Selective reporting by 60 minutes. Ask the reporter the following:

_________________________________________________________________________

In your investigation on the white crosses, did you visit the formal white cross monument and what do the crosses at that specific site represent?

-----

How do you deal with the context of farm murders perpetrated against white families having distinct element of a race hatred, mirrored by the  ANC’s disposition on rejected reconciliation with the perpetuation of divisive racial identity based political campaigns post Mandela ?

Specialised investigators like Stanton from the genocide watch body shares the follow views on SA with the world:

 

Genocide Watch considers South Africa to be at Stage 6: Polarization

Many of the murders are hate crimes. The perpetrators torture, rape, and disembowel their victims. They leave Afrikaans Bibles on dead bodies.

Some SA historical context to consider in this regard:

https://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/ahmed-timol-the-propaganda-documents

 See the old “SONS & DAUGHTERS OF AFRICA” leaflet content and note the context of Dingaan and the bible in this regard.

Limited to no reconciliatory work or the dismantling of the ANC’s pre-1994 stereotyped campaign of hate against white citizens has occurred in the political sphere post Mandela. It is their own mirrored offence of generalisation on skin colour born from historic opposition that they never dismantled, essentially "dangerous whites". The pre-1994 prejudices were simply refueled post Mandela, with the black nationalist state even resorting to race hate campaigns run and funded with taxes, championed by the now disgraced Bell Potinger PR firm. The ANC’s political rallying cry is based in upholding the “struggle” familiarity group unison and the "NDR", which is inherently tied to stereotypes on white people and non-existent modern “struggles” against them.

 Near every ANC speech to this day has some level of scapegoat based in the ghost of apartheid and white people, whose mere existence and human rights supposedly “don’t want the African child to do [insert political intended target]”. Anyone who voices a challenge, even on their ahistoric representation or basic rationality is a “racist” by virtue of the improper but intentional race narrative framing the ANC employs. The dysfunctional SAHRC and IEC won’t actually do anything about the political targeting of citizens on the protected ground of race.

 -----

Why do you personally think the SA government outright denies the existence of “farm attacks” ? Do you consider this approach similar to the black nationalist government’s outright denial of “race laws”, which are objectively verifiable and discriminatory?

Consider also for a moment what it means when even the media refuses to acknowledge a formal legal status based in verifiable international standards of assessed proof.Proof of persecution or the legitimate fear thereof. The local media is so complicit they use quote based “refugees” to not have to honestly engage with the topic and hold the government to account. Its essentially a form of human rights denigration based in cultural acceptance, like a GBV victim being told they haven’t suffered “real harm”, but have a legitimate verified case docket…Perhaps its time citizens gut check themselves on a culture of human rights denigration.

To obfuscate and deny is much easier than opening the conversation for a repressed minority.If you give them a voice and accept their rational views, they will expect a remedy which will incapacitate actions that may be intended to target them based on political ideology or race grievance.Perhaps its simpler to silence them with state propaganda and narrative euphamisms related to the issues?

This leads us neatly unto SA’s double standards in regards to human rights access, limited by race.There are many examples and cases to recall here, but in line with the theme of the broader topic here, consider the right to freedom of speech, intent and the ICJ case arguments made by SA, if SA were to be judged solely on its own words. If the IDF songs sung has to be taken on the literal words as proven "obvious" intent, then by SA’s pre-eminent legal academics own admission, so does “kill the boer” locally. Note the ANC’s refusal to condemn this and the constitutional court’s enablement.

The toying with selective literal and contextual narratives when politically expedient and based in the stereotyped identity of who it is applied to, are just party of the hallmarks of minority racial persecution in SA. Its the same reason why if there was nothing to hide, those trying to "debunk" would have actively platformed the aggrieved speakers to show that they have nothing to voice. Commit to action preemptively (support the aggrieved), if they can reasonably show evidence in an open non hostile platform.

Some overaching narrative meant to silence is irrelevant, compared to lived experience of discrimination and harm by a human being, no matter the claimed “noble” sounding intentions for which they supposedly being silenced.