Afrikaans the language of the oppressor, justice for Nico and a misguided argument, say letter writers

Justice for Nico Naidoo!

Have we in Phoenix lost our humanity to behave like wild animals & take an innocent life for a parking space ?

Have those murderers of Nico Naidoo lost their minds blaming intoxication?

Did Nico have to die in such a hate filled manner by neighbours who are callous and heartless. Ganging up on his old father and uncle, assaulting them for no cause? We the people of Phoenix, must stand as one and demand justice for Nico Naidoo and his family.

A loving son and breadwinner had his life cut down for parking space that belonged to no one. The Phoenix Police must account to us the residents and tax payers of Phoenix why ?

• The gang of criminals who came to attack Nico Naidoo and family, were not arrested for intimidation or assault?

• If 4 perpetrators of Assault / Murder was reported by the Complainants to Phoenix, SAPS, why then, were only 2 arrested?

• Why was no one arrested for the assault of Nico’s Dad and his uncle?

• Given the seriousness of the crime of murder, which was forseeable, why was bail not denied? . We the people of Phoenix demand justice for Nico Naidoo and his bereaved and traumatized family.

The Phoenix Police have been caught out again to be slow on the draw.

We trust and hope the Public Prosecutors will do their jobs properly & efficiently and not fall on their swords like they did with Pastor Omotso & other recent cases! | Robin Naidoo Sunford, Phoenix

Afrikaans the language of the oppressor

Remember Jim Reeves, the country and gospel singer from way back in the ‘50s and ‘60s?

He was very popular in South Africa. In fact, he was more popular than Elvis Presley! While the younger ones liked the hip-wiggling Elvis singing his rock, rattle and roll songs, the older, conservative generation liked the songs of Jim Reeves.

Believe it or not, he had a large following among the Afrikaner community! The Nashville sound singer toured South Africa twice, in 1962 and 1963, and made a film called Kimberly Jim. He even recorded songs in Afrikaans!

I happened to hear one of his popular songs, He’ll Have to Go, which would have appealed to those involved in a love tangle. It brought back memories of my youth.

I didn’t like Jim Reeves. His songs and his singing style didn’t appeal to me. What’s more, he had the cheek to record songs in Afrikaans.

I hated the language. Fortunately, we didn’t have to learn Afrikaans in school. But when I went to college, I had to learn that harsh language! Luckily, it was elementary Afrikaans, which I forgot as soon as I walked out of the college door.

Later on, Afrikaans became a part of the school curriculum. Some teachers opted to teach Afrikaans. But they were not ostracised by the teaching fraternity. It was seen as a job, as a means to an end. But they dared not utter a word in Afrikaans in the staff room! Out of the classroom (Afrikaans lesson time), the language was dead.

Unlike the coloured community, who embraced Afrikaans readily, Indians spurned the language of the oppressor. As much as the apartheid government tried, it couldn’t make inroads into the Indian community. I am really proud to be an Indian.

Some are of the view that Jim Reeves’ music transcended cultural barriers. But I am not convinced. Why did he have to choose Afrikaans of all languages? Imagine an American stooping so low and pandering to the Afrikaner.

Was he so blind that he couldn’t see the evil of apartheid? Perhaps he couldn’t care. He was part of a broad American foreign policy to bolster autocratic regimes around the world as long as they were friendly to the US.

I wonder if Donald Trump was a fan of Jim Reeves. Gentleman Jim? I have my doubts. | T Markandan Kloof

That is one misguided argument

Nicholas Woode-Smith’s claim that a ceasefire would “mean nothing” is dangerously misguided.

The UN’s inability to enforce one does not render it meaningless. It exposes the collective failure of global powers to prevent a genocide already well underway.

Israel’s military campaign has killed over 60 000 Palestinians, the majority of them women and children, and pushed Gaza to the brink of famine. If moral clarity will not compel a ceasefire, strategic logic must.

No campaign in history has been won by bombing captive populations into submission.

Woode-Smith’s suggestion that Hamas alone can end the conflict ignores political reality. Long before October 7, Israel’s leadership rejected two-state proposals, expanded illegal settlements, and worked to dismantle Palestinian sovereignty. The UK and its allies sanctioned Israeli ministers Smotrich and Ben-Gvir for inciting violence. These are the same ministers threatening to collapse Netanyahu’s government over a ceasefire. That fact alone discredits the claim that Israel is passively waiting for peace.

The idea that Israel’s only options are “Hamas surrenders or is destroyed” is a false and oversimplified choice. Conflicts do not end by insisting on impossible ultimatums. They end through diplomacy. This will be no exception.

Woode-Smith’s claim that Hamas “broke every ceasefire” is also demonstrably false. Public reports from March 2025 by BBC and CNN confirm that Israel violated the last ceasefire. These are well-documented facts that do not require interpretation.

The most revealing flaw in Woode-Smith’s argument, however, is the assumption that Israel’s current strategy is achieving anything other than ethnic cleansing. If “destroying Hamas” means levelling Gaza, killing civilians by the tens of thousands, and ensuring generational resistance, then it is not a strategy. It is a blueprint for endless bloodshed.

A ceasefire is not weakness or concession. It is the last bridge to reason amid chaos. | O Parak Pietermaritzburg

DAILY NEWS