BRICS Under Attack: The Empire’s Destabilizing Hand Reaches Into South Africa

An undercurrent of political manipulation pulses beneath the surface of popular South African demonstrations organized around legitimate grievances. But who’s pulling the strings? And why?
By | Follow on Facebook | @stopimperialism |
Be Sociable, Share!
    • Google+

    This article is part of a series on Western meddling to foment unrest and destabilize BRICS nations in an effort to ensure the continuation of Western economic and political control over the Global South. The first part, focusing on Brazil, can be found here. Still to come: BRICS under attack in Russia, India, and China.

    NEW YORK — (Analysis) Major protests have gripped South Africa in recent months as political forces have emerged to give voice to a growing discontent with the government and ruling party. Beneath the surface of these demonstrations organized around legitimate grievances, however, there’s an undercurrent of political manipulation.

    South Africa and its ruling African National Congress (ANC) party have been targeted for destabilization due to the country’s burgeoning relationship with China and other non-Western nations, most obviously typified by South Africa’s inclusion in BRICS, the association of the five major emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

    Last year, for example, China surpassed the United States and European Union as South Africa’s largest trade partner, and the ANC has been hard at work promoting further trade cooperation. Answering questions in the National Assembly, Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa explained: “We trade more effectively with China because the relationship is based on win-win; mutual benefit that they can get out of the relationship and that we can get out the relationship.”  

    But recent protests against the ANC government have threatened the ruling tripartite coalition of the ANC, along with the South African Communist Party and Congress of South African Trade Unions.

    A number of groups on the left such as the Economic Freedom Fighters, led by former ANC youth leader Julius Malema, and the National Union of Metalworkers, have taken part in the protests touched off by student demonstrations against university fees.

    At the same time, however, Western-backed opposition forces led by the Democratic Alliance have positioned themselves as leaders and beneficiaries of the anti-government movement.

    The DA, a center-right liberal political party now fronted by “South Africa’s Obama,” Mmusi Maimane, is lauded by Western financial interests. The American Chamber of Commerce, for example, has consistently heaped praise on DA as the way forward for South Africa.  

    When Maimane delivered a widely publicized speech at a May 2015 business breakfast hosted by the American Chamber of Commerce, he stated:

    “While China may have overtaken the US as South Africa’s largest trade partner in volume, the US remains an incredibly important partner for our future growth and development.

    I refer to ‘future growth and development’ for under the lacklustre and confused leadership of the ANC, our economy has failed to reach its true potential.”  

    A careful reading of the subtext offers a clearer understanding of what Maimane is implying. By noting that China has overtaken the U.S. as South Africa’s largest trade partner, he is directly tying the ANC and its “lackluster and confused leadership” to the close relationship with China.  

    In other words, the DA represents “the future” — that is, a future in which the U.S. is able to reclaim its status as South Africa’s dominant trade partner. This certainly would not have been lost on the attendees at a Chamber of Commerce breakfast. (It should be recalled that the Chamber of Commerce is traditionally seen as the main arm of U.S. economic power projection in the Global South — just ask any leader in South and Central America.)

    The Wall Street-London connection runs deep

    But the ties to the political and financial establishment of neoliberal capital and the U.S. empire do not stop at the American Chamber of Commerce. In 2014 it came to light that one of the principal financiers behind the DA and its short-lived attempt at unity with the centrist Agang SA party, led by anti-Apartheid figure Mamphela Ramphele, was billionaire Nathan Kirsh.  

    As the Business Times noted in March 2014:

    “Mr Kirsh said he provided a ‘marginal amount’ of funding to both the DA and Agang SA … but denied bringing the parties together.

    ‘I believe there’s got to be an opposition to the government, but I wasn’t involved in the marriage. … When Mamphela [Ramphele] came to me, she represented what could be good, credible opposition and I gave her some money. When [leader of the DA] Helen Zille came to me, she had already shown her ability to put things together and the [Western] Cape runs perhaps better than any of the other provinces,’ said Kirsh.

    Zille and Ramphele announced early in February that the short-lived plan to join forces, and for Ramphele to stand as the DA’s presidential candidate, was over.

    At the time, Ms Ramphele was quoted as saying ‘a donor pushed the DA and Agang SA together.’”

