Friday, December 23, 2005

Farm attacks: Farmer executed

Roedtan - A local farmer was forced to kneel next to his bakkie at the gate to the farm Doringfontein before being shot in the forehead. Hennie van Vuuren, 53, had minutes before found his wife Celia's blood-spattered body when he arrived at the farm after having dropped off workers. Celia, 53, had been shot dead in the garden in front of their house at about 18:0 on Wednesday. The attackers did not take anything. TLU spokesperson Dries Joubert described the attacks on farmers as "low-intensity war". "The fact that nothing was stolen, proves once and for all that the police are wrong in claiming that the motive is crime." The chair of the Roedtan South farmers' association, Hendrik Botha, said he and Van Vuuren had been at an auction and year-end function earlier in the day. According to Botha, Van Vuuren had tried to flee the attackers after he'd found Celia's body. "But they shot at him and hit him in the leg through the bakkie's door," Botha said. It is not clear what happened afterwards, but it is believed that the farm's electronic gate opened too slowly for Botha to escape the killers. "Hennie was pulled from the bakkie at the gate, forced to stand on his knees - in a similar manner to being executed - and shot in the forehead. "We found his body next to the bakkie," a shocked Botha said. "This was no farm robbery," said Botha. "It was murder, plain and simple." Agri SA's Kiewiet Ferreira said given attacks on farmers, it was becoming increasingly difficult to convince them not to take the law into their own hands.

Source: News24.Com URL:,,2-7-1442_1851610,00.html

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Robbers are winning

Organised gangs of robbers had a lucrative time the past months with their cash in-transit robberies and the robbing of shopping complexes. During November eighteen malls were robbed while ten in-transit robberies took place. These were only the reported robberies. The robberies were so well planned that the question again arises if the defence force is not involved. The fact that R4 rifles were used in some of the attacks increases the possibility of armed forces being involved. Political parties said outright that members of the previous armed forces of the ANC and APLA are involved.

Meanwhile the police said it is not their task to protect malls and money-carrying vehicles in transit. The official opposition suggested that the police force re-employ previous expert police officers. The party's spokesperson, John Moodey, said only experienced officers can control the upsurge in robberies. Many experienced white officers were dismissed or left the service out of frustration. The new generation of police officers are not experienced enough and their training is questionable. Apparently the police force still rids itself of experienced whites. The Appeals Court even criticised the police commissioner for upgrading a post and then getting rid of the person who holds the post. Today we reap the bitter fruits of this discrimination. Management is poor and the police force cannot control the upsurge in crime. The infrastructure is crumbling and many officers are not crime-orientated. They attach more value to the painting of Old Republican Flags in the Northern province than persecuting murder gangs.

Saturday, December 17, 2005

16 December - The covenant of Bloedrivier.

"It is the evening of 9 December 1838. The recently elected commandant general Andries Pretorius, with 464 Voortrekkers, some servants and wagon drivers, three British settlers and some 120 “tame” Zulus draw a laager at Wasbank, near the current Dundee. They are on their way to uMgundgundlovu, capital of the Zulu king, Dingane to try and break the might of the Zulu force that has caused them so much heartache and sorrow. First the Voortrekker leader Piet Retief and his men were murdered after land negotiations on 6 February 1838 and then hundreds of Voortrekkers and their servants died at Blaaukrantz and Weenen, killed by the Zulu force.

Sarel Cilliers takes the lead and the handful of men solemnly promise that:

If He would protect them and deliver the enemy into their hands, they would build a House in His name and that the day of their triumph would be known unto the last generation because it would be commemorated in His honour;

What followed is familiar to most of the older generation of Afrikaners. The battle of Blood River that took place on the banks of the Ncome River on 16 December 1838, was, according to most historians a turning point in the history of South Africa. The Voortrekkers in their ‘fortified’ laager and with their front-loading rifles and 2-3 cannons repelled wave after wave of Zulus whose force consisted of between 9 000 and 12 000 men. By 11:00 that morning the Zulu forces began to pull back. By this time they had already lost 3 000 warriors on the battlefield while only three Voortrekkers were wounded.

It was an absolute miracle to the Voortrekkers – an act of mercy from God and even though the Zulus were not totally defeated, their victory initiated the way to an independent state for the Voortrekkers in Natal.

Throughout the years historians and others have analysed, criticized and looked at the occurrences of 16 December from different perspectives. Today, while our country’s history is being “re-written”, Afrikaner historians are blamed of distorting and fabricating the facts. Despite this, very little in Afrikaner history draws as much attention as the Covenant of Blood River.

For more information about the Blood River site, please contact Cecilia Kruger or Estelle Pretorius at the Voortreker Monument (012) 326 6770.
For more information about the commemoration of the Covenant on site or at the Voortrekker Monument please contact Deon van Onselen at the same number"

Covenant of Blood River

Even to this day, Afrikaners (also known as Boers, who are decendants of the old Voortrekkers) commemorate this day, viewing the 'ritual' not only as a fulfillment of their duties, but also as a renewal of the covenant of 1838. History repeats itself, as the Boers are in the same situation they were in during 1838. The gruesome torture, rape and murder of Boer men, women and babies are commonplace in South Africa. Violent crimes are not only a plague in the country, but also in metropolitan areas. South Africa is ranked as the country with both the highest murder rate and rape rate in the world. The Boers are indeed in the same position they were in in 1838.

The SA government, an (ANC) autocratic government who are the allies of Robert Mugabe (Iran, China, India, Russia and also Zimbabwe's Zanu-PF, who are notorious for land evictions and other human right infringements), are currently attempting to "erase" the day of the covenant by euphemistically renaming it to "Reconciliation Day". (Note the reporter's biased reporting).

Desperate attempts of the South African government to try and discredit the covenant of Bloedrivier should be shunned and disregarded with the utmost of discontent that their fallacies deserve.

To all the people of South Africa (Especially the Boers):
May you find the freedom that you have longed for for so long!


Friday, December 02, 2005


As shown in this cartoon, SA is the country that has been hit the worst by the AIDS epidemic. It is, however, not a random stroke of bad luck but rather a deadly combination of ignorance, incompetence and bad governance (by the ANC) that lead to this disaster.

What is more disturbing, as mentioned in one of our earlier articles, is that the SA government is actually telling AIDS sufferers that ARV's is overkill and that they should rather use vitamins! The SA minister of health, Manto Tshabalala Msimang even proclaimed that AIDS can be cured by using garlic. Read "Do the ANC benefit if AIDS-sufferers die sooner"?.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

SA 'accepting Aids as reality'

Nearly half of South Africans aged 15 and older find nothing wrong with marrying an HIV-positive person and would not have a problem having sex with them.

This is according to the Nelson Mandela Foundation-commissioned Second South African HIV Prevalence, Incidence, Behaviour and Communications Survey released on Wednesday, on the eve of World Aids Day.

"These results suggest that South Africans are accepting HIV/Aids as a reality in South Africa and that stigmatisation in society is becoming less of a factor, especially in urban areas," said principal investigator Olive Shisana, CEO of the Human Sciences Research Council.

The study found that 90,7% of South Africans polled were willing to care for HIV-positive family members and that 79,8% were against the exclusion of HIV-positive children from schools.

Although South Africans acknowledged the government's efforts in dealing with HIV/Aids, a significant number were unhappy with the financial and human resources allocated to dealing with the scourge.

However, only 47% of male, employed respondents and 44,2% of working women -- 50% of them blacks and coloureds, and less than 40% whites and Indians -- were willing to pay an Aids tax.

A "worrying trend" is confusion among older South Africans about whether HIV cause Aids, the effectiveness of condoms in curbing infections, and the purpose of anti-retroviral (ARV) treatment.

It is unlikely this could be attributed to the debate over the effectiveness of ARVs between vitamin salesman Matthias Rath and the Treatment Action Campaign, said Warren Parker, of the Centre for Aids Development Research and Evaluation. While this could be a contributing factor, the cause is more likely "general misunderstanding", he said.

