We must allow ... it is very painful seeing people without electricity.”

Ms Peters said the project would be implemented in accordance with the rules and regulations of the DRC, which she believed would minimise the risk and perception of corruption.

Perhaps providing a further measure of comfort that the project will not degenerate into a corrupt free-for-all is the involvement of the World Bank, which provides finance for capital projects in developing countries.

A spokesman for the bank said that it planned to support the Inga 3 development in collaboration with other development partners such as the African Development Bank. It is helping rehabilitate the Inga 1 and 2 plants, built during Mobutu Sese Seko’s dictatorship and which fell into disrepair during the civil war after his ousting.

“As is customary for all World Bank-financed projects, all project documentation is placed in the public domain and is accessible online,” said the spokesman.

“The World Bank has a zero-tolerance policy on corruption, and we have some of the toughest fiduciary standards of any development agency, including a 24/7 fraud and corruption hotline with appropriate whistle-blower protection.”

Ms Peters, who is spearheading South Africa’s involvement in the project, said the potential benefits were immense. The World Bank estimated Inga 3’s export potential to South Africa at 2,500MW.

The government’s integrated resources plan, signed and published by Ms Peters in the Government Gazette in May 2011, envisaged 6%, or 2,600MW, of the country’s electricity coming from hydro sources by 2030. Inga 3 is expected to be commissioned in about 2020.

“We can buy (the power) in bulk, making it affordable,” said Ms Peters.

Once complete, Grand Inga will generate almost double the power coming from the Three Gorges Dam in China, which now holds bragging rights as the world’s largest hydropower complex with 22,500MW capacity.

This is only a fraction of the DRC’s total hydropower resources, which the World Bank estimates at 100,000MW.

“Those are the riches of the DRC,” said Ms Peters. “They can help extend the tentacles of energy access in Africa.”

She said Grand Inga would satisfy the African Union’s search for catalytic projects, as it had benefits for agriculture, mining and other sectors in the Southern African Development Community (Sadc) region. Five other African countries outside the region will be connected to the grid.

World Bank estimates suggest the complex could supply energy to as many as 500-million households across the continent.

In 2004, the national power utilities of Botswana, Namibia and Angola jumped at the opportunity to tap into these resources by forming the Westor Power Project, together with Eskom. But this fell by the wayside, with South Africa taking steps to fill the vacuum.

President Jacob Zuma tentatively locked down South Africa’s involvement in the Grand Inga complex with the November 2011 signing of a memorandum of understanding with the DRC, in which it was agreed South Africa would be a potential customer.

Within six months of the memorandum, a draft Grand Inga treaty was drawn up, then approved by the cabinet.

On March 7, negotiation teams from both countries put the final touches to the draft treaty of joint co-operation.

“This is going to be so involved a project that we didn’t want to rush,” said Ms Peters.

Other factors contributing to the length of time included the composition of the teams — with an average of two people from eight South African government departments — and overcoming the language barrier, with the DRC’s official language being French.

Ms Peters said the terms of the final draft treaty addressed how the project would be developed, the phases of the project, the governance processes to be followed, the responsibilities of each partner, the flow of the electricity, and how the electricity would be transmitted from the Inga site to South Africa.

Barring any unforeseen circumstances, this treaty will be presented to parliament next month as Ms Peters’s department is still busy preparing a cabinet memorandum. The Congolese team will follow the same process, after which the two countries will work on a final treaty.

“Working as the Sadc, and working as Africans, we can keep the lights on cleanly. I’m so excited about this project,” Ms Peters said.


Epic! Dana Loesch Schools Piers Morgan and Van Jones on Gun Rights in America

Luckily Grover Norquist (RINO Muslim) wasn't given too much time to speak as Dana Loesch took over when commie Van Jones and the fool Piers Morgan tried to conflate the anti-gun argument.

Just what does Van Jones know about guns apart from the fact that his communist ideology teaches him that a population has to be disarmed for communism to take root. That's the angle he comes in from, and he does this by not talking about guns, but by  bringing up the deaths of the kids in the Newtown shootings. Always aim for the emotional scare-tactics hey Jones! That's sure to get the mommies, grannies and weak-kneed liberals to fall for disarmament. 

Morgan is just an idiot. Thank goodness Dana has a strong personality after years of allowing these Lefties to frame their argument.

She sure has learnt how to stand her ground.

And then watch as Piers goes to an ad break when she hammers him for wanting to ban guns. He didn't like the fact that Dana had cornered him so nicely.

Have The Russians Already Quietly Withdrawn All Their Cash From Cyprus?

This story was published on Zero Hedge two days ago.

We all know that Russian oligarchs had around $31 BILLION (maybe more) invested in Cyrus banks, which was set to be force-donated to the EU. When the EU deal outlining the seizure of all deposits over €100 000 in two of the main Cyprus banks was announced, everyone expected Russia to go apesh!te.

Never happened.

Why? Well it appears that while the Cyprus government and the EU banksta's were plotting to get their grimy hands on the oligarchs money, the oligarchs were quietly transferring their money out of the banks via other countries. It appears that the EU shonksters were so focused on closing the Cyprus banks to stop any raids that they forgot people could transfer money from outside the country.

The stealth withdrawals by Russians of course means that the two megabanks are now utterly drained of capital, and that it will probably mean that ALL deposits will be wiped out, not just those over €100 000. However, no one is saying anything about the Russian withdrawals to avoid a huge run on the banks, now that the Cyprus government has re-opened the banks.

