According to TB Joshua's very own Emmanuel TV, a low flying plane was linked to the collapse of his building. The security footage it flighted, shows that the plane flew past at 11:54. The building collapsed almost an hour later at 12:44.
If a plane had crashed into TB Joshua's building, the wreckage would be obvious. The moment of impact would definitely have been noticed by many witnesses.
Mention of a plane is a desperate attempt to divert blame and will only be taken seriously by those without technical know-how.
If the building was sensitive to vibrations then a passing truck would have been far much more of a hazard than even an A380 taking off. The ground transmits vibrations better than air. That's is why there is earthquakes and never airquakes. It would still mean the building was poorly and inappropriately designed.
Clearly the insinuation carried by the claims of a low flying plane is that some sort of supernatural powers were involved in the collapse. The insinuation of black-magic is utter hogwash coming from a man who claims he is in contact with god so much that he could foretell the deaths of presidents.
He claimed to have foretold the death of Bingu wa Mutharika. How could he fail to foretell the collapse of his own building, and deaths of his own followers? By his own claims, he was given one whole hour of forewarning by the passing of a low flying plane.
Surely, if he could foretell anything, the building could have been evacuated of all people in that time. If his powers were so easily defeated by two bit n'angas (sangomas/witchdoctors) in low flying planes then it is himself admitting that he is a fake.
That aside, the bottom line is a construction site should NEVER EVER have been used to accommodate people. That is STANDARD well established safety practice. A high school building student will tell you that.
The Nigerian authorities themselves need to answer questions on why that was allowed. Do they not carry out construction site inspections in Nigeria?
Then there is that the collapse itself seems to have been kept under wraps for a day or two. That could not have happened without the complicity of people high in authority. How high I don't know.
When the first plane flew into the World Trade Centre on 9-11-2001 we were watching the news on the internet within minutes. How come it took days for a this particular collapse to start filtering into the mainstream news?
As far as I can see, this is more of a scandal for the Nigerian government than for TB Joshua. That is if Nigeria has a government given their handling of Boko Haram and the abduction of school girls about a year ago.
From the hard facts so far, it is clear this is a simple structural failure of a building under construction. Such failures are normally rooted in the owner trying to save costs by cutting numerous corners. While the owners are ultimately to blame, professionals who may have gone along with cuckoo brained cost cutting short-cuts must also be held to account.
Concrete on its own, stone and sand bonded with cement, has a tendency to develop micro-fractures over time. That is why it is always reinforced with steel in most applications. The right amount and type of reinforcement is critical to its ability to bear weight. Any home owner knows that you can put concrete footing with no reinforcement when you built a single storey house, but you can't do that for a multi-storey house.
The higher you go the more reinforcement you need in the foundations, thus the foundation design changes. Its cost increases as well thus normal practice is to design a foundation only as strong as needed for the planned building.
If a foundation is designed for certain number of floors, you can not just raise the building without re-designing and re-doing the foundations. That is why they demolish whole buildings, dig up the foundations and start from scratch when they build bigger buildings where smaller ones used to stand.
Other problems may occur such the crew stealing materials resulting in less steel or cement being used. Some owners may even buy less material than required in an effort to save money. It does not seem to have been the case here.
The problem seems to be that the building was just raised from four to six floors (doubling the weight the foundation had to carry) without re-designing the foundations. If a proper building approval and construction inspection regime had been followed. That should never have happened.
My guess is that either corruption was involved, or there was no proper construction inspection regime. Either way the buck stops with the authorities.
Nigeria needs to account for what happened here.
Wednesday 17 September 2014
Monday 15 September 2014
The Oscar Pistorius Verdict - Unbelievable!
They say the law is an ass. In the murder trial of Oscar Pistorius, it proved to be a very obstinate ass.
At the risk of boring repetition let me rehash the facts as I understood them.
Oscar heard a sound while on the balcony. He then went to his bed to get a gun loaded with soft tipped 'zombie-stopper' bullets.
Zombie stopper bullets are designed to disintegrate into hundreds of fragments upon impact with flesh, tearing a huge hole out of the victim's internals. They are rarely survivable. Any gun enthusiast knows that. Oscar seems to have been an above average gun enthusiast.
