---
title: 'The Plot Against South Africa'
url: 'https://samisdat.in/books/the-plot-against-south-africa-1989/read'
markdown: 'https://samisdat.in/books/the-plot-against-south-africa-1989/read.md'
lang: eng
date: '1989-01-30'
description: 'Klaus D. Vaqué 1989 Varama pubi ishers – pretoria Originally published under the title: VERRAT AN SÜDAFRIKA (1988) Translated by Tom McGhee THE PLOT AGAINST SOUTH AFRICA Copyright © 1989 by Klaus D. Vaqué Cover design by Sigi Dannheimer ISBN 0-620-14537-4 Contents FOREWORD 1 INTRODUCTION…'
---

![](https://samisdat.in/user/pages/03.books/1989%20-%20Plot%20Against%20South%20Africa/read/_page_0_Picture_0.jpeg?g-16018011)

## Klaus D. Vaqué

1989 Varama pubi ishers – pretoria Originally published under the title: VERRAT AN SÜDAFRIKA (1988)

Translated by Tom McGhee

### THE PLOT AGAINST SOUTH AFRICA

Copyright © 1989 by Klaus D. Vaqué

Cover design by Sigi Dannheimer

ISBN 0-620-14537-4

![](https://samisdat.in/user/pages/03.books/1989%20-%20Plot%20Against%20South%20Africa/read/_page_3_Figure_0.jpeg?g-16018011)

## Contents

| FOREWORD | 1 |  |  |
|---|---|---|---|
| INTRODUCTION | 5 |  |  |
| A. THE WHITE GIANT OF AFRICA |  |  |  |
| Chapter 1: The Rule of the Boers | 12 |  |  |
| Chapter 2: Facts or Fiction? | 27 |  |  |
| Chapter 3: The Treasure-House at the Cape | **4** 0 |  |  |
| Chapter 4: The Decisive Domino | 47 |  |  |
| B. THE "NEW WORLD ORDER" |  |  |  |
| Chapter 5: The Conspiracy of the Bankers | 54 |  |  |
| Chapter 6: The Red World Parliament | 68 |  |  |
| Chapter 7: The "Managed" Conflicts | **7** 9 |  |  |
| Chapter 8: The Secret Rulers | 87 |  |  |
| Chapter 9: The Deception of Nations | 98 |  |  |
| C. STRATEGY OF A PLANNED REVOLUTION |  |  |  |
| Chapter 10: "Psychopolitics" and "Disinformation" | 110 |  |  |
| Chapter 11: Exploiting the Racial Problems | 127 |  |  |
| Chapter 12: The Rôle of the "Liberation Movements" | 145 |  |  |
| Chapter 13: The Rôle of the Churches | 167 |  |  |
| Chapter 14: The Rôle of the USA | 190 |  |  |
| D. POSTSCRIPT |  |  |  |
| Chapter 15: Conclusions | 210 |  |  |
| Chapter 16: Whither South Africa? |  |  |  |
| Chapter 17: Warning to Europe | 223 |  |  |
| E. APPENDIX |  |  |  |
| Letter of the International Immigrant Committee of South Africa |  |  |  |
| (IIC) to H.E. Mr P.H. Moberly, C.H.G., Ambassador of the United | 220 |  |  |
| Chalanant bank a Chala Danidant of Court Africa DAN Dalla and | **23** U |  |  |
| 20 Lily 1006 on the assession of the visit of the Pritish Essesion |  |  |  |
| 25 July 1900, On the occasion of the visit of the british Foreign | 222 |  |  |
| Sources | 234 |  |  |
| ources | 230 |  |  |

## Foreword

At some time or other most of us will have tried to put a jigsaw puzzle together; baffling little pieces that in the end form a clear coherent picture of a landscape or what not. The hardest thing about it is the beginning. The more pieces that get put in place, the clearer and more comprehensible the whole picture becomes. Many people never get past the beginning and in frustration give up trying to work it out.

Nor can they understand why the governments of Great Britain and America helped the marxist dictator Mugabe into power in neighbouring Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, in very fishy circumstances and by manipulated elections, after simply rejecting the moderate black Bishop Muzorewa who had already been democratically elected. And now Mugabe is waging a genocidal war against the Matabele people, which so far, according to trustworthy estimates1, has caused the loss of fourteen thousand lives. Yet Mugabe continues to receive support, while South Africa is constantly accused of all manner of violations of human rights.

deepest depression since the thirties; while at the same time granting thousands of millions to communist states and banana republics in South America and black Africa without the faintest prospect of ever being repaid.

Solzhenitsyn calls them "the powers of evil" which have now gone over to the final attack. Particularly since the beginning of this amazing century they have by craft and stealth plunged mankind into a succession of wars and bloodshed unprecedented in all human history. In the course of the years, as the jigsaw puzzle gradually took shape, it became clearer and clearer to me that there was a huge design being put into effect behind the scenes of the world stage, whose purpose is to change that world completely, with all its old established orders. It is a conspiracy with the objective of exploiting and enslaving all mankind and achieving atheistic totalitarian domination of the world; in fact, of establishing a world government, to which all the peoples of the earth shall be forced to submit.

Since of course the nations of the earth would never willingly submit to such a plan, an enemy-image, an "East-West confrontation", had to be created. It is perfectly obvious that the instrument of the conquest and subjection of the nations is imperialistic soviet communism, which the conspirators themselves created with their instigation of the October Revolution in 1917 and have ever since kept in being with enormous credits, shipments of grain and the technical and military know-how of the West.

South Africa is merely a new pawn in this cynical game of chess, which is now being put through the revolutionary wringer so that another and particularly important obstacle may be got out of the way to the New World Order, as they call it. The concentrated attack on South Africa now taking

As Franklin Roosevelt (who undoubtedly knew what he was talking about) said:

# "Nothing happens by accident in world politics. Everything is well prepared, carefully planned and deliberate."

South Africa, and with it the rest of the free world, is confronted with an enemy who exerts perilous influences and powerful blackmailing pressures on all the governments of the world with diabolical cunning and deception through manipulation of the mass media that he controls, and with almost unlimited financial resources at his disposal. By these means governments can be induced to pass measures and carry out "reforms" that often entail their own destruction, as we have seen from other examples.

After reading this book, those who have hitherto identified the archenemy of human civilization and liberty exclusively in Soviet communism will look to the West rather than to the East for the enemy, to New York rather than to Moscow; for it is there that the centres of power and the faceless conspirators are to be found.

First, because I consider it urgent and necessary to present a more

And thirdly, I wish to warn over-trustful South Africans of all races not to be under any illusions about what is really happening. Their fate, and perhaps that of the rest of the free world, is at stake. Their course of action in the years ahead and their firm resolve to stand up to the fraudulent powers of darkness will determine whether this outpost of civilization in Africa shall become yet another victim of the internationalist conspiracy or not.

Klaus D. Vaqué Pretoria April 1987

In Behind the News3 of January 1985 Ivor Benson writes:

"What then happened was that the many national concentrations of finance-capitalism were drawn into coalescence to form something new in history; namely, an **international finance-capitalism** fiercely resolved to free itself from answerability to any national government and its electorate.

"This process of coalescence had already begun at the time of the Anglo-Boer War but only began to exert a major influence in world affairs in the next two decades. One of the last national concentrations of finance-capitalism to capitulate was that of the United States; this occurred in the middle 1930's when the multimillionaire American pioneering families, led by J.P. Morgan, finally lost their supremacy in Wall Street to the internationalists, as recorded by Dr Carroll Quigley.4

"There can be no doubt that a major factor in bringing about revolution-

"The story of how these financial families consolidated their power on an international basis is told by Dr Quigley in his *History of the World in our Time – Tragedy and Hope.* He writes: 'The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendants of Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfort, whose male descendants, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild's five sons, established at branches in Vienna, London, Naples and Paris, as well as Frankfort, co-operated together in ways which other international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled.'

"Dr Quigley names as some of the other international banking families: Baring, Lazard, Erlanger, Schroder, Seligman, Speyers, Mirabaud, Mallet, Fould and Morgan. This list could easily be extended – Warburg, Wallenberg, Kuhn, Loeb, Schiff, etc. There is no need to enquire deeply into the genealogies of these internationally dispersed banking dynasties which, as Dr Quigley put it, 'in time brought into their financial network the provincial banking centres organised as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on the one side and industries on the other.'

When we consider the conflicts and revolutions of this century in many countries, it becomes conspicuous that:

- every revolution or overthrow of a government has followed almost the same pattern;
- every new régime has been either socialist-marxist or at least strongly centralized and dictatorial in its nature, and in nearly every case more brutal, corrupt and oppressive than the government that was overthrown ostensibly on those very pretexts;
- the régimes overthrown were strongly nationalist, anti-communist and particularly autonomous or independent;
- officials of the American State Department had a hand in all these subversions

In his book Behind the Scene5 (1976) Douglas Reed writes:

"Hatreds, passions and prejudices are to some extent innate in man and may be reduced by wise leadership or inflamed by bad. As I have gone along I have seen that they are incited, in all countries, by organized forces from outside for the purpose of setting up the World State on the ruins of Christian nations. That key once found, the dark origins of our twentieth-century wars and the strange doublings their courses take are alike plain to understand."

It is not possible within the compass of this book to reveal the full extent of the global conspiracy in detail. Many excellent books have been written on this subject, and it is recommended to the interested reader to acquire the books listed in the Appendix. Many of the big booksellers might, however, be reluctant to stock such books, for fear of reprisals.

In this book we shall concern ourselves mainly with the events of this century, most particularly with the attack on South Africa, and we shall find parallels with similar occurrences and draw the appropriate conclusions. Never before has any nation been exposed to such a heavy and incessant barrage of vituperation from the establishment media all over the world, for decades on end, as this country; it can be compared only to the conjoint press campaign against the German Third Reich in the thirties. (Could that be a portent of coming events in South Africa also?)

EEC have ordered their ambassadors back. Australia has withdrawn its embassy; Norway and Denmark have shut down their consulates. The US State Department has put South Africa on its list of "hostile foreign powers" – the first country in the free world to receive that honour. The American Congress resolved to introduce thorough-going economic sanctions.

The picture formed by the man in the street in the West from the media is one of total confusion; for how is all this hostility to South Africa to be reconciled with the fact that Yugoslavia, Angola, Red China, Mozambique and other totalitarian self-styled marxist states are still treated as friendly allied powers worthy of aid and support, while the Russian invasion of Afghanistan is apparently forgiven and forgotten?

In *Diagnosen* (no 1/86, p. 26) Ivor Benson, a former adviser to the Rhodesian government, writes:

"The first fact of decisive significance is that the real history of what is happening in South Africa is only one episode of a widespread scenario that is essentially devised for the whole world and all mankind. That means that only by understanding what has happened and is happening in the world in general can we hope to find out the truth about what is going on in South Africa at present. To put it briefly, South Africa has become one of the main targets of the worldwide revolutionary movement that started at the beginning of our century and has rapidly gained impetus since the end of the Second World War. Its goal is the centralization of political power, which is in line with its increasing, by now almost completed, centralization of financial power."

So all the talk about "apartheid" and "human rights" is mere camouflage for a political war drama, and its purpose is to conceal the identity of those who want to soften up South Africa preparatory to its incorporation in the planned new international economic order; which will in due course turn out to be a new political order: the unitary world that the UNO is assiduously working towards.

As we now know, General Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the American forces in Europe, on orders "from above" stopped his advancing troops, thus allowing Eastern Europe to fall into the hands of the communist hordes, which America had been supplying with enormous quantities of weapons and other material.

The bankers' objectives had thus come true according to their plans.

In his book *National Suicide* (Arlington House 1973) Professor Antony Sutton, a scientist at the Hoover Institute, Stanford University in America, cites irrefutable evidence that

"During the past five years we have on the one hand threatened Russia and communism with the sword, while on the other we have secretly given aid to the Bolsheviks on such a colossal scale that without it the communist despotism in Russia would probably have collapsed. In 1944 Stalin admitted that about two-thirds of all large industrial undertakings in the Soviet Union had been accomplished with American aid or technical assistance."

# A. THE WHITE GIANT OF AFRICA

### CHAPTER 1

# The Rule of the Boers

You don't want reforms. You want my country.

Moreover, not one of the eleven main languages of South Africa is spoken by a majority. Therefore, the South African Broadcasting Corporation transmits its programmes over the radio in all eleven languages, and in six by its television services, which are generally understood by its population of about 27 million.

Throughout its whole history South Africa has always been more of a geographical expression than a true national entity. The country did not come into being because its peoples had any particularly close affinities with one another but through purely artificial lines drawn on the map by former colonial administrations. As a result fundamentally different peoples, such as the Xhosas and the Zulus, were sometimes quite arbitrarily enclosed within South African territory, though in their own separate areas. No less arbitrarily, parts of other black peoples were excluded beyond the borders of South Africa. Thus there came about the anomalous situation that larger components of the Swazis, the Basutos and the Tswanas lived inside South Africa than in their own independent territories of Swaziland, Basutoland (Lesotho) and Bechuanaland (Botswana).

different from one another as, say, the Norwegians and the Spaniards, the British and the Greeks or the Dutch and the Italians. In this polyethnic state there is no "black majority"; only nine completely distinct peoples split up into 757 tribes, and each constituting a minority.

Black "racism" and tribal animosities are so deep-rooted that the big mining companies will allow their workers to go underground only in gangs belonging to the same tribe. Nevertheless the armed security men employed by the mines regularly have to intervene in murders and manslaughters committed in the hostels and dormitories by different ethnic groups.

The South African reality of intertribal hostility can reach such a pitch that in one case it became necessary to create two separate government organizations and administrations for the culturally identical Xhosa people because centuries-old animosities between the various branches of the tribe made peaceful co-existence impossible. The Xhosas are now living in two independent black states, the Transkei and the Ciskei, inside South African territory.

Besides the 18,2 million blacks there are 4,8 million whites, 2,8 million Coloureds and 880 000 Asians.

Of the Asians 65,1 per cent are Hindus, 20,6 per cent Muslims, 6,9 per cent either Christians or Buddhists, while 7,4 per cent belong to "other" religions. Although most of the blacks have been nominally "christianized", many of them are still much more inclined towards their ancestral animistic cults than to Christianity. Next to the Chief, the medicine-man or witch-doctor is still the most respected and feared personage. Thus it is not unusual for black heads of state and their ministers to take counsel of the sangoma "throwing the bones" before making any important decision.

Why do they not equally condemn the separatist movements elsewhere: the Basques and Catalans in Spain, the Corsicans and Bretons in France, the Kurds in Turkey and Syria, the Kabyles in North Africa, the Ibos in Nigeria, the Hutu and the Tutsi in Rwanda and Burundi, the Walloons and Flemings

Now that a regular mud-slinging campaign is being waged by the USA and the UNO to which it plays host, it is only fair to mention, not without irony, the fact that the execrated Boers did not exterminate millions of Indians (for which read blacks) – of the estimated ten million original inhabitants of North America there are now only about four hundred thousand 10 – or filch their land from them and pen the survivors up in reservations. Nor did they import Negro slaves; with their own hands they set about clearing and cultivating the almost uninhabited country. Apart from small groups of nomadic Bushmen and Hottentots, it was a hundred years later, in 1770, that they first encountered Negro tribes on the banks of the Great Fish River, a thousand kilometres north of Cape Town. Those tribes formed the spearhead of the Nguni peoples, who had originated in the region of the Great Lakes in Central Africa, hundreds of years before they began their migration southward.

After a few skirmishes and several border wars they eventually came to terms. The Boers left the black migrants in possession of the territories where they had settled, and which are now the "homelands" that they themselves have chosen.

If South Africa now has problems with its present black majority proportions, that in itself is clear evidence of the difference in humanity between the pious Boers and the white subjugators of America, Australia and New Zealand, who would never have allowed any such disproportion to exist. It is the very pinnacle of hypocrisy that those countries should now be in the

forefront of those who accuse South Africa of gross violations of human rights.

The news of the remarkable abilities of the white man and his technical achievements soon had the effect of bringing more and more blacks into the territories occupied by the Boers in quest of work, protection and medical treatment. The white man did not come to Africa to take their land from them, as is often asserted. He could not take from them their schools, their hospitals, their roads or their railways; for of course they had no such things.

As we have said, he entered an almost uninhabited country, a wilderness of desert and bush with little to offer but wild beasts, a pleasant climate and some fertile coastal strips. The few indigenous peoples that he encountered lived in a state of barbarism, their principal occupation being to smash in each others' skulls at regular intervals. They did not use the wheel; they had no writing; they lived as they had lived a thousand years before.

Let me put it quite bluntly: Everything that the black man now possesses in South Africa he owes to the technical knowledge, the initiative and the creative talents of the white man. The white man owes him absolutely nothing. It is sheer nonsense, as is often alleged, that the whites owe their prosperity to the cheap labour of the blacks. Europe did not need to wait for "cheap" foreign labour to be imported to acquire its wealth and civilization. The contrary rather. It is not more necessary than ever before to spend more and more on welfare payments and unemployment benefits to over-prolific migrant workers raised through higher and higher taxes? Are there not more crime and social problems then ever before?

In South Africa at present 4,8 million whites bear 77 per cent of the total tax burden, while 56 per cent of state expenditure goes to the benefit of 18,2 million blacks who pay only 15 per cent of the taxes.11

Where in all the world is there anything comparable? Probably never before have so few done so much for so many. In plain figures the picture is as follows: In the financial year 1986-7 the whites paid R9 thousand million in income tax, the blacks 171 million, the Indians 257 million and the Coloureds 315 million. (From *The Financial Mail* 11.9.1987).

Between 1962 and 1972 the UN paid out 298 million dollars to underdeveloped countries. In the same period South Africa spent 558 million dollars on the development of its black territories. 12

A black citizen of South Africa can undergo a complicated heart-valve operation for little more than one US dollar. (Between two and three thousand such operations are performed annually in one hospital in Pretoria alone.) A black American would have to pay fifteen thousand dollars for the same operation in the USA.

In 1985 there were forty-two thousand black students at South African universities. There are five black universities and twenty-eight polytechnics subsidized by the government.

South Africa far outstrips most developing countries in health care. (According to the UN definition South Africa is one of the developing countries.)

Professor Smock found that the non-whites also participated in the political set-up:

- A tricameral parliamentary system gives Indians, Coloureds and whites authority over their "own" affairs and a say in "general" affairs;
- b) blacks administer their own townships and residential areas;
- c) Blacks have complete supremacy in the National States;
- d) Non-whites have a voice in the provincial governments. (In Natal that means that for the first time the whites are in the minority.)
- The integrated provincial governments have laid down the foundations for integrated Regional Service Councils;

The newspaper writes: "The Professor was also impressed by the many reforms:

- Laws that prevented migrant workers from bringing their families with them had been abolished.
- South African citizenship had been restored to blacks living in white areas.
- d) People of all races are issued with the same identity documents.
- e) The immigration laws are the same for everybody.
- g) Black urban police had been given more authority.

In a paper for American students Professor Smock wrote

- Black South African workers have practically the same rights as American workers.
- In South Africa there are more black women in executive positions than in the whole continent.
- South Africa is the only country in the continent with a black middle class of any size.
- 7. The government is building five thousand houses a month and makes housing available to 92 per cent of the black population.

So much for Professor Smock of America.

Practical training takes place in the nearby black hospital at Garankuwa, in which the whole range of human ailments can be treated. In addition to the standard equipment there is apparatus for artificial kidney transplants, isotope units and their associated specialized laboratories. Occupational therapists can instruct their patients in hospital in thirty-two different therapies to prepare them for a productive life.

The well-known British writer and historian Paul Johnson tells us that if the South African economy were to be destroyed by sanctions, "... the driving motor of growth – even of survival – on the continent would be put out of action, and its fall would pull down all the countries of southern Africa with it, probably all the countries of the sub-Saharan zone too ... We should have to number the dead from starvation in millions." 14

Besides these connections in transport, trade and labour, the regional

The neighbouring states depend on South Africa not only for technical aid by South African experts; they also drive steam and diesel-electric locomotives borrowed from the South African Transport Services (SATS). South African diesel locomotives travel as far north as Zaïre and Tanzania.15

In 1985 thirty-seven diesel and forty steam engines were hired out to the neighbouring states; on average 6 195 SATS goods waggons a day travelled on foreign rails alone, as against 944 in South Africa itself.

South African technicians of South African Airways (SAA) maintain and repair the aircraft of many other African states that possess neither the technical skills nor the proper equipment to do it themselves. South Africa also trains the crews of the Swazi, Botswana, Zimbabwean and Comoran airlines. South African Hercules C-130 transport aircraft carry urgently-needed spare parts, machinery, pharmaceutical and consumer goods of all kinds to most African countries.

Because of their geographical proximity these countries are to an increasing degree dependent on South African supplies. Experts believe that four out of five African countries could not survive without food imports.

In 1980 nine African states imported 1,4 million tonnes of grain, most of it directly or indirectly from South Africa. While food production in black Africa fell by two per cent per head per annum, with all its unhappy consequences in the form of famine, poverty and declining living standards, South African food production rose by five per cent annually between 1960 and 197018, double its population growth rate.

According to the *Argus African News Service*19, at least twelve countries are so completely dependent on South Africa economically that a really comprehensive economic embargo on it would mean their own total economic ruin.

- South African Air Force flew to the Congo with urgently-needed supplies of medicaments, first-aid equipment and food.
- In 1965, at the request of Prime Minister Jonathan, South Africa sent a hundred thousand bags of grain worth R315 000 to Lesotho to relieve the famine there.
- In 1966 South Africa gave Botswana a gift of two hundred thousand rands when the country was suffering from famine.
- During the Biafra war South Africa contributed ten thousand rands to the International Red Cross for the relief of victims of the conflict.
- In 1968 twelve South African farmers lent 230 tractors to nine villages on the Lesotho border so that they could plough their fields in readiness for the maize season.
- In 1969 a Dakota of the SAAF flew emergency supplies for thirty thousand people in the Qagga's Nek district of Lesotho to relieve a famine.
- In 1979 South African fire-fighting teams helped to put out fires in petrol storage depots at Beira in Mozambique and Salisbury in Rhodesia.

of blacks are fleeing to "white" South Africa so anathematized by the WCC, braving the mines, the barbed wire and the wild beasts. On average two thousand refugees a month stream through the Kruger Park game reserve alone. Many of them bring malaria with them, and the game wardens are afraid that the lions, to whom many have fallen victim, will become man-eaters.22

During recent years the various forms of official development aid have greatly increased. The estimated value of official aid to the independent neighbouring states for 1982/3 amounted to R434 million, an increase of 69% over the previous financial year. In January 1983 the total official development aid programme, including the allocation of credits, legal and technical expenditures for 1982/3 were estimated at R627 600 000.23 If the development aid programme for the (non-independent) self-governing black states inside South Africa are taken into account, all this costs the predominantly white taxpayers in South Africa more than a thousand million rands. Unless I am much mistaken, in proportion to population this must be an absolute world record!

If you are still convinced, after all this, that South Africa exploits and oppresses its black fellow-citizens, that the mass-media and many church and anti-apartheid organizations present an objective picture of the situation and that the country deserves worldwide condemnation and economic sanctions, then please read on.

South Africa produces more energy than Italy, as much raw steel as

France, more grain than Canada, more wool than the USA, more wine than Greece and more fish than Great Britain.

South African firms can work to the microscopic tolerances necessary for nuclear industries, build computers and Mach 2 jet fighters, export motor spare parts to a hundred countries and have built the biggest munitions factory in the world.

The income per head24 of the total population of South Africa (including the blacks) for 1983 was 2 450 US dollars, nine times that of Mozambique, four times that of Zambia, more than three times that of Zimbabwe, and almost double that of the whole southern African region.

Compared with the whole region of southern Africa (Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe) the South African proportion is as follows:

80% of the total gross national product (1986)

77% of all electricity produced (1980)

97% of all coal won (1980)

82% of all chromium won (1978)

87% of wheat harvested (1980)

67% of sugar production (1979)

The comparative figures for the entire African continent speak for themselves. The South African share is as follows:

```
46% of all motor vehicles
33% of all lorries
44% of all tractors
66% of total steel production
40% of African cement production.
```

The government is constantly endeavouring to raise the standard of living of the whole non-white population and to create a large contented black middle class. The enormous state expenditures necessary for that are at the expense of the white minority, who have to put up with an inflation rate of nearly twenty per cent, for the increased wages of the blacks, some of it statutory, is not matched by a proportionate rise in productivity.

An American visitor who knows the country well said recently that more changes had taken place in South Africa during the past ten years than in America in the last hundred years.

Racial separation has been scrapped almost everywhere: on the railways (summer of 1985); in the cinemas (Nov. 1985); and in sport. Everybody has the same citizenship (autumn of 1985). The Immorality Act has been scrapped (spring of 1985). The blacks have been given the right to freehold ownership (beginning of 1986) and can open firms in the central business areas (1985). Reserved occupations (for whites) are on the way out, and black members have been incorporated in central education committees: Coloureds and Indians now have proportional representation in Parliament. The blacks have their own democratic governments in their National States ("homelands")25. So far the urban blacks only have a say in their own local administration, but they also will shortly participate in national government by means of a newly-created board.

## Facts or Fiction?

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time.

Abraham Lincoln

The methods that they use range from downright lies, half-truths, falsifications to contrived pictures and "objective" reports that leave out the most important parts.

To most people everything they read in the papers or see on television is quite simply the truth. They believe in their "democratic constitutional state" and of course in a "free press" with its national patriotic duty to inform the lieges objectively and truthfully. They forget all too easily that the mass-media are in the hands of private and usually international interest groups whose aims go far beyond maximization of profits and "the public's right to information", as we shall see in due course.

Let us take a closer look at the accusations most frequently levelled at South Africa:

"Apartheid legislation in South Africa means racist oppression and exploitation of the blacks, and it is an offence against human rights in general."

The Afrikaans word *apartheid* means nothing more nor less than "separation", with the additional implication of "separate development". The ra-

The main buttresses of the policy were separate residential areas, separate schools and separate amenities such as cinemas, theatres, lavatories, parks, hospitals and so on. (Now that some of these things are no longer regarded as necessary the restrictions are being abolished.) There can be no question of oppression or exploitation; the converse is nearer the truth. The blacks in South Africa own more houses, cars and businesses and have a higher standard of living than the blacks in any other part of the African continent. They are paid three or four times more than elsewhere in Africa. That is one of the chief reasons why so many thousands of blacks try to immigrate to South Africa from the neighbouring countries every year.

In telligent and honest blacks have assured me quite frankly that they regard apartheid as natural and that they welcome it. Of course, what the enemies of South Africa have made of the word and convey to the world is something completely different and entirely devoid of foundation.

"If apartheid meant

- political domination of one ethnic group by another;
- injustice or absence of equality of opportunity for all;
- racial discrimination or violation of human rights; 
    - if apartheid meant all those things, then the South African Government also rejects that concept."

### "The blacks in South Africa hate the whites."

That is simply not true. Relations between black and white in South Africa are better than in Great Britain or the USA. It is far safer for a white to walk the streets of Soweto or any other black township than it would be in Harlem, Watts, the centre of Detroit or many other big American towns.

### "The blacks are horribly exploited by the whites."

On the contrary. A million white taxpayers, two hundred thousand coloureds and two hundred thousand Asians subsidize eleven million blacks. Blacks in South Africa pay practically no income tax. The whites subsidize their housing, medical care, transport and education.

In the South African tricameral parliamentary system the whites, the

### "There is no freedom of the press in South Africa."

# "The whites took the blacks' land away from them and 'removed' them to 13,7% of the country."

To that one can only reply that it was the blacks themselves who selected those areas centuries ago in the course of their southward migrations. Apart from that, they are in fact far from being such poor barren areas as all that.

In Bophuthatswana, the independent homeland of the Tswana people, there are the largest platinum deposits in the whole of Southern Africa; and gold is won as a by-product of the big mines.

Apart from the fact that conditions are similar in the other homelands, it would still be unreasonable to hold the whites responsible if things were otherwise.

### "The blacks are 'discriminated against' in South Africa."

If I see my wife struggling to carry a piece of heavy iron plate and I take it from her because I am stronger, then I am "discriminating". If I would rather be treated by a white doctor than by an African witch-doctor, then I am "discriminating".

These few examples should suffice to show how far the word "discriminate" has been turned into a mere catch-phrase. Of course the

blacks are discriminated against, but not because they are black; rather because in so many respects they are simply different from whites. Anybody who is capable of recognizing the great variety of living creatures with all their different qualities and aptitudes must inevitably "discriminate" without that being misinterpreted in a purely negative sense.

# "The anti-terrorist legislation in South Africa is a violation of human rights."

That Act also provides that any person suspected of any such offence may be detained for up to seven days without trial; and on one occasion 566 persons have been locked up in England by the Merseyside police under the Act. In the Netherlands a suspect may be held for twelve days before appearing before a judge. If he is charged he can be detained for a further three months before a trial is fixed.

As a result of historical experience and the realities of Africa, the South African legislation places more emphasis on preventive measures, such as longer periods of investigation, than in Europe. That is also true of banning orders with restricted freedom of movement or house arrests. In South Africa in August 1983 there were 170 persons affected by these laws as compared with 1 560 detainees in Northern Ireland.

The effectiveness of the South African anti-terrorist legislation can be seen from the following examples (the present state of emergency cannot be taken as a criterion): In South Africa in 1982 there were 39 cases of terrorism, compared with 51 in the USA. France recorded 112 cases in 30 months. In Northern Ireland there were 382 terrorist shooting incidents and 219 bombings. In addition there were 580 cases of armed raids and 499 cases of arson in which 97 persons were killed, including 57 civilians.29

### "South Africa attempts to 'destabilize' its neighbours."

# "The blacks are housed in slums and have to live in ghettos like Soweto."

Anybody who has made a tour of this huge conurbation will have observed that here, like everywhere else, there are three classes: poor, middle and upper. Dwellings range from millionaires' villas with well-

By 1978 Soweto had 115 football pitches, three rugby pitches, four athletics fields, eleven cricket pitches, two golf-courses, 47 tennis-courts, seven swimming-pools (some of Olympic standard), five bowling alleys, 81 basket-ball pitches, 39 children's playgrounds and innumerable community halls, cinemas and clubhouses. There are 300 churches, 365 schools, 2 technical high schools, 8 clinics, 63 crèches, 11 post offices and a fruit and vegetable market.

