A crime syndicate is an organisation that commits or commissions crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and benefits from crimes, whether directly or indirectly. Therefore if an organisation commits or commissions crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and benefits from crimes, whether directly or indirectly, it is a crime syndicate. Now, some criminals, who seemingly rather enjoy prison-sex, will tell you that there are differences between a crime syndicate, a criminal cartel, a racketeer-influenced organisation, a corrupt organisation, a criminal enterprise, a yakuza, a triad, a tong, a gang, a mafia, a militant group, a terrorist group and a paramilitary group; such that the nuances make it difficult to brand an organisation which commits or commissions crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and benefits from crimes, whether directly or indirectly; as a crime syndicate specifically. I’m not going to go into my own specificity which says that there is a difference between an organisation and an association; but I will say that I have chosen the term, “crime syndicate” purposefully and intentionally. So with no respect paid to the prison-pornstars, I will continue to refer to organisations which commit or commission crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and which benefit from crimes, whether directly or indirectly; as crime syndicates.
The word syndicate, and the words syndication, syndicated, syndicates, syndicating and syndicator; yes that’s six words from the same root word or word root, which sounds like root work and work root respectively, six, which in Roman numerals is VI, which in “psychospeak” is Victoria Island, which for the Prison Knumbers Gangsters reading this, means that I have called home (London-Lagos-Dakar) and cleared this with the powers that be, after all I am Avishkar and I take my responsibilities very seriously, especially when considering gri-gri, juju and vudu as it concerns crime; all relate to the process of disseminating information in a pattern. This pattern is usually a repetitive broadcast or publication, that finds its way to multiple outlets simultaneously and in a uniform manner. In terms of a crime syndicate this would mean the issuing of the same order to multiple units-of-action at the same time.
In television terms, “syndicate” means to broadcast content to and through multiple television networks simultaneously and sequentially so as to reach a wider audience than if broadcast just through the originating television network. In crime terms, “syndicate” means to broadcast content to and through multiple criminal networks simultaneously and sequentially so as to impact upon a wider community that if broadcast just through the originating criminal network.
This means simply that the organisation committing or commissioning crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and benefitting from crimes, whether directly or indirectly; being a crime syndicate; would be able to issue instructions to commit or commission crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and would be able to derive tangible and intangible benefit from crimes, whether directly or indirectly, on a larger scale, simultaneously in multiple networks than if they simply kept the instructions and benefits within the originating network. So instead of one criminal committing a crime, there would be multiple criminals committing crimes, simultaneously and all for the communal benefit of the crime syndicate as a network-of-networks.
Think of a crime boss sending an SMS to a fellow criminal telling him to sell a range of “fugasi” (fake) gemstones to unsuspecting buyers. Perhaps in one location, over a period of time, with no comebacks, the lone criminal would be able to sell a number of these “fugasi” (fake) gemstones. However if the crime boss sent SMS’s to many fellow criminals telling them to sell a range of “fugasi” (fake) gemstones to unsuspecting buyers, then in multiple locations, with multiple sellers, the group of criminals would be able to sell a greater number of these “fugasi” (fake) gemstones. This is the difference between low-rent crime and organised crime. Now if the organisation, made a business of trading in these “fugasi” (fake) gemstones, and were able to deter anyone from complaining about them, you would instantly recognise this activity as the business of a crime syndicate. That’s all I am saying, an organisation (which is a type of thing, that involves multiple personalities and multiple modes of operation) which commits or commissions crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and which benefits from crimes, whether directly or indirectly; is a crime syndicate.
Now an organisation that is created such that it is a network-of-networks, needs to buy protection. Protection from investigation, protection from prosecution and protection from imprisonment. This is because their business is vulnerable to these things. They must in fact budget a portion of the proceeds of their criminal activities to pay for this protection. This buying of protection takes the form bribes, kickbacks and pay-offs but also takes the form of blackmail, extortion and shake-downs. That is, the criminal organisation can buy protection by committing or commissioning crimes. Why bribe someone when you can threaten them? Why include someone when you can rob them? Why pay someone when you can force them to give up the goods voluntarily? The point of this is the criminal organisation, or crime syndicate, is involved with higher powers, who want a taste of the action. How much of a taste of the action depends on what’s on offer. Some crimes will require small payments up the line and some crimes will require large payments up the line.
Let us consider the case of the crime syndicate whose leadership is bankrupt. They owe more than they own and are owed and their higher-ups have them dead-to-rights in a blackmail and extortion racket. They would be required to hand over the vast majority of the proceeds of their criminal activities. Now crime syndicates that have this problem, which is made worse by the with-holding of monies by the lower down functionaries, are all a little gay. That is they spend so much time colluding and scheming to under-declare to their higher-ups, that they lose their machismo and become dependent upon co-operation rather than entitlement. There’s nothing wrong with rats killing each other, it’s when they start buggering each other that it becomes rather disgusting. This is the condition I want to focus on, because it is endemic to South Africa. Our organised criminals, that is the leading personalities of our crime syndicates are gay. Some literally because they have integrated the Prison Knumbers Gangsters into their ranks and others literally because the drugs have made moffies of them all. However some are only figuratively gay, because they collude, scheme and under-declare with great frequency.
South Africa’s crime syndicates have to pay the “tax” up-the-line to the higher-ups and do so whether they like it or not. There are only crumbs left for the lower down functionaries and the leadership. If you ask the crime bosses they will tell you about their drinking problems, their gambling problems, their drug problems and their money problems and tell you that whomever is blackmailing and extorting them is taking the vast majority of the proceeds of their criminal activities. It’s quite common. The reason I have said all of this is because I want it understood that if an organisation commits or commissions crimes, whether directly or indirectly, and benefits from crimes, whether directly or indirectly, it is a crime syndicate; and if this crime syndicate is controlled by another criminal organisation, which is confirmed by the payment of tax and the existence of a blackmail and extortion racket, it is not sovereign over its own affairs – and cannot be considered to be in actual control of its own affairs.
Let’s consider the political party, which solicits donations, and which does not pay any income tax, as being an organisation. Now if the members of the political party are directed to commit or commission crimes, whether directly or indirectly and if the members of the political party benefit from crimes, whether directly or indirectly, the political party is ipso facto a crime syndicate.
I have to ask, to whom is the African National Congress paying its tax, and to whom is the Economic Freedom Fighters paying its tax? I ask this because it has been proved that the members of the African National Congress and the members of the Economic Freedom Fighters are committing and commissioning crimes, and are benefitting from crimes; such that both the African National Congress and the Economic Freedom Fighters are crime syndicates. The fact that they have to pay their higher-ups raises the question of whether these higher-ups are South African? And if not, whether these higher-ups are being considered as having “captured the state” along with the many accused at the commission of inquiry into state capture?
If this is the case, then neither the African National Congress nor the Economic Freedom Fighters are capable or qualified to act for the government, the state or the republic and must not be allowed to govern, because they are not sovereign over their own affairs and cannot be considered to be in actual control over their own affairs. As a result of which the Democratic Alliance cannot be in coalition with either the African National Congress or the Economic Freedom Fighters, because unfortunately they are criminals.