South Africa P.I.G.: TERRORIST

Showing posts with label TERRORIST. Show all posts

Why, the Beloved Country?

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmX6VTNTKQUbLcq-1ZyDiSXvhAEEGVdQb0KwUOI6_db98c6Wi34wJZlOjX-qPZTOMhVq7rYHo5KCux1HRqxylForMkLJVdbYIltT-fP8AqVhE4eRAczVVp5ZaXG8wzF_jl13NZxkCOg70V/s1600-h/mandela-violence.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5328361654798612402" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmX6VTNTKQUbLcq-1ZyDiSXvhAEEGVdQb0KwUOI6_db98c6Wi34wJZlOjX-qPZTOMhVq7rYHo5KCux1HRqxylForMkLJVdbYIltT-fP8AqVhE4eRAczVVp5ZaXG8wzF_jl13NZxkCOg70V/s400/mandela-violence.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 306px" /></a> By James Kirchick July 29, 2007 In early may, just a month before the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, South African Minister of Intelligence Ronnie Kasrils paid a visit to Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader and erstwhile Palestinian Authority prime minister. Kasrils praised Hamas, which has been designated by the United States as a terrorist organization, and invited Haniyeh to visit South Africa. Several months earlier, Kasrils did similar PR work on behalf of Hezbollah, another U.S.-designated terrorist group. South Africa's chumminess with these two well-known terror organizations may come as a shock to Americans, for whom South Africa probably conjures up fuzzy images of Nelson Mandela, Oprah Winfrey opening up a luxurious school for disadvantaged girls and the heroic triumph of democracy and justice over racism. But it shouldn't. It is part and parcel of a broader and troubling trend in South African foreign policy, one that cozies up to tyrants and is increasingly hostile to the West -- even at the cost of its self-proclaimed principles of human rights and political freedom. <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5NqwoeJypk8obhyCbcPbe1CBIUBfIMiiCYv69rJKTUmsMVEoNWxOwyGJC15UDhlzLYYpHG82L4OkQgbg5R9tJAV6Iox7AktJyTvNPu5fBvwOT9kFoC4xniXBbWrLrMxniT5B81VT43N9n/s1600-h/mandela-castro.jpg"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrMgjhfMe_cyvLyaCShCk5AXJEku_3cRXD915dOvoXZwYQNUA5ZiQI0UT5wkEDEMJjHa7E4bhqG72npzL-ROyt3N5dHLimO5C-C8iRXnWE10glzrTJAU1Z7fY81gmisxvcY-SjUVL3PAB9/s1600-h/mandela-castro.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5328363072610936850" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrMgjhfMe_cyvLyaCShCk5AXJEku_3cRXD915dOvoXZwYQNUA5ZiQI0UT5wkEDEMJjHa7E4bhqG72npzL-ROyt3N5dHLimO5C-C8iRXnWE10glzrTJAU1Z7fY81gmisxvcY-SjUVL3PAB9/s320/mandela-castro.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 320px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 267px" /></a>So why haven't you heard more about it? Why has post-apartheid South Africa's easy relationship with dictatorships been downplayed by the media for years? That oversight seems to reflect a disinclination to report bad news about the African National Congress -- Mandela's party, which led the fight against apartheid -- and especially any news that might be perceived as tarnishing the popular and comforting narrative surrounding the country's triumphant emergence from apartheid. Even as South Africa moves slowly into the anti-Western camp, few outsiders are willing to criticize the ANC, partly out of a misguided sense of solidarity and partly because the party cloaks itself in a shroud of moral absolutism that not so subtly implicates its critics as racists, Western stooges or apologists for apartheid. (To cite only one of many examples, in February, the ANC government attacked the British Broadcasting Corp. for supposedly alleging that "Africans are less than human, or, at least, genetically inferior" in a documentary about out-of-control crime in Johannesburg.) But scurrilous accusations shouldn't be allowed to deter reasonable criticism. And just because the ANC's current leaders were once imprisoned by white racists does not render them immune from censure today. The reality is that, among democratic countries, none has been more supportive of Iran's nuclear ambitions than South Africa. While the United States and its European allies fret over what to do about the nuclear program of this rogue, theocratic state, South Africa's ambassador to the United Nations, displaying remarkable credulity, declared last year: "We will defend the right of countries to have nuclear technology for peaceful uses. For instance, Iran." In March, after assuming a temporary two-year seat on the Security Council, South Africa attempted to gut a resolution sanctioning Iran for defying demands that it freeze uranium enrichment. (Although after the attempt failed, South Africa joined the rest of the council in passing a unanimous resolution.) <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF3bfAe24YfmcQDX87JaxkEfksCDMXQCSP-E4nEmaDzwmgBxiXJltJcCNqvwpd2IVGU-NNrnBS8fnZt9ICBCPX33VCdGKnqI_ikR_LRriFAhQpedxi64JLQcJLlhNLfbYD0D_tkWhFBg_N/s1600-h/MandelaGaddafi.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5328361663372410674" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF3bfAe24YfmcQDX87JaxkEfksCDMXQCSP-E4nEmaDzwmgBxiXJltJcCNqvwpd2IVGU-NNrnBS8fnZt9ICBCPX33VCdGKnqI_ikR_LRriFAhQpedxi64JLQcJLlhNLfbYD0D_tkWhFBg_N/s400/MandelaGaddafi.