Comments

Media Bias on the Garden Route — No Comments

  1. I think this Mary-Anne women is extremely brave and whatever she says should be taken seriously. They forgave us in 1994 and this is the thanks they get? I’m upset about this. I honestly think the DA should reconsider their plan of action in the Western Cape. They are causing much hurt and I dont understand why. They should also start caring more for all the organisations who helps the poor defenceless animals like PAWS.

    • Yep, salutes to Mary-Anne which is why i posted her letter. To further understand her intentions, we had coffee the other night. Impressive lady and likely to be a bull in a corner. Very passionate for human rights and the people of Plett.

      I can’t speak for Plett but i can for Knysna regards associations for animals, drugs, disabilities etc. – there’s far too few attempts by politicians to get to grips with social problems. Instead, they seem more likely to turn up for photo opportunities.

  2. Mark how did you come to your conclusion re JEF’s “using and abusing the justice system? I’ve read their site and the cases…are you so blinded, brainwashed and confused that you cannot see anyone with good intentions? I feel deeply sorry for you…really.

    [WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘0 which is not a hashcash value.

  3. A last thought before I resume my position of standing back and reading your statements – I visited JEF and could honestly not fault them on any aspect of their site. Admitted, it’s seems very pro- ANC but please realise what they have achieved = no Jub-Jub antics in the Western Cape!!!! I honestly doubt if the DA could ever have negotiated such an agreement and that’s why I thank them for getting involved. I still HOWEVER believe they should come in the open and reveal the persons behind the “JEF”? If this should however hinder the seemingly good relationship and open door privilege they enjoy from the ANC and ANCYL, I will understand their current cloak of secrecy and will respect that. They should just always keep in mind that there is always 2 (in fact 3) sides to a story and should perhaps take a softer stance against the DA (despite of all the “admittingly” shocking truths they have revealed thus far and all their legal victories) if they truly stand for justice and equality.

  4. I admire both sides passion and willingness to post comments. However, I do not know if Mark or Red5 is right and neither of them convinced me with their arguments since I can not establish for who’s or which cause they are debating? Please note that I have been reading this site and many more but this is the first time which I have actually felt obliged to post a comment. Since all of you seems to be fighting battles for some-one else I can only rely on the judgment itself, and it speaks to both sides. Admitted, the DA got a massive hiding but still I believe the ANC should also take and learn from this. This judgment is more than a huge victory for “one side” and should be studied and applied right across the country. I hope and pray that all of you will soon find your purpose for really taking the time to post comments and work hard towards that goal which will hopefully be revealed to you through supernatural intervention, in which I, by the way, childishly belief.

  5. And just prove the point I am making, that judgement is upside down. And what’s more the JEF has undoubtedly sabotaged my viewer and removed the option I normally have to sort the problem out. What more proof does one need that it is a conspiracy?

    At least it saves me the fag of having to wade through 34 pages of gobbledy gook.

    • A disconcerting and “loony” comment. I’m holding all your comments, forthwith, for moderation. I realize that you have many computers and IP addresses and truly hope that you take a breather. I’m not your battle. I certainly don’t want to. Go for a walk, have a good meal, concentrate on your business. Hell, if you calm down, have a cup of coffee with me next week. But this, here, it ‘s not good.

  6. The question I am asking is why no one is interested in presenting both sides of the story. I don’t understand the finer points of law and if Brummer is out of control he needs to brought to account. If Brummer is the problem, replace him. He is not the DA. And he should not be used as an excuse to derail the process of change. He should not be used to make Plett ungovernable.

    The problem here is that there is no balance. The JEF has no balance. They are against the DA. They are using and abusing the “Justice” system to perpetuate the abuse of power and inequalities we have all come to accept as the way things are done. They are part of the problem.

    So the question remains. What are the facts? What is objective? You can’t tell me. No one can. There is the problem. It’s nothing but a circus of irresponsible folly.

