@markgoldbridge What you and your gang did to Ole will not work this time with Carrick.
We will fight you and your stinky channel till you guys fuck off and leave United alone
The legal work had been done...she was done....the bedroom stuff had been sufficiently exposed....This energy was needed against ur fellow members that didn't get South Africans to this level.
If Huis Genoot still exists that's where the rest of what u want read out will be. Brilliant legal minds should be respected. 🤝🏽
I HAVE A ASK: Who came with the idea to create IDAC while we have The Hawks, SAPS, NPA and other law enforcement agencies, and what was their main objective.
Since IDAC was formed, what is their track record and what criteria was use to employ and recruit investigators as well as other officials for the entity.
I will listen on the radio 📻
@Daddy_T1one@intrepidesigner On that, I'm questioning the man, especially after we found out that even the conflict between General Khumalo and IDAC was allegedly started by him. What kind of man drags his wife into his fights with other people?
Watching this IDAC woman struggle to answer satisfactorily questions of legal nature, makes one to realize that not all lawyers are equal!
#MadlangaCommission
History made at WAFCON 🤩🇿🇦
For the first time ever, a married couple featured in the same Women's Africa Cup of Nations match as South Africa's Robyn Moodaly and Gabriela Salgado both played against Tanzania ❤️
The idea of “securing borders” is very absurd when you decide to really think about it.
For one, national borders are not natural facts of the world. So, insisting that everyone must stay on their side of a fence is basically saying anyone who happened to be on a particular side of a border when it was put up must just stay there, as if they chose to be there in the first place.
So, now a person’s lifetime economic opportunities are dictated entirely by the GPS coordinates of where their mother gave birth and must be determined by this birthright lottery.
It’s almost as if some regimes want to keep other people inside some borders, barrel bomb them physically and economically, while insisting that they stay where they are.
Just look at how Europe has helped the United States destroy the Middle East with bombings and invasions since 2001, and are now crying foul that the people whose countries they are destroying are fleeing those countries. They’re determined to use “the law” to contain the consequences of their actions in the region they continue destroy.
Of course, you don’t see the same border strictness on the movement of capital.
Money, trade, investments, corporate assets, etc. are expected to flow effortlessly across borders to seek the highest returns and lowest taxes. However, the people cannot follow them.
There’s also the idea of “illegal” and “legal” immigration, which, at its core is another manifestation of the birthright theory saying people must *earn* the right to move to where the conditions are better, while others can just be born there.
Again, when you strip away the legal language, the status of being an “illegal immigrant” is based on where someone was born relative to where they currently stand.
Political philosopher Joseph Carens argued that modern citizenship in wealthy countries functions like old European feudal privilege, where your life chances and class were determined at birth by whether you were born a noble or a peasant.
Today, Europeans are insisting that your life chances must be determined at birth by which side of an international border you were born on.
Carens argues that this criminalising of movement under modern conditions is like punishing peasants for trying to leave a feudal manor.
Following this logic, if you are born in a wealthy, peaceful nation, you hold a high-value identity document that grants you automatic access to safety and infrastructure and you are said to be “documented”.
If, on the other hand, you are born in a war-torn or economically devastated country, you are legally expected to accept those conditions, unless you can “earn” a way out through hyper-selective legal channels and become a “documented immigrant”.
Similarly, the common phrase “they should come here legally” assumes that a reasonable legal pathway exists for everyone. In reality, for millions of people fleeing violence or extreme poverty, no such legal pathway exists at all. The law is designed specifically to keep them out, making “illegal” entry the only entry.
People like the ones in the video below agree on “securing borders” to shift the focus from a world where life outcomes are dictated by birth coordinates to an individual crime of “they broke the law”, which transforms what is essentially a pursuit of better life conditions into a law-and-order problem, making it easier to justify hoarding privilege.