“Saint” Mandela? Not So Fast!
President Barack Obama has compared him to George Washington. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews heralded him as “perhaps the world’s greatest hero.”
The Las Vegas Guardian Express dispensed with the “perhaps,” declaring in headline: “Nelson Mandela World’s Greatest Hero.”
Others have christened him “the greatest man of the 20th century.” Many revere him as “the savior” of South Africa. School children worldwide read books, write essays and sing songs about him, and watch movies extolling his virtues and heroic accomplishments.
As we write, the 94-year-old Mandela has been hovering near death for days, the subject of hourly news updates and the beneficiary of tearful prayer vigils worldwide. With the announcement of his death, the eulogies will soon be sounding and in his honor innumerable streets, highways, schools, stadiums, parks, and public buildings will be renamed.
For the past three decades, Nelson Mandela has been swathed in global media adulation unlike any other human being in history. No pope, president, king, war hero, movie star, or rock star can boast of having been the beneficiary of such undiluted, unalloyed, and unbroken acclaim. It is common for totalitarian dictators to employ their state-controlled media to create a worshipful cult of personality about themselves — Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Fidel Castro, Kim Il-sung — but outside of their countries there are usually journalists and media organs that will report their crimes, failings, and misdeeds. Mandela has not had to worry about dirty laundry; he is the first individual to achieve a near-universal cult of personality on the global level, thanks entirely to the unparalleled glorification campaign bestowed upon him by the major media in the United States and Europe.
As we reported in 1990 regarding his world tour that year, following his release from prison, his media saturation coverage (and infatuation coverage) was unprecedented — and has not been matched by anyone since. He has received the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom from the United States, the Lenin Peace Prize from the Soviet Union, and numerous other honors from countries, universities, and institutions.
What is it about Nelson Mandela the man that justifies this global adoration? To be sure, his mien contributes; he is tall, dignified, and statesman-like in appearance, gracious in public speech, and grandfatherly in tone. He does not exude the radical, self-promotional hucksterism of, say, Al Sharpton, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, or the ANC’s current head, Jacob Zuma. And, yes, he served many years in prison, but not merely for opposing injustice and racism, as his legions of hagiographers would have us believe. He was a leader of the African National Congress (ANC), an organization designated a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department and many governments and intelligence agencies. He was also a co-founder of the ANC’s Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation), a militant terrorist group within a terrorist group. He was tried and convicted for his terrorist and subversive activities within those organizations (more on which in a moment).
Countless thousands of genuine prisoners of conscience, who have never done anything more “criminal” than praying, or speaking out against tyranny, are languishing in prisons all across the planet without so much as a peep of protest from the legions of Mandela worshipers and his chorus of media promoters. How many of those praising Mandela as the world’s moral compass have ever heard of Ignatius Cardinal Kung, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Shanghai, who was imprisoned in Communist China for 33 years, most of it overlapping the same period in which Mandela was in prison? Cardinal Kung’s heroic incarceration was in many ways more severe than that faced by Mandela, but no media love-fest awaited him when he was released in 1988. Ditto for Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, a black Cuban physician who was released from Fidel Castro’s prison system in 2011 after brutal captivity for the “crime” of criticizing the island’s communist regime. But did Nelson Mandela chastise his comrades in Beijing and Havana when he visited there, or did he bring up the plight of the countless political and religious prisoners in their gulags? If so, there is no public record of it, though there is plenty on record of him praising those oppressive regimes.
Mandela: Communist, Terrorist, Liar
This leads us directly to one of the most important issues concerning Nelson Mandela: Was he a Communist with a capital “C,” meaning a disciplined member of the Communist Party, which, in this case means the South African Communist Party (SACP)? In the 1958 treason trial, Nelson Mandela denied being a member of the SACP, a denial he has repeated many times since, and has maintained to the end. His defenders fall into two general categories on this issue, those who believe his denial and those who say, in effect, “So what? What does it matter if he was/is a Communist?”
Those who say they believe his denial must ignore an overwhelming mountain of evidence to the contrary, much of which has been available for decades and much which has only recently come to light from: previously unavailable SACP records; government archives of Communist countries; memoirs and biographies of, and interviews with, SACP and ANC members of the period.
Those who say “So what?” to the question of Mandela’s membership in the SACP must ignore the well established facts that show:
- The SACP was, and remains, a hardcore Marxist-Leninist organization in which all members must pledge unquestioned obedience to the will of the Party, as determined by its Central Committee;
- The SACP took its direction from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), and, as such, was an agent of a hostile foreign power;
- SACP members, including Mandela, secretly took control of the ANC, pushing aside and sabotaging ANC leaders committed to reform and change through peaceful, political means;
- ANC and its terrorist arm, Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), which was also controlled by the SACP, were trained in Soviet Russia and Red China, or in Communist “Frontline States” — Zambia, Angola, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zimbabwe — by Soviet, Chinese, East German, Cuban, Czech, and other Communist instructors;
- The SACP-controlled ANC and MK exploited the conditions of apartheid, racism and colonialism not to help South African blacks, but to further the objectives of the Soviet Union and the world Communist conspiracy;
- The SACP-controlled ANC and MK used the Communist-provided training and arms to direct their terror, torture, and murder against South Africa’s black majority even more often than against the white minority;
- If Mandela was not only a Communist Party member, but also a top SACP leader — which the evidence irresistibly shows he was — then he is not only a colossal and persistent liar, but he is all the more culpable in the innumerable acts of terror, torture, and murder committed by ANC mobs and MK cadres over the past several decades;
- Mandela has bequeathed South Africa a one-party state ruled by the increasingly tyrannical and kleptocratic ANC/SACP, which is leading the country down the path toward economic destruction, record-level violent crime, chaos, and genocide.
The coming wave of terror and genocide
The last point mentioned above is especially relevant, since the ostensible purpose of the ANC/SACP revolution was to ameliorate the plight of the disadvantaged black population. Instead, they are transforming what was by far the most prosperous state in Africa (and the one to which black Africans were fleeing to escape Red/black oppression, despite South Africa’s apartheid system then in place) into a corrupt despotism with: squashing of dissent; looting of the treasury by top government officials; sky-high unemployment; increasing poverty and homelessness; some of the world’s highest rates of murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, car-jacking; and the world’s highest HIV/AIDS infection rates.
Resolving the issue of Mandela’s role in the SACP is all the more important when viewed in its proper historical context, which is in the context of the Cold War and the Soviet’s aggressive campaigns in the Third World through “wars of national liberation.” During that period the Communists were killing tens of millions of their own subjects in what Professor R. J. Rummel calls “democide,” or mass murder by government.
Dr. Rummel, who has painstakingly catalogued the top 15 of the mega-murderer regimes, puts the number of their victims during the 20th century at a conservative estimate of more than 151 million — and that was only up to 1987. The vast majority of those were slaughtered by Communist regimes that claimed to be the forces of “liberation.” A significant portion of that slaughter took place in Africa by those same forces of liberation. And it hasn’t ended. In fact, as we have reported, the stark ominous signs, as cited by genocide experts, are that the ANC is preparing to unleash a Communist-style genocide campaign in the “Rainbow Nation” against the remaining white population (see here and here) that will surely also be directed against Indians, Chinese, and millions of blacks.
The genocide campaign against white South Africans has already been underway for several years, but has not yet reached the all-out intensity of the slaughter stages witnessed in Rwanda, Burundi, or Sierra Leone. But that time may be coming soon, and if it does, Nelson Mandela will have helped to launch it. Chilling video footage of Mandela singing an ANC/MK genocide song about killing whites belies the sainted image.
Similarly, in another stunning video, Mandela’s longtime comrade in the ANC and the SACP (and current president of South Africa) Jacob Zuma, sings “Kill the Boer,” meaning kill the white farmer. Even more chilling than the words of the murderous song is the near frenzied behavior it stirs up in many of the assembled mob members. This is clearly incitement to genocide by the top members of South Africa’s ANC ruling regime, the same individuals who incessantly pose as peace advocates. (See both of the videos imbedded at the bottom of this article.)
