South Africa And Its Ruling African National Congress Involved In A Big War

The plan to hijack the African National Congress by 2019 seems well advanced.

A massive propaganda campaign created the deception that it is ANC- and country president Jacob Zuma, who are corrupt and in that, allowed the state to be captured.

However, it is not Zuma, who is the actual target of the “counter revolutionaries”, their backers and their corporate mainstream media. There are forces both, on the inside and the outside of the ANC, hell-bent to reduce the movement to a mere second to the Democratic Alliance (DA) and its recently joined Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) in the forthcoming presidential- and national elections in 2019.

Will current ANC president Jacob Zuma and the ruling party whither the storm? Will the corporate media “stalwarts” in the movement muster a large enough constituency to counter the ANC branches nationally? Who will be the next ANC- and possibly the next country president in 2019?

It is evident that those, who launched the attack on President Zuma and the ANC, have no constituency outside the corporate media cartels, the academic political analysts, and the owners of the economy. This is the reason for them having requested to meet the ANC.

They already met with the ANC Secretary General Gwede Mantashe. He too has no constituency and knows it. But, the “stalwarts”, also known as “counter-revolutionaries”, would not admit to it. They also have realised that “Jacob Zuma’s constituency is too strong to be challenged”.

Senior ANC NEC insiders raised the questions, “Is the ANC SG, Mantashe, not also in the stable of Anglo American Corporation’s Anglo Gold Ashanti? Which hat does he actually wear? Cde. SG Mantashe (as he is also known within the ANC), will not deliver and will be out of the ANC top structure by the end of next year 2017. He is not a serious factor.”

The “counter-revolutionaries” assured their backers and the media that they will organise a strong constituency. But, they fail to explain, how they would build such constituency, despite their access to huge funds.

A senior and highly respected ANC NEC member explained to this writer under the condition of anonymity, “Two of those “stalwarts” are trying to organise constituencies for their group. Both attempt to get particular constituencies together, as they have realised that they would not be able to get to the ANC branches. One is Cde. Siphiwe Nyanda. He tries to mobilise the armed wing of the ANC’s Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) against Cde. President Zuma and the ANC. This will be a serious struggle though. It is not a constituency they will be able to rely on.”

According to the reliably well-informed senior ANC NEC member, “It is not Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa, who could be the next ANC- and country president. It seems that he was guided not to talk, because it could jeopardise his position. The main candidate for ANC presidency from those “stalwarts”, or “counter revolutionaries”, is the Reverend Frank Chikane. At one stage he was a senior officer in recalled former President and recently installed UNISA Chancellor Thabo Mbeki’s office. But, the poor priest has no constituency at all, despite mobilising the masses against the ANC from the pulpit. Chikane is also part of the “counter revolutionaries’” Rivonia Branch in Johannesburg. If the ANC has not relented by May 2017, Frank Chikane will be out of the movement.”

“The “stalwarts’” third option to build their constituency is to resuscitate the long dead and buried “United Democratic Front” (UDF). Such destructive activities would be futile though. Recalled former President Thabo Mbeki’s men, Sipho Pityana, Sydney Mufamadi and Frank Chikane work closely together.”

“By alerting all ANC branches countrywide strengthened Jacob Zuma. It will be a big fight lasting well into 2017, involving all branches. Corporates too will play a vicious role, as they muscled in since the late 1970s and manipulate from the shadows to assist with hijacking the ruling ANC. But, the ruling party and its branches understand the efforts to destroy it. It is also described as “chequebooks power politics”.”

“Meanwhile, the ANC “renegades”, as the “stalwarts” are also known, would like Zuma to draw his hat and hand over his position and that of the rest of the ANC and government to them”, senior ANC cadres explained.

A seasoned ANC NEC member made his assumed prognosis:

“First, the inevitability is expected that heads will roll before the no-confidence vote in Parliament in February next year in 2017. President Zuma is expected to agree to that move. Those include all cabinet members, who turned against the head-of-state and commander-in-chief.”

“Second, the ANC will honour its decision to hold a policy conference in May 2017 to discuss the organisational issues during the first two days.”

“Third, the ANC will whither the storm against Parliament’s no-confidence motion, pushed for by the DA-EFF.”

“Fourth, it is critical that the ANC will succeed. The chances to come out unscathed are good, as the movement currently builds confidence throughout all branches.”

