What goes for the reconstituted South African Police Force, a corrupt, illiterate, and ill-trained force, riven by feuds, fetishes, and factional loyalties, is organized enough to go after “right-wing militia.”
Taking a page out of the unholy American hymnbook, an extremist—in the eyes of the law and the propagandized at large—is any patriot who doesn’t approve of pillage politics, loss of all individual liberties and, in the case of South Africa, a massive transfer of assets from owners to non-owners while, simultaneously killing off the former.
THE OUTRAGE HERE is that the arrest is linked to an email I too received, which did no more than speak of what is underway in South Africa and attach images of harpooned, raped, sodomized, skewered, white victims. Notice that the authenticity of the so-called subversive material has not been denied by the arresting authorities.
“APA – Cape Town (South Africa) South African police this week swooped on members of an extremist right-wing organisation, the Suidlanders, as part of an investigation into plans to sabotage the soccer World Cup, APA learns here Sunday.
Raids have taken place in Pretoria and Mpumalanga and come in the wake of heightened racial tensions after the murder of white supremacist leader, Eugene Terre’Blanche and the recent outbursts by African National Congress Youth League president Julius Malema. [No arrests of his ilk, so far.]
Earlier this week, the police also swooped on the Worcester home of Frederick Rabie, a former lieutenant colonel in the old civilian force commandos, in the Cape Province. He was arrested and police discovered an arms cache, including explosives and thousands of rounds of ammunition at his house. The bust comes a week after the arrest of the head of security at the Worcester Magistrate’s Court (in the Western Cape Province), Henry Harding, following the discovery of a cache of explosives, firearms, ammunition and drugs in underground storerooms at the magistrate’s court.
Rabie was given bail and will appear in court on Monday.
The police investigation into the suspected sabotage plot is linked to an e-mail calling on foreigners to boycott the World Cup that is being circulated worldwide. It talks of a war against white South Africans and carries graphic details and bloody photographs of white victims of crime. Claiming to reveal information suppressed by the South African Police Force (SAPF) and the media, the e-mail urges foreigners to stay away from South Africa during the World Cup.
Claiming that the country is on the verge of a full-blown revolution that would lead to civil war, the website says : ‘The time has come for people to realise they cannot be on the sideline any longer and everybody’s participation is needed to defend the last bastion of a true Christian nation against total annihilation.’
Sources this week confirmed that alleged plans by right-wing elements to ‘destabilise’ South Africa in the run-up to the World Cup were being taken “seriously”. Police spokesman Colonel Vish Naidoo refused to comment on the investigations, but said that the security forces were prepared for any eventuality during the World Cup.”
[SNIP]
BACK HOME, AND according to William N. Grigg’s update on the Hutaree prosecution:
“the Hutaree defendants, U.S. District Court Judge Victoria Roberts provides extensive excerpts from the evidence. This includes redacted transcripts of conversations in which militia David and Joshua Stone, Michael Meeks, and Kristopher Sickles talk about killing judges and law enforcement personnel.
The ellipses littering the transcript are tangible evidence of cherry-picking by the prosecution.
Even orphaned from context, however, the recorded conversations don’t amount to evidence of a criminal conspiracy, but rather a tendency to engage in the worst kind of self-deluded, adolescent locker-room braggadoccio.” [sic]
UPDATE: I’m growing tired of the Comments Section always plumping for the Republicans, no matter how I and others have labored over the years to show that once in power, there is not an iota of difference between the parties. Really tired. Why should I advertise for the creeps? I’m also tired of adding links to my work to show that, for example, reports maligning patriotic Americans were begun under Bush.
Read up. Search under “Republicans” in BAB’s archive and under the Articles archive on the main site.
CENTER FOR IMMIGRATION STUDIES ON THE NEW ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW, SB1070
WASHINGTON (April 29, 2010) – The new law recently signed by the governor of Arizona, SB 1070, makes it a state crime to violate some federal immigration statutes. While the law is extremely popular in the state, with 70 percent of Arizona voters approving of it and just 23 percent opposed, it has raised controversy. Below is a brief summary of the relevant information on illegal immigration in Arizona, followed by a short analysis of SB 1070’s major provisions.
