Thread: THOUSANDS SIGN PETITION ASKING TRUMP TO LET WHITE FARMERS IN SOUTH AFRICA MIGRATE TO

Originally Posted by Beezer

"I cannot deny that the value systems are completely incompatible."

--------------------------------------------------

Which is why multi-culturalism does not and will not work...and should not be FORCED upon us. Especially in an overcrowded and financially strapped environments while preserving our resources and quality of life for our own future.

Look at Europe...a time bomb that is going to explode. Not a matter of "if"...but "when". What good does this do for anybody? NONE!

Most of these people would rather not flee their countries and would like to stay home with their families. Fix the root of the problems on their soil...the corruption, rape, overbreeding, violence, poverty and education.

If it means gangs, drug dealers and terrorists who are violent criminals get automatic death penalty to rid this scourge of our society so we can live in peace...then so be it! There are too many and we cannot continue to warehouse these people for decades...not to mention the costs that WE are forced to pay for it, while we have homeless, veterans, seniors and children to take care of.

In all your travels...the beauty of exploring these different lands and learning of others their culture, their food, is part of the adventure and understanding and seeing new things. That does not mean we bring it here. They need to preserve their culture, their land, their beliefs and have a good life on their soil. But to mix them all in a big "melting pot" is a recipe for disaster which is unfolding before our very eyes.

It does not mean we cannot get along...we just cannot get along in each others "pockets" with "incompatible" beliefs and think you are going to put us all in a paper bag and shake it up and think we will be happy and get along.

Many of these people invading our country hate us, do not share our beliefs and are destroying our way of life. More segregation, more division for these very "incompatible" reasons. Send them back.

They need to stay in their country, embrace their culture, their way of life and strive to be civilized, productive, human beings.

We need to stop and reverse this invasion of our countries.

All these countries have land, they have resources and they have a lot of evil people that need to be rooted out, removed from office. No excuse to allow this to continue and uproot entire massive hordes of people.

We are not the solution to the World's problems and we need to stop dumping this on our backs.

Multiculturalism has worked well for me. I have no problem recognizing or respecting a different culture.

We all have motives for fighting illegal immigration. The only reason I'm not in favor of illegal immigration is because I believe it is unfair. So in my mind, fighting against illegal immigration is fighting inequality. I couldn't care less about race unless I'm fighting for racial equality inside of the borders of the US.

I will not get bogged down with anything dealing with perpetuating racial inequality.

The land was commandeered by force and it needs to return to it's rightful owners.

Quote from Boomslang: "I will not get bogged down with anything dealing with perpetuating racial inequality. The land was commandeered by force and it needs to return to it's rightful owners."

Which “rightful owners?” You do realize that every square inch of land on earth has been fought over. The victor simply confiscated the land of the defeated. This is true of every culture and every country or tribe on Earth since before recorded history. with rare exceptions. every body, everywhere. You are using an unworkable standard to determine legitimacy of ownership.

I can accept any reasonable standard but it must apply equally to all. Everybody needs to agree to the same rules. But that is not what is happening. Only Whites tie themselves into knots about who originally inhabited the land where they now live. No other ethnic group gives a rip about it when it is applied to their determent. Not the Blacks, not the American Indians, not the Asians not the Arabs, just White who only selectively apply it against themselves. And all of the other groups see this and jump in on the guilt, shaming. Sorry but I will only follow rules if everybody else does too. Otherwise that just makes me a fool.

Originally Posted by Beezer

"I cannot deny that the value systems are completely incompatible."

--------------------------------------------------

Which is why multi-culturalism does not and will not work...and should not be FORCED upon us. Especially in an overcrowded and financially strapped environments while preserving our resources and quality of life for our own future.

Look at Europe...a time bomb that is going to explode. Not a matter of "if"...but "when". What good does this do for anybody? NONE!

