Sunday, January 27, 2008

South Africa - Civil War or Peaceful split?

South Africa - Civil War or Peaceful split?

South Africa - Civil war or Peaceful split?
By Mike Smith – Cape Town 9 December 2007

Watching the current power struggle within the ANC, it is clear that the party can no longer exist in its current form after the Polokwane conference or in the run-up to the 2009 elections. A split is inevitable. This will be no peaceful divorce. The split will be messy and we will see similar scenes as that of the early ‘90s; Xhosas against Zulus, Communism against Tribal Nationalism, basically one big orgy of violence and death.

In the early ‘90s the white population of South Africa was mostly excluded from this fight and it was only the army and police who actually got involved trying to keep the sides separate. This time around it will be different. Whites will be sucked into this future conflict and it will be during this time that we might see the Afrikaners reclaiming their two Boer Republics. The Zulu’s will claim KwaZulu Natal and the Cape Coloureds along with some liberal whites will claim the Cape. This break-up of South Africa is a serious possibility if we look at some examples.

The first example is the former Yugoslavia, an artificially created Kingdom since 1918 and an artificially created Socialist state since 1943, until its breakup in 1991. Yugoslavia today are split up into six independent countries and two autonomous provinces and it serves as an example of what happens when different races, cultures and religions are forced together in the name of multiculturalism, diversity and “Nation building”. It is artificial and it cannot last!

We further saw in Yugoslavia that the Communist never give up land or grants a people autonomous rule without a fight. The various freedom wars were bloody and the conflicts are still not fully solved, as can be noted in Kosovo.

A bloody civil war is not always the answer. Are there examples of countries that have had peaceful splits? Yes certainly.

Norway peacefully separated from Sweden in 1905. Norway's growing dissatisfaction with the union with Sweden during the late 19th century combined with nationalism prompted the dissolution of the union. After a national referendum confirmed the people's preference for a monarchy over a republic, the Norwegian government offered the throne of Norway to the Danish Prince Carl and Parliament unanimously elected him king. He took the name of Haakon VII, after the medieval kings of independent Norway. Today the relationship between Norway and Sweden is better than it ever was when they were in a union.

Czechoslovakia is another example. In February 1948 the Communists seized power, winning an electoral victory in May. The country was divided into 19 regions and, in 1960, into 10 regions plus Prague and Bratislava. During the 1960’s there were some uprisings and calls for democratic change, but in 1968 the USSR sent 600,000 troops to brutally suppress these demonstrations and return rule to the orthodox line.

Influenced by events elsewhere in Eastern Europe, a series of initially student-led pro-democracy rallies were held in Prague in November 1989. The 10 million Czechs saw economic reform as more important than State reform, which was high on the priority list of the 5 million Slovaks. Instead of fighting and blocking each other, the Czechs and the Slovaks decided that a split would be in the best interest of both sides. Many people who were opposed to the split, said that it would be catastrophic, but it went smoothly. Buildings in the Czech part were given to the Czechs and those in Slovakia to the Slovaks. Moving assets and debt were split up evenly and the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic became sovereign states on 1 January 1993.

Recently we have seen the creation of the Scottish parliament, giving the Scots more self rule and it might even lead to an independent Scotland in the future. I certainly will not rule that possibility out.

In Belgium we see the Dutch speaking Flemish wanting to break away from the French speaking Wallonians. The Flemish are economically stronger than the Wallonians and so strong is the cultural and language divide between these two groups, that less than one percent of all Belgium marriages are between Flemish and Wallonians; this in a country where these two groups are both white and Christian. People there say that the split is coming soon, it is only a matter of time and the fuse of the powder keg is burning ever shorter. I certainly hope that the split will be a peaceful one.

If we now turn our attention to South Africa, it is only logical to deduce that South Africa will go the same way as Yugoslavia. South Africa was also artificially created in 1910. The two British colonies of the Cape and Natal along with the two former Boer Republics of the ZAR and the Orange Freestate, were forced together into the Union of South Africa and former autonomous states were reduced to mere provinces. When the ANC took over, they made it nine provinces and artificially created what Mandela refers to as “The Rainbow Nation”. South Africa has nine official languages and fourteen major tribes or ethnic groupings, each with its own distinct culture, traditions and religion. It is madness to think that these groups will live “peacefully” together for much longer. The Marxist, terrorist ANC’s policies of multiculturalism and ethnic diversity is a ticking nuclear time bomb, let alone a burning fuse on a powder keg.