“Fifth, this time the ANC will have to get strong leadership to dismantle the colonial-apartheid institutes and infrastructure totally. The revered late ANC president Oliver Tambo insisted that the ANC would need “independent popular objectives”. Without those, it would be impossible to even think of economic changes in South Africa.”

“Sixth, it has become more important than ever before that state power and institutions have to be used to dictate terms to corporates. Agriculture and the land issue must be in their doing. Here is a perfect example, of how the EFF has hijacked the ANC’s policy debate.”

Finally, if the above-mentioned prognostic assumptions would come true, the ANC would win all the way; possibly receive over 66% of the national vote by 2019.

But, where would the ANC find those leaders to do just that?

“The neighbouring Southern African Development Community (SADC) would not be able to do anything, neither the rest of Africa and nor its African Union, unless the citadel of the “counter revolutionary forces” has been totally destroyed. So far, South Africa has let this region down. It is fact, if the ANC and South Africa are destroyed, particularly Britain and Germany would face serious economic trouble”, a senior ANC NEC member pointed out.

He added, “If South Africa and the ANC are strong, Africa’s and the world economies would be strengthened.”


Follow twitter handle: @theotherafrika

Read blog:




South Africa’s Treasury Dumped The Economy In Bad Sovereign Debt

Currently, South Africa sits on 50-percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in sovereign debt. This is also called “debt financing”. It is in fact, a direct result from the era of the British theoretician John Maynard-Keynes’ theory of “debt financing”. It is however, a discredited theory, as there is simply no logic in his thinking.

EU members today have a deficit financing standing at over 80-percent debt to the GDP ratio.

The United States of America sit with over 110-percent of debt to GDP financing. America’s sovereign debt stands at US$17trillion. The US sovereign debt has therefore, created the largest nation of debtors in the history of the world. That exorbitant debt was built within sixteen years from the time Bill Clinton was US president onwards. At a standing GDP of US$15trillion, the debt of US$17trillion, would never be paid off.

The above translates into serious inequalities for the American citizenry and more strife for the world at large in the form of more wars, more economic restraining measures against the rest of the world.

Back to South Africa, where the controversial regulatory banking law, FICA, was tabled to be signed by president Zuma. However, the ANC Youth League appealed to the president, not to sign it.

An independent economist comments under the condition of anonymity, “FICA is constitutional mischief. South Africa is a sovereign state, which has to apply the constitution and live with it. The Treasury’s mischievous attempt to change this around by compiling the damaging FICA bill, claiming, it is necessary to monitor and control money laundering and financing of terrorism, is simply unacceptable. FICA is certainly not necessary in South Africa.”

This country has a constitutional democracy and sovereign state. The state certainly has no mandate to suspend the constitutional rights of its citizens on the basis that the country is a member of the United Nations (UN).

“As far as FICA is concerned, the national Treasury launched an assault on the constitutional rights of South Africa’s citizens through the dishonest application of FICA, claiming to frighten off corruption and even worse, transferring the criminal justice system, vesting it into the hands of the private banking cartel.” “This move can aptly be described as a major step closer to a rough banana republic status”, the above-mentioned senior economist added.

He further asked, “Why would South Africa’s national Treasury invite, furnish all required information and pay foreign UK-US ratings agencies – Standard & Poor, Moody’s and Fitch – to be reliably downgraded? That service does not come for free. South Africa’s Treasury pays for being downgraded. Who is responsible for such illogical and self-destructive buffoonery?”

Meanwhile, president Zuma has to send FICA back to parliament. At the same time, it is national Treasury’s job to re-finance sovereign debt. This is however, not done. Why would Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan renege on following it through?

“Not addressing sovereign debt, South Africa can forget to solve the challenges of the three evils, inequality, unemployment and poverty. It is an unbelievable mess. Like Trevor Manuel and Nhlanhla Nene, Pravin Gordhan seems clueless and incapable to solve that situation,” a former director of the country’s Central Bank complained.

Gordhan’s first point on the agenda should be that of re-financing sovereign debt. He admitted in parliament, “We have to put national interests first.” Please follow your statement. You should know what to do. If not, you are definitely heading the wrong portfolio.




Follow the twitter account: @theotherafrika


Corporate Racism A Real Threat To South Africa And Southern African Development Community’s Security

South Africa’s senior government circles seem seriously worried of social and political attrition after the recent collapse of the Rand currency.