The study found that 66% of those interviewed did not think they were at risk of being infected -- because they were faithful to one partner, trusted their partner and always used condoms.

However, some of these respondents were later found to be HIV-positive in tests conducted as part of the study.

"Put it in another way, over two million people who are HIV-positive in South Africa do not think they are at risk. This means they may be unaware of their risk of potentially infecting others," said Shisana. -- Sapa

Monday, November 21, 2005

DA opposes air-force training deal with Zim

21 November 2005 02:49

The opposition Democratic Alliance party has urged the government not to use Zimbabwean flying instructors to train South African Air Force (SAAF) pilots.

"The proposal is severely flawed on a number of accounts," said DA defence spokesperson Rafeek Shah, questioning if Zimbabwean Air Force instructors have sufficient knowledge of, or experience with, SAAF aircraft.

"They, for example, have no experience of our most basic trainer aircraft, the Astra Pilatus," he said in a statement released on Monday.

His concerns followed a military agreement signed last Thursday between Zimbabwe and South Africa under which Zimbabwean flying instructors will train SAAF pilots.

"Given that there are not even enough trained South African personnel to train pilots on the forthcoming Hawks, it is highly unlikely that the Zimbabweans will be able to offer training assistance on these aircraft, let alone the even more sophisticated Gripen fighter jets," Shah said.

He said these fighters, part of the country's controversial arms-acquisition process, have highly sophisticated avionics, "much more advanced than anything the Zimbabweans would have been exposed to".

He said there is every chance that as a result of this agreement, the South African taxpayer will have to pay for Zimbabwean pilots to be trained on the new jets in order to train South African cadets.

"It is morally bankrupt for South Africa to recruit instructors from the Zimbabwean military given its appalling human rights record. It is truly bizarre that instead of sending a clear message that human rights abuses will not be tolerated, we have chosen to enter even closer cooperation," he said. -- Sapa

Friday, November 18, 2005

SA to work with Zimbabwe's spies

South African and Zimbabwe have signed an agreement to increase co-operation on defence and security matters.

The two neighbours undertook to share security information and to co-operate in enforcing immigration laws.

After the signing, South Africa's intelligence minister scolded a journalist who raised questions about Zimbabwe's record on human rights.

Details of the deal were not released but Zimbabwe's secret police is accused of torturing opposition activists.

South Africa is a key player in attempts to negotiate an end to Zimbabwe's political crisis.

President Thabo Mbeki has been criticised at home and abroad for not putting more pressure on President Robert Mugabe's government to end abuses.

Zimbabwe prayers

"This week's historic meeting further consolidates a long-standing socio-political and economic relationship between our two countries," South African Intelligence Minister Ronnie Kasrils said at the signing of the agreement in Cape Town on Thursday.

After the signing, a journalist asked Mr Kasrils how South Africa, with a "good human rights track record", could sign agreements with Zimbabwe, which had a "poor human rights record".

Mr Kasrils apologised to his Zimbabwean counterpart, Didymus Mutasa, for the question.

"We have very strong ties with our neighbour and we are indebted to our neighbour for achieving freedom and liberty," Mr Kasrils said.

Mr Mutasa suggested praying for the journalist.

"Lord forgive him for he does not know what he is saying," Mr Mutasa said.

Numerous activists from the opposition Movement for Democratic Change have said they have been detained and assaulted by Zimbabwe's secret police - the Central Intelligence Organisation.

Thursday's agreement also provides for South Africa pilots and instructors to be trained in Zimbabwe.


Also on Thursday, Zimbabwean and international human rights groups called on the African Union to speak out against human rights abuses in Zimbabwe.

"The silence of African leaders on Zimbabwe represents a failure to honour their commitments to the human rights of ordinary Africans," said a statement from a human rights coalition that includes Amnesty International, Zimbabwe's Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions and Zimbabwe Lawyers or Human Rights.

"Hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans have seen their homes demolished. Now desperate, displaced and homeless people are being denied the aid they so badly need - and forced evictions and demolitions continue to take place."

The UN says 700,000 people were affected by a Zimbabwe government clampdown on illegal housing and trading earlier this year.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2005/11/18 11:19:11 GMT


*This is the extent of South Africa's unholy alliance with Robert Mugabe's terror-regime.

Sunday, October 30, 2005

Tensions brewing over "Taal".

Multiple student protests could be seen on south african university campuses during the past few weeks. The cause of these protests are the result of the ANC government's ridiculous policy of anglicization, which have led to several Afrikaans universities undemocratically being forced to convert to English-medium. Some of the universities that are being forced to convert is TUKS (Pretoria), KOVSIES (Bloemfontein) and Stellenbosch.

The ANC and it's pet newspaper firm, NASPERS, claims that this is being done to promote "multilingualism", to provide for a "broader array of cultures, languages and races" and because "handbooks are only in available in English". All of these arguments, however, is nothing but ill-conceived excuses for a campaign of blatant discrimination against the already marginilised Afrikaners. For the ANC, this is one of the final steps in a campaign designed to annihilate the Afrikaners.

According to a 2001 census, Afrikaans is the third-most spoken language in South Africa, whereas English only slurs in at sixth place. Other languages, such as Sotho and Zulu, do not currently have the ability to be used as academic languages. This leaves Afrikaans and English as the only two academic languages. Afrikaans is also widely spoken and understood by groups other than the Afrikaners: most of the indigenous blacks are able to speak and understand Afrikaans better than English. If the ANC's real intentions were to "provide for a broader array of cultures", then surely they would have been promoting Afrikaans as language of instruction as opposed to their current course of action.

Furthermore, it is a well documented fact that mother-tongue education is much more effective than that of a second language. This was also evident in the years preceding the 1994 elections: Afrikaans universities were highly acclaimed research institutions and delivered some of the world's finest professionals, whether handbooks were in English or not.

Thus, it is clear that the mentioned ANC-excuses are invalid and do not bear any truth.

The ANC and their lapdogs are not interested in "multilingualism", but rather in "monolingualism" or anglicization. This is done with the purely political motive of marginalising the already oppressed Afrikaners and to weaken their collective intellectual capital. The English-Only movement serves to justify racist and anti-Afrikaner biases under the cover of "transformation". (PASMA, a black student movement affiliated with the ANC and the SACP, recently threatened to "kill all whites" and "clash with Afrikaner students". They also chanted slogans such as "One language of instruction - English" during an illegal riot on the TUKS campus.)

Rightfully, the Afrikaners have finally liberated and are now fighting the imperialist ANC (for whom these universities is just another beacon of Afrikanerdom to be conquered), by taking to the streets in protest against the ANC's oppressive regime. Even Afrikaners who used to be ardent ANC-supporters, such as Breyten Breytenbach and Max du Preez, have now turned their backs on the ANC, signing a petition against the anglicization of these universities. It is becoming evident that Afrikaners are losing patience with the ANC... that tensions are cooking close to boiling point.

*"Taal" is the Afrikaans word for "language". Afrikaners passionately refer to the "taalstryd" or the "language struggle".

Friday, October 14, 2005

The slaughter continues...

1800 South African farmers killed by blacks since 1994.
Soon, it will be 2000
… If nothing is done.

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

No cut-off is likely for undisguised racial discrimination

The new Broad-Based Economic Empowerment Act sets up a Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council funded by the DTI and chaired by President Mbeki, to advise government and assess progress with transformation charters and other measures. The Act moves away from 'historically disadvantaged' to 'black', defined as African, Coloured and Indian. This excludes White women and could lead to exclusion of other categories in future. Free Market Foundation's Leon Louw says the current deluge of new controls and stifling regulations completely smothers any prospect of broad-based economic empowerment. The Freedom Front Plus wants government to announce a cut-off for the undisguised racial discrimination of affirmative action. Labour department's Snuki Zikalala responds that the process will only be reviewed once government is satisfied that all racial imbalances have been addressed and SA is fully transformed. (Cit 7.1, BT 11.1)

Friday, August 12, 2005

Boer genocide...

by the hands of Britain, 105 years ago:



from the headquarters of


Tel + 27 12 804 8031, Fax + 27 12 804 2014

12 August 2005


The newspaper headline “Land Shock” encapsulated in essence the cumulative hot air, socialistic demands and racist resentment which characterized the land reform summit held over five days at taxpayers’ expense during the last week in July this year. The results of the summit were pre-ordained – we knew the Minister of Land Affairs would ruminate on abolishing the “willing seller, willing buyer” principle - the linchpin of rural property security in South Africa, that the chattering land-grab classes would reiterate their ideological claims, and that the commercial farming sector would present logical and reasoned arguments to a summit which was clearly not listening.