No wonder Putin isn't barking mad. Oh, he's making out as if he's unhappy by launching a surprise large-scale, 36 warship military exercise in the Black Sea. It seems he wants to remind the EU that he's just around the corner and can attack Cyprus any time he wanted to.....if he wanted to. Of course he doesn't, but has to keep up appearances of being annoyed.

So, back to the farce that was the EU via Cyprus oligarch money-grab. It seems that the toughest thing the Russians had to do was to remember their pin code so they could withdraw their money from right under the EU noses. These amateurs running the EU should wise up if they're going to bankrupt countries to take a slap at Russia. However, what these amateurs have done is to alert the entire Eurozone that this is the new way of saving the Euro at all costs. Already the Eurozone chief has shot off his mouth by saying that savers will be raided to save the Euro in future crises.

Nigel Farage - leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP) has warned ex-pat British to remove their money from Eurozone banks - especially those ex-pats living in Spain.

EU egg meet face.

Yesterday, we first reported on something very disturbing (at least to Cyprus' citizens): despite the closed banks (which will mostly reopen tomorrow, while the two biggest soon to be liquidated banks Laiki and BoC will be shuttered until Thursday) and the capital controls, the local financial system has been leaking cash. Lots and lots of cash.

Alas, we did not have much granularity or details on who or where these illegal transfers were conducted with. Today, courtesy of a follow up by Reuters, we do.

The result, at least for Europe, is quite scary because let's recall that the primary political purpose of destroying the Cyprus financial system was simply to punish and humiliate Russian billionaire oligarchs who held tens of billions in "unsecured" deposits with the island nation's two biggest banks.

As it turns out, these same oligarchs may have used the one week hiatus period of total chaos in the banking system to transfer the bulk of the cash they had deposited with one of the two main Cypriot banks, in the process making the whole punitive point of collapsing the Cyprus financial system entirely moot.

From Reuters:
While ordinary Cypriots queued at ATM machines to withdraw a few hundred euros as credit card transactions stopped, other depositors used an array of techniques to access their money.

No one knows exactly how much money has left Cyprus' banks, or where it has gone. The two banks at the centre of the crisis - Cyprus Popular Bank, also known as Laiki, and Bank of Cyprus - have units in London which remained open throughout the week and placed no limits on withdrawals. Bank of Cyprus also owns 80 percent of Russia's Uniastrum Bank, which put no restrictions on withdrawals in Russia. Russians were among Cypriot banks' largest depositors.
So while one could not withdraw from Bank of Cyprus or Laiki, one could withdraw without limitations from subsidiary and OpCo banks, and other affiliates?

Just brilliant.

And if there was any doubt that the entire process of destroying one entire nation was simply to punish Cyprus, it can be completely cleared away now: 
ECB officials contacted Latvia, another EU country that has received large Russian deposits, to warn authorities against taking in Russian money fleeing Cyprus, two sources familiar with the contacts said.
"It was made clear to our Latvian friends that if they want to join the euro, they should not provide a haven for Russian money exiting Cyprus," a euro zone central banker said.
If one thinks there is any material Russian cash therefore left in Cyprus with this epic loophole in place, we urge them to make a deposit in the insolvent nation. One person who certainly will not be allocating any of his money into Bank of Cyprus is German FinMin Schaeuble:
German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said the bank closure had limited capital flight but that the ECB was looking closely at the issue. He declined to provide figures.
Perhaps because if he did, it would become clear that the only entities truly punished by this weekend's actions are not evil Russian billionaires, but small and medium domestic companies, and other moderately wealthy individuals, hardly any of them from the former "Evil Empire." 

Companies that had to meet margin calls to avoid defaulting on deals were granted funds. Transfers for trade in humanitarian products, medicines and jet fuel were allowed.
The stealth withdrawals by Russians of course means that the two megabanks are now utterly drained of capital, and that the haircuts on those who still have unsecured deposits with the two banks will be so big it will likely mean a complete wipeout of all deposits. As in 0% recovery on your deposits!

In other words, by now any big Russian funds in Cyprus are long gone, and the only damage accrues to the locals: for one reason because their money over the critical EUR100K threshold has been "vaporized", and for another because the marginal driving force and loan demand creator in Cyprus, the Russians, are gone and are never coming back again.

This is what passes for monetary real-politik in the New Normal - an entire nation becomes collateral when pursuing a wealthy group of people. And the "wealthy group" is victorious in the end despite everything...

If we were Cypriots at this point we would be angry. Very, very angry.


Former British Foreign Secretary to head large US federal refugee contractor—the IRC

The brother of UK Labour Party leader Ed Miliband, David Miliband, is set to become the new President of the International Rescue Committee (IRC).

The IRC is a bleeding heart organisation. It is one of the top ten voluntary agencies resettling refugees in the USA. The more these organisations can get the media to publish their bleeding heart refugee resettlement stories, the more money they get to fund their lavish lifestylesscam, charities. They get millions each year in government grants to play with. 

The current IRC CEO's package is a cool $447,432 in salary and benefits, which beats Obama’s $400,000 salary. The IRC is a $431 million dollar organization which gets $247 million from YOU, the American taxpayer. 

So what would old David Miliband -  son of Marxist theorist Ralph Miliband - be doing leaving the Labour Party in the UK and moving to New York for a lucrative salary charity? 

Well, the IRC is obviously his next "front" to further his Marxist views, and get paid a packet dangling his fingers in world affairs. It's always something with these commies.

And if they can do it while hiding behind a "charity" all the better. I mean, what better way to hide your true agenda but behind the cover of the "humanitarian" excuse.

Never look at the obvious with these commies - always look further than what's in your face. Because, while you watch his one hand, the other one is doing the dangling and fiddling.

