In his recent piece published in The Times of Israel titled “Naledi Pandor – The South African Jihadi Emissary”, the intent to tarnish Pandor is clearly evident.
Crafted as an open letter to the US government, Nowosenetz describes Pandor as a “malign activist” and accuses her as a supporter of “Islamist radical ideology”.
He writes that Pandor’s remarks are consistent with Hamas, whom he describes as a “terror organization”. A designation that emanates from Israel’s war criminals, parroted by right wing US “think tanks” and shared by the Trump administration.
Believing Hamas’s ideology to be “fundamentally rooted in the concept of jihad (holy war)”, and in his desperate attempt to justify his characterisation of Pandor as a “jihadist”, he leans on photographs of her “in direct conversation with senior Hamas figures Dr Bassem Naim and Emad Saber at a conference in Sandton, Johannesburg”.
In a further leap of Zionist-infused interpretation, Nowosenetz writes that the conference “echoed the ideological tenor” of the 2001 UN Conference against Racism Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and related Intolerance held at Durban, South Africa.
Based on his faulty assessment, he claims that Pandor’s engagement “demonstrates continued and overt contact with proscribed terror actors inside South Africa’s borders”, without acknowledging that Hamas is neither banned nor proscribed in South Africa.
Following a litany of allegations against Pandor, he then pitches his argument that solidarity with Hamas, makes her a “potential security threat to the West and particularly within the USA”.
His alarmist warning to the US administration about Pandor’s “jihad” and “armed struggle” statements, “combined with a scheduled, high-visibility public appearance in the USA, raise a credible prospect of mobilizing hardline and radical activity”.
READ: G20 leaders’ summit in Johannesburg closes with South Africa handing presidency to absent US
To be disingenuous may be par for the course as far as Zionist hasbara is concerned, but it doesn’t absolve anyone from interrogating information to uncover its real purpose.
Nowosenetz’s article concludes with his goal: “The US administration surely cannot allow her to spew her dangerous and inciting narrative on US soil”.
Having been profiled her as a “jihadi” and a threat to the US, we now learn that the US has abruptly and without any explanation, revoked Pandor’s visa.
Pandor, who now chairs the Nelson Mandela Foundation, confirmed that she received an email from the US Consulate in Cape Town informing her that her multiple-entry visitor visa issued in 2024 had been cancelled without explanation.
Though it may not change the price of bread as explained by Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, it remains to be seen whether campaigns targeting Pandor have influenced Trump’s arbitrary decision.
Some media reports have quoted Pandor as telling journalists she had “no idea” why the US took the step but acknowledged being aware of lobbying efforts calling for her exclusion.
And one who has been public about campaigning against her is Nowosenetz. Being associated with the SA Jewish Board of Deputies adds to the intrigue.
Having successfully pulled off the G20 event, despite US attempts to derail it, has been a huge blow to the Trump administration.
That Israel, particularly with the war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu at the helm of it sharing Trump’s disdain of South Africa’s hugely popular stance in solidarity with Palestine’s freedom struggle, is out in the cold, makes it vengeful and vindictive.
To punish Pandor thus makes absolute sense for the genocidal regime.
The question we therefore need to ask is who is next?
No comments:
Post a Comment