My prediction is that the break up of South Africa will start in KwaZulu-Natal with some student uprisings. The Zulus want to be independent; next will follow the two Boer Republics and lastly the Cape. It is during this time that other smaller nations will also claim independence and new borders will be defined.

A peaceful split would definitely be in the best interest of all, but somehow I do not think it will be possible; not as long as the Communists are in control of South Africa.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Zechariah 14

10And from Geba to Rimmon in the Negeb, all the land shall turn into a plain; but Jerusalem shall remain exalted in its place. From the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate; and from the Tower of Hananel to the king's wine presses,
they shall occupy her. Never again shall she be doomed; Jerusalem shall abide in security.
And this shall be the plague with which the LORD shall strike all the nations that have fought against Jerusalem: their flesh shall rot while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall rot in their sockets, and their tongues shall rot in their mouths.
On that day there shall be among them a great tumult from the LORD: every man shall seize the hand of his neighbor, and the hand of each shall be raised against that of his neighbor.

woord vir die dag ...........................gee net so 6 maande
Judah also shall fight against Jerusalem. The riches of all the surrounding nations shall be gathered together, gold, silver, and garments, in great abundance.
Similar to this plague shall be the plague upon the horses, mules, camels, asses, and upon all the beasts that are in those camps.
All who are left of all the nations that came against Jerusalem shall come up year after year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to celebrate the feast of Booths.
If any of the families of the earth does not come up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, no rain shall fall upon them.
And if the family of Egypt does not come up, or enter, upon them shall fall the plague which the LORD will inflict upon all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the feast of Booths.
This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the feast of Booths.
On that day there shall be upon the bells of the horses, "Holy to the LORD." The pots in the house of the LORD shall be as the libation bowls before the altar.
And every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holy to the LORD of hosts; and all who come to sacrifice shall take them and cook in them. On that day there shall no longer be any merchant in the house of the LORD of hosts.

Saturday, January 5, 2008

Zuma: 'n geleentheid vir die Afrikaner?

Zuma: 'n geleentheid vir die Afrikaner? PDF Druk Epos
Geskryf deur Dan Roodt
Woensdag, 19 Desember 2007

ImageTeen dié tyd weet almal dat Jacob Zuma die ANC-leierskapsverkiesing loshande gewen het met 2 329 stemme teenoor Mbeki se 1 505. Die Zuma-faksie het ook skoonskip gemaak sover dit die res van die hoogste posisies in die party betref.

Dat Zuma daarin geslaag het om Mbeki te klop, is geen geringe prestasie nie. Immers geniet Mbeki die steun van die sakewêreld, die media, die koloniale mag Brittanje wat hom oor die afgelope jare konstant met Suid-Afrika bemoei, asook die oorblyfsels van die vorige Afrikaner-establishment in die vorm van Nasionale Pers, Marthinus van Schalkwyk en die Afrikanerbond. Een van die segsmanne van dié groepering, prof. Willie Esterhuyse, het ʼn sleutelrol onder Mbeki gespeel om hom van inligting te voorsien oor hoe Afrikaners beter verdeel en verdruk kon word.

Met Zuma se verkiesing betree die land ʼn nuwe, potensieel stormagtige fase. Terwyl Zuma oor die afgelope jaar of twee uitgereik het na Afrikaners, is sy oorwinning egter ook verseker deur die linkse faksie in die vorm van Cosatu, die ANC-jeugliga en die SAKP. Watter invloed die linkse faksie oor hom uitoefen, is in dié stadium nog onseker.

Vanuit die buiteland gaan daar groot druk op Zuma toegepas word om nie te veel aan Suid-Afrika se ekonomiese beleid te torring nie. As ons praat van die buiteland, dan is dit veral Groot Brittanje wat sal poog om soos altyd in die verlede ons binnelandse beleid te beïnvloed om Britse belange voorop te stel.