The International Rescue Committee, one of nine US refugee resettlement contractors (second largest in terms of number of refugees it resettles) is hiring David Miliband, one of the last of the so-called Blairites to oversee its multi-million dollar operation headquartered in New York City.  The present chairman, former President of Columbia University, Charles Rupp will pass the reins (and presumably the huge salary* he receives) to Miliband in September.

New President of the International Rescue Committee, David Miliband
Here is the IRC’s press release (Miliband is also a global-warming-is-destroying-the-planet believer! Climate refugees here we come!):
The International Rescue Committee (IRC) today announced the appointment of David Miliband, 47, former Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom, as its president and CEO, effective September this year. He will succeed George Rupp, who has led the global humanitarian relief and development organization since stepping down as president of Columbia University in 2002. 
Over the last 15 years, Miliband has had a distinguished political career in the United Kingdom. From 2007 to 2010, he served as the youngest U.K. Foreign Secretary in three decades, driving advancements in human rights and representing the United Kingdom throughout the world. In 2006, as U.K. Secretary of State for the Environment, he spearheaded the groundbreaking Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill, establishing the world’s first legally binding framework for reducing carbon emissions.
“David is an experienced world leader and a man of both action and character,” Rupp said, “as his record as Foreign Secretary — including his work for conflict resolution in the former Yugoslavia, his leadership in calling for a political settlement in Afghanistan, and his drive for education reform in Pakistan and human rights in Sri Lanka — attests. His insights, ability and commitment will be tremendous assets. I look forward to witnessing this next exciting chapter of the IRC’s incredible journey of helping the most desperate people move from harm to home.”
Miliband is the eldest son of Marxist theorist Ralph Miliband (here at wikipedia) and here the UK Daily Mail gives us some juicy bits of information on the politician who is quitting politics (ha! ha!) for a “dream job” running a charity.  

In fact, in his new job Miliband will have a larger world stage on which to be a politician and have a huge salary from the US taxpayer to boot! (Take that brother Ed!).   Indeed, the IRC is one of those NGOs (non-governmental organizations) mucking around in world affairs behind the scenes (CIA?) and they get to do it hiding under a ‘white hat’ humanitarian cover.

This is going to be fun to watch!


White people celebrate Heat loss in exceedingly white fashion

Is there anything more pathetic than a White liberal who lives up to his self-hating, anti-White persona? 

Take this "article" as an example of a self-hater. The author is this thing, Bill Hansock:


Needless to say he's from California. His Twitter description says the following:  "Progressive Boink. Giants fan, feminist, egalitarian, hashtag troll."

Feminist??? Yeah, makes sense actually. 

Well, this great thinker, this Mr Hansock, has attempted to write an anti-White mockery hit-piece on White men celebrating the Chicago Bulls beating the Miami Heat recently. 

He took a photo of White men celebrating and broke it down into sections, and then wrote a disparaging, unfunny narrative on each section. The way it's written sounds as if it's a non-White writing making fun of White people. Needless to say the end result resembled something closer to vomit instead of an example of a great mind trying to be entertaining. 

Take a look at the photo of Mr Hansock above and then just let it sink in that THIS thing is the face of someone who makes fun of other White men. And his photo is at least posed compared to the one he mocks. Does this White pig think he's an oil painting or something?

These are the effeminate White men who are out destroying America today. He is but one  of the many who are so delusional as to think that he can build up street-cred with his anti-White, pro-Black readers with this type of rubbish. There is no doubt in my mind that he's a gay, anti-Christian, effeminate, anti-Conservative, anti-gun, pro-abortion, Bible-bashing pansy. And I don't even know the thing.

What do you think would have been the reaction had he taken a photo of Black men celebrating and mocked each and every one? What if the article had said "Black people celebrate loss in Black fashion" ? 

Well, it would never happen of course. He's too much of a coward to go there. So much easier to bash White people who he knows will never retaliate. 

So I'm doing it for them here.

Hey Hansock, put a sock in it. And I mean in your mouth......permanently.

On Wednesday night, the Chicago Bulls halted the impressive winning streak of the Miami Heat at 27 games. Luckily, a gaggle of exceedingly white dudes had courtside seats (because white people looooooove courtside seats) and treated us to the above picture.

This moment in basketball history deserves special attention. Computer: ZOOM IN. ENHANCE.


This guy is pretty white, I guess. If you were able to capture Howard Dean's infamous scream, grant it sentience and a corporeal form and fill it full of Mike's Hard Lemonade, this is what you'd be looking at. Thanks, science! You've done it again!

Let's move along to the next item on the menu. Whaddaya got for us, white people?


Hey, it's the white Lewis Black! Dude unironically throwing up the peace sign in celebration and looking terrified someone is going to request he start dancing. "I'M EXCITED BUT PLEASE DON'T LOOK AT ME DON'T MAKE ME USE MY BODY TO DO THINGS OH GOD."

I feel ya, buddy.


Aw, a tender moment! Just two white guys, enjoying each others' company, wearing their finest Cherokee-brand shirts. This is something really special. Let's give them their privacy.


Aw, buddy. Well, not all white people can be happy about the Heat losing, I guess. This guys WELP face says it all, I guess. There's only so m-- good lord, that's a lot of jewelry, bro. That's so much jewelry my heavens. And you're only wearing a jersey and some stone-washed jeans. Not even an undershirt. Just a mile of gold chain. Now you're making US sad, but in a very different way.

Okay, moving on.



