From: varvel@plains.NoDak.edu (Andrew Varvel)
Subject: Re: SADF Purge
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 16:36:05 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

In article <Dec.21.17.36.54.1992.27639@andromeda.rutgers.edu> 
detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:
>llk@kepler.unh.edu (Local Genius) writes:
>
>>In article <Dec.20.19.33.27.1992.8310@andromeda.rutgers.edu> 
detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) [commenting on Gavan's post] 
writes:
>
>>[...]
>>>
>>>into retirement when SA seems to be at a crossroads.  I am sure the
>>>SA Press is having a field day with this news, and that the ANC in all
>>>of its arrogance will call for more and call for the State President to
>>>step aside.
>
>>David, I suggest you refrain from commenting on stuff you know nothing
>>about...the SADF has been accused of killing people opposed to the
>>current system of the way things are run in SA...how can you call it
>>arrogant when people call for accountability of the govt to things like
>>these?
>
>I have studied and consider myself above average with my knowledge of
>the situation in SA, and will offer my opinions and banter with the
>rest here on the network for as long as the situation presents itself.

I absolutely agree.  However, plenty of people on the net would be lucky 
to find South Africa on a map...

>It is arrogant of the ANC or ANY, repeat ANY organization to call for
>the removal of the State President at such a critical time in the
>history of South Africa.

Call me arrogant, then.  Of course, few people seem to believe that the
State President of South Africa really is going to step down because 
somebody requests it.

>Those responsible for the improper action should be removed, and a
>complete investigation and report should be conducted.  This is going
>to be one of the stepping stones to reform you are going to have to deal
>with, nothing is easy in politics, especially when it is caught up with
>police and military forces used for more than defence and protection.

Dream on.  If the non-directives aren't found (and they probably won't be
found, since they probably lead to the very top...), then all that is 
happening is scapegoating. 

>No matter if we agree or not here, at least we are talking, which is
>more than what is occurring in many places.

Quite agreed.

>-- 
>David De Trolio - (detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu)
>--------------------------------------------------
>Reagan-Bush 1981-1988 + Bush-Quayle 1989-1992
>An Era of Strong American Leadership

I just wondered.  Imagine for an instant that John Anderson is president 
of the U.S. for twelve years (1981-1992) with about 10% of the vote each 
time and you were living in the independent homeland of KwaNewitaly run by 
a brutal dictator (say, John Gotti?). And what if Bush were the president 
of the independent homeland of KwaYankee, and Reagan were the president of 
the newly independent bantustan of KwaOrangecounty?  Meanwhile, Ross Perot 
would be America's new president with 15% of the vote (a BIG improvement!), 
while Bill Clinton would be considered a hero in jail in the notorious 
homeland of KwaNashville.

In such a scenario, would *you* call for new elections?  Would *you* ask for
either John Anderson or Ross Perot to step down because they didn't get a
majority of the vote?  Or course not.

--Andrew Varvel--

The North Dakota Institute for the Study of Africans who Study Americans who
Study Africans who Study Violence
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african