Huntley: SA govt wants answers

I've heard quite a bit from so called 'experts' who doubt whether Huntley was targetted because he was white. Why can't it be true?

Now, I am not for one moment suggesting that anyone is immune from crime but surely if you are a criminal you go where the loot is? You can call it what you like but some criminals do exercise what, for all intents and purposes, is racial profiling.

Blame apartheid if you will, but white folk have the stuff that criminals want - cash, jewelry, cars, TVs. Again, some black folk have it too but the chances that whitey has it are, for the time being, greater.

But the response we get is playing Huntley and the Canadians rather than facing up to the fact that some regard the crime levels as being totally unacceptable. Which government whiner said that if you think there is crime you must go?
 
Why isn't anybody disputing that Huntley was attacked and that racial slurs was used in these attacks? Is government more concerned about the image being created, that portray them as incapable of stemming the tide of crime in SA? Or that they simply don't care enough to do anything about the crime.

Whether the attacks was racially motivated or not, that is not the issue for me, but how many attacks do you have to survive, before it is considered enough, or at least indicate that you're not safe in your own country?

Focussing on the race aspect of this whole story, is wrong, and deludes the real issue, which is the crime in SA, which is out of control. Is 50 murders a day not considered serious enough? How many more people get attacked, tortured and/or killed for R100 and a cellphone?
 
I think criminals and uneducated native people have a misconception that all white people are rich
 
Nod said:
Why isn't anybody disputing that Huntley was attacked and that racial slurs was used in these attacks? Is government more concerned about the image being created, that portray them as incapable of stemming the tide of crime in SA? Or that they simply don't care enough to do anything about the crime.

Whether the attacks was racially motivated or not, that is not the issue for me, but how many attacks do you have to survive, before it is considered enough, or at least indicate that you're not safe in your own country?

Focussing on the race aspect of this whole story, is wrong, and deludes the real issue, which is the crime in SA, which is out of control. Is 50 murders a day not considered serious enough? How many more people get attacked, tortured and/or killed for R100 and a cellphone?
Click to expand...

Well said.

This is what i got on my snooping around, looking for some murders per day stats.

RANK COUNTRY AMOUNT
# 1 Colombia: 0.617847 per 1,000 people
# 2 South Africa: 0.496008 per 1,000 people
# 3 Jamaica: 0.324196 per 1,000 people
# 4 Venezuela: 0.316138 per 1,000 people
# 5 Russia: 0.201534 per 1,000 people
# 6 Mexico: 0.130213 per 1,000 people
# 7 Estonia: 0.107277 per 1,000 people
# 8 Latvia: 0.10393 per 1,000 people
# 9 Lithuania: 0.102863 per 1,000 people
# 10 Belarus: 0.0983495 per 1,000 people
Click to expand...

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
 
Huntley mustn't get too comfy in Canada,
SOUTH African “white refugee” Brandon Huntley, who managed to convince a Canadian immigration tribunal that he would be persecuted on the basis of his race if forced to return home, summed up the ridiculousness of the situation in an entry on his Facebook home page shortly after the story broke in the local press. “Look, I’m famous now,” he wrote, “lol (laugh out loud)”.

Huntley may have the smirk wiped off his face now that his new-found fame has attracted the attention of the Canadian government, which not only has the power to approach a federal court to have the decision reviewed, but enjoys a cordial relationship with its South African counterpart.

And the ruling African National Congress (ANC) is understandably none too pleased with the message the tribunal has sent out to the world mere months before SA hosts the 2010 Soccer World Cup. For once its knee-jerk habit of assuming a racial motive behind any adverse development affecting SA could have a basis in truth. Tribunal chairman William Davis’ finding that Huntley “would stand out like a sore thumb due to his colour in any part of the country” says more about his own ignorance and preconceptions of Africa than anything else. Certainly, he hasn’t eaten in a top Cape Town restaurant or sunned himself on Clifton beach lately.
Click to expand...
 
Tpex said:
I think criminals and uneducated native people have a misconception that all white people are rich
Click to expand...
Yes, many black people think all white people are rich. Not at all surprising. In a way, compared to them, we are.

DagegeN said:
This is what i got on my snooping around, looking for some murders per day stats.
Click to expand...
Compare the worst cities between countries. It paints a more interesting picture.

Albereth said:
I've heard quite a bit from so called 'experts' who doubt whether Huntley was targetted because he was white. Why can't it be true?