Investigative writer, Barry Sergeant documented in his book, “The Assault On The Rand – Kevin Wakeford And The Battle To Safe A Currency”, that the collapse of the Rand in 2001/2 was described then as “a financial crisis of epic proportions”.”


A senior and reliable source from within the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) points out, “The 2002 story of the collapse of the Rand currency is being repeated all over again in 2015 and 2016.”


“The very same corporate interests and Rand hedged stocks are in the process of implementing a strategy that will cause a collapse in the value of the Rand. In doing so, those treasonous collusions will boost the myopic and opportunistically narrow business interests, while the rest of the region’s citizenry witness their little wealth and disposable income erode beyond recognition,” a senior stockbroker and economic advisor explained under the condition of anonymity.


It directly affects the currencies of Namibia, Lesotho, and Swaziland.


British ‘Barclays Bank Africa Plc’ and its South African banking subsidiary, ‘Amalgamated Banks of South Africa’ (ABSA) with Maria Ramos at the helm, wife of former minister of finance, Trevor Manuel, and the US banker, ‘Goldman Sachs’ headed by Colin Coleman, stand accused of undermining South Africa’s currency value, having contributed to the sharp fall of the Rand.


Meanwhile, banks, the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE), certain ANC members, the media and academics blame president Jacob Zuma for the fall of the Rand. The ANC Youth League countered, accusing the British Barclays Bank Africa Plc and the US Goldman Sachs of collusion to collapse South Africa’s sovereign currency.


ANC Youth League spokesperson, Mlondi Mkhize stated at a media conference, “South Africa has become a target of the anti-BRICS countries. British Barclays Bank Plc is shrewd in keeping attention from itself.”


The massive outflow of capital assisted the fall of the Rand. This is not always determined by normal trade developments, but caused by conscious decisions made by influential financiers, driven by a racist approach to the economy, also known as Afropessimism. It finally resulted in grand apartheid’s structured poverty.


Young Caucasian males have a racist, anti-Africa view in the world of finance. With the slightest ripple from Africa, they hedge against the Rand, meaning, selling the Rand. US-Goldman Sachs and British Barclays Bank Africa Plc instigated a “herd mentality” against the Rand, hedging and selling the currency.


The same globalist bankers reasoned in 2001 that it was Zimbabwe’s president Robert Mugabe and his ruling party ZANU-PF’s “land grab”, which caused the Rand to fall.


But, even before Zimbabwe’s land issue had taken off, the Rand was knocked. Interestingly, the ‘Rand Commission of Inquiry’ into the fall of the Rand caused the currency to bounce back from R13.85 per US$1 to R5.50 per US$1 and that before Zimbabwe’s land issue was in full swing.


In a globalist new economic world order context, South Africa’s president Jacob Zuma sacked his former minister of finance, Nene, and appointed the unknown Van Rooyen. But, that appointment lasted only four days. Former finance minister Pravin Gordhan was re-appointed as minister of finance.


This incident showed that the president listens to his senior party officials and makes the necessary changes. It should be viewed as “democracy-at-work”. However, rightwing Afropessimistic elements intensified the war-of-attrition against Zuma.


This could have serious implications not only for South Africa, but also for sub-Saharan Africa. A scenario of a so-called “perfect storm” is being created. Food rights are being undermined.


The ‘Rand Commission’ of 2002 should be reinstituted to give its former members, Gunshaw and Myburgh, the opportunity to rebuild their tarnished reputation, as they suffered much embarrassment by simply not doing their investigative work decently.


Not a single arrest was made. It is Gunshaw and Myburgh’s shoddy work that stands to be blamed for the continuation of the delinquent behavior within the market with impunity.


South Africa desperately needs to institute market scrutiny through its regulators such as the Reserve Bank as regulator of the country’s currency; the Financial Services Board, commonly known as FSB, which works on a voluntary basis with laws that give it teeth. Then there are the Commercial Crimes Unit and the Intelligence Unit of SARS. All of them have the powers to assist monitoring and correcting the current devaluation of the Rand.


In 2002 a rightwing element mobilized for a coup against the ANC-led government. They were caught in time. Many of them still serve their jail sentence for treason.