If Wallace Shawn were an even whiter Gollum, you'd STILL have to ramp several notches up the White Guy Meter to arrive at ... THIS. LOOK AT HIS CRAZY WRIST AND FIST. IT"S LIKE HIS REAL HAND IS IN HIS SLEEVE AND HE'S HOLDING A WACKY FAKE ARM LIKE A SOUVENIR CAPTAIN HOOK HOOK.

Phew, okay. We really need something to celebrate this occasion. Something worthy of the Internet.


Never change, white people. You are a GOLD MINE.


Would Hansock rather White men look and act like this?


America: Yesterday vs today....two different countries with different people

Go to any African country and those who founded the country and those who live in it today all look the same (except South Africa and Zimbabwe maybe).

Go to America, and the men who founded the country and those who live in it today have vastly changed, and not for the better. No, what these men founded - the safe, decent, civilised country that was to be America, is now on the path to total destruction by being held to ransom by their "minorities" and self-loathing liberals.

I wonder if those who founded America would see the country as a success today? Would they believe their eyes when they see just how far America has fallen?

These are the men who founded, molded, established America:

This is what America looks like today, where police had to restrain a crowd of Blacks from taking food after a supermarket eviction in Augusta,  Georgia:

28 March 2013

Good Friday and Easter long week-end

Tomorrow is Good Friday and the start of a long week-end here in Australia (and other Western countries) with both Friday and Monday being public holidays. (blogging may be light on some of these days)

I would like to take this opportunity to wish all Christian readers a blessed Easter period, as we reflect on the death and resurrection of the Son of God.


USA: Non Partisan report - how much will Obamacare raise your health premiums?

Remember in 2009 when Obama he said that Obamacare would lower health insurance premiums and that's why it HAD to be implemented?

Yeah? He lied.

Really? You don't say! 

Today the non-partisan Society of Actuaries released a stunning report that details the dramatic increases on individual health insurance plans in the United States under the implementation of Obamacare.  The average increase for all 50 states is 31.5%. Only 5 states in the US will see individual health insurance rates go down: New York, Massachusetts  Vermont, Rhode Island, and New Jersey - reason being that their existing premiums are the most expensive in the country. The lower the current cost, the higher the increase will be. Hence why Ohio and Wisconsin's individual rates are projected to increase over 80%.

Just another on-purpose lie by Obama. Obamacare was always about making private health insurance too expensive that America will turn to single-payer healthcare i.e. government-run, government-mandated, government provided healthcare. 

In other words, socialised medicine. Because it's the FAIR thing to do - you know, to provide those who can't afford healthcare the same healthcare as those who can afford private healthcare. And that person gets to pay for those who can't pay. It's the FAIR thing to do. That's also why Obama has pushed for ILLEGAL ALIENS to get free healthcare on the Americans dime. Come on over peeps! We got your back.

Gee, I wonder if an American entered Mexico illegally, would they get free healthcare? Would they get food stamps? Free school education? Free university education? Free housing? Free money? What da ya mean no????

American politicians and the liberals are really, really dumb. They are sacrificing America in the name of fairness. They would rather have everyone living together in poverty, just as long as it's done fairly. 

Now you know why Obamacare was only set to kick in after the last election. And it's also why Nancy Pelosi said that they had to pass the bill to find out what's in it.....

Here's a snapshot of the projected increases:

Picture of the day........

Politicians, not guns are the problem


Executive Outcome - Army for Hire

Executive Outcome was a private military company (PMC) founded in South Africa by former Lieutenant-Colonel of the South African Defence Force Eeben Barlow in 1989. Despite many requests from soldiers around the world, EO only recruited men from South Africa who had either served in the SADF, Koevoet or the ANC’s armed wing Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK). At it's peak they numbered 3000 soldiers and 500 advisers. 

EO were involved in a number of successful activities in Africa. 

In March 1995, EO were hired to quell an insurrection of guerrillas known as the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) and to regain control of the diamond fields. They were extremely successful in the two years they were in the country. So much so that they were trashed in the media and the UN stepped in, demanding that EO be expelled from the country. The Sierra Leone government capitulated to international pressure to have EO withdraw in favor of an ineffective peacekeeping force, allowing the RUF to rebuild and attack the capital.

The pathetic UN "peace keepers" couldn't achieve jack-sh!t. They numbered 18 000 at their peak, compared to the 100 soldiers EO deployed. EO was in the country for 22 months at a cost of $20 million/year and they achieved everything the UN subsequently ruined. They saved countless lives, had the respect of the locals, destroyed the rebel force and were regarded as heroes. The international war-lords couldn't have that!

So, how much did the peace keeping force deployed by the UN cost in comparison? Well, apart from the huge loss of life under the UN's watch, their presence averaged $1 BILLION per year! Starting to make sense as to how the UN operates??

See, EO was doing their job so successfully, at such little cost, with only 100 men, and achieving huge results that the international community had to destroy them. Can't have people not being killed -it's bad for business. Can't have the UN shown up to be the incompetent buffoons they are. No, so they had to trash EO and then take over the 'peace keeping' efforts which were anything but keeping the peace. 

So, next time the UN is singing about the Arms Trade Treaty, keep this little story in the back of you mind. The UN is the biggest control-freaks in the world and nothing but money is their master.

They don't care about you or me. They care about the almighty dollar and they care about controlling our lives - be it via the environment, arms or laws. They need to be destroyed.

EO was dissolved in 1998. They were too successful for their own good. Just like South Africa under the Whites.

Hat tip: FredBarbarossa

Former South Africa special ops.....where are they today?

Here's one, fighting in Sierra Leone. The rebels scared of this South African ex-special ops soldier and his band of mercenaries. ONE helicopter against all the rebels. Guess who's the winner?