Oscar then went to to the bathroom. He stood at the door shouting at whoever was inside that he had a gun. He then claims that, while having made his way from the balcony, it was only when he was standing at the bathroom door that he got such a fright that he accidentally fired his gun, not once, but four times into the bathroom. He definitely was not startled by the door opening because it was locked from inside.
According to the judge all of Oscar's movements were an accident. Even the keeping of a gun loaded with zombie-stopper bullets was an accident. That alone signals an intention to kill whoever he fired his gun at long before there was a reason to fire at anyone.
Moreover, why did he not get a fright while he was at the balcony or by the bed? Why did he not fire warning shots while at the bed?
Oscar knew there was someone in the bathroom. Oscar knew his gun was loaded with zombie-stopper bullets. Oscar knew that those bullets are not survivable. He had fired them at water melons, with much delight at the result. Oscar's set up, long before he fired into the bathroom, long before he had a victim, signals an intention to kill.
I think there are only three facts that swayed the judge in this case. They are called retch, sob and vomit. Those are the facts that went straight to the judge's heart, not necessarily her mind.
I am not saying Oscar was acting. However he sure made a sorry sight sitting all alone in the dock with a green bucket next to him crying bucket-loads of tears. Any soft hearted person would have wanted to give him a smooch, slap him on the wrist and tell him not to be a naughty boy again.
He is lucky I was not sitting behind that bench. With my heart made of Mutoko granite, I would have abandoned all court decorum, got up, went over, gave him some nice treatment that would have left his ears ringing, before telling him to shut the what-what up in a voice loud enough to be heard in my home town of Chivhu.
Needless to say, it is my firmly held opinion that this pathetic display had more to do with feeling sorry for oneself than regret.
Then comes the little speech by Oscar's uncle after the verdict. The family, he said, were very grateful to Judge Masipa. Carefully note that he did not mention South Africa's justice system, but the judge personally. On that score he is right. It was not the justice system that saved Oscar from a murder verdict, but the judge.
He then added that the family would like to show their gratitude to the judge. May I ask, how? I ask because such language is also used in corrupt situations. Such as when offering a palm greaser type of gratitude.
Corrupt people do not say, I am going to pay you a bribe. They use seemingly benign language like, I am going to thank you. I will show you my gratitude. We can work together on this. Perhaps the most popular in South Africa being, let's make a plan.
I do not know about other people, but in my mind Oscar's uncle's language immediately raised a huge red banner. Why that choice of language? He is the best person to explain, but the picture it created in my mind is surely not a good one for him. After using such language, 'clever' is not one of the words I would tick if asked to describe him.
I just hope, someone is going to flog this obstinate ass and get it to move in the right direction. A justice system is primarily supposed to protect and reassure society that the truth and fairness will prevail in the long run.
In this case there were suggestions that domestic violence was involved. It also happened in the same month that a brute, or set of brutes, disembowelled a woman, Anene Booysens, in the Western cape.
I do not think the verdict is particularly consoling for victims of domestic violence. It might even be an encouragement rather than a deterrent to potential offenders.
The state's case was that Oscar was abusing Reeva when he killed her. His acquittal on all charges that involved intent, may be interpreted by some as meaning that he was clever enough to get away with it. Others might try to be clever too and get away with, excuse the pun, murder.
At the risk of boring repetition let me rehash the facts as I understood them.
Oscar heard a sound while on the balcony. He then went to his bed to get a gun loaded with soft tipped 'zombie-stopper' bullets.
Zombie stopper bullets are designed to disintegrate into hundreds of fragments upon impact with flesh, tearing a huge hole out of the victim's internals. They are rarely survivable. Any gun enthusiast knows that. Oscar seems to have been an above average gun enthusiast.
Oscar then went to to the bathroom. He stood at the door shouting at whoever was inside that he had a gun. He then claims that, while having made his way from the balcony, it was only when he was standing at the bathroom door that he got such a fright that he accidentally fired his gun, not once, but four times into the bathroom. He definitely was not startled by the door opening because it was locked from inside.
According to the judge all of Oscar's movements were an accident. Even the keeping of a gun loaded with zombie-stopper bullets was an accident. That alone signals an intention to kill whoever he fired his gun at long before there was a reason to fire at anyone.
