CapeXit 2

[lexity]

Nonsense. I have stated why I think he's a grifter.

Without naming any victims that have come forward, to corroborate your claim.

The act of grift is a crime in SA. If anyone thought they had been a victim of fraud, on the part of Phil, they'd have the law to back them up in getting their money back, with damages.

If you can't name any unhappy donors for other parties, do you similarly assume that there's no grift there either?

I thought he went to the US as a CIAG representative, not as an RP representative.

So, again, unless I'm mistaken about that.... it's a case of false equivalence.

Seeing as you hold the lack of known unhappy Phil donors to mean that there's no grift.

Oh no you don't.... that's a Strawman argument.

You are setting up an easier argument to dismantle.... one that I never made, and is not representative of my position.

I have never indicated that I take that position i.e. I've never said the lack of evidence of victims means there aren't any.

I happen to believe Phil is not generally a grifter, and until I see evidence to the contrary I rely on my personal judgement.... which tells me there is no cause for suspicion. Besides one of my core ethical precepts is that everyone is innocent before the law until proven guilty.

I have nothing to prove because I'm not accusing anyone of a crime.

You(and quovadis), on the other hand are. and so IMO have a moral obligation follow through with some evidence to back up your claim of a criminal act.

(If you don't agree, it's just more evidence of an incompatible moral code. )

 

[vigras rojara]

Without naming any victims that have come forward, to corroborate your claim.

The act of grift is a crime in SA. If anyone thought they had been a victim of fraud, on the part of Phil, they'd have the law to back them up in getting their money back, with damages.


I thought he went to the US as a CIAG representative, not as an RP representative.

So, again, unless I'm mistaken about that.... it's a case of false equivalence.


Oh no you don't.... that's a Strawman argument.

You are setting up an easier argument to dismantle.... one that I never made, and is not representative of my position.

I have never indicated that I take that position i.e. I've never said the lack of evidence of victims means there aren't any.

I happen to believe Phil is not generally a grifter, and until I see evidence to the contrary I rely on my personal judgement.... which tells me there is no cause for suspicion. Besides one of my core ethical precepts is that everyone is innocent before the law until proven guilty.

I have nothing to prove because I'm not accusing anyone of a crime.

You(and quovadis), on the other hand are. and so IMO have a moral obligation follow through with some evidence to back up your claim of a criminal act.

(If you don't agree, it's just more evidence of an incompatible moral code. )

Oh sorry, is this a court of law now?

I have said that I think he's a grifter, because it's the only explanation that makes any sense. How is it that he can do bugger all apart from the occasional tweet or podcast, never making any progress, but jumps on a plane for mythical meetings with hypothetical "key allies". Why is that all still so top secret? If it's not grift it's incompetence. Likewise with the much supported private referendum that never happens.

Apologies for using "RP" instead of " CIAG". Much numpty overlap between those two anyway, but perhaps I just can't type the "Action" part of CIAG without collapsing in hysterical laughter at the irony.

 

[Brian_G]

How is it that he can do bugger all apart from the occasional tweet or podcast, never making any progress, but jumps on a plane for mythical meetings with hypothetical "key allies".

How is that different from other senior politicians?
Sounds like you're scraping in the dirt for pebble sized "problems".

For all we know there's enough donations, there are other reasons for delaying plans.

Why is that all still so top secret? If it's not grift it's incompetence. Likewise with the much supported private referendum that never happens.

What is this "secret" angle now.. which politician tells the public everything about their high profile meetings? Since when do donators expect gameplay to be publicly revealed?
Very thin... makes you sound like a common thug. Disappointed.

 

[vigras rojara]

How is that different from other senior politicians?
Sounds like you're scraping in the dirt for pebble sized "problems".

For all we know there's enough donations, there are other reasons for delaying plans.



What is this "secret" angle now.. which politician tells the public everything about their high profile meetings? Since when do donators expect gameplay to be publicly revealed?
Very thin... makes you sound like a common thug. Disappointed.

Since when is Phil a "senior politician"?

But apart from that, a normal person would assume that the much-publicised mission to DC would hold some advantage for the CI movement. It seems extremely odd that we've heard absolutely nothing further about it now, months later. Of course, you may say that it's all going on in the background, but with nothing at all happening in the foreground, that would sound like clutching at straws.

To address the "secrecy" thing directly, politicians the world over are only to happy to blurt out successes. So I'm not sure what you're on about there. Perhaps Phil is playing that 4D chess that we used to hear so much about...

 

[Brian_G]

For all we know there's enough donations, there are other reasons for delaying plans.

I personally think the delay in any action is 'cos they're stuck. Simple as that.

