1994, when the War stopped

1994 was not brought about by a great military victory by the ANC.
The truth is that this country was GIVEN - yes, GIVEN, like a PRESENT or FREE as in BEER, for FREE to the ANC by the White populace in South Africa. Even though blacks will not admit that this is so they pretty much know in their heart it true.

All this nonsense of whites having to bow down and BEG for FORGIVENESS for crimes they never committed is complete load of shit of the worst kind. This is a one-way path to slitting our own throats. But since these events were WARS, both sides committed many crimes for that is the nature of war. And prior to World War II, during more sensible times, whenever two sides ended a war, they did so on the basis that *ALL* the crimes which were committed in the war are forgotten once the treaty is signed. There was no such thing as "war crimes" because all of war IS a crime - such is the nature of the beast. But when people decide to stop fighting, then everyone wipes the slate clean and there are no further reprisals.

Let's not forget the atrocities the ANC committed against their own people, let us hear from them about their camps such as Quadro ((often referred to as Quatro). Further post to follow))

Let's not forget the bombing of innocent women and children, the victims coming from all ethnic groups in South Africa.

The ANC would like to sweep all the crap under the carpet as they currently do with any other crises in the country - - or wait a minute, it must be the fault of the whites and Apartheid!

The light is starting to shine at the end of the tunnel, more and more facts of the so-called 'liberators' are coming to light.

Once a Terr, always a Terr.

How the ANC came to Power - the real story.

Nelson Mandela is the president of South Africa, an event of monumental significance in world history. This great personal triumph is for him a vindication of his struggle. But now that the South African elections are long past, the record must be set straight about what really happened and why. The press has concealed as much as it reported; ideologues of all stripes have rushed around to rationalize their hypocrisies, and American politicians have been spreading around largesse as if the money were their own. That the results were so perfect, historically so symmetrical, is rather remarkable.

Those with power, or who are connected to it, do not want the facts about the funding of the election to be known because it would reveal a pattern of deception and control, both to influence the outcome and to moderate the African National Congress. And those on the radical left don't want it known that the ANC has compromised itself by joining the list of organizations taking money from the United States, because they think it will hurt the cause of revolution. Everyone involved, across the ideological spectrum, has therefore joined in a kind of game to cloud the minds of outside observers.

Most hypocritical perhaps was the attempt to make a devil out of Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi by characterizing him as the tool of the oppressors and an obstructionist in the transition to democracy. His anomalous situation in post-apartheid South Africa led to suggestions that he was an enemy of democracy, and the cause of dissension that led to violence in an attempt to disrupt the electoral process that black South Africans struggled for decades to achieve. Chairman of the Inkatha Freedom Party and chief minister of KwaZulu, this prince and descendant of Shaka Zulu was then cast in the role of villain and reactionary. But it was not always so.

Read the full article here

The ANC Declares WAR or what really happened in Sharpville.

Umkhonto We Sizwe (aka. MK), the armed wing of the ANC was formed and from that date until 1994 - a period of 33 years - the blacks and whites of this country were OFFICIALLY AT WAR. And during a war, many things happen. Many of these so-called atrocities were just PART OF THE WAR.

Mandela and others claim that Apartheid was their real motivation - if that were true, then one needs to only examine Apartheid from 1948-1961 (a mere 13 years) - because that, supposedly, is the time period during which whites did terrible things which caused blacks to go over on to a war footing. But you will not find much violence happening in that period, because Apartheid was a pretty peaceful system. The so-called "Violence of Apartheid" is a mythology they dreamt up in which they take defensive actions by the White Govt of the day, and then misrepresent these as being offensive or repressive actions "which emanate from the violence of Apartheid". This is a complete mythology. Any govt, anywhere in the world, acts when there are riots, violence and murder, and the White Govt of the day reacted hardly any differently to any other Govt. What is constantly COVERED UP and IGNORED, is that the ANC or PAC were the SOURCE of the violence and that they were the ones attacking first. They were REVOLUTIONARY ORGANISATIONS hell bent on overthrowing the white Govt through force. Their statements on this are clear. All these things I am saying are there on the historical record. But now, there are many subtle twists added to this historical record to try to pretend that Apartheid was just a "violent system" and that these "peace-loving" people were somehow murdered for no good reason. This is ANC propaganda at its finest. This is complete nonsense. The Apartheid system against which the ANC rebelled, and which should be studied, to see what Apartheid was like at a time of peace, is the period 1948-1961. Anything after 1961 is the result of a White response to a black declaration of war made by Nelson Mandela himself.