    Kirsh, the business tycoon who heads a multinational business empire controlled through his Kirsh Holdings Group, is one of the richest men in the world, having made his fortune during the Apartheid regime in South Africa and in a variety of other ventures since then.

    Aside from his dodgy past, Kirsh is well known to have untold billions in assets and companies domiciled in tax havens from the British Virgin Islands to Liberia. Perhaps most notorious among his recent money-making projects has been the massive contracts awarded to his company Magal Security Systems by the Israeli government to provide electronic fences and security systems for the apartheid wall Israel constructed, and which has been almost universally condemned as illegal.  

    In fact, Kirsh is well known as being very close to some of the leading institutions of Western finance capital, as evidenced by his choice of Bradley Fried to oversee Kirsh Group. As noted by Bloomberg, Fried will oversee “the management company that holds Kirsh’s disparate assets, which include two U.S. wholesale grocery businesses, commercial and residential real estate, and private equity investments on four continents.” Fried is a member of the Bank of England’s Court of Directors and a well-connected executive in circles of high finance.

    Fried “takes over [Kirsh Group] from Ron Sandler, the former CEO of Lloyd’s of London who Kirsh said will remain working as a trustee and adviser to the family.” It should be noted that Sandler, who served as chairman of the infamous Northern Rock, had close ties with former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, himself a creature of the City of London.  

    Between Kirsh’s connections to the highest circles of finance capital in the U.S. empire, and his lucrative business dealings with Apartheid South Africa and the current apartheid state of Israel, it should be crystal clear that Kirsh is no progressive. So what’s he doing financing the allegedly “liberal-progressive” opposition in South Africa? To put it simply, Kirsh is making yet another investment that he hopes will pay massive political and financial dividends.   

    obama south africa

    Soft power projects from pro-DA think tanks

    Another source of soft power projection from the U.S. empire are the think tanks that uphold the neoliberal DA as the future for South Africa. One example is Legatum Institute, which has published numerous papers criticizing the ANC and calling for “democratization” and “plurality of voices” in the political sphere.

    In an innocuously titled 2014 report, “South Africa and the Pursuit of Inclusive Growth,” Legatum noted:

    “Together opposition voters constituted just over 34 percent of the national vote. The ANC is understandably proud of its achievements in attracting such a large proportion of votes. However, the weakness of the opposition has reduced the pressure on the ANC to win electoral votes on the basis of its performance in government. It also means that at the national level the ANC’s commitment to democracy has not been put to the ultimate test: the transfer of power to a victorious opposition.”

    While the report notes the democratic nature of South Africa’s election, the implied argument, couched in the typically duplicitous rhetoric of Western think tanks, is that the ANC should be unseated from power in order for a truly democratic South Africa to emerge. The report, it should be noted, was edited and overseen by the notoriously anti-Russia, anti-China, anti-BRICS, neoliberal Anne Applebaum, who has repeatedly used her pen and face in the service of the empire’s agenda. (Interesting to note also is that Applebaum is married to Radek Sikorski, the vehemently pro-NATO former foreign minister of Poland.)

    One example of Applebaum’s anti-Russia outlook is her widely read 2014 essay in the New York Review of Books, “How He [Putin] and His Cronies Stole Russia,” which argued the typical neoliberal finance capital line that Russia was on the right path in the 1990s under the stewardship of the U.S.- and Wall Street-backed Russian President Boris Yeltsin and his gaggle of thieves, but that Putin and his “kleptocratic KGB apparatchiks” seized control of Russia for their own purposes.

    Such nonsense, in addition to Applebaum’s unmitigated warmongering in matters relating to Syria and Libya, demonstrates just what sort of slant exists in her report on South Africa.

    Another important element in this equation is an understanding of exactly what the Legatum Institute really is and who funds it. As Pando’s Mark Ames wrote in 2015:

    “Legatum turns out to be a project of the most secretive billionaire vulture capital investor you’ve (and I’d) never heard of: Christopher Chandler, a New Zealander who, along with his billionaire brother Richard Chandler, ran one of the world’s most successful vulture capital funds

    Brother Christopher Chandler took his billions to Dubai, where he launched Legatum Capital, and, in 2007, the Legatum Institute … The Legatum Institute’s motto, displayed proudly on its homepage, reads ‘Prosperity Through Revitalising Capitalism and Democracy.’