Why?
Yesterday @NoStepOnSnek88 discussed the huge diversity of people-types in WC that are pro independence - that alone is a nightmare to tackle re future planing.
Not making excuses for them, but yeah....

My current personal hope is that they're rather reconsidering the referendum, as per my comments yesterday about it probably being too soon for that. (At the same time, these issues do require some haste.)

Big mountain to climb here. Yes, one they largely made themselves.. but see, no need to throw mud. Unless of course you're a thug...

 

[Brian_G]

Of course, you may say that it's all going on in the background, but with nothing at all happening in the foreground, that would sound like clutching at straws.

Well now you're at least sounding civil about it, and yes, who wouldn't be suspicious. As just touched on, it's a very delicate set of circumstances currently, so that may be why they're keeping their cards to themselves for a change. Usually they're quite vocal..

Time will tell. Phil isn't the quiet type, that's for sure.

 

[Brian_G]

Since when is Phil a "senior politician"?

Senior within his own organisation(s). Senior enough in the eyes of Trump & co.

 

[vigras rojara]

I personally think the delay in any action is 'cos they're stuck. Simple as that.

Why?
Yesterday @NoStepOnSnek88 discussed the huge diversity of people-types in WC that are pro independence - that alone is a nightmare to tackle re future planing.
Not making excuses for them, but yeah....

My current personal hope is that they're rather reconsidering the referendum, as per my comments yesterday about it probably being too soon for that. (At the same time, these issues do require some haste.)

Big mountain to climb here. Yes, one they largely made themselves.. but see, no need to throw mud. Unless of course you're a thug...

Yes, the population of the Western Cape is indeed diverse. The DA managed to navigate that quite easily though, so it obviously can be done.

They may well be stuck in the mud, but it's not because of any mud that I've thrown at them. They exaggerate their support while being extremely low on detail. The lack of progress is all on them.

 

[Brian_G]

The lack of progress is all on them.

Agreed. Though Phil has been far more in the limelight than the CIP ever was, that holds future promise IMO.

Not that I see him as a great leader, just he has got things going before and has excellent political communication skills. So my fingers are still crossed.

 

[vigras rojara]

Agreed. Though Phil has been far more in the limelight than the CIP ever was, that holds future promise IMO.

Not that I see him as a great leader, just he has got things going before and has excellent political communication skills. So my fingers are still crossed.

I think he gets much more attention in this thread than anywhere else!

 

[Brian_G]

Bizarre thought for the day, uttered recently by the US ambassador;

He said the Trump Administration values its relationship with South Africa and considers it among the Top 10 countries in terms of importance.

Linky: https://businesstech.co.za/news/trending/853469/president-donald-trumps-message-to-south-africa/

 

[lexity]

Oh sorry, is this a court of law now?

I have said that I think he's a grifter, because it's the only explanation that makes any sense. How is it that he can do bugger all apart from the occasional tweet or podcast, never making any progress,

We've been over this, vigras.

No CIAG donor believes Phil Craig on his own can make a referendum happen. That is just too stupid for any half-sane person to propose.

To run 2 organizations, one being a political party that commands a lot of attention and risks failure, demands that you do due diligence in making the case for your cause.

" The occasional podcast" quip is really just a poor reflection of what you think it takes to make a determined effort to make a referendum happen.

but jumps on a plane for mythical meetings with hypothetical "key allies". Why is that all still so top secret?

I offered my explanation for why he cannot divulge things told to him.

I would imagine one has to tread very careful to ensure one is not - in the eyes of the legal code - undermining the sovereignty of SA.

You are naive if the SAn government wouldn't bring criminal charges against Phil Craig if they had the opportunity.

You would remember that before he went he delibertely and openly published the letter to the SAn government laying out his intentions in taking the trip and the purpose of the visit. That doesn't happen unless you have consulted lawers. (Which ofc do not come cheap. If he hasn't already done so I hope he soon finds lawyers who are of the same mind on Cape Independence, because legal advice, alone, is often enough to keep a movement dead in the water)

If it's not grift it's incompetence. Likewise with the much supported private referendum that never happens.

There are reasons why a private referendum has not yet been arranged, by the CIAG.

It's a decision I don't particularly agree with but that's a question of strategy within the movement, and I honestly think nobody would donate thinking that their personal strategy will align 100% with everyone else's in the movement. It's kinda obvious the priority is to exit the NDR-bound Rainbow Project.

Apologies for using "RP" instead of " CIAG". Much numpty overlap between those two anyway, but perhaps I just can't type the "Action" part of CIAG without collapsing in hysterical laughter at the irony.