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 300px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 180px" /></a>South Africa has also wasted its opportunity to stand as a clarion voice for human rights at the U.N. On the Security Council, it has regularly sided with Russia and China -- the two powerful, veto-wielding nations that are consistent obstacles to the defense of liberty. In its first substantive vote on the council, South Africa sided with those two states against a nonbinding resolution condemning the human rights abuses of the Myanmar military junta. Archbishop Desmond Tutu admitted that the vote was "a betrayal of our own noble past." Last week, the South African ambassador to the U.N. warned that any talk of sanctions against Sudan for its actions in Darfur would be "totally unacceptable." How can the ANC, with a straight face, call sanctions against a genocidal regime totally unacceptable when it demanded complete and utter isolation of the white apartheid government in Pretoria? Rounding out South Africa's disgraceful foreign policy is its stance toward Zimbabwe, where President Robert Mugabe is inflicting what some have referred to as a "silent genocide" against his own people through starvation and the manipulation of food aid. Instead of threatening sanctions or even lightly criticizing his regime, South Africa has kept Mugabe afloat through vast economic aid and, in 2005, strengthened an already dubious military alliance between the two governments. To the ANC, Mugabe is a hero who defeated white colonialism, and even though his reign is worse than the white government he overthrew, the ANC puts its stubborn principle of liberation camaraderie ahead of common humanity. <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi2kwaIL_GEZp0vfKwOMdPy9xXC1FU3_tDIMPP3LHIR3HylwBpZiz-mhYPApCL9g05gkNXcFTK9KV1XQLywgSiguHOf2InT1cHnnCfSCVscrp5qtnGwmq0Qt7PTbhPgL5CNGpInClV6a2ay/s1600-h/mandela-Arafat.jpg"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhl6XLBzBAXZ4Ka_kRezkPBnMnPbGgVmqexorvzvpo5WFg9mrwp5h4iktiazae5_w9RfvavhP5JYS3m1feYhoHkmnK3JTb6eAY7VXpIxpWUWDd3u0OnZcAYOVgL7aynO2IXhZUBE565dzZW/s1600-h/mandela-Arafat.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5328363068495367794" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhl6XLBzBAXZ4Ka_kRezkPBnMnPbGgVmqexorvzvpo5WFg9mrwp5h4iktiazae5_w9RfvavhP5JYS3m1feYhoHkmnK3JTb6eAY7VXpIxpWUWDd3u0OnZcAYOVgL7aynO2IXhZUBE565dzZW/s320/mandela-Arafat.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 246px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 320px" /></a>Why would the ANC, which came to power with such worldwide respect and goodwill, be willing to squander its moral authority so easily? A large part of the explanation rests with Mandela himself. Although he is regarded as perhaps the most inspirational figure in the world, the fact is that throughout his life, Mandela has praised an unseemly crew of dictators -- including Fidel Castro ("Long live Comrade Fidel Castro!" he said in 1991), Moammar Kadafi (whom he visited in 1997 in defiance of American objections) and Yasser Arafat ("a comrade in arms") -- for their support of the ANC while it was in exile. And he has remained quiet about Mugabe even though a strong rebuke might influence current African leaders to do the same, and Mandela's reticence is a stain on his otherwise illustrious legacy. The roots of the ANC's willingness to overlook totalitarianism go back to its historic hostility toward the West, which solidified during the apartheid years, when it was the Soviet Union that supplied the ANC and the United States, Britain and Israel were unwilling to cut ties to the white government in Pretoria. Regardless of what happened many years ago, previous policies by the U.S. and other Western countries toward South Africa cannot possibly justify the ANC's current friendliness toward Hamas, Hezbollah, Mugabe, Khartoum and Tehran. Yet the ANC refuses to change. Today, it still governs not by itself but as part of a "tripartite alliance" with the country's trade union coalition and the South African Communist Party. It's no surprise, then, that in a recent weekly letter from South African President Thabo Mbeki recounting an ANC delegation trip to Vietnam, he spoke, even all these years later, of "the U.S. war of aggression against the Vietnamese people" and lauded the communist dictatorship's "struggle for freedom and national independence." Mbeki and his ANC colleagues see South Africa as having inherited an "anti-imperialist" intellectual tradition heroically opposed to the Western democracies. With the fall of apartheid, a window of opportunity emerged in which South Africa could have come to the fore as an unrivaled advocate for human rights around the world. Given its own struggle against injustice, the ANC is right to regard itself as having a special duty to stand with the innocent against authoritarianism, terrorism and privation. Regretfully, it appears that South Africa -- at least under the rule of the massively popular ANC -- has decided to cast its lot with the likes of Robert Mugabe, the mullahs in Iran and the terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah.

