South Africa’s Current Situation Is A Power Game

South Africa’s current situation in 2016 had been planned some fifty-two years ago by a think-tank, the “Bogenhagen Report” of 1964. The Bantustans/Homelands would become provinces in a country, governed by the African majority through a rural political party in the form of the African National Congress (ANC).

An urban political party by design could govern South Africa as from 2019. This too is reflected in that “Bogenhagen Report”.

Today in 2016 it seems that the struggle inside the ANC is among those, who want the old status quo of grand apartheid’s “National Party” back and those, who capitulate into a rural political party.

Considering the outcome of the last Local Government elections, the above-mentioned strategies could make sense. In other words, the Democratic Alliance (DA)-Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) would govern the Western Cape Province; Port Elizabeth in the Eastern Cape Province; Bloemfontein in the Free State Province; the capital Pretoria and the economic and financial hub, Johannesburg both, in the Gauteng Province.

Would the new urban political party be the DA-EFF and the rural political party the ANC?

In this process, the owners of the economy, also known as captains-of-industry and architects-of-apartheid with their hitmen and chequebooks in the shadows, seem to test the waters on how to overthrow the president. Foreign interests, who reduced the Ukraine to civil war and regime change, would not work in BRICS member, South Africa. This country has an elected head-of-state and commander-in-chief.

Brazil, also a BRICS member, had to deal with its coup d’état. Ousted president Dilma Rousseff faced a legally acceptable coup plot. The highly unpopular vice president, Michel Temer, replaced her. Temer has hardly any following and is viewed as corrupt.

Meanwhile, the same power mongers and their minions in their think tanks hawkishly observe the situation in South Africa developing. It would certainly not work to impeach president Jacob Zuma, as he and his ruling party, the ANC, retain the backing of the country’s majority. But, a collusion of many forces seems to work, similar to that used to topple president Dilma Rousseff and reduce the Ukraine to outright “civil war”. The forces seem to be the same.

The DA’s take-over of the Western Cape should be thoroughly studied. The former apartheid National Party, merely wearing a different coat this time around, consolidated the Western Cape, having done an analysis of the vulnerabilities of that province and then focused on them. The DA was indeed successful.

Not putting up an efficient and effective intelligence, the ANC has contributed to its major losses of Port Elizabeth, Pretoria (Tshwane) and Johannesburg in the last Local Government’s elections.

South Africa’s corporate mainstream media cartels bombard public opinion daily with Afropessimistic, anti-ANC horror stories. It is latently racist. In fact, their efforts could be described as “brainwashing of public opinion”. The old apartheid Strategic Communications (StratCom) media reports to deceive public opinion, seems alive and at work. The strategy of 70% fact and 30% fiction blended and emotively presented makes for effective media-propaganda. Eventually, the victims of the lie become its biggest protector.

In the up-coming preparations for the next party- and country president, the corporates and multi-nationals, their hitmen and their chequebooks collude to break the ANC up into polarized and tribal camps. They are working hard at securing their dispensation. Deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa is their man. Much money is thrown at their power-game. That could be the reason for Ramaphosa defending Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan.

Certain senior and experienced members of the ANC and its National Executive Committee (NEC) spoke to this writer under the condition of anonymity, expressed their concern and frustration, when they explained, “The ANC has bought into this new strategy. It’s not the movement we know anymore.”

The above-mentioned also pointed out, “In this power game senior members of the ruling party quietly worked with the opposition. They are all well known to the ANC. Their day will come when they’ll be named and shamed. They cannot be part of the ANC’s history.”

Daily media reports reflect countrywide student revolts and previously, also service delivery protests. President Jacob Zuma declared those unrests as democratic, as long as they are registered, legal and do not do damage to any property and, or persons. If however, property and, or persons are attacked and arson is committed, the culprits would be arrested.

If South Africa’s Police Services (SAPS) would allow student revolts and service delivery rebellions to get out of hand, the police would be viewed as staging a putsch against the state. If police services would be allowed to oversee revolts and rebellions, for that matter any form of anarchy, it would be self-destructive.

For the ANC to consolidate and protect itself against its enemies and to move forward, the movement would benefit from the following strategies.

  • The ANC needs to roll out a massive national debate to address all problems and obstacles. Branches, gatherings, meetings, conferences, newly re-established street committees, Afro-friendly media and other such platforms could be made available to address shortcomings and weaknesses.
  • A think tank could be established to work along the lines of a research institute or, a foundation. It would be tasked to do all research, work in a focused way with the movement throughout the country. That way, history could be put into perspective.
  • The ANC could further bring its newspapers such as SECHABA back to the national market, linking it to above network, progressive institutes, the BRICS structures, if and where possible.