Ok. There's a difference between CIAG and RP.

I think there may be sound reasons for waiting before calling a referendum... reasons that wouldn't apply in round 2, or apply less.

Phil doesn't want to use the results of a private referendum as the basis for a declaration. That's due to the historical perception of the strength of the mandate represented by a private referendum.

To me this is a case of poor(State) education, but it's true nevertheless that poorly educated people are less able to stand up for their rights.

But, in any case, that is why he's waiting for the inevitable result of this, latest, GNU incarnation. That, and I think he realizes that whatever the cause of the 3k tally, in 2024, he did miscalculate the RP's chances of achieving the 100k, or whatever the goal was.

So, he has had to take a step back and come up with a plan C.

Don't forget plan A was enough. There is nothing more that the CIAG etc. could have done more. They had sufficient indication for the premier to call a referendum, and they had the agreement of Steenhuizen himself to call a referendum.

Nothing more he could have done. We did our bit. The DA and premier dropped the ball, and afaics, the premier at least, was in breach of his oath the WC people. The DA itself proved themselves duplicitous due to them failing to follow through even on pushing for their own mandate of federal autonomy.

So, we can talk about plan B failing, and why plan C is taking so long, but not before we acknowledge who was at fault for plan A failing.

IMO, until you are prepared to do that, your criticism can't really be taken seriously.

None of you have come out in condemnation of a provincial premier violating his duty to serve the people of that province. I can only assume that pinko hen-peckers have interests which conflict with the right that they themselves have(to become independent when they deem it appropriate to do so).

Your criticism unrealistically blames one side for a failure that by definition takes 2 to succeed.

 

[vigras rojara]

We've been over this, vigras.

No CIAG donor believes Phil Craig on his own can make a referendum happen. That is just too stupid for any half-sane person to propose.

To run 2 organizations, one being a political party that commands a lot of attention and risks failure, demands that you do due diligence in making the case for your cause.

" The occasional podcast" quip is really just a poor reflection of what you think it takes to make a determined effort to make a referendum happen.


I offered my explanation for why he cannot divulge things told to him.

I would imagine one has to tread very careful to ensure one is not - in the eyes of the legal code - undermining the sovereignty of SA.

You are naive if the SAn government wouldn't bring criminal charges against Phil Craig if they had the opportunity.

You would remember that before he went he delibertely and openly published the letter to the SAn government laying out his intentions in taking the trip and the purpose of the visit. That doesn't happen unless you have consulted lawers. (Which ofc do not come cheap. If he hasn't already done so I hope he soon finds lawyers who are of the same mind on Cape Independence, because legal advice, alone, is often enough to keep a movement dead in the water)


There are reasons why a private referendum has not yet been arranged, by the CIAG.

It's a decision I don't particularly agree with but that's a question of strategy within the movement, and I honestly think nobody would donate thinking that their personal strategy will align 100% with everyone else's in the movement. It's kinda obvious the priority is to exit the NDR-bound Rainbow Project.


Ok.

I think there may be sound reasons for waiting before calling a reason... reasons that wouldn't apply in round 2, or apply less.

Phil doesn't want to use the results of a private referendum as the basis for a declaration. That's due to the historical perception of the strength of the mandate represented by a private referendum.

To me this is a case of poor(State) education, but it's true nevertheless that poorly educated people are less able to stand up for their rights.

But, in any case, that is why he's waiting for the inevitable result of this, latest, GNU incarnation. That, and I think he realizes that whatever the cause of the 3k tally, in 2024, he did miscalculate the RP's chances of achieving the 100k, or whatever the goal was.

So, he has had to take a step back and come up with a plan C.

Don't forget plan A was enough. There is nothing more that the CIAG etc. could have done more. They had sufficient indication for the premier to call a referendum, and they had the aggrement of Steenhuizen himself to call a referendum.

Nothing more he could have done. We did our bit. The DA and premier dropped the ball, and afaics, the premier at least, was in breach of his oath the WC people. The DA itself proved themselves duplicitous due to them failing to follow through even on pushing for their own mandate of frederal autonomy.

So, we can talk about plan B failing, and why plan C is taking so long, but not before we acknowledge who was at fault for plan A failing.

IMO, until you are prepared to do that, your criticism can't really be taken seriously.

None of you have come out in condemnation of a provincial premier violating his duty to serve the people of that province. I can only assume that pinko hen-peckers have interests which conflict with the right that they themselves have(to become independent when they deem it appropriate to do so).

Youre criticism unrealistically blames one side for a failure that by definition takes 2 to succeed.

Thanks for the comprehensive reply - much appreciated.

