Cde VC,
 
At a time I responded to Cde Malgas, your posting to Adriano was not in my 
mail. I had at that received only that of Cde Adriano, Cde Lazola and Cde 
Malgas. So it is not correct that I ignored your posting to Adriano. I have 
considered it in my second posting and am not interested in Salaries but in the 
word "Full time" as proclaimed in the constitution.
 
I am very sorry to use your name adjacent to that of Cde Palma. I suspect you 
have details that I do not have about Cde Palma hence your considering him a 
charlatan. I am against your personal battle executed here in the forum.
 
I am still on the issue that you have not correctly clarified - "full-time". I 
do not have a preference and did not know that the conference is not elective. 
The issue of whether Cde Blade should be replaced or not is in the public 
domain and the National Secretary of YCLSA has revived it in all platforms 
including the Mpumalanga SACP congress.
 
I am just not clear about the issue of "fulltime" irrespective of the 
"word-juggling rulebook-lawyer's objections" status that you have decided to 
give me. If we would not use the constitution as a reference then why is it 
there in the first place. Do communists really ignore their brain-child to suit 
preferences of us - me, the VC and others?
 
Not all of us will view thing the way you view them. I still stand to be 
informed on the part of fulltime because it is not for congress. Whether 
congress or no congress, the issue of "full-time" should be clarified. My love 
for the SACP and Cde Blade does not make me a mongol that cannot be able to 
think. My defence of the organisation cannot be in an anarchic way where I 
would say things should happen without a reference to the "rule book".
 
I apply my mind and I do not know what is wrong about a constitutional 
amendment if some issues are not in line with it? Where did I err, so that I 
can make mistakes. It is not a contradiction to say that the constitution says 
this and the office is occupied in this way, what can be done? If such a 
dichotomy exist, then let me be clarified.
 
 


>>> Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> 09/11/2009 12:56 >>>
Cde Mdu,

I am not at all happy about being dichotomised with this charlatan called Palma.

Let me remind you that I have already said that I do not think his attack is 
genuinely against the GS but is against the SACP.

Let me also remind you, in case you have forgotten, that there is no scheduled 
election of NOBs at a Special National Congress.

I have already covered your phrasemongering around the SACP Constitution in my 
response to Palma, and you have chosen to ignore what I have written. That is a 
usually a sign of bad faith. Please return to what I wrote to Palma in the 
first place. It will show you why you are completely mistaken to say that the 
SACP Constitution proscribes the GS's activities and confines him to an ivory 
tower such as the one inhabited by Palma.

In my opinion, your attempt to raise word-juggling rulebook-lawyer's objections 
are aimed towards smuggling in an attack on the GS at the Special National 
Congress. 

Now you have the additional impertinence to suggest that comrades may not 
comment upon such manoeuvres prior to congress, as if you and Palma are 
protected. Let me remind you that a pre-congress period of discussion is just 
exactly when you are not protected, Cde Mdu. So please, let's not have any more 
attempts to push your plots under the carpet and smuggle them into the Congress 
rolled up in that dusty carpet, comrade.

You must not come here saying you support Comrade Blade while saying that he is 
"an unconstitutional occupant". You insult our intelligence like that, Cde Mdu.

VC


Mduduzi H Vilakazi wrote: 


Cde Palma and VC,
 
We have not started the conference but you behave like people who are standing 
alongside each other with differing preferences. Both your behavior in this 
forum is unhealthy. We always learn from you but you have started personal 
attacks which is something that this forum is about.
 
Can you both act maturely?
 
I just want an explanation as to what full time mean and why is it not written 
in constitutional provisions of other office bearers and solely on that of the 
GS. Let the answer be on the "full time" as enshrined in the constitution. 
 
I am not in the angle of sources of income because I do not believe that Cde 
Blade took office for the income attached to it but rather for his commitment 
to serve the organisation. I am happy with the way Cde Blade handle matters of 
the organisation and have nothing against his occupation of the office.
 
I, however, believe that "full-time" means that the person should be available 
at working times in the office of the organisation except when on 
organisational duty outside the office. If my understanding is wrong can 
someone advice?
 
My support for Cde Blade is on the basis that the constitution be changed. It 
may sound like a personal issue that a constitution is changed to accommodate 
him but we are comfortable with him. At times conditions dictates that 
amendments be made to suit a current situation. As it stands now, if my 
understanding of "fulltime" is right then Cde Blade is an unconstitutional 
occupant of that office.
 
Lets engaged without personal sensations on the matter!
 


This message and any attachments relating to official business of the 
Mpumalanga Provincial Government (MPG)is proprietary to the MPGand intended for 
the original addressee only. The message may contain information that is 
confidential and subject to legal privilege. Any views expressed in this 
message are those of the individual sender. If you receive this message in 
error, please notify the original sender immediately and destroy the original 
message. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby 
notified that you must not disseminate, copy, use, distribute, or take any 
action in connection therewith. The MPGcannot insure that the integrity of this 
communication has been maintained, nor that it is free of errors, viruses, 
interception and / or interference. TheMPGis not liable whatsoever for loss or 
damage resulting from the opening of this message and / or attachments and / or 
the use of the information contained in this message and / or attachments.
 ( http://www.mpumalanga.gov.za ) 





This message and any attachments relating to official business of the 
Mpumalanga Provincial Government (MPG) is proprietary to the MPG and intended 
for the original addressee only.
The message may contain information that is confidential and subject to legal 
privilege. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual 
sender.

If you receive this message in error, please notify the original sender 
immediately and destroy the original message. If you are not the intended 
recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that you must not 
disseminate, copy, use, distribute, or take any action in connection therewith.

The MPG cannot insure that the integrity of this communication has been 
maintained, nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception and / or 
interference. The MPG is not liable whatsoever for loss or damage resulting 
from the opening of this message and / or attachments and / or the use of the 
information contained in this message and / or attachments.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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] .
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to