"The Canadians will no doubt be shocked when I say that I'd rather be injured or sick in Soweto than in many Canadian towns. In Soweto there are eight clinics supported by the government and several private doctors. There is also Baragwanath Hospital, an outstanding teaching hospital ... in which 898 heart operations were performed in 1982 alone. Baragwanath is the biggest and most versatile hospital in the whole African continent. Next door there is the St John's eye clinic. It is world-famous for its treatment of glaucoma, detached retina, traumatic eye injuries and rare tropical diseases." (From Globe and Mail, quoted in Vox Africana no. 31, October 1987).

If we compare the mines in the USA with those of South Africa (though they are only remotely comparable) we find a fatal accident rate of 0,93 there as against 1,25 for South African gold-mines. But if we exclude the fatal accidents resulting from sudden pressure bursts caused by the extreme depths we have a rate of 0,95 per thousand, which is not significantly higher than the American rate.32

### "The blacks are deliberately kept stupid and ignorant."

Within the last ten years the expenditures on black education have risen from R143 million to 1,15 thousand million – an eightfold increase! All this is part of a ten-year plan to bring black education in every respect up to the level of the much older and better established systems of the other population groups.

# "The South African police and army are terrorizing the blacks in the townships and should be withdrawn."

### "In South Africa children are being locked up in gaols."

that many of the detained children are hardened criminals and many of them are even murderers.

The South African government is now confronted with the following problem: What is to be done with criminal children? The answer ought to be: Put them before a juvenile court and sentence them. But South Africa is in a state of revolution. The police and the judiciary are heavily overburdened. The inquiries and formalities that must precede a fair trial in court are in many cases several months in arrears. Meanwhile the young detainees must be interned somewhere, somehow. A few years ago most of them would have been released in the custody of their parents until their trial came up. But now even eight-year-old children are forced into revolutionary rôles. The release of a child detained on evidence or suspicion of revolutionary violence would have his immediate return to the revolution as a consequence.

The films showed that some of the murderers of Rosaline Skosana were children less than twelve years old. Hardened journalists reporting on the violence in the black townships were repeatedly shocked by the participation of small children in 'necklace executions', in which the victim has a tyre soaked in petrol placed round his neck and is set on fire.

Teenagers and younger children are often in the front ranks in attacks on the police with stones, acts of arson and sabotage. Witnesses have testified in several court cases that the African National Congress, supported by the Kremlin, urges its fighters in the black townships to use small children at the head of their attacks on property and the police, well aware that wounded or dead children would put the government in a highly embarrassing situation. Children used in that way become indifferent to death and grow up as callous criminals who carry out their tasks with the

# The Treasure-House at the Cape

Our objective is to gain control of the two great treasure-houses on which the West is dependent: the energy sources of the Persian Gulf and the minerals of Central and Southern Africa.

Leonid Brezhnev, Secretary General of the USSR (1971)

"The whole plan is concocted and controlled by a colossal syndicate for the dissemination of false information." These were the words of Lt-Gen. Sir William Butler, Commander in Chief of the British forces in South Africa, shortly before the outbreak of the second Anglo-Boer War, who resigned his position in disgust at what he had seen.37

Before the outbreak of the Boer War the British government used the pretext of alleged abuses and violations of human rights against the *uitlanders*, mostly British immigrants in the Transvaal, where huge deposits of gold had been found. Now the attack on South Africa is being carried out under the pretext of *apartheid*, a word that the establishment presses continually bandy about as a synonym for everything evil, so that it is execrated all over the world, although hardly anybody knows what it really means.

"If the Soviet Union and its allies can get control of the mineral resources of South Africa, with the exception of oil, the following percentages of worldwide reserves would be controlled by the Kremlin:

"No wonder," Miller concludes, "that the Soviets are so eagerly working to turn off the South African tap."

The influential American research institute, the Heritage Foundation, wrote in one of its publications:40 "There is no question but that (American) industry is now and will be in the future far more dependent on foreign supplies of non-fuel minerals than on oil. The possibility of interruption of deliveries of critical minerals must also be taken into account."

General Alexander Haig, a former Secretary of State, believed that the

Five essential minerals in particular give South Africa a key position in the supply of critical raw materials to the free world. These are chromium ore, the metals of the platinum group, manganese ore, asbestos and gold. Of these chromium is the most important, because there is no substitute for it in the manufacture of high-quality lightweight stainless steel. Without chromium the engines for modern jet aircraft or *Cruise* missiles could not be built. It is also much used in the petrochemical industries, in power stations, nuclear reactors, in the building industry and many other branches of industry.

In a publication of August 1981 the American Bureau of Mines wrote:

96% of the world reserves of chromium ores is in Southern Africa, and 95% of the non-communist supplies of the platinum group metals. The USA is dependent on imports for 89% of its platinum, Japan for 98% and Western Europe for a 100%.

The same is true of manganese and asbestos. Although production of those two minerals is not so high as that of chromium and platinum, South Africa and Russia together possess 93% of the world reserves of manganese. After Russia and Canada, South Africa has the third largest supply of asbestos.

Of course the communists know full well that whoever controls the shipping round the Cape of Good Hope controls a vital artery of the economic life of the West. Western Europe alone receives something like a quarter of its oil via the Cape route. On average seventy ships a day sail

- manganese ore 93
- platinum 83
- vanadium 61
- chromium ore 58
- gold 63
- fluorspar 46
- diamonds 29
- zirconium 19
- antimony 17
- uranium 16

Then the total share of the combined South African and Russian resources would amount to the following world percentages:

- manganese 94
- platinum 85
- gold 70
- chromium 70
- vanadium 65

The whole world would then be dependent on the Kremlin for its precious metals, gold and platinum, and the components of high-performance steels, manganese, chromium and vanadium.

In the light of these facts the reader must by now be wondering how it is possible in the circumstances for governments in Western Europe and North America to threaten South Africa with sanctions and embargos. They would not only be cutting themselves off from the mineral resources of South Africa which are vitally necessary for the development of their national economies and their defence capabilities, but also from the supplies of raw materials of the other countries in Southern Africa, whose export routes mostly pass through South African ports.

Is it really credible that Western governments could run the risk of what would be tantamount to suicide for the sake of "violations of human rights" or apartheid in South Africa?

Why then do they support a terrorist organization like the ANC, whose declared goal is and always has been to incorporate South Africa in the communist sphere of influence? (See Chapter 12)

In his book The War on Gold (1977) Dr Antony Sutton writes:43

"... the basic reason for the attack on South Africa has little to do with its racial or domestic policies; these are propaganda counterparts to the war on gold. A moment's thought will suggest that a Kissinger who is unmoved by Soviet persecution of Jews and political dissidents is unlikely to be moved by the lack of voting rights for black South Africans."

Prof. Sutton adds: "The war on South African gold originated with the Wall Street Establishment. But this is not the place to more than hint at the complete story of Wall Street's incredible machinations. The interested reader is referred to the Wall Street involvement in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, the continuing military and economic assistance to and protection of the Soviet Union by the Wall Street banking establishment, and the drive for a New World Order under U.S. dominance (which means dollar imperialism under Wall Street leadership), in which the USSR would become a technical and financial colony of the United States." (See also Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution by Antony C. Sutton)

It is obvious that a single unitary monetary system for the whole world, controlled from a single centre, would be an important prerequisite for the projected "new world order". That means that the ultimate prerequisite for a centralized world rule would be total control of all the raw materials in the world, including gold in particular, under the supervision of a supranational world organization: the UNO.

economic independence and are thus condemned to eternal bondage to their capitalist creditors.

Payments are of course mainly in the form of minerals or other natural products extorted from the enslaved peoples. That is what happened with the much-lauded "decolonization" of Africa and other continents. Never had those countries been so exploited by the colonial powers as they are now by international high finance. The former colonial territories and practically all the Third World are now in the pockets of international money powers, which lend them billions of worthless paper dollars that they have to repay with the wealth of their minerals. Thus the whole business of decolonization was simply a deliberate ploy on the part of international finance groups to enable them to get their hands on those countries. The old colonial empires were emasculated and their control over their colonies was wrenched from their hands; so that now they must pay for their raw materials and natural products from the "decolonized" countries – now recolonized by the banks – in expensive US dollars. So two birds are killed with one stone and at the same time the way is paved to the assimilation of the countries into the New World Order.

A strong, white, independent government in South Africa in possession of the biggest gold deposits in the world and next to those in the USSR the richest reserves of strategic minerals is therefore necessarily a serious obstacle in the road to the projected socialist world order. On the other hand, a corrupt black communist government in the guise of the "liberation" movements that are so zealously supported by the One-Worlders in the Western governments would very soon find itself obliged to repay its credits to the financial powers of Wall Street in the form of the mineral wealth of South Africa.

The international bankers have no scruples; and they are certainly not simple or stupid. For repayment or security all they require is the assign-

The undeclared worldwide war against South Africa can only be understood against this background. How it will end will affect not only the black and white people of this country but also all the other peoples of the – so far – free world.

## The Decisive Domino

Lenin

As I write these words the 22nd "Church Day" has been drawing to a close in Frankfurt, Germany. According to the newspaper reports44 an entire day was devoted to "discussing the situation in South Africa". A hundred thousand people, including the Federal Chancellor Helmut Kohl, filled the Wald-Stadion in Frankfurt to hear Dr Allan Boesak, the South African president of the World Federation of Reformed Churches, conduct the closing ser-vice, "constantly interrupted by thunderous applause", in which he pleaded for a "new world" (order?) filled with freedom and justice. Ten thousand "demonstrators against apartheid" later marched through the streets of Frankfurt, riotously at times.

It is significant that a man like Dr Boesak should have been chosen as chief speaker for this so-called Church Day, a man who is known in South Africa more for his inciting speeches under the red hammer and sickle flag than as a faithful shepherd bringing the Gospel message to his troubled flock.

marxist-leninist ideology all over the globe is still the declared objective of the USSR.

As Dr Dirk Kunert writes in his study, *Moscow, the World-Revolutionary Process and the Southern Hemisphere*", 45 the leadership of the Soviet Union is "systematically and deliberately pursuing the strategic calculation of denying the United States unimpeded access to the whole hemispherical 'world island' (of Europe-Asia-Africa) and blockading it with its maritime presence."

"With these objectives in view the present leadership of the USSR is still moving along the strategic line drawn by Lenin and Stalin: 'If you regard Europe and America as the front, the theatre of the decisive battles between socialism and imperialism, then you can regard the not yet independent nations and the colonies, with their raw materials, fuels, foodstuffs and huge supplies of human material as the hinterland, the reserves of imperialism. To win the war it is necessary not only to be victorious at the front but also to revolutionize the opponent's reserves in his hinterland. Therefore the victory of the proletarian world revolution can be regarded as certain only if the proletariat is able to combine its own revolutionary struggle for the dictatorship of the proletariat with the working masses of the subject nations and the colonies against the power of imperialism.' "

As we have seen in previous chapters, South Africa and the USSR dominate the world market in the most important categories of crucial raw materials. A minerals cartel controlled by Moscow could manipulate world prices and drive the non-communist industrial nations into inflationary spirals, as in fact happened when the Americans were compelled to rely on the soviet market after the embargo on Rhodesian chromium.

With a puppet government established in South Africa by Moscow the USSR would command the sea route round the Cape and could turn off the oil tap to Europe and to a lesser degree to North America at will. Remember also that South Africa supplies large parts of the African continent with food, technical know-how and aid of all sorts and (despite all assertions to the contrary) acts as a stabilizing factor for many black African states. Its dominating influence reaches far beyond its own immediate territory. Add to that a great superiority in the manufacture of arms that has made it the strongest military power in Africa. Its highly-developed military machine, in the opinion of international experts, could advance as far as the Equator without much difficulty if it wanted to; not to speak of its nuclear capabilities.

South Africa is now not only the regional super-power of the subcontinent; it must be seen as the leading power of the whole African continent.

- During the sixties and seventies the USSR shifted the fulcrum of its worldwide effort to the Gulf region and the African continent. The objectives are the wealth of raw materials and the petroleum of the oilproducing countries.
- The West, dependent as it is on its imports and its vitally important sea routes both in war and peace, is increasingly menaced by soviet control of them and the countries supplying raw materials everywhere. The possession of strategically dominating positions and strategic raw materials would bring the eastern bloc considerably nearer to a bloodless victory.

In this Decision in the South – the Flanking Move through the Third World Heinrich Iordis Lohausen writes:46

"The question whether Europe and South Africa will come to grief over America, or whether, as is more likely, America and Europe will come to

The South African "domino" is therefore pregnant with fate for the Western world, which is quite happy to saw off the branch it is sitting on. "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't ..."

However, if we start from the assumption that the "method" is there by design—at any rate of powerful forces behind the scenes—then we can begin to make sense of the non-sense. The governments of Western Europe and America are not composed of idiots (at least not exclusively) who simply don't know about the strategic situation of the Cape route and the critical reserves of raw materials in South Africa. Despite all the rhetoric they too know perfectly well that the blacks are better off here than anywhere else in the world. If, nevertheless, they intend to make common cause with their communist "adversaries" to force South Africa to accept measures that would lead to the extinction of the rule of the white government by the Moscow-controlled ANC terrorist organization, as we shall see in later chapters, then the reader in Europe or America may begin to realize that he is being hocused by his own government as to its true intentions in southern Africa.

During the past years has not one pro-Western country after another been pushed into the communist camp with the help of the West itself? Take Vietnam, Nicaragua, Cuba, Rhodesia, Angola, Mozambique and many others. Iran, the Philippines, Taiwan, Chile, SWA/Namibia and South Africa are now on the list of those condemned to be "prepared" for assimilation by the socialist world state. Most Western governments have long been accomplices – whether willingly or under pressure – in a world-wide charade that shall be completed by the end of this century and shall herd the human race into the welcoming arms of the world-government-to-be. And that will make quite sure that there will no longer be any strong independent national states - especially those with strategic positions and their own supplies of raw materials – in existence.

The fusion of communism with the socialist Western "new world order" has long since been planned in all its details, and it will be pushed ahead step by step. The people of those countries that had hitherto refused to submit to the whole-hog ambitions of the planners of the "new world" will be shown with unmistakable clarity where everything is leading: "... and if you don't like it, we'll give you communism."

### **CHAPTER 5**

# The Conspiracy of the Bankers

"Moscow received five thousand million rands in new credits from seventeen Western nations, most of it long-term," wrote *The Citizen* (31.12.86), "while East Germany and Hungary received 880 million each."

That is only a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars that Western governments and private banks have siphoned off into the communist countries ever since the earliest days of the bolshevist revolution in 1917. Without funding from Western high finance, communism, with its absurd economic system, could not have survived and would have collapsed long ago. That financial support has enabled the USSR to grow into the second biggest military power in the world after the USA and at the same time to pursue its subversive activities in all the non-communist countries.

To understand these incongruities we must go back to the beginning of this century and take note of an event that was to stamp its mark on its further development. In his book *Die Bankierverschwörung (The Conspiracy of the Bankers)*47, published in 1954, Eustace Mullins tells us how on the evening of 22 November 1910 certain very highly-placed personages assembled at Hoboken station, New Jersey, to board a train on a secret mission. One of them, the Republican senator Nelson Aldrich, had recently returned from Europe as chairman of the National Currency Commission.

Along with Aldrich there were three well-known bankers. One was Frank Vanderlip, president of the most powerful bank in America at that time, the National City Bank of New York. It belonged to the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., which represented the Rockefeller oil interests and the railways and owned great possessions in South America. In 1898 they had been accused of levering the USA into the war with Spain.

These three men were leaders of the small group of New York bankers who were reputed to be in control of the entire finances and credits of the USA. It was these men who controlled all the oil, the railroads, the communications and heavy industry in the country.

Why all this secrecy? Why this journey of over a thousand miles in a locked railway carriage to a remote hunting club?"

The bankers gathered together on Jekyl Island now set themselves the task of drawing up a bill that would protect their own interests but could be passed off as a "people's banking bill". As Mullins tells us: "In Paul Warburg's opinion it was highly desirable to avoid the name of 'central bank'; and he therefore proposed the designation of 'Federal Reserve System'. That would allay public suspicion that the intention was to create a central bank. Nevertheless in reality the Federal Reserve System would possess the three most important traditional functions of a central bank: it would be able to control the property of private persons who drew their dividends from stocks and shares and the circulation of money in the national economy; it would have the right of control over all State moneys; and it could involve the United States in serious foreign wars and thus incite it to financial participation and plunge it into debt."

"On that day," says Mullins, "the Constitution ceased to be the basis of

government of the American people; and its liberties were handed over to a small group of international bankers."

To understand this bankers' conspiracy more clearly it is necessary to have some elementary knowledge of banking, and particularly of the international bankers. It would of course be an over-simplification to blame the international bankers for the whole conspiracy that has had such an effect on this our century; although they have in fact played the key rôle in it.

In his book *Die Insider*48 (English title: *None Dare Call it Conspiracy*) Gary Allen says we should imagine the conspiracy as a hand, of which one finger represents international banking, while the others stand for foundations, anti-religious movements, Fabian socialism and communism.

How are they to achieve that? Well, as we know, governments usually spend more money than they raise in taxes.

"Give me the powers of an issuing bank," Amschel Meyer Rothschild once said, "and I care not who makes the laws."

The first big "skim-off" for the bankers came with the outbreak of the first world war – only three years after the passing of the Federal Reserve Act;

and because it was so magnificent they built the necessary conditions for another great war into the Versailles Treaty in 1919-20.

As Gary Allen writes in *Die Insider* (pp. 54 /55): "All those who work for dictatorial control over modern nations understand the need for a central bank. The fifth point in Karl Marx's programme of conquest, the Communist Manifesto, reads as follows: 'Centralization of credit in the hands of the State by a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly'."

In his book *Tragedy and Hope* Professor Quigley writes (pp. 326/327): "It must not be felt that these heads of the world's chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called 'international' or 'merchant' bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks."

How powerful are these central banks?

"He proclaimed a general amnesty for communists and other revolutionaries \[as is now demanded of South Africa: author\] many of whom had been exiled after the abortive red revolution of 1905. Thus a quarter of a million dedicated revolutionaries returned to Mother Russia to seal Kerensky's fate."

Here we can quote only a few of the details of the involvement of high finance in the Bolshevik revolution. The following paraphrases from Gary Allen's *Die Insider* should suffice for the purposes of our argument. He tells us (pp. 95-98) that "The Germans had apparently a plausible justification for their financing of Lenin and Trotsky. The two who were mainly responsible for financing Lenin were Max Warburg and Alexander Helphand, who had been thrown out of Russia. They were able to claim that they were serving the interests of their Vaterland by financing Lenin. At any rate these two loyal 'patriots' refrained from informing the Kaiser about their plan to foment a communist revolution in Russia ..."

Again: "the father-in-law of Max Warburg's brother Felix, Jacob Schiff, a senior partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Co., had a hand in financing Trotsky. According to the *Journal American* of New York on 3 February 1949: 'It is now estimated that Jacob Schiff invested about twenty million dollars for the ultimate triumph of bolshevism in Russia – so says Jacob's grandson, John Schiff.'"

"The important part played by the wealthy American banker Jacob Schiff in events in Russia is no longer a secret, although it has not yet been even partly disclosed.

"Goulévitch quotes General Alexander Nezhvolodov in his book on the Bolshevik revolution: 'In April 1917 Jacob Schiff openly declared that, thanks to his financial support, the revolution in Russia had been successful. In the spring of that same year he began to subsidize Trotsky ... At the same time Trotsky and his adherents were also being subsidized by Max Warburg and Olaf Aschberg of Den Nye Banken in Stockholm ... also by the Rhineland-Westphalian syndicate and Zhivotovsky ... whose daughter Trotsky later married.'"

of the Tsars and then the Kerensky government. Even long after the true character of the Bolsheviks had become universally known he was still sending money to Russia. It turned out to be a good investment.

As Gary Allen's careful researches have proved, the financing of the Bolshevik revolution and consequently the establishment of the communist system began with a syndicate of international financiers to which besides the Schiff-Warburg clique Morgan and Rockefeller also belonged. According to documentary evidence, the Morgan organization put at least a million dollars in the kitty of the red revolution.

Milner had previously been leader of the secret Round Table group, which was supported by the house of Rothschild.

What had the bankers to gain when they brought about the Russian revolution with their financial support? Well, for their plan of total world domination they needed to create a starting position, a geographical hinterland from which they could begin to threaten all the other nations in the world. In short, they needed to "create" and magnify an enemy who would serve as an extended arm.

Nor is it my intention to associate all big businessmen and bankers with the conspiracy. We must make a clear distinction between free enterprise and international finance capitalism of monopolists and mega-bankers.

For the sake of completeness we should at this point mention that

the conspiratorial network of which Professor Quigley speaks is not a phenomenon of this century only. It began with the satanic plans of one Adam Weishaupt, Professor of Catholic Canon Law at the University of Ingolstadt, who founded the Order of the Illuminati ("enlightened ones") in Germany on 1 May 1776. The Illuminati worshipped Lucifer, the "Light-Bringer", and the objective that they had set themselves was to infiltrate all governments of Europe and all religious institutions with their own people and so gradually gain control of all mankind. They insinuated their members into existing and new Freemasons' lodges, infected them with Weishaupt's secret plans, and in that way quickly spread all over Europe. These conspiratorial ideas were welcomed in British high financial circles, which had long been seeking a way to gaining control of governments and countries.

As a future world government they founded first the League of Nations, then the United Nations. Both were and are completely controlled and dominated by them. The "democratically elected" governments supported by Wall Street – in Washington as in the Kremlin – are little more than eyewash for the people. By supporting only those candidates and party-

leaders who are prepared to steer the course set by the One-Worlders, and with all the mass media in their hands, and almost unlimited financial resources, they have absolute control over the results of elections. To the super-rich Illuminati it makes no odds which party wins, since they have their candidates in all camps.

In Europe also one can trace the socialist trend to the world state for decades. The proposed European union, a single European currency and the creation of a European central bank are merely stages along that road.

There is hardly any distinction left between so-called "conservative" and "leftwing" parties except that the representatives of one lot usually wear a collar and tie while the other lot prefer a more "progressive-proletarian" look.

How many Americans, British, Germans or South Africans understand the real driving forces behind the general attack on South Africa? How many have ever heard of the Trilateral Commission, that liberal-internationalist group that now dictates the entire foreign and fiscal policies of the United States and strongly influences the governments of the other Western countries?

In her study she explains that the Trilateral Commission really began in

Like the CFR the Trilateral Commission is financed by the mighty Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation, the Lilly Endownment and the Kettering Foundation. As Aida Parker writes: "All these are well-known liberal internationalists with the declared goal of bringing into being a world government or a superstate."

"In *Encounter*, January 1968 Brzezinski stated, among other things, that with modern data-banks it is now possible to carry out an almost permanent supervision of every citizen. And according to *Diagnosen* no. 8 of 1983 he is of the opinion that a limited atomic war would have a stabilizing effect and facilitate international control measures."

If the Trilateral Commission, together with the CFR, is the "secret government of America", then it is important that we should pause for a moment to become better acquainted with the person of its principal thinker. Brzezinski divides the modern history of mankind into four phases.58

According to his assessment, the first, very primitive, phase was that of religion, in which it was insisted that the destiny of men lay essentially in the hand of God.

As for the "rivalry" between Russia and America, Brzezinski seems to find nothing wrong with the Russian position. "The final result of the contest, because of the historical superiority of the communist system, is a foregone conclusion."

These are the thought-processes of a man who, under orders from high finance, directs an "enlightened" body that has a decisive influence on world politics and whose goal is the creation of a world government. Brzezinski's ideas no doubt tally exactly with those of another influential member of the Trilateral Commission: Henry (Heinz) Kissinger.

It is perfectly clear to the organizers of this body that this "new world order" can only be compassed by the amalgamation of the two superpowers, the USA and the USSR. Those two nations, which are still humbugging the rest of the world with their sham cold war in which they threaten one another with atomic weapons, have been secretly co-operating on many levels for years. Those nations that still refuse to play along (e.g. South Africa) and march their peoples into socialist servitude must be brought to a state of collapse by manipulated economic leverage, revolution and, if necessary, by trumped-up local wars, so that they can build their atheistic totalitarian world hegemony on the ruins of such countries.

### **CHAPTER 6**

# The Red World Parliament

We are going to have a world government, whether you like it or not – by force or by consent.

That is the conclusion that anyone must come to who follows the developments of current events and has seen through the vast web of an international conspiracy that has spread out from America.

In the forty-odd years since its foundation there have been no fewer than 140 different wars all over the world, in which ten million human beings have perished. Never before in history has there been a period so beset by war, terrorism and moral corruption. Since 1945 alone over a thousand million people have been brought under the communist yoke. The UNO has never condemned the enslavement of even a single human being; nor has it liberated anyone from communist tyranny. It has never even tried; for freedom is not the business of the United Nations!

The true purpose of this "incipient world government" is the exact opposite. From UN headquarters by the Hudson River in New York the secret instructions go out to decide whether there shall be war or peace, whether revolutions and terrorism shall be supported, whether economic sanctions shall be applied to countries – so long as they fit into the global concept of the world planners.

In 1950 the American Secretary of State published a revealing official report titled *Preparation of the Post-War Policy of 1939-1945.* The report lists the names of the US government officials who were responsible for the planning and legislation for the establishment of the "United Nations": Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Virginius Coe, Noel Field, Laurance Duggan, Henry Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Abraham Silverman, William Ullman, William Taylor and John Foster Dulles.

All except Dulles later admitted in sworn statements that they had acted as communist agents. In the case of Dulles also it was known where his sympathies lay. He had been appointed a legal counsellor of the Soviet Union by Stalin. Moreover he had close ties with the J.P. Morgan banking house.

In the planned humanistic New World Order of the UNO there is no longer any room for God. The delegates to the UN conference, Alger Hiss (USA), Maxim Litvinov (USSR) and Sir Anthony Eden (Great Britain) removed from the UN Charter everything that had any reference to God and got it ratified by the General Assembly inaugural conference in 1945.

This was confirmed in an article in the New York Times of 22 May 1963, and a UN year-book contains the following names of commanders up to now:

| 1946-1949 | Arkady Alexandrovich Sobolev | USSR |
|---|---|---|
| 1949-1953 | Constantine E. Zinchenko | USSR |
| 1953-1954 | Ilya S. Tchernychev | USSR |
| 1955-1957 | Dragoslav Protich | Yugoslavi |
| 1958-1959 | Anatoly Dobrynin | USSR |
| 1960-1962 | Georgy Petrovich Arkadev | USSR |
| 1962-1963 | Eugeney D. Kiselev | USSR |
| 1963-1965 | Vladimir Pavlovich Suslov | USSR |
| 1965-1968 | Alexi E. Nesterenko | USSR |
| 1968-1973 | Leonid N. Kutakov | USSR |
| 1973-1978 | Arkady N. Shevchenko | USSR |
| 1978-1982 | Mikhail D. Sytenko | USSR |
| 1982- | Viacheslav Ústinov | USSR |
|  |  |  |

An American, Major Arch E. Roberts, writes in a book of his published

He writes: "This war-making capability is, of course, exactly what the authors of the United Nations Charter intended."

Bear this in mind: Wars bring cash into the coffers of high finance and clear the way to the socialist world state. Nowadays it has become generally habitual to refer derisively to the UNO as a world government of farce or a futile talking-shop with no real influence on world events. A great mistake! It is a deliberately disseminated lie to fool the masses.

In actual fact, since its inception the United Nations has done everything in its power to undermine the free countries of the world. It has promoted communism wherever possible; it has uttered promises and lies and then betrayed the peoples. Korea, Hungary, Vietnam, Cambodia, Czechoslovakia, Tibet, Afghanistan, the Congo and Katanga: these are only a few of them. The example of Katanga especially should give South Africa food for thought as to whether to allow the UNO "peace force" to be present at envisaged free elections in SWA/Namibia, as the five leading industrial nations demand.

In his book *Die Herrscher* (p. 169) (English title: *The Fourth Reich of the Rich*) Des Griffin writes:

"In less than a week thousands of UNO soldiers streamed into Central Africa. Belgium withdrew its troops immediately and thus handed over the Congo to the dubious mercies of Lumumba's plundering mob and the 'peace troops' of the UN. These last did little or nothing to help those who really needed help and to restore tranquillity and order. Most of the time they looked on inertly as the country was devastated and got more and more under communist control."

In the words of his Minister of the Interior, Katanga should become "a bastion of anti-communism in Africa." His fateful words: "I detest communism, and I shall never change my attitude" must have so enraged the "peace-loving" UN Supreme Command that soon afterwards they attacked Katanga with UN forces.

Griffin continues: "A year later a 'top secret' memorandum of UNO got into the hands of the American Committee for the Support of the Katanga Freedom Fighters. It contained a detailed plan for a second decisive blow against the anti-communist province. It also said 'As in the past the United States will consider itself bound by UN resolutions to make available the necessary transport aircraft, and later helicopters ... The State Department bases its policies on the UN and will by no means neglect its commitments to the UN.' "

On p. 171 he tells us that "on 29 December 1962 the 'peace' barbarians of the UN, fully equipped with American dollars and war material, attacked freedom-loving Katanga for the second time. A month later, when the invaders stormed its last bulwark, Moïse Tshombe said to his brave troops: 'For the last two-and-a-half years you have twice fought heroically against the enemy. Now their superiority has become overwhelming.' Soon

after the last flickering hope of independence and freedom in the Congo died."

A few more examples of what the use of UN "peace forces" meant in practice should suffice to illustrate the wickedness and hypocrisy of this organization, which had been sold to the world as "the last hope of humanity" and which Pope Paul VI had declared to be the reflection of the Kingdom of God on earth.

