The story published in The Star yesterday about Julius Malema’s alleged lavish lifestyle has truly set the cat amongst the pigeons. The reason is that it goes to the heart of the titanic struggle within the ANC for access to state power and the legal and illegal tenders and benefits that flow from holding such power.
The Star alleged on Friday that Malema owns a R3,6m house in Sandown and a R1m mansion in Polokwane, both of which he paid cash. According to the report, Malema also owns a black Mercedes-Benz AMG, which retails at R734 000, and reportedlydrives an Aston Martin and a red Range Rover Sport. On Thursday night Malema went to a lecture at Wits University in a brand-new white Range Rover – with no number plates – which sells for R1,2m. Malema is reported to earn a net salary of R20 000 per month.
The Times, using the Standard Bank’s bond calculator, estimates that Maelma’s bond repayments would amount to R32,953.87 per month. His car repayment on a R734 000 Merc, according to Wesbank’s Vehicle Repayment Calculator, with a ten percent deposit, would come to R16,307.78 a month for 4.5 years.
The response to the article has been telling, to say the least. Malema hit back by saying:”Those who are calling for lifestyle audits, let them be the first ones to be audited… I know of a national leader of a union who stays in a R6-million house.” These words echo the extraordinary statement made by Jacob Zuma outside court after one if his appearances that if he was prosecuted others in the ANC would also go down. In effect, Juju is implying that if he is pursued others will also be exposed for corruption.
On a close reading the statement of the ANC and the ANC Youth League, “denying” the allegations against Malema amounts to no denial at. It is far too vague to amount to a denial and looks suspiciously like an admission of guilt. The statement reads in part:
The first untrue fabrication (sic) in the report is that Cde Julius has bought houses for cash. Cde Julius Malema has not at any stage bought any house for cash. Like every body else, he has purchased whatever houses or property registered in his name through banks. The second untrue fabrication (sic) is an impression created through the report that Cde Julius owns four expensive cars. We like to state on record that Cde Julius has one car in his name. The third untruth is the reported twenty thousand rands monthly salary that Cde Julius earns from the ANC. This is again very far from the truth.
So, Malema purchased his house through banks? Does this mean he took out a bond on the house or merely that the (cash) payment was arranged through a bank? The fact that the statement vaguely speaks about the purchase of a house through banks suggests there is no bond. In any event, if he took out a bond, how is he able to service the repayments on his house and his car on an ordinary salary?
Second, the Star never said Malema owned four cars, merely that he drove four cars, a claim not disputed by the ANC and its Youth League. The question is really how can Malema afford such an expensive car and who owns the three other cars he drives around in? On what basis does Malema have access to these cars? Are the cars registered in the name of one of his businesses or are they owned by someone else. If the latter, why are others allowing Malema to drive around in their cars? What are they getting for their generosity? And why is he driving around in a car without number plates? The last time a checked that was illegal?
The third question is, if Malema does not earn R20 000 a month as Youth League President, how much does he earn? Does he earn so much that he could afford bond and car repayments of almost R50 000 a month? If the answer is yes, how come the ANC is paying him such a huge salary? If not, where is the money coming from.
Like President Zuma’s infidelities and the alleged infidelities of Lennit Max, this is surely a public issue. Malema has enormous influence in the ANC and if he is living beyond his means and is being bankrolled by others, the question will arise as to why others are paying him? What are they getting in return for their money? Tenders, perhaps? Or are they paying Malema so that he can punt the nationalization of the mines which would allow those who own unprofitable mines to save their investments through a government handout?
So many questions, so few answers.
Driving a car without numberplates … that takes the biscuit.
“the nationalization of the mines which would allow those who own unprofitable mines to save their investments through a government handout”
Of course – that’s the plan!
On a correction this is not about saving investments, it’s more about further milking the nation’s purse.
And government would have to clean up the environmental mess that many leave behind.
Does anyone other than those with special interests believe for one moment that the man is not corrupt? Don’t you just love karma, especially instant karma? The high and mighty inevitably fall with their own criminal misadventures. JuJu has made so many enemies that I believe south africans are saved from significant further damage on his part by his justifiably irate enemies within the ANC. Lifestyle audits? What a glorious concept; reminds me of how the US managed to imprison Al Capone.