Now, the blacks and liberals these days may want to try to fool themselves, but the Soweto uprisings, the attack on the Sharpeville Police station, etc were acts of war BY THEM! The kind of revolution that the ANC and PAC tried to stir up in South Africa (which they never achieved), was a type of French Revolution where the blood would flow in the streets. They tried to light a fire in the hope that it would burn out of control. Their greatest success was the 1976 uprising (uprising = Act of Revolution). And to this day, they milk the 1976 uprising for everything they can get out of it.

Now, the blacks and liberals these days may want to try to fool themselves, but the Soweto uprisings, the attack on the Sharpeville Police station, etc were acts of war BY THEM! The kind of revolution that the ANC and PAC tried to stir up in South Africa (which they never achieved), was a type of French Revolution where the blood would flow in the streets. They tried to light a fire in the hope that it would burn out of control. Their greatest success was the 1976 uprising (uprising = Act of Revolution). And to this day, they milk the 1976 uprising for everything they can get out of it.

The ANC, more than any other Liberation organisation rose to power on the dead bodies of children! The ANC, hypocrits that they are, like to pretend that they are the protectors of chidren. But in fact, their long history is one of exploiting children and using innocent black children as cannon-fodder. In *ALL* the Liberation struggles in Southern Africa, CHILDREN were involved. The ANC was making use of children as CHILD SOLDIERS (which these days is a hideous crime, and which still carries on in much of Africa). The ANC used children to take their bullets for them - and it was deliberate - make no mistake.

While the ANC did not actually abduct that many children here in S.Africa, they did instead use children to MURDER ADULTS and to intimidate them. They did this a lot. In the 1980's, here in SA there were blacks who said how small children ran around armed with handguns, threatening and attacking adults - and they did so at the behest of the ANC. It is a well documented fact that Winnie Mandela and her so-called "football club" had more sinister activities which included MURDER! It is also recorded that the ANC could hardly get adults to fight for it, so it used children as its cannon fodder, and the ANC more than anyone else, used and abused black children in their rise to power.

It was the ANC who had the slogan "Liberation before education".

So let us not kid ourselves about the 1976 Soweto uprisings. These things were not just spontaneous events as the ANC now likes to pretend. These were orchestrated acts intended to draw a response from the Govt of the day (which did react). And why? Well, these children were stoked up and were hell-bent on violence - and they were not just smashing things to bits, they were also killing people.

So let us not fall for the ANC's twisted and edited version of history that these "children" were all so cute and cuddly. This was an attempt - a failed attempt - by the ANC to start a nation-wide REVOLUTION so that blood would flow in the streets and the White Govt would be brought to a fall. This event it is dredged up continuously in ANC propaganda to this day.

Here are photos that show you a couple of things about the 1976 Soweto riots which the ANC would love to keep under wraps forever in their attempts at rewriting history. (extracted from the book: "A History of Communism in South Africa").

And here we see the body of a white man, Dr Melville Edelstein, who went to help the blacks, and like the American girl, Amy Bhiel, he too was murdered for being white. The ANC goes on and on and on ad infinitum about the shooting of Hector Peterson - the first youth to be shot in those riots - but you never hear about Dr Edelstein do you? The arrow indicates a note the blacks leftnext to his corpse. It reads: "Beware".

And while we are on the subject of this MYTH of the "Apartheid massacres of peaceful blacks", here is another photo you will NEVER SEE. Remember the white claim that at Sharpeville, you had a small Police station and it was surrounded by armed blacks who were going to murder the Police inside? Well, here is a photo of the weapons collected by the Police after shooting 70 or so of these rioters who were hell-bent on MURDERING all the Police in that little building.

 

FW De Klerk himself, Nobel Peace prize winner that he is, has admitted publicly. De Klerk said that the blacks should be GRATEFUL that the whites handed over this country to their avowed ENEMIES! He said it was a big step on the part of the whites.

The blacks whine ad nauseum about a few hundred dead. They FORGET that the whites here were ARMED TO THEIR TEETH and could have killed them, not by the hundreds but by the hundreds of thousands - perhaps by the million. This country had nuclear weapons, and many tremendously advanced conventional weapons. If this had been a fight to the death, then black corpses would have littered every square foot of this country. That so few of them were killed attests to the tremendous RESTRAINT the Govt of this country had to never-ending provocation and acts of outright terrorism.

The negotiations which ended a 33 year war in this country were NOT based on an UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER at gunpoint. Even FW De Klerk did not "unconditionally surrender" to the blacks. This was a well-documented "negotiated settlement". You could call it a CEASE FIRE to use a better term. This was NOT about a total victory by black over white. This was an agreement to live in peace rather than to continue fighting to the bitter end. It was about mutually just burying the hatchet. As De Klerk himself said, the purpose was to prevent this country from ending up as a complete RUIN.

Hindsight being 20/20, a blind man can see that that was a futile gesture!