In his book *The Fearful Master*65 G. Edward Griffin writes that 46 civilian doctors of Elizabethville issued a joint report of the United Nations' actions against Katanga, which included the following account of the December 12, 1961 UN bombing of the Shinkolobwe Hospital. The doctors wrote: "The Shinkolobwe Hospital is visibly marked with an enormous red cross on the roof of the administrative pavilion. At about 8 a.m. two aeroplanes of the United Nations flew over the hospital twice at very low altitude. At about 9.30 a.m. the aeroplanes started machine-gunning the market square, then the school, and then the hospital, in which there were about 300 patients and their families. In the maternity section the roof, ceilings, walls, beds, tables and chairs were riddled with bullets.

"A bomb exploded in another pavilion ... the roof, the ceiling, half of the walls and half of the furniture had been blasted and shattered. The blood from the wounded makes the building look like a battlefield. In the maternity ward, four Katangan women who had just given birth, one newly born and a child four years of age, were killed."

It then goes on to say that there are three main reasons why communists should support the United Nations:

- 2. The UNO would be able to frustrate any co-ordinated foreign policy of the principal Western powers.
- 3. The UNO is a particularly useful instrument for the breaking-up of non-communist colonial empires.
- 4. The UNO would gradually bring about the fusion of all the countries in the world into one single soviet system.

It would hardly be possible to be more explicit.

The nearer we come to "D-Day", when a regular world government will be declared on behalf of the UNO, the more impudently and openly this covert co-operation between the planners in the background reveals itself. While formerly it was only "the communists" who ostensibly threatened the liberty of Western or Western-minded countries, the threat now comes quite openly from the UNO and the American State Department.

The same game is now being played in South Africa and South West Africa ("Namibia"). If it were to go according to the wishes of the conspirators in the UNO, South West Africa would be handed over to the tender mercies of the SWAPO murder gangs, the Moscow-controlled terrorist organization, which the UNO unilaterally and in violation of all democratic rules of the game has declared to be "the sole authentic representative of the Namibian people". With such overwhelming partisanship – combined with an extensive propaganda campaign – in favour of SWAPO, which is already accepted in anticipation as "the future government of Namibia", granted observer status at the UN and supported with huge sums of money from UN funds, in such circumstances it would be a sheer farce to hold free elections under the "protection" of UN forces.

For that reason the South African government has long hesitated to put this plan into effect and demanded as a counter-measure the prior withdrawal of the fifty thousand Cubans across the Angolan border, on the assumption that such a legitimate demand could not be acceded to so quickly. The marxist régime in Luanda, which actively supports SWAPO, can in fact only remain in power behind the protection of the Cuban mercenaries.

This political realism on the part of a South African government con-

scious of its military strength might be thought rather curious. The communist ring that would then be closed round South Africa must inevitably have serious geo-strategic disadvantages as a result.

South Africa – and the free world of which it is part – would be well advised not to underestimate this deadly danger from the UNO, whose intention is simply to swallow up one country after another and incorporate it in its totalitarian "new world order". By 1985 there were no fewer than seventeen UN sub-committees busying themselves with anti-South African programmes. In the years 1984-85 that cost the world body (or rather the Western taxpayers) 41 million dollars.66

According to *The South African Observer* of July 1987, the number of antiapartheid committees and sub-committees has now risen to 120; and their influence on each corner of the earth is perceptible. Moreover, UN funds go direct to such enemies of South Africa as the ANC, a bomb-laying, marxist-dominated terrorist organization that has been granted the status of a legitimate "liberation movement" worthy of support. In addition there are twenty-five international radio stations daily pouring out a stream of propaganda and hatred.

According to *The Citizen* of 8 April 1987, Kurt von Schirnding, the former South African representative at the UN, reported that at least two-thirds of discussion time at the UN is dominated by the South African question. In a talk that he gave he said the UNO had a "publicity department" that cost 142 million rands a year. Ten per cent of it was spent annually on South African "disinformation".

The aim of the United Nations and the people behind it is world domination, the abolition of sovereignty of individual nations and the creation of a vast centrally controlled commune. To attain that goal the UNO, that "last hope of humanity", does not hesitate to invade free states directly, if necessary.

The Carnegie Foundation report had the entire approval of the then marxist Secretary General of the UN, U Thant. We cannot be certain whether the plan was dropped because it went too far for some of the Western delegates or whether the military planners of the UN suddenly became wary of the fighting strength of the South African forces. At any rate, the fact remains that the possibility of a direct military attack on a sovereign Western state was seriously contemplated. And it must now be obvious to even the most complacent citizen of the West how the UN proposes to "preserve world peace".

We should also know that the disarmament programme for the superpowers – and subsequently for all the other nations – so assiduously advertised, has as its objective nothing less than the transfer of all the armaments systems in the world to the UN.

In Article 43, Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations we read the basic "treaty law" for the establishment of an "Armed United Nations":

"All members of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement, or agreements, armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for the purpose of maintaining international peace and security." 68

The unavoidable logical conclusion to be drawn from Article 43 can only be that the United Nations intends to equip itself with unlimited powers to wage war. The American Major Arch E. Roberts, in his book *Victory Denied* (p. 76) writes: "Article 43 will wipe national boundaries off the map. It will create an irresistible international army. And it will chain the peoples of the world to the wheel of a military juggernaut."

The peoples of the world would have no option but to capitulate to a UN army equipped with American atomic weapons and commanded by a Russian.

### **CHAPTER 7**

# The "Managed" Conflicts

The world is divided into three groups of people: a very small group that does the things that happen; a rather bigger group that sees that something is happening; and the great mass that doesn't notice that something has been 'done'.

Dr Nicholas M. Butler, former President of Columbia University

A black gardener or maid was happy to work for a white household for

a modest wage. Their chances of development were very limited. There were no labour unions, and the strict apartheid laws ensured rigorous order and discipline.

How, then, has the present situation of conflict arisen? Why all this discontent and disaffection among the blacks, now that so much has been done to improve their lot?

As we have learnt from the examples of the French, Russian and other revolutions, national dissensions and revolutions hardly ever break out from within. They do not originate from the People, the "oppressed masses" who suddenly rise, like some mechanism switched on, all over the country, to overthrow a tyrannical government. There may indeed be real discontent and unrest among some sections of a population; but that in itself will not suffice to cause a nation-wide insurrection capable of overthrowing the government. Revolts and revolutions have to be kindled, financed and professionally organized. And that needs more powerful forces outside the country concerned.

Human history does not unroll as most people imagine: as a series of more or less accidental events from which conflicts arise, which lead to resolutions, which give rise to fresh conflicts and so on *ad infinitum*. Whoever studies the conflicts of this our tormented twentieth century more closely and follows the arguments of this book must recognize that all its wars, revolutions and upheavals not only have a common origin but also that their effects are directed to a common end.

When the Trilateral Commission speaks about "managed conflicts" (as it frequently does in its publications) it means the controlled use of conflicts for objectives set far into the future; and not merely for the purpose of solving some particular problem.

not be brought into being without carefully planned controlled conflicts. Individual measures by persons or groups would not be capable of achieving that; therefore the synthesis must be artificially created. The method is quite simple; and it incidentally earns the international bankers high profits by playing the parties concerned off against one another.

That also explains why the bankers supported both the USSR and Hitler's Third Reich; likewise North Korea and North Vietnam against America and so on. Such conflicts bring in vast amounts of money while at the same time driving the countries concerned into the tentacles of a world government.

financial backing and set up as an alternative government. The fact that by now it has become almost entirely communist in composition and the brutal methods of terrorism with which it pursues its apparently attainable goal of power are extensively euphemized or ignored; for is not all this happening for the sake of "liberating the blacks from the tyranny of apartheid"?

The global planners in the background who have created and promoted the antithesis (the UNO, the Trilaterals, the US State Department etc.) then press the government to negotiate, to open up "dialogue", to offer amnesty to "political" prisoners, and ultimately to accept coalition with the "liberation movement". By means of sanctions, diplomatic pressure, blackmail and worldwide propaganda in favour of the "liberation movement" (the antithesis), in most cases the inevitable result is the desired **synthesis:** a socialist black government in the camp of the One-Worlders.

When we examine the conflicts supported by the USA and the international bankers more closely, at first sight we seem to find a picture of total confusion and self-contradiction. Two examples may serve to illustrate that. Let us confine our attention to Africa: to two of the countries next door to South Africa, Mozambique and Angola. Both countries are now communist since the Portuguese colonial power abandoned them.

Mozambique is ruled by FRELIMO, the party of the late dictator Samora Machel, who devastated the country, ruined it economically and gave his people over to death by famine after years of terrorist warfare. South African newspapers and travellers report that the country is sunk into anarchy and chaos; FRELIMO soldiers terrorize the population, and

thousands are compulsorily "re-educated" in the numerous concentration camps.

Under the threat of economic and other retaliatory measures South Africa was warned not to give any help to the anti-communist resistance movement in its struggle for a free Mozambique. Not long ago it looked as though RENAMO had so much got the upper hand that it was only a question of time before the communist régime would be overthrown. What happened then was what can only be construed as a last-minute rescue operation. Britain sent more military instructors to the hard-pressed FRE-LIMO terrorists to prevent the collapse of the régime. France, Britain, America and other Western countries extended enormous credits. David Rockefeller, head of the Chase Manhattan Bank and *éminence grise* of the Council on Foreign Relations, the secret government of the USA, jetted in to Maputo to take stock of the situation there.

South Africa was "encouraged" to conclude the Nkomati Accord, by which the communist régime was supplied with economic aid to shore it up against collapse. In grateful return the new Chissano government and its ally the USSR accused South Africa of causing the death of Machel in the crash of the Russian-built and Russian-flown presidential aircraft, although an international commission of inquiry had unanimously exonerated South Africa of all guilt and attributed the crash on South African territory to scarcely credible sloppiness and negligence and inattention to flight regulations on the part of the Russian crew. The American government has still not withdrawn its original accusation and displays open partisanship in favour of the communist government of Mozambique.

The situation appears to be entirely different in Angola, where the Western-oriented UNITA resistance movement is supported with supplies of arms against the marxist régime in Luanda. America also demands the withdrawal of the Cuban mercenaries from Angola, without whose help the régime would probably be incapable of survival. In that case South Africa is magnanimously permitted to help UNITA too.

So we have two entirely different pictures: on the one hand a communist régime of terrorists is kept in power at all costs by the international bankers behind the governments; on the other it is a pro-Western movement that is supported. Where is the logic? How are we to understand this contradiction?

Well, the bankers are constantly alert to the danger of allowing the

"enemy", the red empire that they have built up, to become over-powerful. Therefore they have to perform a political balancing act in which they support now the Western side, now the Eastern. It is necessary for them to play off both sides against one another in such a fashion that they retain control of developments and make them serve the desired ultimate end. At the same time it offers an excellent opportunity to humbug and confuse the population of the world.

In *Das Kapital* Marx calls capitalism the thesis and communism the antithesis. According to Professor Sutton, historians, including marxist historians, fail to recognize that this collision between the two opposing forces has never produced a society that is neither purely capitalist nor purely communist but a synthesis formed from both. According to Hegel, this new synthesis must necessarily lead to the equation of the state with God. The individual must necessarily submit to an omnipotent state. George Orwell's prophetic vision of the future, *Nineteen Eighty-Four*, presents an astonishing parallel and makes us suspect that he knew more than he let on to his contemporaries.

We are now encountering the same phenomenon in parties of both "right" and "left". It doesn't matter whether the Americans elect Democrats or Republicans: both parties are controlled by the same powerful interest groups. The same with the press. The big newspaper proprietors print both left-wing and right-wing papers under the same roof, as it were, and the reader can have whatever he fancies. They are manipulated both rightward and leftward; but they are given the feeling of reading a sensible paper that in its commentaries speaks their minds for them. They will believe that particular publication without noticing that it is only its style, its mode of expression, that is different – "left" or "right". But their ideas are moulded in exactly the same way.

Just as the conflict between Nazi Germany and the USSR was tostered in accordance with hegelian dialectics and financed by the same sources of high finance, resulting in a new synthesis of the two super-powers, the USA and the USSR, the manipulators are now in the process of building up Red China as the antithesis to the USSR.

We have already discussed the part played by the USA in the creation of the communist system in Russia. What is less well known is the fact that during the second world war America helped the Chinese communists to power too so as to have a new arm at their disposal in the dialectical process. The decision to build up Red China militarily and economically was President Nixon's; and it was put into effect by Henry Kissinger (Chase Manhattan) and George Bush (Trilateral Commission).

According to Professor Sutton, Bechtel is now performing a function similar to that of Albert Kahn, Inc. of Detroit, which in 1928 worked out the preliminary studies and planning for the first Five-Year Plan in the USSR. "By about the year 2000 communist China will be a super-power, built up by American technology and initiative. It is probably the intention of the Order \[synonymous with the American Insider Group: author\] to bring that power into existence as a conflict-figure in opposition to the USSR."

### **CHAPTER 8**

## The Secret Rulers

The world is ruled by persons very different from what is supposed by those who cannot look behind the scenes.

Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881)

About two hundred years ago, under the influence of liberal currents, the political structures of Western civilization began to soften up and change. The result was the so-called democratic forms of government in which (in theory) power was derived "from the people".

Now it is possible to hold different opinions about the pros and cons of democratic forms of government; nevertheless one thing is certain: they created undreamt-of possibilities of influencing and manipulating the bearers of political responsibility, who often had only a few years in office. The gates were thrown wide open to all the avenues of corruption, blackmail, nepotism and blatant power-lust. To many politicians democracy means all too often a chance to line their own pockets during the short time that the levers of power – and the disposal of billions' worth of public funds – are in their hands. They go on jaunts and live high on the hog at the public expense, handing out millions in "development aid" to black despots and corrupt generals, tamely follow whatever trend happens to be in vogue among the masses and give them their bread and circuses until the state treasury is empty. The main thing is to make sure that they get elected again!

an elected representative of the people appointed for only a limited period. Since he does not need to be re-elected he does not need to curry favour of the people but can in fact rule in accordance with the best interests of all. Ostentatious world tours, tax-free allowances and plenipotentiary powers offer no attraction to a ruler blessed from birth with all the worldly possessions to act in a manner contrary to the interests of his own state, as is now all too often the case when elections are an important factor. There is also a widespread – deliberately propagated – but erroneous belief that democratic forms of government would cost the state and the taxpayer less than, say, a ruling monarchy or an imperial house. That is a piece of deliberate mendacity designed to mislead the masses.

The extravagent expense and wasteful luxury with which an elected representative often surrounds himself during his brief tenure of office can easily exceed the official establishment of a monarch permanently installed.

We have now become so accustomed to a democratic form of society that we have come to regard it as a *sine qua non* of all proper government. Thus we forget the experience of history: that every democracy bears within itself the seeds of its own self-destruction. Think only of ancient Greece and the decline of the mighty Roman Empire, whose "democratic" aberrations greatly hastened its collapse.

When we contemplate the present "permissiveness" and cultural degeneracy and profane obsession with material things of the Western nations, led as they are into regions of infinite "progress" by the American bell-wether, and the decadence and perversions with which we are surrounded, we cannot but recognize that our civilization also has long sunk below its zenith.

The secret rulers of our era are well aware of the prevailing state of things and how to turn this human decadence to their advantage. For centuries they have closely studied the behaviour of the common man and harnessed his weaknesses in their plans. They drive and manœuvre the masses like sheep to the slaughter; and in one direction: the end of which only they see clearly before their eyes. With diabolical inspiration and fanatical zeal they pursue their ends from generation to generation. Every means will suit their purpose. They kindle wars and revolutions; their road to power is paved with human lives. Their god is Mammon and Lucifer is his prophet. Anyone who stands in their way is ruthlessly destroyed.

To all outward appearance they are philanthropists, benefactors of mankind generously contributing copious funds in the service of a new and better world. In reality what they propose is to "liberate" mankind from every vestige of freedom that it still possesses. Computers, credit cards and cashless transactions are important components of their strategy to get the masses in their grasp. Their objective is total power and total control over

every living soul on this planet. They are mostly invisible; but they stand behind every government of any significance, manipulating it.

What they are working for is a totalitarian world order, a world government and a monopolistic economic system that they can dominate and control. They propose to attain that end by the power of their money and gold.

The public first became aware of the existence of these documents when an extraordinary accident happened in 1785. The story goes that a courier of the *Illuminati* secret society was riding hell-for-leather from Frankfurt to Paris to deliver documents and instructions for the projected French revolution. These documents from the *Illuminati* were addressed to the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of France in Paris.

In Des Griffin's book *Wer regiert die Welt?*71 (English title: *Descent into slavery?*), which gives these documents in an appendix under the title of *Protocols of World Dictatorship: the New Testament of Satan*, we read what happened next (p. 245): "The courier was struck by lightning. All the papers fell into the hands of the police, who sent them back to the Bavarian government, which ordered a raid on the headquarters of the Illuminati in which more documents were seized. It was thus discovered that the conspirators had worldwide objectives. All the carefully documented proofs were sent to the governments of England, Germany, Austria, France, Poland and Russia. For some reason or other, presumably through the influence of Illuminati insiders, these governments decided to ignore the warnings. Four years later the French revolution exploded and shook the whole European scene."

While we have no certain proof of the authorship of the later so-called Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, there can none the less be no doubt about the authenticity of the documents themselves. The course of world history up to now, which agrees with astonishing exactitude with these papers, is perfectly unambiguous and allows of no other conclusion. Weishaupt's fundamental ideas keep coming to light in the "Protocols": the destruction of all legitimate governments, religions and nations and the es-

tablishment of a universal despotism to dominate the enslaved masses by terror and force.

That one chapter was published in Britain and America under the title *The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.* Reed was unable to discover whether that was the superscription of the original version or whether it was added in translation.

He writes (p. 211): "When the Protocols appeared in English the minor point, who was the author of this particular document, was given a false semblance of major importance by the enraged Jewish attack on the document itself. The asseveration of Jewish leadership of the revolutionary conspiracy was not new at all; the reader has seen that Disraeli, Bakunin and many others earlier affirmed it. In this case the allegation about a specific meeting of Jewish leaders of the conspiracy was unsupported and could have been ignored ..."

"The attack on the Protocols in the 1920's proved above all else the truth of their contention; it showed that the standing organization for suppressing public discussion of the conspiracy had been perfected in the intervening 120 years. Probably so much money and energy were never before in history expended on the effort to suppress a single document." (p. 212)

On page 212 Douglas Reed writes: "The initial debate was free and vigorous, but in following years the attack succeeded in imposing the law of *lèse-majesté* in this matter and today hardly any public man or print ventures to mention the Protocols unless to declare them forged or infamous (an act of submission also foretold in them)."

That state of affairs has persisted to this day, and indeed it was predicted by the Protocols in 1905: "Through the press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade ... The principal factor of success in the political field is the secrecy of its undertaking; the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat ... We must compel the governments ... to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called 'Great Power', the press, which, with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands ... We shall deal with the press in the following way: ... we shall saddle and bridle it with a tight curb; we shall do the same also with all productions of the printing-press, for where would be the sense of getting rid of the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? ... No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of our government infallibility. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification ... We shall have a sure triumph over our opponents since they will not have at their disposition organs of the press in which they can give full and final expression to their views owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press ... "73

From this the argument is developed that "an absolute despotism" is necessary to govern "the mob", which is "a savage", and that "our State" will employ "the terror which tends to produce blind submission".

Is not that precisely what has been happening throughout this century, as we can see for ourselves from the media any day of the week? The "art of government" is now placed in the hands of peanut farmers and third-rate movie actors whose main function appears to be to flash their teeth in broad grins and for the rest to leave the business of government to their "advisers". In 1905 these unelected but powerful "advisers" were practically unknown to the public. It was only with the outbreak of the two world wars that they suddenly became well-known personalities, the *éminences grises* behind the heads of state.

That was particularly conspicuous in America in the time of President Wilson and his constant companion "Colonel" House, whom the President called his *alter ego*. House was actually a front man for the international bankers and played a leading part in the creation of the Federal Reserve

Later it was Harry Hopkins who as Roosevelt's "adviser" switched the points for the international clique of conspirators. As the President's "right hand" he made sure that from the middle to the end of the second world war the bankers' red empire was amply supplied with war material to the value of six thousand million dollars to make the final victory of Stalin and his bolshevik gangsters quite certain. The exhausted German armies were continually astonished at the abundance of material that the enemy was still able to put into the field right to the end.

Through the instrumentality of the presidential adviser and the help of Henry Morgenthau junior and his closest collaborator Harry Dexter White the Russians were supplied with extremely scarce uranium, heavy water, large quantities of thin copper wire and many other important materials for the production of atomic bombs.

- the principal organizer of the "opening" of Red China, while at the same time secretly intriguing to force Taiwan, one of its founder members, out of the United Nations:
- the driving force behind the appeasement policy towards the USSR, and was responsible for measures that for the first time enabled it to gain tactical military superiority over the USA;
- he was responsible for providing the Russians with the most up-to-date
- he sent American wheat to Russia at astonishingly favourable credit rates, while the price of bread in America went through the ceiling;
- he mediated in the Near Eastern conflict so "skilfully" that his friend the Russian ambassador, Anatoly Dobrynin, was able to comment with satisfaction that in those negotiations Kissinger had represented the Russian side as well as the American;
- despite powerful opposition from Congress and the public, he induced
    the USA to give up its supreme authority over the strategically vital
    Panama Canal and supported the demands of the Panamanian dictator, a client of Moscow;

How was it possible that this German Jew, an immigrant from Fürth in Bavaria, who at one time thought of becoming a bookkeeper, could within a few years emerge from academic obscurity to rise to the second most powerful position in the White House? Who enabled this modest professor at Harvard to make the prodigious ascent to the rank of "presidential representative" of the United States?

Like Zbigniew Brzezinski under Carter, Henry Alfred Kissinger owed his career to the influence and membership of the shadow world government, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and his loyal connexions with high finance; or, more precisely, the Rockefeller empire.

As a result of the NATO alliance policy and the financial dominance of the dollar, the Western countries are almost entirely dependent on the cooperation and protection of America. Their "presidential advisers" are less conspicuous and less familiar to the public than in America. They operate much more in the background; nevertheless they also are committed to the same shadow world government, which sets their course for them.

On page 49 of Manfred Adler's book *Die Söhne der Finsternis – Weltmacht Zionismus*75 (*The Sons of Darkness – World Power Zionism*) there is an American press report on a court case between a Zionist and an anti-Zionist Jew which runs as follows: "Most people think that the purpose of the so-called Zionist movement is to create a home in Palestine for Jewish refugees. Not at all. The real purpose of Zionism is the attainment of total world-wide control by a super world government."

Adler writes that the population of Israel is being primed by every form of political and philosophical propaganda, in the press and in the schools, with the "basic creed" of Zionism to set them on the road to that final goal. He recalls the monstrous remark made by Golda Meir, a socialist Zionist and former prime minister of Israel, which was quoted by the press in 1974: "If the American people hands Israel over to Arafat, it will be the end of Israel and the end of the world."

In 1920 Chaim Weizmann (president of the Zionists from 1920 to 1930) used the same sort of apocalyptic vapourings as Golda Meir when he threatened Britain, the protecting power of Palestine, during a speech in Jerusalem: "You can hasten our coming \[to Palestine: author\] or refuse it. But it will be as well for you to help us, for if you don't we shall turn our con-

The tactical intimidation manœuvres of the Zionists were directed at the peoples so that they would exert the appropriate pressure on the politicians. They are still doing it to strengthen their imperialistic power politics in the Near East, although they know very well that in making their decisions American politicians are entirely dependent on that three per cent of the American population who dominate "the land of unlimited possibilities", especially in finance, the press and industry. In the USA as in Britain, South Africa and many other countries persons who are either Zionists themselves or closely associated with them occupy all the centres of power.

According to a report in the *New York Times*, in 1973 Senator J.W. Fulbright declared: "Israel rules the Senate. In my opinion the Senate is far too servile. We should concern ourselves more with the interests of the United States than doing what Israel wants. The great majority of the Senate of the United States – about eighty per cent – is completely aligned to supporting Israel no matter what Israel demands. That has been shown time and again, and that's what has made the situation so difficult for our Government."77

We can safely assume that the Zionist influence is no less strong in Congress. Anybody who doubts that need only glance at the immediate vicinity of an American President to see who makes the policies there. Manfred Adler gives us the example of the former President Gerald Ford:

Secretary of Defence.

ames Schlesinger Secretary of Defence.
Caspar Weinberger Head of the H.E.W.

Alan Greenspan Head of the President's Economic

Advisory Committee.
President's press chief.

L.H. Silberman Vice-General State Attorney (i.c. Depart

ment of Justice until appointment of

Edward LEVI).

Agriculture.

all complaints about discrimination in

Leonard Garment Head of the Department of Jewish Affairs.

Rabbi Morton Kanter Head of the Youth Development section

of the H.E.W

Harris Friedman Chief economist of the Federal Home

Loans Bank.

Helmut Sonnenfeldt Attorney in the State Department.

Milton Friedman Senior speech-writer to the President

Director of Fodoral Incurance

Mrs Ford's press secretary

descent).

This list, says Adler, could be continued with hundreds more names in the executive offices of the vast Federal bureaucracy. How many of the members and officials of the government are Zionists in the strict sense of the word it is impossible to say. At any rate they did not get to their influential posts by accident. Or does anybody seriously believe that Henry Kissinger and James Schlesinger happened to occupy the most important Departments in the USA by pure "accident"? Neither they nor any other responsible officials can afford to pursue anti-Zionist policies. But if they did – which is apparently what Brother Nixon tried to do – then their days in government would be numbered.

And by the same token the catchword "anti-semitism" is just as fatuous when it is used exclusively for anti-Jewish attitudes and opinions, as though the Jews were the only semites.

The power of political Zionism now dominates the Western world as completely as communism holds the Eastern world in its clutches. The hypothesis that both movements have a common origin—like two branches of the same tree—and are both used by international high finance to gain total control over all mankind must therefore be given serious consideration. It appears to be the only reasonable explanation of the history of our times.

### **CHAPTER 9**

# The Deception of Nations

In this book so far we have had a good deal to say about the background to the present undeclared war against South Africa. Let the reader judge for himself whether the statements made in it constitute a true bill from the facts and events cited; and above all by observing future developments for himself.

For millions of people these realities are hidden by dense clouds of hostile propaganda. "Peter Simple" the brilliant satirist of the London *Daily Telegraph*, calls it "a world filled with lies".

So let us be wary of swallowing the specious reasons for the present campaign against South Africa: they are entirely bogus. South Africa is only one of the battlefields of this century in a war that all the Western nations are engaged in. The forces of the world revolution are sapping away surreptitiously from both sides of the Iron Curtain; which is why their activities are so effective and so dangerous.

That is why Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Dr Allan Boesak, Dr Beyers Naudé and other South African clergymen, who make no bones about displaying their sympathies with marxist-terrorist "liberation movements" and preaching sermons under red hammer-and-sickle flags, are heroworshipped in the West and even honoured (like Tutu) with the Nobel Peace Prize.

That is why the SWAPO and ANC bombers and mass-murderers are not instantly arrested and extradited in the West, as they would have been in earlier "normal" days, so that they could receive just punishment for their abominable deeds. Instead, they are now made welcome at the UNO and

hardly anybody knows any longer what to believe or not to believe. In the Eastern bloc they are mesmerized by the "warmongers" in the West, who are credited with the most diabolical intentions; while in the West the politicians make our flesh creep with stories about the sabre-rattling East. But there is a purpose in all this farrago. As we all know, when two parties have a set-to there is often a third party standing by to take advantage of it. Since both parties keep arming more and more heavily, the war-machines run at higher and higher revs on both sides. If some apparent *détente* or disarmament should take place, it is only an opportunity to scrap obsolete weapons or shift the existing ones somewhere else. And then the game continues as before. The third parties looking on with understandable amusement are of course the international bankers who finance the armaments industries on both sides.

Similar evidence has been provided by other crashes elsewhere or by aircraft flown by deserters to America, Taiwan, South Korea and other countries.

Many such facts are concealed from the Western public so as to preserve the myth of communist equality with the far more advanced technological capacities of the West.

The secret rulers on both sides of the Iron Curtain know full well that the fusion of both systems into a single world state can only be brought about

if this artificially created bogy of mutual hostility is sufficiently alarming to frighten the ordinary people of the world into accepting a world government, if only as a *pis aller*, in face of the threat of the dreaded "holocaust".

In Europe nowadays it is taboo to express frankly anti-communist opinions; anybody who does is damned as a "cold warrior" or some such

How co-operation with the USSR and the projected world government will work was explained in the official journal of the American Jewish Committee in New York in 1958: "The international government of the UN is actually a joint international government of the USA and the USSR in one "79"

In 1967 a radio commentary over "the Voice of America" let another cat out of the bag in its European programme: "In the near future the world will be governed in such a way that the American monopoly will not act in opposition to the Soviet monopoly, but rather there will be an agreed polarization. Consequently the USA and the Soviets will work together in secret and screen this activity by means of the UN. In that way the public of the world, which will of course not be in the picture, will be hoodwinked. Thus both the world powers will apparently be working against each other while in fact they are in secret complicity. That is the "new order". Wars will still be fought, because that is part of the ostensible opposition, but they will be managed and limited to controllable brush-fires so as never to lead to serious large-scale conflict. But behind the scenes everything will be so arranged that neither of the big boys trespasses on the other's territory. \[Cf. the Hungarian rising, the Berlin wall, Afghanistan etc. – author\] The real decisions, made in secret session, will be handed out to the servants of the Kremlin and the White House, and their satellites will not know what has been decided until they are confronted with the faits accomplis. \[author's emphasis\]

Thus the Voice of America in 1967. The game has now got well into the second half; and people are still gazing in petrified terror at this completely sham battle between East and West that purports to threaten them with a titanic war of universal destruction.