And remember, there are ANC powerhouses who are not corrupt or intimated by the boy/man posing as a leader.
And Al, miserable thug that he was, fortunately never emerged from prison.
What a gift to SA if this child is silenced.
We must remember that Cmd Malema is still young, and has a lot to learn.
But it is entirely predictable that an emergent black leader will be subject to a program of ridicule and vilification. He has made himself the white liberal’s worst enemy — by speaking openly about the racism that pervades our society.
Yes, Cmd Malema has done well in business. But that is because he is bright and hard -working. In fact, this brouhaha demonstrates the racism of the media; why does the success of Cmd Malema attract suspicion, while rich young white men are given a free pass? (As if liberals are immune from the siren call of corruption!)
Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder says:
February 21, 2010 at 8:56 am
“We must remember that Cmd Malema is still young, and has a lot to learn”.
Yeah. He is wise enough to stay away from anything related to woodwork. The reported tenders he secured are construction related – spade, wheelbarrow, concrete and it’s done. He knows his limits.
But re learning – Malema should hang around the legal profession. They, especially the Law Societies, have a lot to teach – here’s some hints for him http://www.noseweek.co.za/article.php?current_article=2198 and http://www.noseweek.co.za/article.php?current_article=2193
@Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
Yeah right. In the sea of tender corruption I suppose you believe that all the tenders he won were transparent, published in government gazettes and were awarded purely on merit because his company had the most expertise and his links to the ANC played no part and those that awarded the tenders declared their relationship with him.
Most of the media articles are written by black people.
It’s not racism.
It’s the sure knowledge that anything touched by the ANC is invariably tainted and corrupt.
Whilst it’s understandable that apartheid robbed blacks of their self-respect, no amount of bling can buy that self-respect back. That’s the real struggle and in that sense black people have lost the battle. The ultimate irony is that Mandela hoped that one day his people would be judged not on the colour of their skin but on the content of their character. Now we see what that character really is. Corruption. Lies. Theft. Murder. Bling. And apologists like you.
Maggs, you didn’t post the two Noseweek articles. See below:
Portnet complaint
Issue # 124 – February 2010
Stories about useless lawyers in a useless system, taking care of their own are old hat. So here’s one that adds an ingredient – a useless parastatal organisation.
In 1998 Gary Mills – who’s been in the diving salvage business for some 40 years – bought the Ocean King from a company called Viking Fishing. At R120,000 the ship was a good buy: it needed some engine work, but was in pretty good condition and, refitted, would make a great maritime research and sea rescue vessel.
The Ocean King was docked at the arse end of Cape Town harbour – quay 902/3 if that means anything to you – and from the outset there were security problems, with vagrants boarding the ship and threatening Mills’ staff. Over the following two years the situation got even worse – on one occasion Mills himself was confronted by two panga-wielding vagrants who claimed they owned the ship.
What made the situation so galling was that each time Mills wanted to work on the ship he had to go through elaborate security checks – yet vagrants seemed to have free access.
Once, vagrants even started a fire on board, and, over time, everything of value was stripped from the Ocean King.
By the end of 2001 Mills had lodged 18 charges of assault and theft with the police, and numerous complaints with the operators of the harbour, Portnet (a division of Transnet), including a personal letter to every Transnet director. Absolutely nothing was done.
In desperation Mills stopped paying his monthly R5,000 harbour fee. It hardly needs to be said that this provoked a response from the otherwise sleeping beast – in 2003 Portnet sued him for payment of the fees. (It seems that some legal proceedings may have preceded this, with Judge Burger holding that Mills had not abandoned his ship, and that Portnet had a duty to keep it secure).
Mills defended the claim and counterclaimed for damages – which was the start of a very expensive and frustrating experience. Mills went through a number of attorneys, with all the usual expensive consultations with counsel (with senior never able to act without junior, of course).