Most of these people would rather not flee their countries and would like to stay home with their families. Fix the root of the problems on their soil...the corruption, rape, overbreeding, violence, poverty and education.

If it means gangs, drug dealers and terrorists who are violent criminals get automatic death penalty to rid this scourge of our society so we can live in peace...then so be it! There are too many and we cannot continue to warehouse these people for decades...not to mention the costs that WE are forced to pay for it, while we have homeless, veterans, seniors and children to take care of.

In all your travels...the beauty of exploring these different lands and learning of others their culture, their food, is part of the adventure and understanding and seeing new things. That does not mean we bring it here. They need to preserve their culture, their land, their beliefs and have a good life on their soil. But to mix them all in a big "melting pot" is a recipe for disaster which is unfolding before our very eyes.

It does not mean we cannot get along...we just cannot get along in each others "pockets" with "incompatible" beliefs and think you are going to put us all in a paper bag and shake it up and think we will be happy and get along.

Many of these people invading our country hate us, do not share our beliefs and are destroying our way of life. More segregation, more division for these very "incompatible" reasons. Send them back.

They need to stay in their country, embrace their culture, their way of life and strive to be civilized, productive, human beings.

We need to stop and reverse this invasion of our countries.

All these countries have land, they have resources and they have a lot of evil people that need to be rooted out, removed from office. No excuse to allow this to continue and uproot entire massive hordes of people.

We are not the solution to the World's problems and we need to stop dumping this on our backs.

Originally Posted by 17patri76

Nobody is asking you to fight for them just give refuge to legitimate refugees from genocide unlike every other group that has been accepted for years. The numbers are tiny.

I do believe in giving people refuge.

But then we get into politics. Temporary Protection Status has proven to be a failure regarding it's purpose. People simply never leave.

Where was this outcry during apartheid? Did you think people in Soweto needed refuge?

The undercover nature of race based political moves can be found out just by what you do and say.
For example the so called "Opiate Crisis" is only a crisis because those mostly affected are white. Back in the 80s when the "Crack Crisis" was destroying whole cities, "Lock them up", was the response.

I will not be a part furthering racial inequality in any way, shape or form

Originally Posted by 17patri76

Quote from Boomslang: "I will not get bogged down with anything dealing with perpetuating racial inequality. The land was commandeered by force and it needs to return to it's rightful owners."

Which “rightful owners?” You do realize that every square inch of land on earth has been fought over. The victor simply confiscated the land of the defeated. This is true of every culture and every country or tribe on Earth since before recorded history. with rare exceptions. every body, everywhere. You are using an unworkable standard to determine legitimacy of ownership.

I can accept any reasonable standard but it must apply equally to all. Everybody needs to agree to the same rules. But that is not what is happening. Only Whites tie themselves into knots about who originally inhabited the land where they now live. No other ethnic group gives a rip about it when it is applied to their determent. Not the Blacks, not the American Indians, not the Asians not the Arabs, just White who only selectively apply it against themselves. And all of the other groups see this and jump in on the guilt, shaming. Sorry but I will only follow rules if everybody else does too. Otherwise that just makes me a fool.

Where you concerned for poor people in Soweto during Apartheid? If you were, great. Now let's focus on getting the Dutch and English back home. They can't speak Ndebele, Xhosa or isiZulu. They are not interested in being part of South Africa.
Am I supposed to feel one way for one group of people and a different for the other? If the Dutch and English had stayed in their countries, the pain that they caused would have never happened.

The land belong to the South African People. Period. If the Dutch and English would like to keep their lives they should go home. As I stated before, at least they are given a choice between the land and their lives. Many African people were denied that privilege.

Off topic, in the Congo, but still a good video

The Afrikaners didn't do anything wrong when they settled in South Africa. The history is Portuguese in the 15th century (1400's), Dutch starting in 17th century (1600's), British in 19th century (1800's) until British formed Union of South Africa in 1909 and then I guess they left. Everything worked pretty well until .....1913 the beginnings of racist legislation .... got much worse by 1948 when full-blown Apartheid went into effect. So that's why 1913 impacts the lands being expropriated. Everyone's lands prior to that are not being expropriated. Apartheid was really based on a type of Nazism.