Senior economic observers and a retired general of the SANDF, who spoke under the condition of anonymity explain, “This time around, South Africans are made to suffer again from a dangerous deception. The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) are led by a “commander-in-chief”, Julius Malema, wearing red berets, military attire, masquerading as “freedom fighters”, fighting a “revolution”, mobilising against government and its structures.”


“Fees must fall”, “Zuma must fall” and other such calls are advertised nationwide. The EFF did not organise the uprisings. It arrived opportunistically when those mass marches started and recruited students and youth also outside these organisations. South Africa can’t afford lawlessness.”


The above-mentioned would seem like the “preparations for a perfect storm, where ordinary people out of sheer hardship rise up against the scapegoat, the ANC. Certain forces use Zuma’s bad sentiment against him and harness the angry and poor in a drive to unleash national destabilisation. It seems that conditions would be rife for a counter-revolution.”


Such a development is similar to the uprisings in Nicaragua in the early to mid 1980s. The US-CIA had backed the Contras, trained them as counter-revolutionaries, having destroyed the real revolution. The Contras then took over power.


One of South Africa’s leading economists explained, “At the moment the Rand has lost a third of its value within a few weeks. The end-result depends on what happens to the Rand. Every single citizen is affected. It is like HIV and Aids. All goods in South Africa are US Dollar denominated. Thirty percent of the Rand value is taken off the top of the medical aid funds, insurance funds and pension funds. Everyone’s wealth is measured in US Dollars. The mentioned developments will materialize in national unrests leading to the local government elections this year in 2016. It could affect the entire continent.”


South Africa should seek help from its BRICS partners for protection against the attacks on its economy. BRICS know what is happening and they know what is going to happen. A friend in need is a friend indeed. The imperialist West has repeatedly and reliably shown its brutal hand of exploitation and plunder of South Africa and Africa’s resources. It is not South Africa’s friend.



Through Infantile Opportunism, South Africa’s Political Opposition, Academia And Media Mislead The Public, Strangulating Democratic Debate

Despite democracy, transparency, a Bill of Rights, a liberal Constitution, as well as freedom of association, of choice, of movement and of speech, South Africa’s political opposition, academia and media shy away from addressing the secret Sunset Clauses, which apartheid-president FW de Klerk and Joe Slovo, brought to the CODESA negotiations pre-1994. The Sunset Clauses remain secret to date.

Yet, at the same time, there is an obsession with democracy, transparency, the constitution, the judiciary and the rule-of-law, not to mention Nkandla, corruption, service delivery, rugby and cricket. A clear line of political opportunism looks the other way when in actual fact and particularly, ‘real politick’ needs to be addressed. However, the opposition to the ANC is vocal on president Zuma’s private residence and the EFF dress code in Parliament.

The ill-gotten properties of the apartheid regime elite in the former Bantustans, in Portugal, Argentina, Chile, Mauritius, Namibia, Paraguay, Uruguay and the Seychelles would be listed with South Africa’s department of public works and others. Again, neither the opposition, nor the academia, nor the media spent as much as a paragraph on those properties and their owners.

Political opportunism ignores the real issues. It focuses on soft targets such as Nkandla and service delivery. It refuses to debate the Sunset Clauses and the gerrymandering of the notorious Demarcation Board.

In that context the democratic debate remains on the periphery. In other words, they agree to debate democracy, but disagree to address the cornerstone that formed South Africa’s democracy – the Sunset Clauses and the Demarcation Board, that make democracy almost unworkable.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Alliance went to court to demand the spy tapes. To date it seems that there was nothing much in those spy tapes. But actually, the court actions are mere side issues. True democrats should have addressed the Sunset Clauses, the gerrymandering of the Demarcation Board, a one-person, one-vote electoral system in a constituent assembly.

Is the above-mentioned not deception on the highest level then? There seems to be a consensus that unites all opposition parties, academia and media to sing the same hymn from the same hymnbook to the same tune, avoiding the country’s realities that actually need to be brought out into the open.

As long as the Sunset Clauses remain secret and unpublished, corruption will never end and people will continue to be compromised. As long as the Demarcation Board exists, electoral fraud will be committed through gerrymandering, while the ANC’s voter base is whittled away.

Another issue that needs a free national democratic debate is the ‘proportional representation’, which was implemented through electoral laws. The ruling ANC agreed on proportional representation. The voting public was however, not informed.