When Fairbridges sent him a bill for R50,000 after a consultation with counsel, Mills decided to try another approach and, following a friend’s recommendation, consulted with advocate Hanri Loots. (An attorney called Mzo Mtikitiki, of John Riley Attorneys was also roped in, as an advocate cannot deal directly with a client.) Loots impressed Mills with his quick grasp of the matter and his positive attitude.
And better still, he was happy to work on a contingency (no win – no fee) basis. So Mills briefed Loots to represent him at trial.
On 9 June 2004 the matter came up for hearing. According to Mills, he duly arrived at Loots’ chambers – only to have Loots tell him that going ahead would open up too big a can of worms. He told Mills that if he wanted to go ahead he’d have to represent himself – or he should simply sign a settlement agreement, which he then placed in front of Mills.
Mills went into such a state of shock that he signed, right then and there, an agreement that was basically a capitulation. It required him to move his ship out of the harbour within a month, failing which the boat would be chopped up for scrap. As all sorts of approvals would have to be obtained, there was absolutely no way he could move the ship out within that period – so the Ocean King was duly cut to pieces.
In 2005 Mills, hoping for some recourse against either Portnet or the lawyers who’d sunk his ship, consulted an attorney by the name of Bennie van der Hoven, of the firm Van der Hoven Van Zyl. Van der Hoven assured Mills that he knew both his maritime law and advocate Hanri Loots, and that he would sort things out. Van der Hoven then suggested getting the matter back onto the roll (it had been postponed indefinitely when the settlement was signed).
So Mills paid Van der Hoven a deposit of R10,000 – but got a rather poor return: nothing, to be precise. As Mills puts it, Van der Hoven talked the talk but walked hardly at all. (Which was exactly noseweek’s own experience of the attorney – he had not a clue as to what the matter was about, and promised to read the file and respond the next morning with a synopsis. He never did.)
In desperation, Mills approached the Cape Bar Council to complain about Loots. He set out his complaints in a letter, including the fact that Loots had led him to believe that he was on to a winner, that Loots had withdrawn from the case on the day of the trial – effectively forcing Mills to accept a very bad settlement – and the fact that when Loots returned Mills’ papers, roughly 50% of the documentation was missing.
Loots filed a response in which he said: “At no stage did I withdraw from the matter, either for the reason Mr Mills advances, or at all. The matter was settled during the course of the day of 9 June 2004. The settlement of the matter was negotiated (with the input of Mr Mills) after which a written deed of settlement was drafted and signed by Mr Mills himself in my chambers in the presence of my instructing attorney and the plaintiff’s counsel, Wragge SC [...] On the day of the trial the matter in its entirety was once again discussed with Mr Mills. Mindful of the risk relating to running a trial and the implications a loss could have, Mills confirmed that he would not financially be able to afford losing the matter [...] I wish to add that I lost no documentation.”
Mills responded to Loot’s letter as follows: “Regardless of whether he withdrew, stepped down or just ran away, the reality is he left me stranded – a gross abuse of his position as counsel and absolute cowardice [...] Mr Loots also knew I had been fighting Portnet for seven years for the preservation of the very thing he cornered me into signing away, by resorting to disgusting psychological tactics [...] Mr Loots knew full well that even if I had had the opportunity to remove my ship from the port, one month to ready the vessel was a total impossibility – even with the full co-operation of the port authorities and necessary department. Why would I sign away my rights? The instructing attorney, Mr Mtikitiki, was, in his own words, ‘shocked and surprised’ that Mr Loots could do what he had done – this was definitely not the instruction from Mr Mtikitiki [...] Short of accusing Mr Loots of colluding with Portnet – I can only continue to harbour suspicion towards Mr Loots, whom I trusted to give me educated advice and help me through a tormented and trying time.”
On 26 November 2009 Jeremy Muller SC, chairperson of the Cape Bar Council wrote to Mills to say: “I discern no misconduct on the part of Mr Loots and I have accordingly decided to dismiss the complaint.”
He invited Mills to file an appeal within 15 days. When noseweek asked Muller how it was that, faced with two contradictory versions of events, he found for the advocate, he declined to comment, saying an appeal was still possible. He added: “I did not discuss the matter with Mr Loots prior to dismissing Mr Mills’ complaint against him.”
