>just to make few reflections on the debate ensuing,firstly i think the rflection of the statistics speaks loudly on the kind of society we live in,this reflect the psychology of people which they r on the opposite side with capital relation in society,that much as our economy has been able to grow during past years but the question of the sharing remains the challenge.
Now this seeks to locate the question of the population of lumpagn proletariat im saying this because this shoot to kill is mostly to respond to what the statistics raised,which to me this activities located in those statistics are mostly engaged by this kind of proletariat in most societies,then this suggest that we have seen the growth of this layer in society for quiet sometime throughout the years u see tha thing,now this is the economic matter primarily. second element is that as a goverment u cant keep quiet when the statistics of this nature being consumed by society ofcourse the hegemonic class and the upper strata together with the middle strata would locate that they r not responsible for this kind of crime rather they r sometime the victims and lobbying will go out for goverment to tackle the psychology of the proletariat community.But whether to eliminate this bodies in the population may resolve the issue remains to be scientifically tested. it reminds of one the debate we use to have which says that because this capitalist benefit out the exploitation of working class and as result the working class becomes dehumanised then lets kill all of this capitalist and see wheter in their absence we shall assume socialist state,bt while if u look at it scientifically u find that is not about the capitalist living as a human being but the system being entrenched in the society and it matters not whether BIll Gates lives or is dead if economic fundamentals are in such a manner that the pendulum swing more on the bourgeousie their system shall continue intill such time u demolish the system though economic interventions those that seeks to benefit the working class,now my point is that wether u kill criminals or not,if u do not discipline capital in the manner that seeks to benefit the majority of working class u shall never win the war against the crime,simply because it has been proven that this people are engaging in this activities not because is fun bt for somewhat locating the economic need of some sort which may be the vacuum we created in the course of pursuit of NDR. let me rest a bit shall rejoin later PUPURU Comrade Mampheko vulgarizes the input by the national spokesperson > whilst agreeing to cde Gugu's views, this in my view smacks of a > deliberate attempt on his part to undermine the national spokesperson. > Whilst he desperately claims the monopoly of wisdom and understanding of > the complexity and the response to the crime problem he completely and > miserably fails to provide compelling evidence on how the national > spokesperson input fails to meet revolutionary engagements standards. > > > > On his vitriolic attack on the national spokesperson input with respect > to what he terms "uncomradely disagreement" perhaps cde Mampheko should > be reminded of the powerful words of one of our revolutionary greats > "tell no lies and claim no easy victories" or perhaps on his out of > touch with the masses views on their growing impatience with service > delivery failures he must be advised to give himself time to engage some > of our masses who have been involved in service delivery protests > recently, may be he would begin to appreciate that many of our people > votes for the ANC out of their loyalty in the face of many failed hopes > from our political manifestos from as far back as the 1994 elections and > in the face of continued failures by executive mayors and councilors to > deliver on basic services. For an example I engaged with a group of > protestors in Thokoza, who amongst other things were raising issues of > housing and having been on waiting lists from as far back as 1996 and > still waiting even today to get the houses that as the ANC we promised > them in the 1994 manifesto under the leadership of Nelson Mandela. Now > to down play their loyalty vote is denialism of the highest order which > can only be at the congress movement's own peril. > > We have begin to see challenges of such denialism with recent by > elections results, in Ekurhuleni, the ANC has lost two by elections, one > to COPE and one to the DA for the first time since the dawn of democracy > and this defeat was suffered because of denialists who did not want to > accept the short comings of the congress movement in providing service > delivery to ensure that the ANC becomes the convertor of the dream > enshrined in the freedom charter into a reality for all. > > > > Comrade Gugu is spot on in exposing this known truth and should be > encouraged to continue to raise this views within the structures to > ensure that as we approach the 2011 local government elections we are > aware of the weariness of our people in our failed promises and we > better correct the situation and respond accordingly to our peoples > needs in the historic ANC manner, that of the ANC being a party of the > people by the people for the people. > > > > Comrade Gugu, is correct in highlighting that the shoot to kill policy > does not address the problem of crime as in many instances, the problem > of