The conference can be seen as a prelude to more and more assaults on the commercial farming sector in South Africa. The reiteration of clauses in the communist-contrived “Freedom Charter” of fifty years ago (the land shall belong to those who work it) was given prominent play, and it is clear the summit was to prepare South Africa for a Zimbabwe-style grab of productive commercial farms in the not too distant future.

The most ominous revelation was the SA State President Thabo Mbeki’s statement - reported on the BBC’s website (but not widely disseminated in South Africa) - that the Zimbabwe land grab was delayed “so that negotiations for South Africa’s liberation would succeed”. Mbeki said that when South Africa was negotiating its ‘transition to democracy’ (at the time Zimbabwe started its land grab), the Organisation of African Unity had asked Zimbabwe to stop the programme as it would ‘frighten the apartheid government in South Africa’.

In essence, Mbeki is telling us that the wholesale land theft which was to proceed in Zimbabwe was put on the back burner so as not to frighten South Africa’s whites who were in the process of surrendering their sovereignty on the false premise of power-sharing. This masterful sleight of hand worked, of course, and it is evidence of Mbeki’s supreme self-assurance that he would tell the world of this now, when his own government is relentlessly harassing and hobbling South Africa’s commercial farming sector.

The summit revealed the stark chasm which exists between the realists and the ideologues in South Africa, the last country in Africa to produce enough food for its own people. Given the vivid examples of Africa’s inability to feed itself - Zimbabwe, Niger, Chad, Sudan, Angola, Mozambique are but a few - one would think that those governing South Africa would be more sober in their land reform goals. But logic in the Western sense plays no part in the thinking of a government which is prepared to hand over R6 billion of taxpayers’ money to the heinous tyrant now destroying his country, Zimbabwe. This lack of logic could be seen in the ludicrous demands, vicious accusations and lying propaganda which emanated from the land summit.


To listen to some of the delegates, it would seem the whole purpose of the summit was not only to destroy South African commercial agriculture, but to insult white farmers as well. The vitriol with which some delegates hurled their insolence was shocking, and this racial resentment seems to be very close to the surface in modern-day South Africa. Farmers were verbally harangued by Blade Nzimande of the SA Communist Party. He said farm workers were killed by regularly being run over by tractors, and that farmers killed people by throwing them to lions. (A well known case concerning a man eaten by lions involved a white building contractor and two of his black assistants!).

So-called freedom songs were sung accompanied by the revolutionary cry “Amandla” (power), and the crowd were swept up by the hate speech from speaker after speaker. This resentment is a symptom of the huge inferiority complexes inherent in the ruling classes. They know they are incompetent, they know their continent is - as the London Economist put it - “useless”, and they blame everyone but themselves.

South Africa is at a crossroads. If the demands and malice of the summit prevail, then this country as we know it will be destroyed. There will indeed be no second chance. Once the agricultural sector is on the ropes, those who have been driven from their farms will not come back, as whites will never go back to a Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe.

Lies and myths were propagated yet again, despite being disproved a thousand times.

This TAU bulletin and other agricultural bodies have rebutted the falsehoods ad infinitum, yet they are regularly repeated.

Some of the myths surrounding land reform in South Africa were outlined by Mr. Willie Lewies, Deputy President of TAU SA, at the Land Summit.

In South Africa, a minority of white landowners control the land while the majority are homeless and live in misery.

The truth is the State owns 23% of all land, 13% is communal ground (that is belonging to tribes), 60% is in private hands (and this includes all races) while 4% has been redistributed. Further, the most fertile land is in the traditional black areas of the country but due to subsistence farming methods and over-population, there is little surplus production.

Land reform will spread property ownership equitably, and will increase food production, employment and income.

The opposite is true. So far land redistribution has resulted in most transferred farms falling into ruin. Food production, employment and income have not resulted. In truth, production has been lost. To date, the government has not performed a scientific audit on the results of its land redistribution programme in terms of increased food production and employment. Private researchers have shown by empirical example that handover farms have collapsed.

The land was stolen from the indigenous population and thus land reform is simply a return of productive land to those who originally owned it.

When whites arrived in South Africa in 1652, there was no productive farming to speak of. Subsistence agriculture may have existed in parts of the country, but in many areas there were few or no blacks. Numerous scientific studies have been done to prove this fact, but let us quote the Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1911 under the section Transvaal: “ In 1904, the first population census of the old Transvaal revealed there were 297,277 Whites and 937,127 non-Whites in that region. Of these non-whites, some 135 042 were not from the Transvaal but were only on the Witwatersrand “to work in the gold and other mines” and thus only 77% of all blacks in the Transvaal were actually born there.”

Continues the Britannica: “There were 314,797 blacks in the Zoutpansberg and other northern districts. These people belonged to the Bantu race and none of them has any claim to be indigenous and, save the Bavenda, all are immigrants since circa 1817 – 1820 when the greater part of the then inhabitants were exterminated by the Zulu chief Mozilikatze (see History).”

We can write books about the legitimate origins of commercial farming in South Africa. Those in power however are not listening. They are driven by ideology and in some instances hatred. Will the world sit by and allow those in power to destroy the last remaining working country in Africa? Does the world want another Zimbabwe, another Niger? South Africa’s commercial farming sector appeals to the world to wake up and monitor the deliberate efforts by the SA government and its cohorts to drive South Africa’s white farmers off their land, thus bringing the spectre of famine ever closer.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Darkest days yet to come for the dark continent...

Well, well, well... I guess it was only a matter of time. People like Jan Lampbrecht, Deirdre Fields, Jani Allen, Adriana Stuijt, Dan Roodt and Emmanuel McLittle (and MANY others) have been warning the world for quite some time that South Africa would be following in Zimbabwe's footsteps. They have been telling the world that the ANC are Mugabe's biggest fans, and that the ANC would follow in the footsteps of Zimbabwe's Zanu-PF.

For those of you who are still in the dark and wondering what this rant is about, should read the BBC's article, titled "SA 'to learn from Zimbabwe'". South Africa's new deputy president have unequivocally declared her great admiration for Zimbabwe's disasterous land reform policy, and expressed her desire to follow Mugabe's example.

Brace yourselve's for a disaster of monumental proportions. Why? South Africa's population stands at 44 344 136, against Zimbabwe's 12 160 782 (according to the CIA World Factbook). And what is to stop South Africa from going down the same road? Better polititians? I don't think so. The ruling party, the ANC, admires Mugabe, therefore they are not better. In fact, they tend to be worse. Better economic policy, maybe? Alas, the South African economy was built and is maintained by the white minority in South Africa. If they leave, their intellectual capital and money goes with.

So, what can the rest of the world expect if this disaster takes place? A few million immigrants (legal or not) from the country with the highest crime rate (also world champs in the rape and murder category), the highest AIDS infection rate in the world, and well, possibly the lowest average voters IQ, since they voted for the culprits who are now running South Africa into the ground.

SA 'to learn from' land seizures

South Africa's new deputy president has been condemned after saying that the country should "learn lessons" on fast land reform from Zimbabwe.

The opposition Democratic Alliance (DA) said Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka's comments were "irresponsible".

