Thursday, 17 April 2014

Ukrainian protesters armed with Molotov cocktails gunned down by soldiers in Ukraine's South East.

Both sides agree that at least 3 people have lost their lives. Both agree that all of these victims of the unrest, were pro-Russian in their outlook.

The Ukrainian government calls these people attackers, claiming they attempted to storm a military base. The pro-Russian citizen journalists however say that the crowd had merely approached the base and asked the soldiers to defect, rallying towards the base without firearms, but with words, and ordinary protest behaviour in hopes of convincing the soldiers to abandon their posts. This type of peaceful approaching of bases makes sense, as many soldiers stationed in the South and East are from those areas under government rules, and are likely sympathetic or empathetic to protest demands. Some Western Reports put the crowd at 300, and reports have about 5 dozen arrests, none of which match a dialogue of a separatist attack.

Russia's RT news service says that local media report that some of the pro-Russian crowd had been armed with Molotov cocktails, the same sort of weapon that the current leaders in Kiev got into power through.

13 people were also Injured, according to Kiev's Interior Ministry. It would appear they mean to say all 13 are pro-Russian activists. While uncertain that as many as 13 people were injured, the pro-Russian citizen journalists have also claimed that the injuries that happened were on the pro-Russian side.



Putting this together, if the Pro-Russians had stormed the base in an attack, surely some Ukrainian soldiers would have been hurt, especially if as the Ukrainian new leaders would have us think: the Pro-Russians were Russian special forces, among the best in the world. Instead, what both sides seem to agree about is that the Pro-Russians did approach the base, and only pro-Russians were killed and injured.



This story is similar to one Yesterday, where the Ukrainian New Leaders' Defence Ministry claimed that 6 Armoured Personnel Carriers or APCs had been captured, seized by force by the Pro-Russians, who they were sent to quell as 'terrorists', for doing just as the Maiden Protesters had in Kiev and taking over government buildings. The pro-Russian citizen journalists in comparison have claimed the soldiers manning the APCs, had laid down their weapons, handing their vehicles peacefully over to protesters. Reports later that day have women and children being photographed around the vehicles. It seems highly unlikely that the Pro-Russians could have surprised and forced out 6 APC units without any casualties or reports of a fire fight, if this were a capturing by force.



Also, the Pro-Russians in the East and South East hardly said much of a word that anyone might have noticed before the Maiden riots in Kiev ousted the democratically elected President of Ukraine, and saw him put on the new leader's wanted list as a criminal. Likewise, protesters in the east are called 'terrorists', and the West seems to support use of force against them: a far cry from its position in almost every other recent conflict. Is it not possible, as Christian Science Monitor found, that there is very little support for Separatism among the people in the East and South East, and even among the Pro-Russians. Is it not possible, that this is merely what they see as the safest way to protest against an unelected government, which has attempted to ban the language all business is done in: Russian (The new leaders' President vetoed a bill that the new leaders' parliament voted for: banning Russian). Is it not possible that these pro-Russian ethnic and national Ukrainians, are merely worried about the events in Kiev, and are thus ordinary voices of dissent, voices which are being silenced by force of death?









Thursday, 27 March 2014

At least ten tigers killed, dismembered, for entertainment at private parties for Chinese rich, officials.

Nouvel Observateur reports the sad news. The news of yet another massacre.



A video has emerged, of a prisoner in a cramped cage, undergoing electroshock, and then being butchered. This tiger in the clandestine photography, is far from unique.

It is as though the world has jumped back to the age when the Roman emperor lit Christians on fire to light up his parties for the rich and famous. Chinese officials and the rich attend private events, to watch tigers massacred, mutilated, and then to buy the bodily remains such as bones, making sure the tiger was alive before they saw the medicine beast killed for their pleasure.

It is part entertainment, part a way to show off status and monetary position. The tigers are abused and killed, and the rich whether for superstition or for a show of grandeur, attend, and then are sure to buy the animal fetishes as medicine, though China Daily says in simplified Han Chinese, that the inspection itself is akin to a procedural formality for smugglers, the fetishes were already assigned to buyers well in advance.

The butchery parties are set up at plantations, in the woods or even in houses, China Daily reports in Chinese.

The combination of entertainment and superstition, particularly were hard hitting for French journalists. The slaughter of the animals alone was hardly the end of it.

'At least a dozen tigers were killed in a southern city of China, at private parties bringing together local officials and wealthy businessmen, the Chinese press reported, at the end of March.

'The beasts were then skinned and their fur, meat and their bones sold at exorbitant prices, specifies the newspaper "Nanfang", controlled by the Communist Party of Guangdong Province

'According to the newspaper, the beasts were killed in front of a public official and community leaders, proud to display their wealth.