In addition to above, it is important that the “blind trusts”, that are held by judges and politicians, will be outlawed and abolished as soon as possible. The electorate needs to know those “blind trusts”, as they seem a cesspool of corruption and power mongering through corporate influence. It is the cancer that could destroy the ANC. Parliament needs to pass laws to protect against such invasions; otherwise the chequebooks rule and the voters have no say. That is unfair and unsettling.

The rightwing, or neo-con economic strategies, such as the arms deal, the “Reconstruction and Development Programme”, also known as RDP under the late former president Nelson Mandela. The “Growth, Employment and Redistribution” (GEAR) programme followed. It was a macro-economic strategy under recalled, former president Thabo Mbeki.

None of them worked, least of all in favour for South Africans. Finally, they were done away with. The current programme, “National Development Plan” (NDP 2030) under the incumbent, Jacob Zuma, replaced the previous attempts. Will it work, given the history of the previous programmes? It does not seem like it. There are too many corporate interests with hidden agendas at play to control the ANC and its government.

South Africa’s flawed judiciary needs serious attention too. The biggest evil that grew from the CODESA negotiations in 1994 was the secret “Sunset Clauses”, protecting covert local and foreign structures. Those have greatly influenced the judiciary through a host of corporate cabalists, their lobbies, think tanks and societies and their joint secret trusts. If no changes will be undertaken, the unelected judiciary will keep pushing to take over power from government. It would be anti-democratic, undermining the nation.

Finally, the progressive forces need take charge for all to see and follow. How to take charge needs to be debated nationally as soon as possible. The ANC leadership needs to take the nation along, constantly informing and preparing it for any further efforts of destabilisation and sabotage.

Advertisements

Is Eskom Used To Build A War Chest For Political Change In South Africa?

“A catalogue of disasters seems to be built up for the ANC’s NGC in October this year in 2015, attempting to turn the NGC into an elective conference”, senior members of the ANC NEC and NWC caution. “It would enable the enemies of President Jacob Zuma to recall him and put their man, deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa, in his place. If president Zuma would serve his full second term, chances of deputy president Ramaphosa to become president would be slim.”

Above senior politicians explain, “This ‘catalogue of disasters’ includes so-called xenophobia; rolled out electricity cuts; the assault on the value of the ZAR; so-called service delivery protests; corruption charges, including the call to “pay back the money” for Zuma’s private estate, Nkandla, in the province of KwaZulu; a lawless and treasonous anarchy, propagated as “democracy”; grand apartheid’s structured poverty; resulting in massive youth unemployment. All of this affects the black African majority directly.”

It would seem that that set-up serves to force the collapse of the ANC, bringing about a so-called “regime change” during the ANC’s elective General Conference in December 2017.

The above-mentioned senior leader and member of the ANC NEC and NWC pointed out in his conversation with this writer, “The very thought of, and the strategic reality that the head-of-state and commander-in-chief of South Africa could be poisoned, as reported in the media, shows that absolutely nobody is safe in South Africa.”

To add agony to the above report, Minister of Home Affairs, Malusi Gigaba said, “We keep quiet about our colleagues’ shortcomings, because we don’t want to be attacked.” This means, when under siege, you are alone without any form of protection, or support. Thus, this begs the question: does fear influence leadership?

What exactly are the Intelligence Services, including State Security, the former National Intelligence Agency (NIA); the South African Police Services’ Crime Intelligence and the South African National Defense Force’s Defense Intelligence doing? What could the explanation be for retaining staff in their positions against a reality of so-called “xenophobia”, a mafia-style judiciary, where the perpetrators of violence and murder cannot be found, or are immediately released from jail, if and when caught? They escape the discipline of the rule-of-law. How deep have outside agents infiltrated the intelligence community to render them ineffectual?

South Africa will host the next African Union (AU) summit in the Sandton Convention Center in June this year. With its history of xenophobia, South Africa’s heads of the Intelligence Services Cluster have to assure African heads-of-state that they are safe.

It is interesting that the corporate media does not ask the most obvious questions, why neither the Chinese, nor the Indians have been exposed to the so-called “xenophobia”.

A while ago, Chinese traders just outside Johannesburg’s Central Business District (CBD) had to flee for their lives. But, now they have nothing to fear. The Indian communities in KwaZulu and Gauteng are also safe. Who protects them in return for what?

The Somalis, Ethiopians, Zimbabweans, Tanzanians, Bengalis and Pakistanis paid with the loss of their lives and businesses in South Africa.

Who are the warlords-come-Mafioso, directing a ‘Third Force’ behind this “xenophobia”? Is there any form of “protection money” being paid? What is the role of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) in this effort to destabilise the country? Have Africans been exposed to racketeering when pressed for protection? Could EFF leaders, Julius Malema, Floyd Shivambu and Dali Mpofu as well as Joseph Mathunjwa from the union AMCU shed some light on these questions?

Would the Intelligence Agencies be able to share, what has been done to monitor the movements on the ground in the urban areas prior to the last elections up to today?