    … [T]he Chandler brothers were the largest foreign portfolio investors in Russia throughout the 1990s into the first half of the 2000s, including the largest foreign investors in natural gas behemoth Gazprom. …

    From what I’ve learned, the Chandlers make buckets of fast money by buying into totally depressed and corrupt emerging markets when everyone else is too afraid to, driving up the price of their assets by making a lot of noise about corporate governance and corruption, and then selling out when those investments tick up during what look like to outsiders as principled battles over corporate governance issues. In other words, a form of extreme green-mailing.”

    Applebaum’s official title with Legatum is “director of the Transitions Forum,” “a series of projects that examine the challenges and opportunities of radical political and economic change.” No wonder the think tank’s prized propagandist is so gung-ho in her hatred of all things Putin and Russia: Her bosses were directly targeted by Putin and the Russian government as it sought to reverse the “vulturization” of Russia’s economy carried out by Western capitalists like the Chandlers.

    It seems then that Legatum is part of the same anti-Russian, anti-BRICS network of Western NGOs and think tanks that includes the International Republican Institute, Freedom House, the National Democratic Institute, and the National Endowment for Democracy.  And it should come as no surprise that Russia and many other countries have moved so strongly to curtail their presence and influence in their respective countries (this author has written detailed analyses of the political significance of the NGO laws in Russia and China).  


    Powerful forces aligning

    Make no mistake, though: Institutional issues such as corruption and political and economic disenfranchisement do indeed exist in South Africa, and these must be addressed. The challenge against the ANC from leftist forces who seek wealth and land redistribution, socialization of the economy, and other traditional policies associated with leftist politics is to be welcomed. That challenge could likely push the ANC to make much needed policy changes, including moving further away from neoliberal capitalism, as it broadens its engagement with the non-Western world.

    However, one should not miss the forest for the trees. There are powerful forces aligning behind the DA and other Western proxy political forces in order to destabilize a key partner of the BRICS project.

    Be Sociable, Share!


    Print This Story Print This Story
    You Might Also Like  
    This entry was posted in Editors Picks, Foreign Affairs, Front Page: Foreign Affairs, Investigations, National, Top Stories, Top Story and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
    • Pingback: Now that Washington has destroyed Brazil, their next BRICS target is South Africa | Hard Asset Protection()

    • Pingback: Now that Washington has destroyed Brazil, their next BRICS target is South Africa – To The Death Media()

    • hobbes007

      The Zuma-led ANC is now implementing the 2nd transition of their communist NDR (National Democratic Revolution) whereby they want to transfer wealth from the oppressed white minority to the black majority. There are numerous racist anti-white laws in place to exclude whites from the economy. The ANC is in the process of planning the nationalisation of land (farms, mines etc) claiming that the black people are poor because White farmers own the commercial farms. But when they nationalise the land, they won’t give black South aifrcans the title deeds, they will merely lease it out to them. The fact that black South Africans had a population explosion of from 3million in 1900 to 45million 100 years later while the white population only grew from 1million in 1900 to 4.5million 100 years later is completely ignored as a factor contributing significantly to current poverty levels amongst black South Africans. Under Zuma’s rule, South Africa is well on it’s way to becoming ZImbabwe 2 which will be a huge crisis for all people living there.

    • John Hunter

      Though it is true that there are ongoing riots in south Africa for example Protests leading to the destruction of 23 schools in South Africa’s Limpopo Province (11 May 2016)


      While many are engaged in campaigns demanding building and improvement of schools, economic saboteurs and agitators still act as if they live in the past as if they are fighting a minority white government and wish to destroy infrastructure to rebuild a new South Africa based on black nationalism, however there is a black majority African Nationalist government in power for decades already and agitators burn the few available schools which remained the only hope of the development of African communities and society according to statement from the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union.

      South Africa it has many laws, but Law enforcement is poor in South Africa. They seem to answer every problem by making more rules and laws to address it, but the implementation of these laws is lackadaisical, half-hearted and lacking any enthusiasm or initiative, that is if they ever respond at all to a call. They will merely record details if there is an insurance claim or for a court case to give you a case number but hardly respond to halt or pursue criminals.

      Not surprisingly for example on 22 April 2016 in the agricultural town of Vryheid reportedly 15 armed men with AK47s mowed down the two farmers of the same family Billy van Rooyen and Ronnie Lombard and also injured a third family member, who survived. The police described the terrorist attack as ‘senseless, without any motive’.