'"The tigers were probably anesthetized during transport. But buyers ensured they were alive before their being put to death," said an anonymous source quoted by the newspaper.

'Despite official bans, there is a persistent demand in China for tiger products (bones, claws, whiskers, penis ..) [...]

'This fuels the poaching of this feline that has always been associated with high status in Chinese history and mythology.'

(Le Nouvel Observateur | 'CHINE. Des tigres tués et dépecés en guise de divertissement' at 27-03-2014 16h05 by staff and AFP)


The Nangfan communist paper continues the story:

'One of the suspects jumped from a building to his death while trying to flee. The police retrieved a number of weapons used to capture the tigers, tiger goods to be sold on the black market, and the tiger’s carcass, Yangcheng Daily reports on Tuesday.

'According to Zhanjiang Police, the 15 suspects are mainly from Baisha County, Leizhou; while the 16th suspect, who jumped to his death was from Shentang County. In total, 10 tigers were killed.

'In recent years, tiger meat and tiger baijiu have become quite popular in Leizhou, and can fetch a hefty price. Although unconfirmed, it is suspected that the tigers were smuggled into China from Vietnam. Typically, smugglers find buyers for the meat or bones before they smuggle the tigers from Vietnam. Occasionally, they make the trip to Vietnam and then quickly flee after the sale is complete. Tigers are slaughtered in a variety of places to avoid being caught by the police: in the woods, banana fields, or houses.'

(The Nangfan | 'POLICE BUST TIGER SMUGGLING RING IN WESTERN GUANGDONG' at 03/20/2014 1:00 pm by staff)

See also: SACNS version of this same article: At least ten tigers killed, dismembered, for entertainment at private parties for Chinese rich, officials.

Saturday, 15 March 2014

Oscar Pistorius will not be acquitted, that isn't his team's strategy anyway.

Oscar Pistorius shot at a door either knowing or having the duty to know that someone might be hit and killed by his bullets. Whether it is a robber or Reeva behind the door is irrelevant: the Error in Objecto rule, where someone intends to murder A, but accidentally murders B, still results in a murder conviction. Furthermore, aberratio ictus or missing blow theory cannot negate guilt if the wrong target is hit with intention to murder another target: but this sister of Error in Objecto, would not apply here, as it is not a case of the wrong target being hit due to bad aim. Likewise, private defence, what Americans call 'self defense', in South African law rests not on perceptions of danger but on objectively viewed imminent danger to the person's self. Whatever Oscar thought: Reeva was no threat to him, it thus cannot be said to be private defence. Such is the view of long established and long enforced case law. The law can change, but that is what the law is as it stands.

Before we get onto the other factors, we must remember that in South African law: if you can foresee that it is a real possibility that something (an unlawful death) will result from an action, and nonetheless/recklessly proceed with behaviour risking that possibility (dolus eventualis), it is murder not culpable homicide. If the facts show you did not foresee that possibility but a reasonable person would have, then your actions are culpable homicide. A further aspect lies in that those heart strung jury arguments in the west do not stop a murder charge: they emerge in mitigation, even complete mitigation of all jail. It is not in dispute that Oscar shot and killed Reeva Steenkamp. It is not disputed that she was no objective threat to Oscar Pistorius. The only way he could be completely acquitted is based on temporary insanity in the form of 'provocation'.

So what are Oscar's team aiming at?

Either culpable homicide (what Americans call manslaughter), and maybe a year or three in jail if he is lucky.

Or Putative Private Defence (my bet would be on this).

Or provocation (from the French word for cause).

Culpable homicide:

- The law requires a warning shot prior shooting.
- A reasonable person would not have shot through a door without checking if it was Reeva.
- Shorter sentence, not murder but a competent verdict of murder.

Putative Private Defence:

- An established part of our law: applicable when a person believes they are acting in private defence but are not.
- This goes both for proportion of response and for factors which appeared true to the accused, but were objectively false.
- The accused is convicted of murder, but gets mitigated sentencing and possibly even no jail time.