Many other ex-special ops have worked around the world - some have died plying their trade. But, the ANC didn't want them so they do what they have to do.....


A blogger named Shane posted a good blog post on the SANDF foray into CAR which I blogged about yesterday.

Have a read below. Sums it all up quite nicely me thinks.....

The good old days, where discipline and pride were standard in the SADF:

Today as the SANDF:


So the SA army gets its ass whipped!!

Well Mr Zuma this is all your fault!! Like it or not you created this limp wristed, aids infected, undisciplined collection of fools that you call the SANDF!! You just had to jump on your little soap box and tell the world that you will send your armed forces into CAR to sort out their problems. Now you have dead soldiers on your hands and the world laughing behind their hands at the ineptitude and inability of your armed forces to overcome against a band of rebels!!

I cant even bring myself to blame the soldiers, you let them live like pigs in their barracks, you let them join unions, you let them strike, you and your cronies promoted morons with little or no experience to positions of leadership? And yet you still expected them to become real soldiers? Idiot!!! You sent men that are led by leaders who are seen in our shopping malls in full uniform wearing pink slippers to fight against men who believe in their cause, men who would gladly die for their cause?? How stupid are you? Now the once mighty SADF has become the SANDF who are cowering in their barracks and begging the French to escort them to the airport so that they can get the hell out of there and return to the land of “rape and money”!!

Let this be a lesson to you when you decide to use your “army” to control us, remember we were trained in the old army where discipline and training were everything and we will escort your raggamuffin army straight into the sea!! Next time instead of sending your armed forces to other countries to do a job they are clearly not trained to do, try deploying them on the farms in south Africa to protect our food supplies from your criminals who will soon have us all starving!! Or try deploying them in large numbers along our borders to stop the millions of illegal aliens who are flocking here to take part in the free for all mentality that you have created. I remember a time when Africa trembled at the sound of the SADF mobilizing because it was known as the “iron fist” of Africa !! Now they are more akin to the lacy white glove on the hand of Michael Jackson?

Your police force has fallen apart and been overrun with criminals, your military has proved what they are worth – nada! Nothing! Zilch! It seems to me Mr Zuma that the writing is on the wall clear as daylight for all the world to see, all except you and your cronies who are permanently blinded by your randelas!! in my day we were well trained, well armed and had a “dankie tannie sakkie” bible in our pockets and we were willing to fight to last breath because we were proud to be there in defense of what was good and right!! That may well be your problem – nobody in their right mind could be proud of what you have done to this country!! You should hang your head in shame…


27 March 2013

13 South African soldiers killed in CAR clash

Most of my international readers would not have heard that 13 South African soldiers were killed in Central African Republic (CAR) over the week-end. The worst combat losses for South Africa's military since 1994 (the year the ANC took over the country)

All of those killed were members of One Parachute Battalion, from Bloemfontein. All of those killed were Black. Twenty seven were injured.

So, what were South African troops doing in CAR? 

Apparently, they'd been present in CAR for the last six years training and equipping their counterparts. There were 200 troops on the ground. Senior army officers last week warned top brass that sending more troops was tantamount to a suicide mission and that circumstances in the country had deteriorated drastically. While the SA government were picking their noses considering sending another 200 troops, the battle broke out....and CAR President François Bozizé fled to neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo.

And the clueless South African National Defence Force (SANDF) were caught napping. There were no contingency plans; no withdrawal plans; no air support; no logistic support to the soldiers; no medical support, apart from one doctor with a backpack of medical supplies. The South Africans apparently had to keep calling the 150 French parabats for essential equipment (I'm guessing ammunition and toilet paper?)

By the way President Zuma, what happened to all the arms bought during the R45 BILLION Arms Deal a few years back?? You know, during the Arms SCANDAL where money went missing left, right and into ANC bank accounts? Where are all those fancy  corvettes, submarines, light utility helicopters, lead-in fighter trainers and advanced light fighter aircraft you dumbo's "bought"??????? Shhhhhh.......but most of it is out of commission, because either they've been farked up destroyed by the Blacks; or there aren't enough skilled Blacks in the SANDF to operate them........shhhhhh.....don't tell China or they may invade.

Does this surprise me? Should this surprise you? No.

The SANDF has turned into a joke under the ANC. When the ANC took over the country, South Africa had one of the top militaries in the world. The ANC replaced the competent generals with their own fearless lucky-dip Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) "generals". What a farce. The MK never fought ONE proper military battle in all their lives. All they knew was how to plant a bomb and run away. Like the cowards they were. But the ANC were very proud of their "fighters". Well, they certainly showed those CAR rebels a thing or two, eh?

Today the SANDF is a unionised, AIDS infested wannabe military run by this man, chief General Solly Shoke. Shoke is a former MK "field commander".  Looks like someone I'd trust to lead me into battle......not.

Chief General Solly Shoke

You gotta laugh - honestly. Our once brilliant military, run by White Generals, was the cream of the crop of militaries. Everyone feared us. We kicked USSR, Cuban and East German butt in Angola with a fraction of the soldiers and military equipment used against us. We trained Black soldiers and molded them into deadly units, to fight alongside the White BOYS who were sacrificed by White families. All to keep the communists out of South Africa, and to keep ALL South Africans safe - yes, that includes the Blacks who never appreciated the fact. 

And this fool Shoke can't even strategise to protect the base in CAR with 200 "special forces" troops? 

Blow me down. I can pretty much guarantee you that in the Old South Africa, this would NEVER have happened. The CAR rebels would've crapped their pants had the SADF rolled into town.

