KPMG
Hannes Engelbrecht
Na die skuldigbevinding van Schabir Shaik en sy gevolglike gevangesetting, het die Nasionale Vervolgingsgesag (NVG) die firma KPMG genader om ‘n forensiese verslag op te stel oor Shaik se verdure posisie en veral die verhouding wat hy met Jacob Zuma gehad het.
-
KPMG se opdrag was om betalings tot voordeel van Zuma deur Shaik en die Nkobi Groep op te spoor; en ook te kyk na na die Thomson/Thales-groep; asook om vas te stel of Zuma sy invloed en posisie gebruik he tom enige van hierdie persone of groepe te bevoordeel.
-
In Augustus 2005 is KPMG ‘n verdere opdrag gegee om ook die volgende te ondersoek: ‘n gedetailleerde analise van finansiële rekords en geskiedenis van die volgende – Shaik, Zuma, Reddy, Kogl, Fakude-Nkuna, Nkobi Groep en Thomson-CSF.
Die verslag van KPMG aan die Nasionale Vervolgingsgesag bevat die volgende stipulasie: “Restriction on distribution of report”
This report was prepared solely for the purposes of reporting our findings to you. This report should therefore not be utilised for any other purpose. No part may be quoted, referred to or disclosed in whole or in part, by any party, without our prior consent”.
-
Boere Krisisaksie (BKA) beskou die geheime verslag egter as van nasionale belang en glo dat dit bekendgemaak moet word, nie net in Suid Afrika nie, maar ook so wyd moontlik in die buiteland.
Die verslag van 490 bladsye bevat ondermeer die volgende:
* Bladsy 28 “The first payment identified was on 25 October 1995. These payments were effected under the title of Shaik acting variously as “Financial Advisor”, “Economic Advisor” and “Formerly Appointed Financial Advisor” of Zuma5.
Zuma, in his personal capacity, did not have access to sufficient funds solely from his position as an official employed by the South African Government, to fund his lifestyle and as a
4 Refer paragraphs18 and 19
5 Refer paragraph 19
consequence had to rely on funds from external sources such as borrowing from financial institutions, Shaik, third parties and the Nkobi group. This necessitated, inter alia, the Nkobi group, Shaik and other entities, related to the Nkobi group, settling debts and other personal expenses for and on behalf of Zuma in excess of R4 million during the period covered by this report”
Bladsy 69: KPMG dui aan dat hulle in besit is van ‘n tjek uitgemaak aan Nelson Mandela wat in Zuma se rekening as begunstigde inbetaal is. Ene Bennemeer van Absa Trust skryf aan ene Schreiber, Absa se bestuurder by Durban City-tak dat Absa verantwoordelikheid neem vir die tjek waarvan die begunstigde van Mandela na Zuma verander is. Die tjek van R2 miljoen is dieselfde dag afgemerk en Zuma het tjek 272 van rekeningnommer ***** (bylaag 98) uitgeskryf vir R1 miljoen aan die Jacob Zuma Education Trust.
Bladsy 75: KPMG rapporteer dat daar ‘n totaal van 783 verdagte betalings ter waarde van R4 072 499.85 in Jacob Zuma se rekening inbetaal is. Die eerste inbetaling van R3500 is van Clegton Investments op 25 Oktober 1995.
Betalings van Shabir Shaik en Nkobi Holdings alleen aan Zuma het skerp per jaar toegeneem: 1997 net R48 000; 1998 tot R310 476; 2004 byvoorbeeld R779 514 .
SOCIAL ENGINEERING AND THE ANC
The freedom of any country is determined by the amount of social engineering meted out by the government. Most people (rightists included) will argue that “freedom” existed in the latter part of the nineties as South Africa moved from one dispensation to another – simply because the new ANC government of the time had not had the opportunity yet to put social engineering plans in practice.
One of the weaknesses of the separate development (Apartheid) policy in the international arena was not the policy itself, but the social engineering needed to put the policy in place – people being uprooted and moved by force and not by persuasion: it was fatal in the eyes of the United Nations and its member states. The establishment of industrial nodes in the homelands was a positive and effective way, but as soon as it could not stem the flow to the cities separate development was always doomed. Dr HF Verwoerd is on record that he wanted a natural migration and natural separate development, but unfortunately some of his followers did not grasp the difference between “grand Apartheid” and “petty Apartheid”. The old NP also had the drawback that they had to make the choices for people from other ethnic groups (something we will NEVER do again).