Provocation:
- One must give medical evidence that whatever caused the actions was based on uncontrollable sane automation. This is to be done via medical evidence: since the Eadie case we use medical evidence to prove temporary insanity. A neuropsychologist might be the appropriate expert witness.
- Classic Provocation is no longer a part of our law since the Eadie murder conviction, as the Supreme Court of Appeal set forth at that time:

'[57] I agree with Ronald Louw that there is no distinction between sane automatism and non-pathological incapacity due to emotional stress and provocation. Decisions of this Court make that clear. I am, however, not persuaded that the second leg of the test expounded in Laubscher’s case should fall away. It appears logical that when it has been shown that an accused has the ability to appreciate the difference between right and wrong, in order to escape liability, he would have to successfully raise involuntariness as a defence. However, the result is the same if an accused's verified defence is that his psyche had disintegrated to such an extent that he was unable to exercise control over his movements and that he acted as an automaton - his acts would then have been unconscious and involuntary. In the present contest, the two are flip sides of the same coin. The judgments of this Court referred to earlier, as the highlighted parts of relevant dicta show, see it as such.

'[59] Whilst it may be difficult to visualise a situation where one retains the ability to distinguish between right and wrong yet lose the ability to control one’s actions it appears notionally possible.

'[60] The view espoused by Snyman and others, and reflected in some of the decisions of our courts, that the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity is distinct from a defence of automatism, followed by an explanation that the former defence is based on a loss of control, due to an inability to restrain oneself, or an inability to resist temptation, or an inability to resist one’s emotions, does violence to the fundamentals of any self-respecting system of law. This approach suggests that someone who gives in to temptation may be excused from criminal liability, because he may have been so overcome by the temptation that he lost self-control - a variation on the theme: “the devil made me do it”. It is for this reason that it was suggested earlier that the use by Joubert JA in Laubscher's case, supra, of the word "weerstandskrag" was unfortunate. So too was the use of the word "drang" in Campher's case at 956 B, referred to in paragraph [32] of this judgment. These words suggest a resistance to urges or temptation. No self-respecting system of law can excuse persons from criminal liability on the basis that they succumbed to temptation. Against the fundamental principles restated by JM Burchell (quoted in paragraph [58] of this judgment) it is with respect, absurd to postulate that succumbing to temptation may excuse one from criminal liability. One has free choice to succumb to or resist temptation. If one succumbs one must face the responsibility for the consequences.

'[61] The time has come to face up to the fact that in some instances our courts, in dealing with accused persons with whom they have sympathy, either because of the circumstances in which an offence has been committed, or because the deceased or victim of a violent attack was a particularly vile human being, have resorted to reasoning that is not consistent with the approach of the decisions of this Court. Mitigating factors should rightly be taken into account during sentencing. When an accused acts in an aggressive goal-directed and focused manner, spurred on by anger or some other emotion, whilst still able to appreciate the difference between right and wrong and while still able to direct and control his actions, it stretches credulity when he then claims, after assaulting or killing someone, that at some stage during the directed and planned manouevre he lost his ability to control his actions. Reduced to its essence it amounts to this: the accused is claiming that his uncontrolled act just happens to coincide with the demise of the person who prior to that act was the object of his anger, jealousy or hatred. As demonstrated courts have accepted such version of events from accused persons.'

(S v Eadie (196/2001) [2002] ZASCA 24 (27 March 2002))

So, if Oscar's team can prove temporary insanity due to extreme fear: then he is in that scenario, acquitted and off the hook: for the murder itself: the problem is proving medical sane automation/ temporary insantiy. However that is not his likely intent. His likely intent is mitigation. Or change of law.

This article does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice, approach a competent legal practitioner with knowledge of your facts.

Wednesday, 12 February 2014

Fairland and Northcliff: safest parts of Gauteng Province.


ABOVE: A police vehicle parked at the community policing forum event. The photographer notes the reflective marking.

Police, speaking via a high ranking official, a Brigadier, from Johannesburg, confirmed to a community policing forum Tuesday, held for residents of Fairland, Johannesburg, that the Fairland policing district, and Northcliff, remain the safest areas of Gauteng Province. Police and counsellors answered extensive questions from community members on a variety of safety and security matters. Police, via a high ranking official confirmed that hundreds of police officers yearly are caught by the applicable branch for corruption, and stated that the South African Police Service currently have about 200 000 members. Police also confirmed that there is no gang activity in Fairland whatsoever. A SACNS journalist was present during the meeting between police and the community.

Wednesday, 22 January 2014

E-tolls violate the right not to be subjected to slavery...


[Written form article continues below embedded audio summary.]

Fast credit: Shocking? Or everyday business?


'Wonga offers £400 loan to 13-year-old boy which would take 98 years to pay back'

Food for thought: A headline in the British newspaper Metro on 23/11/2013

A contentious thing:


The newly arrived e-tolling system, which has been imposed upon the Gauteng freeways has been challenged on many grounds. Some say that it violates the right to free movement. Others questioned to what extent the government is permitted to privatise public resources. There certainly is the public international law ideal that the state holds resources in trust for the population: that it is say as a trustee rather than an owner. As a trustee the state therefore must act in the best interests of the population and not in the best interests only of a small minority of special interests. This concept is why tender fraud is such a big issue. None of these arguments are one which I am going to be making today.