    • You are right about one thing – Brummer is not the DA, but you lose sight of the fact the he was apoointed by the DA and his actions were condoned by the DA – they voted and decided to take this matter to court – in fact, to prove the point that it is not JEF who is using and abusing the legal system – Brummer (supported and mandated by the DA) instituted this frivolous litigation NOT JEF – they merely opposed it. So, in fact, the DA initiated the litigation, they just did so in Brummer’s name. This is fact, objective and clear.

      You do not see the purpose of JEF – it is indeed to STOP the “abuse of power and inequalities we have all come to accept as the way things are done”. And yes, the DA is not the target, but, currently in the garden route, they have shown themselves to be the perpatrators…

      JEF is presenting their side of the story purely because no one else is. That is exactly why JEF is needed – if the media comes to the party and starts telling both sides of the story the public will be better informed, and that inevitably will lead to leaders being more accountable. At the moment they can basically do as they please without the fear of being publicly exposed and that leads to an abuse of power.

  7. @ Mark

    Brummer went to court to fight a personal battle with taxpayers money. He has been holding a grudge against certain ANC councillors for years and the court even pointed this out, saying that his actions were motivated by his prejudices. Change is only healthy if it is healthy. If it is rotten, it is not healthy at all. See, the problem here is the abuse of power while accusing others of abusing power. I was really hoping to see the DA take the moral high ground (as the promised in their election campaign).

    What was this judgment a victory for? For truth and justice. Hopefully, this judgment will cause our leaders to consider their actions more carefully, and act according to the mandate they received from voters instead of in self interest.

    If you want more facts, visit the JEF website – there are many facts that were never published in the mainstream media – which is more than likely where you get the information from to form your opinions. That is the danger – forming set opinions while only having half the information (the half THEY want you to have). Mary-Anne mentions many facts in her letter. You question these facts, yet accept the “facts” you read in the mainstream media. Why?

    The 2 sides of the story is quite obvious – mainstream media tells only the one side. Here, at least you can also get to read the other side.

    A bit further on the fact that Brummer lost – this is not as important as the fact that he was allowed to proceed with this litigation – that it was supported by the DA council and the Mayor, while they were well aware that the case was frivolous and without any merit whatsoever. This is the gravest concern, that they will disregard commons sense (and good advice) at huge cost to taxpayers to fight petty personal and party battles. You cannot argue that away, and you cannot say that you are OK with that? Why must this sort of behaviour by the DA not enjoy the same “sensational” media attention as for instance Julius Malema or the Arms deal? What is the difference? The amount of money involved? Because the principles remain exactly the same.

  8. Mark read the judgment and you will see the facts speaks for itself. What more do you need to establish the facts? The courts are independent and both parties presented their respective cases to an independent judge who evaluated the evidence and made a dtermination, as simple as that. Don’t try to look for something that is not there.

  9. Mike there have been changes in the local structures and generally change is healthy. But you are not presenting two sides to this story. You are branding yourself as being against change and contradicting everything you stand for. Why did Brummer go to court? The fact he lost is something that should be looked at. But that was a victory for what?

    Lets have the facts. You are almost guilty of exactly the same bias you are accusing others of.

  10. What are the facts? Why is it so difficult to establish what is fact and what is not? Why is hysteria and emotion used to cloud issues of fact?

    • Morning, Mark. Yep, lots of emotion but many, many issues raised within it. If you haven’t yet, read it in the context of http://www.knysnakeep.org/pletts-da-speaker-loses-big-time as well. DA lost on 6 accounts (not 3 as i reported) in a case they brought against the ANC. One of the points i’ve tried to ram home on this blog is that there’s 2 sides to the political story and that, until recently, there was only one incredibly bias view. My goal is to make people think, one further reason for me posting Mary-Anne’s letter.

  11. Nou ja toe! Holier- than -thou “journalist” who are on the DA’s pay-roll. These allegations are very serious and we must do everything in our collective power to stop them from peddling lies to the general public. Shame on you Niel and Janine. Soos my ouma altyd gese het “laat dit met julle baie goed gaan!”

  12. When will the journalist realise the immense responsibility they have to portray the news accurately, fairly and impartially. One-sided reporting does nothing but to further polarise society and stirs the flames of anger, mistrust and hatred.

    Shame ons these journo’s who are willing to report like this!

Make yourself heard

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>