Yet, the “hate speech” police in our media, who are quick to pounce on any real or fabricated racial or “homophobic” gaffe by politicians, celebrities, or common citizens, have hypocritically ignored the Mandela/Zuma genocide endorsements — or have attempted to exonerate them of any malice with lame excuses about the songs being mere cultural/political slogans.
But with the fires, violence, and chaos already burning in South Africa, these actions by the ANC’s most revered leaders are pouring gasoline on the fire. They are stoking a genocidal inferno. We have already seen what this will look like and it is horrible beyond the ability of words to convey. Videos of the ANC’s “necklacing” torture/executions have documented the kind of grotesque “justice” that is meted out by the comrades and minions of Mandela, Mbeki, and Zuma. In this unutterably vicious method of terror/murder the victim is seized by a howling mob, beaten, stabbed, stoned, and then, while still alive, has a tire soaked in petrol placed around his/her neck and set ablaze. It can take agonizing minutes for the unfortunate victim to die. (See videos of necklacing here and here).
Hundreds of victims, the vast majority of whom were black, were killed this way by ANC-led lynch mobs. Nelson Mandela’s second wife, Winnie Mandela, was caught on video infamously shouting to a huge mob: “With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country!” Despite this and the fact that she was convicted in court in the torture/murder of 14-year-old Stompie Moeketsi and found by the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission to be guilty in the kidnapping, torture, and murder of numerous men, women, and children, Winnie Mandela is free as a bird and still sits on the ANC’s Executive Committee. If Nelson Mandela and Jacob Zuma have any “moral authority,” it has not evidenced itself in the form of condemning and removing this murderess from the ANC’s highest body.
Necklacing is one of the ANC’s enduring “gifts” to humanity; it has been exported to Haiti, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Mexico, and many other countries. And, over the past couple of years, many news stories from South Africa report on its revival there.
Overwhelming evidence: guilty beyond reasonable doubt
The evidence that Nelson Mandela was a member of the South African Communist Party is so enormous that we will be able to detail only a tiny fraction of it. Dr. Henry R. Pike solidly established the record on this matter in 1985 with his 600-page monumental work, A History of Communism in South Africa, which is massively documented with many photographs and reproductions of official court records and SACP, ANC, and MK documents.
Important new evidence has been made available since 2012, with the publication of historian Stephen Ellis’ extraordinary book, External Mission: The ANC in Exile, 1960-1990. Dr. Ellis, a professor based at the Free University of Amsterdam is no conservative and no apologist for apartheid; he is a former researcher for Amnesty International and was a researcher on the Mandela-appointed Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa. In fact, he seems to bend over backwards to put the best slant possible on Mandela’s SACP involvement. Nevertheless, the facts speak for themselves — and they are damning. (For articles on and reviews of Dr. Ellis’ book see The New American here and The Telegraph (U.K.) here. A lengthy abstract of an article by Ellis surveying much of the material in External Mission is available here.
In addition, we now have many admissions against interest from interviews and articles over the past decade in the official Communist Party press and in the books and articles of Vladimir Shubin, a Soviet official who was stationed in South Africa for many years and played a key role in the Kremlin’s policies vis a vis South Africa and, more specifically, its aid to and direction of the SACP and the ANC.
In his book, ANC: A View from Moscow (Bellville, South Africa: Mayibuye, 1999), although Shubin is careful to still put the Kremlin spin on his revelations, he nonetheless confirms much of what anti-communist critics had long claimed (and which the so-called intellectuals and media mavens had long scorned), as well as providing details not previously in the public domain.
Here is a brief sampling of the mountainous record documenting Mandela’s long, conspiratorial role in the South African Communist Party:
- Among the evidence uncovered recently by Prof. Ellis are the official minutes of a secret 1982 SACP meeting at which veteran Party leader John Pule Motshabi explains to the comrades that Mandela has been a (secret) SACP member for two decades;
- Rowley Israel Arenstein, a lawyer and leading SACP member since the 1930s, said that Mandela was chosen by the SACP to create Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), and Mandela was the SACP’s main instrument in “hijacking” the ANC and marginalizing its longtime leader and president Albert Lithuli, an opponent of the SACP’s program of “liberation” through armed struggle.
- During the Rivonia Trial (October 1963-June 1964), Bruno Motolo, a black member of SACP, ANC and MK, provided devastating testimony of Mandela’s involvement in all three groups. Despite death threats, he later provided even more details in his memoir, Umkhonto we Sizwe: The Road to the Left;
- Other prominent SACP members that have publicly identified Mandela as a fellow Communist include Paul Trewhela,3 Joe Matthews, Hilda Bernstein and Brian Bunting;
- Paul Trewhela, an SACP member who was imprisoned (1964-1967) for his communist activities, and more recently assisted Prof. Ellis in his research in the archives of the Stasi (the KGB’s East German subsidiary), has said: “Mandela was indeed a member of the Central Committee of the South African Communist Party.”
- During the Rivonia Trial, more than 10 documents in Mandela’s handwriting were introduced into evidence, totaling hundreds of pages. One, entitled, “How to be a good communist,” stated: “Under communist rule, South Africa will become a land of milk and honey… In our country the struggle of the oppressed masses is led by the South African Communist Party and inspired by its policies.” He also wrote: “The people of South Africa, led by the South African Communist Party, will destroy capitalist society and build in its place socialism.”
- Mandela’s Rivonia documents also declared that “traitors and informers should be ruthlessly eliminated,” and he recommended “cutting off their noses” — among other barbarities — a tactic he had adopted from Algeria’s communist FLN terrorists and which he put into practice by MK;
- Mandela did not deny writing the damning material, but merely attempted to explain it away by claiming they were notes he had taken down for study purposes;
- A Rivonia trial surprise witness was Gerard Ludi, a top SACP member who was actually an infiltrator, Agent Q-018, for the Special Branch of the South African Police. Ludi provided detailed incriminatory evidence on the SACP’s leadership and illegal activities. He identified Mandela as “a top man in the central committee of the underground communist party.” Subsequent revelations have proven the reliability of Ludi’s testimony.
- In the category of a picture being worth a thousand words, one of the most striking images of Mandela is of him standing beneath a giant Communist hammer and sickle symbol (photo at left), side-by-side with Joe Slovo, top leader of the SACP — with both men delivering the communist clenched fist salute. Mandela declared: “I salute the South African Communist Party for its sterling contribution to the struggle for democracy.” It is worthy of note that this occurred not once, but many times, as Mandela and Slovo toured South Africa;
- Comrade Slovo, a Lithuanian-born Communist and a colonel in the Soviet KGB, was for decades one of Mandela’s closest associates in the SACP, ANC, and MK;
- Slovo himself stated, in his 1986 propaganda article, “The Sabotage Campaign”: “To constitute the High Command [of Umkhonto we Sizwe] the ANC appointed Mandela and the Party appointed me.” Since Mandela was himself a secret top member of the Party, this constitutes a admission that the SACP appointed and thereby controlled MK from the start.
So, Nelson Mandela was not only a SACP member, but a top Communist at that, a member of the ruling Central Committee. And not only that, but he was selected by his fellow top Communists to be the key Red who would launch the Kremlin-approved, Soviet-backed terror war against the South African government.
The ANC had begun as a non-communist organization, and, as a broad-based mass organization, always had many non-communist and anti-communist members. However, they were no match for the rigidly disciplined and conspiratorial SACP, which quickly infiltrated and took control. “The first real alliance between the ANC and the communists,” Dr. Pike wrote, “dates back to 1928, when E.J. Khalile, the ANC general-secretary, was elected to the SACP’s central committee. From this time onward, the alliance continued.” Albeit the alliance went through rocky periods when the non-communists tried to extricate themselves from the communist grip; but they never succeeded.