      It is extremely dangerous to protect wildlife or to farm with “gangs” like these going around, that act more like terrorist groups.

      If you can afford it those who are more well of must pay for a private armed response security firm even some police stations have armed response security.

      The country hasa corrupt president Zuma. Corruption in South Africa includes the private useof public resources, bribery and improper favouritism.

      South Africa has a robust anti-corruption framework, but laws are inadequately enforced. Two forms of corruption areparticularly prevalent in South Africa; tenderpreneurism and BEE fronting.

      And sadly this hampers even normal small businesses, farming and wildlife protection and policing as its tentacles spread through all aspects of society at all levels.

      A tenderpreneur is an individual who enriches themselves through corrupting the awarding of government tender contracts, mostly based on personal connections and corrupt relationships.

      BEE-fronting is an abuse of the rules governing Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), where qualifying persons are given a seat on the Board of Directors of a company while having no decision-making power in the company, in order to qualify the company for government contracts in terms of BEE.

      Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act (Act 53 of 2003) (BEE) is a racially selective programme launched by the South African government to redress the inequalities of Apartheid by giving certain previously disadvantaged groups (Blacks, Coloureds, Indians, and Chinese who arrived before 1994) of South African

      citizens economic privileges previously not available to them.

      Since race is the overriding factor Archbishop Desmond Tutu warned that South Africa is sitting on a “powder keg,” Archbishop Desmond Tutu argued that Black Economic Empowerment only serves a few black elite, leaving millions in “dehumanising poverty”.

      Inkatha Freedom Party leader Mangosuthu Buthelezi is a strong critic of BEE and supports this view. He has stated that “the government’s reckless implementation of the affirmative action policy is forcing many white people to leave the country in search of work, creating a skills shortage crisis”.

      Related to this is Cadre deployment and employment, which is an official ANC policy ensuring their supporters and cronies has its control on all aspects of power and economy.

      Sadly although BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) is supposed to address the wrongs, injustices of the past and address inequality yet it is abused by a ruling black elite that allowed a corrupt system to take hold by demanding bribes, money for jobs and money for welfare housing and giving preference to their supporters of their

      corrupt network (the so called inner circle) for jobs.

      There are many laws against racism and discriminating on the basis of race, religion or sexual orientation yet BEE has become a corrupt network for many of those enriching themselves under the cover of legislation.

      So how does this affect law and order? a few examples:

      Former National Police Commissioner and ex-President of Interpol, Jackie Selebi, was convicted on corruption charges in July 2010, for receiving (at least) R120 000 from alleged crime-syndicate boss, Glenn Agliotti.

      The Goodwood police station commander, Siphiwu Hewana, was found guilty of attempting to defeat the ends of justice by tampering with the docket for convicted fraudster Tony Yengeni’s arrest for drunken driving in 2007.

      While all this is going on Europe is subsidizing their agricultural crops while South Africa and other African countries lose out on the opportunity to competitively export agricultural products to Europe.

      Their minerals are being literally bought out from under their feet by The west’s vastly overrated exchange rate that pay very little from their privileged position for the wealth of African countries.

