praag.co.uk

South Africa's premier news site

Tuesday
May 22nd
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

The UN - genocidal onlooker or human rights champion?

E-mail Print PDF

On 7 and 8 April 2010 the United Nations at their head office in New York observed the 16th annual commemoration of the Rwanda Genocide during which an estimated one million innocent people were slaughtered.

In his commemoration address secretary-general Ban Ki-moon stated:

"Today, we observe the sixteenth commemoration of the genocide in Rwanda. We cherish the memory of more than 800 000 innocent people who lost their lives. Our thoughts are also with the survivors, whose haunting testimony woke us to the reality of a tragedy that was all too preventable."

In September 2005, world leaders came together at a United Nations Summit to review progress since the Millennium Declaration and to address key issues related to UN Reform. The then secretary-general Kofi Annan reported on the implementation of the Millennium Goals. His report, In Larger Freedom, proposed a bold agenda of “highest priorities” for the September Summit.

Significantly, it urged heads of state and governmens to embrace the *'responsibility to protect” as a basis for collective action against genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.

The killing of 6 million Jewish people during the Jewish Holocaust is still regarded as one of the world's most horrible crimes against humanity and a crime never to be repeated.

Not even Hitler and his gas chambers could match the efficacy of the Rwandan genocidal killing machine. On average, they killed 7 people per minute, 24 hours per day over a period of one 100 days. It is estimated that they raped between 285 000 and 400 000 women. One person was murdered every 8,5 seconds and one woman raped every 20 seconds 24 hours per day for 100 days. Nothing in recent history has yet matched that brutal Rwandan extermination machine with a killing rate 25 times as fast as that of Hitler. In contrast to this extremely effective Rwandan killing machine, the South African ANC Communist revolutionary killing machine opted to use crime as their cover and means to clandestinely murder South Africa's white farmers who have been slaughtered, raped, tortured and executed in the most inhumane manner. Not even the life of the recently executed Willemientjie Potgieter (2) was saved by this brutal killing machine.

Although the ANC genocidal regime has been executing its genocide in low-intensity form, with “crime” providing an alibi for the brutal murder of 3 700 white farrmers, we cannot underestimate the efficacy of its genocidal campaign. More than one million white South Africans have already emigrated to Australia, New Zealand, Canada and other Western countries. Unlike Rwanda, the ANC brutal regime has signed most if not all international treaties for the prevention of genocide and other inhumane atrocities. The ANC leadership has opted for a clandestine crime-based genocide because they fear international legal prosecution.

During the United Nations' high-level plenary meeting of the 60th session of the UN General Assembly of 14 -16 September 2005, a working document on the Prevention of Genocide was adopted by all state parties, including South Africa.

The report's central theme was "The Responsibility to Protect", the idea being that sovereign states have a responsibility to protect their own citizens from avoidable catastrophe, but that when they are unwilling or unable to do so, that responsibility must be borne by the broader community of states. When sovereign states deliberately fail to protect their citizens such as in the case of South African farmers and the broader white community now suffering from the worst pandemic of violent crimes ever committed against them as an ethnic group, The UN Responsibility to Prevent and Intervention becomes a life-saving priority.

For the last sixteen years since 1994 many ANC political revolutionaries and radicals have been calling for the killing of the Boer and the farmer. When interpreted in the widest sense, it represents a call for the murder of all white people living in South Africa.

The UN report “The Responsibility to Protect” emphasizes that resources must be devoted to early warning and analysis of genocide.

The report states:

“Preventive action is founded upon and proceeds from accurate prediction, but too often preventive analysis, to the extent that it happens at all, fails to take key factors into account, misses key warning signs (and hence misses opportunities for early action), or misreads the problem (thereby resulting in application of the wrong tools). A number of distinct problems weaken analytic capacities to predict violent conflict: the multiplicity of variables associated with root causes of conflict and the complexities of their interactions; the associated absence of reliable models for predicting conflict; and simply the perennial problem of securing accurate information on which to base analyses and action.”

The above analysis does not apply to the South African situation where the element of the crime of “incitement to commit genocide” are found in Julius Malema's cries. Public incitement by genocidal murderers the likes of Julius Malema reverberates through the electronic media (nationally and internationally) as if it were legal to call for the murder of a specific ethnic group in South Africa. Yet the UN and the International community refrain from any intervention or protective action.

The vision of the office of the The Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide is very clear and can be summarized in one word: PREVENT.

The warning signs for Genocide are stipulated as:

  • the country has a totalitarian or authoritarian government where only one group controls power;
  • the country is at war “or there is a lawless environment in which massacres can take place without being quickly noticed or easily documented”.

In South Africa during the last 16 years, the ANC government has deliberately created a lawless society for the purpose of performing a genocide of the white farmers and all whites in South Africa, under the clandestine and covert cover of extremely high crime rates.

The Rome Statute, which is international law and law in South Africa by virtue of the “Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act 27 of 2002, 18 July 2002”, is ignored by the SA government and nobody in SA ever mentions the act.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948 and which was ratified and signed by the SA Government clearly defines the crime of “Incitement to commit Genocide”, yet the SA Government despite International Conventions, the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court appointed Mr. Gilbert Marcus, S.C. to make the case for inciting genociding. On 29 November 2010 in the Southern Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, in an attempt to legalize one of the most hated and most heinous international crimes of all – genocide – Marcus argued that singing songs encouraging the shooting or killing of whites and Boers was “part of ANC history and culture”.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide unambiguously states:

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

Article 4

Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

Yet, Julius Malema and his followers were never charged.

During the last 16 years more than 3 600 commercial farmers have been murdered, but the UN is as quiet as before the Rwandan massacre, without teeth, without political will or the conviction to protect.

Shall we in future commemorate, in New York at the UN Head Quarters, the UN International day of reflection on the Afrikaner Genocide and shall we have another UN Plenary session where the nations of the world discuss a document on the Prevention, Intervention and Protection of innocent citizens murdered in the South African Afrikaner Genocide?

Shall the secretary-general state: “Our thoughts are also with the survivors, whose haunting testimony woke us to the reality of a tragedy that was all too preventable."

Yes, without a doubt we will!

The UN has no teeth. The UN at best must be regarded as a talk shop on international affairs and the largest paper tiger on planet earth.

The UN has always been an excellent onlooker and bystander at evil genocides committed by various nations and states.

For the UN does not protect, the UN commemorates.


blog comments powered by Disqus
Last Updated ( Saturday, 18 December 2010 09:31 )  
Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious Stumbleupon Google Bookmarks RSS Feed 
Banner