When noseweek asked Loots for comment, he reiterated that Mills had been a willing party to the settlement, and had accepted it because he couldn’t afford a costs order against him. According to Loots this “was the only can of worms that could have been opened”. He insisted that his speciality is commercial law and delict, and that he’s never acted for Portnet, though he once acted for Transnet Property Division.
As regards the fee, he said he’d been asked if he would do the matter on a contingency basis, but no contingency fee agreement was signed. Had Mills won, Loots would have been paid his “normal fee”, but, because the matter was settled, he earned no fee at all – despite the fact that “a considerable amount of time and effort had therefore gone into the matter prior to its settlement”.
Noseweek also spoke to Mzo Mtikitiki, now at De Beers, but he had nothing to add – as far as he could recall, the matter had been resolved on the day of the hearing.
Mills – who is down R1m in legal fees, or R2m if you take into consideration what he spent on the boat – also lodged a complaint to the Cape Law Society about attorney Bennie van der Hoven, asking for help.
The answer: “Should an attorney be found guilty of unprofessional conduct, the likely sanction is a fine. We are therefore not permitted to give legal advice nor render legal assistance [...] we suggest that you approach an attorney for legal advice.”
Mills’ response to the Society was that he had approached them “as a cry for help – not to get even with someone – a very simple plea of ‘what do I do now to find relief?’.
“I very clearly stated that I have lost all faith in our legal system – and understandably so – and your only advice is that I should approach an attorney for legal advice – a comforting slap in the face, to say the least.”
“I have no faith in our legal system” – now that’s a cry heard with depressing regularity.
Reader’s comments:
Submitted by : Paul on 2010-01-29 13:09:28
The Law society is there to Protect lawyers – not investigate them. In fact the fines have not been increased since the legislation was passed in the 1970′s. Max fine is R10 000.
I tried to have Buchanan Boyes investigated for fraudulently signing a deed of settlement – the Law society refused to even obtain an answer from Buchanan Boyes as the person(s) involved had now left the firm.
Another time I caught a lawyer lying under oath and proved he lied to a judicial officer in a legal matter (taxation). The Law Society conveniently concluded that there was “no merit” in the complaint.
Someone should walk into the Law Society with an automatic weapon and teach these scum once and for all!
Submitted by : Kayroon on 2010-02-04 22:53:34
I had a similar problem with a lawyer Strauss and Associates, where promises of going to court were made, yet that never happened. The bills climed to a soaring R225 000-00, with invoices made for an Advocate that I had NEVER met. J Strauss kept informing me that the reason the bills were so high is because the “documents” are with the “scorpions”. Guess what, after me investigating with the Scorpions, I realise that he was lying to me. When I contacted the law society, I was informed that these Lawyers do protect each other and that there is not much that I could do…….this was after, “supposedly all my documents were with the Scorpions” I have since left the matter in the hands of Karma.
Rose
UPDATES: Lawyers who give sharks a bad name
Issue # 124 – February 2010
The plight of Mrs Bunty Money, who was aggressively hounded by shady Joburg law firm Van de Venter Mojapelo Inc (VVM) for an amount she didn’t owe (nose123) elicited considerable response from noseweek readers:
Cliff Livingstone says he is being pursued by VVM for rates on a Lyndhurst, Joburg, house which was sold by his wife six years ago.
Another reader, Greg de Chaves, complains that for some time VVM have been harassing him over a rates bill outstanding on a house he sold seven years ago, and are now threatening to have him blacklisted. VVM are demanding that he prove his innocence by producing a rates-clearance certificate. His response: “Who keeps that sort of thing?” (Besides – how does a property get transferred to its new owner without a rates clearance certificate?)
David Wolpert, reports that he’s been getting rude and aggressive telephone calls and text messages from VVM for months, demanding that he pay a Telkom debt allegedly incurred by a now insolvent company, of which Wolpert was a director – but for which he never signed surety. He left the company’s service in 2005 and believes it went into liquidation in 2007. Although VVM staff have conceded to Wolpert that they can’t verify that he is in fact legally responsible for the debt, they insist that he must pay – unless he can prove that he is not liable. The threats culminated with a final letter of demand (dated 24 December 2009), addressed, quite absurdly, to “Business David Wolpert”.