Now, I am not for one moment suggesting that anyone is immune from crime but surely if you are a criminal you go where the loot is? You can call it what you like but some criminals do exercise what, for all intents and purposes, is racial profiling.
Click to expand...
Possibly wealth profiling, but when it comes to stealing small amounts of petty cash and mobile phones anyone would be a potential target. The criminals probably know this. When it comes to deciding which houses to rob, cars to break into or hijack I very much doubt the colour of the occupants typically figures into it.

But the response we get is playing Huntley and the Canadians rather than facing up to the fact that some regard the crime levels as being totally unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Crime is excessive. So is our unemployment and poverty level. Fact remains the Canadian official made a wrong decision even if Huntley isn't a liar. And they're going to have to reverse it or grant the same status to every other non-black South African that arrives.
 
"While South Africa is a very violent society the vast majority of the victims of violent crime are black," SAIRR noted.

Whites, who make up 9 percent of the population of 49.3 million, are generally safer because they can afford to pay for private security, SAIRR deputy president Frans Cronje said, referring to the legions of private security guards that watch over the homes of the wealthy.

While a racial motive was sometimes detected in crimes, there was no "general pattern of racial attacks on white South Africans by black South Africans," SAIRR said.
Click to expand...

http://http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=nw20090902162955738C701591

...persecusion se gat...

The Institute of Race Relations is basically calling Huntley a white liar
 
Last edited:
Soyou think Canada will send him back with a target on his forehead?
 
If anything black South Africans are more vulnerable to crime due to the sad historical reality of higher poverty levels in their communities," said Zev Krengel, head of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies.
Click to expand...

Oh oh oh!!! Look!!!

Its apartheids fault:D
 
"are generally safer because they can afford to pay for private security" - hmmmmm... interesting. So for a white person to be safe, they HAVE TO HAVE private security. They are using this is rubbish a claim that whiteys are targetted by criminals? This type of idiocy amazes me even now...
 
smokey said:
"are generally safer because they can afford to pay for private security" - hmmmmm... interesting. So for a white person to be safe, they HAVE TO HAVE private security. They are using this is rubbish a claim that whiteys are targetted by criminals? This type of idiocy amazes me even now...
Click to expand...

Which goes back to the government being unwilling and/or unable to protect it's citizens.
 
noxibox said:
Possibly wealth profiling, but when it comes to stealing small amounts of petty cash and mobile phones anyone would be a potential target. The criminals probably know this. When it comes to deciding which houses to rob, cars to break into or hijack I very much doubt the colour of the occupants typically figures into it.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how you want to try and describe it - Huntley managed to convince the Canadians that it is because he is white.

Noone can really talk about facts regarding crime in this country because the government hides the numbers. But it appears, from the media reports, that most home invasions are on whites, and that the most brutal of farm attacks are against white farmers. And I am pretty certain that most assaults and rapes are against black folk.

You can call it wealth profiling or class profiling or whatever you want but the fact is that there is a strong correlation between class/wealth and race.

The next point is that communities are still strongly homogenised. Criminals check out a neighbourhood - they want to know the reaction times of the security companies, the routes in and out, etc. etc. These are not petty, I need bread to eat, people. They are professional. And they aren't going to hit one house, they operate in an area for a while. Again, you can call it wealth profiling, but the truth still remains that the majority of folk who live in a suburb tend to be quite similar to their neighbours - so we still have white neighbourhoods.

The argument about security companies plays exactly into Huntley's argument. The fact that people have to hire security companies is clear proof that the SA government is not doing anything to combat crime.
 
smokey said:
"are generally safer because they can afford to pay for private security" - hmmmmm... interesting. So for a white person to be safe, they HAVE TO HAVE private security.
Click to expand...

I think its because THEY CAN afford private security, just like rich black people too.
 
It's not about answers...

It's about asking the right questions....

Why is crime so bad in South Africa?
Why are so many whites being murdered, especially farmers?
Why are the police so corrupt and unable to deal with crime?

Their response to this whole matter has simply proven that the Canadian government's decision to grant him refuge was the right one.
 
The decision may yet change and it doesn't look like Canada's immigration tribunal (independent of their gov) didn't need much convincing in this decision. Huntley's fame may yet come back to bite him in the rear.
 
Garyvdh said:
Their response to this whole matter has simply proven that the Canadian government's decision to grant him refuge was the right one.
Click to expand...

Just imagine, Huntley gets deported back to SA, and then gets killed, or gets ruffed up because he dared to say he was attacked once too much. Not only is he white, but he is now also (in)famous. He will definitely stand out now :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X