crime is underpinned in poverty and many other social ills of our > society and therefore can not be deterred by a shoot to kill > intervention from the government. This articulation was very clear in > comrade Gugu's views, amazingly enough whilst cde Mampheko attacks this > views he goes ahead to repeat it with only modifying it by adding a lot > of common sense examples in addressing the crime problems. > > > > I wonder what drives such an energetic attack on the views of comrade > Gugu on the part of comrade Mampheko, when such an attack itself lacks > content and substance! > > > > I remain! > > > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mamphekgo,Steve > (GPDPR) > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 10:58 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Re: Shoot to kill-death sentence without > trial > > > > I would like to differ with the views expressed by Cde Gugu on this > matter, both at the level of substantive issues raised, but also at the > manner in which she has decided to express her views (anger) on the > "shoot-to-kill" sentiments of the government security cluster officials, > and President Zuma. > > > > Uncomradely disagreement > > > > I am not sure whether the views expressed by Cde Gugu in this piece are > hers or those of the YCL-SA, as signed at the bottom. I am saying this > because I find her manner of expression very strange to the culture of > engagement within our revolutionary movement. > > > > Firstly, I find her opening statement inherently questioning our > government's commitment to the course of NDR, which is that of > "liberating black people in general, and Africans in particular", inter > alia. Cde Gugu says, in her own words, "When South Africans voted in > 1994, they had hoped that our government will, by default, be more > sympathetic to the course of emancipation of black people....". The > insinuation that our people only continue to vote for the ANC because > there are no viable options is misleading and therefore cannot be left > unchallenged. Quoting from Cde Gugu's article in verbatim "until today, > the masses still loyally vote for the liberation movement as options are > non-existent in real terms in South Africa". The article goes further to > say "the very same government now unilaterally decides to turn a blind > eye on the conditions that ail the poor.....". Now, I find these kinds > of utterance indeed very strange to be associated with a comrade of her > stature, especially the Spokesperson of the YCL-SA. > > > > If I personally did not know Cde Gugu as the Spokesperson of YCL-SA, I > would have thought that the article was authored by an angry member of > Africanist organization, BCM or even the anarchic ultra-leftists who > continue to mobilize our people in the township against our very own > government. > > > > I do not find anything wrong with comrades being critical about some of > the statements uttered by our comrades in government, and in fact I > think that becomes our revolutionary duty at all times, but the manner > of engagement and the tone of our expressions should be constructive and > in line with our the culture of our Congress Movement. > > > > Substantive argument against the amendment of Section 49 > > > > I would want to move from the premise that crime rate in our country has > reached unacceptable levels, that our people are increasingly feeling > insecure, and that this has become a common campaigning tool for all the > opposition parties in our country. Opposition parties are > opportunistically opposed to this call because they would not want to > see crime reduced drastically in our country, as that will disarm them > during the election period and increase the electorate confidence in the > ANC. > > > > There are many contributory factors towards this unacceptably high crime > rate in our country, which will include, amongst other things: > unemployment, poverty, corruption within crime prevention state > apparatus, loopholes within our justice system towards criminals, > liberal approach of western-oriented human rights, etc. > > > > The recent statistics on crime rate in our country suggest that our > government should declare a state of emergency on criminal activities. > Something must be urgently done to address this disturbing state of > affairs. We therefore cannot begin to suggest that there is > one-size-fits-all approach to fighting crime in our country. Our > government must therefore adopt a multi-pronged approach to addressing > this situation. Amongst mechanisms to be adopted will therefore include > tightening our criminal justice system to ensure that convicted > criminals don't get away with light sentences; that we address we > continue with our fight against poverty and unemployment; that we fight > fire-with-fire against criminals, etc. > > > > We cannot ridicule the call made by President Zuma and other security > cluster government officials when they suggest that our crime prevention > officials must utilize maximum power to protect their lives and those of > ordinary citizens when confronted with compelling situations. It is > therefore wrong to simply reduce this argument to police harassment of > hawkers, the shooting of an innocent unarmed kid by private security > guards, harassment of prostitutes, etc. I don't think either President > Zuma or any of other government official has made such