One of the respected senior members of the ANC NEC and NWC reminded this writer, “Twenty-one years since the first democratic elections it would be advisable for the ANC to free itself from the traps of the pre-1994 negotiations and return to a one-person, one-vote system and a constituent assembly.”

“The majority of South Africans in the struggle led by OR Tambo, Albert Luthuli, Robert Sobukwe, Chris Hani, Govan Mbeki, Anthony Lembede, Duma Nokwe, Dan Tlhome, Moses Kotane, Mark Shope, Moses Mabide, Dr. Limbada, Dr. Neville Alexander and dr. Sammie Marx, as well as the numerous freedom fighters, who perished in the war against apartheid. They fought for freedom against an evil, exclusive and elitist colonial-apartheid system. Their ideal was a one-person, one-vote system in a constituent assembly to set all South Africans free. They fought for the implementation of the Freedom Charter,” the old ANC NEC member explained. The UN defined apartheid as ‘crime against humanity’.

He continued, “It is disappointing to observe that the Freedom Charter is no longer discussed. No platforms have been created to debate the Freedom Charter. Hence, opportunistic political parties such as the “Economic Freedom Fighters” (EFF) and the “Congress of the People” (COPE) make efforts in their deception to claim that they will address the Freedom Charter. The real freedom fighters would turn in their graves.”

Meanwhile, there are no serious policy debates. In stead, institutionalised armchair academics and the media encourage the EFF and the DA to commit anarchy in order to bring about a failed state. The mindset – “I told you so. Blacks (ANC) can’t manage a state!” – prevails.

The senior ANC NEC member further explains, “The honourable action to take now would be to lead the debate on the Freedom Charter, publish all Sunset Clauses and dismantle the Demarcation Board. The fundamental key to a good future for all would be the economic policies. Industrialisation needs to be fostered and a technological hub needs to be created. But, this cannot be part of the industrial and economic elite. It should never land in those hands, as it would certainly be destroyed.”

“You can see how the IMF-World Bank keep their stranglehold on Third Wold countries, continuously destroying emerging markets through misleading, bad policies. The Breton Woods Institutions have never come in good faith. Why would they now?”

The ANC would need to develop a strategy within the ambit of BRICS. The BRICS Development Bank currently based in Shanghai, China, should be nurtured. Patriotic capitalism would best be promoted, as that would not withhold cash, but reinvest it in the local economies. The majority of the foreign owned companies do not reinvest anywhere in South Africa and the SADC region. They rather hoard their capital, hindering local economic development. Those owners play politics. Hence, there is an upward spiral of unemployment of 25%, as recorded by Stats-SA. The majority of the unemployed are the youth and the women. If the IMF-World Bank directives and policies would be followed, it would lead to total destruction of South Africa’s economy.

The country’s parastatals are a case in point, more particularly Eskom, the electricity supplier and the national water supplier. Cabinet was made aware back in 1998 that Eskom and the water supplier would run into serious problems. So far, no strategic initiative was taken to ensure that Eskom would receive a well-structured investment programme with experienced and strong management.

Both, senior ANC NEC members as well as owners of the small and medium sized economy suggest that an inter-ministerial commission should be set up to deal with Eskom and the national water provider. They ask, “Are South Africans gradually set up for privatisation, so that the private sector can buy the parastatals for a song? Would this not impoverish the majority of the population? Could that be the reason, why no particular guidance is given? Why no action, but in return just silence?”

Does South Africa’s Public Protector Have Her Own Political Agenda?

What seems clear for the ruling African National Congress’s former military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe and its Veterans’ Association (MKVA) is, as it is often said, “We know an enemy agent by his/her conduct.”

At the same time they admit, “It is difficult to prove that a spy is a spy. But, as former MK members, we know how foreign intelligence works. We have that expertise among us.”

The ANC is however, not alone with the experience and knowledge, who a foreign-linked agent is and who infiltrated the ruling party and its alliance partners.

Namibia’s SWAPO Party, Angola’s MPLA, Mozambique’s Frelimo and Zimbabwe’s ZANU-PF have similar experiences and knowledge. Those foreign-linked agents often occupy strategic key positions and some of them even pose as populists such as Ronnie Kasrils. They often stand accused of attempting to ferment factionalism, an age-old tactic to divide and destroy ruling parties that grew from popular liberation struggle movements.