A system of credit and debt:


The argument I am here today to make also is not based on reckless credit in accordance with the statutes of South Africa. However, the purpose for the statutes illuminates a constitutional right, and what is more a human right. There is a long history of persons becoming indebted beyond their means to escape their debts. This was in fact one of the means by which slaves were gained by large landholders in certain areas of the world. A person was made to become so legally indebted to another that they are forced to work for the remainder of their life always in debt to the other individual and always forced to work for that individual. In contract law classes, South African law students study a case where a doctor agreed that a vast majority of his salary would go to paying off a debt. The court found that the contract was against public policy and therefore unenforceable as it turned the doctor into essentially what the court called a slave. The e-tolling system has according to SANRAL: been seemingly exempted from the National Credit Act provisions which prevent the issuing of reckless credit.

In order to issue credit, a credit provider must ensure that the person to whom they issue credit, is capable of paying back the credit in their circumstances. The National Credit Act also allows for debt counselling for debtors who cannot possibly afford to pay back their debt. SANRAL seems insistent that this does not apply to e-tolling.

E-tolling is essentially a system of credit. Whenever an individual rides on an e-tolled road, that individual is essentially taking out a loan from SANRAL. It is like swiping a credit card. However, if a person is unable to pay off their credit card the credit card is cancelled. A person who takes out credit from SANRAL can essentially take out unlimited credit whether or not they are able to pay off their debt. A person who earns 1000 Rands a month: could accrue a debt of 10 million Rand. This person would not be afforded debt counselling according to SANRAL. This person would simply have to pay off their debt. It is expensive to file for insolvency, and some return needs to be shown for creditors. Stating that insolvency is a way out of such a debt, also is not stating an absolute solution in such a case. Could such an applicant for insolvency show even one cent to the Rand return for creditors? Would it even be possible for them to file for insolvency? Furthermore, causing a person to become insolvent deeply changes their status, their ability to do business, and their means and resources on which to live.

Micro-lending and Marikana Tragedy:


An aspect of Marikana and the tragic shooting which took place there which is not often brought up is that of micro-lending. Many of the miners who went on strike had taken out small loans. Their salaries were garnished, in order to allow the creditors to reclaim their money. The miners thus could not afford to live and support their families. The unrest was almost inevitable as a result of credit having been granted when it ought not to have been. The absolute desperation of the miners who charged the police at Marikana: should surely hint at the predicament of the indebted miners. Their determination to strike in desperation to bring something home to live on and to support their families: surely shows the effects upon the economy of such strange granting of credit where it ought not to have been granted.

Who are the Debtors?:


Many South Africans are illiterate. Many South Africans do not have basic mathematical education or literacy. Many South Africans are deeply poor. Many South Africans barely get by. These sort of things need to be taken into account by ordinary businesses doing business. Extending a person an unlimited line of credit and expecting them to pay it back without any chance of doing so: no doubt strikes one as immoral. Immorality is not enough. It has to be legally reprehensible. Thus one has to ask in accordance with the Bill of Rights: is the extension of unlimited credit with no cut-off points and no contingencies unconstitutional. I would say that it could well violate the right not to be enslaved. I would say that it could well violate the right to life in as much as it affects a person’s ability to earn a livelihood. I would say that such unfettered granting of unlimited credit could well violate the right to dignity of the human person.

Perhaps I am wrong. However I do believe there is a strong argument that the granting of unlimited and unfettered credit to persons regardless of their creditworthiness or their circumstances and ability to pay back that credit: violates the rights of the debtors.

Disclaimer:


Nothing in this article constitutes legal advice. This argument is provided for entertainment purposes purely, and in order to strike up debate. For proper legal advice please contact the legal practitioner with understanding of your specific circumstances for proper legal advice.



Article written by Marc Evan Aupiais, a LLB Law Graudate, for the SACNS News Service and Aupiais Wire.

Monday, 20 January 2014

E-tolls violate the right not to be subjected to slavery...


[Written form article continues below embedded audio summary.]

Fast credit: Shocking? Or everyday business?


'Wonga offers £400 loan to 13-year-old boy which would take 98 years to pay back'

Food for thought: A headline in the British newspaper Metro on 23/11/2013

A contentious thing:


The newly arrived e-tolling system, which has been imposed upon the Gauteng freeways has been challenged on many grounds. Some say that it violates the right to free movement. Others questioned to what extent the government is permitted to privatise public resources. There certainly is the public international law ideal that the state holds resources in trust for the population: that it is say as a trustee rather than an owner. As a trustee the state therefore must act in the best interests of the population and not in the best interests only of a small minority of special interests. This concept is why tender fraud is such a big issue. None of these arguments are one which I am going to be making today.