The eviction of almost all of Zimbabwe's 4,000 white farmers is widely seen as having led to the country's economic crisis.

South Africa recently said it would move to speed up land reform.

Some 80% of agricultural land is owned by white South Africans, who make up only 10% of the population - the legacy of apartheid laws.

Since the African National Congress won power in all-race elections in 1994, it has not seized white-owned land but has pursued a policy of "willing buyer, willing seller".


But Ms Mlambo-Ngcuka said this had been "too slow and too structured."

"There needs to be a bit of oomph. That's why we may need the skills of Zimbabwe to help us," she said.

Zimbabwe offers a textbook example of ways in which land reform should not be carried out
Kraai van Niekerk
Democratic Alliance

At the same time as the Zimbabwe government moved to speed up its own land reform in 2000, thousands of government supporters forcibly occupied white-owned farms, leading to several deaths, many rapes and countless beatings of black farm-workers.

The government denied opposition accusations that it had orchestrated these land invasions.

"Zimbabwe offers a textbook example of ways in which land reform should not be carried out," said DA agriculture spokesman Kraai van Niekerk.

He said existing laws were sufficient to redistribute land and blamed delays on government inefficiency.

At a summit on land reform held last month, government officials said they would do more to speed up the redistribution of land from white to black farmers.

Since 1994, only 4% of land has been acquired by the government from private owners for redistribution purposes, and unused state land has also been redistributed.

Ms Mlambo-Ngcuka was appointed deputy president in June after her predecessor, Jacob Zuma, was implicated in corruption allegations.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

Afrikaner innovation vs. crime

Since the ANC's rise to power in 1994, crime has become one of South Africa's most lucrative industries. Rapists, murderers, drug - and hijacking syndicates are experiencing what can be best described as their heyday. According to the CIA World Factbook, South Africa has become a "transshipment center for heroin, hashish, marijuana, and cocaine; cocaine consumption on the rise; world's largest market for illicit methaqualone, usually imported illegally from India through various east African countries; illicit cultivation of marijuana; attractive venue for money launderers given the increasing level of organized criminal and narcotics activity in the region".

The Afrikaners (which includes some English-speaking Afrikaners), are now forced to protect themselves due to a poor (and often hostile) police service. They often find creative and innovative ways to combat crime.

One such example is that of the special automobile flamethrower, which is used to barbeque budding hijackers to a crisp. Yes, South Africa is notorious for it's unusually high highjacking statistics (about 15000 hijackings yearly - bearing in mind that South Africa is about twice the size of Texas).

Another problem in South Africa is that of rape. Just 'Google' the term "rape capital", and see the results for yourself. An Afrikaner woman, Sonette Ehlers, got fed up and decided to invent a tampon that "bites" an attacker's penis. Yes, the tampon makes use of microscopic sized hooks that attaches itself to the attacker's member. Apparently an attacker would not be able to remove the device by himself - the device can only be removed surgically, and under sedation.

It is a disturbing thought that people have to resort to such extreme measures to protect themselves. For Afrikaners, living in the terror-stricken crime capital of the world have become part of their daily lives. But, as many Afrikaners are often heard saying: "What else can one expect of a country that is ruled by terrorists?"

Wednesday, July 27, 2005



27 – 31 JULY 2005

The Union’s Executive Committee decided to attend the National Land Summit facilitated by the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs at NASREC, Expo Centre, Rand Show Grounds, South Africa, as from 27 -30 July 2005 on certain terms.

TAU SA is attending and is participating in the proceedings of the Summit on the following pre-conditions:

1. TAU SA is participating in the National Land Summit by the auspices of its General Council and is therefore directly liable to the Council;

2. TAU SA is representing the concerns of commercial agriculture and the interests of its members;

3. TAU SA is not attending the Summit to join in events to celebrate the Freedom Charter;

4. TAU SA is participating in the deliberations in an exclusive way by taking part in discussions only, not in any other way of communication and also only by enhancing the principles by which it approaches agriculture;

5. TAU SA will not be approving any recommendations unless it has been condoned by TAU SA’s General Council and the Council has confirmed it as such in an explicit, written statement.

Mr Willem Lewies, Deputy President of TAU SA and Chairman of the TAU SA Property Rights Committee, presented the following speech at 14:00 at the National Land Summit today:



Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen

The TAU SA takes this opportunity to present the case of Commercial Agriculture and Land Reform to this Summit. The principles at stake are that of productive and sustainable agriculture to ensure food security in an economy based on private property rights and market forces, by farmers well acquainted with the ecology and environment of the South African region.

According to Government “(T)he main objective of the Summit is to find solutions to the Land and Agrarian problems and challenges …related to Land Redistribution and Restitution, Agrarian Reform, Land use and Human Settlement.” The moral issue raised is that of rights that imply that “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that people shall share in the wealth of the country.”

Land Reform includes Land Redistribution and Restitution, Agrarian Reform, Land use and Human Settlement, which is also AgriBEE.


The aim of this presentation is to enlighten the Land Summit regarding the risks and dangers of Land Reform in the agricultural sector if implemented in an unscientific and irrational way without considering the context of sound economic principles.


The myths on which Land Reform, as applied in the agricultural sector are based, create unstable ground for agriculture. These myths are propagated in rural communities and through public media.

Ø Myth no 1: In South Africa a minority of white landowners have all the land, leaving the majority of people without access to it and in miserable conditions;

Ø Myth no 2: The white landowners do not adequately cultivate their properties, thereby harming agricultural production and contributing to the fact that the majority of the population live in hunger and misery;

Ø Myth no 3; There is a great disparity in the distribution of wealth making the rich even richer and the poor even poorer, therefore the farmers are an untapped source of income;

Ø Myth no 4: Land reform will spread property ownership and increase production, employment, and the income of those who live in the rural areas;

Ø Myth no 5: Land Reform in South Africa is a prerequisite for economic growth and is not against free economy;

Ø Myth no 6: It is irresponsible to go ahead with the aims of this Summit otherwise there will be a general revolt of the poor masses leading South Africa into a social revolution with grave political, social and economic consequences.

These myths are based on the restructuring of the agricultural and economic history of South Africa to fit the purpose of the so called democratic political revolution. The re-writing of the history of land and property rights in the idiom of Socialism is now the main aim for the redistribution of land and to support Land Reform policy, irrespective of the facts and figures of the past. It’s also true that reality will prove these myths wrong and unfounded.


The context in which Land Reform is applied, is within a construct of the present government’s ideological and political position. This construct is defined in the following terms:

Ø Research by TAU SA on Land Reform shows that “Land Reform is the elimination of large and medium properties, of the system of wage compensation, and of share cropping. The corollary result is the elevation of the manual labourer to the status of independent tiller of a single family or even collective property, as in most land reform programmes”. This is in general the case with arable land.

Ø The implementation of the Land Reform programme in accordance with the ideological predisposition of Land Restitution and the BBBEE policy of the SA Government, will impact on the sustainability of food production, food security and competitiveness of Commercial Agriculture in the globalised economies, in an environment of food insecurity and economic decay in the Southern African region.

The agricultural and economical framework of commercial agriculture in regard to the need for agricultural produce is defined in the following terms;

Ø Commercial Agriculture is a high-risk and climatologically sensitive and responsible industry with a high strategic profile that impacts on the basic existence of every person by delivering sustenance to combat under-nourishment, malnutrition and famine and secure health on a sustainable competitive and commercial basis in globalised economies.

The interaction between these distinguished components as indicated emphasizes that the implications of the application of Land Reform should be determined by scientific and feasibility studies and put in a geo-political context.

Ø “Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.” (World Food Summit in 1996),

The essence of commercial agriculture in South Africa is to provide food security in an economic and sustainable way, in a destabilised political and economic environment.