What South Africans must realize and the other nations must recognize is simply this: political Zionism and world communism are the driving forces of a world revolution that draws its vital sustenance from international high finance. In the present world of unrest, instability and contrived chaos they both serve high finance by waging incessant war, by destabilization, by the spread of false information, by insurrections and terrorist attacks. That is the nature of the third world war against the West, its peoples, its religion and its culture, which are to be weakened, worn down and destroyed by ever-renewed attacks, by terrorist intimidation and bloody insurgencies. But no battle, no resistance is more infallibly lost than one in which the enemy is unseen and unknown. And a war of resistance has now become a necessity not only to South Africa but to all the peoples of the free world. They must now stand their ground and fight back, or else lose it by default.

This wholesale humbugging of nations is now happening in all areas: since the very beginning of this century in schools, universities and theological seminaries the tares of confusion and destruction have been sown, and their shoots have sprung up all over the world. Conditions of anarchy, rebellion against parents and teachers, empty atheist churches—these are all symptoms of a sick society living from day to day, spineless, devoid of morality or ideals or principles.

As a result of the falsifications of history by the victor powers young Germans today are presented with a picture of their country that makes patriotism and national loyalty seem misplaced and teaches them to become not Germans but pan-Europeans and citizens of the world. We see the same trends in many other countries. Thus the planned abolition of national sovereignty and the amalgamation of Western Europe – and later with Eastern Europe – will be facilitated.

In anthropology students are inculcated with the marxist doctrine of the equality of all races and all human beings – an equality that does not exist either in mankind or in nature. Some of the fateful consequences of that disastrous doctrine are contempt for ethnic connexions or national fellowship and the great diversity of the human species, resulting in chaos and border wars and separatist movements, often accompanied by murder and terrorist attacks in the fight for their autonomy and "separate development" (apartheid).

The subversive material churned out by UNESCO, the branch of the UN concerned with educational affairs, in the form of school text-books and guides as to their content, is now uncritically accepted by most Western countries. The result is a standardization and stultification of thought that will make it easier for the future citizens of the world state to submit to the prospective revolutionary changes in politics, society, the economy and religion.

The systematic destruction of Christianity as a buttress and bearer of our Western civilization is regarded as a prerequisite for the creation of the New World Order, which pursues a policy of *syncretism*, the fusion of all the different religions into one all-embracing world temple.

It is not surprising, therefore, that readiness for "dialogue" has led the

The great Rockefeller foundations in America not only train promising New-World theologians from all over the world at their Union Seminary in New York, where they are imbued with an anti-Christian "God is dead" philosophy; they have also given the world its biggest abortion clinic, which, in association with other such clinics in America, is designed to kill up to eighteen hundred thousand unborn babies a year, as John H. Knowles, a former president of the Rockefeller Foundation, boasted; though in less blunt language.

Who can blame the good Rocky if he takes the Fifth Commandment somewhat less seriously than the advantages of birth and population control?

The Christo-communists from the Rockefeller theological institute now occupying the pulpits of many churches in the West are busy making sure that the fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith is falsified and nullified by political interests, with the result that more and more people are abandoning their churches and turning away from Christianity. But a people robbed of its spiritual values and firm moral foundations and rules of conduct is at the mercy of any voguish ideologies and "trends" and can be driven in any desired direction.

So far South Africa has on the whole been able to escape the most noxious of the Western influences and trends; partly because of its geographical remoteness, but to some extent also because for many years it was spared the demoralizing influences of the "TV culture"; for television was introduced only about fifteen years ago. Since then, however, the country has also been exposed to the corrupting and stultifying effects of mostly American trash and subliminal propaganda. The television and the press unite in selling the public a saccharine and totally bogus American scene of perfect racial harmony, in which token blacks in positions of authority and prestige are obligatory, and ignoring all trace of the real state of affairs well known to anybody who has ever been to New York, Washington or Miami.

Thus the principal church in South Africa, the Dutch Reformed Church, recently performed a theological somersault and pronounced apartheid a sin, "since it could not be justified on biblical grounds". It seems not to have occurred to the worthy gentlemen of the Synod that made this heroic decision that they were doing something that the enemies of their country had been trying to bring about for years.

Could they so soon have forgotten that their theological predecessors had been maintaining precisely the opposite for at least a generation; that "separate development" under the will of God was absolutely justifiable by scripture? They believed that God had with excellent reason warned his people of the old Covenant against all mixing, which would lead to their assimilation by aliens. They cited the Testaments both Old and New, with particular emphasis on the words of Jesus: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfil."

For many years now they have been bombarded by the UN, "friendly"

Western states, international church organizations and so on with a constant, indefatigable, incessant barrage of accusations, myths and half-truths, and a controlled domestic and foreign press has been beating its breast and preaching at them, filling them with a sense of guilt and trying to manœuvre them into an inescapable blind alley where they should be compelled to capitulate. South Africa is allowed no alternative; although perfectly good alternatives do in fact exist, and the fault-finders do not accept that their meddlings are an intolerable interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. From all sides the croaks are heard: "It's inevitable"; "Too little, too late"; "Things have gone too far to be stopped now" and so on and so forth.

Any stick will serve to beat a dog; and every means is used to sap the strength and the will and the morale of the whites. Seditious poison is brewed and disseminated from pulpit and press. Foreign church delegations and "fact-finding" politicians arrive in droves, generously imparting the fruits of their wisdom and learning more in a two-week tour than the people who have lived there for generations, solving problems the complexity of which they can hardly even begin to understand. The Afrikaner himself knows perfectly well that most of the "problems" are caused only by the propaganda barrage and officious meddling by those outsiders. Add to these the Christian and secular groups, the friendship societies and the naïve writers who with the best of intentions call for "reforms" and "antiapartheid" action – who can do more harm than good.

In Britain, Germany and innumerable other countries seminars and "church days" are held in which the main subject of discussion is South Africa; as if those countries hadn't enough internal and external problems of their own to occupy their attention.

The Organization for African Unity (OAU), which at its annual meetings regularly demonstrates its inability to solve the problems and alleviate the conflicts of even one of its under-developed and poverty-stricken member states, joins in the general chorus of condemnation of a country that they should rather be taking as a model and an example to emulate.

Meanwhile the international bankers spare no effort to bring South Africa to its knees. By means of artificially provoked and communist-controlled insurrections and acts of terrorism all over the country they stoke the fires of revolution, working away to wear down the resistance of the whites and try to crush them between the hammer of Moscow and the anvil of New York.

### CHAPTER 10

The latest vogue nowadays is for "civil-rights leaders" in Washington, would-be politicians and parsons and actors to assemble in noisy protest demonstrations outside the South African embassy or get themselves arrested for an hour or two for illegally occupying institutions that deal in Kruger rands. "Church days" are turned into South Africa days. Unsatisfied housewives, "professional" students and liberal crackpots of all shades throw themselves into these fooleries with neurotic passion in an unconscious attempt to conquer their frustrations and inadequacies by a display of self-righteous indignation against a nation that they know only at second hand.

The explanation of their antics is the false information with which they are force-fed by the Establishment media. A succession of falsehoods about South Africa is so constantly repeated that most people come to accept such statements as "things that everybody knows". No further proof is needed.

In 1984 an American company by the name of Accuracy in Media published an analysis of the reporting of civil rights during the year 1982 in the *Washington Post*, the *New York Times* and the CBS TV network. It found that the *New York Times*, for example, devoted more than half (53 per cent) of its reports on South Africa exclusively to the subjects of "human rights", compared with the USSR with 27 per cent, Nicaragua 18 per cent, Red China 14 per cent, East Germany 9 per cent, Iran and Angola 6 per cent each and Ghana 3 per cent. Three of the most repressive régimes in the world, Albania, North Korea and Cambodia, were scarcely mentioned; and the genocidal activities of Robert Mugabe's Fifth Brigade in Matabeleland (Zimbabwe) were referred to only peripherally as of little interest.83

On 12 January 1985 the *New York Times* published a report by its South African correspondent Alan Cowell under the headline: "Hunger in South Africa – selective". It alleged that apartheid guaranteed starvation for 2,9 million blacks because "legislation consistently withheld the fertile land from the black population" and their subsistence cultivation was being systematically destroyed.

In connexion with the later expulsion of the *New York Times* correspondent the South African newspaper *The Citizen* printed a letter from an American in New York on 21 January 1987, whose view of the situation I should like to quote in full. It appeared under the heading:

It is true that we have a free press in the US – free to twist and distort the news, free to report or not to report, in order to advance the political and social agenda of the enormously wealthy and powerful oligarchy that owns and controls the major national news media in the US – an oligarchy that is solidly Leftist and pro-Marxist.

Correspondents like Mr Cowell and almost every other representative of the American print and broadcast media now in South Africa must be considered as an enemy army operating within your borders. It is folly to continue to let them remain. Their goal is revolution – not evolution. The sooner they follow Mr Cowell out of the country the better it will be for South Africa and the entire Western world."

(George E.R., New York 10475, N.Y.)

This hostile propaganda does not come only from America, as anybody can confirm by listening to the broadcasts to Africa of the BBC, Deutsche Welle and Radio Netherland, to name only a few. One might well suppose that they came from the other side of the Iron Curtain.

### THE PAPERS AND SOUTH AFRICA

- A South African working with a foreign TV unit informed the police that some TV crews had prior knowledge of certain future events. They set up their apparatus in advance and waited for them to happen, usually the burning of schools and other buildings. Such scenes were engineered entirely for the purposes of the TV reports!
- which gave the cameramen an opportunity to film them. This incident was also filmed from some distance away by a police video unit.
- It was also evident from some of the video material shown to me that some foreign TV crews were provided with gas-masks to enable them to film the actions of the police against rioters while moving freely among them. In doing so they hampered the police and deliberately aggravated a tense situation.

That report is by one observer on the spot.

For years the public all over the world has been systematically fed thousands of snippets of information, some true, some false, some relevant, some irrelevant, some contradictory, some incomprehensible. To the average citizen it seems a meaningless mosaic of unrelated bits and pieces. He shrugs and gives up trying to understand the world situation. He turns instead to the sports broadcasts or reads the juiciest gossip about some divorce or devotes his attention to the photographic representation of female anatomy. His mental withdrawal and failure to understand the present state of the world of course make it infinitely easier for the international wirepullers to steer governments and peoples in the desired direction.

The importance of the co-operation of the Western mass-media in the planned revolution in Southern Africa (Rhodesia, Namibia, South Africa) was admitted years ago by the present communist president of Mozambique, Joaquim Chissano.

A British newspaper reported:84 "Soon after the FRELIMO guerrillas had taken over power from the Portuguese in Mozambique, a German journalist, Lutz Herold, interviewed Samora Machel's deputy, Joaquim Chissano. He asked him what chances the ZAPU/ZANU rebels had against the Rhodesian army. Chissano, who had received his training in revolutionary tactics and propaganda in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and the USSR, replied that the guerrillas by themselves stood little chance of defeating the Rhodesian forces. He added that the ANC \[the communist African National Congress; author\] by itself had absolutely no chance of beating the South African security forces. 'But,' he said, 'that doesn't matter. We know that the whites in southern Africa are so influenced by their media that they will give up their position of power.'" \[Author's emphasis\]

They consider every reform as not going nearly far enough. Almost all the English-language papers, and to an increasing extent the Afrikaans papers too, influence their readers in favour of the pro-communist ANC, the extra-parliamentary United Democratic Front (UDF) and the anti-government South African Council of Churches (SACC) and demand the release of Nelson Mandela, a communist who was imprisoned for high treason. They palliate or ignore the communist threat both inside and outside the country and advocate radical reforms and the immediate abolition of all race-separation laws, which would have a particularly advantageous effect on Big Business in South Africa. They take part in discussions and dialogue with terrorist "liberation movements" and de-

Most of the South African press, including the publishers of books and periodicals, belong to the vast Anglo-American business empire, and are therefore controlled by its head, Harry Oppenheimer. He is closely associated with the most important international establishments in the USA, such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission, and the European Bilderbergers and the Royal Institute for International Affairs in London. Oppenheimer is a strong supporter of Archbishop Tutu and a leading promoter of the internationalist South Africa Institute of International Affairs.

He sent his top management of Anglo-American to hold discussions with the ANC bombers in Lusaka in Zambia, despite the fact that it was planning the overthrow of the government and had been prohibited in South Africa as a subversive organization. Since other "liberal" representatives of South African Big Business took part in these talks, the terrorists were given far more prestige than they could have wished for. The parallel with Rockefeller's close associations with marxist states is striking, and it demonstrates the preference that multinational concerns have for social systems in which the free market economy is replaced by monopoly capitalism.

as wage negotiations, trade unions, strikes and expensive security measures ..."

The radio and television services of the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) are controlled by the government, and until recently the programmes were still moderately conservative, apart from the fact that the Corporation does little to make the South Africans aware of the dangers threatening them from both outside and inside. Meanwhile "liberal" forces within the SABC have gained the upper hand, and it is now preparing the population step by step for total racial integration and "power-sharing" with the black majority. Plans are being made for the privatization of the SABC. All else being equal, it is now probable that the Oppenheimer interests will acquire the majority of shares, so that ultimately the press, TV and periodicals in South Africa would be under his control. This concentration of mass-media power in the hands of "liberals" is typical of the whole Western world nowadays.

The demoralization of the South African people is one of the main objectives of the psychological war against the country. It is intended to break the nation's will to resist by undermining its faith in itself, its institutions and its government. It is done by holding up to South Africans a false picture of reality. The security forces are represented as defenders of an immoral system that deserves condemnation rather than defence, and young people are urged to refuse military service, and thus weaken their country.

could ensure a lasting peace, harmony within the country and with the world outside and economic progress.

One of the first steps in psychological warfare consists in the isolation of the enemy country, both physically and psychically. It is made out to be the pariah of the world. (In America efforts are being made to get South Africa officially declared a "terrorist state".) The country is excluded from all international committees and sports organizations. Trade boycotts and restrictions on travel are imposed. Tourists, sportsmen and businessmen are put under such pressure by their governments and "the media" that they hardly dare to visit the country. Newspapers and television present distorted images of reality: exaggerated stories of a state of civil war, terrorism, murder and violence calculated to frighten off anybody thinking of going there. Famous sporting figures and stars who are not intimidated by all this are "black-listed", reprisals are taken against them, and on their return they are boycotted by many countries. Through fear of the media in their own country and the concomitant adverse effects on their career and earning power many of them are induced to jabber the stereotyped claptrap expected of them, although in fact the impressions that they had formed of the pariah state and its inhabitants were entirely different.

Yet there are dauntless exceptions, such as the young American TV actor Jan Michael Vincent, who recently visited South Africa and had the courage to say openly what he really thought.

### AIRWOI E STAR THINKS WE'RE A HAPPY RINCH

Vincent, who plays Stringfellow Hawk in the action series Airwolf, was in Durban at the weekend promoting a chain store. He said he saw only happy and cheerful South Africans wherever he went. He said that when he returned to the US he intended meeting President Ronald Reagan and telling him what he saw in South Africa.

Mental isolation is even more important than physical isolation. The white population of South Africa must be made to feel like lepers, outcasts from the world community, for living in and with and by an abominably unjust system that enables them to prosper at the expense of the "oppressed". If they want to regain the goodwill of the world, they are told, they must do something about dismantling that system.

These emotion-laden expressions, which in fact stand the truth on its head, and by constant repetition come to be swallowed as self-evident axioms by a gullible world public, with the result that even South African businessmen and sportsmen and tourists abroad often fall victim to this psychic barrage. Like exchange students, theologians and professional people who undergo some part of their training abroad, they more often than not return as mouthpieces for the enemies of their country without being aware of it.

The sense of guilt implanted in them is skilfully used by the establishment media to spread it into every corner of the country. Well-known personalities in sport, the churches and business, who from sheer simplicity or a positive marxist inclination spread their corrosive bane, are the

Whatever evolutionary reforms may be made, whatever justice and equality of opportunity may be instituted within the obdurate South African social system – and indeed are necessary – they will do nothing to ward off the onslaught against the country!

The machinery of propaganda and the psychological strategies of the KGB make use of the same channels and vehicles of "disinformation" and calumny so readily available in the West.

The Russian version of South African politics is one of unnatural contrast and conflict between South Africa and the black African states. Its dominant position and its mere existence as a white entity in Africa are decried as a "system of injustice with no legitimate rights".

To isolate South Africa still further Russian radio broadcasts and publications concentrate on mustering black Africa, particularly the "front-line" states, and Western Europe against South Africa.

Touching a highly sensitive nerve, they falsely represent South Africa as

a colonial survival from a past era that has attained its position of power by exploitation and oppression of the black population. In Europe Russian psycho-propaganda endeavours to represent South Africa as heir and successor to Hitler's Germany by equating its form of society with the National Socialism of the Third Reich. A well-known South African bishop who makes no secret of his "red" sympathies even went so far as to imply that the aim of the South African government was a "final solution of the black question" – whatever he meant by that.

That this was a coordinated strategy is obvious from the fact that similar statements were suddenly made everywhere. Thus J. Makatini, a member of the prohibited underground communist movement the ANC said: "The architects and present upholders of apartheid derived and still derive their inspiration and examples ... from the Hitler régime."

Even the official documents of the UN suddenly adopted this line: "This cowardly and criminal act of aggression against Lesotho \[i.e. a South African attack on ANC terrorist positions; author\] and the massacre of civilians reflect the crimes of National Socialism."

In addition to the attacks by the establishment media both at home and abroad there is a spate of publications of all sorts in South Africa itself that creates a revolutionary climate and sometimes assumes dangerous dimensions. These "alternative media" are largely financed from abroad; often by church organizations in Germany, Switzerland and Scandinavia, whose missionary zeal, it must be said, does little for the cause of Christian unity and love of one's neighbour.

black townships. Black leaders who wished to restore peace in their locality and had perforce to co-operate with the security organizations were denounced in the media, while radical agitators were often represented as heroes. Bodies and individuals who did not steer the revolutionary course laid down by the ANC were vilified and branded as collaborators. A careful selection of news and photographic material flattering to radical-left organizations endeavoured to set them in a favourable light. On the pretext of objective reporting and normal journalistic practices these publications were vehicles of subtle propaganda and helped to create the revolutionary climate in the country.

The special connections of the media with revolutionary activities could hardly have been made more obvious than in the trial, years ago, of Braam Fischer, a former leader of a communist underground movement in South Africa that had close relations with Moscow. He had cheerfully admitted: "Our press has done marvellous work." By that he did not mean *Pravda* or *The Morning Star* but the South African mass media belonging to both chains, the Argus Group and South African Associated Newspapers.

Scarcely anything has done more harm to the image of South Africa in the world than the propagandistic, distorted and one-sided reporting in its own media, which is eagerly snapped up abroad and only needs to be reprinted.

In the Aida Parker Newsletter no. 49 of 29 January 1985 the writer published some readers' letters under the heading *The Truth Is South Africa's Strongest Defence* which well express the mood and dissatisfaction within the population:

possible is done to undermine public trust and faith in the security forces. Let that be achieved and the radicals can then operate more freely against us, in this country and abroad." (Citizen Force officer)

"One of the least admirable traits of the liberal White South African, including many opinion-forming Afrikaners, is this continuous whining mea culpa, mea culpa. Such selfdenigration would be sensible and understandable in a country which had clearly failed. Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Angola, Tanzania, Uganda, Ethiopia, all would be well justified in wearing the sackcloth, in acknowledging guilt. But this thirst for self-accusation among so many in SA is incomprehensible. The problem is that SA's self-esteem has been almost mortally wounded by a powerful alliance within the country's own borders: the news media, radical churchmen, NUSAS \[National Union of SA students; author\], the Black Sash, the arts, literature, theatre, trade unions, all ready and willing to parade at any time in denunciation of their own country. Combined, they do everything possible to poison and confuse public opinion, to erode public support for the White community, the free enterprise system, for the army and police." (A Natal doctor)

"Should one impose certain restrictions on an adversary press? In certain circumstances, yes. Freedom of speech is a luxury you can afford when living in isolation and a state of tranquillity. Once you are surrounded by enemies who leave no doubt about their ultimate aim, and in the process use their interpretation of free

Many blacks clearly accept that South Africans are all in the same canoe and must paddle hard together to avoid going over the waterfall. **A black businessman from Sebokeng** takes offence at the demand for sanctions by the South African archbishop Tutu and writes:

Another black South African, "**Pro-Peace**" from Soshanguve writes in a letter to the SA newspaper *The Citizen* (12.10.1987):

"During the past three years, I have, as a concerned citizen, been following the media and news about the necklacing method used by the 'comrades' in killing 'spies' and 'collaborators'. It has been a horrible and shocking experience to us all nationally, and even internationally. So far 1023 have been killed by this barbarous method

Without any doubt, this method was used to terrorize the many law-abiding citizens in the Black townships. Recently, Oliver Tambo (leader of the ANC; author) announced that necklacing must stop. But it took him and his organization a very long time indeed to say so. They must have been pressurized into their new stance. Their main aim of striking terror into the people was not realized as many people condemned and denounced this barbaric method. The ANC also has been recently losing credibility and sympathy in most Western countries. One should now wonder what method will they now apply because they do justify the execution of police 'collaborators' and spies. Perhaps a 'better' less barbaric method will be used! My advice to them all is that negotiations pave the way for a better understanding between nations, than dictatorial and barbaric methods. All those barbaric and horrible killings were really a waste and loss for mankind. What a shame! God forgive us all."

hysterical lunatics, they are harshly criticized, not only in our own country but world-wide.

A few years ago I experienced a 'rent-a-crowd' crazy mob of black teenagers brought in to Braamfontein by the busload, to be passed off as Wits students, and this was a very frightening experience. Our brave young policemen, after warning this crowd again and again not to come into the streets, were forced to stop them and control them and protect us, and they charged this sea of stick-wielding, stone-throwing rioters.

Of course, the baton-charging policemen were very well filmed by a well-positioned group of foreign TV newsmen, whom, incidentally, I had witnessed a few days before, in the very same spot, placing their cameras and practising for this riot, so that they could film our police in the worst possible positions for their lying overseas newscasts. I am sick and tired of hearing daily of yet another death of a brave young policeman. Very strong action must be taken against the ANC terrorists, who appear to be taking control of our land and are very well organized by Tutu, Boesak and the like, who are obviously on the payroll of their Marxist bosses. My heartfelt thanks and appreciation to our police and Security Forces who are doing their utmost to control the violence in our land. God help us all if they were not there!" (Mrs. Pat F., Port Edward)

When the government imposed severer restrictions on the daily papers and the "alternative media" as part of the emergency legislation to contain the rioting and chaos in many black locations, partly at the urging of both blacks and whites; the said media having continued to print revolutionary propaganda despite the prior warnings of the minister responsible, with the result that some were suspended, there was a great outcry from the press all over the country. Together with the liberal media in other countries they accused the government of unjustified dictatorial measures caused by such neurotic obsessions as the "total communist onslaught", and the abolition of "freedom of the press" by which the citizens were deprived of "the right to information" and "the voice of the oppressed" had been silenced by undemocratic means.

The psychological war against South Africa, last but not least, has a strong impact in the economic sphere. A weakening or total collapse of the economy of the country would be the simplest means of forcing the government to capitulate. The bloody revolution so often conjured up, especially in the foreign media, for South Africa, the prospect of a marxist takeover and concomitant nationalization of industrial firms, together with pressure from their home governments and "the world public" to turn their backs on the apartheid state has induced dozens of large firms to sell off their South African affiliations and withdraw. The result was that financially powerful South African interest groups have been able to buy up the local offshoots of such multinationals as Coca Cola, IBM, Ford, General Motors, Kodak and Barclays Bank for a song.

Actually their financial withdrawal is only a piece of show-business; for most of them continue to make considerable profits from lucrative technological exchanges and licensing agreements from the plant that they have sold

illusion to many liberal intellectuals in the West, a bogus creed that they hang on to with stubborn tenacity; for if they were to recognize the great campaign of lies for the monstrous things that it is it would be unendurable.

# Exploiting the Racial Problems

Israel Cohen, a communist functionary, in his book A Race Programme for the Twentieth Century (1912)

However absurd and contrary to all human experience that doctrine may appear to anyone capable of thinking clearly, it was adopted in principle by the UN and entered into the statute-books of several multiracial states, including Britain and America. The notion is now championed with fanatical zeal by marxists, communists, socialists, liberals and many politicizing churchmen who are not prepared to admit that wherever equal opportunities exist, unequal abilities are perfectly obvious.

It is the natural tendency of all human beings – of all animals – to consort with their own kind; it is an unalterable fact of life observed all over the world wherever different cultures and races live together. The marxist objective of forcing all mankind down to the lowest common level through

racial mixing – to bring about the perfect Marxist Man of the future – has concealed political motives the demoralizing effects of which, particularly in America and Britain, are all too apparent nowadays.

Hatred, envy, discontent, social instability, captiousness and high crime rates are the consequences of an integral political order that takes no account of the national and racial differences that exist. Wherever natural antagonisms and hereditary racial differences are treated as if they did not exist, and – ostensibly – there are equal opportunities for all, ideas and expectations are raised that cannot be realized. The frustrations caused by a sense of "denial" and one's own inadequacy – despite legislated equality of opportunity – necessarily lead to feelings of inferiority, a tendency to "let yourself go" and to a general moral decline in a society in which only the "smart", the industrious and the talented can achieve success and recognition.

How else are we to explain the race riots in such "liberal" countries as England and America, with all their equality laws and care and social welfare programmes for the black or other ethnic elements of their populations?

They tell us that on the average the American negro produces eight times as many illegitimate children per head of population, six times as many feeble-minded adults, and commits nine times as many robberies with violence, seven times as many rapes and ten times as many murders as white men.87

admitted to British orphanages. Most of them are illegitimate and of negroid stock.89

These figures are necessary to show what it leads to if unequal races have to live together. To uprooted people alienated from their own culture and way of life, it almost always means social decline, distress and despair; it is almost a form of genocide.

Legally prescribed equality between unequals inevitably gives rise to tensions and disharmonies; for it flouts divinely-ordained realities. Inequality is one of the unalterable realities of this world. Men cannot be **both** free **and** equal; for free men would not be equal, and equal men would not be free. But it is precisely in the multiplicity and variety of all forms of life that we perceive the blessing and the wisdom of a creation in which talents and abilities are unequally distributed and ought to complement one another.

In the different peoples of South Africa their marked differences in abilities are particularly evident. Some are distinguished by their preference for husbandry and tillage; others are skilful craftsmen, painters and builders of huts. Others again are noted for their carpet-weaving, and their products are exported to many countries. Some tribes are warlike and tend more to the hunting life of their ancestors, and their special talents in that sphere earn them considerable respect. But there is one thing that all the black peoples of South Africa have in common: they are infinitely superior to the white man, within their own cultural contexts, in the natural environment and in their ability to survive in the wild African bush.

But if all these peoples were to be lumped together with Indians and Coloureds and whites into a completely integrated unitary state, it would

not only give rise to dangerous racial tensions, it would also be a grave injustice to black peoples, uprooted and robbed of their own cultures.

The policy of *apartheid* or separate development was developed to prevent just that.

If the white Afrikaner has hitherto refused to share the responsibilities of government with his black compatriots, it is not merely out of malicious hostile "racism" but from sheer experience and the judgment acquired over centuries of the abilities of his black compatriots. That may well be "discrimination", but it is perfectly understandable to anybody who knows how the black African states in general are governed and administered. Incompetence, corruption, prodigality, one-party despotisms: these are the rule, not the exception.

Of course the black man has his own abilities, his own strengths and spheres appropriate to his particular culture; but he is by no means as fit to run a modern industrial state like South Africa, far less to assume sole power of government, merely by virtue of his overwhelming majority of votes as the white "European", whose culture and civilization have a history of thousands of years and offer a better guarantee of progress and the maintenance of a stable and ordered polity.

It is significant that, so far as I have been able to ascertain, the words "racist" or "racism" do not appear in any dictionaries printed before 1960. The words did not exist; they must therefore be artificial neologisms, created for a quite definite political purpose. We may assume with a probability bordering on certainty that they were put into circulation by the appropriate specialists of the KGB propaganda department or some equivalent branch of the UN.

good for humanity in general or to any people in particular and is imprudent enough even to allude to the ethnic characteristics and differences that so obviously exist must put up with being accused of the most abominable crime of "racism". Since the offender has no defence – there is no such thing as an official definition – he is automatically condemned out of hand without trial.

"In America and Europe nowadays everything may be publicly called in question," writes Heinrich Jordis Lohausen in his Entscheidung im Süden – der Umweg über die Dritte Welt (Decision in the South – the Detour through the Third World); "everything may be publicly debunked: any constituted ideal, any genius, any élite, any tradition, any law, any truth, any belief; but not one thing: the alleged equality of human beings. Everything else can be argued about, but not that. That alone is taboo.

"Driven by their bad conscience – extermination of the Redskins, enslavement of the Negroes, the Opium War, persecutions of the Jews, massacres in India, massacres in the Sudan and so on – some nations nowadays are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The only equality is that of the inalienable right to live of human beings, not that of human beings themselves. There is nothing equal about them but their inequality. They were different in essence even before they trod this earth in flesh and blood. The capacities of one are not those of another; and conversely. And just as their abilities are different, so also are their stages of development and their capacity to govern themselves in freedom under present conditions. Individuals, like races and peoples, are not interchangeable; and that uninterchangeability is at the same time their wealth and that of all mankind."91

their dogma of the equality of all men and women. It wasn't harmony and peaceful progress that they wanted but "chaos and old night" and the decline and fall of nations.

"I enclose a copy of a letter that I sent to the Australian newspapers on October 27, 1987, re SA Airways. I felt quite angry that our socialist government would thus exercise its power while on things like capital punishment, or Asian immigration, which too, are sore points and which nine out of 10 Australians feel strongly about, are brushed aside arrogantly. Needless to say, it was not published. This country was a good country when in 1963 I arrived here from Wales. It had a 'White Australia' policy which was a good policy, but now, because of communists, religious cranks, etc. Australia is going to the dogs. Sydney is full of Asians, Orientals, Pacific Islanders who almost in living memory were all cannibals – the Pacific Islanders I mean – not the Asians and Orientals.