In the case of South Africa it seems that pressure is continuously applied from many sides to discredit and possibly topple the head-of-state. That war of attrition has long been taken to the corporate mainstream media. The president’s private home, Nkandla, is in the focus of a host of political opposition parties, academics, the judiciary, the owners of the economy and their media.

The Public Protector’s head, advocate Thuli Madonsela, leading the investigations of the funds spent on Nkandla, has taken her report to the same public platform. She challenges the head-of-state, using the media. Advocate Madonsela and the corporate media have found president Zuma guilty of having taken R246million from the public coffers.

The Public Protector is a Chapter-9 Institution and therefore, answerable to parliament. According to the constitution of the land, all Chapter-9 Institutions, without exception, have to follow the rules as laid down by parliament. They have to submit their reports to parliament first. The media should not be approached and should certainly not be put above parliament.

Not so, advocate Madonsela seems to argue. She seems above the constitution of the country. In fact, she now seems to be more powerful than parliament and the president together. In other words, she wilfully ignores the existing rules. In that context, her approach could be viewed as unconstitutional and unprocedural.

After careful research, such action could be seen as treasonous. Is Thuli Madonsela aware that she could have committed high treason? As one constitutional lawyer put it, “Advocate Madonsela’s actions of attacking the head-of-state from the public platform of the media, has fallen directly into the ambit of high treason. It could be interpreted as an attempt to assist with overthrowing the head-of-state. There is no debate. She could be charged with high treason.”

By definition, high treason according to the Oxford dictionary is “the crime of betraying one’s country esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign, or overthrow the government.”

“Madonsela engaged in discrediting the president and parliament, taking a stand in the court of public opinion, judging and finding the president guilty”, a senior member of the ANC NEC and NWC explained under the condition of anonymity.

In addition to above, Madonsela was meant to have a meeting in Harare, Zimbabwe, last year to address the ruling party and its leadership as well as the media there on her report on president Jacob Zuma’s private home, Nkandla. She was to attack Zuma from a public platform there coming in from outside South Africa. That would have caused division in the SADC region.

However, President Robert Mugabe would not have this. He did not allow Madonsela to use Zimbabwe as her platform to conduct her nefarious political agenda against South Africa’s head-of-state and commander-in-chief.

In addition to above, Zimbabwe’s authorities, as well as Kenya’s government know the Kenyan academic, professor Shedrack Gutto and his role as a political commentator and agitator well. He became a naturalised South African where he is now based as a constitutional law expert and director for the Centre for African Renaissance Studies at UNISA.

A reliable source explains, “In that capacity he acts as Madonsela’s political advisor. He has become a media celebrity, always commenting from every media platform on political and so-called constitutional matters. Gutto uses Madonsela to attack South Africa’s president.”

Many senior ANC NEC and NWC members angrily insist, “Gutto’s South African citizenship will have to be revoked with immediate effect. He should return to his home country (Kenya) and face the music for reasons of political agitation.”

“Forget reducing the attack from ministers and deputy ministers on Madonsela as a mere political attack. She is viewed to have committed high treason and should be charged for it.”

It has been clearly put to this writer, “South Africa’s public protector is not above the head-of-state and commander-in-chief. Neither are she and her chapter-9 institution above parliament. Madonsela should not be allowed to discredit the country’s souvereign structures.”

Twitter Handle: @theotherafrika

Follow my Blog:

FNB Joburg Art Fair: Selling the African Birthright

This is an open letter to the Board of First National Bank Limited as sponsors of the Joburg Art Fair; the organisers of the FNB Joburg Art Fair; to the editors of South Africa’s print and electronic media and its Ombudsmen and the City of Johannesburg. The ruling party, the ANC in Luthuli House, the South African government’s line ministries, the headquarters of COSATU and the SACP, as well as the head office of the SADC in Gaborone, Botswana, and all African Embassies, High Commissions, Consulate-Generals and Consulates, have been addressed and copied. 


Ayanda Mabulu, you have done the unspeakable, like so many of those counter-revolutionaries, mercenaries, drug dealers, gunrunners and warmongers – you have sold your African birthright … and yes, it is worse. You have no shame at all, selling your criminal act, a so-called “painting”, to the owners of houses, only they dare describe as “art galleries”. Together, you then go on to display cowardice, hiding behind over-managed “human rights”, “freedom of speech”, “freedom of expression” and a host of “freedoms”, including South Africa’s judiciary, which you then collectively exploit and hijack.