      • Nofearorfavor

        You have managed to encapsulate most of the most glaring of the hugely complex problems we stare we have existing in our country today. Yet, as you say, while there’s robust laws to protect us all equally. they are mostly not enforced and with bribery rife, the unscrupulous can buy there way out quietly, so than a hue and cry is seldom heard afterwards. With Africa’s history generally a corrupt one, there was at least hope that with the Constitution and Bill of Rights underpinning the New South Africa, that our black government would set an almost unique example in Africa, as a government of transparency and sound governance, but alas, just more of the same bribery, corruption, nepotism, cronyism and outright theft at the highest level. It is tragic that this state of affairs was allowed to happen in a country of South Africa’s calibre. All our comments here made 5 months ago… and look at how issues have worsened further since then. It is very difficult to actually have a frank discussion on any of the local sites… as mostly one’s comment is then either moderated — not published or one is banned from the site for criticising the western cabal. Yet, this is where the grievous paradox pertinently erupts in the face — on the one hand we have a generally corrupt and self-serving government, who truly does not give a damn about SA– are not committed to our peoples at all– then on the other hand we have the main opposition– and a wealthy opposition it is too, never seems short of funds… What are we looking at here to correct what is actually problems which are not half as complex as they appear to be– the complexities we face (IMO) mainly come from the dangerous neglect of a government who stood by and allowed SA’s education to slide into oblivion, deliberately did not support the growth of SME’s or viable new start up businesses, especially singling out whites South Africans– people with the know-how and commitment to SA, mostly happy to form black partnerships, assisting growth of the economy, while permanent employment generated by these enterprises, uplifted black families– every enterprise contributing to SA’s consumer index and GDP. But no BEE, did not even serve ordinary black South Africans– never mind their white brothers and sisters! So now do we fix the mess we’re in? We have the DA in control in a number of metros, while the ANC continues to be in disarray. Do white South Africans even consider having a white government again? In my opinion– NO. But we do need an honest and hugely committed government, representative of ALL of born and bred South Africans… What we don’t need is the US and the west continuing to meddle in our affairs. Well we know SA, like most countries around the globe, is not a fully-fledged sovereign state, but still firmly under the Anglo-Axis’ jackboot. Who owns main shares in our reserve bank, gold and especially diamond mines… oh could go on… we all know the global bankster gangsters control all our major resources, with only a bit of give and take to the top tier, most of whom while bitter about it, had no choice but to go with Uncle Sam and is colonial imperialist minions, or SA would be made ungovernable or even worse a blood bath– the situation Mandela was confronted with as well as Mbeki and JZ. But Mandela’s strategy of beating the globalists at their own game, by uniting us as a nation and building SA into an independent powerhouse over time, able to determine her own future. Yet those who followed him, had neither his vision, wisdom, competence or commitment to his people– which included every citizen of South Africa. Instead, our so-called elite, while benefiting personally from singing to the same Zio hymn sheet, the Apartheid government sang from too– had to please their less fortunate and mass of uneducated black constituents, by blaming and holding white South Africans accountable for having to submit to the global bankster gangsters– a network which consist of all races, including Saudi Arabs! Thus alienating and practising reverse apartheid was critical for our government, to ensure they remain in power, as was it also critical for them to keep the masses as ignorant as possible, unaware that yet again, they were betrayed.

        At least that’s what leaps to the eye with me, simply because so many whites wanted to help and were committed to rebuild our nation– are so to this day. Yet, they were rebuffed and accused of ‘white fronting’, which in general was not the case! As the previously advantaged group, we had the knowledge, the education, the skills etc, to share and in working together, as Mandela had envisaged, putting the pain of the past behind us by reaching for an achieving a common goal– Mandela knew nothing would serve to unite us faster and benefit our country. He must be turning in his grave right now. Sorry, I put everything across so clumsily, but my thoughts just flowed and thus a bit haphazardly… Sometime ago I tried to explain on one our business sites– that there’s more behind our student protests than meet the eye, but my comment wasn’t published. One can only assume this happens because our media is owned and controlled by the western media moguls. Anyway, would appreciate your thoughts, at least it is heartening to know how many South Africans of all races, see the wood for the trees… know who is muddying the water.

    • Mpho David Rambuda

      It has always been the last resort of African governments to use the west as the scapegoat for their failure to transform and bring progress to their countries. It is a pity that the citizens always fall for this. Who promised free education and failed to deliver? Who is abusing state resources? Who’s laundering money from their own governments using friends and families as fronts? Our own leaders

    • Pingback: A Terceira Guerra Mundial está atualmente acontecendo. Quanto tempo levará até esquentar? | Dinâmica Global()

    • Pingback: BRICS Under Attack (2) | Bill Totten's Weblog()

    • Pingback: BRICS pod napadom: Rusija na nišanu Zapadnih banaka, vlada i cijene nafte » SBPeriskop()

    • Nofearorfavor aka Papas

      As a South African, I appeal to South Africans of all races — have an open mind, become globally as informed as possible — to the nth degree, if you have the time — check out the following article for starters: This article is not an anti-Semitic article at all — it simply brings facts as they are in the world we live in today.