Why, the Beloved Country?

By James Kirchick July 29, 2007 In early may, just a month before the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip, South African Minister of Intelligen...

12:05 PM

South Africa a base for terrorist activity

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFBM13qinYPEMeqyV5PNjzAA_bzpm8nkCPoRnjuQJeHt3TIa6h7JU_CnixBnnBBAA5uj80a0gUQamIl8DEoBP-usk6ihbVB2Zk3gNDdd6kH7TzOEuWySdVJyOAPCMTNRvjBVRP6W3v9y8/s1600-h/bombplot-terrorists-uk.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5300904390253794274" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFBM13qinYPEMeqyV5PNjzAA_bzpm8nkCPoRnjuQJeHt3TIa6h7JU_CnixBnnBBAA5uj80a0gUQamIl8DEoBP-usk6ihbVB2Zk3gNDdd6kH7TzOEuWySdVJyOAPCMTNRvjBVRP6W3v9y8/s400/bombplot-terrorists-uk.jpg" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 294px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 201px" /></a>Britain's Home Office is imposing tougher visa requirements on South Africans as it seeks to combat emerging new terror fronts. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith says South Africans will need a visa to enter Britain in the future. They do not require one now. The change follows concern that terrorists are exploiting the availability of stolen or forged South African passports. Security officials say that South Africa also has become a new base for terrorist activity. Prosecutors have alleged that a defendant in the 2006 trans-Atlantic terror plot flew to London from South Africa to lead the final stages of the plan to blow up at least seven airliners in suicide strikes. The Home Office says it will outline visa changes later on Monday Related links:- <a class="twelveblackBold" href="http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2467426,00.html">Govt admits passport problems</a> <a class="feedlink" href="http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=180&art_id=vn20090210161531969C570701">UK cracks down on SA passports</a><a class="feedlink" href="http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=180&art_id=vn20090210104538755C836408">Minister accepts UK visa rule for SA</a>

South Africa a base for terrorist activity

Britain's Home Office is imposing tougher visa requirements on South Africans as it seeks to combat emerging new terror fronts. Home Sec...