The current so-called “xenophobia” in South Africa is similar to the covert urban war, waged by apartheid Military Intelligence’s Civil Cooperation Bureau (CCB) from 1990 to 1994, when over 8000 indigenous black African South Africans were murdered. This is on record of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). Certain media described it as “black-on-black violence” then.

Independent observers explained that the attack on foreigners from Africa is at the heart of the geo-political engineering attempting to destroy South Africa’s leadership position in Africa. Who stands to benefit from it?

Senior ANC NEC members remarked under the condition of confidentiality, “This “xenophobia” could have been avoided. Is the ANC running away from its responsibilities of power? Had the security cluster not been stable, these attacks could have led to a civil war.”

However, it cost South Africa dearly. African countries retaliated by having stopped importing goods from South Africa, closed South African businesses down and stopped local artists from performing in neighboring countries.

In a similar context, it is observed that a cruel war of exterminating the majority of the populations of the Ukraine, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Yemen has been on the cards for a while. So is the destruction of the Developing World.

Over a hundred historic monuments and statues mainly in the cities of the Ukraine were brought down. It happened shortly before a foreign-engineered uprising and the subsequent toppling of its government. An inhumane war against unarmed civilians of all ages and backgrounds followed. Who engineers and benefits from that lethal global holocaust?

Boko Haram is attacking Nigeria. To this day, the international community has not fervently declared Boko Haram a terrorist organisation.

Al Shabaab in East Africa attacks Kenya at will to destroy its economy, ensuring that Kenya will not call for another currency.

What is the role of large companies such as Exxaro Mining Company, Pembani Holdings, Shanduka, Glencor and Afric-Oil in South Africa’s current political climate?

Interestingly, Afric-Oil supplies Eskom, the national electricity provider, with Diesel to the tune of 50 to 60 million liters per month. It costs something to the amounts of four to five Rand per Kilowatt-Hour to produce electricity from Diesel. The same Kilowatt-Hour is sold for R0.84. What is the logic in this? It seems the state is being plundered. Would it not be in the interest of Afric-Oil that Eskom buys its Diesel from them until 2017 to make as much profit as possible for as long as possible? Who really makes these profits?

It would seem that a war chest of sorts would benefit from the above-mentioned profits. Who initiated this war chest? What is the aim for stockpiling such huge profits? Would that “war chest” be used to finance the build-up to and the final outcome of a “regime change” in South Africa?

As some leaders in southern Africa stress, “Africa needs to know its enemies and fight back united, or else, be destroyed.”

Will the engineers of the destruction of the Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Iraq and the attempted destabilisation of South Africa be brought to book?

Follow my Twitter Handle: @theotherafrika

Africa’s Imperialist Re-Colonisation Wants Legalisation

For the African Union to stand its ground and by Kenya’s democratically elected Head of State, Uhuru Kenyatta, and his Deputy, William Ruto, against Europe’s imperialist-colonial powers is indeed a job well done. Congratulations to the new Chair, Dr. NImagekosazana Dlamini-Zuma and her team! Despite a reliably hostile corporate mainstream media and their established network in South Africa lobbying hard against the AU and for the continent’s re-colonisation through the ICC, the Commonwealth and foreign corporates, President Jacob Zuma too stands by the decision of a stronger union in accordance with the AU.  

It cannot be more blatant, more obvious, that the “former” imperialist-racist Western conquerors have set out to legalise their colonial conquest of African nations in order to legalise their plunder of the rich resources of the continent. Neo-liberalism and neo-colonialism are very much part of the history of colonialism. In other words, it is the same old.

In addition to foreign satellite and military bases throughout the continent, the exclusive oligopolistic plunder-barons mustered their corporate mainstream media-cartels and their opposition politicians to unleash a gobal propaganda campaign. Together, they attempt to lobby and intimidate Africa’s 34 signatories of the so-called International Crimes Court (ICC) in The Hague, the Netherlands in Europe. They are manipulated not to “turn their backs on the (ICC) court”.

It is noteworthy that those international Western lobbyists with their deep pockets and their tools are indeed fully aware of what they are doing and what they want to achieve … the ICC as well as Britain’s Colonial Commonwealth to remain firmly in place, blessed with absolute powers over “those cannibals from the dark continent”. Now they want the African Union (AU) to underwrite their legal attempts with their hidden agendas, put together in bad faith, but dressed up as “ending a culture of impunity in African politics”.

Their heartless and godless greed knows no bounds. First, with their Bible and their guns the imperialist robber barons colonise the “dark, barbaric, uncivilised and un-Christian” continent, wiping out whole nations. At the imperial-colonialist summit in Berlin from 1884 -1885, Africa’s borders were drawn up. Shamelessly, they successfully split whole nations into two and more countries.

To entrench their hidden policy of ‘divide and rule’, they assisted African leaders in the period after World War 2, to de-colonise in the 1950s up to the mid-1990s. Many of those African leaders were men and women of their picking, putting an African face to Western control. Such leaders were compromised from the onset and have to dance to the tune of their puppet masters to date.   

