WARNING: This is Version 1 of my old archive, so Photos will NOT work and many links will NOT work. But you can find articles by searching on the Titles. There is a lot of information in this archive. Use the SEARCH BAR at the top right. Prior to December 2012; I was a pro-Christian type of Conservative. I was unaware of the mass of Jewish lies in history, especially the lies regarding WW2 and Hitler. So in here you will find pro-Jewish and pro-Israel material. I was definitely WRONG about the Boeremag and Janusz Walus. They were for real.
Original Post Date: 2008-11-10 Time: 20:00:06 Posted By: Jan
By Leonard Ramatlakane
Carl Niehaus is obviously playing catch-up big time in the ANC, after almost a decade in the political wilderness, hence the ardent and blinded responses we have witnessed from this ANC cadre in trying to re-establish his political credibility to the new leadership.
Why else would Niehaus go to the lengths he is going in covering up for a leadership looking over the abyss.
The opinion article in the Daily News last Monday, (November 3) is yet another attempt to play the man and not the ball – ie. the issues.
| You cannot set poor standards and expect a leadership of high value |
Niehaus starts his piece by clearly characterising the breakaway of the Shikota group from the ANC as an affair “devoid of principle… and solely based on bruised egos… and the inability to accept internal democracy”.
Shikota, led by Mosiuoa Lekota and Mbhazima Shilowa, is all for the latter, but Niehaus and some ANC leaders are constitutionalists of the highest order, defenders of good governance and the sole custodians of ethical leadership.
Nothing in daily practice of the ANC at organisational level is further from the truth and slowly but surely this tendency of mob rule is beginning to creep into state organs, as we can see.
The problem with apologists like Niehaus and others is that they have not been present in the ANC to witness the shenanigans of this period.
They should be asking what is wrong in the ANC of today that leadership across the country at branch, zonal, regional, provincial and even NEC levels are prepared to throw in the towel and say the ANC under the current leadership is not the ANC we grew up with.
| The NEC can attempt to cover-up, but this leadership will not stand the test of time |
The statements, actions, purges and direction of this movement under Zuma cannot claim to be to torch bearers of Albert Luthuli, Oliver Tambo, Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and Govan Mbeki.
Indeed, we all fought for the democracy we have today and Shikota can form their own party and leave the ANC, and yes, the ANC is entitled to its own views on why people are leaving, but the nature of that response must be about bolstering our constitutional democracy, not the type of vile res-ponses we have witnessed from the leadership of the ANC – referring to Shikota’s movement as snakes, dogs, etc.
What kind of leadership is this that is prepared to go on national television and call leaders opposed to their rule derogatory names?
This, Carl Niehaus, is the leadership you claim is visionary, exemplary and courageous and having good values.
The questions often asked are: why are you leaving the ANC? What are we espousing that is different from the current policy of the ANC?
The fundamental differences are what Shikota stands for:
The ANC would claim all of the above; the difference is the practice of these goals in the Shikota movement, in the organs of the party and in government.
The ANC under the current leadership has flouted all these values in practice.
Look at the disarray in the ANC structures today, how provincial conferences were planned, orchestrated, manipulated for the sole purpose of retaining a faction loyal to the current leadership, to the extent that in certain instances there were even claims of fraud and criminal acts having taken place.
Niehaus needs just to look at the Western Cape, Northern Cape and Limpopo. Then he will understand why the ANC under the current leadership has lost its moral and ethical leadership compass.
You cannot set poor standards and expect a leadership of high values; your processes are corrupt, that is the starting point. The NEC can attempt to cover-up, but this leadership will not stand the test of time.
On the issue of policies, we will develop our own policy guidelines where the ANC intends to deviate from the very successful policies of the Thabo Mbeki government.
One needs to read the latest policy trends beginning to emerge from the ANC Youth League to get a sense of these well-known, market unfriendly initiatives being planned.
Central to our policies must be greater intervention in the fight against crime, not to kill the golden goose in the fight against crime – the Scorpions; the independence and authority of the country’s central bank to defend the currency and our economy, not diminishing the role of the governor of the Reserve Bank; more foreign direct investment, requiring at times a degree of well negotiated and regulated labour market flexibility if we are to compete with India, Brazil, Vietnam, etc – not a blanket “no” to any reforms.
The character assault by Niehaus on Shikota is slanderous, but then I guess that is the new weapon in the ANC arsenal in dealing with opponents: rubbish them until the negativity sticks.
Shikota is about fighting ideas with greater ideas.
The bitterness and resentment ascribed to us might well be correct, as post-Polokwane was to represent the unity of the movement, as the ANC leadership promised.
The ANC has never been so divided in its 96 years. So, yes we are bitter that we were forced to leave an organisation which for many has been there our entire lives. But the ANC leadership has made this departure more palatable by its responses, once again affirming our decision to leave.
Niehaus questions the inference of cult personality of Jacob Zuma and rather construes this as a Mbeki trait.
How do you explain the quotes: “I will kill for Zuma”, “We will die for Zuma”, “I will kill myself for Zuma”.
This has become the ANC of today, ruled by ANCYL president Julius Malema and companions.
Indeed, the family break-up has taken place.
The ANC must allow those who wish to leave the party the freedom to organise, relocate, and defend their positions, without fear, threats and retribution. Only then can the likes of Niehaus claim to be true constitutionalists in defence of a free South Africa.