The new colonial masters: Moscow, Beijing, Havana
Here is a small sampling of the overwhelming evidence of the SACP’s ties to Moscow and Beijing and SACP’s decisive control over the ANC and MK:
- In 1960, top members of the SACP went to Moscow and Beijing for aid. In Beijing they met personally with dictator Mao Zedong and Den Xiaoping, Mao’s assistant and eventual successor. It was only with the blessings of the Kremlin and Mao that the SACP-led ANC launched their armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe. The meetings with Mao and Deng had not been public knowledge until revealed by Dr. Ellis’ research;
- Bartholomew Hlapane, a former member of the SACP Central Committee, testified in court: “All policy-making in the ANC was first discussed by the Central Committee of the Communist Party.” He also stated: “Umkhonto we Sizwe’s policy was formulated by the communist party and the organization received its instructions from this party.” For this and other testimony Hlapane and his wife were brutally murdered and their daughter shot and left paralyzed;
- In 1982, Jorge da Costa, a personal friend of Joe Slovo and the head of security for Communist Mozambique’s dictator Samora Machel, defected to South Africa, bringing irrefutable proof of the Soviet/SACP/ANC connection. Regarding the SACP’s Slovo, da Costa said: “There is no doubt in my mind that Slovo is behind every operation launched by the ANC against South Africa. He has a brilliant mind and is one of the best-informed people about this country.”;
- SACP general secretary Joe Slovo, a KGB colonel, was in regular touch with fellow KGB agents, such as Vasily Solodovnikov, the Russian ambassador to Zambia, through which Moscow directives were channeled to the SACP/ANC/MK;
- The World Peace Council, a KGB-directed international communist front organization, has been one of the ANC’s most durable allies and can claim much of the credit for organizing the decades-long “Free Mandela” media campaign that resulted in his release from prison;
- In his 2003 memoir, Nothing But the Truth: Behind the ANC’s Struggle Politics, SACP leader Benjamin Turok recalled “how easy it was for a small group like ours to exert much influence in the mass movement without giving away our existence.”
- In They Were Part of Us and We Were Part of Them: The ANC in Mozambique from 1976 to 1990, published in 2008, veteran ANC members reminisce on their experience. Among the many nuggets is an interview with Franny Rabkin and Ronnie Ntuli which contains this admission: Franny: “For us: We were Communists, and we were ANC.” Ronnie: “And so was everyone else.”
- Soviet official Vladimir Shubin wrote: “The Russian press has calculated that from 1963-1991, 1,501 ANC activists were trained in Soviet military institutions.” Thousands more were trained in the Frontline States. Communist veteran Gerald Horne, stated in Political Affairs, the official journal of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA): “There can be no doubt that the direct involvement of Soviet officers helped to raise the level of combat readiness of ANC armed units and, especially, of the organizers of the armed underground.”
- Mandela passed on control over the ANC and South Africa to Thabo Mbeki, his longtime comrade and a “former” SACP member. Mbeki subsequently lost out in a power struggle with another Mandela comrade and prison mate, Jacob Zuma, also a “former” SACP member, who is accelerating the ANC’s destructive policies as the current president of South Africa.
- Zuma has continued the Tripartite Alliance, the formal agreement among the ANC, SACP and COSATU, which guarantees that the SACP and the Communist-dominated COSATU will back the ANC as the Communist-run front group that runs South Africa.
- In 1998, at age 80, Mandela married for the third time, to Graca Machel, the widow of Mandela’s longtime ally, Samora Machel, the ruthless Communist dictator of the People’s Republic of Mozambique. Graca was a longtime member of FRELIMO, the communist terrorist organization run by her husband that took control of Mozambique in 1975. For more than a decade, she was a partner in Samora Machel’s vicious reign of murder and torture of men, women, and children, including even many of his FRELIMO comrades whom he turned against.
Media propagandists unfazed by the evidence
Again, we have barely scratched the surface. But the enormity of the damning evidence notwithstanding, the doyens of the Establishment chattering classes continue to sing the same pro-ANC, pro-Mandela rhapsodies and offer the same lame excuses. In a recent article in the New York Review of Books, Bill Keller, the former New York Times executive editor and the Times’ former bureau chief in Johannesburg, attempts to dismiss the communist commitment of SACP members with the assertion that “Most [SACP] members weren’t all that Communist.” Yes, goes the argument, they were merely a bunch of African nationalists dressing up their rhetoric with some Marxist ideology for effect. That was the argument Keller, the Times and their ilk would drag out time after time during the 1960s, ’70s, ’80s, and ’90s whenever a startling new revelation threatened to make it obvious that the ANC were not freedom fighters but instead a bunch of Kremlin-backed, bloodthirsty, communist thugs. South African author Rian Malan takes Keller to task, pointing out that among the many SACP veterans refuting Keller’s claim is Hilda Bernstein, friend of Slovo and wife of SACP Central Committee member Rusty Bernstein. “Joe and Rusty were hardline Stalinists,” she said in a 2004 interview. “Anything the Soviets did was right. They were very, very pro-Soviet.”
But Keller is unmoved. In a reply to letters to the editor from Malan and former SACP member Paul Trewhala, he dismisses their evidence and that of Prof. Ellis, saying he disagrees “that the alliance with the Communists damns the ANC as a Stalinist front. That is simply Red-baiting nonsense.”
It is virtually axiomatic that no matter how iron-clad the evidence presented, MSM “journalists” such as Keller will see any charges of communist conspiracy as “Red-baiting” and “McCarthyism.” And, conversely, no matter how contrived, flimsy and false the charges by leftists and communists against conservatives, anti-communists, pro-lifers, Christians, Tea Partiers, Birchers, military veterans, etc., the Kellers of the Fourth Estate will rush to give these smears credence. (See here, here, here, and here.)
Mayor Linda witnessed this dynamic in action in South Africa with a cruel vengeance during the 1960s-’90s, as the MSM joined the Communist press, not only in their glorification of the ANC, but also in viciously attacking (or completely ignoring) the moderate South African black leaders, many of whom had far larger constituencies and more legitimate claims to moral authority than Mandela and his ANC comrades. Those moderate leaders included: Zulu Chief Mangosuthu Bethelezi, who is also head of the Inkatha Freedom Party; Tomsanqa Linda, former mayor of Ibhayi township; Nelson Botile, former Mayor of Soweto; Bishop Lekganyane of the Zionist Christian Church; Bishop Isaac Mokoena, leader of the Reformed Independent Church Association, which claims a membership of four and one-half million members; Dr. Elijah Maswanganyi — and many others. Chances are good you never heard of any of them, or that you only heard nasty, negative things about them. But that wasn’t a matter of mere chance; it was according to a plan that was to insure that no serious challengers to Mandela and the ANC/SACP leadership would come to the fore. That same plan continues in place, guaranteeing that the thugs and thieves who are Mandela’s ANC heirs will remain in charge of South Africa.
Unsung Hero, Genuine Freedom Fighter:
Tomsanqa Linda pictured on U.S. Speaking tour. Despite serious dangers to himself and his family, Tomsanqa Linda, the mayor of Ibhayi Township (population 400,000) and president of the Eastern Province Council Association (representing 74 townships with a total population of nearly 14 million) came to America in 1990 for a national speaking and media tour to expose Nelson Mandela and the ANC. In city after city, he preceded by two or three days Nelson and Winnie Mandela’s triumphal tour. Although he was ignored by the national media, he reached millions of Americans with his powerful message through local television and radio news programs and talk shows. He was sponsored on this important national tour by The John Birch Society.
Photos of Nelson Mandela in this article: AP Images
After Nelson Mandela passed away on December 5, 2013, both the South African Communist Party and the African National Congress acknowledged in official statements that Mandela was a high-level member of the South African Communist Party. For an updated article about this admission after decades of denial, click here.
South African Communists’ Friends in High Places
Author: Alex Newman
Source: The New American – 05.11.2012
Related Article: The Real Mandela
The tragedy unfolding in South Africa as genocide and communism march onward should not be surprising. Such events may shock Americans who have relied on the establishment press for information, but that the once-prosperous nation would eventually sink to this point was easy to foresee even before the African National Congress (ANC) and South African Communist Party (SACP) alliance regime began to take over. The decades-old communist domination of the ANC was widely documented long before it came to power.