At the beginning of this century there were loud demands in America for the creation of a separate federal state for the Negroes. In 1912 a communist writer, Israel Cohen, wrote a book under the title: A Racial Programme for the Twentieth Century, in which he set forth a cunning scheme to stir up discontent and racial hostility among the blacks as part of an effort to propagate racial integration and mixed marriages. For example: "We must recognize that the most effective weapon of our party is racial tension. By drumming it into the heads of the blacks that they have been oppressed for centuries we can mould them according to the programme of the communist party. In our propaganda we must particularly make use of the notions of colonialism and imperialism. While we raise the black minority against the whites, we must endeavour to inculcate a guilt complex among the whites with regard to their exploitation of the negroes. We will help the negroes to attain leading positions in all areas of life – in all the professions and in the world of sport and entertainment. With that prestige it will be possible for the negroes to marry whites and set in motion a process that will deliver America over to our cause." 92

For many years now it has incessantly been drummed into the blacks in South Africa that they have been oppressed and exploited by the whites, that they have a right to demand more and more from them and that the country really belongs to the blacks. No wonder, then, that the result is raceriots and insurrections. Discontent is systematically fanned by communist agents, marxist churchmen, socialists, liberals and extra-parliamentary groups. The UN, the World Council of Churches, the press and hundreds of foreign anti-apartheid organizations who make it their business to "raise the blacks against the whites", as the marxist theoretician Cohen proposes in his guide.

Actually the marxists are anything but negrophiles. Anybody who thinks that they are not "racists" should read *Karl Marx – the Racist* by

The black leaders in South Africa are well aware of that. The Zulu Chief, Mangosuthu Buthelezi, leader of the biggest tribe, seven million strong, warned his people against any suicidal conflict with the whites. He has long understood that powerful foreign forces can achieve far more through diplomatic threats and pressures and economic action than his Zulu warriors ever could.

He expects those forces to prevail sooner or later and the government to throw up the sponge or be compelled to make such concessions as would enable him, through the numerical preponderance of his people, to take over the reins of government.

Buthelezi sets himself up as a Christian preaching a future democratic order in which blacks and whites would have equal rights; and by so doing he has won the sympathies of many whites. He could well afford such a "democracy" with free elections after the Western model; for he knows that he would then automatically be elected head of state.

But what Buthelezi has apparently not grasped is the fact that the external forces working for the overthrow of the present government are not in the least interested in a democratic state under his leadership. At most he might be allowed to set up a transitional government, like that of Muzorewa's transitional government in Rhodesia, until the United Na-

tions, with American, British and German support, had established "the only authentic representatives of the South African population", the communist-controlled ANC, securely in Pretoria.

The South African government is fully aware of all this; and it finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand it has to defend itself against the attacks on the country under white rule, and with little help from the black South African leaders, who see those attacks as an easy way to their own seizure of power. On the other, it needs the co-operation of the black leaders to go ahead with its programme of reform and "power-sharing" with the blacks. So far many of the blacks prompted from outside have declared themselves for "all or nothing". Only when they realize that the whites are prepared neither to step down nor to capitulate to the onslaught will they be prepared to co-operate with their white compatriots in contriving some federal or confederal system of government—supposing they even want to be given their independence.

Meanwhile the secret rulers are working away to block this peaceful evolutionary road by all means in their power. It is a race against time, a scoop-the-pool game to be won by whoever can hold out longest. Any concession by South Africa, any humanitarian gesture by the government, such as the release of communist agitators, talks with the ANC or premature lifting of the state of emergency, would be construed as weakness by the black leaders and the enemies of South Africa, and the immediate response would be fresh demands.

Total racial integration by the abrogation of all existing segregation laws (schools, residential areas etc.), as demanded by "liberal" businessmen (for reasons of profit) and the leftist press, would certainly not lead to peaceful change and harmonious coexistence in the future. The following example of integrated American schools – with blacks numbering only twelve per cent of the population – may serve as a foretaste of what South African pupils and teachers could encounter.

On 11.9.75 the *Rheinische Post* of Düsseldorf reported on the racial integration policy in American schools and its chaotic consequences: "Washington: The new school year in the USA is opening under an ominous star. After the summer holidays of over three months the doors of their schools are shut on more than two million American children, because their teachers are on strike. The racial integration of schools passed by a constitutional amendment by the Supreme Court once more led to bitter demonstrations and bloody clashes between its supporters and opponents. Tensions in the classroom itself are so serious that pupils are required to pass through an electronic screen before entering the school building to search them for weapons ..."

In *Die Absteiger – Planet der Sklaven?* (English title: *Descent into Slavery?*) Des Griffin writes (p.345):

That this is not just a fantasy dreamed up by a few cranky individuals is evident from a statement made by Dr G. Brock Chisholm, a prominent member of the World Health Organization, who would certainly not have said it without the approval of his department: "What people must practise everywhere is ... genetic mixing, so that one race in one world under one government may be created." (USA magazine 12.8.55)95

Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, Ph.D., himself a "Eurasian" halfbreed and former husband of the Jewish actress Ida Roland, was a professor of history in New York, secretary-general of the European Parliamentary Union, a recipient of the Charlemagne Prize from the City of Aachen, a freeman of the University of Frankfurt am Main, a recipient in 1954 of the great Federal Cross of Merit of the German Federal Republic, Chevalier of the Légion d'Honneur and a member of the Humanitas Lodge of Freemasons in Vienna.

"To pretend that racial mixing is progressive is sheer nonsense. The opposite is true: is it the idea of race that is progressive, the raising of a stock above previously existing standards. And it is the same with sorely-tried humanity. Is it human to bring sick people into the world? People of mixed race are sick, torn inside, often troubled by physical or mental afflictions. A whole series of investigations has been done on that. Do you call that human? Humane? Wherever there is legislation against racial mixing, as in Israel and South Africa, it can't be called inhumane. It's sheer common sense. It shows a sense of responsibility. It's meant for irresponsible parents; even if it gets in the way of their happiness, it has the happiness of posterity – whole generations – at heart.

"Once at some church 'working group' they were knocking South Africa, the usual stuff, how inhumane and horrible the wholy policy of apartheid was. Then a man of mixed blood who had been listening quietly to all this got up and asked whether they had actually talked to a coloured man. Silence. Then he went on: 'Well, I'm one myself. And I've suffered because of it. Not that I'm ill-treated – that's hardly ever happened. People have always treated me with understanding and sympathy. But the main thing is that I'm split inside myself. I don't know where I belong. Do I belong in black Africa, or do I belong here? I don't fit in anywhere. Here I have to keep taking vitamin C just to stay alive. This isn't my tradition or my culture either. And I wouldn't fit into black Africa – the life would be far too primitive for me. I can't feel at home anywhere in the world. And my

The speaker continued:

"That was the feeling of an actual half-caste. If we are against miscegenation, it's for the humanest principles. In any case, even if general mixing were to happen racial tensions wouldn't disappear, and there would still be no real equality. In Brazil there is no (legal) impediment to mixed marriages, but there is racial stratification just the same. People there take their place in the social order according to the lightness of their skin. The idea seems pretty unfair to us, but it seems sensible to them. And every mother wants her child to marry somebody with a lighter skin. Free-for-all mixing solves no problems. When we advocate racial purity we aren't turning the wheel backwards, we're turning it forwards; for we're in conformity with nature."

"The half-caste is a mixture or cross of different racial valencies: Germanic, Hebraic, Negroid, Mongolian etc. Individual racial features are fused in him; and they do not produce a homogeneous person but remain separately autonomous alongside one another, strain apart and fight against one another for dominance, get in one another's way and produce a person who is capable of swallowing any lie, muddled, excitable, discordant, aimless, disorganized. He hates and opposes everything of value. Therefore he will support any form of democracy." 98

The internationalists are fully aware of the importance of the disintegration of races through miscegenation in their efforts to bring about their One World. If it did not come about, then the continuing cultural separateness of the different national groups would keep them conscious of their distinct uniqueness. Their love of freedom and independence would break out in revolt against the masters of the One World.

Instead of denouncing such general miscegenation and warning their people of its ill effects, not only on biological grounds but on social and ethical grounds, governments and churches zealously preach the gospel of racial integration and denounce all resistance to it as reactionary and callous. That attitude, whether they know it or not, is the direct result of an organized, co-ordinated and powerfully funded campaign against all races, but particularly the white man, who must be stripped of all the racial springs of action that have made him dominant over so many centuries. The people who are now spreading the gospel of racial integration in South Africa and all over the world have of course no intention of allowing their own blood to be contaminated by that of any other race. They will keep their line pure at all costs, and all over the world they practise the most rigorous segregation with regard to marriage, education and business.

The incessant bombardment of the whites in South Africa with catchwords like "racist" and "the racist régime in Pretoria", "apartheid state" and what not is subtly calculated to induce them to root out their natural self-awareness as a race and to submit to general integration. Under constant pressure from the press both at home and abroad and partly brainwashed and softened up by regular exposure to trashy "integrated" American movies and TV programmes in which—in flat contradiction to all American reality—negroes are the heroes or represented as persons exercising authority over complacent whites, they are humbugged with an image of utopian fantasy that bears no relation to the real world. Black South Africans, whose various peoples have if anything an even stronger sense of race than the whites, and rarely mix or marry outside their own tribe, have now taken up the parrot-squawks of denunciation of the "racist Boers".

On a visit to Zimbabwe, which the marxist head of government Robert Mugabe had in a few years reduced from the prosperous flourishing Rhodesia to beggary, the Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney at a banquet in his honour declared, in a voice vibrant with total conviction: "Apartheid is based on the premise that human beings are born unequal because of the colour of their skin. Any system founded on that concept is condemned to failure, because it is false through and through. It is simply a question of When." Whereupon the former terrorist leader Mugabe, under whose command a genocidal campaign is being waged against the Matabele tribe in his own country and who is in the process of turning it into a one-party dictatorship, replied no less unctuously: "Our policy of nonracialism, democracy and social justice for all is regarded (by Pretoria) as anathema, because it constitutes a threat to the wicked system of apartheid." (The Citizen, 28.1.1987)

The "separate development" of peoples in South Africa and the marxist Utopia of equality of all are the opposite poles of two conceptions of the world, the success or failure of which will be decided by history. Despite the prodigious efforts of propaganda by influential circles to damn race separation and represent it as wicked racism, there are still plenty of people capable of seeing through all the hocus-pocus. But they are only a shrinking minority; for inexplicable reasons the South African government makes no attempt to counter the worldwide propaganda assault with an equal campaign of information. The millions that it would cost would be only a drop in the bucket of the vast sums spent now on defence and the circumvention of sanctions and trade boycotts.

Readers who derive their information mainly from one-sided reports on South Africa might find it interesting to hear opinions from other sources once in a while. Here is a letter from England to the editor of *The Citizen* (1.10.1987):

not a minority and which practises our English culture.

A reader from Massachusetts, USA, writes: (The Citizen, Jan. 87)

South Africa recognises racial conflict explicitly by formal apartheid. The US recognises it covertly by tacit apartheid. It is probably true that almost all the Whites who oppose apartheid in the US live in White areas. That hypocrisy is not unusual in the country of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote that all men are created equal but owned slaves all his life.

The conflict between the acceptable (beautiful) and the unacceptable (ugly) can only result in separation for both or subjugation for one—either distance or disaster. The new leadership of the Dutch Reformed Church has apparently chosen disaster. Choosing disaster is a sin." (Charles Z., Hyde Park, USA)

upon South Africa. This is what the US arrogantly did in Vietnam ... American policy for South Africa will be what it was for the city of Hué: 'We had to destroy the city in order to save it'.

South Africa should beware the treacherous power which rushed to save Bolshevism in World War Two, destabilised Lebanon, betrayed Cuba, murdered the Catholic president of Vietnam, and now wants to bring 'justice' to South Africa. Trust yourselves alone ..." (Charles Z., Hyde Park, USA)

The following is the private opinion of a Catholic priest who bravely puts his point of view in opposition to the official attitude of his church: (*The Citizen*, 17.3.88)

Apartheid, racism in its odious sense is the undue glorification of one's own nation coupled with contempt and oppression of other races and nations. To say ... that there exists no pure race, therefore 'race is but a fiction', is crooked logic and ridiculous. To be proud of one's race and nation is perfectly right and normal; what is objectionable is the self-glorification of the one and the contempt and the belittling of the other. That would be evil 'racism'. Mr. v.E. denies that the Bible speaks of apartheid and differentiation of races and nations. The Bible condemns miscegenation. In the Bible God demands that the Israelites keep apart from the surrounding nations; Egyptians, Assyrians, Philistines etc.

"In all sincerety I appeal to the State President to re-think about reform. This threadbare word 'reform' is going to be the demise of the South African nation. Since the winds of change, the curse of Africa, started blowing we have been a divided nation. Mankind against mankind which is now enveloping the Republic of South

Before reform stirred the nation we were truly an independent nation, proud of our heritage and love for our wonderful country. The different ethnic races were happy and respected as humans. Immigration to our country was increasing, employment, development, investment, contact with the rest of the world was accepted unequivocally, no anti-this or anti-that, a word unheard of. The Springbok, our sporting emblem, being swallowed up by nations wanting to compete against us. Our health departments from locust control to veterinary services were welcomed in Africa; crime too was never as high as it is today. Tourists and investors flooded our country. Then suddenly, we were awakened to the 'new reform', forced upon the government which is going to be the downfall of this nation." (J.G.K., Lynnwood)

"What is this apartheid that South Africa is constantly exhorted to 'get rid of'? It is not based on race hatred, but on the God-given differences between peoples. It is not a barrier to achievement, as many highly placed people (including a certain Archbishop) must acknowledge.

Since most of the Black peoples practise apartheid amongst themselves, why is it a sin for White peoples to advocate it? Apartheid is simply the best guarantee of human rights ever devised by man and there are plenty in Africa who wish that they had some. If ethnic homelands are not acceptable to the West, why are Bechuanaland, Basutoland and Swaziland acceptable? Merely because they were created by the British a hundred years ago?

The greatest mistake that South Africa made was not to reply immediately to the attacks on its policy of separate development with a worldwide information campaign to refute them. Now it is too late, and the government has allowed itself to be manœuvred into a position of weakness in which its only recourse is to initiate a number of extremely risky "reforms", whose success or miscarriage will be judged by history.

### **CHAPTER 12**

# The Rôle of the "Liberation Movements"

We members of the Communist Party are the most advanced revolutionaries in modern history ... The enemy must be completely smashed and rooted out of the earth before the communist world can be made a reality.

Nelson Mandela, former leader of the African National Congress (ANC)

In many capital cities ANC personnel are allowed to maintain their own offices and command posts from whence they can plan their subversive

programmes against South Africa under the aegis of the host governments. There is no lack of funds for them; enjoying as they do the benevolent support of the World Council of Churches, the UN and many Western governments.

In 1921, with the help of Moscow, they founded the Communist Party of South Africa (CPSA) in Cape Town and immediately began to put out feelers towards the Natives' Congress. Their objective was the creation of a "united liberation front" with the aid of the black masses and under the leadership of the Communist Party.

At first the ANC showed no particular sympathies with bolshevism and the Moscow party-liners; but about the mid-twenties that attitude gradually changed. In his report to the annual conference of the ANC in 1927 Gumede, president of the ANC, had some very kind words for the communists: "Of all the political parties the communist party is the only one that honestly and sincerely fights for the oppressed".101

Whereupon Gumede was promptly confirmed in office for a further three years. At the same time a trade union official who had been thrown out of the Industrial and Commercial Workers' Union for refusing to break with the Communist Party, E.J. Khaile, was elected Secretary General of the African National Congress.

J.B. Marks, who had been a member of the management committee of the ANC since 1945; and from then on the CPSA and the ANC increasingly coordinated their activities.

The National Party, which had won the General Election in 1948, was nevertheless firmly resolved to put a stop to these communist activities in South Africa. In 1950 Parliament passed the Suppression of Communism Act, which prohibited communist activities of all kinds. Thereupon the communists continued their activities underground.

Other communist front organizations that joined the Congress Alliance were the Federation of South African Women (FSAW) and the South African Peace Council (SAPC). The "Freedom Charter" drawn up at Kliptown was declared to be the official programme of the Congress Alliance, and it is still taken as the signpost to "the democratic future" of South Africa.

Bartholomeus Hlapane, who was later murdered in Soweto, stated to the American commission of enquiry: "I discovered that the document \[the Freedom Charter\] had been drawn up by Joe Slovo on the instructions of the Central Committee, before being definitely accepted by the Communist Party."

Joe Slovo, a white Jew of Baltic origin, is president of the prohibited

To put the events in their proper perspective, she writes, it is necessary to go back in time a little, to Cato Manor, on the outskirts of a normally sunny, sleepy Durban. It is the 25th of January 1960, barely two months before the main drama of Sharpeville. On that day nine policemen, four whites and five blacks, were to lose their lives in gruesome circumstances.

It was the job of the police to keep the tensions in the location under control, to prevent crime and to get rid of the shebeens. The 25th of January was a Saturday. A huge crowd of blacks had come into Cato Manor from outside to drink and spend the weekend with friends and relations.

The patrol-leader was a white constable called Joubert. The squad made a few arrests, and then found themselves surrounded by a drunken unruly mob who demanded the release of the prisoners. In the circumstances it would no doubt have been best to let them go on some pretext or other; but Joubert, who had put in only eighteen months' service, underestimated the danger now threatening his party. Even when the women in the crowd began to set up their shrill ululations with which they traditionally incite their men to battle Joubert's reply was stubborn: "These prisoners will be released only over my dead body."

While all this was happening Sergeant Winterboer turned up, saw what was going on, panicked, and instead of opening fire rushed back to the station for reinforcements. In his absence the showers of brickbats continued, together with the ululations of the women and the cries of "Kill the cops!" Constable Joubert made a desperate attempt to break out and ran to an avocado tree nearby and tried to climb it. He was seized and hacked to pieces with long pangas and horribly mutilated. (Only a month later nine

blacks drinking beer under the very same tree were struck and killed by a flash of lightning.)

The white constables Kriel and Rademan and a black constable called Dludla also managed to escape from the beleaguered shack. Kriel fought for his life with his bare fists and ran nearly a kilometre before he too was hacked to pieces. Rademan, who had reached safety, heard Kriel's screams and went back to help him. He likewise was hacked to pieces. The black constable Dludla tried to help Rademan; and he suffered the same fate.

That, then, is the story of Cato Manor on 25 January 1960. It was ignored by most of the foreign press, passed over in silence. But when only two months later, on 21 March 1960, the police at Sharpeville were faced with a similar mob estimated at from ten to twenty thousand, the events of Cato Manor were still very fresh in their memory; they had cause enough to be in fear for their lives. As at Cato Manor, only ordinary uniformed constables were on duty, with no special training in the handling of mass demonstrations. One of them had only been in the service for a month.

Tension began to gather round the police station on the Sunday evening of 20 March. Throughout the night groups of armed blacks had continually to be driven off by the police with truncheons. On Monday morning the police found themselves confronted by a huge jeering and menacing crowd. Teargas proved ineffectual, and the police had to make several more baton charges against the agitators.

According to the report by P.M. O'Brien, the judge who conducted the enquiry, by about noon a crowd of about nineteen thousand blacks had assembled, whose attitude was "insulting, menacing and provocative". It was at 13h35 that the fatal events took place. The crowd had repeatedly attempted to charge the police barricades. An attempt by the police to seize one of the ringleaders failed. What then ensued was far from being a calculated massacre by the police but rather a panic-stricken reaction by young policemen who were unprepared for a situation of that kind. Many of them had been on continuous duty for twenty-four hours. The tension had reached its climax. The commanding officer, Colonel Pienaar, ordered his men to load but not to fire until they received the order. The tumult outside was so loud that instructions could be heard only a short distance

Then it happened. Suddenly an infernal din broke out: howls of "Cato Manor! Cato Manor!" and the crowd surged forward. The gates were torn down. A police officer of high rank was flung to the ground. Stones rained down on the police, and shots or sharp orders were heard from the crowd. The police opened fire. There were 69 killed and 180 wounded.

Joint decisions were taken by the combined supreme command of both organizations on the planning and execution of acts of sabotage. Three representatives of the SACP and the ANC respectively belong to it: the SACP – Lionel Bernstein, Ahmed Kathrada and Govan Mbeki; the ANC – Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and Raymond Mhlaba.

In 1962 the South African security forces managed to arrest Nelson Mandela. A year later, on 11 July 1963, they picked up all the CP headquarters personnel at Lilliesleaf Farm in Rivonia, just outside Johannesburg: the leadership cadre of *Umkhonto we Sizwe*, Sisulu, Kathrada, Mbeki, Bernstein, Mhlaba, Dennis Goldberg and Arthur Goldreich.

"This plan envisaged the following two stages: a partisan movement combined with massive subversive activity and to organize and further infiltrate trained fighters on the sea and air routes who would join the partisans and the armed people." 105

The police raid on Rivonia was a severe blow to the ANC and the SACP. Eight of their leaders were sentenced to life imprisonment, including Nelson Mandela. During his trial he admitted that he had played a leading

Henning von Löwis of Menar wrote: "The Rivonia trial made it clear how deeply the Communist Party had infiltrated the ANC. At the same time it was made plain to the South Africans what aims the communists were pursuing and what methods they were using: the South African government was to be violently overthrown. The communists intended to seize power either on their own or in combination with other forces. As in Cuba and South Vietnam sabotage and guerrilla operations would clear the way for a power takeover, create fear and panic among the whites and mistrust of the government, and convince the blacks that powerful forces would be working for their liberation. On the mobilization of the masses there would be a *coup d'état*, carried out by South Africans trained abroad and supported by troops of foreign powers. That was to be the course of Operation Mayibuye." 106

After the Rivonia trial, the ANC structures having been effectively smashed by the South African forces, the remaining leaders of the ANC, PAC and SACP groups shifted their bases abroad. In the next few years the ANC endeavoured to consolidate its position. With the active support of the UN, the USSR and its allies, and several Western governments and organizations, they gradually succeeded in regaining still greater international recognition as the South African "liberation movement".

In Europe and America the ANC is readily represented as a pro-Western liberation movement with the praiseworthy goal of getting rid of apartheid and the establishment of more human rights. On German TV the communist ANC terrorist Nelson Mandela, sentenced to life imprisonment, is sometimes actually referred to as "the South African opposition politician", whose release is now "demanded" by Federal Chancellor Kohl, Prime Minister Thatcher and other Western governments. According to a piece in the London *Sunday Express*, the release of Mandela is the price that Pretoria would have to pay if they hoped for a visit by Mrs Thatcher; as had been intimated in British diplomatic circles. "\[Mrs Thatcher\] believes that the release of this man, who has been languishing in goal for over twenty years, would have a moderating influence and avert the threat of a bloody conflict." (*The Citizen*, 11.1.1988)

This absurd statement turns the realities of South Africa completely upside-down. Perhaps the best answer by South Africa would be to suggest the release of the Bader-Meinhof gang, the IRA terrorists or the Red Army Faction, so that they first could "exercise their moderating influence" in Germany and Britain.

To the credit of the South African government, it has made no such ridiculous proposals.

To understand that it is necessary to understand the revolutionary strategy jointly adopted by the SACP, the ANC and the USSR. According to soviet revolutionary theory "national liberation movements" play a central part in all the Third-World countries. In such countries there can be no direct road to the final phase without some transitional stage. They must first pass through the preparatory phase of "national liberation". In this preliminary phase as broad a national front as possible must be created, which will consist of all the "progressive elements" –liberals, churchmen, students, academics and workers, which will be under the leadership of an "advance guard". In the case of South Africa this advance guard during the "national liberation" phase will consist of the ANC. Their common basis is Joe Slovo's Freedom Charter.

When "national liberation" has been achieved, rallying the masses behind it, the second phase of the revolution will begin, with the workers as the advance guard; that is, the SACP. It is only during that phase that the "useful idiots", the liberals and naïve democratic elements of the previous national front, are given the push and a "people's democracy", i.e. a communist state, is set up.

In the same issue the ANC lets the cat clean out of the bag:

In Vietnam, for example, there was a National Front, the FLN, some of whose leaders were non-communists. There were also other democratic forces, such as academics, Buddhists, Catholics and students, who got mixed up in anti-government agitations. But as soon as the "national liberation" was achieved, the "advance guard" took over the leading rôle and got rid of the former elements of the democratic front. Many of them found themselves back in "re-education" camps. Others fled. Many were killed.

It was the same in Cuba. There was a broad national front, the so-called 26th of July Movement, which included many democrats who had resisted the Batista régime. In the early stages of the revolution Fidel Castro promised his liberal friends that he would lead the country to true democracy with free elections. But as soon as he was in power he locked up or banished or put to death many of his former non-communist comrades in arms.

Likewise in Nicaragua after the "National Liberation Front" had overthrown the Samoza régime. Again it was the advance party, in this case the communist Sandinistas, who seized power and eliminated their erstwhile democratic and liberal fellow-fighters.

The equipment used by the ANC includes road mines, limpet mines, bombs, explosives, hand-grenades and AK 47 rifles. In warfare of that sort, in which mines and car bombs are used, there can be no selection of victims. Innocent civilians, and indeed mostly black pedestrians, therefore constitute the majority of victims. Since the ANC offensive is not directed primarily at the armed security forces but rather at the intimidation of the population in general, it forfeits all claim to any such designation as "liberation movement" or "partisan fighters", as the mass media of the world attempt to convince their audience. The ANC is nothing but a communist terror organization that considers any means legitimate in its endeavour to gain power for itself and to sovietize South Africa. The blacks in South Africa serve merely as cannon-fodder for the unscrupulous aims of the terrorists, and if there were a power takeover, as in neighbouring Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Angola, they would be the principal sufferers.

Here are some of the terrorist acts committed by the African National Congress since 1976:

- 12 mine explosions; 30 others were rendered harmless by the security forces.
- 7 bombs exploded; 87 others rendered harmless.
- The security forces seized 85 other explosive devices in ANC caches.

Thus, for example, "Radio Freedom", the voice of the ANC in Africa,

Earlier, in January 1985, Radio Freedom had noted with satisfaction some of the goals that had been achieved: "Puppets \[i.e. members of freely elected black local councils; author\] have been killed, their houses burnt down, many have been forced to resign from office."

In October 1985 the transmitter sent out the following report from Zimbabwe: "The strategy of burning traitors \[i.e. 'necklacing'; author\] has evidently paid well."

In May 1985 the National Executive Committee of the ANC, broadcasting over its transmitter in Addis Ababa, called for the murder of black civil servants: "Out watchwords must be: Unite in mass actions ... confrontation of the enemy on all fronts ... making the country ungovernable – the police and soldiers must be ambushed ... for the purpose of taking their weapons from them. Our people must make bombs and incendiary bombs at home from locally available materials. We must buy weapons whenever possible. When our people are armed in that way they must seek out collaborators and enemy agents and settle accounts with them. Collaborators working in local councils, informers, policemen, Special Branch men, members of the army, all of them living among us must be killed. The Popular Front must support the armed struggle and attack the enemy on the economic front, carry out acts of sabotage against firms and industries by which the government gets rich ..." 109 etc., etc.

After a meeting with Oliver Tambo, president of the ANC, a member of the British Cabinet, Mrs Lynda Chalker, Minister for African Affairs, said of this terror organization remote-controlled from Moscow that it "didn't advocate violence any more than anybody else." 109

Here is a sample of the fare dished up to unsuspecting German Christians by the External Office of the Evangelical Church of Germany (EKD) (from an EKD project group *Publicity Work in SA Questions*): "The ANC is very popular among the black people ... the resistance by the ANC cannot simply be condemned as terrorism ... It must be embittering to the members and leaders of the ANC to be compared indiscriminately to certain terrorist groups ... So far it has shown circumspection in the great majority of its

actions and taken care to cause as little harm as possible to the life and limb of innocent people $...^{''110}$

UCANEWS, the information sheet of United Christian Action in South Africa, wrote in its issue no. 20/85 of 6.11.85: "Meanwhile the ANC, like all 'liberation movements' controlled by Moscow, commits murders, mostly among the civilian population. 'Our watchword now is: A corpse a day!' – that was the message broadcast over the official transmitter of the ANC, 'Radio Freedom', from Tanzania on 4.7.85."

- An old car tyre is pulled over his shoulders and soaked in petrol or diesel oil. Diesel is preferred, because it burns longer and sticks to the skin better.
- 3. The fuel is set alight with matches. If the victim's hands have not been chopped off, he is forced to light his "necklace" himself.
- The burning tyre gives off dense clouds of smoke, producing carbonic gases at a temperature of 300 degrees. Breathed in, they destroy the tracheal and lung tissues.

to help the poor blazing creature. But the perpetrators – who include children and striplings – know that by now nothing can be done. The molten rubber seethes like boiling tar and cannot be got off the burnt flesh. 112

In the curious words of a German prelate: "By its ambiguous attitude the Evangelical Church is contributing to the prejudiced notion that the liberation movements in southern Africa are evil."

In an interview with the Russian news agency TASS the "future first lady" said that the Soviet Union was the true ally of all oppressed peoples, and she expressed her gratitude for its fraternal solidarity with the salutation: "The Soviet Union makes our dreams come true!"

Another dream that came true was a Volkswagen bus given to her by the government of the Federal Republic of Germany – for her "social activities and welfare projects". (proTEST no. 4/5, August 1986)

UCANEWS no. 24/87 of 9.12.87 wrote: "On 3 September 1984 the condemned men set fire to Mayor Dhlamini's house and when he managed to escape from the burning building they overpowered him and stoned him. Finally they poured petrol over the still living victim and burnt him alive. The presiding judge described the deed as 'horrible, mediaeval, barbarous'. Yet the weekly *New Nation*, the mouthpiece of the Catholic Bishops' Conference, hailed thirty-two criminals, including ANC terrorists and the murderers of Dhlamini, as 'patriots' to whom the status of prisoners of war should be granted."