A system of credit and debt:


The argument I am here today to make also is not based on reckless credit in accordance with the statutes of South Africa. However, the purpose for the statutes illuminates a constitutional right, and what is more a human right. There is a long history of persons becoming indebted beyond their means to escape their debts. This was in fact one of the means by which slaves were gained by large landholders in certain areas of the world. A person was made to become so legally indebted to another that they are forced to work for the remainder of their life always in debt to the other individual and always forced to work for that individual. In contract law classes, South African law students study a case where a doctor agreed that a vast majority of his salary would go to paying off a debt. The court found that the contract was against public policy and therefore unenforceable as it turned the doctor into essentially what the court called a slave. The e-tolling system has according to SANRAL: been seemingly exempted from the National Credit Act provisions which prevent the issuing of reckless credit.

In order to issue credit, a credit provider must ensure that the person to whom they issue credit, is capable of paying back the credit in their circumstances. The National Credit Act also allows for debt counselling for debtors who cannot possibly afford to pay back their debt. SANRAL seems insistent that this does not apply to e-tolling.

E-tolling is essentially a system of credit. Whenever an individual rides on an e-tolled road, that individual is essentially taking out a loan from SANRAL. It is like swiping a credit card. However, if a person is unable to pay off their credit card the credit card is cancelled. A person who takes out credit from SANRAL can essentially take out unlimited credit whether or not they are able to pay off their debt. A person who earns 1000 Rands a month: could accrue a debt of 10 million Rand. This person would not be afforded debt counselling according to SANRAL. This person would simply have to pay off their debt. It is expensive to file for insolvency, and some return needs to be shown for creditors. Stating that insolvency is a way out of such a debt, also is not stating an absolute solution in such a case. Could such an applicant for insolvency show even one cent to the Rand return for creditors? Would it even be possible for them to file for insolvency? Furthermore, causing a person to become insolvent deeply changes their status, their ability to do business, and their means and resources on which to live.

Micro-lending and Marikana Tragedy:


An aspect of Marikana and the tragic shooting which took place there which is not often brought up is that of micro-lending. Many of the miners who went on strike had taken out small loans. Their salaries were garnished, in order to allow the creditors to reclaim their money. The miners thus could not afford to live and support their families. The unrest was almost inevitable as a result of credit having been granted when it ought not to have been. The absolute desperation of the miners who charged the police at Marikana: should surely hint at the predicament of the indebted miners. Their determination to strike in desperation to bring something home to live on and to support their families: surely shows the effects upon the economy of such strange granting of credit where it ought not to have been granted.

Who are the Debtors?:


Many South Africans are illiterate. Many South Africans do not have basic mathematical education or literacy. Many South Africans are deeply poor. Many South Africans barely get by. These sort of things need to be taken into account by ordinary businesses doing business. Extending a person an unlimited line of credit and expecting them to pay it back without any chance of doing so: no doubt strikes one as immoral. Immorality is not enough. It has to be legally reprehensible. Thus one has to ask in accordance with the Bill of Rights: is the extension of unlimited credit with no cut-off points and no contingencies unconstitutional. I would say that it could well violate the right not to be enslaved. I would say that it could well violate the right to life in as much as it affects a person’s ability to earn a livelihood. I would say that such unfettered granting of unlimited credit could well violate the right to dignity of the human person.

Perhaps I am wrong. However I do believe there is a strong argument that the granting of unlimited and unfettered credit to persons regardless of their creditworthiness or their circumstances and ability to pay back that credit: violates the rights of the debtors.

Disclaimer:


Nothing in this article constitutes legal advice. This argument is provided for entertainment purposes purely, and in order to strike up debate. For proper legal advice please contact the legal practitioner with understanding of your specific circumstances for proper legal advice.



Article written by Marc Evan Aupiais, a LLB Law Graudate, for the SACNS News Service and Aupiais Wire.

Friday, 3 January 2014

Man's best friend/ canine compass? : Dogs tend to poop facing North or South, extensive study by scientists finds.

Depending on whether magnetic conditions were calm or disrupted, dogs tend to align their bodies with the magnetic poles in order to excrete, a study suggests.

'Researchers from Czech University and the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany observed 70 dogs from 37 different breeds over the course of a two-year period.