a ridiculous call > for police officers just to shoot randomly. The call is fundamentally > against violent crime, and those incidents cannot be classified as such. > And I think Cde Gugu concurs with this call when she concludes by saying > "A well-trained officer of the law will know exactly when to shoot", but > you need the law to protect such well-trained officers in such cases. > > > > And perhaps Cde Gugu should in future not sign her personal views on her > official capacity, because this might associate them with those of the > YCL-SA. > > > > Steve Mamphekgo > > On individual capacity > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tuis Dumisani > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:10 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Re: Shoot to kill-death sentence without > trial > > > > Amandla, I'm in support of the process, let's engage our Comrades in > government but also engage in other forms of showing that we are not in > support of the amendment of section 49 that will promote police > brutality. > > > > Dumisani Tuis- Court Manager > > Department of Justice & Constitutional Development- Victoria West Office > > Tel: +2753-6210007 > > Fax: 0865070204 > > Cell: +27736430439 > > > > "The possibility that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us > from the support of a cause we believe to be just"- Abraham Lincoln > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gugu Ndima > Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 8:57 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Shoot to kill-death sentence without trial > > > > Shoot to kill-death sentence without trial > > Having grown up in a township where young boys and girls yearned for > role models to give them direction; a place where inadequacies of > education illustrated themselves in our communities more especially in > January where matriculants now wonder what's next for them, has made me > understand the causations of crime within our society. A place where > hope of alleviating poverty, is still a myth. Unfortunately choices and > options that avail themselves to people that are subjected to such > social ills have horrendous pathways that tend to end one's life or lead > them to the cold corridors of South African prisons. For most women the > alternatives are inclusive of options such as prostitution, shop-lifting > and gambling in township games known as "U-Mchina" or cards. Some have > found minimal salvation in grant money and subject themselves to retail > exploitation in stores such as Shoprite which have found a magnificent > and loyal market in our townships despite their disgusting service to > our people. > > These are some of the social ills that still characterise urban poverty; > poverty that is mostly over looked, due to the illusion that poverty is > minimal in areas of urbanisation. Unfortunately such areas are those > that are more susceptible to it (poverty) and it's increasing as a > result of the perpetual divisions between the rich and the poor. These > divisions have become more ailing due to the fact that they are now > class divisions between the black elite and the poor black majority. > > When South Africans went to the polling stations for the first > democratic elections in 1994, they voted with the hope that the > transformation of government would yield economic and political relief > and moreover bring the promise land to the masses in the form of a > better life. Most saw this as a new beginning for them and the newly > elected government would by default be a government that would be more > sympathetic and understanding towards the conditions that still > terrorise the black majority of this country; until today, the masses > still loyally vote for the liberation movement as options are > non-existent in real terms in South Africa. It becomes a sad case when > the very same government now unilaterally decides to set a blind eye on > the conditions that ail the poor and opt to use military methods to deal > with problems in our society. > > When I first heard the utterance "shoot to kill" by Commissioner Bheki > Cele, I could not help but question the logic or obscure ideological > connotation from which this mentality stems from. This route or manner > of approach for addressing crime manifests lawlessness and violence > amongst the people. It potentially has the element of destruction in > society as this will encourage retaliation or retribution from those > that will fight against the abuse of this "shoot to kill" tactic by the > police force. In the place of respect, fear will emerge from the members > of our society. It's blatantly clear that such statements are pre-mature > and cannot be condoned. The justification that was mumbled by the Police > ministry brigade for this "shoot to kill" tactic was that it's the best > form of method to deal with thugs that choose to execute cops in a > gun-battle. Now unfortunately you cannot implement such a law in South > Africa due the short-comings of the whole SAPS. For one corruption in > the SAPS is horrifically the major characteristics of the force, most > people that join the force tend to buy their way in through bribery. > Secondly skills are serious concern within the SAPS and sometimes it's > embarrassing that you find police officers that cannot even properly > draft an affidavit let alone an official