The following external force fields impacts on the sustainability of commercial agriculture (Research by Intersearch):

Poverty: Ben Roberts of the Human Sciences Research Council indicated that the aids pandemic had the potential to “severely undermine the likelihood of attaining many of the millennium goals, including the poverty target”. He argued that 70% of people in southern Africa live below the poverty line on less than $2 (R13) a day and 40% on less than $1 a day. Poverty continues to rise with 27% from 315 million to 400 million by 2015

Famine: Traditionally, famine was a result of drought. Now, HIV/AIDS has replaced drought as the main cause of famine. The Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) calls it the “loss of intergenerational knowledge” and the result is the loss of local knowledge of agro-ecology and farming practices. This knowledge is usually transferred from mother to daughter, but “with the death of parents, the transfer of knowledge about seeds and cropping patterns is lost.” This short-circuits in knowledge transfer, cuts the vital link of societal survival. It seems that chronic food shortages could become part of the regional scene in the next ten years.

Food Aid: Countries bordering South Africa are all dependent on food aid from countries with strong and stable economies and high volumes of food production. Food aid is the result of the failure agricultural policies based on Land Reform and the direct or indirect socialisation of land. Food aid has enslaved and destroyed agricultural production in most of the countries.

Work and job losses: 75% of the people in Africa are without proper jobs and without any possibility of getting jobs. Job losses occur in agriculture as the impact of Land Reform is experienced in rural areas. The average wworld trade in agriculture, the main exports from Africa has decreased from 5.3% in 1948 to 1.8% in 2003 and is still sliding.

Land; The issue of land in its essence must be defined within the context of the principles of food production. Land is experienced by some black people as the basis of their riches. Other black middle class see land as a culmination of their riches and a piece of land to build a house. Commercial farmers see land as a means of production. The re-distribution of land outside the context as a means of production and economic competitiveness of commercial agriculture within the markets, is at stake and will eventually be eroded by Land Reform. The essence is that the competitiveness based on the knowledgeable experience of the farmer is not negotiable and can not be replaced once it left the agricultural sector and his land.

The Right to Private property: The issue on the right to private property of commercial agriculture is the essence of land redistribution through Land Reform and AgriBEE. The principle of private property is the basis on which the productiveness and competitiveness of commercial agriculture and the value chain of food security exists.

It is within this geo-political framework that the impact of Land Reform on agricultural production and food security should be validated.


"Good agricultural practices are our (Food and Agriculture Organisation) way of translating all the wishful thinking on sustainable agriculture into very concrete recommendations for countries and production systems - and also for consumers so they know what they're buying”. (FAO – 2001).

This lays down the basis for sustainable commercial agriculture as the essence of food security. Economic growth, know how and entrepreneurs with high technology and information driven agriculture practices will be the farmers of the future. South Africa is already losing knowledgeable farmers from their land as a result of the policies and practices by Government in the quest for Land Reform, which we know from research was a futile experience in many countries.

The Government expects the Land Reform Programme and restitution to be the central pivot to alleviate poverty. In the mean time the degradation of the agricultural sector will be in no position to contribute to the upliftment of the rural areas. The loss in information and human capital in agriculture to the number of 12 000 commercial farmers will impact on the viability of the sector.

Louise O. Fresco of the FAO said the world is more complex than in the past, and it is being made ever more so by globalisation. This also applies to the policy of Land Reform. The following factors are of importance:

Ø The human resource vacuum increases through transition and transformation of existing structures;

Ø Systematic regression of the abilities of good governance, infrastructure and capacity in more than 40 years reaches a point of no return;

Ø 70% to 80% exports of the region is in agricultural products and do not penetrate the international markets irrespective of the trade barriers that are lifted;

Ø Foreign aid to the estimate R350 billion is necessary to kick start Africa economies;

Ø Land claims lodged will require R 17 billion to settle and will distort the agri-economy if the willing buyer, willing seller principle is disregarded.

The financial implication of Land Reform that includes land redistribution is more than the GNP can bear. Commercial agriculture and land is too scarce and a valuable strategic resource to risk in such a socialistic venture. South Africa does not have the luxury in time and resources to rectify the results of an experiment gone wrong.


Of the 84 900 000 hectare of land approximately 26 000, 000 hectare of arable land will be redistributed through land restitution. Agri BEE will take another 26 505 000 hectare. This leaves us with 32 395 000 hectare arable land. This excludes the communal land that is already in the possession of the State, previously part of the National States and still the basis of subsistence farming. This is the land that has to deliver food security to South Africa and the southern African region.

The process of land restitution is based on land claims. In spite of the procedures laid down by law, land claims is a major issue for land owners because the right to private property is at stake. The landowner is excluded from the process of the land claim until it is published in the Government Gazette. The marginalisation of the farmer as proprietor until the last moment is a distortion of the right of private property.

The process of Land Reform also jeopardise the civil rights of the farmer if the implementation of the act is forced onto the farming community as a political process without supporting the economic viability of the agrarian communities. Land claims and the constant threat of AgriBEE impacts on the psychological and social structures of the rural communities and creates a society in imbalance.

More agricultural land is available on the free market and approximately 2003 farms have already been offered to the Department of Land Affairs for possession. In the mean time more claims are published on agricultural land. It is unlikely that the commercial productive farms will continue its production after the claimants have possessed the farm. The question arises if the claimants are farmers, potential farmers or only subsistence farmers. Will they sustain the optimal ecologically balanced production potential of the land? According to resent examples it is unlikely that commercial agriculture will benefit from this process.

The process of Land Reform should enhance the commercial production of food and provide the structures and environment for black emerging farmers without discriminating against white commercial farmers.


TAU SA hereby emphasises that the future success of South Africa’s commercial agriculture and sustainable food production in globalised economies, will be determined by international economic and financial standards and regulations, and not by South African standards and a Land Reform Programme. TAU SA maintains the point of view that free economic and market forces must determine the development of Economic Empowerment in the agricultural sector.

The test for successful agriculture is when food is produced in quantity and quality on a commercial basis to impact on the basic existence of every person by delivering sustenance to combat under-nourishment, malnutrition and famine and secure health on a sustainable competitive and commercial basis in globalised economies.

With the collapse of the economies of the neighbouring states and the regression of social services the South African economy will have to grow with 6% to 7 %. This is unlikely if the loss in human capital through an aggressive transformation process and policy continues and the burden on services in rural areas escalates. The influx of illegal foreigners and the unprotected borders will eventually restrict the growth and put more stress on commercial agricultural land. This scenario is not far fetched if all the existing factors intertwine with a high risk industry like agriculture.

The terrain of agriculture is a highly sensitive area, therefore:

Ø Commercial Agriculture is a high-risk and climatologically sensitive and responsible industry with a high strategic profile that impacts on the basic existence of every person by delivering sustenance to combat under-nourishment, malnutrition and famine and secure health on a sustainable competitive and commercial basis in globalised economies.

The relation between commercial agriculture and sustainable food production and security is determined by the position of Government. On the intervention of government through Land Reform the following quote gives the necessary insight:

Ø “Plans aiming at a more or less equal distribution of the soil among the farming population are, under the conditions of the market economy, merely plans for granting privileges to a group of less efficient producers at the expense of the immense majority of consumers. The operation of the market tends to eliminate all those farmers whose cost of production is higher than the marginal cost needed for the production of that amount of farm products the consumers are ready to buy. It determines the size of farms as well as the methods of production applied. If the government interferes in order to make a different arrangement of the conditions of farming prevail, it raises the average price of farm products.” (Ludwig von Mises, Austrian Economist),

To preserve a sustainable commercial agriculture sector Government must re-think its position on Land Reform, agricultural production and food security in a globalised economy.


In conclusion TAU SA’s position on Land Reform can not change from the stance that Land Reform and the BBBEE framework for Agriculture will jeopardise the property rights, production and competitiveness of commercial agriculture in a sensitive and high risk industry to the detriment of food production and food security.