'They found that dogs preferred to excrete when their body was aligned along the north-south axis under "calm Earth's magnetic field (MF) conditions." '

(Times of India 'Dogs poop in line with the Earth's magnetic field' by PTI at Jan 3, 2014, 04.56 PM IST)

The scientists' breakthrough may be difficult to replicate without high technology however, as calm Magnetic Field conditions only occur one fifth of the time, and dogs only do the doozey in line with the poles when the magnetic field is calm. That means your dog might not be a replacement for your compass after all.

Article by SACNS and Aupiais Wire.

Bus overturns, gravely injuring 65

Nongoma, a small town in Zululand, Kwazulu Natal has experienced a terrible happening. A bus was progressing along a dirt road, when it overturned. All of the passengers, 65 in total were seriously injured, the Department of Transport has warned, relay Bloomberg.

'Emergency workers stabilized the injured on the scene before they were transported to the hospital, the department said in a statement on its website. It was unclear how the accident occurred, the department said.'
(Bloomberg 'South African Bus Accident Leaves 65 People Seriously Injured' by Mike Cohen at Jan 3, 2014 1:17 PM GMT+02)

The event closely follows a crash between a minibus taxi and a bakkie/utility truck in which at least 12 people lost their lives, also in Kwazulu Natal, South Africa.

'Durban - Twelve people have been confirmed dead following an accident between a minibus taxi and a bakkie near Margate, the KwaZulu-Natal transport department said on Thursday.'
(Independent Newspapers '12 confirmed dead after Margate crash' by SAPA at January 2 2014 at 01:53pm)






SACNS Post in conjunction with Aupiais Wire.

Thursday, 2 January 2014

As Colorado begins a journey into weed...

Call it what you will: Dagga... Weed.. Marijuana.. Cannabis...

It has increasingly become the in thing in the U.S.A.

With legalisation there and elsewhere, and its popularity, you may be wondering why it is governments ban narcotics. You may think perhaps it is to protect drug addicts. That might be what your resident government says. When we did forensic medicine in law school, a different story was told.

Most crime could be eliminated if narcotics and drugs were not abused. Where drug use increases, so does the crime rate. This is why drugs were initially banned, and the real reason to keep drugs banned. Yes, cannabis also is known to cause schizophrenia among other side effects, but if we are honest... it is the links between intoxicants and unnatural deaths, both of addicts and of those they might commit harm against which causes prohibition of substances.

So... good luck to Colorado... science shows your crime rate is about to sky-rocket just a little bit more.

But it is legal now, you say? So? Alcohol is legal... and as a result many more crimes are committed and many more people die of foolish Dutch courage. Alcohol is a part of life, narcotics don't have to be.

Post Originally appeared at Aupiais Wire.

For those music refugees, born after 1990...


I never expected that this post I wrote ages ago would be so popular. It seems I am not the only one:


For those music refugees, born after 1990... This is what a music video looks like...
and wow ... did you notice she didn't even have to prostitute herself with overt and obscene references to sex... and thus didn't pervert the young ones ;)!~ Please help us return music to Real Music, by Real People, with CREATIVE Music Videos! LOLS! Join the crusade! P.s. This is one of my favourite artists!

P.s. This is one of my favourite artists! and I've added it to my personal YouTube Music Playlist, I suggest doing the same: with yours : create a music playlist, and put songs on it you actually like!

Limitation sky... Tonight... will I be lost forever... Natalie Imbruglia - Beauty On The Fire !



It is a member of my Youtube music list:

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL98D09D6FF2316A41&feature=mh_lolz

Post originally appeared at Aupiais Wire.

Man murdered at 00:00 on 1 January 2014


Rob Meek deceased of subsequently fatal gunfire... to his reproductive area, seconds after the clock struck 12, and 2014 commenced.

There are many ways to celebrate the passing of a new year... causing another person to pass away is one of the more unusual methodologies.

A man by the name of Rob Meek, was photographed celebrating the end of 2013, at 00:00 at 1 January 2014. Little did he know the end of 2013 would warrant his end.

Three men with faces obscured by balaclavas approached the Wild Coast Beach House Rob Meek was celebrating in. One shot him, all three disappeared, according to the Cape Times. The newspaper puts it down to a robbery gone wrong... but the version of events presented is suspicious, so far as the events did not fit an ordinary robbery. Were there really three armed men? This seems likely, from the witness' accounting of the terrible event she and the others encountered. Did he die in another manner? Was it a robbery or was it a hit? Rob Meek apparently eeked out his existence as an urban designer, and was a sailor, well known we are told. Yet, the events seem more appropriate to a hit than a robbery.