Wolpert referred the matter to the Law Society of the Northern Provinces, ending his letter with a weary plea: “I would appreciate it if you can assist me to stop this unlawful terrorising of an uninvolved citizen.” But to no avail: The Law Society, keen as ever to have the legal profession live up to its slimeball reputation, simply slapped Wolpert on the wrist for not submitting his complaint as an affidavit.
The Society proceeded to clarify the matter by telling Wolpert that attorneys represent “their clients regarding a claim that their client alleges they have against a debtor”. In other words, in the view of The Law Society, attorneys are under no obligation of any kind to ascertain whether or not the claim they are hired to pursue against someone has any legal validity.
The Law Society’s solution to the situation was that, if Wolpert objected to being unlawfully harassed by an attorney, he should get an attorney to help him.
Wolpert’s response was considerably more dignified than anything the legal profession had managed thus far: “I have always been under the impression that a registered attorney would, at all times, be required to uphold the high principles of the legal profession and would be obliged to conduct him/herself in a manner aimed at maintaining the ethics and values laid down by the profession’s governing body. Threatening and haranguing a member of the public, while aware that that party has no debt whatsoever to the client, merely in order to earn collection and related fees, would, in my view, not constitute anything like the type of integrity and ethics referred to above. I will take your advice and engage an attorney to put a stop to the harassment.”
See Letters Page
Reader’s comments:
Submitted by : Dawid on 2010-01-29 05:26:11
I can add my name to the list: My father cancelled his TV licence 10 years ago since my stepmother has a TV licence and 2 licences in one household is superfluous. The SABC in their usual apathetic way never cancelled the licence as requested many times (but then they are not known for their competence…) but in any event for over a year now VVM has been sending me threatening SMS’s about the account, nevermind the fact that they were informed in detail of the history, plus the fact that my father died in July 2008. So every now and then I get an SMS (where VVM got my number is a mystery) threatening the late mr. CHG van Wyk with legal action. I have called and e-mailed VVM and explained the matter ad nauseam, but still they persist in threatening my dead father with a lawsuit for an account that is not legally valid. Another shining example of VVM’s legal ethics and overall competence…shall I send them a spade to go and dig him up? A friend of mine once said (after we had compared horror stories about doctors) that one should always remember that some doctors study hard and pass their degrees magna cum laude and others party and drink and scrape through by the skin of their asses with a 51% pass, but we call them all “Doctor.” Maybe VVM is populated by “51% lawyers?”
Submitted by : Karen on 2010-02-18 09:51:33
Yes, I know about this lot. They buy up ‘old’ debt and then harrass people for payament. They had a ‘debt’ against my name in the form of some or other ‘judgement’ – the details of which they could never supply me with. Twelve years ago I did have financial difficulties but all of my debt was paid through and with my (decent, honest) attorney. Although they have now ‘removed’ this black mark against my name, it was very embarrassing and it took four months to resolve. My credit record has been flawless for 8 years but this bunch of palookas almost ruined it.
Dear Noseweek Editor
Issue # 124 – February 2010
Cheaper than you think
One should not forget the Master’s offices when it comes to judicial favours for sale (nose123).
Despite their assurances to the contrary, it can take months to have a letter of executorship issued by the Master of the Gauteng High Court. My Pretoria colleagues advise me that, subject to the payment of an incentive (I believe the going rate is R250), the letter of appointment in an estate will be issued within days.
An example: In November 2008 a friend passed away. In January 2009 his son-in-law and daughter passed away simultaneously. In May the three estates were reported to the Master’s Offices. I signed as Commissioner of Oaths and advised the heir that it would take a couple of months to get the appointments. He assured me he would get them the same day. I advised him that if he managed that, I’d kiss his ass.
That afternoon I got a call from a very amused colleague who advised me that I had to come and do some kissing. All it had required was three family-size KFC buckets, with Cokes, to get the letters of executorship within the hour.