Vox Africana no. 30, June 1987, reports on another poll taken in Soweto, with its millions of black inhabitants: "At the time of the white parliamentary elections in South Africa a large-scale 'alternative' parliamentary election was held in Soweto. For months The Sowetan, the paper with the largest circulation produced by blacks, for the purposes of this mockelection, asked all blacks to name up to ten of their favourite personalities to whom they would like to entrust the conduct of state affairs in a democratic South Africa. At regular intervals the paper reminded its readers of the campaign, which was expected to be a powerful demonstration of the black masses for the leadership of their choice. The results were made known on 7 May 1987. They were remarkably meagre. In an acid commentary The Sowetan observed that the interest of its readers in this exercise in democracy had been 'not exactly overwhelming'. Actually the 'alternative' election had called a myth in question. Nelson Mandela, regarded in certain circles as the most prominent prisoner of all time, the almost universal symbol of the black fight for freedom, whom even Archbishop Tutu, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, called his Leader, got precisely 838 votes from his black compatriots in South Africa."

Soweto. We assume that certain action groups are hiding behind the votes for Mandela." (UCANEWS 5.5.87)

All the to-do about Mandela – in London the City Council recently unveiled a statue of Mandela on the Thames embankment – is a remarkable triumph for the "disinformation" policy of the USSR and its Western accomplices.

Unlike many foreign critics of South Africa, the indigenous communists knew very well that the reforms initiated by President Botha were far from being merely cosmetic in nature and that they might therefore have an inhibitory effect on the revolution. The UDF was therefore created as a legal successor to the banned ANC, not only as an act of ideological self-preservation but also because it offered the communists their last chance of strangling the reform policy by force.

character of the UDF at its inception could hardly have had any doubts remaining about its real purposes and objectives after the election of its office-bearers: Archie Gumede, Albertina Sisulu and Oscar Mpetha – all former members of the ANC and long-service activists – were the first three national presidents of the UDF to be elected. The fact that Nelson Mandela, former president of the ANC, and all the ANC terrorists who had been given life-sentences along with him for high treason were adopted as patron saints of the organization seems just as logical as the fact that the present leadership cadre of the UDF comprises over ninety per cent of former members of the ANC, the SACP and other prohibited revolutionary organizations

As has become perfectly clear during recent years, the UDF campaign of agitation is not confined to South Africa; it also includes the direct mobilization of "world opinion" against Pretoria in the hope of isolating South Africa by that means from the "civilized" world and so bringing about the fall of the government. The international mass media have an essential part to play in the process; they are regularly supplied with "information" and

with their sensational TV reporting they have done much to precipitate and aggravate the troubles in South Africa. It is significant that the rioting in the black townships has greatly abated since TV crews were forbidden to enter them. The second international brigade more than useful to the UDF in its campaign consists of "committed" parsons and certain church organizations. It is certainly not accidental that the head offices of both the UDF and the South African Council of Churches (SACC) share the same address in Johannesburg. How well the collaboration works is demonstrated by the activities of the two patron saints of the UDF, Allan Boesak and Desmond Tutu; the international boycott campaign against South Africa and consequently the destitution of thousands of unemployed blacks is largely due to the indefatigable efforts of these two sky-pilots.

### School Boycotts

Here again there are large sections of the UDF and affiliated bodies, revolutionary student societies, "committed" teachers and parsons who are the real driving force behind them. So churches are regularly turned into centres of assembly and agitation and usually serve as the starting-points for bloody "children's crusades" in which non-revolutionary-minded teachers and pupils are harried and terrorized. On the pretext that education for blacks is inferior schools are systematically wrecked and textbooks and equipment burnt. Those who refuse to co-operate with them or dare to oppose them are lucky if nothing worse happens to them than a severe beating; most are killed in savage fashion.

## "People's Education"

way that one of the elementary needs of the people, "people's education", can be achieved, according to the ANC publication *Upfront*, for again part of a general political development is the "take-over of power by the people".

### Strikes and Work Stoppages

### Consumer and Rent Boycotts

Years ago the ANC had been constantly calling for the mass boycotting of white shops and the public transport services and refusal to pay rent. The UDF has also held true to this tradition, for it realizes that the consumer boycott is one of the most effective weapons by which the black residential areas can be made ungovernable. By refusing to continue paying rents to the municipal authorities they would deprive them of their most vital necessity, the administration would collapse and be taken over forcibly by UDF-controlled cadres of activists and "street committees". Thieves, house-breakers and other criminal elements would gang up with one another to take advantage of the summons to boycott to assault and plunder with impunity those blacks who did not toe the line.

### Intimidation and Murder

The road to the "liberation" of South Africa is now strewn with the corpses of the victims of the murderous revolutionaries who, encouraged by the international boycott movement, propose to wage a "cleansing civil war" so as to be able to build a communist state on the ruins. By the

"necklace" and other horrors they will try to isolate those blacks who are willing to accept reforms and co-operate with the whites, so that from the outside it will look as though the black people living in the townships were firmly united behind the "liberation movement" led by the ANC-UDF revolutionaries.

In accordance with Lenin's catchphrase "Terror is just another means of persuasion", the scenario of intimidation as staged by the UDF gangs always follows the same pattern: for example, if the inhabitants of a township do not comply with a consumer boycott of white shops, the young activists fall upon their black fellow-citizens with unimaginable brutality. They are beaten up, their purchases confiscated or destroyed, and they are forced to eat soap or drink cooking-oil. In one case the white owner of a shoe shop received a pair of his shoes by post with the feet of the black woman who had bought them from him still in them.

Black civil servants, members of local councils and policemen, even low-grade employees, teachers and petty traders who have laboriously built up a decent livelihood, become targets for the terror gangs of the ANC-UDF alliance, as "profiteers of the system". Hundreds of families have been living in fear of attack and physical violence. Their children cannot be allowed out in the street, because they would be beaten up without mercy, and their houses and shops are a constant invitation for the arsonists. Often — usually as a result of some capricious denunciation — they are subjected to outright manhunts in which the victim is either beaten or stoned to death, hacked to pieces with matchets or murdered by the notorious "necklace" method.

Meanwhile Oliver Tambo, president-in-exile of the ANC, rides in triumphall over the world, hailed as the future head of state of South Africa; a country that he has not set foot in for nearly thirty years; and is received by senior members of government in London, Paris, Bonn, Washington, Wellington and Canberra. Allan Boesak, the founder and patron saint of the UDF, is invited as guest of honour to the church convention in Frankfurt to deliver the principal address.

and lawlessness contained, so that the great mass of peaceful black citizens can once more go about their business in reasonable safety.

When black South Africans beat, stone and burn other black South Africans to death, it is not merely condoned by the ANC-UDF and their foreign aiders and abettors but exploited as positive propaganda. The world shall be roused to anger – not over the brutal murderers in the townships; its righteous wrath is directed against the government that has done all in its power to prevent the atrocities! The conspirators may well hope that the system will ultimately collapse under the combined assault from within and without, when they will be able to build "a new Jerusalem out of the ashes of Pretoria", as Dr Boesak so poetically put it to the assembled Evangelicals in Frankfurt.

### **CHAPTER 13**

## The Rôle of the Churches

We are all familiar with the tragic beginnings of communist rule. The churches were either shut up or destroyed. Of the forty-six thousand churches in Russia there were four thousand left in 1940, and in the first thirty years of bolshevist rule forty-eight million human beings were "liquidated", forty thousand of them priests and leading members of religious groups. Despite the cruellest persecutions, from Stalin, Khrushchev and their successors down to the present day, they discovered that Christianity could not be extinguished; on the contrary: the numbers of believers underground kept growing. The promise of Jesus, that the gates of hell should not prevail against his church, proved to be stronger.

In 1938 Georgi Dimitrov, the leader of the Bulgarian communists, put it in this way: "Let our friends do the work. We must always remember that one sympathizer is worth more than a dozen militant communists. One university professor who isn't a party member but stands up for the interests of the Soviet Union is worth more than a hundred party members. One well-known writer or one retired general is worth more than five hundred nonentities who have just enough sense not to get beaten up by the police. A writer who isn't a member of the Party but defends the Soviet Union and the trade union boss who isn't one of us but stands up for the soviet international policy is worth more than a thousand party workers. Those who aren't party members or known communists have greater freedom of action. Our friends must confuse the enemy for us. They must export our principles and mobilize campaigns in our support against people who don't think as we do and whom we can't get at. We must use most especially ambitious politicians who need help, men who know that we communists can smooth their path and give them publicity and help them in other ways. Men like that would sell their souls to the devil; and we buy souls."

Thus we see that the communists use liberals, "useful idiots", as Lenin called them, to advance the goals of communism in the West.

They are to be found everywhere in the world nowadays. Wittingly or unwittingly they work for the destruction of Christianity; for they have been taken in by the Utopia of an ideology that promises man the Kingdom of God on earth. It is liberal theologians of that kind who now sit at the controls of nearly every church organization and distribute their members'

Indirectly the attack on the "white" positions in Africa had begun in 1961. In that year the Orthodox Church of Russia was accepted as a member of the World Council of Churches. It was in that same year that President Kennedy

The Russian Orthodox Church had been a member of the Oecumenical Council of Churches for barely ten years when politicization began to set in in Geneva. It was soon clear to all and sundry that the "Christian" brethren from the east were less interested in spreading the Gospel than in expanding the soviet hegemony.

When in 1970 they pushed through the Programme to Combat Racism of the WCC and fumigated it with Christian incense, the KGB officers active in the Church Centre had scored their first striking success. It had long been the goal of the soviet planners to exchange the anti-communist bastions in southern Africa for régimes subordinate to Moscow so as to gain control over the strategic Cape route and the mineral wealth of the subcontinent.

Their direct drive by supporting terrorist cadres with arms and ideological propaganda had not produced the desired results. But now with the aid of the Programme to Combat Racism of the WCC their efforts were sealed with the blessing of the churches. The terrorists constantly working for the overthrow of the white governments not only received an unexpected moral boost and sanctification of their bloody deeds, they were soon able to dip their hands into the stream of Western money raised by the churches in the form of "humanitarian aid". In view of so much active moral support on the part of a world organization of churches, many "progressive" Western governments and – of course – the UNO were swift to follow suit and dig deep into their pockets to stump up their share for the noble cause.

How greatly the Evangelical Church of Germany (EKD) esteems the work of the WCC is shown by the fact that its contributions exceed those of the highest share of any other members by several million. But that is understandable. The president of the External Office of the EKD, Dr Heinz-Joachim Held, is also the chairman of the Central Committee of the WCC.

with 2,2 million DM is paying the highest share of all the members of the WCC. For years the church has been arguing that none of the church funds had been used for the support of terrorism in South Africa, and at a meeting of the Central Committee of the WCC in January 1979 it was stipulated that the support for terrorists should not come from general church funds, but only from donations for clearly identified projects. The chairman of the External Office of the EKD gave his word of honour for that. Thus the public was deceived for years, until in November 1982 it came out that in the year 1982 at least the Oecumenical Council had handed over money to the terrorists that had been earmarked for world missionary tasks and evangelization and had come from the Evangelische Missionswerk; thus church funds and Free Church funds."

We must add that they were far from fussy in their choice of organizations on whom to pour their golden shower. Those that received the most favourable consideration seemed to be mainly those with an anti-Western slant, who had distinguished themselves as enemies of the "capitalist" free-market economy and were subservient to the advance of atheism. In short: the organizations regarded as most worthy of support were and still are those that serve the interests of Moscow.

Reviewing a few facts that illustrate this development, Homuth wrote: "From 1970 to 1979 alone the WCC gave away 3 063 545 dollars. Of that 65 per cent went exclusively to marxist terrorists in southern Africa. In 1978 the 'Patriotic Front' in Rhodesia, which was trying to overthrow the white pro-Western government, was given a sum of 85 000 dollars by the WCC. At the same time this Patriotic Front is financed by Cuba and the Soviet Union. Even before the WCC announced its donation for 'humanitarian aid', the Patriotic Front had killed 207 white and 1712 black civilians, not counting the 296 civilians mangled by terrorist mines. The WCC rejected all criticism from all sides and announced with pride that it had given another handout of over 125 000 dollars to marxist SWAPO (Namibia). Altogether SWAPO had received 823 000 dollars from the WCC by 1982. In Angola the Russian-supported MPLA received 78 000 dollars, marxist FRELIMO in Mozambique 120 000 dollars. In 1978 thirty-five foreign missionaries and their children were murdered in Rhodesia by the terrorists financed by the WCC. Soon afterwards they shot down an unarmed civilian aircraft and killed all those who had survived the crash; and two members of the Salvation Army were also killed by the terrorists. Because of that the Salvation Army left the WCC."

The last and strongest bastion against communist domination in south-

ern Africa and the principal objective of the USSR is the Republic of South Africa and South West Africa (Namibia). It is on these two countries that the joint attack by all those forces that intend to neo-colonialize Africa and use it as a springboard for its New World Order is concentrated.

A report by the WCC admits quite openly that the support of terrorists in South Africa is intended "apart from compassion to enable the WCC to have a say in the new distribution of power."

Among whom the power is to be newly distributed, if all goes according to the wishes of the WCC, can be seen from its donations. Since 1970 mostly marxist "liberation movements" have received 7,5 million dollars in annual instalments "for the fight against racial injustice" and to give assistance to the "racially oppressed".

| Donations by the WCC to "liberation movements" | (in US dollars) |
|---|---|
| African National Congress (ANC) | 110 000 |
| Pan-African Congress of Azania (PAC) | 35,000 |
| South West African People's Organization (SWAPO) | 115 000 |
| South African Congress of Trade Unions (SACTU) | 10,000 |
| South African Congress of Trade Onions (SACTO) | 10 000 |
|  | 270 000 |
| D .: 1 |  |
| Donations to "Support Groups": |  |
| Japanese Anti-Apartheid Committee | 5 000 |
| New Zealand Hart Aotearoa | 2 000 |
| Deutsche Anti-Apartheid Bewegung | 6 000 |
| Mouvement Anti-Apartheid Français | 6 000 |
| Western European Parliamentarians for Measures |  |
| against Apartheid | 10 000 |
| English Namibia Communications Centre | 4 000 |
| Welsh Anti-Apartheid Movement | 3 000 |
| US-Southern África Program, American Friends Service |  |
| Committee | 4 000 |

10 000

320 000

(Oecumenical Press Service, 1 - 7 Nov. 87)

The objectives of the recipients "must not deviate from the general goals of the World Council of Churches", as the WCC stipulated. That can only mean that a marxist-communist, atheist order of society is in general agreement with the goals and intentions of the World Council of Churches. Since the donations are made "with no control over the manner of their use", there is nothing to stop the money from being spent on weapons, bombs, or Mrs Mandela's famous tyres, petrol and matches.

A few years ago this National Council of American Churches caused a great to-do by appearing as co-plaintiff in a court action in Rhode Island against a public performance of the Christmas story. No, dear reader; you have not misread that. The US Council of Churches actually took out a writ against a children's representation of the birth of Jesus.

In his book *Vorsicht, Ökumene*!119 (*Beware of the Oikouméne*) Norbert Homuth writes: "Just as the illuminati served the National Council of Churches of the USA, the same took place on the world level by the foundation of the Oecumenical Council in Geneva. It is one of the tactics of the Freemasons to try out something on a regional level before putting it into practice worldwide. One of the most powerful wirepullers in that business was Rockefeller. He is a high-degree Freemason. Rockefeller not only funded the UN building \[should read: UN site; author\] in New York, he also financed the establishment of the World Council of Churches in Geneva. To the question as to what extent the Oecumenical Council was connected with Rockefeller's Council of Foreign Relations the reply came from Geneva: 'The Rockefeller Foundation contributed substantial sums to make possible the creation of our Oecumenical Council. Four founda-

As Homuth writes: "The same Rockefeller who financed an abortion centre for over ten thousand abortions a year in New York also financed the sex-guru Bhagwan, the Club of Rome and the World Council of Churches in Geneva. They all serve the same ends."

A few years ago Frau Dorothee Sölle, of all people, was the only German theologian to be invited to report to the WCC conference in Vancouver; whereupon a storm of indignation broke out from the Christian press in Germany. Why? Since 1975 Frau Sölle had been a professor at Rockefeller's Union Theological Seminary.120

According to Homuth, the creation of a fund for Christian literature and music in 1964 was a logical sequel to that. Millions of dollars of *illuminati* money must have flowed into the creation of "Christian" rock music alone.

lic Church, so that now the Vatican is populated by a whole army of Freemasons."

Thus one brick is added to another to build the pyramid of the *illuminati*. While the UNO is the incarnation of the future world state, the Oecumenical Council in Geneva foreshadows the emerging anti-Christian world church. Its magazine, with the significant title of *One World*, leaves no room for doubt that the interests of the World Council of Churches in Geneva are identical with the *novus ordo saeculorum* of the UNO. Both organizations are the political instruments of influential forces that are changing the world and intend to enslave humanity under a totalitarian marxist world government and a pseudo world church. The WCC long since made it clear that it was not concerned with an *oikouméne* of the Christian churches alone.

Ever since the World Conference of Churches in Geneva in 1966 it has been obvious that its aspirations go far beyond that to an *oikouméne* of all religions, sects and cults. It is no longer a question of the unity of Christians but of the unity of all human beings in the liberal-freemason sense.

At the fourth plenary session in Upsala, Sweden, in 1968 they were already talking about a widening of the notion of unity: "The church makes bold to speak of itself as the symbol of the future unity of all mankind." 122

In 1974 the Catholic Cardinal Suenens acted as host to a "world conference of religions" in Louvain, Belgium. For that he received a prize from the Templeton Foundation, a Freemason institution that consists of representatives of the six world religions.

In the spring of 1982, an Islamic-Christian "dialogue" was held in Colombo, Sri Lanka. The result was a decision by the Islamic World Congress and the World Council of Churches to form a Standing Common Committee.

The former Secretary General of the WCC, the marxist Philip Potter, made an introductory speech at a meeting in Bossey Castle in 1980 in which he said: "The Charismatic Movement is a connecting link. It can help the

World Council of Churches to attain the goal that it has set itself, which is the integration of all human beings all over the earth."

In his book *Die Protestantischen Kirchen im Sog des Kommunismus*123 (*The Protestant Churches in the Wake of Communism*) Dr Beat C. Bäschlin writes: "The destructive elements that were able to usurp control over Protestantism so extensively are pursuing a twofold strategy. Absurd demands are made in the name of Jesus Christ. The intention is, **on the one hand**, to discredit the churches and shake the faith of believers or otherwise put them off; **on the other hand**, they intend to take over the ecclesiastical apparatus and its funds for the ends of communist policy and the advance of atheism. These two strategies reinforce one another.

So it is all still in the (EKD) family; and the German communities that had been hoping to dispense with the "imported" and EKD-trained ministers in future and train their own ministers bound to the Scriptures and the Creed had congratulated themselves too soon.

The fact that the German head of the Faculty of Theology had signed the notorious KAIROS document, which is full of the spirit of marxism and calls for the violent overthrow of the South African government, hardly helped to pour oil on the troubled waters of the resentful German Christians in South Africa. The Lutherans still loyal to their church in South Africa see themselves exposed by this "partnership relation" to increasing political pressure from their church leaders who, in total contempt for their rights, require them not only to condemn the policies of the country that they are living in but also to force them into "greater Christian unity" with their black fellow-citizens in an integrated church in which the proportion of whites would be less than five per cent.

And the fact that this unity between black and white Christians has always been interpreted purely spiritually in the biblical sense means little to the church politicians who exert the pressure; for the unity that they are interested in is quite a different kind: the unity of organized power-politics.

On whose side the ecclesiastical structure-changers stand was made clear to an astonished German church community in Pretoria recently, when the visiting specialist on South Africa in the External Office of the EKD told them that the church had many friends in South Africa, "but unfortunately many of them are in gaol".

At that moment a light was switched on for many Germans in Pretoria. With the uneasy feeling of having been left in the lurch by an opportunistic church leadership and being ministered to by a bunch of EKD pastors whose vocation is regarded as politically suspect, many members of congregations have been fighting for years for a total dissolution of the link with the EKD.

They accuse the churches of the Federal Republic, both Catholic and Protestant, of the greatest guilt in the collapse of general morals, legal concepts, the destruction of the family, the horrible number of abortions, and all the other phenomena of degeneracy that are now the norm in Germany.

black fellow-Christians and likely to be conducive to peaceful development in South Africa.

A young black woman from South Africa, a former member of the African National Congress (ANC), shocked Americans recently by her admission that she had been incited to take part in acts of murder and arson in the townships mainly by South African church leaders. Salamina Borephe was one of several witnesses who testified before a study committee of the Republican Party in Washington. Miss Borephe, who had become a Christian since breaking with the ANC, spoke of the sleepless nights and nightmares that had tormented her ever since. She said that in 1975 she had attended the Congress of South African Students (COSAS), at which she was told that it was a branch of the ANC. The student members of COSAS were taught how to make Molotov cocktails, and "parsons told us how good communism was. They promised us a better education in other countries; and that's why I joined the organization."

An anglican priest and another clergyman (whom she named) were the ringleaders of the "opposition movement". "They told us that the local councillors must die, because they paid no attention to the people. There was a lot of confusion, and some people who went to work were beaten up, others were killed, some burnt to death."

On Sunday 2 September they had held a meeting in the Catholic church of Evanton and Sharpeville. "By half past five on Monday morning we were on our feet and throwing stones at cars and buses." She described how a black councillor was seized by "the boys" and burnt to death with a petrol bomb. Another was hacked to death with pangas as he was coming out of his house.

"They always referred to the Bible to explain why we should murder the local councillors", she said. "They said that Mandela was like Moses, and he had been sent to set us free. We were also urged to kill policemen, and some members of COSAS had got hold of firearms for that purpose". The organizations also used children and adolescents from twelve to eighteen. "We were told to burn down the schools,

These are the words of a former member of the ANC.

But many other clergymen and churches fanned the flames in South Africa. In its publication *ucaNews* 11/86, United Christian Action, an umbrella organization of several Christian associations, wrote:126

### "Catholic Bishops in South Africa Smooth the Path to Marxism.

"On 16.5.86 the general secretary of the South African Bishops' Conference, Father Smangaliso Mkhatshwa, was arrested for illegal possession of arms and ammunition. This event shows only the tip of an iceberg, for under the leadership of Archbishop Denis Hurley the South African Bishops' Conference has become a tool of marxist revolutionaries. United Christian Action substantiates this by the following examples:

"Class struggle in Catholic school-books: The Education Section of the Bishops' Conference in 1983 published a study course for school children in which the leaders of the black homelands were depicted as puppets of the South African government who were merely continuing the oppression of the masses. Black policemen, soldiers and councillors and Coloured and Indian parliamentary representatives were abused as 'collaborators' who betrayed their people from a craving for power and prestige. The Catholic study course is illustrated with pictures of black children raising their fists and expressing their hatred in the caption: 'We won't work for the whites any more! Europeans get out! We won't pay any more taxes! Schools are useless! The chiefs are oppressing us! Give us land! We'll never allow the Christians to rule us!' (Signposts, 1/83)

"Publication of the pro-marxist New Nation: With a grant of over DM 250 000 from the charity funds of Misereor and Missio, two German Catholic relief bodies for famine and sickness all over the world, in 1985 the South African Catholic bishops started a periodical called *The New Nation*. In issue no. 10/86 of 22.6.86 the paper glorified the marxist 'comrades' who by that time had murdered over five hundred black people who had no revolutionary inclinations with burning car tyres.

"Hand in hand with the ANC against national defence: On 13.4.86 Archbishop Hurley led a five-man delegation to the ANC headquarters in Lusaka, Zambia. Excerpt from the communiqué issued by the bishops and the ANC: The black majority knows from experience that the South African police and army are instruments of oppression ... The Conference therefore acknowledges the importance of the campaign to end conscription in South Africa.' (Citizen 17.4.86). The episcopal magazine The New Nation also commented on the South African commando action against ANC bases on 19.6.86. According to issue no. 10/86 the objective was not the ANC but the economic independence of South Africa's neighbours. The military want to cause as much chaos as possible. They are afraid that the successful development of a multiracial socialist state in Zimbabwe or Mozambique will show up the absurdity of apartheid capitalism.'

"Other activities: The Catholic Bishops' Conference in South Africa has acknowledged its support for the marxist Kairos document; it has repeatedly demanded the withdrawal of the police and army from the black townships in South Africa while ignoring the threat to peace-loving inhabitants by radicals; on several occasions Archbishop Hurley has perverted the Holy Mass by offering petrol bombs and firearms as sacrificial objects, ostensibly to strengthen the oppressed in their struggle for liberation.

"The Catholic bishops of South Africa are not interested in the opinions of the members of their flocks – according to surveys more than 95 per cent of Catholics in the country are opposed to any kind of sanctions against South Africa – yet their shepherds call for punitive economic measures. The Catholic organization TFP (Tradition, Family, Private Property) collected over ten thousand signatures against them. Another group that calls itself Concerned Catholics submitted a note of protest against the 'socialist activities' of the bishops to the Vatican. At a three-day conference in Durban on 20.11.85, attended by eighty senior black church leaders, a motion of censure was carried against the activities of Archbishop Hurley. In an interview with *The Sunday Times* a leading black theologian said: 'The general feeling at our conference was that we are fed up with the white Messiahs who set themselves up abroad as martyrs for the black cause.' (Sunday Times 1.12.85) Black priests then withdrew their support for Bishop Hurley's

"Yet the Archbishop is obviously confident that the Bishops' Conference does not need the support of the ordinary member of the congregation any more. Foreign donations for the revolutionary activities of the bishops more than make up for the growing abstention. In 1984 the Bishops' Conference received DM 750 000 from abroad, mostly from Germany. A year later donations from abroad passed the two-million mark, which does not include the DM 250 000 for *The New Nation* Pastoral Project from Misereor and Missio. The Vicar General of Cape Town, Father Reginald Cawcutt, commented thus on the jibbing at the Bishops' Conference: 'The bishops are the leaders of the Catholic Church and need not necessarily ask the community which road to take.' (*Citizen*, 30.4.86)" (End of report)

It stated that the SACC was waging "a political war of liberation in fraternal association" with the marxist terror organisation the African National Congress (ANC) and other militant organizations. The chief characteristic of the activities of the SACC was the fact that it would opt for a revolutionary rather than an evolutionary process to bring about change in South Africa. In the planning of its activities, therefore, it identified itself more and more with the so-called liberation struggle. It had embarked upon a programme of "reinterpretation" of the Christian faith so as to be able to justify its active participation in politics. With its own version of "liberation theology" the SACC was attempting to indoctrinate and politicize the churches associated with it and the blacks in the country, while the whites were to be subjected to a "change of consciousness" to prepare them for a revolutionary change in the existing structures.

He incessantly prophesied the impending violent uprising and declared his solidarity with all who came in conflict with the government, whether they were striking teachers, militant black power movements or radical black trade unions.

With regard to the links between the SACC and the ANC the commission found that after consultations with the ANC and other "liberation movements" in Lusaka the SACC had passed a resolution "to enhance its credibility with the liberation movements". The SACC justified the use of violence by the terrorists with skilful theological formulations and thus gave them its express approval.

There was, however, nothing theological about the recent pronouncement of the former secretary general of the SACC, Dr Beyers Naudé: "Stone-throwing and the burning of cars and houses and the killing of collaborators occasionally" could not unconditionally be regarded as "violence". 127

He called Nelson Mandela, a communist who was sentenced to life imprisonment for high treason for his terrorist activities, his leader, and spoke warmly of him as the future South African head of state. Tutu, now the Archbishop of Cape Town and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, who nonetheless boasts of being "no pacifist", predicts that the use of force in the fight for liberation will be unavoidable. In that case he could see nothing wrong with actively supporting the fight himself. He hardly ever uttered a word in condemnation of revolutionary violence, because in his eyes the use of force was justified if the South African government did not change its course very soon.

"Every Christian must be a revolutionary. Jesus was a revolutionary. I am a revolutionary, if by that you mean somebody who wants to change things completely." (*Rapport*, 20.4.86)

"As far as I'm concerned the West can go to hell." (Cape Times, 23.7.86)

One of the main stumbling-blocks in the way to realization of his programme of action for a radical change in South African society was the existence of a theology that distinguished between spiritual and worldly matters. He therefore made it his task to convince the leaders of the member churches of the SACC that theology was indeed concerned with worldly realities and phenomena and that the church should investigate sociopolitical problems. In his opinion "the theology of the member churches had to be adapted" to the so-called "social gospel" or "liberation theology" and to a new definition of Christian ethics in which the old notions of sin and guilt would be identified afresh.

How important the co-operation and support of the churches in South Africa have become to the aims of the communist terrorist movements is clear from statements made by Oliver Tambo, president of the African National Congress (ANC), on various occasions. For example:

"I hope $\\dots$ the church in South Africa will really be in the front rank of the advance $\\dots$ "

We also hear similar strains from SWAPO: "The churches must declare themselves for the liberation movements or else they are taking sides with the oppressors ..."

If we were to assume that the SACC and the churches in South Africa are aware of the true character and ungodly ends of these marxist "liberation movements" we might think that there would be unbridgeable differences

Thus, for example, at a joint session of the WCC with representatives of the ANC, SWAPO, PAC and the SACC were present, the subject of *The Church and the Liberation of Southern Africa* was discussed. In its recommendations the following proposal was adopted: "The conference fully approves the demands of these liberation movements and wishes to declare its unconditional support in their fight against imperialism, colonialism, racism and minority-settler rule. Moreover the conference declares its respect for the African liberation movements and those groups which are taking up the cause of the total liberation of the African continent. We therefore call upon all the churches, particularly those in Southern Africa, to take practical steps to support the freedom struggle ..."

At another meeting in May 1982 the PAC expressly thanked the WCC and its various organs for their moral and financial support in previous years and expressed the hope that it would be continued. Since then conferences between representatives of the churches and the communist "liberation movements" have been held regularly. With regard to the civil disobedience campaign, in a BBC interview Bishop Tutu said: "... laws that seem unjust to us ... should not be obeyed; and then a disobedience process is set in motion on a large scale in which nearly all the laws of the legislation are disregarded, until this country becomes practically ungovernable."