According to Zuma, the South African forces defended their base for 9 hours, inflicting heavy casualties until the rebels asked for a ceasefire. Haha - until the rebels asked for a ceasefire??? Really??? He wants us to believe that the rebels kicked SANDF butt, killed 13 and wounded some 27, and then were so scared of the South African soldiers that they asked for a ceasefire? 

I'm guessing what really happened was that the SANDF soldiers held up a white flag to surrender before anymore of them were killed. I can just see them running to their Union when they're back in SA, toi-toing for danger pay and compensation because they got to fight in a real battle, with guns and everything.

And no, I don't feel sorry for them. They didn't feel sorry for our White boys who were killed on the Border of SA back in the Old SA. In fact they celebrated every death and saw each one as another victory. Many White boys died protecting our country against these communists. Many families lost their young sons. No one remembers them anymore - the ANC only too willing to label them as racist White dogs. And our traitor FW de Klerk gave the country away for nothing, despite all the death to keep it free.

Well, me wonders how quickly Zuma will send his "special forces" to go fight another battle in Africa. I mean, just how many more hidings can his ego take before people start to wonder just which kind of nincompoops are running the country and protecting them!

Hat tip: Clarence W

SA troops in the Central African Republic. (Picture: AFP)
SA troops in the Central African Republic - looking relaxed. I'm thinking this was before the battle?

Senior army officers last week apparently informed top brass that sending more troops to the Central African Republic (CAR) was tantamount to a suicide mission.

This warning was issued as the army was deciding whether to send an additional 200 soldiers as reinforcements to the current forces in the capital Bangui, reported Beeld.

Informed sources said senior officers were warned last week that circumstances in the country had deteriorated drastically. There was also doubt about how the army would withdraw its soldiers should the situation get out of control.

Due to a lack of money and air support, the army struggled to support its soldiers logistically.

There was apparently only a single doctor with a backpack as medical support.

The South Africans apparently had to keep calling the 150 French parabats for essential equipment, although these soldiers were meant to look after French interests.

The officers’ concerns were ignored and an additional 200 soldiers were sent to Bangui on Friday night.

According to some sources, CAR rebels are angry because South African soldiers apparently helped President François Bozizé flee to the DRC over the weekend.

SA soldiers had now become a target.

Army chief Solly Shoke said on Monday that his soldiers were at their posts and “would not run anywhere”.

“Fleeing is not even an option. It is not for me (or the army) to decide what will happen next. We are acting on government’s orders.”


UK allows Muslim nurses to not wash to protect their “modesty”

Hey, who wants to be lying in a hospital bed with a filthy, no-hand-washer female Muslim doctor or nurse looking after you?

Must be great if they've just finished with an AIDS patient or a highly infectious patient! 

Well, if this is one of your fantasies, move on over to the UK where their Department of Health is imposing Apartheid rules on health workers. Non-Muslim female nurses and doctors have to wash their hands between patients and before procedures. Female Muslim doctors and nurses don't. They get the option of wearing the less sanitary disposable plastic over-sleeves. (and keep in mind that they use their hands and water to wash after going to the toilet - no kaffir toilet paper for them)

Isn't it too funny how the UK government, in their quest to not offend, is creating two societies within their country? Didn't they fight Apartheid South Africa because they were offended that Blacks and Whites couldn't live side by side under the same equal laws? Who would've thought England would be an implementer of their own version of Apartheid???? 

Haha - you couldn't make this up if you tried. 

So, now Muslims are being seen as a protected species, subject to lesser laws than anyone else. They are to get special treatment and waivers on things they don't agree with in British society. Soon they'll start to dictate the terms under which they'll work and failure to heed their demands will be subject to calls of human rights abuses. Is this what has become of the once mighty British empire? And they laugh at the French for being white-flag waving cowards. At least the French have a law against wearing a full-face burqa! 

Well, Britain has lost its spine - no two ways about it. They have been cowered into the political correct corner, never to emerge again until someone with sense finally emerges. They are too spineless to defend their British laws and practices; too spineless to expect even basic human hygiene expectations towards their own PATIENTS. To the British government, patient lives are less important than cultural and religious beliefs of a group of invaders into Britain. 

It's the Muslim way or the highway. Goodness, I never thought I'd see the day that Britain lost respect around the world. That day has arrived for me.


The UK Department of Health recently announced that it would loosen hygiene rules for Muslim doctors and nurses. From now on, Muslim female staff will not need to wash their hands before procedures as it compromises their modesty. Instead, they will have the admittedly less sanitary option of wearing disposable plastic over-sleeves.

Acknowledging the danger of microbes and death, a Department of Health spokesman said, “The guidance is intended to . . . balance infection control measures with cultural beliefs.” But, believe it or not, from a culturist perspective, the death of some patients is not the main cause for concern that this policy elicits.

The most dangerous problem is that this policy encodes multiculturalism not culturism. Whereas culturism acknowledges that England has a majority culture to protect and promote, this multiculturalist policy implicitly says that England has no core culture. It says that the nation can be whatever pressure groups decide it is. It, therefore, officially ends the dominance of English culture in England.

If you think this is hyperbole, consider the decision’s potential impact on schools. If we are going to implement policies that recognize and give legal standing to balkanize our culture, we must think it through to such a broader societal impact. This legal precedent may require us to set up schools in which Islamic teachings are taught. If that seems extreme, keep in mind that multiculturalism has currently made it nearly a firing offense to criticize Islam in our schools.