Moreover, why did he not get a fright while he was at the balcony or by the bed? Why did he not fire warning shots while at the bed?
Oscar knew there was someone in the bathroom. Oscar knew his gun was loaded with zombie-stopper bullets. Oscar knew that those bullets are not survivable. He had fired them at water melons, with much delight at the result. Oscar's set up, long before he fired into the bathroom, long before he had a victim, signals an intention to kill.
I think there are only three facts that swayed the judge in this case. They are called retch, sob and vomit. Those are the facts that went straight to the judge's heart, not necessarily her mind.
I am not saying Oscar was acting. However he sure made a sorry sight sitting all alone in the dock with a green bucket next to him crying bucket-loads of tears. Any soft hearted person would have wanted to give him a smooch, slap him on the wrist and tell him not to be a naughty boy again.
He is lucky I was not sitting behind that bench. With my heart made of Mutoko granite, I would have abandoned all court decorum, got up, went over, gave him some nice treatment that would have left his ears ringing, before telling him to shut the what-what up in a voice loud enough to be heard in my home town of Chivhu.
Needless to say, it is my firmly held opinion that this pathetic display had more to do with feeling sorry for oneself than regret.
Then comes the little speech by Oscar's uncle after the verdict. The family, he said, were very grateful to Judge Masipa. Carefully note that he did not mention South Africa's justice system, but the judge personally. On that score he is right. It was not the justice system that saved Oscar from a murder verdict, but the judge.
He then added that the family would like to show their gratitude to the judge. May I ask, how? I ask because such language is also used in corrupt situations. Such as when offering a palm greaser type of gratitude.
Corrupt people do not say, I am going to pay you a bribe. They use seemingly benign language like, I am going to thank you. I will show you my gratitude. We can work together on this. Perhaps the most popular in South Africa being, let's make a plan.
I do not know about other people, but in my mind Oscar's uncle's language immediately raised a huge red banner. Why that choice of language? He is the best person to explain, but the picture it created in my mind is surely not a good one for him. After using such language, 'clever' is not one of the words I would tick if asked to describe him.
I just hope, someone is going to flog this obstinate ass and get it to move in the right direction. A justice system is primarily supposed to protect and reassure society that the truth and fairness will prevail in the long run.
In this case there were suggestions that domestic violence was involved. It also happened in the same month that a brute, or set of brutes, disembowelled a woman, Anene Booysens, in the Western cape.
I do not think the verdict is particularly consoling for victims of domestic violence. It might even be an encouragement rather than a deterrent to potential offenders.
The state's case was that Oscar was abusing Reeva when he killed her. His acquittal on all charges that involved intent, may be interpreted by some as meaning that he was clever enough to get away with it. Others might try to be clever too and get away with, excuse the pun, murder.
Monday 1 September 2014
The ANC vs The EFF? Or is it the ANC vs democracy?
Recently the ANC complained that the nature of EFF objections to some issues in parliament 'undermines the authority of the state'.
If anybody is undermining the authority of the state it is the ANC. Statements by ministers that the security cluster which includes the army is going to be deployed to 'deal' with any disruptions of parliament is a clear threat meant to intimidate opposition politicians into not asking questions that the ANC does not want asked.
Clearly the provisions of the constitution, to allow representatives of the people to object to actions of the executive, are being made subordinate to the wishes of the ANC not to be embarrassed. Parliamentary rules should never ever be used to shield a sitting president from robust scrutiny.
The speakers of the various houses are very loyal ANC functionaries. If an MP makes a statement or asks a question that they don't like they quickly order them out. If the MP objects, ministers who are also very loyal ANC functionaries are now promising to deal with them violently.
These party functionaries are using a benchmark, respect, that is not defined or required by any law.
I cannot imagine in what way these threatened actions will enhance democracy. The only likely effect is that they will silence vocal opponents. Nothing can be more anti-democratic than silencing vocal opponents. If the EFF are undermining the state, charge them with treason, not chuck them out of parliament.