11:13 AM

The Obama - Mandela myth

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlaRI3a9TO-2W68SfUR_VewJZoONz80f1aF7HHf-2Uz85PsajUC3Kw-ySPpEPA_XOg7OaUA043sHO47tKD5paH6Tgl90mLIgSUMFZizeR7XtkWtuUVaBO6YbEHbArIPk31QORCtq0rcxI/s1600-h/obama-jesus.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5266783769052395154" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlaRI3a9TO-2W68SfUR_VewJZoONz80f1aF7HHf-2Uz85PsajUC3Kw-ySPpEPA_XOg7OaUA043sHO47tKD5paH6Tgl90mLIgSUMFZizeR7XtkWtuUVaBO6YbEHbArIPk31QORCtq0rcxI/s400/obama-jesus.jpg" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 197px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" /></a><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5266783767596700114" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkUbd5_hFRKHVS7Gd7ITNscMrrTvip4NXbcLH6w4iu9TstcLgQdAL-g8nbVinpWMvv-W-ZwG1HMfk85q-q95JZI74QLA2y2SC8nbp25KHfmujdcyhMJ0tDKTbXYephH1N9uayCHXlsLWo/s400/obama-mahatma.jpg" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 243px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" /> "A student of history cannot help but observe the ominous parallels between Obama and Mandela. Both politicians promised to heal the divisions of racial strife. However, Nelson Mandela did nothing to mend racial discord in South Africa. Instead, Nelson Mandela wholeheartedly embraced policies like Black Economic Empowerment, a perverse South African form of affirmative action in which countless incompetent and often-illiterate blacks displaced competent whites in the civil service for no other reason than their skin color."<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5266784160839731170" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHr88a_ZSQvddhjy_CbWADuMwkus8TECC_E6ZzeVkvx89CElOjpBlO8FzlecqAejCgXVkEJBNXDj__j3yt-_oeVY-NJXjXf6XuWGUo45AitoFVqWMxyaZm3-EqarC8eotKV3yjj0E_X6k/s400/mandela-mahatma.jpg" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 380px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" />"Similarly, Obama has promised to lift the downtrodden and disenfranchised by adopting the same failed Socialist economic policies that Mandela enacted in South Africa. Like Obama, Mandela promised only to tax the "wealthy" and redistribute the wealth to the poor. Further, Mandela adopted a litany of regulations under the auspices of improving conditions for workers, which ultimately made South Africa a much less competitive place in which to do business." <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjQ5-BQ3T0oxjCUcFUWPBPuBzcU-lJQi39NGa6gtfgChs36nzlmU3vFeln9PZXqXP6jr0HSDUX0zcFfE4-DRt8pUun0cplAzeAOFUmMdZzU9fIp_mu_o67nGVtuHKUCaB5WTc_FjGp5jW1/s1600-h/Nelson_close.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5217279737994564290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjQ5-BQ3T0oxjCUcFUWPBPuBzcU-lJQi39NGa6gtfgChs36nzlmU3vFeln9PZXqXP6jr0HSDUX0zcFfE4-DRt8pUun0cplAzeAOFUmMdZzU9fIp_mu_o67nGVtuHKUCaB5WTc_FjGp5jW1/s400/Nelson_close.jpg" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; CURSOR: hand; TEXT-ALIGN: center" /></a> Let us examine Nelson Mandela's achievements, and the events which have occurred in South Africa in the 14 short years since he took power in following the post Apartheid election in 1994, and the new South Africa which he created after coming to power on a surge of worldwide optimism and hope in 1994, when, following the end of Apartheid, he and his followers promised a new dawn for what became termed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Nation">the Rainbow Nation</a>. Today South Africa stands out as one of the most <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRZvtFurvho">dangerous</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_South_Africa">crime ridden</a> nations <a href="http://www.iss.co.za/Pubs/CrimeIndex/01Vol5No1/World.html">on Earth </a>which is not actively at War. In 2001, only seven years after the end of Apartheid, whilst the city of Amsterdam in the Netherlands with 5,6 murders per 100,000 population was declared the "murder capital of Europe", Johannesburg, with 61.2 murders per 100,00 population and remains the <a href="http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/321.htm">world's top murder city</a>. In South Africa as a whole, the murder rate is seven times that of America, in terms of rape the rate is ten times as high and includes the ugly phenomenon of child rape, one of the few activities in which South Africa is now a world leader. If you don't believe me, you can read what Oprah Winfrey has to say about it <a href="http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200604/tows_past_20060420_b.jhtml">here</a>. All other forms of violent crime are out of control, and Johannesburg is among the top world cities for muggings and violent assault, a fact seldom mentioned in connection with the 2010 World Cup which is scheduled to be hosted in South Africa. The rape, murder and violent assault of whites is a daily event, and there is more ... As with the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7388214.stm">Matabeleland massacres</a>, news of which the BBC, together with much of the world media suppressed for twenty years to protect their one time hero, Zimbabwe's <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1709488.stm">Robert Mugabe</a>, another secret genocide is being ignored by the world media, the genocide of white Boer farmers, thousands of whom have been horribly tortured to death in their homes since the end of Apartheid. Anyone who clicks on <a href="http://www.africancrisis.org/Photos45.asp">this link</a> should we warned that it includes some very gruesome images as the savagery of these attacks belie the authorities attempts to dismiss them as nothing more than a "crime wave". Given that it is now all but illegal in South Africa to report the race of either victim or the perpetrator of a crime (unless the perpetrator is white and the victim black) and as modern South Africa's official crime statistics are notoriously massaged, it is impossible to know the exact numbers of farm murders that have taken place. Many reliable sources estimate the figure as close to 3,000, but even if we take the more conservative figure of 1,600 quoted in the <a href="http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2311179,00.html">politically correct South African press</a> (but not quoted at all in ours) this is three times the numbers killed by the South African security forces over a period of 43 years, and which the UN calls a crime against humanity. To put this in perspective, <a href="http://www.southafrica.info/about/people/population.htm">the population of South Africa</a> is 47 million, (13 million less than Britain despite its far greater land mass) of which the 4.3 million whites account for 9.1%, about 1% less than the immigrant population of Britain. Can you imagine the outcry if 1,600 (let alone 3,000) members of a minority community in Britain were tortured to death by the native population?. Yet when the victims are white, there is hardly a peep in the South African press and silence from the international media. Compare this to when a white youth is the killer, such as in the case of Johan Nel, who shot three Africans, a story which became instant <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-508821/Mom-just-snapped-says-white-teen-killed-rifle-rampage-South-African-squatter-camp.html">world wide news</a> with the predictable <a href="http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__national/&articleid=330701&referrer=RSS">screams of racism </a>and machete wielding mobs <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E36-9_o_ENE">baying for his blood</a>. Crime aside, Mandela and his ANC inherited the strongest economy in Africa, indeed, despite economic sanctions, South Africa was still one of the richest world nations, and indeed initially there was a brief post Apartheid boom, resulting from the lifting of sanctions and due to the fact that until affirmative action forced most of the whites out of their jobs to be replaced by under qualified blacks, those who had built South Africa were still in place. However, any optimism was to be short lived. Now, after just 14 years of rule by Mandela and his grim successor Mbeki, corruption is rife, the country is beset with <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6276009.stm">power cuts</a> and the infrastructure is crumbling. The nation's great cities like Durban and Johannesburg, which could once rival the likes of Sydney, Vancouver and San Francisco, had descended in to <a href="http://deathofjohannesburg.blogspot.com/">decaying crime ridden slums</a> within a decade. And in recent months we have seen the so called Rainbow nations <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1020512/Wave-anti-foreigner-violence-sweeps-South-African-townships.html">ultimate humiliation</a>, as xenophobic <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJkISJ5HIIcQ&refer=home">anti immigration violence</a> spreads across the country. (“xenophobic” is what the media call racism when blacks do it) As poverty and unemployment explodes and is exacerbated by the floods of immigrants flooding in to escape the even more advanced Africanisation of the rest of the country, the mobs turn on those they blame for stealing their jobs, their homes, and their women. Thus the cycle turns, and, like watching some barbaric version of “back to the future", on the news we see exactly the same scenes we saw on our televisions twenty years ago, wrecked buildings, burning vehicles, mobs brandishing machetes, axes and knives hacking at everything and everyone which comes within their reach. Most horrific of all, <a href="http://southafrica-pig.blogspot.com/2008/05/necklace-lynching-returns-to-south.html">'Necklace' lynching returns to South Africa</a>, we see the return of that most savage symbol of African brutality, the necklace where, to the cheers of a blood thirsty crowd, some poor trembling soul, with a tire around his neck, is dragged from his home and set alight, exactly as all those other poor souls were set alight throughout the Apartheid years, when we were told it was all the evil white man's fault. <a href="http://southafrica-pig.blogspot.com/2008/05/execution-by-necklacing.html">Execution by Necklacing</a> . As nothing else the return of the necklace exposes the failure of Mandela's revolution, and those who fought for him should weep. Under Apartheid, blacks and whites went to separate hospitals but they received world class health care, whatever their colour, now <a href="http://news.ronatvan.com/2008/05/02/disillusioned-doctor-says-“south-africa-go-to-hell”/">the facilities are collapsing or non-existent</a>. Black children went to different schools than white children, but they received an education, something which is now a privileged luxury. When they grew up, their bosses may have been white, but they had jobs and a living wage, as the recent violence shows us, such security is but a memory for most South Africans. Eighteen years after Nelson and Winnie made their historic walk towards the cameras, and 14 years, since Mandela assumed power on a tide of optimism, a once proud South Africa slides like a crumbling, crime ridden, wreck towards a precipice created through greed, corruption and incompetence. For all his gleaming smiles, grandfatherly hand gestures, and folksy sound bites, Nelson Mandela and the party he leads, have shown the world that, for all its flaws, Apartheid was a more benign system than what replaced it, and that the average South African was immeasurably better off under the hated white rule than they are under the alternative which black rule has created. <img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5266783136184823794" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGXL00wn8efgIwUICq9FD7zH-OdBINdAgHDrdYdfUH88p89avrdlUuZ4gHMCmdKzgd3pQLcyYyZh3UMh7DUYjGka6G9RhoogjUjybqdioakSYkMizEAUTLkED2iuXXrxWbfNTAc-yrjGo/s400/obama-saint.jpg" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 337px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" />Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it is an oft-quoted saying directly applicable to Barack Hussein Obama. On Nov 4, mobs of adoring fans celebrated Obama’s victory, for the mob believes that Obama is a transformative figure that will usher monumental and beneficial change. Soon, however, the jubilant celebrations will end and the mob’s intoxicated infatuation will dissipate when it realizes that Obama’s words about change are mere platitudes devoid of substance, much as the promises of Nelson Mandela, a so-called transformative figure and darling of the liberal media, proved to be fruitless. A student of history cannot help but observe the ominous parallels between Obama and Mandela. Both politicians promised to heal the divisions of racial strife. However, Nelson Mandela did nothing to mend racial discord in South Africa. Instead, Nelson Mandela wholeheartedly embraced policies like Black Economic Empowerment, a perverse South African form of affirmative action in which countless incompetent and often-illiterate blacks displaced competent whites in the civil service for no other reason than their skin color. Consequently, South Africa today has deteriorated from a country that had first world infrastructure under apartheid, into a country with a crumbling and dilapidated infrastructure, as the frequent power blackouts attest. Additionally, Jacob Maroga, a black Mandela crony that became CEO of ESKOM, South Africa’s state owned electricity provider, received an outrageous salary even as the country’s electric grid was collapsing much as Franklin Raines, the black CEO of Fannie Mae and Obama adviser, received an unconscionable compensation package despite being responsible for Fannie Mae’s bankruptcy. Similarly, Obama has promised to lift the downtrodden and disenfranchised by adopting the same failed Socialist economic policies that Mandela enacted in South Africa. Like Obama, Mandela promised only to tax the “wealthy” and redistribute the wealth to the poor. Further, Mandela adopted a litany of regulations under the auspices of improving conditions for workers, which ultimately made South Africa a much less competitive place in which to do business. Ultimately, Mandela’s economic policies were a colossal failure for South Africa. Poverty and unemployment increased dramatically under Mandela’s rule. In 1994, the United Nations annual Human Development Index survey ranked South Africa number ninety-three in terms of human development, which includes GDP, life expectancy, and literacy. By 2007, South Africa had dropped to number one hundred twenty-one. Most worrisome for whites in America is the frightening disconnect between Obama’s public calls for racial reconciliation and his past radical associations. Obama associated himself with his radical mentor Jeremiah Wright, who preached anti-white vitriol from the pulpit for twenty years while Obama sat in the pews. Of course, Obama repudiated Wright’s remarks only after they threatened to derail his political campaign. Similarly, Nelson Mandela often spoke about peace and reconciliation, yet Mandela has shouted anti-white slogans like “Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer” and sung in his native Xhosa about killing whites. <a href="http://southafrica-pig.blogspot.com/2008/04/songs-they-sing_5967.html">THE SONGS THEY SING.</a> The reality is that under Nelson Mandela South Africa spiraled into a wave of uncontrollable crime to where many whites in places like Johannesburg live behind high walls and electric fences. Moreover, since Mandela became President in 1994, South Africa has experienced a wave of black on white violence of genocidal proportions, including the murder of over three thousand white farmers at the hands of black criminals who receive material support from the Communist ANC government. Regrettably, the adulating liberal media fails to report these inconvenient truths about Mandela and Obama because doing so would ruin the myths surrounding these men. Ultimately, whites in America and throughout the world will watch the Obama myth shatter as the United States decline into Third World status accelerates under Obama. Today, the United States faces a significant financial crisis that may degenerate into a Second Great Depression The United States government is on the verge of bankruptcy, the US has an annual one trillion dollar trade deficit, and Medicare and Social Security face an unfunded liability of fifty-three trillion dollars. Obama has no answers to these problems save to continue with the same failed policies implemented by George W. Bush, as evidenced by Obama’s enthusiastic support and vote for the seven hundred billion dollar bailout of Wall Street banks. Recently, we learned that the banks would use bailout money that the government borrowed or stole from taxpayers to pay bonuses to top Wall Street executives. Obama promises change, yet it appears the old adage that the more things change, the more things remain the same holds true yet again.Source <a class="l" href="http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/general-political-discussion/32927-barack-hussein-obama-americas-nelson-mandela.html" onmousedown="return clk(this.href,'','','res','10','&sig2=ezmm4UQ8fNzPlbu5tWiLKg')">Barack Hussein Obama: America's Nelson Mandela?</a><a href="http://sarahmaidofalbion2.blogspot.com/2008/06/mandela-legend-and-legacy.html">Mandela - The Legend and the Legacy</a>