But that lesson is in the past now. What is the new South African ANC-government like where social engineering is concerned? Unfortunately, and that is something the liberal and socialist cannot understand, the ANC today is manipulating the population on a much bigger scale than the Apartheid government could ever imagine:
-
State funds are used to create the “upper middle class black” by manipulation of tenders, BEE and quotas. The rich black elite in South Africa – people like the Mandelas, Ramaphosas, Kunene’s, Zumas, Guptas and Sexwales are not “rich” – they are “super-rich”!
-
Certain ethnic groups, especially the Afrikaner/Boer and the coloured, are being manipulated. Work reservation, affirmative action, black enrichment and quotas have impacted on education, opportunities and self-development. Be honest: is there any way for a six-year-old white boy to become the Commissioner of Police in South Africa? That is social engineering – when you reach a threshold and you cannot go any further because of state intervention. Social engineering means that you have to pay your way through university while other ethnic groups get the bursaries. Social engineering means that you have to forfeit your place in a sport team so that somebody from another ethnic group can take your place.
-
Social engineering means that your language is under threat – your Afrikaans school or university “must open its doors” to other languages, yet you will never hear of an English/Zulu school being forced to open its doors and accommodate Xhosa. It means that even if more people understand and speak your language than English (52% tot 46%) you have to sacrifice everything.
-
Social engineering means that you pay out social grants to 12 million people simply to keep them happy and to secure their votes; even if tax payers are only half that figure. Social engineering is when you buy the farmland where one farmer and six workers could make a living; and you distribute it to 300 families who keep on living in squalor because the farm cannot provide an income to them all – but they are happy because they have land and they will vote for you.
-
Social engineering is when you let a railway system go down the drain to keep taxi owners happy – because they will vote for you.
Any political system where the state enforces “unnatural” laws such as land distribution, affirmative action, quotas, BEE, welfare, education (where marks are manipulated according to race), admission to universities, different municipal tariffs according to race, or different sets of laws or responses from the police – is an oppressive system.
We live in an oppressive political system and we have to get out of that as soon as possible!
HOW THE GUPTAS MILKED TAXPAYERS
The super-rich Gupta family milked South African taxpayers off millions of rands with the failed Gauteng Online project.The Gupta family started Sahara Computers in 1997 and it was not too long before President Jacob Zuma’s friends and business partners landed their first lucrative tender for computers – the Gauteng Online project where thousands of computers, satellite dishes, widescreen television sets and adapted classrooms would be installed in Gauteng schools.
Gauteng Online was a provincial initiative to build a province-wide school computer network. The project aimed to create 25-seat computer labs with Internet and e-mail capabilities at all public schools in the province, to be used for curriculum delivery.Announced in 2001, the project was initially allocated R500 million over the course of three years to build the computer network. The project was supposed to have built and connected labs at 1 100 schools across the province between 2001 and 2004.
In 2005, an additional R100 million was allocated to fast-track the project and the deadline for its completion was first extended to 2006, then to 2007.
In March 2008, a R2 billion tender for the implementation of the project was controversially awarded to the consortium SMMT Online to offer a hybrid Internet solution to schools.
In 2007 it was reported that only 313 computers had been installed and connected to the network, 61 were installed, but unconnected, while 910 labs were being built. The Gauteng provincial government also reluctantly agreed that the project had been targeted by “an insider crime syndicate” stealing the computers, televisions and equipment at a higher rate than could be installed.
WHERE do the Guptas fit in? The whole project that squandered at least R2,5 billion of taxpayers’ money is clouded in secrecy: the Gauteng Education Department handed the project to GSSC; SMMT Online changed its name to Cloudseed; Mustek pulled out of the project even though it had a tender for 300 schools; and a handful of disreputable firms such as SMM Telematics, Hawkstone Marketing, Sifikile, Self Empowerment International, Beget Holdings, Tebfin, Enlightened Security, and Vimba Security. An internet search could not provide the names of the directors of any of these companies involved, except for Tebogo Mogashoa – who was incidently CEO of SMMT, CEO of Tebfin and director of Beget. Tokyo Sexwale owned 50% of Sifikile as far as can be established.
But before the shenanigans of name changes started (to pull the wool over the eyes of the taxpayer) there were some interesting news flashes:
-
NetDay, an internet service provider, boasted on their website in 2007 that “During the Gauteng On-Line pilot phase, NetDay played a pivotal consulting role in the management of the Sahara Consortium in collaboration with Sourcecom Technology Solutions. Sahara went on to win a major portion of the contract as a result of this work by NetDay”;
In February 2007 Sahara Computers’ Atul Gupta boasted in an e-mail by one Naidoo:
“Sahara has been instrumental in securing further operational services and support for the Gauteng Online (GoL) project. The company has supplied, delivered, installed and configured infrastructure for five schools within the Krugersdorp area and also provided training services for the schools’ staff compliment.