However he seems to be doing nothing to raise visibility/drum up support for the concept while waiting for all the wheels to turn that the poor chap is apparently hamstrung by.

You really should drop the repetitive pinko nonsense though, it's as tedious as waiting for Phil to do anything. You're always going on about how business leaders are too entrenched in the system to support the glorious secession nutters, but that holds very little credibility. It would be extremely odd for successful capitalists to cling to what you frequently describe as "socialist", "commie" and all your other favourite terms , when they could embrace your free market utopia and feast on the promised tidal wave of investment.

If Phil can't get credible leaders on side, all the yabber about timing is moot.

 

[Brian_G]

Don't forget plan A was enough. There is nothing more that the CIAG etc. could have done more. They had sufficient indication for the premier to call a referendum, and they had the agreement of Steenhuizen himself to call a referendum.

Regarding that plan A, surely everyone involved realised back then what we recently learned; that a Yes result would have absolutely no teeth due to that constitutional right of the premier never having actually been written into law as it should have been. Only the SA President has that right technically.

So then, why do it at all? Or is it possible the legislative "oversight" actually wasn't widely known... surely not.

Whatever was in mind, it did at least play its part with publicity.

 

[Brian_G]

There's actually been a lot of press releases in the last few months surprisingly, I guess none of us expected that.

I think these are all new. So much for Phil sitting on his asss, LOL



From CIAG:

PRESS STATEMENT: South Africa Must Also Recognise Somaliland

PRESS STATEMENT: CIAG calls on South Africa to recognise Somaliland. All people have a right to self-determination, Somaliland is already functioning as an independent state, and Somalilanders have voted for independence

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Self-determination Must Trump Colonial Borders in Africa

Phil Craig responds to Qaanitah Hunter op-ed in News24 and challenges the South African Government's hypocrisy on self-determination asking who is really perpetuating colonialism

www.capeindependence.org

RESPONSE TO PRESIDENT: CIAG responds to Ramaphosa on Cape Independence

CIAG responds to a statement by the President relating to Cape Independence, calling his comments disingenuous and explaining why

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Cape Independence: A Better Life Than The ANC Can Give Us

OP-ED: Prosperity, safety, services, & non-racialism - This is what drives Cape Independence !! Phil Craig responds to Faiez Jacobs (ANC)

www.capeindependence.org

Fund Change With Your Taxes, Not ANC Corruption

Reduce your tax bill by making a tax deductible donation to Cape Development Institute NPC

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: The Colonial Logic Behind South Africa's Political Centralisation

Cape Independence doesn't repeat colonialism, it dispenses with one of its most harmful legacies - colonial borders, writes the CIAG's Robert King

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Why the Cape wants out: Freedom, migration, and the battle for liberal values

Robert King responds to Ivo Vegter, defending Cape Independence as a values-based call for self-determination and controlled migration

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: How South Africa's Minorities Could Break Free and Thrive

Writing in Visegrad24, the CIAG's Robert King examines how the ANC's radical policies are driving minority groups toward autonomy, with the Western Cape leading the push for independence

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Ten Steps to Cape Independence

The CIAG's Robert King outlines ten practical actions ordinary Kapenaars can take to help make Cape Independence a reality

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Is self-determination the solution for South Africa?

Robert King proposes that a self-determination pact could pave the way for referendums and greater provincial autonomy

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: ANC attacks on democracy prove devolution is not the solution

Robert King argues that the ANC's disruptions of hearings for the Western Cape Provincial Powers Bill exposes their contempt for provincial democracy

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Will the Real Geordin Hill-Lewis Please Stand Up

Are we all equal before the law and should ratepayers be paying excessive rates to upgrade illegal settlements? Writing in BizNews, Phil Craig calls for greater transparency from politicians and political parties

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Tien Dinge Wat Jy Onmiddellik Kan Doen Om Kaapse Onafhanklikheid Te Bevorder

Die CIAG se Robert King sit tien praktiese aksies uiteen wat gewone Kapenaars kan neem om Kaapse Onafhanklikheid ’n werklikheid te maak.

www.capeindependence.org

PRESS RELEASE: CIAG Lodges Complaint At Advertising Regulatory Board, Says City of Cape Town Is Misleading Ratepayers

PRESS RELEASE: For most ratepayers, "Lower rates are NOT coming to Cape Town" - the City is misleading you. CIAG lodges complaint with the Advertising Regulatory Board

www.capeindependence.org

OP-ED: Thinking clearly about South Africa’s economy

Robert King writes about South Africa's GDP growth figures, why Poland and South Africa took such different economic trajectories after 1994, and why self-determination may be the economic answer for the Western Cape.