When we encode multiculturalist school policy, we have a recursive loop of disaster. When we cannot criticize Islam, we cannot teach that much of Western history has been about fighting Islam. We must erase the concept that our defending Europe against Islamic invasion led the way to the Enlightenment and, ultimately, to our political freedoms. And when our school children are taught not to value our Western culture, they will not feel any sense of pride, have reasons to defend the civic virtues that make England strong, or possess a desire to protect their homeland.

Islam has been at war with the West nearly continuously since its inception. Wherever it takes over it imposes a ruthless theocracy that smothers the freedoms we hold dear. We cannot protect the West with policies that say Islam is equal to our civilization. Culture is not metaphysical. It exists in space and people. Everywhere Islam has legal standing and is practiced is a space where English culture does not exist and is not practiced. It means the territory of defending Western values has shrunk and that believing in Islamic values has grown. The hospitals are now becoming Islamic.

England has a culture. To survive, England must set up culturist policy that affirms that this is English land with Western practices. We must tell people that our schools will teach the glories of the European defense against Islam and the contribution philosophers such as John Locke made to creating the Western concept of rights. Our streets must not become areas where women must conform to Muslim customs. Just as Saudi Arabia has an Islamic culture and protects it, England has a culture and a right to protect it. To survive, England must enact culturist, not multiculturalist policies.


"Bizarre Interpretation of Second Amendment" is Obstacle to UN Gun Grab

The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) negotiations are currently underway at the UN in New York.

The ATT seeks to regulate global imports and exports of conventional weapons, which will help curtail the flow of weapons into conflict zones and the hands of human rights violators. The Trojan Horse being used by the UN on this gun-grab is that the treaty is necessary for human rights reasons. Oh really? 

Well, just take a look at how successful the UN is today at looking after human rights, and then tell me this is all about human rights. The UN hounds Israel as the biggest violator of human rights today, yet turns their head to the various dictators around the world who are really infringing on their people's human rights. In fact, the UN usually rewards these dictator states with seats on their various human rights bodies.

Oxfam, the World Council of Churches, Amnesty International, and Control Arms are lamenting that the current version of the treaty is too weak to be effective. Apparently, it's not going to save lives or protect people as it currently reads. 

That is how loopy these communists are. And make no mistake, the four organisations mentioned above are pure communist organisations. They won't be happy until every private gun is removed, leaving people defenceless and sitting ducks to evil. Oh, guns in government hands is okay - guns in the UN hands are even better - according to these fools, but those in the hands of anyone else should be stopped. So, following their logic, the moment the ATT comes into effect, every terrorist group on Earth; every tyrant on Earth; every low-life scum criminal on Earth - will miraculously see the light and hand over their arms to the UN. (rolling eyes) 

Well, let's go a bit further than what these commies want. How about we just disarm everyone in the world, including every army, police force and any other "peace-keeping" organisation, including the hopelessly inept UN peace keepers? That way no one will ever have a boo-boo. If private individuals aren't allowed to bear arms, then this view should apply across the board.

In the good old days guns were a necessity for self-protection and to protect property. Before guns, knives or swords were the weapons of choice. Then guns came along. And then big government came along and THEY decided that people shouldn't be armed. They would protect us. They would provide armed police to control and protect the people. And yet, when you are attacked in your home, there are no police in the cupboard just waiting to fight for you. They arrive after the fact. The Police's role in society should be one of maintaining the peace and to pre-empt attacks. They should be there to solve murders and to investigate crime. People should be able to protect themselves until they arrive.

Just look at Switzerland. Switzerland doesn't have an army - they have a people's militia as its national defence. Men between the ages of 20 and 30 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. The personal weapons of the militia are kept at home as part of their military obligations, and many keep their guns after they complete their service. As a result, Switzerland has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world, but little gun-related street crime. They are a land-locked country which no one has dared attack or invade - even during WWII. Why? Because the people are armed to the teeth. It's also why no one has invaded America.....yet.

But not according to the UN. No. They can't have people armed and ready to fight and defend their lives and their fellow man. They want government to be in charge of that. All sounds great, right? But, what happens when government doesn't have your best interests at heart? Just ask anyone who has lived under a dictator how free and protected they felt. It's why people living under dictators would rather die trying to escape than live under their oppressive laws. 

The biggest killer of people has been.........government.

The USSR killed 61 911 000 people from 1917-1987. 
Germany killed 20 946 000 from 1933 - 1945. 
Japan killed 5 964 000 from 1936 - 1945.
Cambodia killed 2 035 000 from 1975 - 1979.
China (PRC) killed 76 702 000 from 1949 - 1987.

That's just some of the deaths at the hands of caring governments - where people didn't have the option of protecting themselves using weapons equal to what government used on them. In fact, they were all unarmed by their governments.

The Founding Fathers in America read history and understood man's nature. The more things change, the more they stay the same. And the American Constitution is to protect "the same" in that sentence. No matter how much man advances, his basic instinct stays the same. The Second Amendment allows the people - the militia - to be able to defend themselves against a tyranical government. Obama views the Constitution as flawed and stuck in the Founding Fathers era. No my dear Barrack Obama - it is because of  the nature of tyrants like you and your fellow progressives that the Founding Fathers built in protections for the ordinary man on the street to protect himself against you. 

We are born free and then controlled by government, and now it seems the UN also wants in on the action. Well, good luck with that. People are able to make 3D-printed guns and magazines these days. What you gonna do then? 

The more government tries to control us, our human nature allows us to find ways around the laws they throw at us. When will they learn?

Hat tip: Huge P

The white part is a 3D printed magazine. Government bans large magazines? No prob, just print one.

