Posted on 04/21/2015 7:20:47 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
An 86-year-old nun was reportedly gang-raped before being murdered in her bedroom at a South African missionary.
Gertrud Tiefenbacher's hands had been tied with a typewriter cord and a towel placed over a face, say local police.
Her body was found by other nuns at the Sacred Heart Missionary in Ixopo, a small town 85 miles south-west of Durban.
Police in KwaZulu-Natal are waiting for the results of forensic tests to confirm that Sister Gertrud was sexually assaulted.
They say she was suffocated but they are unsure how many men attacked her. A small sum of money - thought to be in euros - had been stolen from her room.
The victim's friend Betty Firmstone, 85, told South Africa's Daily News: 'I met Sister in 1952 when I started teaching at a school attached to the mission. We worked very closely together. She loved her work with children.
'This really was an act of savagery against a gentle, caring soul.'
Sister Gertrud had lived at the missionary for 60 years after moving to South Africa from her native Austria.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
If you don't have family members and/or friends living there, you can't really know the complete picture.
I wasn't talking about the murder and deaths of the Boer farmers, the house breaking, the carjackings, nor other road crimes; I was solely talking about the RAPE incidents...which IS what this thread is about.
That's because evolution isn't true.
Would this crime have happened back when SA was a great country? Something to think about.
I’ve done so much reading. I know the church as said a long time ago that evolution is not incompatible with there being a God.
As some may know, I had a head injury ten years ago and in reading for ways to relieve my symptoms I have read about the brain for hundreds of hours. I just don’t see hoe evolution could make such an Extremely complex organ. Just the sleep wake cycle is impossibly complex, with so man hormones and chemicals working together to bring you out of sleep correctly. And the repair that goes on during sleep is miraculous.
All of the hormone and chemicals and parts of the brain involved in sex is incredible. I have read for hours and hours how it became so pleasurable and evolution doesn’t have a good answer for it
I believe there is an intelligence in the genes that was put there by God. But I could be vey wrong lol.
“No, You don’t know more about this nation than I do and have proved it.”
No, you failed. The Bantu peoples were there since before the turn of the first millennium. They might have been as far south as the Dutch, but there were other indigenous tribes there to meet the Dutch when the Dutch arrived. Just the FACT that the Bantus began to push the Khoikhoi further south in THE THIRD CENTURY A.D. shows you have no idea of what you’re talking about.
“How is having more rights essentially meaningless to you?”
If you’re South African and can’t vote in your own country’s elections, can’t travel freely, can’t get a passport, can’t work jobs or go to schools or buy land or buy a house except in “appropriate” racially designated areas, then you have no rights worth speaking about. Next you’ll be telling me how great ghetto life was for Jews.
“Do you not give South Africans any credit for building up that country to what it became?”
Yes. That changes nothing, however. “The Nazis built great roads” is not an argument.
“Why did Blacks continue to migrate into South Africa in spite of “White rule”?”
Why did large numbers of Europeans migrate into Nazi Germany after the beginning of the war - by choice no less? Because the economy of Nazi Germany was larger than that in Lithuania, or France, or Italy, or Bulgaria. South Africa had a thriving economy. Even states with evil, inhuman policies can have thriving economies. China does.
Your statement shows a total ignorance, perhaps deliberate for ideological reasons, but ignorance of the ethnic & historical realities of the South African sub-continent.
Have you ever been to South Africa? If you had you might appreciate the difference between the concept of a nation, and the borders drawn by the former Colonial power. The various nations of South Africa--for they are various nations--have different racial origins, to be sure. They also have different languages, and even radically different types of native architecture. The idea--now in practice of having a common voter role may appear to be idealistic to you--and certainly it appeals to those seeking a World Government;--but it effectively undermines the continuity of all those distinct nations.
Now, for example, are you aware of how the Indaba institution was applied by the Zulu Monarchy? It is a form of Democracy, but not one with much in common with the practices in a New England Town Meeting.
Apartheid has been grossly misrepresented by the Internationalists in the Western Media. It was basically intended to reverse the lumping of those distinct Nations together by the former Colonial power, and was never fully implemented because of industry's desire for cheap labor. But some of the programs that were implemented were shortly followed by similar programs in the United States, that also--as in South Africa--provided incentives to locate industry where it would be most convenient to non-White populations. In any event, it was not intended to hold any group back; rather premised on the very Conservative position that people were entitled to build on their own cultural heritage, rather than be homogenized in the way sought by the "diversity" cult in American Academia.