A loud ruckus over controversial issues is quite normal in a properly functioning democracy. In India parliament recently had to be adjourned early after opposition MPs kept loudly objecting to the dropping of a motion condemning Israel's actions in Gaza. The ruling party had connived, using its majority, to have the motion dropped from the agenda.
In my native Zimbabwe proceedings often come to a stand-still as MPs sing opposing songs or engage in shouting matches. MDC member of parliament now exiled in South Africa, Roy Bennet, once went to the extend of shoving Zanu-PF minister, Patrick Chinamasa, to the ground. Despite its close alliance with the security forces, Zanu-PF never issued threats like the ANC is doing.
Though, they used their parliamentary majority to have parliament sit as a court and sentence Bennet to 1 year in prison for contempt. That was provided for by the constitution. That episode is often cited as an example of Zimbabwe's lack of democracy.
Other parliaments literally feature MPs engaging in boxing matches and throttling each other. Yet you never hear of armies and the police being called in. Using the armed services to intimidate opposition is a typical characteristic of dictatorships.
The official opposition, the DA, seem to be quite happy to tag along with the ANC against the EFF. It looks like they think that if the ANC gets rid of the EFF then their own position as number two will be secure.
They are doing a disservice to South Africa's democracy by choosing to be an ANC poodle. In a democracy, the security services should never ever be used to evict objecting MPs. That defeats the spirit of democracy.
Showing respect to an establishment, especially a corrupt one, is not a requirement in democracy.
I do not know what respect the ANC are demanding. They are the ones who chose to be led by a man with scandals hovering around him like flies. A constant stream of controversy is an obvious consequence of such a choice. It does not require a PhD degree, even a fake one, to figure that out.
Here are the facts beyond dispute. The man admitted impregnating the daughter of a family friend. Despite claims that it was his culture and he had done nothing wrong, he had to pay a fine in terms of that culture. A fine in any culture is an admission of guilt.
He had unprotected sex with the HIV positive friend of his own daughter. The girl ended up accusing him of rape. He caused an outcry when he admitted that his only precaution during that episode was to take a shower after the sex.
Imagine Barrack Obama being allowed to serve after admitting to impregnating Jesse Jackson's daughter and to having sex with Malia's friend.
A close friend and adviser of the man was convicted of corruption related charges. When pronouncing the conviction, a judge said that the two clearly had a corrupt relationship.
The ruckus, over which opposition MPs are being threatened, is again corruption related.
Nearly 250 million Rands were spend on a collection of building, which even if they were placed in a high-end suburb like Saxonworld or Cape Point, it is difficult to imagine that they would be valued at over 50 million Rands. Four similar if not bigger properties belonging to the man's friends in Saxonworld, the Guptas, were last year valued at a combined value of only 35 million rand.
In the engineering profession, consultation services are normally pegged at between 1 and 6 percent of the value of a project and almost never go above 20%. What kind of professional services were offered that would cost nearly 400% the physical value of the project. It stretches imagination and boggles the mind.
The ANC are trying to use their majority to reduce parliament to a rubber stamp. They want to brush opposition objections aside in the name of respect. We know the objections are little more than tokens of protest, rather than effective checks and balances. The ANC will likely use its majority to smoother them.
Now the ANC want to silence even those tokens of protest. Clearly they are worried that the constant highlighting of their deficiencies is going to cost them votes in future. In my opinion, that is the main motivation for their threats, not upholding the dignity and authority of the state. They are trying to contain the negative news constantly hovering around their leader through badgering the opposition from raising the issues.
If the succeed, South African democracy will be walking with one leg broken. South Africans need to the think very carefully on whether the struggle going on in parliament at the moment is the ANC versus the EFF. It may be the ANC versus democracy.
If anybody is undermining the authority of the state it is the ANC. Statements by ministers that the security cluster which includes the army is going to be deployed to 'deal' with any disruptions of parliament is a clear threat meant to intimidate opposition politicians into not asking questions that the ANC does not want asked.
Clearly the provisions of the constitution, to allow representatives of the people to object to actions of the executive, are being made subordinate to the wishes of the ANC not to be embarrassed. Parliamentary rules should never ever be used to shield a sitting president from robust scrutiny.