To keep checks and balances, foreign colonial interests orchestrate, guide and finance civil-, rebel-, and tribal wars, structured abject poverty and genetically modified “food”, genocide and xenophobia in Africa. By now in 2013, the AU together with the UNO have no option, but to declare structured poverty a crime against humanity, as it is an integral part of colonial-apartheid-UDI. It is based among others, on organised crime and of late, on a so-called “North African-style Arab Spring” with subsequent “regime changes”. Again, it is the same old, where democracy and national reconciliation are mere farces.

All African Union members need to stand their ground together now more than ever in their struggle against the imperialist-racist-colonial forces, re-taking the African continent. It was the goal of the Dutch based European-ICC to target particularly, if not only Africa, ignoring crimes elsewhere. Rightfully, souvereign African states and their AU would be concerned.

If the ICC succeeds to indict Kenya’s President and his Deputy, it would make history in discrediting and overruling souvereign, independent African states. Indeed, Africa would then be legally colonised.

Remember, when Liberia’s President Charles Taylor stepped down, ending the war in his country and went into exile in Nigeria? African heads of state signed an official agreement, which provided for Taylor’s exile in Nigeria under President Olusegon Obasanjo then. African heads of state, including Nigeria’s Obasanjo and South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki signed the agreement. The war in Liberia came to an end.

But, one telephone call from US President George W. Bush Jr. to his Nigerian counterpart, as Obasanjo was about to take off from Abuja to Washington DC, reduced the signed African agreement to less than the paper it was written on. Obasanjo had to release Taylor to Sierra Leone from where he was transferred to The Hague.

Remember, how an accused war criminal and accomplished liar such as Britain’s former Prime Minister and JP Morgan global agent, Tony Blair, breached the international Lancaster House Agreement of 1979, implementing crippling economic sanctions against Zimbabwe? His and his US counterpart, George W. Bush’s efforts to put Zimbabwe under illegal sanctions brought Zimbabwe’s economy and currency down. The UN Security Council never signed Britain, the US and their club’s sanctions against Zimbabwe.

Rightfully, AU members and most of the 34 signatories to the ICC, ask, “Why are the US, UK, Canada, Israel, Australia, New Zealand and the EU not signatories to the ICC?” And, “Why do real war criminals such as former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair; former US Presidents George Bush Snr. and his son, George Bush Jr. and their inner circles; former US President Bill Clinton and his wife Hilary Rodham Clinton and their inner circles; Israel’s head of state, Benjamin Netanyahu; the owners of powerful global banks; the armament industry; the oil cartel and many more of that ilk, never appear in front of the ICC, nor any other court of law?”

Meanwhile, the local media reported that Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe met with Swedish Deputy Prime Minister, Jan Bjorklund, on Friday, 11 October 2013, in Pretoria, jointly chairing a bi-national commission. Motlanthe explained rather diplomatically, “The AU was not saying, withdraw the charges (against Kenya’s president and his deputy), because there is a commitment that those who may have committed offences must be brought to book.” Well, that can be interpreted in many ways, of course, if the media reported it correctly and in context.

The international Western media applauded US-EU NATO’s criminal “humanitarian bombing” of the North African state of Libya. As is known, NATO did not have to answer the ICC for its mass murder of African people.

Twitter Handle: @theotherafrika

Zimbabweans have taken back their pride, their land and their elections

Heading the Southern African Development Community (SADC) as well as chairing the African Union (AU), South Africa’s role as facilitator and mediator in Zimbabwe is to respect the souvereign right of its northern and most important neighbour, Zimbabwe, its gateway into Africa. It is Zimbabwe that has to independently make its own decisions about its future. By now, President Jacob Zuma and his Special Advisor for African Affairs, Lindiwe Zulu, have understood that Zimbabwe will not be dictated to by outside interests and covert manipulations and their opportunistic internal minions.

The retired director-general in South Africa’s presidency under former recalled president Thabo Mbeki, Reverend Frank Chikane, documents in his latest book, “ The Things That Could Not Be Said – From A{ids} to Z{imbabwe}”, “Thabo Mbeki’s … particular form of diplomacy (in the case of Zimbabwe), incensed those who wanted to pursue the (so-called) ‘regime change’ strategy, which Mbeki refused to be pressured into. Those who pursued the ‘regime change’ agenda included major powers like Britain and the US. A multiplicity of strategies was unleashed, including various communications strategies and intelligence projects, to get the public to buy into the ‘regime change’ approach (in Zimbabwe) against the wishes of the SADC and the AU member countries.”