Anyway, like I said, I don't know that much about it, but some corrections need to be worked out so the country can be a country without racism from anyone, and as we know, that takes a lot of time, and it's something the people of the country have to work out themselves.

Originally Posted by Judy

The Afrikaners didn't do anything wrong when they settled in South Africa. The history is Portuguese in the 15th century (1400's), Dutch starting in 17th century (1600's), British in 19th century (1800's) until British formed Union of South Africa in 1909 and then I guess they left. Everything worked pretty well until .....1913 the beginnings of racist legislation .... got much worse by 1948 when full-blown Apartheid went into effect. So that's why 1913 impacts the lands being expropriated. Everyone's lands prior to that are not being expropriated. Apartheid was really based on a type of Nazism.

Anyway, like I said, I don't know that much about it, but some corrections need to be worked out so the country can be a country without racism from anyone, and as we know, that takes a lot of time, and it's something the people of the country have to work out themselves.

Don't you mean invaded. The Khoisan in the west were there before anyone. In the east, Shaka had United a large empire. Of course he made a lot of enemies in the process.

King Cetshwayo fought for as long as he could. Warning the surrounding nation's of the barbarians at the gates.

Out of mercy, the South African people should give the Dutch and English a 1 year amnesty. Prove that they can speak a major South African language and they pay a fine for their continued presence in a country where they caused so much pain.

It doesn't really matter who was there first. What matters is who ends up with it. What the Dutch, English and Germans did in South Africa is no different than what all humans have been doing everywhere since there were humans. That's what I mean by not doing anything wrong. It's the course of civilizations. And be assured, if you end up with it and can't protect it, you will lose it. Law of the Universe.

We all like to think we're evolved, modernized and enlightened. But, are we? Some, but not all. It's why we have wars. Hitler was a barbarian, so was Hirohito. They weren't evolved, modernized or enlightened. They were savages. That wasn't that long ago either, just 70 years ago when the barbarians were at our own gates.

The South Africans need to work it out among themselves. I for one have confidence in the black majority of South Africa to make it right and do so in a fair and decent way. I sure hope they can. But it is a huge task with 27% unemployment and a drought to boot.

Originally Posted by Judy

It doesn't really matter who was there first. What matters is who ends up with it. What the Dutch, English and Germans did in South Africa is no different than what all humans have been doing everywhere since there were humans. That's what I mean by not doing anything wrong. It's the course of civilizations. And be assured, if you end up with it and can't protect it, you will lose it. Law of the Universe.

We all like to think we're evolved, modernized and enlightened. But, are we? Some, but not all. It's why we have wars. Hitler was a barbarian, so was Hirohito. They weren't evolved, modernized or enlightened. They were savages. That wasn't that long ago either, just 70 years ago when the barbarians were at our own gates.

The South Africans need to work it out among themselves. I for one have confidence in the black majority of South Africa to make it right and do so in a fair and decent way. I sure hope they can. But it is a huge task with 27% unemployment and a drought to boot.

I cannot stress enough that the Dutch and English should trade their land for their lives. That's the starting point I would push for if I were South African.

If you remember the MLK video about farming, the SA government will be needing to get involved too! But I fear corruption and greed might rob the honest people.

Grants, machinery, agriculture colleges, and more is needed.

South Africa Explores Constitutional Change to Allow Land Seizures

February 28, 2018 1:39 PM
Anita Powell

JOHANNESBURG —

South Africa's parliament voted Tuesday to examine how to amend the constitution to allow land seizures without compensation, a move that resonates deeply in a nation where the white minority still controls much of the farmland.

But the strongest proponent of the motion immediately sought to reassure the nation that nothing too drastic would come of it.