Mr. Mabulu, you ride on the back of a tired Marikana debacle, which you most likely do not even fully understand, depicting it as “Yakhali ‘inkomo” (Black Man’s Cry), displaying the Head of State and the Commander-in-Chief of the Republic of South Africa and the ruling ANC, Jacob Zuma, at his age of 71 years, a father and grandfather, crushing the head of a striking mineworker under his foot, while Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II and her son, Prince Charles, look on from a gallery with blood dripping from the ANC emblem, mounted on top of that painted ‘gallery’.  

Shame on you, for you have sold your birthright for your five minutes of controversial infamy in the media limelight and a few pieces of cheap, blended mock silver. In this context, you have denied yourself the inheritance of being an African, while posing as indigenous “African artist”. This country and this continent are no part of your mindset. You cannot call it your home.

It is clear that the history of the ruling African National Congress and its sacrifices to rid South Africa and the southern African region of – what the United Nations Organisation (UNO) defined as ‘crime against humanity’ – are neither understood, nor respected.

President Jacob Zuma, as a cadre, a soldier and eventual head of the ANC Intelligence, stood his ground and fought colonial-apartheid at great cost. When urban warfare took over the townships in KwaZulu/Natal between 1992 and 1994 and beyond, it was Jacob Zuma who effectively brought that bloodletting to an end.

It also demonstrates that South African so-called “art galleries” and their sponsors including the banking industry do not have any interest in, thus no respect for the culture, history and traditions of the indigenous African majority. Their motto is profits, profits, and profits before anything else and at any cost. By sponsoring and hosting such “art” exhibitions, those criminal distortions make it clear that racism is far from over. National reconciliation has been reduced to an insulting and arrogant lie.

It is interesting how thunderously quiet opposition political parties and the likes of Bishop Desmond Tutu and the Chief Rabbi, Warren Goldstein, have been in both cases, where president Jacob Zuma and the ANC have been ridiculed in public “art galleries” with the assistance of a hostile corporate mainstream media. First, the Goodman Gallery in Johannesburg’s northern suburb of Rosebank and now, at the FNB Joburg Art Fair, South Africa’s president has been insulted and ridiculed.

Do these “church leaders” and the opposition political parties actually support racism and polarisation of South Africa? Is this freedom? Whose freedom is it really? Why hide behind all these misleading “freedoms”, an over-liberal constitution and a yet to be revised judiciary, when those “freedoms” were delivered at great cost by the same people you so cunningly discriminate against in the same way, colonial-apartheid did? This has turned democracy into the farce it is today.

It would be the responsible duty of all concerned citizens and the Tripartite Alliance to collectively take serious action now to ensure that such criminal and vulgar racism will never be repeated again. That disrespectful “art” exhibition at the ‘FNB Joburg Art Fair’ and its organisers as well as all “art” galleries need to know and need to be made to understand that colonial-apartheid has its roots in the shameful murderous and discriminating history of this country.

The photographer, David Goldblatt, should certainly know better. When he removed his photographic exhibition from that fair in protest at the organisers so-called “censorship” of Mabulu’s “artwork”, Goldblatt showed his true colours. It could put his lifelong work under a huge question mark. He would have been much better off, had he kept his photographs at his home instead.

Germany has rightfully outlawed any and every form of discrimination against the Jews.

It is indeed unnerving to note that with reliable continuity an aggressive right-wing neo-colonial-apartheid racist minority lobby living comfortably in South Africa, promotes the colonial-apartheid crime of fascist racism through some of the “art galleries”, whilst marketing it through the media under the guise of “democratic civil rights”.

Indeed, they know how much they benefitted from the colonial-apartheid past, how they assisted in the plunder of South and southern Africa’s natural resources at huge cost of lives of the indigenous African majority to only enrich themselves and their structures abroad. They know exactly, who they are.

Mind you, those same plunder-barons have not appeared in front of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and have thus, not been granted amnesty and have therefore, no indemnity. Yet, they have no shame to add insult to injury, displaying their collective primitive and arrogant disrespect for everything African. Their massive financial-, property-, mining- and other business interests, including the mass-sale of skin-lightening creams for “those stupid” Africans based on reckless greed, remain hugely profitable and very much protected. Their African plunder-safari on the “dark continent” would have to come to its rightful end, the sooner the better. What gives them that confidence?