ANC leader and new South Africa’s first president Nelson Mandela was not persecuted for his “political” beliefs, the widely accepted myths about Mandela notwithstanding. He was actually put in jail for admitting that he planned sabotage to violently bring down the government and crush South Africa under communist rule. It was hardly a secret, though the Western establishment did its best to conceal the facts from the world.
“We communist party members are the most advanced revolutionaries in modern history,” Mandela proclaimed in a document later used when he was prosecuted for sabotage and treason. “The people of South Africa, led by the South African Communist Party, will destroy capitalist society and build in its place socialism.” In the 1980s, Mandela was repeatedly offered the opportunity to get out of prison if he would just renounce violence. He refused.
Meanwhile, the communist revolutionary’s wife at the time, Winnie Mandela, became notorious for endorsing brutal mob executions where tires filled with gasoline were placed around the victims’ necks and set ablaze – a savage tactic used by the predominantly black ANC against pro-government blacks before the new regime took power. The ghastly spectacle, known as “necklacing,” was aimed at punishing ANC opponents and dissuading other blacks from standing against it. “Together, hand-in-hand with our sticks of matches, with our necklaces we shall liberate this country,” Winnie declared.
The ANC, meanwhile, was listed as a terrorist group as late as 1988 by the U.S. Congress, which had previously documented its control by communist forces. “No major decision could be taken by the ANC without the concurrence and approval of the Central Committee of the South African Communist Party,” former ANC and SACP leader Bartholomew Hlapane testified before the U.S. Congress. Less than a year later, he and his wife were executed by an assassin using a Soviet-made AK-47.
Brought to Power
Despite what was already known about the ANC and the SACP, the ruling regime in South Africa has had friends in high places for decades – since long before it came to power, actually. Among the communist powers supporting the alliance were the regimes ruling the Soviet Union, Cuba, Libya, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe. Those forces and others, by helping to arm and train Marxist terrorist groups and front organizations, provided key “pressure from below” to force the South African government’s surrender.
When he was in the South African military decades ago, Andre Vandenberg, who now lives in the United States, learned a lot about the communist subversion behind the scenes. “We would attack a base and we would get ANC members, but when you get past that line of defense, you get into the Russians, East Germans, and Cubans,” he told The New American. When probed further, Vandenberg walked away and returned with binoculars. “These are binoculars I took off an East German,” he explained, pointing to the German writing. They were made in the East German city of Jena.
Communist powers alone, however, were not enough to bring the ANC and SACP to power. “All of the AK-47s, mortars, bombs, Soviet advisers, terrorist training camps, assassinations, demonstrations, and biased broadcasts of these revolutionists combined could not, of themselves, have brought about the transformation in South Africa of a vicious terrorist group and its titular head from the status of political outlaws to that of global cult heroes and de facto heads of state,” The New American’s William F. Jasper observed in a 1994 article entitled “Silk Tie Revolutionaries.”
To gain support for their cause, the ANC-communist axis exploited the issue of “apartheid,” which South Africa had adopted in 1948. Essentially, the idea behind apartheid, or “separate development,” was to allow the various “nations” in South Africa – European-descent Afrikaners, for example, and the 10 major African tribal groups such as the Zulu and the Venda, to develop their own institutions and eventually become sovereign nations. By the early 1980s, four African tribal groups had already achieved full sovereignty, with the others making progress.
Despite flaws and difficulties, apartheid was supported by many of South Africa’s ethnic and tribal groups, including, obviously, the Afrikaners (whites of mainly Dutch descent who lived in South Africa), who, after a devastating war against the British Empire, had a terrible but well-founded fear of total annihilation if they ever surrendered control over their own destiny. However, under the guise of fighting against “racist” apartheid, the bad elements of which were already being reformed, virtually the whole world joined forces against the South African government and the African tribes that supported it.
Aside from the openly communist powers, key to the ANC takeover were the United Nations, the World Council of Churches, the NAACP, and the Congressional Black Caucus. The international media and Hollywood, of course, helped immensely as well. Even more important, though, was the support provided by the highest echelons of the Western establishment (think David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger). Both men played a key role in bringing the South African government to its knees in the face of Marxist terror so the communist takeover could proceed.
In 1993, for example, banker and Council on Foreign Relations boss David Rockefeller hosted a dinner to honor Nelson Mandela and raise money for the ANC’s election. Then-ANC “Foreign Secretary” Thabo Mbeki, another communist who would later become president of South Africa, celebrated Rockefeller as a longtime friend who had “backed the ANC financially for more than a decade.”
Just before the elections that brought the ANC-SACP alliance to power, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and a team of “mediators” arrived in South Africa to “confer the Insiders’ benediction on Mandela and the ANC,” Jasper noted in his article. Prior to helping crush South Africa, Kissinger, one of the most fervent advocates of a “New World Order,” also helped destroy the anti-communist Rhodesian government by, among other tactics, isolating it from allies like the South African government. His work in Rhodesia paved the way for Marxist despot Robert Mugabe to enslave what became known as Zimbabwe. The nation is now starving to death.
From at least the 1950s onward, the U.S. government and other Western powers were frantically shoveling taxpayer money into communist groups in South Africa to install the ANC – again, applying pressure from below by fomenting unrest and empowering Marxist terrorists. The violent ANC offshoot known as the Pan-Africanist Congress, for example, was actually organized at the Johannesburg office of the U.S. Information Service in 1959.
According to a study by the Rand Afrikaans University’s Institute for American Studies, the Reagan State Department alone showered hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on pro-Soviet and pro-ANC groups in South Africa. The U.S. government directly contributed millions to specific Marxist terrorist groups in the region, many of which, like the ANC, had been formally designated as terror organizations. The South West Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO), for example, received about $4 million from American taxpayers between 1975 and 1978, according to a report by the South African Foreign Ministry. Western governments together provided some $80 million during that period.
The “pressure from above,” meanwhile, came from the international banking and corporate elite in the West, as well as its political front groups and governments. Among other sources, the Council on Foreign Relations and its international affiliates helped lead the charge, with the CFR proudly publicizing its 1990 visit by Mandela. Numerous other top figures in the ANC and the SACP were similarly honored and promoted by the CFR and its allies around the world.
Among the CFR operatives who put the cabal’s agenda for South Africa into effect were, of course, Kissinger, as well as numerous other top U.S. government officials. Multiple administrations from Carter to Clinton were also involved. President Reagan, despite vetoing a sanctions bill over disagreement with the “means,” declared a “national emergency” to “deal with” the alleged “extraordinary threat” posed by the pro-U.S. South African government.
At the same time, other Western governments were piling on the pressure as well, imposing brutal sanctions and painting the South African government – which likely had the best human-rights record on the continent despite oppressive race-based laws that were being reformed – as a demon to be eliminated. Communist regimes were doing the same thing. The time-tested “pincers” strategy ultimately prevailed.
In the face of a full-fledged assault by both the “Free World” and the world’s communist tyrants, the South African government capitulated. The ANC and the communists, virtually inseparable from each other, as even top ANC leaders admit, took power. Just as unbiased analysts warned, South Africa – once one of the most prosperous nations in the world for people of all colors – began marching full-speed down the bloody road to slavery and genocide.
Today, the ruling cabal in South Africa still has overwhelming support from what remains of the “Free World” and the totalitarian regimes enslaving the rest of it. Despite the genocide and growing unrest, socialist and communist-minded political parties from around the world gathered in Cape Town for the 24th Congress of the Socialist International in late August, openly associating with and celebrating a regime that is under fire for facilitating and encouraging genocide.
The immensely powerful coalition consists of numerous ruling political parties, including many from the developed world. In Cape Town, they concluded by adopting resolutions demanding more money from Western taxpayers, bigger and more powerful government at all levels, and, unsurprisingly, more socialism in the world. It should all be administered by a planetary socialist regime, the cabal declared.
“The Socialist International is now stronger than ever before,” the group boasted after the congress, sometimes referring to members as “comrades.” The gathering featured representatives from over 100 socialist and communist-minded political parties all over the world, ranging from the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and the Algerian National Liberation Front (FLN) to European social democrats and Latin American statist extremists.