The Obama - Mandela myth

"A student of history cannot help but observe the ominous parallels between Obama and Mandela. Both politicians promised to heal the di...

11:40 AM

The Horrors of the 'New South Africa'

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihwaY_trPJvZ2PNLKS1q07cDU8OrTOxICQCGvJmdZiEedpvoXGKt9TWj19YeDH3-kPuVyCLnU0bRiWDismcrPyANZKlil_Tj9p2N31-fiGdC6H75kqvANvRo8pA15EEZz36908W-rAQbA/s1600-h/ANCnomoreyrs.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5241885699727602930" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihwaY_trPJvZ2PNLKS1q07cDU8OrTOxICQCGvJmdZiEedpvoXGKt9TWj19YeDH3-kPuVyCLnU0bRiWDismcrPyANZKlil_Tj9p2N31-fiGdC6H75kqvANvRo8pA15EEZz36908W-rAQbA/s320/ANCnomoreyrs.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; CURSOR: hand" /></a>John Morse chronicles South Africa's slide to agony The horrors of the 'New South Africa' are perhaps best encapsulated in the grudgingly disclosed facts concerning both the scale and the pattern of rape in the country. Whilst South Africa's ANC rulers bask in the insane adulation of the world's dominant 'liberal' establishment and its contrived 'international opinion', South Africa's women, of all races, endure a reign of criminal terror, violence and cruelty unequalled anywhere else - incidentally exposing yet again the self-contradictory nonsense of liberalism, which simultaneously demands the dethronement of the white race and its values and the protection of women's rights (something which in fact only Whites have properly understood and guaranteed). South Africa is now being styled, not without good reason, the "rape capital of the world'. It is so designated in an article by David Jones in the Daily Mail of Saturday, November 13th 1999. This article backs up the observations of Jones' colleague Ross Benson on the current state of that unhappy land two weeks before in the same paper, which I looked at in last month's Spearhead. It is here, if anywhere, in the matter of rape, that key issues of censorship, racial motivation in the incidence of crime, and what amounts to the ethnic cleansing of the country's white population are most dramatically crystallised and exposed. Brutal assault Jones sets forth the raw facts of South Africa's now endemic problem of rape with uncompromising directness. He describes the brutal assault of a white woman, Mrs. Ame Brown, in her Johannesburg home, in the absence of her husband, who was working a night shift. Mrs. Brown's two young sons were bound at the wrists and forced at gunpoint to watch by the four-strong black gang which had broken into their flat as their mother was violated in turn by each of the gang members. Says Jones: "As the first man made way for the second, he spat out the hate-filled words Ame, an Afrikaner, will never forget: "For years you Boers always took from us. Now we're taking from you." In fact, Ame Brown worked as a care assistant looking after mainly black children at a Johannesburg home for youngsters. But her work on behalf of such an underprivileged, have-not section of the population obviously cut no ice with her assailants. Her race was all that mattered as far as they were concerned. "Afterwards," continues Jones... "... the attackers remained in the family's home, a second-floor apartment, for almost two hours before brazenly carrying away everything they could find - from furniture right down to the boys' favourite Dinky toys - through the front door and into a waiting car." The attack had what Jones describes as "its desired effect." The Browns left the city, with its "gratuitously violent gangs and simmering undercurrent of residual racial resentment." But their move to a rural location did not help them escape their nightmares. Their having been, in effect, thus 'ethnically cleansed' from Johannesburg, the family's wounds, both psychological and physical, persisted and festered. The youngest son, nine-year-old Justin, gave vent to what must have been suppressed rage of staggering ferocity and bitterness in one so young. In an attack on what was apparently the closest friend he had in his new home, a black boy of his own age, he tied the latter to a tree with his shoelaces, in the same way as he had been bound by his mother's rapists back in Johannesburg and using exactly the same type of knots. He then beat the boy to pulp with a length of plastic hose. Questioned by his parents, Justin, whom Jones describes as a "usually affable and impeccably mannered" little lad, replied, according to his mother, that "black people had come into our home and done horrible things to us, so why shouldn't he do the same to them?" Meanwhile, in the aftermath of her own savage attack, Ame Brown herself has been diagnosed as HIV-positive. So much for the peace, equality and harmony that the abdication of South Africa's Whites was supposed to inaugurate, and the 'reconciliation' (a weasel word that we shall be looking at later in its South African context) which we are endlessly assured Nelson Mandela was bringing about. The end of apartheid and European rule - as was widely predicted by any observer with half an ounce of sense decades before - seems only to have brought on a new, indeed an unparalleled - era of intensifying racial vendettas. This incident, which is far from isolated, perhaps best epitomises the country's reality. Effort to hide the truth Completing the picture, Jones refers to the censorship which seems to constitute the principal response of the new rulers to the situation:- "In the new South Africa, where the very mention of the words colour and race is now deeply taboo, I will no doubt be pilloried for relating this story, just as my colleague Ross Benson was vilified by sections of the press here two weeks ago for his painfully accurate article about the demise of post-apartheid South Africa. "Instead of rounding on 'racist' outsiders and attempting to draw a veil over the underlying causes of the rape epidemic sweeping through this country with the speed and devastation of a veldt fire, the media and the ANC government would be better advised to address the facts." Rape in South Africa has now attained such proportions, says Jones, that... "... thousands of women are expected to sign up for the first rape insurance policy. For £1.10 a month, it entitles victims to free anti-AIDS drugs, the morning-after pill, trauma counselling, alternative therapies and a full range of medical tests." In discussing the inadequacy of official measures to counter the rape onslaught, Jones focuses not just on the scale of what is happening but on the sheer vicious sadism of the attacks to which South Africa's female population is being subjected. With grim drama, he comments:- "In South Africa today, we are rarely just talking about 'straightforward' rape, if that is not too trite and unfeeling a phrase, but increasingly brutal and despicable rape. "Rape by bottles and sticks and knives; rape by gangs who behave like packs of wild animals, biting and gouging their victims, with the intention of disfiguring them physically as well as mentally." He details a few instances:- "Among the many harrowing cases I uncovered here, one black woman had her lips scorched off with a red-hot iron after her attack; another (black) woman had been deeply bitten all over her face and body. "A young (white) bank clerk was pushed into a clay-filled building-site pit and raped just as she arrived for work in busy Central Johannesburg. Both her legs were broken, and afterwards her demented attacker abused her horribly with fistfuls of clay. "Noeleen Naude, a 23-year-old Afrikaner, was caddying for her boyfriend and his father on a suburban golf course one warm Sunday afternoon when two black men, one with a gun, sprang out from behind a small hillock halfway round the course. "After robbing the golfing party of their clubs and jewellery, the men took Noeleen away and raped her in turn, telling her: 'We are black men and you are a white woman. We can do exactly as we want.'" In the latter case, the culprits were caught and jailed for 30 years each. But this is unlikely to act as much of a deterrent. Despite such attacks as those on Miss Naude being "so commonplace they rarely rate more than a few lines in local newspapers," only about