Well-known international journalist and observer/researcher, Prof. John Pilger, explained, “On 14 October 2012 US-President Barak Obama announced he was sending United States Special Forces troops to Uganda to join the civil war there. In the next few months, US combat troops will be sent to South Sudan, Congo and Central African Republic (CAR). They will only ‘engage’ for ‘self-defence’, says Obama, satirically. With Libya secured, an American invasion of the African continent is under way.” The US’s militarisation of the entire African continent through its programme of ‘African Command (AFRICOM)’ is another obvious case in point. Never has this continent been as militarised and as unsettled as in 2013 under Obama’s dictate, who seems to find a terrorist behind every bush in far away Africa. It has catapulted Africa’s safety and security into the abyss.

The root of Zimbabwe’s problems however, is firmly anchored in the blatant disregard of the legal, international contract, the ‘Lancaster House Agreement of 1979’, which forms the cornerstone of Zimbabwe’s independence. The United Kingdom and the United States of America were to compensate the white settlers of Zimbabwe for the land they would have to give up in the process. But, that particular clause in the Lancaster House Agreement of 1979 remains ignored.

Former British Labour Party Prime Minister, Tony Blair, is on record having misled his government and people, the international community and even the white settlers in Zimbabwe. Blair’s breach of that agreement is nothing short of an act of crime, which should be taken to the International Crimes Court (ICC) in The Hague, The Netherlands, Europe. It should be the first, unanimous move of both, the SADC and the AU as African structures, to take this criminal case against Tony Blair to the world court.

It is expected that there are agents’ provocateurs and proxies, fronting for foreign interests, who would enter any and all negotiations towards the elections in bad faith. Zimbabwe’s land is the issue that has caused much furore. It has raised the attention of African people and states alike. And, the racist right wing will stop at nothing when unleashing its destabilisation campaign on the unfortunate Zimbabwe and all other African countries that do not kowtow imperialist Western interests.

South Africa and Namibia still abide by the foreign UN Western programme of ‘willing seller, willing buyer’, while the majority of the indigenous population remains landless, without access to an endemically hostile economy. After so many years into independence without much land having been transferred, it has been proven that the ‘willing seller, willing buyer’ programme simply does not work in favour of the indigenous African majority. It rather delays the efforts to transfer land to the indigenous landless indefinitely.     

Those, preventing indigenous Africans from getting their land back and participating in the economy on their own continent should note that their tactic of structured poverty on a continent not theirs is equal to a holocaust, much larger than that Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels and their cohorts had dealt out to the Jews during WW2.

Meanwhile, it has been widely accepted that Zimbabwe now holds the record of implementing the largest land reform in Africa, according to which “6 000 white farmers have been replaced by 245 000 black farmers”, – authors/researchers Joseph Hanlon, Jeanette Manjengwa and Teresa Smart wrote in their book, “Zimbabwe Takes Back Its Land”, published by Stylus.

The indigenisation of the mining and banking industries in Zimbabwe would obviously not be in the foreign Western interests, which seems on its way to a one-world rule.

According to the research of among others, author Joseph Hanlon and his team, Zimbabwe’s land reform is a success. They describe the agricultural development of Zimbabwe in their book, “Zimbabwe Takes Back Its Land”, “Agrarian reform is a slow process and it takes a generation for new farmers to be fully productive. A decade after Zimbabwe’s agricultural production has largely returned to the 1990s level and small-scale black farmers now produce together almost as much tobacco as the big white farmers once did.”

They add, “Land reform in Zimbabwe will not be reversed. The Global Political Agreement (GPA) includes the phrase, ‘accepting the irreversibility of said land acquisitions and redistribution’, and two million new occupants would not allow any changes now.” Indeed, it would provoke a guerrilla war of historic note, if the land were to be taken back.

Meanwhile, Zimbabwe’s all-white Commercial Farmer’s Union (CFU) published in the local media in April this year, that it has “given up opposing the land reform, as it could not keep on swimming against the current”. This published article was signed by CFU vice president, Peter Steyl. He concluded, “We have finally realised that the land reform is irreversible. This is a change of heart.”

Like South Africa’s ANC- and country president Jacob Zuma and his ruling party remain in the focus of political snipers, so do Zimbabwe’s ZANU-PF and country president Robert Mugabe. South Africa too is being threatened with a treasonous ‘Arab Spring’. Hence, the media would only report anything and everything negative about Mugabe.

President Robert Mugabe is clear – Zimbabwe will never return to Rhodesia. Mugabe and ZANU-PF will win the next elections starting on 31 July 2013. He and his leadership delivered education, land and full economic participation at great cost. Indigenous Zimbabweans are well qualified, resilient and industrious. The SADC and the AU hold Mugabe in high esteem. Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa’s indigenous majority respect President Mugabe and hail him as a visionary. In fact, most African countries revere Mugabe as one of Africa’s greatest leaders.

On the other hand however, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC-T could not deliver, even having tried for a while to have the sanctions against their country lifted. They had called for those sanctions – but could not succeed in having them lifted, when tasked to do so. UK, US and EU interests explained in their diplomatic cables as reflected in Wikipedia, “Prime Minister Tsvangirai would need much guidance.” He does not seem to instil much confidence in the electorate, or his backers.