www.capeindependence.org

From RP:

PRESS RELEASE: RP Says Fisherhaven Academy Fiasco Is a Warning to the Rest of the Province | RP News

The Referendum Party demands immediate action at Fisherhaven Academy and warns that illegal settlement expansion is driving a wider breakdown across the Western Cape.

www.referendumparty.org

PRESS RELEASE: Referendum Party Notes Dion George Resignation from the DA and Parliament | RP News

RP says that, regardless of the personal allegations, Mr George’s claim that the DA has failed to deliver meaningful changes to government policy within the GNU is clear for all to see.

www.referendumparty.org

PRESS RELEASE: RP Slams DA For 17 Years Of Inaction On Illegal Settlements In The Western Cape | RP News

The Referendum Party says the DA is avoiding responsibility on land invasions after failing to use its provincial authority in the Western Cape - where housing is a concurrent competence - to curb illegal occupations and enforce lawful housing policy.

www.referendumparty.org

PRESS RELEASE: RP Warns Stellenbosch Water Crisis Exposes Crisis Of Local Democracy | RP News

The Referendum Party says reports of a looming water crisis in DA-run Stellenbosch expose serious failures of municipal oversight with potentially life-threatening consequences for residents.

www.referendumparty.org

 

[lexity]

Well-established business operators understand that CI would disrupt their market.

This is a significant factor in why they do not fund the CIM.

Their markets are protected through the artificial stabilization mechanism of legal red-tape/bureaucratic hurdles (that do not emanate from consumers).

Prohibitively expensive costs of doing business - not least of which require obscenely expensive legal advice, on account of State regulatory hurdles - accounts for the lack of competitors in most if not all SAn sectors.

For example, navigating and adhering to PAIA alone, is enough to keep most would-be competitors out of business.

 

[lexity]

An example of legal costs, in the first test case of EWC that has been in the courts for quite a few years.... loading.

 

[Brian_G]

Recommended reading :

(Extracted from this particular article mentioned earlier)

OP-ED: Is self-determination the solution for South Africa?

Robert King proposes that a self-determination pact could pave the way for referendums and greater provincial autonomy

www.capeindependence.org

A self-determination pact​

It would appear a pact is needed of principled political parties and organisations in SA who support the right to self-determination, with such a pact acting as a key negotiating bloc when provincial governments are formed after 2024. This pact would be able to force the DA into holding referendums on self-determination in the Western Cape, restructure the bloated metro municipalities of Gauteng into smaller more distinct entities and push for greater autonomy for KZN's traditional authorities and minority communities.

The pact would agree to a series of strategies and policies to pursue after the election, and would allow for a collective effort for self-determination that crosses party and cultural lines, making it difficult for bad faith actors to brand specific parties as "racist" or "tribalist". This pact could follow the model set by Nigel Farage in the European Parliament, where UKIP came together with other eurosceptic parties from six different European countries to form the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy group – creating a united front against increased EU centralisation.

Such a pact need not replace the Moonshot concept, but rather run parallel to it and complement it, with it having the ability to play a key role in shaping Moonshot's policies around provincial autonomy before and after the elections. In the words of FF Plus Chief Whip, Dr. Corné Mulder, "it is not a case of either/or, it's a case of and/and."

‍The two core parties that would be key to such a pact would be the IFP and FF Plus – SA's 4th and 5th largest parties respectively, that together represent the three main arms of South African self-determination: Zulu, Cape and Afrikaner and hold a great wealth of political experience and knowledge between them.

Adding to the pact might include parties from the Northern Cape, where there have been a blossoming of regionalist parties such as the Namakwa Civic Movement and the Khoisan Revolution. In the Western Cape, potential partners could include the Cape Coloured Congress and the Cape Independence Party. The pact can also give a platform to non-partisan groups such as AfriForum, Solidarieit and the CIAG to advance their different ideas about autonomy in the legislative space.

​

 

[Brian_G]

To the contrary, that you can't see the strength of my argument on the specifics of market-cornering, is why the labels of pinko, cuck, knuckle-dragging, hen-pecking are completely justified.

Those words are insultive, surely a more civil yet still descriptive alternative is available?
People can still believe what they want - you do still support that notion, right?

I know you believe in it being fair game to sling mud within public debating, but is it always an extreme must? Some still believe in being gentlemen. British parliament sometimes gets close to being a good example.

 

[Brian_G]

My personal best choice from the previous collection of links;

OP-ED: Ten Steps to Cape Independence

The CIAG's Robert King outlines ten practical actions ordinary Kapenaars can take to help make Cape Independence a reality

www.capeindependence.org