As for the finances of the SACC, the commission found that between 1975 and 1981 it received over seventeen million rands in donations from abroad. Nearly nine million, or 52 per cent, came from West Germany alone, followed by ten per cent from the WCC. By far the largest proportion of the money from Germany came from the EKD and the churches in communication with it; altogether about eight million rands. The EKD not only supports the SACC as its principal contributor, practically keeping it alive; it also pays the salaries and retirement pension contributions of its mastermind, Dr Wolfram Kistner, and the former secretary general of the SACC, Dr Beyers Naudé, two gentlemen who "demand the removal of the South African government and the take-over of power by 'the people' under the leadership of the ANC." 128

They canvassed not only foreign governments and church organizations, but also such leftist bodies as the International University Exchange Fund (IUEF). That organization gave direct financial assistance to the African National Congress, which they regarded as the leader of the national liberation movement in South Africa, also to PAC and SWAPO, as "the only legitimate liberation movement in Namibia". The activities of the IUEF \[a front organization financed by the CIA; author\] included programmes for the training of specialists for "the future liberated countries of Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa". The IUEF was a body particularly hostile to South Africa, with the clearly stated intention of destroying the existing order by a revolutionary *coup*.

These are only a few points from the official report of the Eloff Commission. They speak for themselves.

When one considers that the SACC, as an offshoot of its parent WCC in South Africa, contrary to its own claims represents only a small minority of the Christians there and that over 97 per cent of its budget of millions comes from abroad – more than half of it from the EKD – then it must be clear to all that a curious game is being played.

More and more blatantly the constant pressure of the EKD to manœuvre the German churches in South Africa into the fold of the SACC becomes apparent. Against the background that I have described such attempts by no means allay suspicions about the real intentions of the organization. They raise the question whether South Africa and its German churches would not be wiser to withdraw completely from the sphere of influence of the organization, send the imported pastors and teachers packing and rely entirely on their own financial resources and those of their adopted South African home.

The irreligious activities of the SACC are by no means an exceptional case; and they are not confined to South Africa. For example, the government of Singapore recently ordered the dissolution of the Christian Conference of Asia, the regional headquarters of the WCC there. In a statement by the Foreign Minister the Council was accused of using Singapore as a theatre for pro-communist "liberation movements" all over Asia. Five foreign leaders of the supposedly religious body were given two weeks to get out of the country.

It also came out that members of the Christian Conference of Asia were behind a "Christian-marxist" conspiracy to overthrow the government in 1987 and that they also had close connexions with the radical opposition in South Korea. The WCC and other organizations associated with it were also accused of having paid millions of dollars to the National Democratic Front in the Philippines, the political arm of the guerrillas of the New People's Army.

session with prayer, where grace is still said at table and evening Biblereadings are not uncommon, and the pastors still command the undisputed respect of their flocks, – such a nation is particularly vulnerable through its churches and clergymen.

How is it possible (many will ask) that so many clergymen and church leaders nowadays preach a political "gospel", support militant atheist terrorists and have fallen into the pit of marxist ideology so easily?

The attack on South Africa is not confined to its strategic minerals and control of the Cape route. It is at the same time a satanic, eschatological attack on one of the last strong bastions of Christianity still standing in the way of the marxist New World Order and its universal pseudo-church.

### **CHAPTER 14**

The appalling thing in the revolution is not the tumult but the design. Through all the fire and smoke we perceive the evidence of a calculating organisation. The managers remain studiously concealed and masked but there is no doubt about their presence from the first.

Lord Acton (1834 - 1902)

For many years South African observers have been following the influences of the USA on the political developments in their country with increasing dismay. The interference of American organizations and government departments in the internal affairs of South Africa has reached such proportions that it amounts to a deliberate destabilization campaign that, but for energetic counter-measures by the South African government, would plunge it into economic chaos and revolutionary violence. If it were to continue unhindered, such a development would undoubtedly lead to a communist take-over of power by the African National Congress.

After examination of the available facts there can be no doubt whatever that that is the actual intention of influential circles within the American government.

However shocking that statement may seem to many of my readers, nevertheless the events themselves permit no other interpretation. The partly overt, partly carefully concealed, programme of action of the dominant Western super-power against South Africa is unequivocal; it speaks a language that it is impossible to misunderstand.

The fall of the Shah in Iran, which was contrived by the American CIA, opened the way to the transitional régime of the Ayatollah. The abduction of Ferdinand Marcos, President of the Philippines, by high-ranking American officers into exile in Hawaii, enabled the big international bankers to install one of their confederates, Corazon Aquino, in his place.

After the death of Khomeini in Iran, the communists are well positioned to seize power. In the Philippines the bankers can be equally confident of success, since both Mrs Aquino and the strong communist opposition are working for the New World Order. The unaccommodating nationalist Marcos was slandered – like the Shah – in the usual tried and tested fashion, accused of corruption, oppression and what-have-you, and driven into exile by suborned officers.

When at last the country can no longer meet its repayment obligations, more stringent new conditions are dictated for the advance of further loans by the bankers, the IMF or the World Bank, with the result that the people are plunged into poverty, and riots, lootings and mass demonstrations against the government ensue.

If the necessary government actions lead to hardships and austerity within the population discontent, riots and upheavals often ensue; and that

If the demands made on the government are refused, all financial and military aid is withdrawn by the West, sanctions and boycotts are imposed, punitive economic measures are threatened or put into effect and American and foreign firms are compelled to withdraw. Every conceivable opposition group in the country is provided with lavish subventions from tax-free American foundations. If the national leaders of the target country are not prepared to resign office they might well expect to be assassinated. As a result of the sustained blackmailing pressure that they are exposed to they are often prevailed upon to introduce "reforms" dictated by the enemies of their country or to release communist subversives from prison and set up a coalition with them. To appease the foreign countries the supposed "representatives of the people" are granted an arbitrary number of seats in parliament and free elections are promised for some future date.

fraternal collaboration has driven one country after another into the clutches of the internationalist CFR planners.

Against this background let us consider the demands made on the South African government by the "conservative" President Reagan in 1986:

- Release of all "political" prisoners;
- Participation of Nelson Mandela, the former leader of the ANC, in the political process;
- The beginning of "dialogue" between these organizations and the government.

On 29.9.86 Reagan said: "We all know that a solution to the problems in South Africa can only be found after the lifting of the state of emergency." 129

If by "solution to the problems" the President meant handing over power to the communists, he was certainly right. Otherwise his statement is in flat opposition to any realistic peaceful development in South Africa; and it certainly does not correspond with the wishes of the vast majority of either blacks or whites.

While the American State Department under George Shultz (a member of the CFR) and his understrapper Chester Crocker and his understrapper Frank Wisner were doing everything in their power to destabilize South Africa, it simultaneously blocked all humanitarian and military aid to the pro-Western resistance movements UNITA and RENAMO in communistruled Angola and Mozambique. (The decision with regard to UNITA was later rescinded on the intervention of President Reagan).

interview that Great Britain would use a whole lot of other "positive and practical measures" that would lead to the same result:

"We shall spend an additional twenty million pounds in the next five years to instruct and train blacks in South Africa.

"We are helping the front-line states to reduce their dependence on South Africa by making over a thousand million dollars (!) available to them. That will be used to improve their own transport routes and harbours. We are giving aid in the form of military training in Zimbabwe and Mozambique to strengthen their defensive capacities. We are putting quite considerable sums of money, about 35 million pounds, at the disposal of Mozambique to help to solve their problems." (The Citizen, 14.1.88)

Anybody in South Africa who still believes (as some newspapers say) that the British government is "the only true friend that this country has", since Britain has plenty of well-considered self-interested reasons for opposing sanctions against South Africa, fails to understand that there are no friendships in politics, only power-political motives. It is now as it was before the outbreak of the Boer War. The sell-out of Rhodesia to the communist dictator Mugabe by the Thatcher government should serve as an example and a warning. The Anglo-American One-World planners may be marching along different roads (which helps to confuse the masses), but they are united in their common goal "to get rid of apartheid".

Forces within the American State Department gave the advance of communism a further boost when on 28.1.87 the terrorist leader Oliver Tambo (ANC) was received by US Secretary of State George Shultz soon after being hailed as a hero by the American press. Tambo was enthusiastically described as "the only unifying force in black South Africa" when he was presented to a hundred journalists in the National Press Club in Washington.

*UcaNews*, the press release of United Christian Action in South Africa, wrote in 1987 (No. 5/87): "US State Secretary and African specialist of the White House, Dr Chester Crocker, on 22.6.86 in the US ABC TV programme: 'The ANC feels itself committed to democracy and a whole series of other ideals that I believe all Americans could agree with.'

*UcaNews* continues: "The ANC treated these vapourings with the utmost contempt, which was evidently not taken seriously in Washington. The ANC radio station, Radio Freedom, announced on 11.5.86: 'There are no non-communist leaders in the ANC'."

The US magazine *The New American* ironically commented (2.3.87, p.11): "But it is these non-existent non-communist leaders that the US State Department thinks it has discovered. It wants to support this non-existent element within the ANC to prevent the real communist leaders of the ANC from establishing a marxist dictatorship in South Africa."

"This programme is described by Douglas Holladay, head of the South Africa Working Group in the US State Department, as follows: 'The Reagan administration wants to do for the black majority in South Africa what Pretoria isn't doing – put the tools in their hands to take over the government and lead a flourishing, progressive and free-enterprise democracy.' (Business Day 22.4.86)

Which all confirms the preference of the super-capitalists for monopoly communist-capitalist economic relations.

Although American firms are perfectly happy to trade with every country on earth, whether with governments of the extreme left or the extreme right, Russia, Red China or South Korea, they appear to be seized with the most delicate moral scruples only when it comes to South Africa. Willard A. Butcher, president of Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank and

In contrast with other foreign firms and the normal practice of American concerns outside their mother country, in South Africa the offshoots of American multinationals set themselves on a course of direct confrontation with the government. According to a report by the Institute for American Studies at the Rand Afrikaans University in 1987, the influential black American Baptist preacher Leon H. Sullivan drew up a four-part programme for American firms in South Africa in 1977 with which they all had to comply or else expose their parent firms to boycotts and vilification campaigns by pressure-groups at home.

The perfidious part played by America in the destabilization of South Africa was first exposed by the South African journalist Aida Parker in her

The Citizen is now in private hands and controlled by one of the two press giants in South Africa associated with the Oppenheimer group. The accuracy of the details of the secret American plan for South Africa leads us to conclude that the source was either the South African or some foreign intelligence service that had an interest in leaking the material. At any rate the report served to disillusion even those who until then had assumed that the communists in the Kremlin and the American State Department were pursuing different goals.

The report gives detailed, authentic, documented proofs of a perfidious American plan to destabilize South Africa and overthrow its government. For example, Miss Parker demonstrates in full detail that the Ford Foundation had supplied reading-rooms in Soweto and other black townships with books about radical "black power" movements and the French Revolution, that it and other foundations had raised over a million dollars for the legal defence of terrorists in South Africa and that most of the money had been channelled through the World Council of Churches, although it originated from the Rockefellers. These outrageous revelations were smothered by the establishment press in South Africa under a cloak of silence – in itself a testimony to their truth that they could not have demonstrated more clearly.

The government of Chile, which is also on the liquidation list of the One-World planners of the American State Department and their invisible backers, printed 75 000 copies of the report and distributed them among all the officers of the armed forces as a warning.

- A large-scale campaign to form and mobilize anti-South African opinion among the American and other populations;
- Foreign governments will be put under pressure by American embassies to withdraw or reduce their investments in South Africa.

    Agencies of the American government will attempt to destabilize South Africa by giving enormous amounts of aid to "liberation movements", black resistance groups and black leaders in opposition.

The activities of the American State Department leave no room for doubt about what the intention is: the replacement of pro-Western white rule in South Africa by a black "majority rule"; and it matters not a jot whether the new government is pro- or anti-marxist. The official warcry is anti-apartheid; but in reality the objective is the incorporation of South Africa in the socialist New World Order in which human rights will exist only on paper, if at all.

As Miss Parker says, there is sufficient reason to assume that the US embassy in Botswana next door is receiving vast sums of money which are placed by the State Department and the CIA at the disposal of South African dissident groups. Regular visitors to the embassy include leading members of the Black People's Convention, the South African Students' Organization and the Soweto Students' Representative Council. These and other persons – many of them banned activists – have in that way access to large sums to finance their subversive monkey business.

For years the CIA has been building up a wide network of opposition groups in South Africa and giving them financial support. It has infiltrated political, cultural, academic, labour, church and social institutions and used them improperly to further its ends of polarizing black and white and destroying the existing order. In recent years it has been secretly supporting the Black Community Programme, the Union of Black Journalists and the National Youth Organization.

340 500 rands was made available for the SASO trial in 1976. Of that a legal firm in London paid 21 500 rands, the South African Council of Churches paid 98 000 rands and the Africa-America Institute 221 000 rands.

Great pains are taken to conceal the CIA connexion. Neither the accused nor the defence are ever informed of the source of the money, although there is hardly a political trial in the country in which the CIA is not implicated. Practically every judicial proceeding is attended by a senior member of the diplomatic staff. There is also ample evidence that black radicals receive financial support from US agents and that they endeavour to stir up feelings of hatred against the whites and the government.

According to the report, several agencies of the US government are constantly engaged on "vulnerability and feasibility" studies to seek out weak points in white South Africa and thereby employ any means of inflicting damage on the country.

There is also a secret section of the CIA that collaborates with sociologists, psychologists, historians and "specialists in the media" in carrying out research studies on South Africa. This section concentrates on "reachable targets" such as South African students, intellectuals, academics, journalists, church leaders, missionaries and so on. They are enlisted in the destabilization activities without knowing in whose service they are employed.

Then there was the master plan called Group Action to destroy the South African economy. An analyst said that the plan was "so competently prepared that it makes your blood go cold". From then on it was used as a basis for anti-South African activities at a thousand American universities and thousands of church, community and working groups. Group Action is the work of the American Friends' Service Committee.

- 2. The preparation, support and promotion of attacks on banks and other financial institutions that do business with South Africa.
- 3. How to stop the sale of Kruger-rands in America.
- 4. How to act against firms, especially multinational, with branches in South Africa

So what is behind this American Friends' Service Committee (AFSC) that devised and developed the plan?

Miss Parker tells us that the organization was established in 1917 as a kind of welfare body of the American Quaker sect. At any rate they soon got mixed up with communists and World Government enthusiasts. Later their sympathies with the African "liberation movements" became more and more evident. The American Committee on Africa, the Defence and Aid Fund for Africa and the International Women's League for Peace and Freedom are kindred bodies. In 1954 an American committee of inquiry found that the AFSC was supporting the American Students' Union, a communist front organization; also the League for the Refusal of War Service, the Brotherhood of Reconciliation, the Independent Communist Workers' League and so on and so forth.

After all that one might well suppose that the AFSC was dependent on purely communist sources of cash; well, that would be an absurdly mistaken assumption. Again it is the by now familiar story of the big capitalist foundations: in this particular case Ford, which put 1,34 million tax-free dollars at the disposal of the AFSC.

Is it necessary now to mention that the principal source of financial support for the AFSC is the Rockefeller Foundation?

The activities and recommendations of this body include exhorting the Americans to place the security functions of their country under a world authority, refusal to undergo military service and making bitter attacks on

Let us now take a look at another of the 74 organizations that support the Group Action attack on South Africa: the American Committee on Africa (ACOA). In 1977 it had about twenty thousand members, who included such figures as Congresswoman Bella Abzug, the trade-union leader Victor Reuther, the actor Sidney Poitier and the writer James Baldwin.

The ACOA is the mother-organization of all secular, marxist anti-South African groups in the United States. Ever since its foundation it has been in the forefront of political and financial support of African "liberation movements". It built up the Defence and Aid Fund for Africa (USA), mobilized well-known sportsmen and show-business personalities in the boycott campaigns and initiated "action programmes" and mass demonstrations. The ACOA played a leading part in the disinvestment campaign. It was chiefly responsible for the church-backed boycott of the American firms ITT, Motorola, IBM and Control Data. Paul Irish, an office-bearer in ACOA, took part in the formation of a coalition to prevent the import of any more coal from South Africa. ACOA was behind the juridical proposal to prohibit the advertisement of post vacancies by South African firms in American newspapers. In 1977 ACOA organized and financed a poster competition with the title "Apartheid kills", offering a first prize of five hundred dollars for the best poster that most dramatically brought it home to people that "apartheid means murder, injustice and oppression".

ACOA is behind the "Stop the sale of Krugerrands" campaign, which calls the purchase of the coins "an investment in oppression".

A whole series of other similar activities could still be listed; but let us here confine ourselves to the question of how these expensive exercises are financed. In 1977 Aida Parker asked: What is the position of the US

government to all this, and does it attempt to restrict these destabilization activities by the ACOA and other anti-South African organizations?

The answer is that it is by no means easy to trace the labyrinthine ramifications of what payments are made to whom in South Africa. But it can be stated with certainty that the ACOA receives official remittances from the Africa Fund. That fund was established as a "charitable and educational" institution to make it possible to transfer taxfree money to the ACOA for its own use. The Africa Fund in turn is regularly and lavishly supported by the Samuel Rubin Foundation and the Norman Foundation, which are both known to be CIA intermediaries. Like the Africa Fund they are both taxfree.

At that time big British, German, French and Swiss banks were reporting that they were being placed under increasing pressure from America not to extend any further credits to South Africa and to reduce trade with it. A London banker said: "The present \[American\] pressure goes far beyond mere harassment. The Carter Administration gives every indication of wishing to precipitate a major decline in South Africa by punitive economic sabotage."

The policy was consistently applied by the Reagan government under the name of "constructive engagement". The rhetoric changed, but the intentions were still the same; although many South Africans were taken in.

The American government is pumping a million dollars a year into the militant South African trade unions, which at the same time receive huge amounts from other countries. (*The Citizen*, 10.4.87).

Pro-marxist groups in Britain and Germany clamour for boycotts of South African fruit. Naïve members of women's church associations allow themselves to be harnessed to the American bandwagon with shrill cries of "Don't buy apartheid fruit!" In their myopic or ideological antipathy these Christian (?) ladies are helping to take the bread from the mouths of thousands of black plantation workers and their families.

It is the African-American Institute (AAI), a body at the service of the

internationalists of the State Department, the CIA and the White House hierarchy.

Among the number of the delegates were representatives of the banned ANC, the New York head of foreign relations of the banned PAC, David Sebelo, the American senator Dick Clark, the coloured American Congressman Charles Diggs and the viciously anti-South African brigadier from Nigeria, Joseph Garba.

It is less well known that between 1962 and 1977 the AAI spent about twenty million dollars on black "training programmes". Large amounts of that money went to "refugees" and members of "recognized liberation movements". Many of them returned "trained" and promptly took part in organized acts of violence in South Africa. It was an open secret, says Aida Parker, that in programmes of that sort there were close connexions between the AAI and the "dirty tricks" specialists of the CIA. The AAI is also known to keep in close touch with radical American negro leaders, banned ANC and PAC terrorists and white South Africans in exile.

such as Mr Edwin Khabelo of the ANC, Mr Testus Muundjna of the South West African National Union, Mr Sam Nujoma of SWAPO, Mr John Simons of the World University Service and –last but not least – Mr Harvey Hall of the Ford Foundation.

We get a pretty good idea of the approach of the AAI to its educative function by reading the report issued at the end of the meeting. "It is of vital importance to provide education and training for refugees from Southern Africa ... because they are symbols of the struggle against racism and for the majority rule in their countries, and because they will be needed in the fight for freedom and in the subsequent process of nation building. The objectives of such training should be ... to prepare students to participate effectively in the struggle for freedom ... Scholarships for training should be awarded where possible to students affiliated with a liberation movement. Refugee students at US institutions should be helped to maintain contact with their liberation movement, to preserve their sense of commitment to their cause. Whatever steps are taken to solve short-term problems, there is only one ultimate solution to the overall problem: that is the overthrow of minority régimes in Southern Africa and the liberation of the Southern tier of the continent "

The arrogance and presumption of this meddling in the internal affairs of another nation by government-backed American organisations becomes startling when we read the statement made by William R. Cotter, then president of the AAI, before the House Committee for Foreign Affairs: "For me the litmus test is simple. When reviewing a US activity, we should ask: can it lead to changes in South Africa which will result, as immediately as possible, in ending apartheid and minority rule in that country? I personally am in complete accord with those who call for the strongest measures by the US to accelerate the process of change within South Africa. Nor would I automatically rule out violence as an instrument for obtaining the rights of the non-White majority."

We could continue ad infinitum and ad nauseam to quote details of the American plans, both secret and overt, to subvert a sovereign Western country. But I think enough has been said to show my readers, both South African and other, who are ultimately behind the insurrections in South Africa, the revolutionary onslaught, the opinion terror and the economic problems.

Are not these the very forces responsible for the defensive measures that the South African government has been compelled to adopt and with which it is now reproached? The declaration of the state of emergency, the restrictions on freedom of the press, the exclusion of foreign journalists and TV crews, the temporary restrictions on news, the arrest of ringleaders and trouble-makers, the strengthening of the police and military control in the disturbed black areas – all these are the consequences of a co-ordinated attack from both east and west on a country singled out for destruction on the pretext of "apartheid" so as to be able to put the whole continent of Africa in the hands of the socialist One-World planners.

The real instigators of the defensive measures in South Africa are meanwhile infuriated by the fact that a small country should have the audacity to defend itself. They demand with menaces, blackmail and economic sanctions – in close collaboration with their trilateral fellow-conspirators in Europe and Japan – the immediate cessation of all defensive measures and the unconditional release of all the communist subversives and terrorists who are dignified by the name of political prisoners. They have persuaded "world opinion" to accept their lies and distorted images of the truth and become more and more brazen and blatant in their ostensible campaigns for "justice and democracy" in South Africa.

ment that prisoners like Mbeki should clearly renounce the use of violence before their release could be considered.

I should perhaps at this point remind the reader that Mbeki and the top leadership of the ANC were arrested at Lillies leaf Farm in Rivonia on 11 July 1963 for being in possession of comprehensive plans for the overthrow of the Verwoerd government. For their proposed sabotage campaign the terrorists had been expecting 210 000 hand-grenades, 48 000 anti-personnel mines, 144 tons of ammonium nitrate, 22 tons of aluminium powder, 15 tons of black powder and 1 500 time detonators from the USSR.

Predictably, the release of Mbeki was immediately followed by demands for the unconditional release of Nelson Mandela and the other convicted subversives. One should assume that the South African government will think twice about that, since it has its hands full as it is trying to cope with the present mass *démarches* and demonstrations organized by the Mass Democratic Movement, the UDF and other ANC front organisations. But if they were to yield to the pressures from abroad and release Mandela unconditionally and without restriction, it might strike the spark of revolution that the conspirators are hoping for.

in other Western governments are demanding the abolition of apartheid and "dialogue" between the South African government and black leaders, it has really nothing to do with human rights and a peaceful evolutionary development in this country. They want conflict, they want the overthrow of white government and a "Red Azania" that they, as the agents of high finance, can control and exploit just like the other African colonies of the big bankers.

![](https://samisdat.in/user/pages/03.books/1989%20-%20Plot%20Against%20South%20Africa/read/_page_215_Picture_0.jpeg?g-16018011)

### CHAPTER 15

# **Conclusions**

Von guten Mächten wunderbar geborgen, erwarten wir getrost, was kommen mag. Gott ist mit uns am Abend und am Morgen und ganz gewiß an jedem neuen Tag.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

By the time I had got to this point in my manuscript I was more and more assailed by doubts of ever finding a publisher abroad who would be prepared to publish a book on South Africa that presents the problems of this country from a point of view that is generally withheld from the ordinary citizen.

Surely "everybody knows" what's wrong with South Africa? Was there anybody at all who could conceive of another side to South Africa and be prepared to read and think about it?

My thoughts ran round in circles. South Africa had become far too much a universal stereotype and had been far too long exposed to a barrage of one-sided propaganda for the "truth" about it, as presented by the mass media everywhere, to be doubted. I had no illusions about that ...

I could already hear the controversy that the book would arouse, the pros and cons about the "conspiracy theory", the arguments about apartheid and the furious attacks from the left.

not directed at the individual minister but at the hierarchies and the wolves in sheep's clothing who make wrongful use of their position.

Another treatment could be to drag the book through the dirt, make it ridiculous and dismiss its contents as moonshine. Who would buy a book that got an unrelievedly bad press?

Lastly there is the ancient weapon, defamation of the author. "No case – abuse the plaintiff's attorney". He can be blackguarded as a communist or a nazi, a racist or an anti-semite, extremist, intolerant, hidebound, a stooge, a lackey of the apartheid régime or a government hack, or any other terms of endearment that may lie at hand.

Very well; be it so. That cannot change the facts compiled in this book, which I have been collecting for over fifteen years. And the conclusion that my studies of many separate pieces and many inconsistencies and the findings of other writers led to was that all these things added up to the picture of a universal political intrigue that only a few people could see through. And although it has not been possible within practicable limits to exhaust every single theme – each chapter could have been expanded into a book – nevertheless I hope that it will have made any reader who has hitherto looked at South Africa only through the stock black-and-white spectacles provided by the establishment media realize that there s a good deal more to it than that.

One thing I can be fairly sure of: after reading this book, dear reader, the world will not seem quite the same to you as it did before. What seemed obscure or confused should now be clear; what seemed inconsistent should now make sense; what seemed illogical now becomes perfectly logical. The events that unfold in days to come will be comprehensible so long as you check them against the background depicted in this book.

The one-sided attack on South Africa by the world press, the striking absence of criticism of the communist sphere of power, the fragmentation

and financial exploitation of Germany, the central power in Europe, by the victorious powers, the surreptitious co-operation between the World Council of Churches and the UNO, the support of marxist régimes and "liberation movements" by democratic Western governments, the increasing politicization of the churches, the advance of atheism, the subliminal attacks on the white race and the Christian religion – all these and far more make comprehensible sense only if we recognize the events as components of a deliberate conspiracy in both the East and the West, unsuspected by most people and steered towards a common goal. To attain that goal it is necessary to conceal the true intentions as long as possible. Meanwhile the points are being switched; and once the train of history that carries us all has passed over them the fact will have been accomplished, with no hope of return.

The South Africans must clearly understand that for many years now, their country has been in a state of undeclared war. While they are staring fascinated at the communist bogey in the East they fail to see the far deadlier enemy in the West. They do not see that they are caught between the pincers of East and West in a co-ordinated attack organized by America, backed by European governments and executed by communist forces.

Ultimately it makes no odds to the initiates of the New World Order whether South Africa is subjugated by their Eastern auxiliaries or capitulates in the face of the UN-led attacks from the West. The power-groups behind the UNO, the State Department and the Kremlin have all the same end in view: a centrally controlled socialist world government with a monopolistic economic system run by them.

Since politics are more than ever before subordinate to economics, and the greatest part of all money, gold and basic industry in the world are in the hands of the two thousand-odd members of the Council on Foreign Relations and the organizations associated with it, that is where the real centre of power is situated. The present economic and monetary interdependence of states, and therefore their increasing vulnerability in isolation, is one reason why so many countries have submitted to the "New International Economic Order". Many see in a global socialistic redistribution the only way out of the debt crisis that they have been manœuvred into by the bankers. The beggar nations of the Third World, which for many years have been reduced and condemned to almost total dependence on Western handouts, even see advantages to them in the New World Order. It seems not to worry their rulers that they will then no longer be heads of sovereign states but at best governors of provinces.

But the peoples of the world have not yet begun to suspect where they are all heading for. They seldom or never read anything about the secret plans

of the politicians; and if they do it is only as an occasional inconspicuous column-inch in the press that few would even notice.

Here are two examples to illustrate what I mean—the only two that I have been able to find. On 2.8.85 *The Citizen* printed the following report that occupied forty by forty millimetres, or one column-inch:

### "CALL ON WCC

"Buenos Aires: Argentina's President Raul Alfonsin called yesterday for a new economic order and urged the World Council of Churches (WCC) to take the message to the powerful nations of the North." (Sapa – Reuter)

What the WCC has to do with the New Economic Order (synonym for New World Order) will puzzle only those who think that the WCC represents mainly church interests.

About two years later, on 1.4.87, the paper printed the following report, again in one column-inch:

### "NEW ORDER

"Kinshasa: Romanian President Nicolae Ceausescu and Zaïre President Mobutu Sese Seko have called on developing nations to join together to convince developed nations of the need for a New World Economic Order." (Sapa – AP)

Of course, there are also forces in South Africa dedicated to the plans of the One-Worlders. They exert a strong influence on the government and it is largely because of them that this once peaceful and stable country has in recent years been shaken by civil disturbances as never before in its history of over three centuries. The causes have not been internal stresses and grievances, apartheid, violations of human rights and what not, as "the media" continually hammer into everybody's head, but rather a skilfully organized manipulation of the black masses.

Just as the division of Europe into national states was in accordance with the will of its peoples and brought order and progress to the whole continent, so had the South African version, *apartheid* or separate development, exercised an undeniably positive influence on the development of its multinational communities. The result of that policy, as we saw in Chapter 1, was the rise of a continental super-power that gave its many-layered population by far the highest standard of living in all Africa.

I know very well that the present progressive abolition of many obsolete apartheid laws is necessary and overdue. They are paternalistic survivals from a vanished age that have lost their original purpose, and they do indeed injure the human dignity of individuals beyond necessity. But that does not mean that the solution to the problems of South Africa is to be found in the total integration of its races and a new attitude of *laissez-faire* that would surrender the ordering and stabilizing function of the government to the caprice of the mob.

There is no doubt whatever that there is still much to be done to root out anomalies and injustices in South Africa. But that is true of every country on earth: of the European countries with their chronic "immigrant" and "gastarbeiter" problems, as well as of America with its slums and "coloured" discontents. But if there is a country in Africa that despite all its shortcomings and deficiencies has made unexampled progress towards the welfare and prosperity of its peoples of all colours, that country is South Africa.

What impudent hypocrisy it must seem to the blacks in South Africa when they hear corrupt and murderous dictators in the rest of Africa together with their communist friends in the UN clamouring for reforms and human rights that they take good care to withold from their own oppressed and starving peoples living in conditions that simply cannot be compared to South Africa.