The bad taste still lingers.
Name withheld
Kempton Park
Whatever happened to the spin-doctors of days gone by? The more the ANC and some government officials try to deny a story, the more they confirm its veracity.
Mikhail Fassbinder, your tongue-in-cheek responses, are simply refreshing.
Will all those who are not theives, please step forward, minority or not. To be honest takes courage, for starters.
Tony, I suppose I don’t really get the value of irony which is Fass’s venue of expression. Have you google’d Mikhail yet?
Sirjay, with respect, your rude dismissal of my humble contribution probably stems from your implacable attachment to a liberal racist paradigm sponsored by the arch hypocrite that has seized control of the Western Cape.
Michael Osborne says:
February 21, 2010 at 20:24 pm
Hey Dworky – are you under cover or has Michael been put under the Spell of Dwork?
Anyway, here’s an interesting one
“ANC Youth League president Julius Malema has accused those who leaked stories about his houses, cars and enrichment through government tenders of employing strategies used by former president Thabo Mbeki….
“These people who are saying we are criminals are not different from president Mbeki’s government. Because president Mbeki’s government, when you disagreed with them, you were going to be investigated like a criminal.”
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20100222070541781C359537
The smart tacit – the facts are not in dispute, from the horses mouth that is, despite the initial denials from the organisations.
I get the feeling that the attempt to rely on the Mbeki discord, is a rather tired one that is unlikely to smooth this one over. It will probably just deepen the enquiries.
Micahel: perhaps you could indicate where I dismissed some humble post of yours. I’m not aware of having done so. As for arch hypocrasy having seized control of the Western Cape, personally I fail to see that.
Sirjay, its seems that sad, crude, ironist Dwork has hijacked my identity again.
Please ignore whatever is said by the sarcastic fool.
Unless and until it can be shown that Malema made the money through corrupt contracting (which is perfectly likely, given the lack of transparency, but hasn’t been proven) this is a non-story.
It only appears as a story because of the assumption by all people promoting the story that it is impossible that Malema can make money because he is too unintelligent.
But, firstly, Malema is no fool, and secondly, you don’t need brains to succeed in business.
Prof,
As much as I dislike the rather ‘intelligent’ Julius, I disagree that his money is a public matter.
Only the money received by public sector tenders should be open for public scrutiny, but as he is not an elected person occupying a public office, his private business is his business.
I think the state should nationalise his houses, suites, watches and cars. Redistribution to the masses…
I was just wondering, in the light of his wealth, why should I as taxpayer foot the bill for police protection and blue light brigades to escort Julius?
Once again Cosatu and the Communists will save the ANC from itself and it has happened before. We must go to the next conference with a stronger organisation and expose the selfish, useless and dishonest elements in our ranks.
The Alliance cannot fail the people of SA.
@ George
Julius is elected, remember the bums and his office is not private. By the way greed, selfishness, dishonesty, slavery, opportunism, abuse of poor can be advanced in both private and public institutions.
Just a thought the posts concerning the alleged misconduct of certain attorneys and advocates, I wonder if they studied in Liepzig or were they home-grown talent in UCT or UWC?
Donovan is right.
UCT and UWC-trained lawyers have misconducted themselves many times over the years. Also, they have sometimes made errors in litigation.
That proves that Leipzig was a good law school.
malema is in the same position as cop youth leader and DA youth leader and they are all not government employees (public servants)he is just the leader or anc youth wing, to audit his life style we will have to do so to vf youth president.
Has Julius broken any law?
I saw the interview on the news and his arrogance is confirms his huge helicopter, this guy is an untouchable, Al Capone eat your heart out!
Gwebecimele,
Malema is not elected in any general or municipal election, not appointed to any public institution, therefore occupies no state or government position.
Technically the ANC-YL is private institution (ab)using the ANC name which happens to be the governing party at the moment.
I could care less if he made sound investments on the JSE and are now reaping the benefits.
What I do care about: allegations of tender rigging with public money.
The key here is the word “public”
Public office, public money etc. then his affairs are a public matter.