His family rushed him away to get help, to no avail. The end of 2013 ushered in the end of Rob Meek, with the passing of another year, Rob Meek passed away. I had never heard of him prior his death, but he certainly died in an deeply perplexing manner. The Cape Times give an account:

'“We moved out on to the deck overlooking the sea. The flash went off. We popped some champagne. We all cheered.

'“You can see in the photo my husband had turned around. He’d already seen the three guys,” Meek said.

'She said three men wearing balaclavas approached them. She said they looked as if they were holding pieces of wood, as residents had done earlier while offering to make bonfires. “My husband said: ‘They’ve got guns,’” Meek said.

'Meek, who had seen three guns, did not recall hearing the three men ask for anything.

'She lay flat on the deck.

'“They looked nervous. I heard a shot. I just saw my husband... There was no provocation.” After the shot went off, wounding Rob in the groin area, Meek said, the gunmen ran away. They had not stolen anything.

'She, her family and friends managed to fashion a tourniquet to try to staunch the blood flowing from Rob’s wound, and they carried him up a steep hill from the house to a vehicle.

'“We got him into the back seat. My daughters sat and spoke to him. I was driving.”

'Meek said at a nearby “TB mission hospital”, two doctors tried to save Rob. Her daughters also tried to resuscitate him and “kept pumping him with oxygen”'


(Cape Times 'Fatal end to new year celebration' by Caryn Dolley at January 2 2014 at 08:09am)


Man named Rob Meek... murdered at the turn of the new year, at 00:00 on 1 January 2014, in South Africa's Wild Coast, say Cape Times.

http://www.iol.co.za/capetimes/fatal-end-to-new-year-celebration-1.1627835

Sunday, 29 December 2013

New French 75% Tax... a disincentive to employees, or a strengthening of state power?

It was about a year ago... Francois Hollande's socialists were taken to court. The French Constitutional Council angrily struck down a law that would tax individuals 75% of their income above a certain amount. Hollande's Marxist core took a brief step back and puzzled on how to attack the wealthy. Not the wealthy independently this time, but employees.If a company paid their employees above a certain amount, Hollande would have the company taxed the 75%. His ingenious scheme has no parallel other than the Collins v Minister of Interior 1957 (1) SA 552 (A), which heralded apartheid by a similar such moving of semantics and maintenance of substance. The French Constitutional Council has validated this slightly different move that largely keeps substance.

The question must be asked then: won't such a move disincentivise French employees from working all the more to achieve a higher salary beyond a certain point? Will not the skills exodus from France increase by this taxing of those who work hard enough to earn that amount? How will something which contributes such a small amount to Gross Domestic Product but causes those wealthy enough and skilled enough to earn such an amount to leave France really benefit the people?

The simple answer is it won't by in large benefit the French people, but there are many examples in history of grand utilization to rely on.

When Apartheid came to dominate South African politics, Catholic schools lost their government funding. As a powerful force against disintegration, it was inevitable the church would be targeted. Communist China had university professors and the wealthy targeted and humiliated or dealt with in her early days. Stalinism took a similar approach.

The ancient Spartans ruled over a slave population. If a slave became too good at harvesting or too skilled, the Spartans would end the life of that slave with a knife in the night. It was an effective mechanism of control. A government or slave master who takes on the hardest working, most effective people, destroys the desire to be exceptional, and along with it most grand cultures in which competition to authoritarianism might covertly fester in an intelligent, or clandestine manner.

Zheng who would build the great wall of China and the Terracotta army, moved all the aristocratic families away from their fiefdoms into his capital in his Qin dynasty. It would fare him well as he taxed the Chinese to near extinction before his dynasty disappeared.

What better way to enforce socialism and the power of government than to disincentivise those who work the hardest for their companies, and cause them to either be taken down significantly, or move countries as many French entrepreneurial future leaders have?

People who make a lot of money are admired by others, listened to by others, unless they are demonised as many modern authoritarian regimes attempt to.

So why did the Spartans murder the best of their slaves? Mediocre workers are better than free workers to a slave-master. A mediocre worker does not challenge the slave-master. Even if one does, he is a mediocre worker, what does he know?

But, a successful hard working individual, a super-ultra-talent who warrants a massive salary... if they challenge the government? Well, the socialists demonise such a person, and when that is not enough they punish them for being exceptional, for not being the mediocre same that socialism requires of her adherents. When that is not enough, the socialist regime tries to take away the exceptional in the person by stealing their fruits of success. Driven by envy, others might relish in this taking down of the great. Others might believe the lies that those who work hard to etch out a future are the devil himself. The people on social welfare might be compared to angels... as they are in the modern world: the chief concern of the state.