South African President Jacob Zuma, the communist ANC chief who hosted the Congress and now sings songs calling for genocide against whites, was elected as “vice president” on the “Presidium” of the socialist alliance. His deputy president, Kgalema Motlanthe, told delegates there was a “global crisis of capitalism and imperialism.”
Zuma, meanwhile, blasted the alleged “fundamental contradictions in the capitalist system,” which he said needed to be addressed with “radical” so-called solutions. “We should emerge with radical positions and a radical agenda,” added the controversial leader, who in addition to being an admitted member of the Communist Party has in the past been officially charged with corruption and even rape. Zuma’s defense in the rape trial was that the victim was “clearly aroused,” as evidenced by her “quite short” kanga. “In the Zulu culture, you cannot just leave a woman if she is ready,” Zuma said.
During a speech at the socialist confab, Zuma said it was an honor to host the summit “bringing together progressive forces from around the world,” Socialist International reported. The polygamist ruler said the socialist alliance should respond to “inequality” and other problems (many, of course, caused by socialistic policies), with a “New Internationalism” and a “New Culture of Solidarity,” two main themes of the 24th Congress. He almost certainly did not sing about killing the Boers (the white farmers), as he does at ANC gatherings, but the communist message came through loud and clear.
The Socialist Congress also heaped adoration on the scandal-plagued United Nations. Former South African foreign minister and newly elected chairperson of the African Union Commission, Zuma’s ex-wife Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, for example, referred to the UN as “the greatest collective achievement of human kind” during her keynote speech. She spoke of the “importance of multilateralism,” claiming that “humanity” could find “solutions to common problems” if only the world’s largely totalitarian regimes would just “cooperate more.”
Also featured at the summit were speeches by representatives of the brutal communist dictatorship ruling mainland China and an assortment of other totalitarian regimes. “Vice-Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee” Liu Jieyi, for example, lectured assembled attendees on the “social democratic response to the financial crisis.” The communist regime ruling China has become increasingly influential throughout the whole continent, but especially in the new South Africa.
Delegates, meanwhile, celebrated the barbaric Chinese dictatorship’s growing influence on the world stage as part of the socialist-minded BRICS alliance (the socialist and communist rulers of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The alliance has repeatedly blasted the United States while calling for global governance and a new world currency.
Even while the ANC regime was celebrating world socialism with some of the most oppressive dictatorships on the planet, the U.S. government was propping it all up. The government of South Africa is now one of the top 10 recipients of American foreign aid worldwide, with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars flowing to the ANC-SACP regime since 1994. Well over $500 million in foreign assistance was handed out in 2009 just through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
Despite the fact that the South African government has been caught selling military equipment to the brutal Marxist despot ruling Zimbabwe, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hoped to increase the amount of American taxpayer dollars buying arms for the ANC regime. The U.S. government has been training its military officers, too.
“America will stand up for democracy and universal human rights even when it might be easier to look the other way,” Clinton said during an official visit to South Africa in August, seemingly oblivious to the twisted irony. Between dancing and lavishing praises on the ANC, the Secretary of State also found time to pledge billions more U.S. tax dollars to prop up the regime.
But the U.S. government is not alone in the West when it comes to celebrating South Africa’s ruling cabal amid genocide. In September, the European Union held a “summit” with the South African regime to celebrate the increasingly close bonds between the two entities, and to continue pushing for “global governance” while showering European taxpayers’ money on the ANC.
“This 5th EU-South Africa Summit will be a new milestone in our relationship with a key EU partner in Africa and on the global stage,” said European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, a former Maoist revolutionary who is now pushing to create what he called a “federation” in Europe. “Our bilateral cooperation is increasing in breadth and depth.”
Friends to the End
Considering the key role played by Western governments and elites in creating South Africa’s current problems, not to mention perpetuating them with never-ending foreign aid and support, it is hardly surprising that most of the world remains unaware of the nation’s plight. What occurred in Zimbabwe, or at least a general outline of it, is now well known. Mugabe’s brutality and mass murder have become impossible to conceal.
Fears that the same fate awaits South Africa, a nation rich with key minerals, are growing fast – but largely in the shadows. Activists and exiles say they are worried that if the world does not wake up soon, the looming genocide and total communist takeover of the nation may remain largely hidden, too.
With Western governments and the establishment continuing to aid and abet the ANC-SACP regime and its crimes, the final destruction of South Africa and the Afrikaner people may come sooner than anyone realizes. Whether the West will speak out before or even after catastrophe strikes, however, remains to be seen.
- Most famous members of the South African Communist Party Central Committee (topconservativenews.com)
- The Real Mandela (pilgrimpassing.com)
- Mandela one of the world’s communist greats – SACP confirms his membership (praag.org)
- Mandela has been sanitised by hypocrites and apologists | Seumas Milne (theguardian.com)
- Comrade Mandela’s Secret Life (trevorloudon.com)
- South African Communist Party Confirms Mandela Was a Member (economicpolicyjournal.com)
- The Mandela Cover-up Unravels (trevorloudon.com)
- Mandela memorial: it’s the ANC that’s betrayed South Africa, not the booing (theguardian.com)
- South African president booed at Mandela memorial (sacbee.com)
- South African President Zuma humiliated at Nelson Mandela memorial (latimes.com)
In Death, as in Life, Truth About Mandela Overlooked
Author: Alex Newman
Source: The New American – 12.06.2013
With the widely anticipated passing of South African revolutionary leader Nelson Mandela late Thursday, December 5, presidents and dictators from around the world — as well as everyday people, and especially the press — are in mourning. Lost amid the tsunami of praise and adoration, almost canonization even according to some of his supporters, however, is the truth about the man himself, who was, after all, still just a man.
The announcement of Mandela’s death was made by current South African President Jacob Zuma, the fourth leader of the so-called “rainbow nation” ushered in after the fall of Apartheid rule some two decades ago. “Our beloved Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, the founding President of our democratic nation has departed,” said Zuma, a polygamous tribal chief who, amid never-ending corruption scandals, regularly sings “struggle” songs about murdering European-descent Afrikaners.
According to the current South African president, Mandela passed on “peacefully” in the company of his family late Thursday. “He is now resting. He is now at peace,” Zuma continued, adding that the deceased leader would receive a state funeral and flags would be flown at half-mast until then. “Our nation has lost its greatest son. Our people have lost a father. Although we knew that this day would come, nothing can diminish our sense of a profound and enduring loss.”
Like heads of state and the media around the world, Zuma celebrated Mandela’s alleged “tireless struggle for freedom” and how he “brought us together” in common cause. “Our thoughts are with his friends, comrades and colleagues who fought alongside Madiba over the course of a lifetime of struggle,” South Africa’s current president continued, offering the briefest of glimpses into the reality about Mandela that has been largely expunged from the history books.
President Obama, also heaping praises on Mandela, even ordered American flags flown at half-mast until Monday — especially shocking when considering that the late leader and his Soviet-backed armed movement spent decades on the official U.S. government terror list before being removed in 2008. “I am one of the countless millions who drew inspirations from Nelson Mandela’s life,” Obama said. “I cannot fully imagine my own life without the example that Nelson Mandela set. So long as I live, I will do what I can to learn from him.”
- Obama’s Past Is No Secret
By contrast, even in the late 1980’s, shortly before the Apartheid regime surrendered to overwhelming global pressure to hand over power, Western leaders saw Mandela and his “African National Congress” in a very different light. “The ANC is a typical terrorist organization,” explained former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. U.S. President Ronald Reagan put Mandela and the ANC on the American terrorist list in the 1980s.
Indeed, outside of open support from ruthless communist dictatorships — the tyrants ruling over Cuba, East Germany, and the Soviet Union, for example — Mandela’s ANC and its South African Communist Party partners were widely viewed as ruthless communist terrorists. Considering their murderous activities, which included the barbaric executions and torture of countless South African blacks who opposed them, it is easy to understand why.