      Spend time on this site and really recommend that again, specifically South Africans initiate their own searches in their quest for the ultimate truth. Don’t simply believe something you read, just because it says so or it even offers so-called evidence, which often was disproved later — main thing is validate it for yourself. If what you considered the truth, turns out to be lies — then be ruthless with yourself and have the courage to face it. Unfortunately in the world we live in today, few things are as they appear to be and the very much murdered truth, lies somewhere in between. Finding the truth is very hard today due to the evil cunning applied to obscure it — but obscured and lied about it has been from virtually the beginnings of time as committed research will soon reveal to anyone who refuses to be satisfied with anything less than the truth. I personally have found many answers from Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Pepe Escobar, Jan Oberg, Jon Rappoport, Patrick L. Smith, William Engdahl, Phil Butler, Mike Whitney etc as well as sites such as Global, Washington’s blog, Information Clearing House and New Eastern Outlook and Veteranstoday. For history, I enjoy and even Henry Makow, but for the more conventional, check out the independent review for political studies. But its for each one to arrive at their own conclusions. As for our own reserve bank from what I’ve read, it remains in mainly the hands of the Rothschild’s and according to Stephen Goodson, when US banks needed bail outs in 2008, the SARB sponsored a beyond handsome amount in gold bullion. Many of you may already be very much informed about all I am sharing here, be visiting the same online analysts and sites I mentioned above … but simply put them out there for those who don’t or may be interested to check them out.

      It is very hard to discuss matters which threaten us all through comments on even the most so-called ‘independent’, SA media, as mostly one is moderated or even banned for giving one’s honest opinion, or for trying to share meaningful thoughts with fellow South Africans. At this point, because recent events have happened, which resulted in terrible anger and condemnation erupting between all races, racism has again reared its ugly head and could reach an all time high.

      To my mind, more than ever before, when most who comment are deeply concerned — but angry and even outraged too and across all races, we should be open to respecting each other, first and foremost. That despite our anger, we should perhaps remain calm and commit to civilised discussion with our fellows, not gross insults, which achieve nothing and only succeed in dividing us further — so maybe we should consider, that when South Africa’s future is critically important to us all, we should apply critical thinking and cool heads and try finding common ground and amicable solutions for our many differences? Especially, about issues which way beyond sensitive, impact us all and are today mostly caused by powerful global politics beyond our borders.

    • Al

      It’s not as simple as the article manes out. I despise US hegemony, but as a south African I’d chose the US over the ANC any day. The only part of the country that hasn’t collapsed yer us the Cape, a province that the ANC does not administrate. Voters in SA have a serious lack of education, the ANC exploits this by hsdlnding out free meals if you promise to vote for them. Meanwhile there are powercuts everyday, lack of water treatment in many areas, no housing, cuts to education funding etc. While Chinese investment would be better, the ANC had to go, the DA is the only party that stands a chance. Nothing is black and white, pun intented

    • “A number of groups on the left such as the Economic Freedom Fighters, led by former ANC youth leader Julius Malema…”
      A few years back SARS successfully sued ANC youth leader Julius Malema for R16 million in unpaid taxes.
      Malema, on a govt salary of R20,000/m at the time, has never explained where he got the money from to owe the taxman R16 million……

    • I wonder if Russia would like a little Tartus in Cape Town? Before we join NATO.

    • Pingback: "World War III Has Begun" — Paul Craig Roberts | The Daily Sheeple()

    • Pingback: World War III Has Begun - SansMemetics()

    • Pingback: Paul Craig Roberts: World War III Has Begun | Political American()

    • Pingback: Paul Craig Roberts: World War III Has Begun | THE UNHIVED MIND III()

    • Rasputin

      Applebaum is a Zionist, working for the Tribe.

    • Pingback: World War III Has Begun – Real News Now()

    • Dr_NOS

      I partially agree with the article. Although the DA seems to be a forefront of the USSA the ANC is not clean of problems either, therefore it would be a gray area to say that the US is pulling the strings to topple ANC.
      First of all we (I am South African) have a retarded president, He is so low on an IQ scale that would make a chimpanzee a PhD candidate by comparison. Most of the ANC cadres fit the profile of the president which leads to virtually no returns on taxation. Extremely poor services, degradation of the infrastructure to a point of no return (roads, electricity, waste, mismanagement, water supply, a huge ratio of public to private employees, etc). These are not USA drives, but the incompetence of the locals. Not to mention the affirmative action policy against a mini minority of whites.
      In a nutshell, USSA does not have to do anything to grab SA, as the ANC keep shooting themselves in their feet continuously.