The speakers of the various houses are very loyal ANC functionaries. If an MP makes a statement or asks a question that they don't like they quickly order them out. If the MP objects, ministers who are also very loyal ANC functionaries are now promising to deal with them violently.
These party functionaries are using a benchmark, respect, that is not defined or required by any law.
I cannot imagine in what way these threatened actions will enhance democracy. The only likely effect is that they will silence vocal opponents. Nothing can be more anti-democratic than silencing vocal opponents. If the EFF are undermining the state, charge them with treason, not chuck them out of parliament.
A loud ruckus over controversial issues is quite normal in a properly functioning democracy. In India parliament recently had to be adjourned early after opposition MPs kept loudly objecting to the dropping of a motion condemning Israel's actions in Gaza. The ruling party had connived, using its majority, to have the motion dropped from the agenda.
In my native Zimbabwe proceedings often come to a stand-still as MPs sing opposing songs or engage in shouting matches. MDC member of parliament now exiled in South Africa, Roy Bennet, once went to the extend of shoving Zanu-PF minister, Patrick Chinamasa, to the ground. Despite its close alliance with the security forces, Zanu-PF never issued threats like the ANC is doing.
Though, they used their parliamentary majority to have parliament sit as a court and sentence Bennet to 1 year in prison for contempt. That was provided for by the constitution. That episode is often cited as an example of Zimbabwe's lack of democracy.
Other parliaments literally feature MPs engaging in boxing matches and throttling each other. Yet you never hear of armies and the police being called in. Using the armed services to intimidate opposition is a typical characteristic of dictatorships.
The official opposition, the DA, seem to be quite happy to tag along with the ANC against the EFF. It looks like they think that if the ANC gets rid of the EFF then their own position as number two will be secure.
They are doing a disservice to South Africa's democracy by choosing to be an ANC poodle. In a democracy, the security services should never ever be used to evict objecting MPs. That defeats the spirit of democracy.
Showing respect to an establishment, especially a corrupt one, is not a requirement in democracy.
I do not know what respect the ANC are demanding. They are the ones who chose to be led by a man with scandals hovering around him like flies. A constant stream of controversy is an obvious consequence of such a choice. It does not require a PhD degree, even a fake one, to figure that out.
Here are the facts beyond dispute. The man admitted impregnating the daughter of a family friend. Despite claims that it was his culture and he had done nothing wrong, he had to pay a fine in terms of that culture. A fine in any culture is an admission of guilt.
He had unprotected sex with the HIV positive friend of his own daughter. The girl ended up accusing him of rape. He caused an outcry when he admitted that his only precaution during that episode was to take a shower after the sex.
Imagine Barrack Obama being allowed to serve after admitting to impregnating Jesse Jackson's daughter and to having sex with Malia's friend.
A close friend and adviser of the man was convicted of corruption related charges. When pronouncing the conviction, a judge said that the two clearly had a corrupt relationship.
The ruckus, over which opposition MPs are being threatened, is again corruption related.
Nearly 250 million Rands were spend on a collection of building, which even if they were placed in a high-end suburb like Saxonworld or Cape Point, it is difficult to imagine that they would be valued at over 50 million Rands. Four similar if not bigger properties belonging to the man's friends in Saxonworld, the Guptas, were last year valued at a combined value of only 35 million rand.
In the engineering profession, consultation services are normally pegged at between 1 and 6 percent of the value of a project and almost never go above 20%. What kind of professional services were offered that would cost nearly 400% the physical value of the project. It stretches imagination and boggles the mind.
The ANC are trying to use their majority to reduce parliament to a rubber stamp. They want to brush opposition objections aside in the name of respect. We know the objections are little more than tokens of protest, rather than effective checks and balances. The ANC will likely use its majority to smoother them.
Now the ANC want to silence even those tokens of protest. Clearly they are worried that the constant highlighting of their deficiencies is going to cost them votes in future. In my opinion, that is the main motivation for their threats, not upholding the dignity and authority of the state. They are trying to contain the negative news constantly hovering around their leader through badgering the opposition from raising the issues.
If the succeed, South African democracy will be walking with one leg broken. South Africans need to the think very carefully on whether the struggle going on in parliament at the moment is the ANC versus the EFF. It may be the ANC versus democracy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)