The Whites are not the only victims of what has been happening in Africa, of course. The same mentality that assailed South Africa in the 1960s through 1990, also denied ethnic rights to the Christian Ibos in Nigeria; to Tshombe's tribe in Katanga in the former Belgian Congo. The attack is on any tribe or nation, of any race, that would opt out of the pursuit of a new world order.
“Apartheid has been grossly misrepresented by the Internationalists in the Western Media.”
You’re really getting desperate.
“It was basically intended to reverse the lumping of those distinct Nations together by the former Colonial power, and was never fully implemented because of industry’s desire for cheap labor.”
Apartheid was invented by whites, specifically Afrikaaners, as a way to practice segregation in a world which was turning against racial segregation. The “homeland” idea was used as cover and as a system of coercion. That is why the Zulu’s “homeland” was such a gerrymanded nonsense. That’s why the Japanese were designated as “honorary whitemen” when they visited South Africa. You’re not only a sucker for believing what you believe, but you’re the worst kind of sucker.
Those "homelands," were hardly a cover-up. They were the result of the interaction of the various nations, particularly in the 19th Century, in which the Colonial power was consolidating what is now "South Africa."
I would suggest that you open your eyes, and see the common pattern that has emerged in Africa & Asia, that suppresses a lot of peoples, not just the South African Whites, who in many respects just happen to have a history that most closely parallels our own--so far as times of settlement; struggles with the Colonial Power; and kindred pioneer values.
They also went to school and college( HOW ELSE COULD NELSON MANDELA GET A LAW DEGREE ? ), own property, and held jobs and not just menial ones, long before Apartheid was ever installed and after it had been.
You neither know anything much, that is factual, about that nation and its history, but you are rabidly ignorant and proud of the falsities that you continue to post.
All media is state owned there; even with that kind of censorship, with blacks now running the newspapers, in the second year of Mandela's reign.....the papers had 1/2 front page high headlines of :"BRING BACK APARTHEID NOW!". This was NOT sanctioned, it was NOT written nor begun by whites of any background, but rather, was a reaction to how bad things were then and things have only gotten far better as the years have passed.
It would behoove you to not comment on tropics you don't know nor understand.
The Brits actually started Apartheid, once they took over; it just wasn’t called that and it wasn’t just aimed at the various different black tribes, but also at the “coloureds” and the then defeated Afrikaners !
There are not that many whites and they have murdered thousands which is a large percentage of the white population and disproportionate %,. the government is in on it and they purposefully leave whites also to starve and many get tortured and murdered. discriminatory government leaves whites unemployable and wont give food aid to them. many whites are homeless in s africa and starving
I doubt that you have ever been to RSA, have family and/or friends who live there, or even read any newspapers from there on a daily or even monthly basis. Yet you "trust" what you imagine you "know" from reading a couple of websites over actual facts which I and others have posted and which you are lying about what is in them.
Yes, there has been a steady rise in criminal behavior, in RSA, for the past few decades. Yes, there has been a steady growth in the number of murderous attacks on mostly Afrikaner farmers by blacks; as well as house break-ins and road attacks. Please quote, word for word, where I disallowed such a thing ! Any sane person, with good reading comprehension skills can tell you that that IS what I stated.
What I did say, is that the majority of rape, rape/murder cases is black on black crime. That IS a factual statement,which you can easily check, by going to papers from RSA and other sites.
The government of RSA is "starving" whites there?
Yes, blacks, those high up in the ANC and their family members and friends have been placed in jobs ( which most can't or won't do...if they show up at all ), replacing some whites; however, Mandela began that. The white unemployment rate is nothing at all like you are claiming!
Where are you getting this absurd, specious codswallop from?
You know less than NOTHING at all about what's going on over there and your hysteric posts are beyond the pale!
“Blacks were first given the right to vote, in South Africa, in 1914.”
That’s a distortion to say the least:
http://www.content.eisa.org.za/old-page/south-africa-historical-franchise-arrangements
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.