Illegal immigration in Arizona:
• The federal government estimated that Arizona had one of the fastest growing illegal immigrant populations in the country, increasing from 330,000 in 2000 to 560,000 by 2008.1
• Arizona has adopted other laws to deter the settlement of illegal immigrants in the state in recent years. The federal government estimates that the illegal immigrant population dropped by 18 percent in the state from 2008 to 2009, compared to a 7 percent drop for the nation as a whole.2 This may be evidence that the state enforcement efforts are having an impact.
• The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has found that 22 percent of felonies in the county are committed by illegal immigrants.3 Illegal immigrants are estimated to be 10 percent of the county’s adult population.4
• Analysis of data from State Criminal Alien Assistance Program showed that illegal immigrants were 11 percent of the state’s prison population. Illegal immigrants were estimated to be 8 percent of state’s adult population at the time of the analysis.5
• Approximately 17 percent of those arrested by the Border Patrol in its Tucson Sector have criminal records in the United States.6
• The issue of illegal immigration and crime is very difficult to measure, and while in Arizona there is evidence that illegal immigrants are committing a disproportionate share of crime, it is not clear this is the case nationally.7
• In 2007, the Center for Immigration Studies estimated that 12 percent of workers in the Arizona are illegal immigrants.8
• In 2007, the Center estimated that illegal immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) comprise one-fifth of those in the state living in poverty, one-third of those without health insurance, and one out of six students in the state’s schools.9
• In 2007, the Center estimated that one-third of households headed by illegal immigrants in Arizona used at least one major welfare program, primarily food-assistance programs or Medicaid. Benefits were typically received on behalf of U.S.-born children.10
• The new law (SB 1070) is extremely popular among Arizona voters. A Rasmussen poll found that 70 percent of voters approve of the new bill, and just 23 percent oppose it.11
Among the new law’s provisions:
• The new Arizona law mirrors federal law, which already requires aliens (non-citizens) to register and carry their documents with them (8 USC 1304(e) and 8 USC 1306(a)). The new Arizona law simply states that violating federal immigration law is now a state crime as well. Because illegal immigrants are by definition in violation of federal immigration laws, they can now be arrested by local law enforcement in Arizona.
• The law is designed to avoid the legal pitfall of “pre-emption,” which means a state can’t adopt laws that conflict with federal laws. By making what is a federal violation also a state violation, the Arizona law avoids this problem.
• The law only allows police to ask about immigration status in the normal course of “lawful contact” with a person, such as a traffic stop or if they have committed a crime.
• Estimates from the federal government indicate that more than 80 percent of illegal immigrants come from Latin America.12 Thus, there is concern that police may target only Hispanics for enforcement.
• Before asking a person about immigration status, law enforcement officials are required by the law to have “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal immigrant. The concept of “reasonable suspicion” is well established by court rulings. Since Arizona does not issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, having a valid license creates a presumption of legal status. Examples of reasonable suspicion include:
• A driver stopped for a traffic violation has no license, or record of a driver’s license or other form of federal or state identification.
• A police officer observes someone buying fraudulent identity documents or crossing the border illegally.
• A police officer recognizes a gang member back on the street who he knows has been previously deported by the federal government.
• The law specifically states that police, “may not solely consider race, color or national origin” when implementing SB 1070.
• When Arizona’s governor signed the new law, she also issued an executive order requiring the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board to provide local police with additional training on what does and what does not constitute “reasonable suspicion.”13
# # #
The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent non-partisan research institution that examines the impact of immigration on the United States. It is not involved in drafting legislation and has not formally endorsed or opposed SB 1070.
Endnotes
1 See Table 4 “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2008,” http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2008.pdf.
2 See ‘Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2009,” Table 4, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf See also Table 4 “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2008,” http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2008.pdf.