NEW YORK — On Monday, March 25, the permanent mission to the United Nations from Mexico sponsored a press event where representatives of four major non-governmental organizations (NGOs) made statements on the progress of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) negotiations currently underway in New York.

The four speakers — representing Oxfam, the World Council of Churches, Amnesty International, and Control Arms — lamented the fact that the current version of the gun control treaty is too weak to be effective.

“This treaty is not good enough,” said Anna MacDonald of Oxfam. “This is not the treaty that is going to save lives and protect people.”

Decrying the “loopholes,” “weaknesses,” and “deficiencies” of the proposal, the groups called for increased regulation and more robust enforcement provisions.

At one point, departing from the globalist party line which promises that the treaty will not affect domestic gun laws, MacDonald warned that the ATT could only save the world from violence if it is made more stringent and is “consistently enforced across state borders.” 

Among the many complaints registered by these human rights groups, the one most often mentioned Monday was the draft proposal’s failure to clamp down on the sale, trade, and transfer of ammunition.

As I’ve written early in this series of reports from the UN, nearly every nation participating in the negotiations advocates a more robust treaty, one that will include regulations and eventual confiscation of ammunition. 

When pressed by reporters to name the state parties responsible for the treaty’s lack of substantial anti-ammo provisions, MacDonald named the United States.

Secretary of State John Kerry, however, issued a statement just prior to the opening of the latest attempt to hammer out an arms trade agreement announcing that the U.S. was “steadfast in its commitment to achieve a strong and effective Arms Trade Treaty that helps address the adverse effects of the international arms trade on global peace and stability.”

There is also the irrefutable fact that there would be no conference right now were it not for the fact that the Obama administration’s previously filed objections to the treaty mysteriously disappeared after the president won reelection in November.

Within hours, in fact, of locking up another four years in the White House, President Obama ordered the U.S. diplomats to vote in favor of another round of negotiations and to green light the globalist gun grab.

Ironically, then, without the support of the United States there would be no treaty to debate, but it is the United States that is accused of being the roadblock that is standing in the way of accelerating toward civilian disarmament.

Unlike in most sessions of this conference, not only was the United States identified as the chief culprit in the robbery of peace and happiness from the world’s women and children, but the specific provision in the Constitution that inspires this evil was named, as well.

When asked by this reporter how he answers the criticism by gun rights advocates in the United States that the Arms Trade Treaty infringes on the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, World Council of Churches programme executive Jonathan Frerichs said that such a notion was a “bizarre interpretation of the Second Amendment.”

“The [Arms Trade Treaty] does not impact the Second Amendment,” said Anna MacDonald, adding that any statements to the contrary were “lies and misinformation.”

Frerichs, evidently fired up by the opportunity to vent about the American fascination with civilian gun ownership, denounced the “paranoia” of the gun lobby for “holding the world hostage” to violence by demanding that the Second Amendment be held inviolate.

After the press conference, this reporter asked a man identifying himself as a member of Control Arms why, if his organization and others were serious about drafting a treaty that would answer the objections of Second Amendment advocates, they didn’t just include a provision explicitly forbidding any diminution of that right and declaring that it was a person’s unqualified right to keep and bear arms. The response?

“Because we don’t believe that is a right.”

And therein lies the rub: The internationalists do not believe that an individual has the right to keep and bear arms. The internationalists do not believe that that right — or any other right — was given to man by God. The internationalists believe that the slate of UN-approved “human rights” are subject to negotiation and revocation at the will of government.

It is clear from nearly every statement made during the first five days of the Arms Trade Treaty conference that the United Nations is not content to confine itself to ending violence through regulation of the trade in arms. Its principal aim is to enact a globally enforceable scheme whereby all firearms — from handgun to intercontinental missile — all ammunition, and all parts and components of weapons and ammunition, are kept out of the hands of individuals and under the closely regulated and absolute control of the United Nations or one of its approved “state parties.” 

National governments are to be converted via this treaty and myriad others already passed and yet to be passed into nothing more than bureaucratic administrative units of the global government-in-waiting.

And, although the U.S. delegation seems to be playing the role of spoiler, the very presence of American diplomats at a conference whose goal is anathema to one of this nation’s most fundamental liberties is reprehensible. The fact that the U.S. delegation sits and listens as other nations insult our way of life and our “bizarre” belief that man is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights, including the right to defend oneself from being deprived of life, liberty, and property, is an insult to the men and women who have given their lives to secure these rights.

Given the nearly constant call for the United States to relent and allow the tinhorn dictators of the world to dictate terms of disarmament to this Republic, our president should immediately recall these negotiators and demand that the teeming nest of hornets buzzing around Turtle Bay be fumigated and relocated to some other country where devotion to a person’s right to keep and bear arms won’t be such a nuisance.

This will not happen, however. Despite their pantomime of commitment to preserving the Second Amendment, President Obama and Secretary Kerry are inveterate internationalists committed rather to the slow and steady surrender of U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations and to securing the world body’s monopoly over all means of armed resistance to its efforts to enslave the world.

American interests would be better served if U.S. diplomats at the Arms Trade Treaty looked less to Barack Obama and John Kerry for guidance and more to Joseph Story’s commentary on the purpose of the Constitution’s protection of the people’s right to keep and bear arms. In 1833, Story wrote:

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

Our ability to resist and ultimately triumph over arbitrary power is being threatened this week at the United Nations. If the Arms Trade Treaty passes and the American people are threatened with imprisonment should they refuse to first register and then relinquish their guns, the would-be despots at the UN will have triumphed and the palladium of liberty will be demolished.