“Currently, the Company is involved in a replacement Project for 142 schools with GoL involving in replacing and re-configuring old equipment in schools and upgrading the infrastructure of computer labs in these schools.
“We cannot stress enough the importance of technology infrastructure in schools. Our participation in Phase V demonstrated the difference South African companies, and the ICT industry in particular, can make.
“In the Free State, Sahara Computers has been actively involved in the Lejwelputswa Project – a similar initiative to that of GoL, but with the additional aim of setting up computer labs for 25 schools.
“Sahara Computers also contributed significantly towards The Free State Project, a phased initiative specifically aimed at replacing antiquated equipment within schools’ administration departments.
“The first phase involved the provision of two Sahara PCs and one printer to 300 schools. In the second phase, Sahara Computers provided one Sahara laptop and one Epson projector to 152 schools. There is also a one year warranty for all components”.
** The questions now remain – where did the money go? Why did the Guptas see it fit not to divulge their role in the Gauteng Online saga? Why were companies’ names changed so fast and untraceable? Who was the crime syndicate involved in stealing equipment as fast as it could be supplied? Most of these “changes” happened in 2007 – is that the reason why ITNews could report in 2007 that Atul Gupta has decided to relocate to South Africa from India “to take control of Sahara Computers”?
SPEEL OOP KAARTE MET ONS
Hannes Engelbrecht
Die swaarste ding wat ‘n mens kan doen is om ‘n bondgenoot in die openbaar aan te vat – veral ‘n organisasie waarvoor jy baie respek het.
Dit is egter nou tyd dat die vakbond Solidariteit en sy nutsorganisasie Afriforum reguit vir ons sê waar en waarvoor hulle staan. Solidariteit het sedert sy dae as Mynwerkersunie onder Arrie Paulus bekendgestaan as ‘n volkseie vakbond. Ek en Flip Buys van Solidariteit het saam in die tagtigs en negentigs in optogte gestap. Is dit nog so?
In die wandelgange in Pretoria word al meer gefluister dat Solidariteit en Afriforum gerig is op die “Afrikaanssprekende” en nie op die “Afrikaner/Boer” nie. Voorbeelde word gegee van Radio Pretoria, van regsgedinge namens anderskleuriges, van hulppakkette aan anderskleuriges, van Boeresimbole wat verban word. As ‘n vakbond en as ‘n burgerregteorganisasie is dit hulle goeie reg om te besluit wie hulle nismark is – maar om een ding in die openbaar te sê en ‘n ander ding te doen is nie hoe ons volk dinge doen nie.
By Boere Krisisaksie het ons verrassend baie steun uit ook Kleurlinggeledere – maar ons bly in die eerste en laaste plek ‘n etniese volksbeweging vir die Afrikaner/Boer en die anderstalige wittes wat met ons vereenselwig. Ons is nie skaam om dit te sê nie. Uit die verlede het ons een ding geleer – dat ons as volk/etniese groep NOOIT weer verantwoordelikheid wil neem vir enige ander etniese groep of volk nie, want dit sal neerkom op neo-kolonialisme. Dit staan enige groep of volk, met ons ondersteuning, vry om verantwoordelikheid te neem vir hulle eie toekoms, kultuur, taal en tradisies – maar ons as ‘n volk gaan dit NOOIT weer inisieër of manipuleer nie.
Ons is nie bang om te sê dat ons die multi-kulturele stelsel in Suid Afrika verwerp nie, want dit is ‘n totale mislukking. Dit is ‘n mislukking wêreldwyd en Europa steier tans die meeste daaronder. Ons beywer ons vir selfbeskikking tot die grootste moontlike mate gegrond op ons geskiedenis en westerse lewensbeskouing.
Is Solidariteit en Afriforum met ons? Of poseer julle net dat julle met ons is omdat dit is waar die lede se geldsakke is?
Ons is vennote in die toekoms van die Afrikaner/Boer en waar julle namens ons optree sal ons julle altyd ondersteun (selfs al is julle dan “Afrikaansprekend”).
Maar ons moet die waarheid weet – daar is nie meer wegkruipplek vir pragmatiste nie.