3 The Maricopa County Attorney’s office report is at: http://www.mcaodocuments.com/press/20081002_a-whitepaper.pdf.
4 See Table 3 in “Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Conflicted Issue,” http://www.cis.org/ImmigrantCrime.
5 See Table 6 in “Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Conflicted Issue,” http://www.cis.org/ImmigrantCrime.
6 See “The Krentz Bonfire: Will the murder of a respected Cochise County rancher change anything on our border?” Tucson Weekly, April 29, 2010, http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/the-krentz-bonfire/Content?oid=1945848.
7 The Center for Immigration Studies has conducted a detailed review of the literature and data available on crime. Nationally it is very difficult to come to a clear conclusion about crime rates among immigrants. The report, “Immigration and Crime: Assessing a Conflicted Issue,” is at: http://www.cis.org/ImmigrantCrime.
8 See Tables 21 in “Immigrants in the United States, 2007: A Profile of America’s Foreign-Born Population,” http://www.cis.org/immigrants_profile_2007.
9 See Tables 23, 24, and 26 in “Immigrants in the United States, 2007: A Profile of America’s Foreign-Born Population,” http://www.cis.org/immigrants_profile_2007.
10 See Tables 25 in “Immigrants in the United States, 2007: A Profile of America’s Foreign-Born Population,” http://www.cis.org/immigrants_profile_2007.
11 Rasmussen poll released April 21, 2010, of likely voters in Arizona, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/arizona/70_of_arizona_voters_favor_new_state_measure_cracking_down_on_illegal_immigration.
12 See ‘Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2009,” Figure 2, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf.
13 See http://www.azpost.state.az.us/bulletins/eo201009.pdf.
“Rachel Maddow’s gayness (and goggles) is the most interesting thing about her. What I’m trying to say here is that the MSNBC TV host has a mundane mind, which, rest assured, will insert and assert itself during an upcoming special presentation, “The McVeigh Tapes: Confessions of an American Terrorist.” ….
A far more interesting choice for presenter of the forthcoming MSNBC feature on McVeigh would have been the brilliant belletrist Gore Vidal.
Like Maddow, Vidal (aged 83) is a gay leftist. Unlike Maddow, he manages to dazzle with his original insights. (Unfashionably, Vidal has also poked fun at assorted anal activists and at all manner of “vulgar fagism.”)
Gore Vidal is rare in recognizing the legitimate federal insults to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that motivated McVeigh to commit his crime. He is also unique, on the Left and Right, in acknowledging that McVeigh was not a rube, but a thoughtful man who had fought for his country and was familiar with its foundational principles and documents.
As the most able counsel for the defense (McVeigh’s), the iconoclastic octogenarian would have given his viewers something to mull over; mundane Maddow will not. …
The Second Edition features bonus material and reviews. Get your copy(or copies) now!
Update (April 16): Inferring motivation, or psychologizing about the reason Vidal respected some of McVeigh’s arguments are species of ad hominem. I avoid them, for the most; I don’t take them seriously when others make them. In fact, that’s MSNBC’s stock-in-trade; impute motivation (“racism” always) to your foe and attack him based on assumptions about his inner workings, rather than deal with the facts and merits of his argument.
So, our (much-welcomed) commenter claims Vidal had a homoerotic fixation with McVeigh, and therefore everything he claimed to respect in McVeigh is not credible. That line of reasoning is illogical.
A quote from McVeigh:
I think it all has to do with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and the misconception that the government is obliged to provide those things or has the jurisdiction to deny them. We’ve gotten away from the principle that they were only created to secure those rights. And that’s where, I believe, much of the trouble has surfaced.
I agree with that. And if a “stormtrooper” agrees with the above statement, then consider that a stormtrooper, McVeigh and I agree about the statement. Other than to argue in circles, so what?!