one rapist in 20 risks going to prison, given present conviction rates, in contrast to three out of four in Britain, where we have long considered the security of our own womenfolk to be far from satisfactory. A part of this, says Jones, is "thanks to appallingly shoddy detective work by male-chauvinist (sic), ill-trained, insensitive and under-manned police forces (some of whom have raped the victims they were interviewing)." Jones does not venture any comment on how far this state of affairs is due to the ravages of 'affirmative-action' recruiting in order to achieve the racial make-over of South Africa's police which is ANC policy, nor how far the "inefficiency of the prosecution service," which he also blames for the five per cent conviction rate, may be due to the same factor. Perhaps this may be assumed. But Jones does paint an appalling picture of official indifference - and worse. Records ignore race factor Speaking of rape and other crimes, Jones, rather absurdly, describes it as "in some ways laudable" that official police report forms no longer detail the race of criminals and their victims, as they used to under apartheid, "given that reconciliation is the name of the game in modern South Africa." Apart from the fact that, in elementary common sense, there is, and can be, no 'reconciliation' as most people would understand it, where members of one group are deliberately committing violent crimes against members of another on an escalating scale, how can any such outbreak even be understood, let alone controlled, without an accurate 'epidemiology' of such crime? In the circumstances of South Africa, how can there be such a scientific criminology without accurate recording and analysis of the race factor? In the mouths of the ANC régime and its supporters, the term 'reconciliation' would appear to have a special meaning. It seems to indicate yet another one-way street in which Whites give and non-Whites take, the former accepting whatever the latter dish out without protest or resistance. 'Reconciliation' appears to mean simply that South Africa's Whites are expected passively to 'reconcile' themselves to whatever conditions non-Whites choose to impose on them. This nonsense aside, Jones does manage to get something of substance out of the government's 'Secretariat for Safety and Security'. Whilst the majority of rape victims are black women - as is to be expected in a population in which a mere 14 per cent are white - white women are over-represented. An official of the Secretariat commented: "There is a higher percentage of white women raped than their share of the population." Adds Jones: "This might, or might not, explain why the Mbeki government no longer requires the race section of the crime report forms to be completed." This is of a piece with the observation, made in some sections of the media, that South Africa's Whites in general have been disproportionately on the receiving end of the tidal wave of violent crime. For instance, of all occupational groups, it is reckoned that white farmers are most at risk of being murdered. Their casualties have been put in the hundreds since the demise of white rule. Murder in the countryside has gone hand in hand with large-scale encroachment of squatters on the country's farms, and an evident disposition to drive white folk from the land which they and their ancestors first brought under the plough and, over many generations, made fertile and productive. Ethnic cleansing Rape and murder are the crimes normally associated with ethnic cleansing, and most quintessentially representative of it in most people's minds. Judging by their combination with racial motivation in South Africa, there are few other places on earth suffering such a plague of this evil. In the Balkans, the occurrence of ethnic cleansing was held to justify prodigiously expensive international military intervention - at least where Serbs and non-Moslems were held to be guilty of it. But in South Africa it is alive, well and internationally ignored. But here, of course, the victims are of culturally European, Christian background - a no-no in the New World Order to which South Africa has now been annexed. Whites are being driven from pillar to post, and finally, in many cases, out of their land of birth altogether, by a combination of criminal, not to say terrorist, violence and 'affirmative action designed to strip them of jobs, incomes and status - only the racial criterion applying for purposes of recruitment and promotion, regardless of character or competence. So why the lack of international indignation, let alone action, that we have seen against the Serbs? The truth is that our ruling liberal establishment, dominant now throughout the West and hubristically inclined to impose its imperium on the entire globe, has made a huge emotional and political investment in the new multiracial South Africa. This has lasted two generations, almost since the end of the Second World War. The promoters of the process cannot allow it to be thought that, now they have got their way, there can be anything wrong with the outcome. Facts must not be allowed to interfere with ideology. No matter what actually happens, the typically lunatic liberal delusion of 'multiracial democracy' in South Africa must at all costs be preserved inviolate, and maintained in its status as one of the self-justifying dogmas of our time. Challenge to globalists Notwithstanding occasional exposures like those of Messrs. Benson and Jones, there is today a virtual conspiracy of silence in protection of the new order in South Africa. This is consistent with the hysterical past attacks on the old order there. South Africa always represented a special challenge to the protagonists of liberal globalism, which envisaged as its cornerstone the merging of all racial and ethnic groups - with Whites as the main sacrificial victims - into a homogenised ethnic stew. Especially after the victory of the Afrikaner Nationalists, with their policy of white exclusiveness and dominance, in South Africa's 1948 general election, that country became, in liberal eyes, an unseemly warp in the pattern that international liberaldom had by now marked out for the future. More than that, Nationalist South Africa was a danger. Partly this was because it was ruled by some of the most vigorous of the white peoples - Boer, Briton, German and other, people well able, other things being equal, to hold their own in a battle for their independence from the new liberal imperium. Partly it was due to South Africa's immense mineral wealth, which made it difficult for economic pressure to be put upon her. Last but not least, the country's new government was developing a racial programme which hinted at an alternative vision of world order, and one that could catch on elsewhere. It was certainly the hope of South Africa's greatest post-war leader, Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, that this would be so. He frequently commented on the need for the countries of the West to climb out of their liberal 'sick-bed', in which he made it plain that, if he had anything to do with it, South Africa would never join them. Verwoerd argued for apartheid - or 'separate development' - with great moral fervour. Whilst his priority was his own Afrikaner people, whom he saw as the standard-bearers of his country's European identity, at the root of his outlook was the perception that South Africa's multifarious peoples could only live in harmony if they lived apart. In view of what is happening now, who can say that he was wrong? Far from wishing to oppress the non-white peoples - whose plurality apartheid, in his understanding of it, fully recognised - Verwoerd aimed to set up arrangements whereby each of them could be provided with a separate territory (a homeland or 'Bantustan') within which it could live as it saw fit and develop at the pace it preferred. The project foresaw ethnic self-determination, leading eventually to independent statehood, in a way that would liberate South Africa's Blacks as far as possible from direct political domination by the country's Whites, albeit within an overall framework of white leadership - bearing in mind that Whites were the strongest group and most of South Africa's