A listing of transcripts of the dialogue and narrative of this section.
The list provides the transcript, info about the text, and links to references contained in the text.
Transcripts for Section 4 of Episode 56
|24:14||The seven applicants before the Amnesty Committee this week repeatedly stated that their killings were informed by their views on race, particularly as suggested by the infamous PAC slogan, ‘one settler one bullet.’ Those who attacked the St. James Church did so because it was located in a white area, Kenilworth. The three applying for Amy Biehl’s murder similarly said that she was an immediate target because she was a white person. These young men and their lawyers attempted to explain to the Amnesty Committee that their understanding of white people had a political dimension. Firstly they say, white people were not indigenous to Africa, they were settlers. Secondly white people were representatives of a system which had appropriated the lands of the Africans. Any white person was therefore a legitimate target for attack. The Amnesty Committee is confronted with a prickly issue. It has to decide whether these acts were purely racist, killing because you don’t like the colour ...more||Full Transcript|
|25:25||It is not the first time the Amnesty Committee has been presented with race based killings. At the beginning of the year it denied amnesty to the four van Straaten brothers who in 1981 had killed two black night watchmen in Vereeniging.||Full Transcript and References|
|25:41||‘Potchefstroom Amnesty Hearings, September 1996.’ // Are you saying to us that you don’t distinguish between murder committed through a political objective or motivation on the one hand and murder committed as a result of pure racial hatred? // That is correct, Mr. Chairman. // Are you serious?||Full Transcript|
|26:03||This was a clear case; racism is not an acceptable political motive, but what of the seven young applicants this week? Lawyer Norman Arendse gives his impression. // It’s a matter of locating what they did in the political context at the time. And clearly the political context at the time was that we were being ruled by a white minority government which was illegitimate as far as the black majority was concerned and it’s in terms of that that you understand what they did. // Does one, because how do you move from that sense of politics to an understanding that goes every white skinned person is the enemy. // Yes, it’s very important to qualify that and I think Judge Ngoepe during the hearings made the point very nicely and very clearly. You can only understand the anger against white people, you can only understand the fact that in this case, I mean we agree here that we’re only talking about APLA operations, you can only understand the anger against whites and the fact that ...more||Full Transcript and References||