“Eugene Terre’Blanche, leader of the Afrikaner Resistance Movement (AWB) that seeks the establishment of a homeland for the Afrikaners of South Africa, was alone at his homestead over the Easter period, when two farmhands bludgeoned the sixty-nine-year-old separatist to a pulp with pangas and pipes. Based on hearsay—and their abiding sympathy for savages—news media across the West are insisting that the motive for the murder was a “labor dispute.” …
… The brutality of the racially motivated murders of white farmers in South Africa, and, increasingly, of whites in general, is one aspect of these crimes. Mr. Terre’Blanche was unrecognizable. Two weeks before he was slaughtered, seventeen-year-old Anika Smit was raped, her throat slashed sixteen times and her hands hacked off and removed from the scene.
Both acts of butchery were unremarkable in Mandela’s South Africa.
The dehumanization of the victim—Crimen injuria in South African law—is another feature of these feral acts. When they were finished with him, Terre’Blanche’s killers pulled down the old man’s pants, exposing his privates. Slain white farmers are often displayed like trophies by their black killers.
Mr. Terre’Blanche was a victim of a farm murder, plain and simple.” …
Malama “threw a BBC journalist out of a press conference, accusing him of ‘white tendency’ and calling him a ‘bastard,’ ‘bloody agent’ and ‘small boy.'”
The BBC, chief obfuscator on matters South African, is made to eat dirt by a Frankenstein that is of its own creation. The West pushed for raw democracy in South Africa, and is now recoiling in horror at its former proteges and at what they’re, predictably, doing to the place.
Update I (April 10): The Funeral.
To our reader in the Comments Section: I did not see the Nazi salute in the footage I watched of Eugene Terre’Blanche’s funeral. However, I have never claimed the AWB was a savory organization. What I said is that as volatile as Terre’Blanche was, he and his cause (self-determination for whites) had come to appear civilized—civilized and prophetic—as compared to the people of whom he had warned, now running the country.
In the interviews I’ve watched, I saw gleeful black folks in Ventersdorp; and dignified resigned Afrikaners. That’s all I saw.
Now, is the AWB multicultural and non-racial; no. They believed that were South Africa—a country built by Boer and British—to fall into the hands of a black majority, it would go the way of the rest of Africa. That’s why they were separatists. Theirs was not a racial war but a war of self-preservation and survival.
Americans who’ve long since forgotten what it is to fight for their national life—and life—think that such South Africans were having fun fooling around with Nazi-looking insignia. Yes, there is unsavory stuff about the AWB. I did not understand nor sympathize with them back in the day. But I recognize now that the drive behind such an organization was a desperate attempt to forestall black majority rule, as it was believed that should that come to pass, the country they loved would be lost.
Were they right? You tell me.
Update III: I have very little patience for the South African Institute for Race Relations in all its sanctimony. I’ve been drawing on some of their factual work for my own book, but overall, they have been deniers of the racial aspect of Boer murders. That is criminal negligence. Unjust. And worse.
Nevertheless, the SAIRR teases apart some of the dynamics behind the uptick in the ANC’s racial incitement against whites (using barbarian front man, Malema):
the party is acutely aware that its support base of poor black South Africans has begun to turn against it. Violent protest action against the ruling party is now commonplace around the country.
In order to shore up support in the black community the ANC increasingly appears to be seeking to shift the blame for its delivery failures onto the small white ethnic minority, which today comprises well under 10% of the total population of South Africa. Here parallels may be read to the behaviour of Zanu-PF in Zimbabwe when that party realised that its political future was in peril. The ANC Youth League’s recent visit to Zanu-PF which saw it endorse that party’s ruinous polices are pertinent here.
Note: You can incite racial violence all you want in my neck of the woods, or among most white South Africans; murder will not be resorted to. Boer are being killed en masse because there are a lot of blacks who want to kill them.
From hereon in the much-anticipated press release descends into the same liberal clichés and solecisms.
“… a resurgent right wing will be numerous. It is most unlikely that this right wing will take the form of camouflage clad henchmen on horses in shows of force.”
