Comments on: Our own Minister Ras Dumisani

By: Sine

Sine — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:06:01 +0000

@ Thomas

Thanks for the link containing the letter to DCJ Moseneke. I am still waiting for his direct involvement in any of the shady deals mentioned in the letter. So far he is only being crucified for belonging to the Moseneke family or for the fact that the Meseneke family has a family trust…

By: mayimele

mayimele — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:57:50 +0000

Musa my friend, you seem to be having problems in understanding issues, the context in which they are argued and their analysis – in this case the context in which Prof refers to the herb and the letter. I cannot agree more with Prof himself in his response to your conclusions based on this misunderstanding as well as Leigh’s detailed response in this regard.

By: Dumisani Mkhize

Dumisani Mkhize — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 12:43:17 +0000

Menzi has been appointed to make sure that Zuma does not get prosecuted (the same reason Mbeki was recalled from office) and also to make sure other cadres don’t have to face justice for breaking the law no matter how corrupt they may be.

Finish and klaar.

By: Leigh

Leigh — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:09:55 +0000

Musa, let me put forward five related points here. In the first place, I do not think that anyone seriously believes that the Minister smoked pot. Secondly, the reference to weed smoking was meant to convey an opinion – which, incidently, is shared by many – about the quality of the Minister’s reasoning in defence of Simelane. Thirdly, when the Professor pens his pieces, he does argue – and he typically does so very well. But he also tries (with regular success) to be engaging and entertaining and that is a well-conceived object insofar as it fosters readership beyond the sphere of lawyers and political analysts. Fourthly, Minister Radebe is a prominent public figure who, if he has taken the measure of his job, would expect to be the subject matter of a few light-hearted remarks. Finally, as one of our fellow bloggers pointed out in another discussion, the fact that ANC supporters take issue with a few fairly humorous comments about ANC figures is clearly indicative of the hypocrisy of many an ANC proponent. The ANCYL has said far worse and for far less in the way of cause. Here you take issue with an innocuous comment. And this to me seems similar to the Presidency’s decision to take issue with the Professor’s choice of words in a different but related context.

So in short, Radebe was not labelled here and in my view, the Professor has done nothing despicable.

On a separate but related note, it seems one could fairly argue that many ANC figures and proponents are at once over-sensitive bullies and proper cowards. Not one of them could match the personal courage that the Professor demonstrates daily.

By: Pierre De Vos

Pierre De Vos — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:17:14 +0000

Musa, you have failed to grasp the two different issues. I have never taken Adv Simelane to task for hiding the Mbandla letter and have never claimed such. I have stated that the CONTENT of the letter is objectionable as it contains a blatantly illegal instruction. I hope that clarifies things for you.

By: Musa

Musa — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:42:07 +0000

Prof, your past articles have always referred to the letter Adv Simelane drafted for Minister Mabandla. You and many here crucified him on those basis. Suddenly when there is evidence that the letter was submitted to the commission, you change tact. See your topic “Neither fit or proper” just below the quote of Frene Ginwala.

By: Maggs Naidu

Maggs Naidu — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:37:47 +0000

Thomas says:
December 1, 2009 at 10:10 am

Maggs Naidu says:
December 1, 2009 at 8:54 am

The Ginwala Commission findings resulted in dismissing Pikoli.

For that it had to be impeccable.

It cannot be sensibly argued that only those portions that related to Pikoli was accurate while those aspects that related to Simelane were not!
————————————————————–
Was the commission about Mr. Simelane?
—————————————————————————————————–
No.

By: Musa

Musa — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:17:14 +0000

Leigh my issue is the ease at which we label people we don’t agree with. No one has proof of Minister Hadebe smoking a whole herb. To even associate him to Ras Dumisani is despecable by the Prof.

Also note that over the weekend the PSC acknowledged that they ignored the representations made by Adv Simelane to the minister, which the minister forwarded to them. Had they read his representation, they probably would have come to a different conclusion.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:10:27 +0000

Maggs Naidu says:
December 1, 2009 at 8:54 am

The Ginwala Commission findings resulted in dismissing Pikoli.

For that it had to be impeccable.

By: Mr Black

Mr Black — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 07:52:29 +0000

The Prof is justified in assuming that the speech was written by Ras Dumisani. How else can you justify such utter trash.

Radebe seems to be blaming everyone else but Simelane; the PSC, Ginwala, Pikoli and his mother, blah blah blah… but somehow conveniently forgets that he (Radebe) was responsible for not affording Simelane a proper platform to answer to those charges. And he seems to think that because he refused to give Simelane the platform, then Simelane should be appointed. We say no. We have to discuss Simelane’s fitness no matter what, even if it means we demand a 100 push-ups from him.

Ras blamed the microphone, the words, acoustics etc. But, you see, Ras was high. What’s Radebe’s excuse?