With help from elements of the Western establishment and the media, however, all of that gradually changed. Widely adored in South Africa and around the world, today Mandela is almost universally portrayed as a peaceful hero who struggled to bring down the white-led Apartheid regime that ruled the area for decades — all in the name of “democracy,” “equality,” and racial harmony.
Lost amid the cacophony of praise and near-worship, though, is the truth about the late South African leader, which has been all but erased from the planet’s collective memory. Today, for example, endless amounts of news reports on Mandela’s death continue to falsely suggest that he was a political prisoner jailed merely for his “beliefs” and opposition to the system of Apartheid (meaning separate development, which despite its myriad flaws, was working to grant full independence and sovereignty to the various tribal and ethnic groups in South Africa).
A mere handful of articles have offered even a hint of the truth. In reality, the Soviet-backed revolutionary was imprisoned for terrorism, sedition, and sabotage — an integral part of Mandela’s long communist history that his adoring fans tend to downplay, at best, or more often, ignore altogether. Almost none of the adoring eulogies pouring forth from around the world have noted, for example, that Mandela was offered the chance to walk out of prison a free man if he would just renounce violence. He refused.
Instead of a man of peace, as his legions of fans would like to believe, and in many cases do believe, Mandela was actually the co-founder of the armed wing of the ANC known as Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation). Outside of communist dictatorships, virtually every government recognized the movement as a communist-backed terrorist outfit — it was, after all, famous for murder, torture, bombings, sabotage, and more. More recently, as The New American reported, conclusive evidence further confirming Mandela’s senior role in the Soviet-backed South African Communist Party has been widely published.
Meanwhile, Mandela’s wife during much of that time, fellow ANC revolutionary Winnie, was a zealous and open advocate for one of the most brutal murder tactics ever conceived by man. Pioneered by the ANC, so-called “necklacing” involves filling a tire with gasoline before putting it around the victim’s neck, setting it ablaze, and watching the poor target slowly writhe in horrifying agony before eventual death. Most of the ANC’s “necklace” victims were fellow blacks.
Unsurprisingly, Mandela’s history of violence, brutality, terror, and communist scheming has scarcely been mentioned in the thousands of obituaries currently on the front pages of newspapers around the world. Instead, one of the ex-guerilla’s key accomplishments, which earned him praise from around the world, was his supposed ability to prevent a “blood bath” and mass-slaughter in the transition to “democracy” — as if genocide were the obvious course that history would have inevitably taken absent a figure like Mandela.
Almost incredibly, the few reports that have highlighted even the tiniest hint of controversy surrounding the life and works of Mandela suggest that the only criticism of his legacy comes from extremists who think the late leader did not do enough to turn South Africa into a full-blown Marxist dictatorship. An opinion piece in the New York Times, for example, describes the rage among some forces in South Africa over Mandela’s failure to completely disempower or even obliterate the Afrikaner people — a process that many respected analysts say is accelerating and could quickly spiral out of control.
“It is ironic that in today’s South Africa, there is an increasingly vocal segment of black South Africans who feel that Mandela sold out the liberation struggle to white interests,” claimed Ohio University Professor Zakes Mda, who knew Mandela, in the Times column. “This will come as a surprise to the international community, which informally canonized him and thinks he enjoyed universal adoration in his country.” As the Times’ piece suggests, even more extreme anti-white racist and Marxist forces are gathering momentum.
All of that, however, has been largely covered up amid news of Mandela’s death. “As we gather, wherever we are in the country and wherever we are in the world, let us recall the values for which Madiba fought,” said Zuma, referring to Mandela by his African tribal name. “Let us commit ourselves to strive together – sparing neither strength nor courage – to build a united, non-racial, non-sexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa.”
Acquitted of rape charges in 2006 by claiming that his victim was wearing a “kanga” and so, clearly wanted to have sex with him, Zuma has been steadily following in the footsteps of his communist-affiliated predecessors. With the economy crumbling and violence exploding, Zuma and his allies continue to publicly sing “struggle” songs inciting genocide against the white population at virtually every political rally.
Meanwhile, the ANC-Communist Party alliance that has ruled South Africa since the end of Apartheid is steadily working to foist tyranny and lawlessness on what was once among the most prosperous countries in the world. The planet’s top authority on genocide, a man who worked to help bring down Apartheid in South Africa, has even warned that the Afrikaners may be on the verge of literal extermination.
While the largely bogus public image created of Mandela certainly has some praiseworthy elements — opposition to racism, violence, and support for human rights, for example — it is important that reality not be overlooked. Senior Editor William Jasper with The New American magazine wrote a detailed piece on the real Nelson Mandela under the headline “Saint” Mandela? Not So Fast! If the truth is worth anything, Americans should resist the temptation to worship a fake caricature of a leader who was, after all, still just a man.
Patrick Henry’s Speech
to the Virginia House of Burgess
Richmond, Virginia – March 23, 1775
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.
This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth—to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House?
Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation—the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?
No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.
We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.
Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.
Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope.
If we wish to be free—if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending—if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak—unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot?
Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.
The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable—and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come!
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, “Peace! Peace!”—but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
Patrick Henry – March 23, 1775
Author/Pastor: John Franklin
In three previous articles I endeavored to answer the great question gripping our nation and more specifically Christians, “In the devastating plague of moral decline, what is the antidote of hope that will cure the infectious spread of evil?” For those who have read the previous articles, you will remember that I argued the antidote is recapturing a proper fear of God. In a nutshell, my logic is:
Whenever the fear of God is lost, you can be sure the greatness of God has been lost. And whenever man loses the greatness of God, he unfortunately finds the greatness of man. The more man finds his own greatness, the less he acknowledges God, until finally God becomes despised or lost to his consciousness. Once respect or God-consciousness is lost, man becomes ultimate. When man becomes ultimate, he loses any sense of accountability or ability to be convicted of sin. Conversely, whenever the greatness of God increases, man’s awareness of his accountability to God increases and he departs from evil. Therefore the cure is to regain the fear of God.
- Praying for Richmond, VA and the Greater Richmond Area
If fear is the antidote, how does God reestablish fear? Precisely by doing the opposite of what caused man to lose it. Scripture exposes the reason men left to themselves despise God when Isaiah 57:11b asks, “Is it not because I have held My peace from of old that you do not fear Me?” Likewise after listing the sins of sinners God declares in Psalm 50:21, “These things you have done, and I kept silent; You thought that I was altogether like you; But I will rebuke you, and set them in order before your eyes.” Since men lose the fear of God when God withholds judgments against them on earth, then it logically follows that for God to reestablish His fear, He must do it by actively judging sin in the earth (Ps. 58:11, Is. 26:9).
And that is precisely what you find throughout all of Scripture whether for nations or His people. Large portions of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Revelation warn nations of God’s impending judgments against them. When His own people continued in sin, the same books warn them of judgment. Since God is the same yesterday, today and forever, He still reestablishes His fear by judging sin. This begs the question – if God reestablishes His fear by judging sin then what would that look like today? What would be the indication that a nation or His people are under judgment for sin?
- God Bless America?
Let’s begin with a nation. Too many evidences exist for the brevity of this article, so please allow me to list the one I deem most serious. Job notes in 12:13-25 that God does as he pleases with the nations. He “makes them great and destroys them.(vs 23)” When God is destroying a nation, Job identifies which judgment of God He exercises, “He takes away the understanding of the chiefs of the people of the earth…(vs 24)” To Job the worst judgment God could inflict is the deprivation of wisdom. This holds true in other passages as well. In Isaiah 3:1-5 God begins to judge the nation of Israel by taking away everything that benefits them. Notice that the list includes, “the judge and the prophet…the honorable man” and “the counselor…” – in other words the people with wisdom. In Romans 1:18-32 Paul lists how the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness in a three-step progression of increasingly severe judgments – all of which relate to the understanding. To sum up the final state in verse 28, Paul notes the continual loss of wisdom eventually leading to a completely debased mind.
- Oh Your Wicked Heart!