OMIGOD. Would that such a resurgence took such a form; why would putting the fear of God into men with murder on their minds be so bad? How is a show of force from an attacked minority a bad thing when the alternative is to put your faith in a fat, functionally illiterate, corrupt constabulary that roots for Malema?
These people (SAIRR) make me sick.
More useful facts:
• the ANC depends greatly on the tax income paid by white South Africans to balance South Africa’s books.
• it depends entirely on the food produced by a small number of white farmers to feed the country.
• white South Africans still dominate the skills base of the country.
• and most importantly, much white opinion since the early 1990s has been moderate. White South Africa has been willing and often eager to cooperate with the Government in building an open, non-racial, and prosperous South Africa
Update IV (April 11): The British Daily Mail has decided that the raised arms at Terre’Blanche’s funeral are Nazi salutes. Is it so, or is it the interpretation of media that have not bothered to inquire what the raised arm means? I myself do not know. The flag emblem, as explained on the AWB website, isn’t intended as Nazi insignia.
Here’s what we know which belies the stupid, malevolent fixation of a hostile, ignorant media: This tiny minority is being systematically killed off; this tiny minority doesn’t wish to exterminate, a la Nazis, the 38 million blacks surrounding it; all the AWB wants is a place they can call their own, in the country they founded, away from those who want to kill them.
Have I distilled the facts without the fanciful? I think so.
Update V: To geniqu4u, thanks for writing:
• I hope you get my book when it’s out. I compare the number of deaths in detention under 40 years of apartheid with the number of murders in the New South Africa. More people die in ten weeks under Mandela’s SA than died in detention over 40 years of white rule. Ordinary blacks are missing the old SA. That’s how bad it is.
• Africa was immeasurably improved under colonialism; before that it was a morass of tribal internecine warfare of unimaginable cruelty; there were no roads, no infrastructure, education, health care, security. As I’ve written in “Blaming Colonialism Invalid, Even In Academe,” “Colonialism, dependency and racism—all highly politicized constructs—are beginning to be seen as humbugs, untrue and unhelpful, in explaining—and hence, helping—the Third World. What was once ‘conventional wisdom that brooked no dissent,’ in the words of Lawrence E. Harrison, is rarely mentioned today in intellectually respectable quarters. South Africa’s black population’s longevity, education, and numbers were markedly increased under white minority rule. Naturally, to describe reality is not to condone apartheid.”
• I don’t know where you get your data on African farming methods, but not one point you make is factual. South African blacks were never anything but subsistence farmers who had often done untold damage to the land, stripping it via indiscriminate grazing. The Afrikaner has been, in general, a good custodian of the land and the natural environment. There is no commercial, large-scale farmer in the world like the Afrikaners, who’ve turned an arid, impossible-to-farm land into oases with technology, innovation, dedication, and hard work. There isn’t a farmer who loves his live stock more than the Afrikaner. Most of the white-farmed land being seized under the land distribution policies of the ANC and given over to blacks has gone to seed. Beautiful, high tech installations taken from their owners (who feed the country, nay, the continent) and given to blacks have been reduced to rubble. The cruelty to the live stock is beyond belief; cattle dying of thirst, hunger and disease. I tell it in my book.
TimesOnLine: “South Africa’s white-dominated farming unions have greeted the threat of nationalisation with alarm. Since the end of apartheid in 1994, when multi-racial elections were held, 15m acres of farmland have been transferred to black ownership. Much of it is now lying idle, creating no economic benefit for the nation nor its new owners. Last year South Africa became a net importer of food for the first time in its history.
Update VI (April 12): Glenn Beck joined the ignoramus media by referring dramatically to the rise of extremism in South Africa, gleaned at a glance from the so-called Nazi-like salute at the funeral of Eugene Terreblanche. Thus, in order to conclude that the non-violent gathering of people at the funeral was the party deserving of condemnation—Glenn required nothing more than a symbolic gesture from them. Ignorance is bliss.
The insularity of American headline makers is alarming.