land surface would remain theirs - where internal peace would be facilitated by the fact that the possibility for the different racial groups to tread on each other's toes would be minimised. At the end of it, whatever limitations the scheme might have laboured under, South African Blacks could have looked forward to ethnic sovereignty at least as substantial as that of most of 'independent' sub-Saharan Black Africa, and states probably more viable economically, whilst possibly avoiding the kind of tribal domination that prevailed elsewhere. The word never became flesh. Verwoerd was assassinated, and his successors (some of whom may have been implicated in his murder) revamped the National Party, abandoned much of its vision, and ended up appeasing and seeking accommodation with world liberalism. The rest is history. Was the old SA so bad? So was the old South Africa really the unjust, tyrannical, hate-ridden monstrosity it has been portrayed as by its enemies? When I first arrived there nearly 27 years ago, the country certainly presented a very different aspect to that of today, as described by Messrs. Benson and Jones. Despite the big numerical majority of non-Whites on the streets of Johannesburg, it was the ethos of the Whites that prevailed. The 'feel' of the country was European. Nobody arriving from any western land of origin had the sense of moving out of his own culture and civilisation. The atmosphere was one in which the work ethic, as understood in Europe and the West, prevailed. Economic life and public administration were expected to be efficient and honest in the European sense, and generally were. Above all, law, order and public safety were enforced and preserved throughout most of the country. In areas designated 'white' under the provisions of the Group Areas Act - a key piece of apartheid legislation - peace and quiet, sometimes to the point of paralysing boredom, were the norm. Police officers were neither frequently seen nor frequently needed. Amongst the black population, largely residentially contained within its own rural reserves and urban townships, it was only in the latter that crime attained serious proportions. It consisted almost entirely of black criminals preying on their black neighbours; in other words, it was a phenomenon mainly internal to black communities. It appears from what Benson and Jones say that this is one feature of the old South Africa that has been carried over into the new. In most of the countryside, law and order very rarely, if ever, appeared a major problem. I never experienced any sense of danger when hitch-hiking, as I frequently did, entirely on my own in the furthest reaches of remote Zululand, the Transkei or other native 'homelands', or in the wilds of East or West Griqualand, mainly coloured districts within Cape Province. None of this is to say that the old South Africa was a paradise. It was no such thing. Inter-group tensions and animosities were widespread, often being sharper between different non-white groups than between any of them and their white rulers. Of course, Blacks often complained against white rule, especially any aspects of it that might have borne down personally on the complainant. But there was enough realism amongst the majority to appreciate, not only that the Whites could not forcibly be overthrown, but also that if they ever were non-Whites would be immeasurably worse off. Natural respect for power Although never loved, the White Man was by and large respected - at least while he showed a determination to maintain his power. On the African Continent, whether between White and Black or among Blacks themselves, that is the sole criterion by which the legitimacy of government is judged. Africans are not interested in the finer points of their rulers' character; they want to know only whether those who govern them are strong or weak. As South Africa's Whites are now discovering, having voluntarily yielded up power against all the wisdom of their ancestors, woe betide the weak! A part of the former strength of the Whites was expressed in the economic stability of the country. From the 1950s to the 1970s, it was clear to most people of all races that it was overwhelmingly the productivity and enterprise of the European that was creating a growing national income, in which all population groups shared, however unequally. The whole man-made structure of the country - farms, mines, cities, factories, advanced communications, etc. - was the product of the genius and hard work of Boers, Britons and other Europeans. European imperialism, whether of Briton or Boer, inevitably produced some brutalities towards the natives. But such is imperialism and such, above all, is Africa, where things have always been thus from long before any European was seen or heard of there. That is the true background against which the alleged 'tyranny' of the old South Africa must be judged. Two things must be said for the European settlers: firstly, they were great practical problem-solvers, as revealed in their physical development of South Africa; secondly, they, and they alone, successfully imposed peace and order on the situation that they found. Now the Europeans have resigned their position of supremacy. Is anyone the better for it? In a country where unemployment now stands at 40 per cent, and the new masters' public actions are dominated by an agenda of racial revenge, rather than anything of the least practical use to their own people, what is likely to happen to the once-impressive economic infrastructure that guaranteed to most inhabitants at least a chance of work and wealth. When 'affirmative action', crime and ethnic cleansing have made an end of the people who built practically everything, what then? One thing is for sure. With the arrival in power of the ANC, the problem-solvers have been replaced by problem-creators. The ANC government, however much Tony Blair and Robin Cook may fawn upon it, is a corrupt gravy train made up of incompetents, crooks and parasites on the take. So what does this say about the whole 50-year anti-apartheid project, and about our own politicians who promoted it all this time? The future Whither then South Africa? Back to apartheid? At the moment this is just not practicable. The ANC's grip is too tight. Its leading lights and hangers-on, living the life of Reilly on the proceeds of theft from the Whites, are too tightly bound into their comradeship of corruption. For the foreseeable future, the ANC is likely to prevail in the misgovernment of South Africa, much as the communist parties of the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia prevailed over their own respective ethnic hotch-potches - the lure of the gravy train and the fear of counter-revolution causing their apparatchiks to hang together for dear life. Nevertheless, apartheid remains the only specific for South Africa's historical predicament to show any track record of success. If it were ever to be restored, this might happen by violence or consent. The ideal, of course, would be the latter, whereby the substance of apartheid's original constructive intent was re-established through concurrence among South Africa's separate peoples, once it was agreed that the continued reign of the ANC was intolerable for all. Historically, salvation for South Africa has always originated from among the country's creators, the Whites, and particularly the Boers. Today the latter appear broken and demoralised. If they were ever to revive their fortunes, and thereby those of South Africa as a whole, they would not be starting, as in 1948, from a position of strength, but from one of considerable weakness. To pull it off, they would have to discover in their midst some leader not only of inspirational courage, self-discipline and judgement, but of unprecedented political genius. Will such a figure emerge? South Africa had better hope so.

The Horrors of the 'New South Africa'

John Morse chronicles South Africa's slide to agony The horrors of the 'New South Africa' are perhaps best encapsulated in the g...

8:32 AM

South Africa P.I.G.

Why, the Beloved Country?

South Africa a base for terrorist activity

The Obama - Mandela myth

The Horrors of the 'New South Africa'

Popular Posts

Blog Archive