Minister’s SAT3 comments confuse

Yet another demonstration of the idiot we have for a communications minister.
 
As far as I know, lying to a parliamentary body is an offence (correct me if I'm wrong...).

Get an MP to challenge her on this (Dene Smuts, are you listening? :)). The only way she can clear her name is if she produces the SAT3/SAFE usage figures. If she doesn't produce them (highly likely since this is Telkom's data, not hers AND they'll probably contradict her statement anyway), she should get nailed.
 
As far as I know, lying to a parliamentary body is an offence (correct me if I'm wrong...).

Get an MP to challenge her on this (Dene Smuts, are you listening? :)). The only way she can clear her name is if she produces the SAT3/SAFE usage figures. If she doesn't produce them (highly likely since this is Telkom's data, not hers AND they'll probably contradict her statement anyway), she should get nailed.
NeoTel would also be privy to this information.
 
NeoTel would also be privy to this information.

OK, amend that to "highly likely since this is Telkom and NeoTel's data, not hers"

My point still stands. Challenge her on it. I'll bet anyone a beer that she either can't or won't provide the proof. :)
 
As far as I know, lying to a parliamentary body is an offence (correct me if I'm wrong...).

Get an MP to challenge her on this (Dene Smuts, are you listening? :)). The only way she can clear her name is if she produces the SAT3/SAFE usage figures. If she doesn't produce them (highly likely since this is Telkom's data, not hers AND they'll probably contradict her statement anyway), she should get nailed.
NeoTel would also be privy to this information.

OK, amend that to "highly likely since this is Telkom and NeoTel's data, not hers"

My point still stands. Challenge her on it. I'll bet anyone a beer that she either can't or won't provide the proof. :)
And Verizon Business will also be privy to this information.

Anyways her Poisonous Ivyness has never admitted to any wrong-doing, it's not like she will admit to being a lier now...
 
And Verizon Business will also be privy to this information.

Anyways her Poisonous Ivyness has never admitted to any wrong-doing, it's not like she will admit to being a lier now...
Thanks - I wasnt aware they had a share of SAT3 - how much do they own?
 
As much as I hate to admit it, her Poisonous Ivyness probably will need a whole new submarine cable to cater for the bandwidth needs of the SKA project, 80Gbits/s will not be sufficient, having said that, her Poisonous Ivyness is definitely lieing about SAT-3 currently running at full capacity!!!
Thanks - I wasnt aware they had a share of SAT3 - how much do they own?
Verizon Business' parent company that used to be called MCI, is a SAT-3 shareholder.

A point of UUNET-SA not being allowed direct access to SAT-3 bandwidth & the Melkbosstrand landing station, was made at the time when J&J Naidoo [one the former MoC] did a BEE deal to buy into UUNET-SA [now Verizon Business], despite MCI being a member of the SAT-3 Bandwidth Illuminati group of shareholders...
 
Thanks - I'm still curious though as to who has the biggest chunk. http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showpost.php?p=730399&postcount=4
On account of it being a secret shareholder's agreement, that even broken-promises-Padayache DMoCk Roy claims not to have access to, it's impossible to say with any certainty, but I think it is widely believed that Telkodemonopolies holds the single largest block of shares - whatever percentage that amounts to.
 
On account of it being a secret shareholder's agreement, that even broken-promises-Padayache DMoCk Roy claims not to have access to, it's impossible to say with any certainty, but I think it is widely believed that Telkodemonopolies holds the single largest block of shares - whatever percentage that amounts to.
Perhaps - maybe rpm can spread some light - both articles were penned (can you still use that term?) by myadsl.

Didnt the agreement leak out some time back?
 
Perhaps - maybe rpm can spread some light - both articles were penned (can you still use that term?) by myadsl.

Didnt the agreement leak out some time back?
Allegedly yes, at least part of it, but I haven't seen that published anywhere...
 
As far as I know, lying to a parliamentary body is an offence (correct me if I'm wrong...).

Get an MP to challenge her on this (Dene Smuts, are you listening? :)). The only way she can clear her name is if she produces the SAT3/SAFE usage figures. If she doesn't produce them (highly likely since this is Telkom's data, not hers AND they'll probably contradict her statement anyway), she should get nailed.

There is no such thing as accountability in South African politics. If there was, none of the idiots that make up our current government would be able to find a job.
 
There is no such thing as accountability in South African politics. If there was, none of the idiots that make up our current government would be able to find a job.
I would disagree - I believe Ivy is very much held accountable for her actions by her taskmasters at telkom.
 
Perhaps - maybe rpm can spread some light - both articles were penned (can you still use that term?) by myadsl.

Didnt the agreement leak out some time back?
Hi Bwana

I have no idea what exactly the agreement says. Maybe the initial investment is not directly related to shareholding percentages. I think Telkom’s status as the network administrator may also influence the total shareholding.

Regards,

RPM
 
Hi Bwana

I have no idea what exactly the agreement says. Maybe the initial investment is not directly related to shareholding percentages. I think Telkom’s status as the network administrator may also influence the total shareholding.

Regards,

RPM
Thanks for the answer. Why the government would feel the need to shroud the whole SAT3 issue in secrecy from day 1 is beyond me. I assume they were readying their coffers even back then.
 
Thanks for the answer. Why the government would feel the need to shroud the whole SAT3 issue in secrecy from day 1 is beyond me. I assume they were readying their coffers even back then.

yup most likely the case,the cash cow might get upset if it found out the truth
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X