Die mynhuise word hoofsaaklik uit Londen beheer en dus sal Brittanje wil sien dat mynwinste en –produksie nie geraak word nie. Daarteenoor staan Brittanje, asook die vele Britse nie-regeringsorganisasies wat in die land bedrywig is, radikale grondhervorming voor sodat Afrikanerboere finaal van hul eiendom ontneem kan word. Soos mnr. Willie Lewies van die TLU dit al so dikwels gestel het, sal die grondlose Afrikaner in daardie geval ʼn “swerwersvolk” word.

Die Boer-Britstryd gaan dus onder Zuma se presidentskap voortduur en afhangend van wie se kant hy kies, sal Afrikaners dit moet ontgeld, aldan nie. Vanweë die feit dat Brittanje, asook die VSA, tot dusver die Mbeki-faksie geondersteun het, wil dit voorkom asof Afrikaners darem ʼn billike kans staan om invloed op ʼn Zumaregering uit te oefen. Sodoende kan ons boere, asook Afrikaanse onderwys en kultuur, van die gewisse ondergang gered word waarvoor hulle onder Mbeki bestem was.

Op Pietersburg was die ANC duidelik sterk verdeel tussen die Zuma- en Mbeki-faksies. Die vraag is nou: kan die ANC in die afsienbare toekoms in twee skeur? Myns insiens is dié moontlikheid glad nie uitgesluit nie. Die Mbeki-faksie het nog glad nie gaan lê ná die bloedneus by die partykongres nie. Hulle beheer nog steeds die staatsapparaat en mag dit gebruik om Zuma nog verder in hofsake vas te draai of hom selfs tronk toe te stuur. In so ʼn geval sal die Zuma-faksie waarskynlik tot revolusionêre optrede in die vorm van massa-aksie, betogings en selfs die bestorming van die Uniegebou oorgaan om die Mbeki-faksie uit die kussings te lig.

Soos gesê, geniet Mbeki steeds die steun van Brittanje en kan die Britte via hul magtige media en hul intelligensiediens allerlei planne bedink om Zuma uit die weg te ruim, letterlik of figuurlik.

Wat Afrikaners egter moet besef, is dat die volgende twee jaar aan ons geleenthede bied om te midde van die grootskaalse verdeeldheid in ANC-geledere, asook die Britte wat beheer begin verloor, ons belange te bevorder en moontlik selfs terug te keer na die politieke spel in Suid-Afrika.

Hoewel hy taamlik onvoorspelbaar is en te eniger tyd ʼn ommeswaai kan maak, is die populistiese Zuma ʼn interessante figuur in die SA politiek. Anders as Mandela of Mbeki, word hy nie soos ʼn marionet vanuit Engeland beheer nie en geniet hy steun op voetsoolvlak en veral onder Zoeloes. Hy is die spreekwoordelike swart Piet in die pak kaarte wat die spel deurmekaar kan krap.

Ons Afrikaners moet nou begin saamstaan en kyk of ons nie hier ʼn paar kastaiings uit die vuur kan krap nie. Reeds meer as ʼn jaar gelede het ʼn klein groepie van ons die versiendheid gehad om te sien dat daar ʼn magsverskuiwing aan die kom was en het daarom vroegtydig met Zuma gesprek begin voer. Hierdie gesprekke moet voortgaan en ons moet probeer om in ruil vir Afrikanersteun toegewings van Zuma te verkry, veral indien hy onder druk van die Mbeki-faksie, die Britte, asook Groot Besigheid in Suid-Afrika, sou kom.

Die logika van “my vyand se vyand is my vriend” wil hê dat Zuma die Afrikaner se vriend is. Dit mag ook wees dat die Afrikaner-Zoeloe-alliansie waaroor daar al jare lank in regse Afrikanerkringe gedroom word, met Zuma se hulp tot stand kan kom.

So iets sal egter slegs gebeur indien Afrikaners met verbeelding, intelligensie en vasberadenheid begin optree.