Is the Scripture clear? Whenever a nation begins to be deprived of wisdom, it ought to recognize it is under the judgment of God. This being the case, America ought to be quaking. Our understanding has already been darkened to the point of accepting homosexuality as a viable lifestyle, and with the rise of cultural violence we are not far off from the completely debased mind described in Romans 1:29-31. Evidently since we have not thought it worthy to retain a knowledge of God, He has righteously judged us unworthy of retaining knowledge and wisdom. This horribly severe judgment against our nation indicates that God has already begun the process of destroying us. Of course that process can be reversed by repentance, but the departure of wisdom evidenced by turning from God, family breakdown, broken relationships, and increasing violence ought to reawaken us to fear God so that we will repent and plead for His mercy before He renders a final judgment.
- The Nature of Mankind
What about the church? Is she under judgments of God as well? Unfortunately many Christians’ theology does not allow for this possibility because they limit the idea of judgment to end times and eternal destiny. However numerous passages in the Bible point to the reality that God’s people have an earthly accountability for sin (Lev. 26, Deut. 28, 1 Cor. 11:27-34, Heb. 2:2-3, 10:30, and Rev. 2-3). Since this is an Old and New Testament reality, this begs the question, “How would the church in America know if she were under judgments from God?”
Scripture and history record that when God’s people please Him, He answers their prayers affirmatively and grants them favor by transforming their culture. This happened in the Old Testament, the Roman Empire, Europe and America. When we displease God the converse happens just like it did in the Old Testament, Europe and America. This being the case, we ought to ask some questions. In America where we once had widespread respect, honor and influence, why have we now lost it? Why is sin advancing in our land? Why are we being turned over to immoral leadership in our nation (Job 34:29-30)? Why are our enemies succeeding (Lev. 26:17)? Why are great numbers of our youth being led astray? Why are Christians now the only politically correct group to bash? Why have we been praying for the abortion decision to be overturned now for 27 years yet God has withheld His hand? Could it be that the main problem lies not in our culture, but in our relationship with God? In light of the fact that the majority who profess Christianity basically do the same things in the same proportions as the culture, does it not make logical sense to ask if God is righteously judging us because we no longer fear Him? Since we have not honored Him, could it be that He is no longer giving us honor in our society? Could the cultural antagonism against us be God-allowed because God is calling us to account for sin?
- Examine Yourself
Do you see the implications of which conclusion you draw? If nothing is wrong then we should only intensify what we’re already doing. However, if God Himself is judging us, if this withholding of His hand on our behalf is because we have displeased Him, then the solution demands that we stay before God until we identify where we have departed from Him and repent.
I contend that the signs indicate we are not right with God; therefore, we ought to ask what are the sins for which God is calling us to account. In the next article I will try to identify the main ones, but for now suffice it to say that our nation is under the severest judgment of God it can incur before final destruction, and that Christians by and large have departed from God and also are incurring judgments as evidenced by the fact that we are losing the battle. Both realities ought to be interpreted as God seeking to reestablish His fear because we have ignored His standard of holiness.
- Judgment, not Warning
© 2002-2013 SermonIndex.net Audio Sermons
Author: Daniel Greenfield
Source: the Sultan Knish blog – 12.04.2013
The god of liberalism is an idea and ideas are notoriously fragile things. They fall apart once they make the transition from the ivory tower of the mind to the mud and dross of reality. Every writer and artist has had the experience of holding a perfect ideal in his mind only to lose it as he struggles to set it down on canvas or paper. The creative process is that recognition that the ideal cannot be made real.
Liberalism, progressivism and the various names by which the modern left identifies and is identified is the belief that the ideal can and must be made real. That anything short of the ideal is a savage state of repression, tyranny, patriarchy, fascism and the whole litany of crimes against ideal humanity.
The liberal god rises as an idea and dies again. And rises again. No matter how many times the whole thing ends in blood and bankruptcy, the worshipers return to worship the coming of the god again.
“People in every corner of the globe who saw in him a hope for the future and a chance for mankind. We weep for our children and their children and everyone’s children: For he was charting their destinies as he was charting ours,” Art Buchwald wrote in the International Herald-Tribune after the assassination of JFK.
In Buchwald’s crude Stalinist panegyric, JFK was a deity who charted the destinies of the whole world. “He cared about all of us,” he writes. No sparrow could fall but that JFK would see it. JFK would help the “Negro”, the “working man”, “the artist, the writer and the poet”, “teachers and pupils” and even “old people”.
But John F. Kennedy the man with flaws and strengths is not present in the North Korean scale orgy of leader worship because it isn’t really him that Buchwald is mourning. It isn’t Kennedy the man that liberals weep for every year. It is liberalism.
Camelot is liberalism. The death of Kennedy was the death of the idea. Liberalism didn’t die, but its best avatar did. The ideal became the real with a magic bullet. The man who was supposed to chart the destiny of the world couldn’t save himself from a “single lousy Communist” who killed the hope that he was supposed to represent.
The god of liberalism vests in an avatar like Kennedy or Obama. The avatar is messianic. It is superhuman. Its empathy is unlimited. Its liberal godhood elevates us all by merely being in its presence, hearing it speak or reading one of its speeches. It is the idea made flesh. The secular god.
But the god of the left must die. It is a mad illusion to think that any man can chart the destinies of the world. Buchwald put far too great a burden on JFK. Had a lousy Communist not killed him, then, like Obama, he would have lived to disappoint and infuriate his followers.
The Russians went mad when Stalin died. The North Korean weeping was equally insecure. When you believe that your destiny is charted by a man who is the only hope for your future; what can you do but weep, not for him, but as Buchwald writes, “We weep for the millions of people who are weeping for him.”
- Catastrophic Failure of Human Government
The ideas of the left always fail because the avatars and muses always fail. The ideas that seem so bright in theory fail when confronted with the actual task of charting human lives and the unpleasant reality that the Negro, the working man, the old people and the students may not want the same things that the idealists want for them.
For a golden moment, the avatar of liberalism makes it seem as if all things are possible, he weaves an enchanting spell of transcendence that promises that paradoxes can be reconciled and that people will set aside their “selfish” needs and interests. They will stop thinking of themselves and start thinking of what they can do for their country. They will become the change they were waiting for.
The progressive ideal is that all men and women will become avatars of the liberal god in the same way that what we think of as Communism was only meant as a temporary system of rule that would give way to the true Communism in which there would be no more need for rulers and secret police because each man would be a true Communist with no need for external pressure and coercion.
Instead of this golden age, the tyranny of the avatar grows, coercion increases, protests spread and the project decays into a totalitarian state or is overthrown. The golden age never arrives. The ideal is slain by the real. And the true believers go into mourning for what might have been.
The tyranny of the ideal is the most brutal of all tyrannies for men and women are not ideal; they are real. Its plans are bound to fail and yet it has such a passionate grip on the minds of its believers that it is bound to rise again and again.
And so this cycle of the liberal god who dies and rises again, dies and rises, keeps repeating. As long as the tyranny of the ideal remains a rallying cry, as long as men and women choose to believe that a better world can be created through central planning, forcible redistribution and mass reeducation then the cycle will continue. No matter how often the liberal god dies, he will rise again.
The secular god of the progressive ideal has become an entity of life, death and rebirth. Its failures only incite its followers to believe that it will come again. It does not matter how many gulags and mass graves lie in its wake. It is a matter of faith. And in a secular world, there is nothing left to believe in except a better world.
- Making A God of Government
Obama is dying now. ObamaCare, his great work, has failed. Like Ra and all the others, he will pass into the darkness and the ideas will reemerge again in a new avatar. Perhaps it will be Elizabeth Warren. Or someone else. And it will not be remembered that health care nationalization does not work. Like Communism, it will only be another experiment that was carried out incorrectly.
Men are flesh and blood. They are born and they die. But ideas appear to transcend them. That is what attracts men to ideas. Even the worst of them carry the taste of immortality on their lips.
“Alone–free–the human being is always defeated. It must be so, because every human being is doomed to die, which is the greatest of all failures. But if he can make complete, utter submission, if he can escape from his identity, if he can merge himself in the Party so that he IS the Party, then he is all-powerful and immortal,” O’Brien declares in Orwell’s 1984.