statement. Thirdly we have > officers that tend to think by virtue of their uniform they are above > the law. > > The abuse hawkers, commuters in roadblocks, they take bribes as opposed > to dealing with cases. They abuse civilians in holding cells, the SAPS > has been implicated in numerous cases where prostitutes were held in > holding cells and raped by men in blue; deaths under police custody have > increased. Lest we forget that organised crime cases tend to have the > men in blue implicated highly. Now we ask where does the shoot to kill > fit in from the above, well for any police officer that could > potentially be implicated in the above can easily utilise the "shoot to > kill" tact to get rid of evidence. The Independent Complaints > Directorate has recently complaint that it has limited powers to deal > with complaints bought against police officers in our country. We can't > have a police force that will be a law unto themselves. Yes there is a > serious crime issue but unfortunately we cannot look at crime > unilaterally without simultaneously addressing the causations. The SAPS > has no clear transformation policy in place and racism is still an > issue. We have a serious influx of foreigners for example, but that is > no lee-way for police officers to abuse them as they please and this is > exactly what is happening around the country; at the rate the Police > ministry is going with the whole shoot to kill debacle, you would swear > that there is a new award for the number of body bags that police > officers bring in. > > The amendment of section 49 will not resolve anything instead it will > create animosity between civilians and police officers. Let's first > achieve an environment that will curb young people from resorting to > violent crimes. Some of the men that have resorted to such criminal > activities, are men that strongly defended the revolution during trying > times in the early nineties unfortunately the government has never had a > plan in place to absorb them. They sacrificed their education in order > to see political emancipation and now they have become statistics within > our prisons or are buried by the bullet of the SAPS. This whole debacle > reminds me of a sad story in the township where a Fidelity guard was > parked outside a petrol station, due to the inadequate recreational > activities that are minimal in the township, young children play in the > street. A young girl mistakenly rolled her tennis ball under the van as > she ran to go get it quickly, she was greeted with a rain of bullets and > until today the family never got compensation for that. Now this is just > Fidelity, a private security company, what more if law enforcers have > been given a blank cheque to murder people equally just like criminals. > A well-trained officer of the law will know exactly when to shoot and > does not need the law to be amended for that. We have worked hard to > eradicate injustice in our country and the process of transforming the > law is far from over. Introducing a new form of death sentence will just > take us back to the dark years of apartheid, the difference will now be > that this will be sanctioned by our very own people. > > Phansi with the amendment of Section 49 phansi!! > > I remain Gugu Ndima > > National spokesperson (YCLSA) > > 076 783 1516 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Disclaimer: > > This message may contain confidential information and is intended only > for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should > not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the > sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake > and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be > guaranteed to be secured or error-free as information could be > intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or > contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any > errors or omissions in the content of this message, which arise as a > result of e-mail transmission. The Gauteng Provincial Government does > not take responsibility for Gauteng Provincial Government users' > personal views. Gauteng Provincial Government services available online > at: www.gautengonline.gov.za <http://www.gautengonline.gov.za/> > > > > > > > Disclaimer > > This email and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential and > proprietary information. This information is private and protected by law > and, accordingly, if you are not the intended recipient, you are requested > to delete this entire communication immediately and are notified that any > disclosure, copying or distribution of or taking any action based on this > information is prohibited. > Emails cannot be guaranteed to be secure or free of errors or viruses. The > sender does not accept any liability or responsibility for any > interception, corruption, destruction, loss, late arrival or > incompleteness of or tampering or interference with any of the information > contained in this email or for its incorrect delivery or non-delivery for > whatsoever reason or for its effect on any electronic device of the > recipient. > If verification of this email or any attachment is required, please > request a hard-copy version. > > > > ----------------------------------------- This email was sent using SquirrelMail. "Webmail for nuts!" http://squirrelmail.org/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