(Udo W. Froese was born in the third generation of German colonial settler background in Namibia.)

Follow on Twitter: @theotherafrika

Propaganda, Media, Regime Change, South Africa and the Myth of a South African Powerhouse – a reality check.

By Udo W. Froese, published columnist, independent political and socio-economic analyst based in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Adolf Hitler’s propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels declared, if you have to use a lie to propagate your course, you would have to repeat it more often than possible and use the established mainstream media to turn it into a publicly acceptable truth.

A key CIA informer, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, admitted he lied about his allegations that Iraq had “weapons-of-mass-destruction”. He proudly announced that he would lie again to “bring democracy to the people of Iraq”.

When the international West unleashed its war against the people of Iraq, this deliberately unscrupulous and intentional lie for “democracy” cost over a million innocent human lives. “Weapons-of-mass-destruction (WMD)” was the popular media propaganda to motivate that Holocaust. The international West’s “war correspondents” became “embedded to be able to report from the front” meaning, openly travelling in and reporting from US/UK tanks, armoured vehicles and military bases.

In Shakespeare’s English it is said, “all is fair in love and war”. You could add, the first victim in every war is the truth. Today’s global media often refers to “sweet, sweet lies and the ugly truth”.

Life’s experience taught this columnist that the victim of the propagated lie, cunningly packaged as truth, becomes its most ferocious defender and would die defending it.

A Savage War For” Peace and Democracy” assisted by a Global Propaganda War.

The destabilisation of North African countries and the Mid East, including Libya, was clearly explained in the international Western media networks. CNN, BBCW, SKY NEWS, EUROPE NEWS, AL JAZEERA, South Africa’s electronic media with the support of the print media, sang in unison from ‘the same hymnbook and from the same page’, as guided by former US president George W. Bush Jr. and France’s head-of-state, Nicolas Sarkozy, at a Breton Woods summit in 2008.

The global mainstream media describe the uprisings in North Africa and the Mid East as the “Arab Spring”, lauding the “people’s peaceful drive for democracy”, throwing their weight behind rebels that were described as “pro-democracy change agents” and condemning the heads-of-state and their governments as “corrupt dictators” at the same time.

Today, these countries and their people suffer the consequences. They find themselves in a daily struggle for survival to feed themselves, not being able to eat their freshly fought for “democracy”.

Yet, the same media refuses to report on the nationwide unrests in Israel, where over 350 000 Israelis protest against Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government. Israel rebels against huge prize hikes and an exorbitantly high cost of living.

The courageous former South African journalist, Paula Slier, reports on those uprisings daily for over three weeks. Slier is now based in Israel.

The international West’s media analysts and geo-political commentators openly admitted that their intelligence forces had prepared those “regime changes”, in some cases for over a period of twenty years, immediately after the “Cold War”. The foreign intelligence services issued the “peace-loving, pro-democracy protestors” with arms and ammunition, uniforms, ration packs and military hardware and guidance. In the case of Libya, they created a new, national bank overnight. Libya’s oil is a major motivator.

The organisation of the “pro-democracy change agents” was made possible through the media and modern-day high technology telecoms, which include social networking sites such as “Twitter”, “FaceBook” and “MySpace”. The “Blackberry’s” sophisticated technology BBM is of assistance too. So is money, lots of it.

Above-mentioned are the same technological mechanisms and tactics used to enforce US/UK/EU/Israel/Canadian/Australian/New Zealand led “globalisation”. A seriously funded “civil society” uses the above-mentioned for their agenda of “regime change” and creating parallel government structures to governments in Third World- and African countries.

The UN Security Council, which includes South Africa, gave NATO the green light to invade Libya’s airspace. They bombed Libya to pieces. It seems, South Africa’s decision to go with the international West’s decision against Libya – a fellow African country and member of the AU – will haunt president Zuma and the ANC-led government for time to come.

Is it not the case that an irrevocably bankrupt international West without any vision has declared a covert war against China, Russia and Iran?  It is this reason for hitting on those small countries to clear North Africa and the Mid East in order to keep the feared forces out of the Mediterranean area. At the same time, countries that have economic and business relations with China, Russia and Iran are destabilised whilst their political leadership would be taken to the neo-colonial International Crimes Court (ICC) in The Hague, the Netherlands, Europe.

Syria, for example, is said to suffer at the hands of foreign interests, because of its relationship with Iran. Powerful international Western countries mentioned to undermine Syria are the USA, Israel, Saudi Arabia and possibly also latecomer, Turkey.

US Secretary-of-State, Hillary Rodham-Clinton, called for economic and financial sanctions against Syria. She urged China, Russia and India at the same time to immediately stop trading with Syrian oil, as they are major investors in Syria’s oil industry. Clinton is perceived to command the real power in Washington DC.

