While Ramaphosa condemns the land grabs as “illegal”, he is pushing ahead with a plan to return much white-held land to black ownership, without compensation. All that is needed to change the South African constitution — in this case, to remove the compensation clause — is the support of two-thirds of the parliament.

Ramaphosa’s African National Congress and the EFF have the numbers. Meetings will be held after Easter when Ramaphosa is expected to reveal further details of the expropriation scheme, which he vows will be “fair”.

White farmers — who now have a fourth problem, of old-school Afrikaner extremists hijacking the debate with their own separatist agenda, fouling the waters — are expecting the worst.

The question of whether farm attacks are “normal” crime or targeted race crime is the subject of much commentary. There is no question that more black people suffer more from crime in South Africa than whites — given their majority, that is not surprising.

However, there are only 30,000 commercial white farmers left in South Africa, down from 60,000 at the changeover from apartheid in the early 1990s. With 400 farm attacks last year, up tenfold from a decade ago, and between one and two farmers murdered every week, this cohort soars above the current annual national murder rate of 34 murders per 100,000.

The heavy toll, along with a tendency for attackers to linger on the scene to commit wilful atrocity, is why white farmers feel certain they are persecuted; and the reason Australian Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton sparked outrage and gratitude when he said he would consider humanitarian visas for them to apply to live in a “civilised” country.

Mostly, the farmers don’t want to come here but they appreciate that it has brought international attention to their plight.

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/394c213e111f7a3e8527c4495943ac73?width=650
Mieke Heunis, 7, told the man who shot and killed her father Johann in front of her on the family’s chicken holding outside Pretoria last year that he could take her piggy bank if he would stop hurting her father. Mieke is now being treated with antidepressants. The property was surrounded by electric fences and thought to be safe.

“If I had to decide with my head,” says Gabriel Stols, “I would go to Australia for my children. But with my heart, I still want to stay. The reason is there is so much blood shed on this ground. My brother’s blood is on the ground. To leave, then his life will mean nothing.

“I want a future for my children. I’m scared for myself, my children and my wife. It is being said on national TV that they’re not calling for the slaughter of white people ‘yet’.”

Leon Kellermann, SC, of the South African bar, lives on a small holding outside Pretoria. It was a functioning egg-production farm but it became too dangerous for him and his black workers to guard from attack as they shifted produce and cash on the roads.

South Africa, says Kellermann, is teetering. “The courts are still functioning here, there is rule of law,” he says, citing the refusal of the judiciary to dismiss corruption charges against the previous president, Jacob Zuma. “But the rest of the organisations are in turmoil. If it wasn’t for the courts, we would be a pariah state.”

Kellermann, like most South Africans, plans his days around survival. It means changing the time he leaves home and work each day so observers don’t clock his patterns.

“I’ve got eight-foot walls, electric fencing, dogs inside my home,” he says. “I’ve got cottage windows to make access difficult. Going upstairs to my bedroom, I have a built-in gate which I close myself in at night and, of course, alarms. Every day, without fail, I check the perimeter for what we call ‘battle signs’.

“I know the local population and I know who’s who. I grew up with them. I know who’s new.”

This barrister, who by day writes opinions in well-appointed chambers, always has protection at hand. “I’ve got a shotgun and a 9mm that I carry,” he says. “You have to be prepared to use it.” https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/six-hours-of-torture-for-the-keys...

Perhaps they are worried about being fitted for one of her necklaces?

In Reel Bad Arabs, the late professor Jack Sheehan conducted a comprehensive and damning study of the representation of Arabs in Hollywood. Analysing more than 1,000 depictions of Arab fictional screen characters, he found Arabs were routinely portrayed as “heartless, brutal, uncivilized, religious fanatics through common depictions of Arabs kidnapping or raping a fair maiden; expressing hatred ... and demonstrating a love for wealth and power.” Sound familiar?

Only 5% of Arab film roles – 12 characters in total – portrayed Arabs as “normal, human characters.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/20/what-a-surprise-that-two-a...


Reputation.

While Ramaphosa condemns the land grabs as “illegal”, he is pushing ahead with a plan to return much white-held land to black ownership, without compensation. All that is needed to change the South African constitution — in this case, to remove the compensation clause — is the support of two-thirds of the parliament.

Actually Frank, no constitutional change is required ,,,,if they decide fair compensation is zero.

And they will.

miketrees wrote on Apr 24^th, 2018 at 9:09pm:

This is why Africa  - and remote aboriginal Australia - are shithole 60 years after black rule/self-determination was instituted. Black rule simply means the reverting to pre-modern tribal bastardry on the taxpayer's dime.

In the name of 'native culture' of course. It is the same everywhere. Re-asserting native 'values' in 2018 just leads to ruin because 2018 is NOT 40,000 BC.
But when the primitives have tax payer funding - who is to stop them? Keep the money coming in fort Toyotas and welfare and they will beat the shite out of their women and children and let their young run amok, drugged and promiscuous  and have VD coz they are 'free' and communing with the land and singing to it.

miketrees wrote on Apr 24^th, 2018 at 9:12pm:


These days, anyone that calls me a "racist" gets a response of "thank you". Many years ago (over 20 years ago when I was in my late 20s), I recall someone using that strategy against some "xenophobe censor". The reaction they got from getting thanked was a blank stare and then a couple blinks of disbelief. Someone attended a Pauline Hanson meeting. Some proto-social justice warrior of the late-1990s went up in the face of the attendee and called the man a "racist". The attendee just gave him a challenge with "Why am I a racist?". He then reported that the accuser went to water and backed down without giving an answer.

Some people are just plain determined to go along with whatever the flavour of the month on social issues is current. The crowd of protesters that went to the hall in Rockhampton to chant were so blinkered in their ideology that they were oblivious to the people in the world that were not concerned either way with being triggered by racial issues. I almost ran a few protesters over doing deliveries back in 1997. They just stepped out in front of traffic, more concerned about where they were headed, rather than the journey they took to get there. And I think that is the main problem we had back then. Too busy being obnoxious. Not concerned about how they present their message.

If the politicians need to optimise the immigration so that we get more migrants or less, it should not matter how people see them as racist or not. We should be concerned about developing our society and economy for what is best for our people.