"No one is going to lose his or her house, no one is going to lose his or her flat, no one is going to lose his or her factory or industry," Julius Malema, who leads the far-left Economic Freedom Fighters party, said immediately following the vote. "All we are saying is they will not have the ownership of the land, they will have a lease, depending on what is the arrangement, particularly as it relates to the outcome of the Constitutional review process."

​Another Zimbabwe?

There are fears the vote will put South Africa on the same path as neighboring Zimbabwe, where forceful, violent seizures of white-owned farms in the early 2000s were blamed for the nation's economic freefall and political instability.

The ruling African National Congress also supported Tuesday's motion, but with the provision that land seizures cannot hurt agricultural production, economic stability or political stability — a fairly large and vague loophole, analysts say.

​The loudest group in support of land seizures, the Black First Land First Movement, has denounced the motion as nothing but an "electioneering gimmick" by the ANC.

"Black First Land First is concerned that the Economic Freedom Fighters and the African National Congress are not serious about land expropriation without compensation," the group said in a statement.

Painful history

But as Malema knows, South Africa's soil is stained by hundreds of years of colonial exploitation, by the blood and sweat shed by underpaid, mostly black laborers working for white bosses. Today, black South Africans, who are the majority of the population, remain on average significantly poorer than white South Africans.

With a critical national election looming, Malema used this emotional pull to full effect when arguing in favor of the motion in parliament:

"The time for reconciliation is over," he said. "Now is the time for justice. If the grandchildren of [early Dutch settler] Jan van Riebeeck have not understood that we need our land, that over and above it is about our humanity, then they have failed to receive the gift of humanity."

The opposition Democratic Alliance voted against the measure, and blames the slow pace of land redistribution on the ANC, which has ruled since the end of apartheid in 1994, but now faces a tough election next year as it has slowly lost ground to the opposition.

Democratic Alliance Shadow Deputy Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, Ken Robertson, began his speech by exhorting in Zulu, "People are suffering."

"The ANC government does not have a land problem, we have a problem with the way the ANC are handling land," he said. "People were dispossessed of their land and their dignity by the discriminatory laws of the past, the painful past that can never be forgotten. The ANC's call for expropriation without compensation is a lazy attempt to divert attention away from the real reasons that lie at the heart of the slow pace of meaningful land reform and restitution."

​Missing facts

While this debate has no shortage of fiery rhetoric, what it lacks, says analyst Ebrahim Fakir, is any concrete details.

Because of a general lack of facts and an abundance of rhetoric, Fakir was one of several analysts who told VOA that recent developments have left them confused.

"At present, all bets are off," he said. "No one knows how and what this could mean. Theoretically, it could even mean that it does actually end up denying a regime of protection of private property."

No reliable figures on land ownership in South Africa exist, although a recent government study found that only a third of the nation's land is privately owned.

Furthermore, it's unclear how the constitution would be changed, if at all. Tuesday's vote mobilized parliament's Constitutional Review Committee to deliver a report on the topic by August 30. Any changes to the constitution require a 75 percent vote.

https://www.voanews.com/a/south-afri...s/4274508.html

The important facts from this article are:

1. there has been no expropriation yet
2. none of the people in the photos lost their land because of the proposed amendment to the Constitution
3. the Amendment to expropriate land hasn't even passed, only a Review process to report back to the committee by August 30 of this year
4. the homeless Afrianers in the photos have more than likely lost their land to foreclose by the banks, because of the drought, and that's why someone is calling for them to be accepted into the US as "refugees". Sorry, no.
5. 2/3 of the land in South Africa is already owned by the government, the British did this.
6. even if they decide to take more land, no one will lose their home or flat, industry or business.

See? I trust the black majority of South Africa to do the right things in the right way. No white person needs to be handing over their land, home, flat, industry or business in exchange for their life. They may be required to hand it over to a bank, though if they get foreclosed upon.