Perhaps if instead of punishing ingenuity and expertise, governments such as in France were to incentivise such, the poor might be drawn out of poverty.

Unfortunately marxism creates the concept of inequality... that if the rich get richer it is a bad evil thing. Perhaps if rather than fighting inequality and making it in the best interest of exceptional individuals not to play the game, governments were to fight the real enemy of poverty with the aid of the exceptional... well then... perhaps there would be no place for Hollande's socialists to get votes...

Indeed, Hollande, France's least popular president has found a way to romanticise poverty... all as his economic incompetence insures all the more that France's poverty lines excel in expansion. Meanwhile those employees who are targeted for fulfilling expert work, shall likely find somewhere else to grace with the fruits of their labour, somewhere that values hard work, and those who conduct it and then spend their money from it in such a place.

This article originally appeared in the publication: Marc Evan Aupiais Professional, under the title: 'New French 75% Tax... a disincentive to employees, or a strengthening of state power?'. This is the given publication.

A time of simple study...

I have been spending my time reading. Reading different accounts of early French and Chinese history. I read of the great Charlamagne. I read of the terrible Xin dynasty, the brilliant dictatoriship of the Qin, and the brilliance of the Han (briefly interrupted by the terrible Xin).

For me the interplay of the path of Confucious with the relevent dynasties is amazing and momentous. From the burning of books by an anti-confucian Qin emperor (who built the Great Wall of China and the Terra Cotta army), to the Han Liu Bang who urinated in a scholar's possession to show disrespect to that profession while allowing confucian religion to flourish. Most notable to me is that the Xin dynasty sought to exactingly enforce confucian beliefs, to the destruction of the poor and the detriment of the wealthy.

So? How does this relate to the first Holy Roman Emperor?

For me it relates most ostencibly to the value of literacy and of education. Confucism is called the scholarly tradition by the Chinese. It seeks to promote the best from the past by study. It seeks to incorporate learning and spread literacy. Charlamagne sought something similar: an educated France which could be bent to his will. His greatness was in his cultural achievements, not his mass murders. His push for better education and restoration helped to regain western europe with the blessing of the weak and foolish papacy of the time.

They say museum visits make the poor and underprivileged more likely to succeed in life, and to pursue education. They being people who studied the matter in America. Education and not marxism is the great uplifter of humankind. Culture also is. It is by turning to culture and history and learning that we truly graduate in humanity.

So, I thought to take a short break from my enjoyable studies of humankind. Why? Because of what I learnt, what I always knew. Culture is the core of humanity.

Saturday, 28 December 2013

My name is Marc Evan Aupiais.

My name is Marc Evan Aupiais. I am a LLB Law graduate, a journalist with half a decade's experience, an editor of online publications, an IT expert with programming and databasing knowledge and formal education in the area, web designer, legal and factual researcher etc.

My greatest skill is in presenting myself and in presenting my views. In high school, all the children said I should go into law. In first year, I was instantly electable, often unanimously: to positions of authority, this continued in later years. I am told I come across as intelligent, presentable, and knowledgeable on subjects I speak of. I've been told that I take questioning well, and am at ease during a crisis.

I have a fascination with language, and have extensively investigated my own home language of English. I love to read, especially older books, and enjoy reading non-English works also. Law absolutely fascinates me, as do most of the workings of the world.

I have extensively investigated, where I can: the world's cultures, legal systems, morals, courtesy, language systems and intricacies, and religions: for the purposes of my own interests. In my spare time I have also written a number of novels, and edit a network of on-line informative services, which have had an unexpected proportion of success.

I consider myself a global citizen and a South African patriot, and have many connections in different countries across the world, who have aided me in better understanding other points of view.

I like to argue a controversial matter, and do not fear debate, nor do I easily fall into fear, when faced with a predicament.

I believe success requires more than hard work, it requires intelligence, perseverance, and where necessary, the assistance of those better versed in a matter than I am, which advice I am not afraid to seek out to better my argument, and where necessary: myself.

I especially have a passion for evidence law, and criminal law.

Specialties:web design, debate, negotiations, convincing hostile parties, law, branding and identity, economics, politics, political watching, geopolitics, defense monitoring, fact verification
I speak, read and write:

English (UK, USA, RSA),
Spanish (Continental, South American) with some proficiency,
French (with professional working proficiency),
Afrikaans (I passed the subject in matric),
Zulu (I passed with 90% in grade 7 but have not used Zulu in many years),
Latin (to some degree).
I may be found online at:

http://za.linkedin.com/in/marcaupiais
https://twitter.com/SACNSNew
https://www.facebook.com/marcaupiais

Read More!

Read More!
Subscribe to us!

Popular Posts