What will befall South Africa is summarised by the following quote if this Land Summit does not address these issues in a rational and scientific way:

“After decades of mismanagement and corruption, most African states become hollowed out. They are no longer instruments capable of serving the public good. Indeed, far from being able to provide aid and protection to their citizens African governments and the vampire-like politicians who run them are regarded by the populations they rule as yet another burden they have to bear in the struggle for survival” (Meredith, M.; 2005. p.668).

TAU SA - Tel: 012 804 8031

Fax: 012 804 2014


Monday, July 25, 2005

"So Bob, how much should we give you?"

According to the BBC, Mugabe is now seeking financial aid from none other than communist China and South Africa. One can not help but ask why these two countries would pay to see Mugabe stay in power.

The ANC government of South Africa seems all too eager to assist Mugabe by financing his reign of terror. After all, they share a common ideology, namely ridding Africa of "white settlers". The ANC government of SA argues that it is in South Africa's financial interest to ensure that "Zimbabwe succeeds". But truthfully, this is by far one of the ANC's worst fallacies to date. Robert Mugabe's reign in Zimbabwe has been nothing but bad news for both the Zimbabwean and South African economies. Mbeki's silence on issues such as the Zimbabwean landgrabs and the recent demolition of more than 200 000 homesteads and shacks have had a very negative impact on foreign investment in South Africa.

China on the other hand, has a much more monetary motive: if Mugabe loses power over Zimbabwe, they lose control over Zimbabwe's mineral wealth (See: "Who funds Africa's opressors").

Both China and South Africa have clearly undermined the rest of the world's sanctions against the tyrant, Robert Mugabe. It is clear what the rest of the world needs to do: firstly, take more aggressive action against Mugabe, or bear whatever tragedy that takes place next in Zimbabwe, on their conscience. Secondly, realize that Mbeki's ANC are a bunch of communist tricksters who only pretend to care about human rights when it suits them (As mentioned, they clearly don't care about human rights, which is evident by their undermining of sanctions against the Mugabe regime).

Sources and related articles:

Updated: Related articles
See Jan Lamprecht's

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

An interview with Deirdre Fields, part 1

American Dissident Voices broadcast for the week of June 12 - June 18, 2005
listen to the broadcast (mp3)
download the broadcast (mp3)
real audio download

by Kevin Alfred Strom

AS WE'VE DISCUSSED on this program several times before, there is an almost unknown genocide of White people happening right now in South Africa -- a country which once was a technologically advanced First World nation under White rule, but which is rapidly descending into chaos and savagery under Black rule.

Today we are pleased to welcome to our microphones Mrs. Deirdre Fields, who (ILLUSTRATION -- Two executioners of lives now in California but who is
Whites in South Africa: left, Nelson probably the premiere activist in the
Mandela; right, Joe Slovo, the former's United States on behalf of White
Jewish handler and mentor.) South Africans.

Kevin Alfred Strom: Welcome to the program, Deirdre.

Deirdre Fields: Thank you, Kevin; it's a great pleasure to be here.

KAS: It was wonderful to hear you speak so passionately and so well at the European American conference last month in New Orleans. My only complaint was that your speech should have been quite a bit longer.

DF: Well, I was lucky to get the time.

KAS: Can you tell us a little bit about your background and how you came to be so well-informed about South Africa?

DF: Well, I am a South African. I'm an Afrikaner. My ancestors go back to several very prominent leaders in South Africa. So I guess we've always been involved in politics. Actually, even one of my Mother's cousins was a cabinet minister for many years. So this has been very important to us. We've had that political awareness.

I studied politics myself; I have a degree in international politics. And, if you know the supreme players and the object of the game, one can easily make sense of what one observes taking place, and make accurate predictions, regardless of the efforts of the media and governments to muddy the waters.

I became particularly vocal when I began my overseas travels. I was so astounded at how little people knew about South Africa, and what total propaganda they had believed, and how misconceived their perceptions were –and I would of course set the record straight.

KAS: I can remember back in the 1970s the propaganda was almost incessant -- in every medium here in the US; newspapers, television, radio -- about the incredible "evil" of the so-called Apartheid regime in South Africa, the White government there. And most of these hosts and writers in the media considered the racial policies of that government to constitute a real emergency -- we had to "do something" to bring down this White government. Was it during this period that your awareness was developing?

DF: Absolutely. The whole world had sanctions against us. We were told how we were "oppressing our Blacks" and we looked at our accusers and asked "How are we oppressing them?" They had the highest living standard in the whole of Africa.

And the whole basis of the complaint was that we had "stolen the land from the Blacks." And that's erroneous. We did not. The Blacks were not there before us. The first White settlers arrived in 1652. This was under the aegis of the Dutch East India Company of Holland. At that time there were only Bushmen and Hottentots -- neither of which are Negroes. Bushmen are Sanids and Hottentots are Khoisanids; they are not Negroids. The Hottentots died out in 1715 and 1717 in two smallpox epidemics, and what is left of them exists only in the Colored [mixed] population; the Bushmen migrated to South West Africa (Namibia) where the Blacks are killing them today..

The first Blacks (the Nguni peoples) didn't come down to our part of Africa until the late 1700s, when they came from the Central African-Uganda area. Blacks really started to swarm into South Africa only after gold and diamonds were discovered. And that was due to Cecil Rhodes and his diamond and gold mining cronies who were importing Black labor from all over. These Blacks came in, worked on contract, and after, say, three years, they were just let loose. And this is how they came to be in South Africa. Today, the country belongs to them. This is a good lesson for both America and Europe: immigration of unrelated, dissimilar peoples into a white nation will eventually result in the whites being outbred, ousted from all power, and eventually being genocided. We whites, the smallest population group in the world, have to have safe homelands where we can be secure amongst ourselves, and have our genepool protected, intact and unpolluted. This is a basic requirement for survival. Failing this, extinction glares us in the eye.

Up until the handover to the ANC, there were something like nine different Black ethnic groups in South Africa, none of which gets on with the others.

Under the system of Grand Apartheid as devised by Dr. Verwoerd, we tried to give each one of those ethnic groups self-determination -- and we actually gave them parts of our territory in order to draw them out of the White mainland. We gave them homelands like Bophuthatswana [pop. 2.5 million], which was composed of Tswanas. They come from Botswana, which is a huge country on our borders. They were brought to a high degree of independence, and Bophuthatswana was the seventh richest country in Africa before they were reintegrated into South Africa when our country was handed over to the ANC. They then reabsorbed all these independent Black nations.
[ ]

KAS: So, basically, South Africa had a policy of separate development -- but it was not a policy of genocide against Blacks.

DF: Oh, absolutely not -- in fact, quite the opposite. Their numbers burgeoned under White rule because they had the benefit of our White medicine. Also, we stopped them from hacking each other to pieces. That was largely successful, but not completely. Wherever they were in proximity to each other there was still conflict. Our South African surgeons were frequently the best in the world because they had practice that was unavailable anywhere else. In a place like Soweto -- a big Black township, although the different tribes lived in different sections, they would come into contact with each other, and attack one another.

KAS: Yes. I can remember, not only in the 70s but all the way through the 80s and part of the 90s, the endless demonstrations in front of the South African embassy. Even some celebrities, such as Amy Carter, would demonstrate there. And there was a sense of urgency, promoted I think mainly by the media. We were told it really was an "emergency." We had to bring down this "evil" White government.

However now we have a situation in which we hardly ever hear anything at all about South Africa in the media. Apparently, everything there must be fine. Since they voted in the new constitution 11 years ago, now that there is a Black ANC government, clearly there's no emergency anymore and everything is all right -- at least according to the so-called American media. Do you agree with that?

DF: Absolutely not. The beauty of the South African situation is that it shows up the hypocrisy of the New World Order. Yes, you're quite right, there was a sense of urgency that the "hateful" Apartheid regime needed to be removed, because we were "oppressing the Blacks."

Well, today, South Africa, especially Johannesburg, is the rape and murder capital of the world. There is terrific lawlessness. In fact, total lawlessness: You’re even afraid to call the police because you never know if the police are going to attack you or not. For a White person, it's particularly bad -- but it's extremely bad for the Blacks too. They have been unable to sustain the country; it's rapidly becoming a Third World country.