The conspirators fear nothing more than premature exposure of their plans. The longer they can suppress the truth, the nearer they come to their goal. It is up to all of us — including South Africa — to stop them in their tracks. It is still not too late.

### **CHAPTER 16**

# Whither South Africa?

A society that does not defend itself is doomed. A system that remains passive in the face of attack deserves to go under. Those unwilling to defend freedom will become unfree. To stand idly by is to commit suicide.

Brian Crozier (Strategy of Survival, 1978)

It is a fact that every visitor to this country is astonished to find that relations between blacks and whites are distinctly harmonious. Whatever their colour, they are both Africans. Both were born and bred on this continent, both have got accustomed to one another and have learnt to understand the mental processes of one another. In contrast to the widespread antipathy of European peoples to foreign immigrants, *gastarbeiter* and what not, black, white and brown South Africans regard themselves as natural compatriots whose birth and right of habitation is not in question.

The vast majority of the black population of South Africa took no part in the riots and disturbances of recent years. What is not generally realized abroad is the fact that the troubles were mostly caused by power struggles between rival black groups, often exploited by criminal elements. The "insurgencies" were directed less at the whites than at black fellow-citizens, which is moreover proved by the fact that they were entirely confined to the black locations. When white – and black – police acted in defence of lawabiding citizens, there were scenes that were readily interpreted abroad as a state of civil war between blacks and whites.

There are other important circumstances that in my opinion rule out a violent revolution in South Africa. No attempt at revolution has ever succeeded unless all or most of the following preconditions were fulfilled:

- Weakness in a normally strong and stable government, often associated with a military defeat.
- Serious dissatisfaction and smouldering hatred against a tyrannical government.
- Widespread corruption, splintering of parties and lack of will to lead in the ruling élite.
- Powerful financial and organizational support from foreign powers.

The problem that the radical leaders are confronted with is precisely that the great majority of the blacks have no desire for a revolution; no doubt because they are aware of the consequences of "successful" revolutions in the neighbour countries, from which there now stream hordes of starving and desperate refugees across the borders into South Africa. Besides, the strength and loyalty of the security forces of the white establishment make any prospects of a violent convulsion very unrealistic.

There is another important difference: South Africa was never a colony unjustly annexed by the Boers. They feel no sense of guilt, nor do they feel under any moral obligation to hand over their country to a black population merely because it has since grown into the majority. The white Afrikaners have no wish to domineer over the blacks. They have given them as much autonomy as possible within their own areas and left the tribal structures and the authority of their chiefs as intact as possible. But it is precisely because the Boers do not wish to rule the blacks that they have no intention of themselves being ruled by the blacks.

The white electorate, which has given the ruling National Party a mandate to introduce necessary reforms and peaceful social change, is now deeply split over the correctness of the course adopted. Instead of appreciation of their willingness to share power with the blacks, they see violent disturbances, increasing pressure from abroad, punitive economic measures and demands that they should completely hand over power to a "black majority" that does not exist, since it consists of disparate tribes and peoples.

The greater the willingness of the Boers to accept reform, the stronger grew the pressure. Many Afrikaners simply cannot grasp this apparent paradox and are now demanding a return to the undivided power policy of former years. If the National Party fails to come up very soon with a constitutional model that will guarantee the whites a secure future in freedom and autonomy and restores the whole country to stability and order, then it will have to reckon on being replaced by the Conservative Party, the parliamentary opposition. They are demanding a return to the old undiluted policy of "separate development" as the only possible way to peaceful co-existence of the different peoples of South Africa. They propose a state formed by a territorial division according to ethnic affiliation, which would give all communities the right to political self-determination and provide a basis on which none would predominate. The Conservatives regard any kind of "power-sharing" as a sure road to chaos in which the whites would finish up ruled by the blacks.

ington or Moscow that South Africa is capable of making nuclear weapons at very short order, and perhaps already possesses them.

How that power-sharing will look in practice and why such an experiment should succeed in the multinational state of South Africa when it has been such a dismal failure everywhere in Africa and elsewhere, the government has so far left unanswered. It is to be hoped that it does succeed in devising a constitution that will enable both blacks and whites to find a peaceful way to the future, together but in separate autonomies. Otherwise there are only two possibilities: either white rule or black.

Sharing power would be an absurdity, an unstable condition that would soon lead to new power-struggles and power entirely in the hands of the strongest group. We must assume that the government of South Africa is fully aware of the dangerous nature of the balancing-act that it is attempting to perform with its programme of reforms. It is certainly unlikely to allow itself to be taken in by any such diplomatic manœuvres as those that led to the Lancaster House Agreements by which the erstwhile Rhodesia was taken for a ride by America and the British Foreign Office. The then British Foreign Minister, Lord Carrington, who switched the points that sent the communist dictator Mugabe to power, was later elected Secretary General of NATO (!)

To sum up: Neither sanctions nor boycotts could cripple the South African economy – the strongest on the continent – severely enough to cause a total collapse; an overt military attack on the country must be regarded as highly improbable for the foreseeable future, since it would entail incalculable risks for any attacker; a violent overthrow by revolutionary forces inside and outside the country has no prospects of success; a total isolation of South Africa is not feasible; and more and more people are becoming aware of the insidious invasion by the New World planners and the plot against South Africa.

nations linked with the decline of the dollar, which would have calamitous effects all over the world, – all these contingencies in the years to come must be taken into account.

There are some encouraging signs, especially in America, of a great spiritual reawakening. More and more poeple are beginning to recognize the dangers of a godless, materialistic New Age that is bent on destroying all the old orders so as to build their totalitarian New World on the ruins of the Christian West and the ashes of the white race.

But if South Africa allows itself to be deceived; if it fails to recognise the dangers of the liberal *Zeitgeist* and accepts its decadent materialistic conception of the world; if it allows itself to be forced by its enemies to make more and more concessions and submits to an impossible "power-sharing"; if its government succumbs to the present mania for "equality" and attempts to force the peoples of South Africa into the melting-pot of a democratic unitary state; – then the country will sink into African chaos and old night; and there will be no future for it.

The tragic conclusion to such a development (unlikely though it may seem at the moment) could be one of the following end phases: either a military intervention by the UNO with the help of the great powers and the installation of the African National Congress, a *coup d'état* by the South African military and the establishment of a military government, or a rebellion by the Afrikaners and their secession to found a separate Boer republic.

### **CHAPTER 17**

# Warning to Europe

The evil in the world does not live through those who do evil but through those who tolerate evil.

Edmund Burke, 1729 - 1797

The French military writer Ferdinand Miksche prophesied that the existence of Europe was directly linked to events in southern Africa. If it were to fall into the hands of communists, the Europeans would have good cause to fear economic strangulation.

It has always been the hope of the USSR to see the red flag waving over Cape Town. As long as 1928 the Communist International pointed to the road to South Africa: "Our aim should be to turn the African National Congress into a national revolutionary fighting organization against the white bourgeoisie and the British imperialists on the basis of the trade unions, peasants' organizations, etc. in which the leading rôle of the workers and the Communist Party must be systematically developed in this organization." 136

The first phase in the long march to power was the adoption of the ANC and its incorporation in the socialist world revolution. For the second stage many "useful idiots" were enlisted: churchmen, liberals and socialists, who could not see what was afoot in South Africa. The controlled massmedia saw to the rest by softening up the country with a constant barrage of propaganda in readiness for the final charge and driving it into world-political isolation and economic ruin.

The gains to the Russians and the planners of the New World Order would indeed have been great. The incorporation of South Africa in the Russian sphere of influence would deprive the NATO pact states of a very

The net result of this situation is obvious. The battle for South Africa is actually a battle for control of the rich industrial nations of Western Europe. Its ultimate goal is the incorporation of America in the socialist world republic of the super-bankers.

The American historian Otto Scott, who knows South Africa well, warned his countrymen in these words:

Now do you understand why South Africa must at all costs be isolated and detached from its natural allies? Can there be any other plausible reason for bombarding a foreign country in far-away Africa with a tremendous propaganda barrage of hatred, for decades, at inconceivable expense,

for the sake of a few million well-nourished blacks from whom the right to vote has been withheld, while hardly anybody bothers about the most brutal oppression and almost total absence of "human rights" all over the rest of Africa and the peoples of the communist bloc? As Mark Antony said: I pause for a reply.

But there is still more to it. South Africa is the domino that is to knock over first Africa, then Europe, then finally the USA.

As Otto Scott puts it in his *The Other End of the Lifeboat*: "What I suggest to you today is that South Africa is the key to not only all Africa south of the Sahara, but to the survival of the United States. To blockade South Africa, to cut off its mineral flow to the West, would cripple Europe and America alike. It would mean the control of the world will fall into the hands that rule the Kremlin. Make no mistake about it; this is a real crises." 137

But the reality will look different; radically different. A world government would have to apply dictatorial measures to keep "the mob" (i.e. the ordinary people of the world like you and me) under control. The national consciousness of peoples, their traditional scales of values, their notions of honour, their racial distinctiveness and their religious, moral and cultural characteristics cannot simply be switched off. But they could not be allowed to exist within an egalitarian, totalitarian and atheistic world system. For that reason a world government could exist only within a system of brutal coercion, which in turn could only be kept in being by means of draconian laws, police terror and the repression of all individual liberties.

For seventy years now a third of the population of the world has been subjected to the system of Soviet communism. It was created expressly for that purpose; and it is now preparing to seize control of the world on behalf of the super-bankers. To make possible this fusion with the West it is necessary to assimilate both systems to one another ("White House directive," see page 203) that the populations of both East and West will quite happily accept it. The replacement of the Old Guard in the Kremlin by westernized, smiling, "charming" personalities is a part of that strategy; just as are Gorbachev's *perestroika* reforms and the temporary replacement

of the brutal communist system of coercion by a socialist-democratic form of government such as exist in the countries of Western Europe.

From the fusion of Western and Eastern Europe with the Soviet Union the Socialist One World Order will be launched; and then the union of America, Japan and the rest of the world will follow.

After a few years of socialist peace there would begin a "consolidation phase" in which millions of "undesirable elements", including whole national and racial groups, would be scientifically eliminated. Never before in the history of mankind, in none of its many and bloody wars have so many human beings been killed as it would be necessary to kill to establish and maintain the socialist New World Order.

Anybody who doubts that should be reminded of the communist takeover of power in only two countries: Cambodia and Vietnam. The whole extent of the terror was not reported by the media. In the initial phase millions of people were massacred, millions were forced into slave labour and millions were shut up in "re-education" camps. What happened there on a national scale would happen in a worldwide "purge"; for it would be the only way possible for the rulers to hold "the mob" in check. By then they would no longer need to take any notice of the – no longer existent – free Western democratic world on the co-operation of which they had formerly been dependent.

As in the USSR and its satellite states, a world government could hold on to power only through ruthless terror and an ironclad, brutal police apparatus

danger. In your own interests help South Africa to keep within the free world. Put pressure on your politicians to stop the sanctions and propaganda campaigns. At meetings and discussions fight for a free South Africa. Provide information. Write letters to your newspapers. If you can, come to this country and form your own personal impressions at first hand. You will soon find that things are quite different here from what you supposed and that you have been misled by your churches, your politicians and your mass media

Perhaps you are old enough to remember the fate of Hungary. On 23 October 1956 tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators streamed on to the streets of Budapest demanding the end of soviet rule and the restoration of their own democratic government with free elections. The Russian reprisals were swift and brutal. The Russian tanks battered down all resistance without mercy. The Western governments did not stir a finger. On 4 November the last cry for help from Hungary was heard over Radio Free Budapest: "Peoples of the world, hear our cry! Help us ... Don't forget, this savage attack by bolshevism won't stop here. You could be the next victim! Save us! SOS, SOS, SOS ..."

A little while later the voice continued: "Peoples of the civilized world, in the name of freedom and solidarity we beseech you to help us. Our ship is sinking. The lights are going out. The shadows are getting thicker from hour to hour. Hear our cry ... God be with you – and with us."

![](https://samisdat.in/user/pages/03.books/1989%20-%20Plot%20Against%20South%20Africa/read/_page_234_Picture_0.jpeg?g-16018011)

To: Ambassador of the United Kingdom H.E. Mr P.H. Moberly, C.H.G. Embassy of the United Kingdom Hill Street/Pretorius Street PRETORIA

## SOLIDARITY WITH SOUTH AFRICA

In South Africa we all have found work and a warmhearted reception from all communities and those of us who are refugees have also found freedom from Communist dictatorship and oppression.

We who live here know that what is taking place is one of the most dishonest, most vicious and most dangerous propaganda campaigns ever witnessed.

Unfortunately, it could also be one of the most effective.

We appeal to our Embassies to set the record straight and most particularly urge that the Embassies themselves do not become accessories to the campaign of distortion, defamation and sometime total misrepresentation directed against South Africa.

We urge these Embassies to provide their Parliaments with unbiased and balanced information about the realities of the South African situation.

Bishop Tutu's claim that South African Blacks would welcome a Soviet occupation is manifestly absurd. From all over Africa almost 2 million Black people have voted for South Africa with their feet, seeking opportunities here that they no longer enjoy at home, trying to escape the miseries, internecine warfare, brutalities, oppression and famine that, tragically, have become almost the norm in Africa today.

The South African Government is always prepared to receive prominent representatives of other governments and to discuss with them matters of common concern.

We fully realise that we do hold the key, and we also realise that with that key we can open the door to peaceful co-existence in multicultural countries worldwide. But there are elements which obstruct us in using this key.

In this regard I posed a number of questions to Sir Geoffrey, relating to key issues, not only in contemporary South African politics, but in a host of other countries as well.

If we can reach agreement on these questions, and their answers, I believe that we have the key to the solution, and that we shall be able jointly to help in solving these problems worldwide through a combined leap of imagination.

### THE QUESTIONS ARE:

- taneously the problems of all countries that are experiencing internal conflict as a result of racial, ethnic or religious tensions?
- 4. Would they agree to link the question of the quest for ethnic national states in South Africa, with similar questions relating to, among others, the Sikhs, the Tamils, the Gurkhas, the Aborigines, the Maoris, the Northern American Indians and the Basques, to name only a few?

Yet, instead of encouragement and co-operation we find that Western democracies and totalitarian states alike are neither prepared to acknowledge the sincerity of our efforts nor to grant us the opportunity to achieve our goals.

We are a developing country that has achieved much to be proud of and when sound advice is given to us in a spirit of goodwill, we welcome the opportunity to discuss and test it.

We prefer to have normal relations with other civilised states, but we cannot allow uncalled for direct interference in our internal affairs, which could only lead to confusion and deterioration of relations, both within and outside our country.

During the discussions with Sir Geoffrey I availed myself of the opportunity to provide him with information on the vast and comprehensive programme of reform carried out in South Africa. I also explained to him to what extent the BLS countries in particular, as well as other neighbouring states in Southern Africa are dependent on South Africa.

In our discussions I also referred to the political, economic and social reform programmes that we carried out during the past number of years in the fields of constitutional law, sport, labour, influx control, property rights for Blacks, education and business.

I also told him that the world at large should take a greater interest in the real redevelopment of Southern African States, because we prefer to have prosperous neighbours.

But during our discussions it was quite clear to me that Sir Geoffrey, as the representative of the twelve nations, was not interested in these positive policy matters. He came to South Africa mainly to bring pressure to bear on us to release Mr Mandela unconditionally and to unban the ANC.

I drew his attention to the cruel murders perpetrated against innocent people and the intimidation of Black people by Blacks under the leadership of the ANC and their allies.

I impressed on Sir Geoffrey the necessity that South Africa should be left in peace: that there are enough authentic and representative leaders in this country with whom we can iron out our future dispensation; that we are making headway; and that the reaction to our proposal about the National Council is so overwhelming that I am optimistic that we will make the necessary progress.

In pursuance of internal co-operation and communication between the peoples of South Africa, we shall continue with dialogue and negotiation with peace-loving leaders of all our communities, as we have done in the past.

We are resolutely committed to dialogue, as part of our efforts to broaden democracy in our country, and it is our aspiration to continue with dialogue in our search for a common destiny for all the peoples of South Africa.

However, we believe that dialogue should not inevitably have the

end result of jeopardizing the self-determination of the groups and communities in our multi-cultural country, but that it must be an instrument of hope, peace and freedom for all.

I told Sir Geoffrey that I looked upon his recent speech in the House of Commons as nothing but a threat against our country.

In connection with sanctions and threats of sanctions I informed him as follows:

Oil sanctions were applied against us. The steps we took also put us in a position to overcome that problem.

I don't believe in sanctions. If this world is to become a better place to live in, nations must learn to deal with each other in a more just, responsible and civilised way. But if we are forced until our backs are against the wall, we shall have no alternative but to stand up in self-respect and say to the world: You won't force South Africans to commit national suicide.

Leave South Africa to the South Africans and with God's help our country can go forward in faith.

## SOURCES

- 1. S.E.D. Brown in *The South African Observer* no. 4/87, p.15 (P.O. Box 2401, 0001 Pretoria)
- Quoted from Wer regiert die Welt? Verlag Diagnosen, Untere Burghalde 51, D-7250 Leonberg
- 4. Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope A History of the World in our Time, (1966, MacMillan, N.Y.)
- Ivor Benson, Behind the Scene, p. 2 (1976, Dolphin Press Pty Ltd, P.O. Box 332, 3600 Pinetown, South Africa)
- Diagnosen no. 1/86, p. 26 (for address see 2.)
- 7. *Diagnosen* no. 11/86, p. 46 (for address see 2.)
- South Africa, International Bone of Contention (1979, Maskew Miller Ltd. Cape Town, South Africa)
- 11. Die Afrikaner, 11.2.87, quoted in Vox Africana no. 29 4/87
- 12. South Africa, International Bone of Contention (see 9.)
- Profile, Black Socio-Economic Development (1986, Bureau for Information, Pretoria)
- 14. Bulletin, Vol. 26, 4/86, p. 56 (Africa Institute of South Africa, P.O. Box 630, 0001 Pretoria)
- Bulletin, Vol. 26, 4/86, p. 3 (Africa Institute of South Africa, supplement "Economic Interdependence in Southern Africa" (see 14)
- 18. South Africa, International Bone of Contention (see 9.)
- ibid.
- 20. Africa Insight, Vol. 13, no. 1/83, p. 25 (Africa Institute of South Africa) (see 14.)
- 21. Pretoria News 15.10.80, quoted in Africa Insight, Vol. 13, 1/83, p. 26 (see 14.)
- 22. Vox Africana, no. 28, 12/86, p. 7 (see 8.)
- 23. *Africa Insight*, Vol. 13, no. 1/83, p. 26 (see 14.)
- 24. Bulletin, Vol. 25, no. 5/85, p. 59 (see 14.)
- 27. Signposts, Vol. 6, no. 2/87 (P.O. Box 26148, 0007 Arcadia, Pretoria)
- Die unchristliche Kampagne von Misereor gegen Südafrika, p. 72, quoted from Deutschland magazine no. 3/83 (Verlag Claus Peter Clausen, D-4780 Lippstadt, Postfach 1327)
- 29. Southern African Facts Sheet, no. 54, Dec. 83 (see 26.)
- Quoted from The Citizen 2.4.87
- 32. *Mining Survey* no. 3/4 1983 (Chamber of Mines of South Africa, P.O. Box 809, Johannesburg 2000)
- The Aida Parker Newsletter no. 45/1984 p. 4 (P.O. Box 91059, Auckland Park, Johannesburg 2006)
- Reader's letter to The Citizen Feb./March 1987
- 36. South African Panorama no. 170 Feb. 1987, p. 20 (Bureau for Information, 228 Church Street, Pretoria 0002)
- 37. Ivor Benson: *The Battle for South Africa*, p. 3 (1979, Dolphin Press Pty Ltd, P.O. Box 3145, Durban, South Africa)
- 38. Südafrika informiert, Heft Nr. 12/83 (Information Service of the South African Embassy, Auf der Hostert 3, D-5300 Bonn)
- 39. Diagnosen no. 12/1986 p. 49 (see 2.)
- 40. Southern African Facts Sheet no. 50, Aug. 1983 (see 26)
- 41. Vox Africana no. 30, June 1987 (see 8.)
- 42. Welt am Sonntag, special edition May/June 1986
- Antony C. Sutton: The War on Gold (1977, Valiant Publishers, Pty Ltd. P.O. Box 78236, Sandton 2146, South Africa)
- 44. Quoted from Pretoria News 22.6.87
- 45. Die unchristliche Kampagne von Misereor gegen Südafrika, p. 29 (see 28.)
- Heinrich Jordis Lohausen in Entscheidung im Süden der Umweg über die Dritte Welt, quoted from Nation Europa Heft 1/2, Jan./Feb. 1986 (Postfach 2554, D-8630 Coburg)
- Eustace Mullins: Die Bankierverschwörung (1980, Verlag für ganzheitliche Forschung/Verlag für biologische Sicherheit, D-2251 Wobbenbüll)
- 48. Gary Allen: *Die Insider*, p. 48 (1974, Verlag für angewandte Philosophie, Wiesbaden)
- 49. ibid. p. 48
- Arch E. Roberts: Victory Denied (1966, Howes at Oak Publishing, Fort Collins, Colo. 80521, USA)
- 52. ibid. p. 93
- 53. ibid. p. 93
- 54. Carroll Quigley: *Tragedy and Hope A History of the World in our Time*, p. 950 (see 4.)
- The Aida Parker Newsletter (Pty) Ltd, P.O. Box 91059 Auckland Park, Johannesburg 2006
- 57. Memo-Press no. 4/85, published by Emil Rahm, CH-8215 Hallau
- 58. Des Griffin: *Wer regiert die Welt?* p. 222 (1984, Verlag Diagnosen, Leonberg)
- Aida Parker: Secret US War against South Africa, p. 68 (1977, SA Today (Pty) Ltd, Nedbank East City, 120 End Street, Johannesburg 2001
- 60. Gary Allen: Die Insider, p. 127 (see 48.)
- 61. Diagnosen no. 2/86, p. 30 (see 2.)
- 62. Des Griffin, *Die Herrscher*, p. 165 (1980, C.O.D.E. Verlagsanstalt, FL-9490 Vaduz/Lichtenstein)
- 63. Arch E. Roberts in *Victory Denied*, p. 36, and Gary Allen in *Say No To the New World Order*, p. 49
- 64. Des Griffin: Die Herrscher, p. 168 (see 62.)
- 65. South African Opinion, Sept. 1978, p.67
- Psychological Strategies, Publication no. 21 (Institute for Strategic Studies, University of Pretoria)
- 67. Arch E. Roberts: Victory Denied, p. 64 (see 50.)
- Antony C. Sutton: How the Order Creates War and Revolution (Veritas Publishing Co. (Pty) Ltd, P.O. Box 20, Bullsbrook, Western Australia 6084)
- 70. ibid. p. 77
- 72. Douglas Reed: The Controversy of Zion (1978, Dolphin Press) (see 37.)
- 73. ibid. pp 213/214
- 76. ibid. pp 11/12
- 77. ibid. p. 13
- 78. S.E.D. Brown in *Diagnosen* no. 6/84 p. 10 (see 2.)
- 79. S.E.D. Brown in *Diagnosen* no. 7/86 p. 53 (see 2.)
- 80. ibid. p. 53
- 81. ibid. p. 53
- 82. Gary Allen: *The Rockefeller File* (1976, '76 Press, P.O. Box 2686, Seal Beach, Calif. 90740, USA)
- 83. *The Aida Parker Newsletter* no. 49, 29.1.85 (see 33.)
- 84. The Aida Parker Newsletter no. 46, 4.12.84 (see 33.)
- 86. Quoted from The Citizen 19.8.87
- 88. Andrey Shuey: *The Testing of Negro Intelligence*, 2nd edition 1966, New York (quoted from *Race and Reality*, p. 46 (see 87.)
- 90. Des Griffin: *Die Absteiger Planet der Sklaven*, p. 346 (1981, C.O.D.E.-Verlagsanstalt, 9490 Vaduz/Lichtenstein)
- 92. Des Griffin: Die Absteiger Planet der Sklaven, p. 342 (see 90.)
- 93. Warum Völkervermischung?, p. 35/36 (Hugin-Gesellschaft für Politisch-Philosophische Studien e.V., D-5802 Wetter 4, Postfach 13)
- 95. Des Griffin: Die Absteiger Planet der Sklaven, p. 343 (see 90)
- 96. Warum Völkervermischung? p. 17 (see 93.)
- 98. Warum Völkervermischung? p. 10 (see 93)
- 100. Des Griffin: Die Absteiger Planet der Sklaven, p. 344 (see 90.)
- 101. Henning von Löwis of Menar: Der Afrikanische Nationalkongress (ANC) Moskaus Speerspitze gegen Südafrika, p. 3 (1987, Schriftenreihe, Heft 40, Deutsche Afrika-Stiftung, Heussallee 40, D-5300 Bonn 1)
- 102. ibid. p. 7
- 103. Chris Vermaak: *The Red Trap* (Johannesburg 1966, pp. 27 ff.) (quoted from *Der Afrikanische Nationalkongress (ANC)* Heft 40, p. 8) (see 101.)
- 104. Der bewaffnete Kampf der Völker Afrikas für Freiheit und Unabhängigkeit, pub. Institut für Militärgeschichte des Ministeriums für Verteidigung der UdSSR/Afrika-Institut der Akademie der Wissenschaften der UdSSR, Berlin (DDR) 1981, p. 317 (quoted from Der Afrikanische Nationalkongress (ANC), Heft 40, p. 10 (see 101.)
- 105. ibid. p. 11
- 106. ibid. p. 11
- Talking with the ANC, 1986, Bureau for Information, Private Bag X745, Pretoria 0001
- 109. *The Aida Parker Newsletter* (85/1986) special German issue by the Hilfskomitee Südliches Afrika e.V., D-8630 Coburg, Postfach 851
- UcaNEWS 20/85, press release by United Christian Action, P.O. Box 35737, Menlo Park 0102, South Africa
- 111. UcaNEWS 1/86 of 1.1.1986 (see 110.)
- 113. UcaNEWS 10/85 of 19.6.85, p. 2 (see 110.)
- 114. ibid. p. 2
- 118. D. Scarborough: Gospel Defence League, Nov. 1987 (P.O. Box 17007, Regent Road, Cape Town 8061)
- 120. ibid. p. 44
- 121. ibid. p. 44
- 122. ibid. p. 47
- 124. ibid. pp. 30/31
- 126. UcaNEWS 11/86 of 21.5.86 (see 110.)
- 127. Kairos Document pp 11/12, quoted from *Vox Africana* no. 30, June 1987 (see 8.)
- 128. P.G. Kauffenstein: *proTEST* no. 5/1987, p. 14 (see 125.)
- 129. UcaNEWS 5/87 of 4.3.87, p.1 (see 110)
- 130. ibid. p. 2
- 132. Code no. 3/88, p. 29 (Verlag Diagnosen) (see 2.)
- 133. UcaNEWS 21/87 of 9/11/87 (see 110.)
- 134. ibid.
- 135. South Africa: Prospects for Revolution, p. 4 (special report from Martin Springs's South African Newsletter)
- 136 *The South African Question:* resolution adopted by the Executive Committee of the Communist International in the year 1928 (quoted in Deutsche Afrika-Stiftung, Heft Nr. 40, p. 40)

|  | \_ |  |  |
|---|---|---|---|
|  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |

| We shall shortly be issuing a fortnightly newsletter edited by Klaus D. Vaqué which will keep you up to date on the confidential backgrounds and developments in church, politics and economics. |
|---|
| If you would like to receive a free copy of this information service with no obligation, please send us your name and address on this card. |
| NAME: |
| ADDRESS: |
|  |

| NAME: |  |
|---|---|
| ADDRESS: |  |
|  |  |
|  | POSTAL CODE: |
|  |  |
|  |  |
|  |  |
|  |  |
|  |  |
|  |  |
|  |  |

The turbulent events of recent years, the one-sided reporting and the concerted worldwide onslaught on South Africa have aroused the suspicion in an increasing number of people that there must be some mysterious forces at work here that are steering the course of events and are responsible for the unrests and widespread confusion. In bewilderment it is not only many South Africans who are asking: WHAT does all this mean, and WHO is behind it?

This book attempts to make it clear that the history of South Africa towards the end of the twentieth century shows all the marks of a continuation of the betrayal and conspiratorial machinations of an international power group, which was responsible for the outbreak of the Anglo-Boer War in 1899. The book reveals what forces and manipulators lurk behind the total onslaught against South Africa. It explains what aims and objectives are linked with the overthrow of "white South Africa", throws light on the vital global-strategic rôle of the country and unmasks the conspiracy that has stamped its impress on the whole course of this century and is directed to the achievement of a so-called "New World Order" and the establishment of a totalitarian World Government.

The author has not hesitated to tackle controversial subjects. He describes "apartheid" and "racism" from the point of view of a German immigrant in the light of South African realities and presents a picture of South Africa such as has seldom if ever before been shown.

![](https://samisdat.in/user/pages/03.books/1989%20-%20Plot%20Against%20South%20Africa/read/_page_250_Picture_4.jpeg?g-16018011)

Klaus Dieter Vaqué was born in Kolberg in the eastern German province of Pomerania in 1940. At the end of the war he fled with his mother and sister to the west. Studied and trained in Hamburg at the Higher Commercial College for the foreign trade and international banking business. Lived in Denmark for 16 years. Built up his own successful firms in Sweden, Norway and Denmark. In 1977 emigrated with his family to South Africa. There he soon became involved in the vortex of political turmoil. In addition to his business activities he interested himself in Church matters. Though a "newcomer" he was quickly elected an elder to the Church Council of the largest Germanspeaking Evangelical-Lutheran congregation in the country. Co-founder of several conservative-Christian organizations and for two years chairman of one such society. As a result of many years' study of the backgrounds to world politics, Klaus Vaqué endeavours to draw the attention of his fellow men to the imperilled future.

---

## Navigation

- Parent: [The Plot Against South Africa (1989) by Klaus D. Vaque](https://samisdat.in/books/the-plot-against-south-africa-1989.md)