And so the messiahs come offering transcendence through submission to the Party. But they die and they fail, and the Party, that ugly confused creature with a million mindless heads, a trillion talking points, and no soul, looks around for a new avatar to embody its secular religion.
A man who will call for the submission of the world so that the world may become the Party and the Party may become the world.
“‘We are the priests of power, god is power,” Orwell tells Winston. This is the liberal priesthood of community organizers and activists, NGO chiefs and talking heads, senate aides and prattling pundits who wait for a god who will justify their power and their cruelty, who will convince them that their immortality within the body of the Party is within reach.
And then he dies and they appoint another avatar to embody the progressive godhood and wait again for their community organizer god to be born anew.
- The Man Behind the Mask
This liberal avatar will care for the Negro, the working man, the artist, the poet and writer, the teacher and the pupil, he will “save us from war”, “command” us and “chart the destinies” of the whole world. He will do what he was unable to do in any of his prior reincarnations– he will make the ideal into the real, he will make the impossible ideas of the left finally work.
Author: Daniel Greenfield
Source: the Sultan Knish blog – 11.23.2013
Every morning the media paws through a dictionary looking for the most innocuous ways to describe Obama’s big health care lie.
According to the New York Times, Obama “misspoke” when he said over and over again that if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. But unlike the times that the smartest man to ever put up his feet on the table in the Oval Office thought that Austrian was a language or that the United States had 57 states, he wasn’t misspeaking.
44, as Politico likes to call him, was doing what 1 wouldn’t do after he chopped down a cherry tree. And to call a lie, misspeaking, is itself a lie.
Rob Ford didn’t misspeak when he claimed not to be on crack, despite being on crack. Barack Obama didn’t misspeak when he promised to let you keep your health plan, when he had no intention of letting you do any such thing. And the New York Times didn’t misspeak when it tried to pass that lie off as a mere slip of the tongue.
The New York Times, which never hesitated to call George W. Bush a liar, switched up its euphemisms and began calling Obama’s lie an “incorrect promise”. NBC News called it a “promise they couldn’t keep.” The Associated Press called it an “inflated promise.”
A few of their more honestly dishonest colleagues in the media argued that Obama did the right thing because he could never have pried the health plans of Americans out of their grubby little hands if he hadn’t promised them that his government takeover of healthcare would affect everyone else but them. Some of the pundits making that argument included those on Obama’s regular reading list.
The excuse that Obama lied blatantly about the impact of a law he wanted to pass in order to pass it will no doubt be a great comfort to those gun owners who were willing to trust that his crusade against gun rights would stop where he told them it would and those Republican supporters of amnesty for illegal aliens who believed that he really would secure the borders once he got his millions of newly minted Democratic Party voters
If Obama lied to pass one law, what sensible argument can any of his supporters make for believing him the next time he promises, “If you like your guns, you can keep your guns” or “If you like your borders, you can keep your borders”?
Obama wasn’t the first politician to lie. He won’t be the last. But most politicians who lie don’t have an army of reporters swarming around them to explain that they didn’t lie, but just inflated their misspeaking. One man did not get up in front of the microphones and cameras and lie over and over again. The entire liberal establishment lied. And it’s still lying.
- The Reverse Racism of Black Democrats
The media’s lies and excuses, even more than the original Obama lie, reveal why liberals can never be trusted.
- Barack Obama and the Media Alliance
If Obama had only lied about being on crack or with an intern, that might be an impeachable act, but an understandable human failing. But he wasn’t lying to cover up something shameful that he did. He lied because he didn’t think Americans deserved to keep their health plans… or the truth.
Obama lied because he is a liberal.
That Obama would lie was an inevitable as the sun rising in the morning and the taxman coming in the spring. The lie was baked into the nature of the progressive movement that he identified with and its social experiments with human lives for the greater good that he participated in.
Lying isn’t incidental to a liberal. Liberal is another word for liar. Someone who believes, as Obama and his media cronies do, that Americans are too stupid and ignorant to be trusted to choose their own health care, isn’t about to trust them with the truth.
Telling someone the truth shows that we respect them as people. We give them the information and then trust that they will make the right decision. Trust and respect are the key words here.
Liars don’t trust and respect people. Neither do liberals.
- Gay Activist Admits Truth
Liberals don’t believe that the people they lie to are their equals. If they did, not only wouldn’t they lie to them, but they wouldn’t subscribe to a skewed leftist take on liberalism that compels them to take away choices from people for their own good.
You don’t take away someone’s right to choose unless you think that they are inferior to you. The policies of liberalism can only be justified by assuming that the people whose lives they run into the ground are their ethical and intellectual inferiors.
If you think that the next person over can run his life just as well as you run yours, then there’s no reason to take over his life and to lie to him about it. But if you think that he’s probably a racist moron who worships the flag and clings to his gun and bible and can’t be trusted to buy a car, raise his kids, drink a large soda and see a doctor; then you’re probably a liberal. And a liar.
- The Truth About Lies
That’s the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives respect people’s choices. Liberals don’t. And if you don’t respect someone’s choices, you don’t respect them.
If you think that the average person is a moron, then the only answer is to set up to some ideal republic of liberal philosopher kings who will nudge the marching morons into the death panels for their own greater good while lying to them that the death panelists are really the judges for the next hot talent competition.
If ordinary people don’t deserve the basic decency of being allowed to make decisions about their own health care, then they also don’t deserve the basic decency of not being lied to their faces about those decisions being taken away from them.
If Obama had trusted and respected Americans, he wouldn’t have lied to them about ObamaCare. But if he had really trusted and respected them, then he wouldn’t have engaged in a massive government hijacking of their health care options, mandated their participation in health plans at virtual gunpoint and then rewritten the regulations to destroy as many of their grandfathered health plans as possible.
And so if Obama had really trusted and respected Americans, he wouldn’t have inflicted ObamaCare on them.
The existence of ObamaCare made it inevitable that Obama would lie about it in the same way that a burglar smashing the window of a jewelery store won’t hesitate to lie to the owner about what he’s doing. A man who is willing to rob a store or a nation will easily and casually lie about his crime.
Obama’s crime isn’t the lie. The lie is the cover-up of the crime. The crime is that Obama packaged a tax, a welfare program and a government takeover of health care together and called it reform. That was the bigger lie and there was no misspeaking involved.
The media has shown that Obama’s lie was no isolated incident by lying about the lie for the same reason that he told the lie. The health plan lie wasn’t the lie of one politician protecting his reputation; it was the big lie of a liberal establishment protecting its agenda.
The liberal media manipulates its readers, listeners and viewers the same way that liberal governments manipulate their citizens. And they both do it because they don’t believe that the ordinary person has the right to the truth or the right to his life.
The liberal media manipulates its readers, listeners and viewers the same way that liberal governments manipulate their citizens. Unlike Clinton’s lie, Obama’s lie was not one man’s mistake, but a movement’s arrogance. And not only hasn’t Obama stopped lying about his lie, but the media and the rest of his movement haven’t stopped lying about his lie.
Obama’s big health care lie shows why liberals can’t be trusted. Any movement that believes its members are superior to ordinary people cannot be trusted to represent them or to tell them the truth.
- The Psychopathology of the Liberal Mind
- Lying Liberal Liars (sultanknish.blogspot.com)
- Lying Liberal Liars (frontpagemag.com)
- Doc’s Talk: Lying Liberal Liars (docstalk.blogspot.com)
- President Obama didn’t misspeak; He lied (grumpyelder.com)
- ‘Boom!’ Dana Loesch shreds NYT’s Obama ‘misspoke’ lie with simple question (twitchy.com)
- Boot-licking fail: You won’t believe NYT’s excuse for Obama’s ‘you can keep your plan’ lie (twitchy.com)
- #ObamaMisspoke: Obama’s lies, NYT hackery spark delicious mockery (twitchy.com)
- Dems anxious over Obamacare lie (bostonherald.com)
- The Truth About “If You Like Your Plan, You Can Keep Your Plan” (govtslaves.info)
- Word Games (pilgrimpassing.com)