Soon after Mandela took power, we had this insurgence of Blacks from all over Africa -- so that we gained over 20 million people. They're squatters; they're on people's land. The ANC is not doing anything to protect the landowners, who are being murdered. There is a policy of genocide going on right now in South Africa which is almost totally ignored by the media.

KAS: That's a strong word to use -- genocide. What evidence is there that genocide is taking place and that genocide is the intention of the current rulers of South Africa?

DF: You had a youth leader of the ANC who adopted as his motto "Kill a farmer; kill a Boer." That was his motto. The ANC also uses the slogan “one settler, one bullet.”

KAS: Now 'Boer' means 'farmer' in Afrikaans, the language of many of the White South Africans, correct?

DF: Yes.

KAS: And ANC stands for African National Congress. That was the Black Marxist party which was handed power in 1994. And you're telling me that their actual open slogan used by one of their leaders was "Kill a farmer; kill a Boer"?

DF: Yes, absolutely. And since then there have been between 1,700 and 1,800 murders -- brutal murders -- of Afrikaner farmers. Now these murders are usually without any monetary motive. Some of the earlier ones we had pictures of, but since then there's been an ANC policy that pictures are not to be released and these stories are not to be covered because they "incite racial hatred" or whatever. Afrikaners have been protesting in the streets about this.
[ ]

I'll just give you an example of what is happening: A farmer would go out to work his land. Then these terrorists would come to the farmhouse and attack the wife, kill her and sometimes rape her. And then they'd wait in the house until the children came home, and kill them. Then they'd wait again until the farmer himself came home, and they would murder him. And there were different degrees of atrocities. Sometimes they'd chop the head off, sometimes they'd chop the hands off. There was one poor person who had his hands cut off, and he was castrated, and then burned to death. They had babies -- six-month-old babies -- wrapped up in newspaper and then burnt alive. There's been a whole slew of murders of elderly Whites -- like one old farmer and his wife... they shot the man, who was probably trying to defend his wife; they got hold of her, tied her to a tree, and tortured her for hours on end with boiling water before they finally slit her throat.

KAS: Sick. And you say there is no monetary motive in some of these cases.

DF: Often they wouldn't take anything. Sometimes they'd take a boom box, or sometimes a TV or VCR. But usually nothing much.

In Natal, they broke into a house where everybody was sleeping. They murdered the father and mother and I think one of the children. And there was a young boy -- a teenager about 13. They held him and forced him to watch his parents being murdered. Then they made him open the safe, from which they stole the weapons. After that they took him in a little pickup truck out into the bundoo where there's nothing at all -- took him out and then thrust their AIDS-infected tongues in his mouth. And left him to find his own way back.
[ ]

And there are so many rapes these days. If all things were equal, there should be a huge outcry about the lack of rights for women in South Africa, because we are now the rape capital of the world. This is not only for Whites, but for Blacks as well. AIDS is rampant, and the Blacks are very superstitious: The witch doctors have told them -- and they believe -- that if they rape a virgin, then they will be cleansed of their AIDS. So, they are doing this to children. Even little babies have been gang-raped. You'd think there would be an international outcry about this.
[ ]

KAS: Who's behind these farm murders? Who's planning them? Who's encouraging them? And why do you call it genocide?

DF: It's genocide because Blacks are going after a group -- White people -- who are identifiable by their race, their skin color. And most of the farmers are Afrikaners. So they're going after that group specifically. This is also part of their plan to "redistribute" the land. This also happened in Rhodesia, which is now Zimbabwe. They drove off all the White farmers, but they didn't murder them as much as they're doing in South Africa. They basically just drove them off the land. And that has received some publicity. But in South Africa they're actually murdering them.
So if your skin is White you are a target. You have to be very careful. I have lost several friends already, who've been murdered there. If you have Blacks committing murder on Whites, on a specific group, then you have to say it's genocide. And nobody's doing anything about it.

In fact, I have a very interesting case that is quite damning of the ANC and their complicity in all this. It's the case of Rick Theron and his common law wife Estelle van Dyk, who had a farm where they retrained racehorses. When they bought the farm it had a couple of squatters on it, living in some of the outbuildings. But Theron and his wife really needed that space for their own servants. So they tried to negotiate with the squatters and get them off. After a time, they were actually successful, and the squatters moved.

Then the ANC came along, and told these squatters "You don't have to leave." And they brought them back onto the property in Government trucks! You can imagine what that did to the attitude of these invaders: "This is our place; you can't do anything about it."

Then there were cars driving around the property at all hours of the night, driving right past their house and making a noise. So the couple would complain. They would complain to the ANC. And they left a paper trail. All the time. Without any success.

The numbers of these squatters just burgeoned. They started pulling down the buildings that were there. They just took them apart, removing various parts of the buildings. They even started taking things off the house. They threatened the servants, told them they were going to kill them. There were parts of the couple's property that they could no longer use because it was too dangerous. The squatters told the couple many times that they were going to kill them.

So Theron and his wife complained, over and over again, to the ANC. They described one interview they had with an ANC official. They said she could hardly look them in the eyes. They were told "You're racists. You're just part of the oppressors."

The wife replied "I've been a nurse. I spent my whole time under the so-called Apartheid regime nursing Blacks in Soweto. I never did anything to oppress anybody."

KAS: If you're White, it's very, very difficult, I understand, to get the police or the other authorities to help you. You're almost helpless against these marauding gangs.

DF: Absolutely. The upshot of the story for this couple is that Rick was finally killed by these invaders. He was outside when they butchered him. Rick was hacked to pieces with an ax and Estelle barricaded herself in the house. The squatters tried to hack down her door and she shot through the door but missed, and one of the attackers shot her through a window. The keys of their 4x4 were on the kitchen table, but neither the 4x4 nor anything else was taken.

So they were murdered. But they did leave that paper trail. And it shows how the ANC was backing up the squatters and how they totally supported everything that was going on.

KAS: Now you told me before the program that this attempt to commit genocide against the Boers is not the first attempt.

DF: No. The first attempt was in 1899 to 1902, during what the British called the Boer War -- the Afrikaners called it the English War. And that is, of course, what it was. At the time of the discovery of gold there, the two Boer republics, the Transvaal and the Free State, had been recognized as independent states by international law. So Britain couldn't gerrymander the border as she had done upon the discovery of diamonds.

KAS: So this was very much like the war of American independence 120 years before.

DF: Yes, there are many similarities. In fact our whole history is very similar.

So gold was discovered in the heartland of the Transvaal, and the Brits of course wanted to have control of it. There were some important gold mine owners; perhaps the most significant among them was Cecil John Rhodes. This is a man who had a vision of One World Government under Anglo-Saxon control. Unfortunately, he was sponsored and financed by Rothschild – Baron Rothschild, who was not an Anglo-Saxon.

KAS: He was a Jew...

DF: Yes, he was a Jew. The major gold mine owners were all Jews -- other than Rhodes who was English, but the representative of Rothschild. Their names were Alfred Beit, Julius Wernher, Barney Barnato, Sammy Marks and Solly Joel. They had links with all the international financiers.

And Paul Kruger, who was the president of the Transvaal at the time, was very opposed to this whole bunch of people. The Afrikaners were strong Calvinists and considered that money was the source of all evil. And they could not stand these English-speaking materialists and opportunists who had invaded their land. I mean, we had just purchased that land with our blood, sweat, and tears!

We didn't even have a standing army or anything like that. We were very much a pioneer republic.

So the financiers fronted the money to build up propaganda against the Afrikaners, and the whole character of the Afrikaner was smeared and totally destroyed. And they finally whipped Britain up into a war.