South Africa’s media shows its undemocratic, neo-liberal one-sidedness too.

Two seasoned columnists expressed their opinions in one of South Africa’s newspapers. They were published and fired. One humorously described the behaviour of the people of mixed race (called Coloureds in SA). The other writer criticised an editor of a Sunday newspaper, at the same time defending the leader of the African National Congress’s Youth League (ANCYL), Julius Malema. Both writers are black-African South Africans.

On the one hand, the ruling ANC’s tripartite partner, COSATU, and South Africa’s “civil society” viciously attack the governments of neighbouring Swaziland and Zimbabwe, more particularly King Mswati III and President Robert G. Mugabe. Zealously committed opposition political parties-, the international Western- and their media support are tirelessly at work reporting negatively on Swaziland and Zimbabwe, pushing for “regime change” in both countries.

On the other hand, when the ANCYL and Malema vocalise their support of a “regime change” in neighbouring Botswana, the same ANC, “civil society” and certain minority groups expect the ANC leadership to fire the youth league leader. One would expect, what is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Following could be contributing reasons for ANCYL call for a “regime change” in Botswana.

Some nine years ago media- and political analysts described Botswana as the ‘Trojan Horse’ in the SADC region, because of its US American airbase, US satellite command and monitoring station and regular joint military manoeuvres with the US army in Botswana. Even Israeli forces were mentioned to be present in Botswana, a country ruled by President Lt. Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama, Commanding Officer of the Botswana Armed Forces and former Minister of Defence.

In those years Botswana’s presidential spokesman was also identified as a US citizen, who advised Botswana’s head-of-state then to withdraw from the unanimous SADC decision to bring Zimbabwe back into the ranks of the British Commonwealth at its summit in Abuja, Nigeria, in December 2003.

Khama hosted Zimbabwe’s MDC-T president, Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and his colleague, Tendai Biti, today Minister of Finance in Harare. They claimed that they had to fear for their lives. Then Khama publicly criticised neighbouring Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe and the ruling ZANU-PF.

The above-mentioned developments and the setting up of the US’s AFRICA COMMAND (AFRICOM) in Botswana and Namibia do not seem to have created a sense of security among SADC members.

Bankrupt propaganda mechanism protecting same old status quo.

In South Africa too the media ‘sings from the same hymnbook and from the same page’ – a happy collusion between the owners and shareholders of the publishing companies, the advertising industry and the “captains of industry”. This small elite has often been described as an “incestuous family of inhumane and greedy oligarchs”, “enemies of democracy” and interested in profits only by furthering structured poverty among the majority of the country’s and the regions’ population. From the onset, those few oligarchs paid for and benefited from colonial-apartheid. It worked for their interest. They never had to answer to anyone for their unscrupulous vice-grip on people’s lives and their future. On the contrary, they benefited hugely from an ANC-led government in a “new” South Africa. This is described as “free market economy”, based on international Western neo-liberal capitalism. A better description would be “centralised corporatisation” and “neo-fascism”, the same side of the same coin.

Two media houses have embarked on a national campaign of “Lead SA”. That campaign focuses on fixing of potholes, driving with lights-on during the day, anti-crime and pro-police support, a positive input into the daily lives of South Africans etc. for now, to establish itself in the public domain. It is to popularise their nation-wide drive for “Lead SA”.

The same media company’s talk-radios employ hosts and research teams that openly promote “regime change” through “peaceful, pro-democracy, protests” in Zimbabwe and Swaziland, calling on their listeners to “assist” their neighbours with efforts for a “regime change”.

This columnist called in to inform the host, her team and the station that such propaganda-for-destabilisation in souvereign, neighbouring countries is illegitimate, possibly illegal and unconstitutional. The producer demanded, what statement would have to be made on air. However, when told this would not be the case, the producer insisted that the caller should promote same pro-democratic call for interference in souvereign neighbours and members of the SADC. This writer stood his ground. The producer hung up.

The media’s “Lead SA” campaign seems quite similar to the “pro-democracy” forces in northern Africa and the Mid East, being used to ferment civil unrest in souvereign neighbouring countries to assist with “regime change”. Besides the modern technology of mobile phones and computers, could such media not also be used for a similar “regime change” in South Africa under president Jacob Zuma and the ruling ANC?

Both media companies are foreign owned and controlled. One knighted British subject and media baron, former rugby player, Sir Tony O’Reilly, and the other, the Kirsch family together with a local trade union fund, to give it local credibility. It is seriously alleged that the latter deploys a former member of SA’s colonial-apartheid tri-cameral parliament under the late P. W. Botha for the minority Indian population group, Yussuf Ambramjee to head “Lead SA”.

Democracy, freedom of speech and freedom of association seem seriously limited in South Africa. In fact, those democratic developments are now under threat.

