I am convinced that Bantu Holomisa knows exactly what he is saying when he uses this specific word in relationship with the ANC. I however, don’t believe he is saying it for the right reasons.
And I am not even going to try and understand where he comes from, because I do not see the West as evil, rather the opposite….
For this piece I am more interested in the morality of the ANC.
Definition of 'nefarious'
1. (adj) nefarious, villainous extremely wicked
"nefarious schemes"; "a villainous plot"; "a villainous band of thieves"
Definition of 'nefarious'
1. (adverb) nefarious
wicked in the extreme; abominable; iniquitous; atrociously villainous; execrable; detestably vile
And the one I like:
The word nefarious has its origin in Latin. It was taken from the word nefārius. This was obtained from nefās which means crime or transgression. The word nefās is formed of two parts: ne and fās. The first part 'ne' means 'not' and the second part 'fās' means divine law. Nefarious is an adjective. Someone or something that is nefarious is known as an extremely wicked person or thing. The quality possessed by such an individual is termed as nefariousness. For example: a nefarious plot. It is nasty plot.
Not divine law……..now there is a thought…….
divine law - a law that is believed to come directly from God, or to put it differently for those that do not believe in a God, a natural law, - a rule or body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society
It is interesting to read the articles and comments in the daily newspapers the last week or so, and see how the ANC brethren are spinning the story.
Now for the sake of clarity, also read:
By their friends you shall know the rapist of Africa
A lot of people got money from the Gaddafi regime, for various reasons, either for performances, or for re-elections.
Any money received from Gaddafi should be considered blood money.
If it is true that the ANC got in the region of $300 million from Gaddafi, our esteemed ANC took away money from the people of Libya.
Any bets that the ANC will even consider doing the right thing?
I am at this very moment ashamed to be a South African.
Usher to return money made at Gaddafi family party
Beyonce Will Return Qaddafi Money
Gadaffi's Son Tells Sarkozy to Return Alleged Campaign Funds
20 March 2011
UDM says South African should not have voted in favour
SOUTH AFRICA DUPED INTO POLITICS OF REGIME CHANGE AND HYPOCRISY
On becoming the member of the United Nation Security Council, South Africa received the support of the African Union (AU) and other developing countries, among others. Recently the AU took a resolution to engage the Libyan government on its use of military force on innocent civilians.
The AU's resolution is opposed to any form of military intervention by the International Community in Libya since such actions adversely affect innocent civilians the most.
President Zuma is among the panel African leaders who are tasked with implementing the AU's resolution. The AU's approach is in line with South Africa' s foreign policy, which was started by former President Nelson Mandela in 1994, of seeking negotiated solutions to African countries' complex problems (Burundi, Congo ,etc,) over short-sighted and destructive military interventions.
Despite this well documented foreign policy position and the AU's resolution on this matter, President Zuma and his ilk seem to have been duped into abandoning South Africa's foreign policy stance and the AU's resolution by voting in favour of the dubious United Nations Security Council's Resolution Number 1973, which the Western is currently exploiting in its use of military intervention in Libya for their own nefarious objectives.
The Libyan conflict emanates from the Libyan people's desire for political liberties and democratic reforms. However, we have seen the unfortunate backing of the rebels by the West in this conflict by supplying them with arms such as anti-aircraft weapons, and so on. Needless to say that by voting in favour of the UN Security Council's Resolution Number 1973, South Africa has also sided with the rebels in this conflict, long before the quest for a negotiated solution has begun.
This position is a smokescreen for regime change. Elsewhere in countries like Bahrain, people are calling for regime change, but the same Western Superpowers have chosen to side with the ruling regime against the wishes of the people of Bahrain. It this kind of hypocrisy that makes us cringe as a Nation.
The ANC Government, which has been heavily funded by Gaddafi, owes the Nation an explanation whether our Country is going to be used to achieve the nefarious objectives of certain powers. The ANC Government should also explain if this is what they voted for in the UN Resolution, in light of recent militarily interventions by the West, and whether they have been briefed by their newly acquired allies about their military intervention, which is going to cause untold damage on the lives of the Libyan people. Or were they just used as voting cattle? Or should we deduce that this is an indication that they have now dumped their renowned funder, Gaddafi, in favour of wealthier funders from the West?