As I said, we didn't have a standing army. And Britain sent out a quarter of a million troops. So how could you fight when you don't have an army? This is really where guerrilla warfare got off the ground. They would ambush the Brits and then run to the nearest farm, change horses, and gallop away to fight again another day. So the British realized that they couldn't win with a conventional war. I think in the whole war, four years, they were only able to kill 3,000 men in the field, so they devised a new plan.

I think it a pro pos to explain here that Rhodes’ major business partner was Baron Nathaniel Rothschild who had financed him to the tune of some One and a half million Pounds. Soon afterwards (with Barney Barnato, who was financed to the tune of some Five and a half million Pounds), he formed the De Beers Consolidated Mines. The Rothschilds appointed Sir Carl Meyer (also a Jew) as their watchdog director, while Sir Alfred Beit (Jew) became Life Governor.

All these mining companies were enmeshed: The Rothschild’s together with the Mosenthals, in London and South African Exploration Co. also had a financial interest in the enormously powerful firm of Wernher Beit and Co., which owned huge tracts of land and gold mines in South Africa. I’ll quote here from J.B. Taylor of Wernher Beit & Co. in his book A Pioneer looks back,( 1939, p. 109): “When Beit realized that it would be necessary to obtain the support of international financiers and bankers in order to raise all the capital required for the gold mining industry, he decided to broaden the market by giving participation to the Rothschilds of Germany, Austria, and France.”

Baron Nathaniel Rothschild also facilitated a meeting between Rhodes and the leading politicians of Britain at his residence at Tring Park (Daily Telegraph, 8th January, 1935), in order to further the behind-the-scenes manipulation obtain a strangle-hold on South African diamond and gold mines through the British, and

The new strategy they devised was a scorched earth policy, which included the first concentration camps in the history of Western civilization. Incredibly, Milner himself was reported as saying that ‘the purpose of the Scorched Earth Policy and the imprisonment of the Afrikaans families in Women’s Concentration Camps was to annihilate the great Afrikaner nation forever and ever. Amen.’

The policy was actually carried out by, Lord Milner, Lord Kitchener and his “Kindergarten,” and Lord Roberts. Kitchener was so close to the Rothschilds that later on, during In the First World War, Alfred Rothschild, Nathaniel’s brother, paid him daily visits at the War Office. Milner also had close ties to the Rothschild family.

They burnt down all the houses and the crops in the field, took whatever animals they could, killed the rest, and then took the women and children and put them in concentration camps. They were taken out on long journeys in all kinds of weather -- in the blazing African sun, in open cattle trucks. They were put in concentration camps whose locations were purposely chosen to be bad for the health of the prisoners.

KAS: You have said that these were the first concentration camps in the history of Western civilization.

DF: That's right -- and they were for women and children only. Typhus broke out in the camps and one fifth of the population died. And there were other deliberate things.

For instance, my own great-grandmother was in a concentration camp, and they were given flour with ground glass in it. They were given bully beef with little metal fishhook-type things in it. My great-grandmother had a whole big bag full of these fishhooks that she'd fished out. And they have exhibits in the Vroue Monument in Bloemfontein, too.

According to a British journalist, WT Stead, the concentration camps were nothing more than a cruel torture machine. He writes: "Every one of these children who died as a result of the halving of their rations, thereby exerting pressure onto their family still on the battle-field, was purposefully murdered. The system of half rations stands exposed and stark and unshamefully as a cold-blooded deed of state policy employed with the purpose of ensuring the surrender of people whom we were not able to defeat on the battlefield."

KAS: This is another story that Americans have not been told.

DF: No, they've never heard it.

The captives were given bad rations -- rotten meat, and so forth. We have pictures of children that look like Bergen-Belsen inmates, from typhus. We received no war reparations, not even an apology when the Queen was apologizing to everybody for what the British had done to them, including the Australian Aborigines but they refused to apologize to us because we were then as now, an obstacle to the New World Order – and the international financiers.

But there were a couple of Bittereinders -- Boers who continued to fight even after most of the people had surrendered. They fought so hard because the British were demanding unconditional surrender. They kept on fighting until they negotiated a better treaty. Afterwards, in 1910, we achieved Union and self-rule and so forth to complete independence under Dr. Verwoerd -- which, for the British, pretty much undid all the gains of the war.

And today we have the same people, the same moneyed elite, still trying to get rid of the Afrikaner.

This whole One World Government got a real spurt in South Africa through the diamond and gold mines and through Rhodes and the Rothschilds. As I said before, Rhodes had this idea of creating a cabal, a secret society, to take over the world for the British. But then he left as his executor -- Rothschild. So there were two purposes going at the same time; one group thought they were creating something for the British, and then you had Rothschild and his group, who were basically achieving their own separate ends, slowly subverting British rule.

A direct connection with the present fall of the Afrikaner dates back to the De Beers Consolidated Mines, of which the Jew Sir Ernest Oppenheimer, (the father of Harry Oppenheimer who financed the ANC) later became the Chairman. And Harry Oppenheimer actually boasted after the handover of power to Mandela that he, Oppenheimer, had really been "the quiet engine running the ANC for all these years."

KAS: Now it's widely perceived that the present government of South Africa is a "Black government." But you told me, and I believe you mentioned in your speech in New Orleans, that the ANC government does include a strong Jewish influence. Can you elaborate on that?

DF: There are about 11 Communist Jews who are in the cabinet and in other high positions in South Africa; many were appointed as soon as Mandela gained power. Joe Slovo was the most important. He was a Lithuanian Jew who was also a KGB colonel. He really brought the ANC to power. The ANC was a nondescript little group when he came in with the South African Communist Party (SACP) and took over. He wielded a great deal of power. He sort of swapped positions all the time, whether it was the ANC or the SACP or the Umkhonto we Sizwe which was the military arm of the ANC – the

terrorist arm. He finally wrote the constitution of South Africa. He has died in the meantime.

The Communist Jews included in Mandela's cabinet and other high positions were:

Gil Marcus - SACP, Vice President of the S.A. Reserve Bank
Trevor Manuel - Minister of Finance (Colored)
Alec Erwin - Minister of Trade and Finance
Ronnie Kasrils - Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry
Helena Dolny - Communist, former wife of Joe Slovo, Executive director of the Land Bank

Prof. Louise Tager - chairman of Spoornet (RSA's railway system)
Michael Katz - the ANC-SACP's chief consultant on taxation
Meyer Kahn - managing director of the police service

Many of these are still in office. Three of the 11 Constitutional Court Judges are Jewish: Richard Goldstone; Arthur Chaskelson; Albert Sachs.

The (spurious) official opposition party, the Democratic Party (DP), is controlled by Jews: Tony Leon was supported by Helen Suzman, Harry Schwartz, and was always financed by the Jewish mining magnate Harry Oppenheimer. Since Oppenheimer's death, his son Nicki heads the financial enterprise from London, and presumably still supports the DP. Ironically, the "official opposition" is the same party which throughout the Oppenheimer years was constantly lobbying for concessions to the ANC.

KAS: So you have South Africa's probably richest man, the Jewish mining billionaire, stating that he was the power behind Marxist revolution. To most people, that would just blow their minds. It's inconceivable.

DF: That's right. This shows again the connection between Communism and capitalism.
[ ]
[ ]


Be sure to be with us next week for the second part of our interview with South African expatriate and truth-teller extraordinaire Deirdre Fields, who will show us the tremendous and terrible lesson that the death and destruction of South Africa holds for White America.


If we join together, we can avoid such death and destruction and build a clean, safe, secure, and progressive world for our children. Won't you help us by joining National Vanguard today? If you're unable to join, you can still financially support our efforts and remember us in your estate planning. For further information on National Vanguard, write to Post Office Box 5145, Charlottesville VA 22905, or visit and click on the "join" link at the top of the page. We appreciate your support.

Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you of the words of Richard Berkeley Cotten: Freedom is not free; free men are not equal; and equal men are not free.


(We've added to the above text some links and additional detail provided to us by National Vanguard researchers and by Mrs. Fields herself, subsequent to the original interview.)