Therefore, I believe that the sponsors of the FNB Joburg Art Fair should be listed in this letter:

–       FNB

–       Gauteng Provincial Government

–       Goethe Institute

–       Business Day Wanted Magazine

–       Pirelli SA

–       National Arts Council of South Africa

–       Areva

–       Total

–       Pommery Champagne

–       Department of Arts and Culture of South Africa

Until that chapter in this country’s shameful history has been firmly closed, this confusing and unnatural co-existence will always stand in the way of national reconciliation and stability.

As a concerned and embarrassed citizen of this country, I would like to appeal to fellow non-racists and all structures in place, to deal with such heinously criminal disorders.

Thank you.


Udo W. Froese

South Africa and the Mangaung Cliff

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


The African National Congress (ANC) will choose a new leadership at its historic Conference in Mangaung (Bloemfontein) in a few weeks from now. The lessons from the previous conference in Polokwane in the northern Province of Limpopo should be clear and debated in order not to repeat missed opportunities.

It is quite clear that the democrats actually ride the moral high ground in South Africa. When the results were known in Polokwane in December 2007, the democrats had taken the moral high ground.

It is important that the results of the elections would be accepted, as it is important to acknowledge the newly elected leader. In fact, the full conference of the ANC would have to pledge its support of the new leader.

A fine example is the recent elections in the US. When the incumbent won a second term, his opponent, Mitt Romney, pledged his and his party’s full support for president Barak Obama. No less is expected from the ANC and all democratic structures that form the political landscape of South Africa. In that light, the ones, who have lost would have to accept their defeat gracefully, bearing the nation’s interest at heart.

One of the lessons learnt from Polokwane is that the recalled ANC and country president, Thabo Mbeki, refused to accept the election outcome. It seems wrong to go to an election, finally loose and then dissent to form a new political party in opposition to the 100-year-old ANC. That shows political bankruptcy and opportunism. The absence of sincere commitment is obvious, as dirty politicking followed. Those opted to occupy the moral low ground.

Will this be the case at Mangaung? Will the ruling ANC elect another leader, or will the incumbent, or his challenger show South Africans the moral high ground? Will the full ANC and the country’s leadership pledge to serve under the democratically elected new leader? Or, will South Africa be exposed to a similar scenario as Polokwane? What would it mean to the average South African to accept the newly elected ANC leader and president of the country and work under him?

It must be of serious concern to every South African, if the ANC looses the forthcoming elections, as strived for by a concerted front of mischievous institutionalised armchair academic analysts, the corporate media, the political opposition and the financiers in the shadows – the old architects of apartheid. Would the looser of those elections accept the outcome?

By not having accepted the popular election-outcome of a new leader from Polokwane, recalled, former president Thabo Mbeki lost the opportunity and demonstrated that he is indeed not a democrat.

If the looser does not accept the election-outcome, how will it be addressed? How will the looser, his inner circle and backers deal with it? Will a loosing leader strategise and plot against the democratically elected one? Or, will he accept his defeat?

Mbeki, who had gunned for a third term in office, squandered his opportunity to build his legacy. He did not accept that he had actually lost in Polokwane. In other words, Thabo Mbeki showed his weakness to the general electorate and South Africa at large. Will South Africa see a replay of Polokwane, of Mbeki, of Cope? Or, will the newly elected ANC leadership coming out of Mangaung be accepted and respected?

In a radio-interview with Cope leaders, Mosioua Lekota and Mluleki George, Prime Media staff forgot to ask the most obvious questions, allowing both Cope leaders to lambast the ANC. – Why split from the ANC after the elections and not before, if they had problems with the movement? Why was Cope not formed before the ANC conference in Polokwane? The attacks on the ANC after Polokwane therefore, were not based on principles, but rather on opportunism. A desperate case of moral bankruptcy showed its ugly face.

Throwing the toys out of the cot by snubbing the incumbent, Thabo Mbeki shows for all to see that he is the weakest, pseudo-intellectual link. In fact, it is a worst-case scenario of infantile behaviour.

The all-out propaganda of the rightwing and its hard work at destroying the ruling ANC from within drives to achieve national intimidation of the electorate. This is enforced through national destabilisation. That Machiavellian approach hopes to force the majority of the electorate away from voting for the ANC and, if that fails, from voting all together.

Soon South Africans will see who will fall off the Mangaung-Cliff.