Otherwise I would say it is a private matter.
Gwebecimele says:
February 22, 2010 at 9:22 am
“We must go to the next conference with a stronger organisation and expose the selfish, useless and dishonest elements in our ranks.”
That’s seems to be the plan.
Of course it does not help when a “powerful” leader who is less than scrupulous threatens all and sundry.
“May the force be with you”, but when it turns against you, it turns – no one is more powerful than the ANC as one ex-future President will learn.
The carrion will be fed to the vultures.
As the saying goes “you don’t mess with the Zohan!”
The part of this whole mess that scares me the most, is that his default position when asked about this matter was that one has to be “racist” in order to ask such questions. as though to question where he got all the money from … is racist in and of itself!
that is a little troubling …
Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder says:
February 22, 2010 at 9:35 am
“UCT and UWC-trained lawyers have misconducted themselves many times over the years.”
You lie Dworky!
If there is the slightest possibility that impropriety by its members, those august bodies, the bastions for truth and justice, the Law Societies and Bar Associations would act against their highly professional members and hold them against the oaths of office that they had taken.
Be assured that it is completely untrue that the unsaid rule is that members are only in violation if they get caught – there is no way that legal professionals would stoop to the kind of abuse, neglect and criminality that is rumoured.
And in the cases where such things may happen, the professional bodies are not, contrary to the perception that some have, trying to cover up for their colleagues.
Why would the ordinary person know about the goings on you may ask and not the august bodies – well the professionals do not allow themselves to be influenced by rumours and petty gossip, they seek the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – if there was something to know they would know it and more they would act will godspeed on it to protect the broader interests of society.
The cheek of Donovan, equating legal professionals to criminals and/or political opportunists!
Yes concerned citizen and it seems there are intelligent people too who are of this view, check old Dworky’s post up there, I thought he makes quite relevant comments, but the: “when whites drive Jeeps, nobody gets suspicious……” This exact way of thinking is the core of the curse, you’d think that your racism would affect the subject of your hatred adversely, but you’re wrong the whites just cruise past in that Jeep and they don’t feel anything for you and they do not care that you hate them, on the contrary when you have these thoughts, they affect you negatively, look at the people who has used this kind of reasoning and tell me (without saying if it’s positive or negative) just whether it’s affected their situations?
And there’s no shortage of examples here, there’s the bok coach, he said something about black v. white mechanics, there’s the how many? who said any critism from whomsoever stems from racism ect ect over and over like a monkey with a miniature simbol and a hat.
sirjay jonson says:
February 21, 2010 at 18:40 pm
I am not a thief – however, impliedly, Julius Malema has admitted that he is. I copy my post that I have added to the previous Julius Malema thread “On Julius malema, HIV and Democracy” here to substantiate my argument.
“Anonymouse says:
February 20, 2010 at 13:12 pm
Yesterday, Cmd Julius Malema said this in response to people questioning his high – gravy-train – lifestyle:
“Ek steel nie van arm mense nie, want my ma was self ’n kombuiswerker. Laat dié mense wat aanbeveel dat my leefstyl geoudit moet word, eerste in die ry staan. Laat alle hoëprofiel-leiers geoudit word. As hulle skoon is, dan weet ons dit én dat hulle beter as God is.”
Translated:
“I do not steal from POOR people [only rich ones], because even my own mother was a domestic worker. Let those people who advocate an audit of my [extremely extravagant lfestyle] be first [in the row to be audited]. Let all high-profile leaders be audited. If THEY [unlike me] are clean, we will know that, and that they are better than God!”
Boy! Hee’s gooood!”
Anonymouse says:
February 22, 2010 at 11:06 am
Another lesson from Jacob Zuma : “Never fight unless you have to. And when you have to, never fight on the terrain set by the enemy you will always lose. Bring the enemy into a terrain that you know well then you have a good chance of winning”.
Methinks one former, future President been lured onto a very unfamiliar even dangerous territory which he is not smart enough, strong enough or clean enough to defend himself in.
Even the pack which ran with him on the hunt for greener pastures will soon (when they realise that he has been hung out to dry) turn on and devour him.