South Africa’s media ombudsman, Joe Thloloe, seems just too happy with the state of affairs of such bigotry and repeated contradictions. So seems the South African National Editors’ Forum (SANEF). So seem the media barons and their minions. So seems the general public, who have access to that media, which happens to make out hardly five percent of the total population of South Africa. It is that small minority only that can afford the media and the high costs of modern technology.

The established right-wing South African daily newspaper, ‘The Citizen”, remains in national circulation, despite it having been set up with stolen tax funds from the public during the colonial-apartheid regime. This newspaper was funded and launched in the 1970s by colonial-apartheid’s dr. rugby, dr. Louis Luyt and the notorious Department of Information under Minister dr. Connie Mulder and his director, dr. Eschel Rhoodie.

The editor of South Africa’s Sunday publication, “City Press”, is of Indian background. She edited the elitist investigative weekly journal, “Mail & Guardian” before. “City Press” is geared for an elite black-African market.

During one of the local radio talk shows, a caller from Soweto complained on air, that to make a person from a different, un-indigenous minority group editor of a publication, that markets itself as a “black-African newspaper” for a miniscule middle-class black-African readership is historically, culturally and traditionally off the mark, as such editor would simply not be able to understand its clientele at all.

The reputation of the Sunday publication “City Press” seems to be that of a provocateur and chief whip to streamline national thinking behind the same old status quo and agenda, discussed only behind closed doors. Meanwhile, the same powerful individuals, who own Nasionale Pers, Media 24, MNET-MultiChoice, seem to collude with and be behind the AVUSA Publishing Group and E-tv.

On the other hand, PrimeMedia and Independent Newspaper Group add their weight to the same cause, having created their “pro-democracy Lead SA” programme. That leaves the public broadcaster, the SABC, and the new daily newspaper, New Age, as the only two media organs not yet part of the national media strategies.

This writer’s column was published in the weekly “City Press” where he also wrote in defence of souvereignity, independence, democracy, tolerance and respect, understanding real African leaders such as Robert Mugabe, Sam Nujoma, Winnie Mandela, Chris Hani, Steve Biko, Kwame Nkrumah, Patrice Lumumba, Ahmed Ben Bella and many unsung heroes of the Pan-African, anti-colonial-apartheid-settler struggle and their cause.

The former editor then had the decency to call the writer, informing him that the Group CEO of Nasionale Pers/Media 24, who owns and publishes “City Press”, Koos Bekker, had told him telephonically to drop this columnist immediately, because of his analysis. But, no official reasons were given. That was in 2003, well into the “new, democratic” South Africa and Bishop Tutu’s “rainbow nation”.

Shortly thereafter this writer was published in the “Sowetan Sunday World”. This too was short lived. The analytical exposure of the geo-strategic position and the role of Botswana in the SADC and the former senior member of the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), Patricia de Lille, today Democratic Alliance (DA) mayor of Cape Town and other such exposures were just too much for the editor and his publisher.

Saving Democracy in South- and Southern Africa.

The owners of the Fourth Estate should be identified for the public and held responsible to lead by example, respecting democracy, souvereignity, media freedom, freedom of speech and freedom of association. At the same time they should be stopped through a media-watchdog to collude as transpired for example, when the enemies of president Jacob Zuma together with certain editors built a case against the incumbent president. Particularly the media should be transparent, working with government and the public.

The media’s meddling in power politics, continuous attempts in character assassination, misrepresentation of facts, contradictions, using the law and “human rights” in its favour to achieve its goals and its overall bigotry are all equal to the evil ‘blood libel’ of well paid agents-of-confusion.

As in neighbouring SADC member countries, South Africa’s ruling ANC would be well advised to set up its own national daily newspaper and become part of the regional initiative of establishing a regional weekend newspaper and add a weekly ANC party newspaper to compete with the private media. Such effort would be able to balance the media industry of South Africa and the SADC region. This form of responsible leadership would not tolerate fear or favour.

“Continental Powerhouse” – Fact or Propaganda?

In conclusion, former South African president Thabo Mbeki defined the country realistically. He described it as two societies located in the south of the African continent: (i) one majority black-African, represented by the ruling ANC, but with no access to the economy, to banks and land, to proper education – thus, historically exposed to structured poverty and (ii) the other well-to-do minority Caucasian, Eurocentric owners of the economy, most of who already had shifted their head offices and capital to the City of London under the banner of “globalisation”.

As soon as black-African South Africans show a serious interest at becoming part of the mining-, banking-, agricultural- and land sectors, its current owners and shareholders threaten a full-scale economic war, claiming as always foreign investment would stop immediately and jobs would be lost, as if black-African South Africans ever had any benefits from foreign capital. They would have to be content with a neo-liberal democracy.

For all the above-mentioned reasons, it would not make sense to perceive South Africa as a “power house of Africa”. It is however good propaganda, which suits the real owners of the status quo.

End.