It seems that you can annoy some of the people some of the time, but you cannot annoy all of the people all of the time.
Or the Bushism “Annoy me once, shame on you. Annoy me twice – you can’t annoy me twice. Duh!”
http://www.news24.com/Content/SouthAfrica/Politics/1057/34bf00fa52214fefbe61ecb5f71b9587/22-02-2010-12-27/Malema_puts_the_record_straight
@ Michael Osborne
Please do not dismiss me as a vulgar ironist.
I happen to disagree, strongly, with the neo-liberal orthodoxy puhed by yourself and Maggs. It is not for you to question my sincerity in that regard. I have always struggled against both liberalism and, its close cousin, racism.
@ Anonymouse
As if that settles it. I can bet the papers are coming with another headline tomorrow, watch the space.
Gwebecimele says:
February 22, 2010 at 12:18 pm
I agree – I intended to be ironically cynical in linking that news article
How to manage a tender and defend it in court without disclosing the beneficiaries. We can’t live without medical doctors but I bet we can do better without lawyers.
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page326289?oid=469707&sn=2009+Detail&pid=287226.
Gwebecimele says:
February 22, 2010 at 13:41 pm
Thanks for posting the link.
It’s an outrage.
“Snotho was only incorporated after the closing date of the tender; “prima facie”, stated the judge, “that rendered its bid invalid . . . One perforce asks how Snotho could have satisfied the requirement of providing evidence of readily available financial resources.” Duly served notices calling on Snotho and Pfula to disclose particulars of proprietors or partners were neither followed up nor answered. “The unsatisfactory result”, Judge Heher stated, “is that counsel representing those entities asked this Court to make orders in favour of those respondents without knowledge of their locus standi, their true nature or the faces behind them”.
“”the initial reasons furnished to Phoenix by the department were, to say the least, seriously misleading. They created the impression that its tender had been evaluated and rejected on its merits, which was far from being the case. No explanation for the compilation of those reasons was ever furnished. In a proper case such a failure might justify an inference of mala fides [bad faith]“.
And that’s R15.75 million more on a tender that ought to have cost R27 million, inflated by over 36%.
Instead of promoting a state sponsored BBBEE for all paid for by Apartheid beneficiaries, , we chose the narrow BEE that is driven by Whites on a rent a darkie scheme amongst the elite.
Gwebecimele says:
February 22, 2010 at 13:41 pm
“I bet we can do better without lawyers.”
We can all have peace of mind, now that the lawyer has commented.
As Shakespeare said “Lawyers are honourable people”.
“His lawyer, Tumi Mokwena, said he had received the instruction from Malema to terminate the directorships.
“This happened somewhere in 2008. He said he did not want to have an interest in any company any longer.”
“Mokwena said Malema gave his lawyers special power of attorney to handle the matter.”
http://www.news24.com/Content/SouthAfrica/News/1059/2b5813f22f3c453ead5564839180c6d2/22-02-2010-10-51/Malema_money_mystery_deepens_
Dworky, how is liberalism a close cousin of racism? In fact how are they related at all? Gwebecimele, if you do some research, you will find that where people are forced to act or speak in a certain way, some will revolt and some will try and comply by any means neccessary, whether it’s to promote the interest of the business or the self. research the work tokenism.
Dworky, how is liberalism a close cousin of racism? In fact how are they related at all? Gwebecimele, if you do some research, you will find that where people are forced to act or speak in a certain way, some will revolt and some will try and comply by any means neccessary, whether it’s to promote the interest of the business or the self. research tokenism.
Friend says:
February 23, 2010 at 6:24 am
“Dworky, how is liberalism a close cousin of racism? In fact how are they related at all?”
Dworky is wrong.
Not related in the least.
See for yourself.
DNA code for liberals – http://www.jyi.org/articleimages/419/originals/img2.jpg
And for racists – http://www.woodrow.org/teachers/bi/1994/dna_codes.gif
his the man,tell us more about the bribes juju
You what i like about you,is that you call a spite a spite
All we can hope for is that we all are treated the same.. black or white