    • Pingback: III Wojna Światowa już się zaczęła – Paul Craig Roberts | - Serwis informacyjny dziennikarstwa obywatelskiego.()

    • Pingback: BRICS Under Attack: Western Banks, Governments Launch Full-Spectrum Assault On Russia (Part I) - Black Opinion()

    • Pingback: BRICS Under Attack: Western Banks, Governments Launch Full-Spectrum Assault On Russia (Part I)()

    • Caphela

      As somebody who closely follows developments within BRICS, I can tell you that this is COMPLETE AND UTTER DRIVEL! South Africa’s current issues are due upwellings in the politiosphere. The highest court in SA finally brought closure to an issue that came to the fore in 2011! It found that the president enriched himself with public funds and violated the constitution by not accepting the findings of the Public Protector (or “ombudsman”, if your not in SA). To even suggest that the judge or the party that took the case before the Constitutional Court is imperialist is ludicrous!

      If one conducts even a little more than a superficial analysis of Russia and Brazil, you will find that their problems are also induced by factors that could not possibly be led by some “third force”. Russia depends on oil and natural gas for about 2/3 of its income. The reason why it is in a recession is because the price of natural gas has plummeted and a barrel of crude has also come down 76% since mid 2014.

      Like South Africa, Brazil current crises are due to political infighting within the ruling party and a slow down in it’s resource dependent economy.

      Just because these nations aren’t doing well at the same time, does not mean that they are in trouble because some cabal has plotted against them. Please, please, please stop misleading people! The leaders in these various countries have failed in some way, shape or form and that is why they are where they are. Disseminating such propaganda only allows for these leaders to shift the blame elsewhere, instead of correcting the underlying faults.

      • Laurine le Roux

        I think you should take a good hard look at “the cabal” and what it represents; look at the events in Ukraine and Crimea in the recent past, in order to read between the lines of what the article might be suggesting. The Western Corporation (short for banking elites, industrial-military complex, the unholy marriage between US and Zionist Israel, the genesis of ISIS/all the terrorist groups that have mushroomed in the past few decades) have their tentacles deep in world affairs and their main agenda is destabilization, regime change, installation of vassal statesmen and finally economic and political control on a global scale. South Africa is interesting to this cabal now because it has done the unthinkable, joined forces with these shady communist-leaning countries who are forming alliances that are not good news to the West. Otherwise SA may well remain in the back-benches of their discussions. The article acknowledges in the last paragraph that the problems such as economic disenfranchisement and corruption exist and must be addressed. But there is light thrown on financiers and groups such as Legatum and Nathan Kirsh, which deserve examination. You may not like the left-leaning tone of the article, however without such independent journalism these nuances would not unfold and challenge people to take a closer look at the obvious.

        • Caphela

          I am well aware of the Western cabal and its agenda, but its simply too far-fetched to attribute the current quandary to some carefully contrived outside plot. Ours was a negotiated political transition. Hence the liberation movement has always had to figure out how to work WITH rather than AGAINST the historical beneficiaries of SA’s resources and foreign capital in order to effect socioeconomic change. In 1996 Mbeki called for a ‘dialectical relationship with private capital as a social partner for development and social progress”. Chaps like Kirsh, Wiese, Rupert, Oppenheimer, Mouton, Ferreira, Dippenaar, Harris and Western imperialist elites who wield influence through orgs like Legatum are not new. Some of these families have been actively influencing SA politics since the first diamond was discovered on the south bank of the Orange River. Furthermore I believe characterizing these families/orgs as an evil, monolithic block hellbent on subjugating South Africans to be a fallacious, simplification.

          What IS new is the fragmentation and decline of a once glorious liberation movement. Look at the current situation. Did a Western cabal hatch a plan to build Zuma a R250mil home? Did they force him to feign the remedial action of the Public Protector? Did the West draft the unlawful police report that determined that the President’s swimming pool, amphitheater, cattle kraal, chicken run and visitor’s center were legitimate security upgrades? Did they collude to force Zuma to replace a respected finance minister with a malleable, sycophantic cadre? Is the West behind the rampant corruption we’re seeing at state-owned enterprises such as SAA, ESKOM, SABC, PRASA etc? Is the West planting corrupt officials in the national assembly and in our municipal and provincial governments?

          Yes, I am certain they’ve heaped media pressure and stepped up the funding of opposition parties and dissenters within the ANC to destabilize things further. But as far as I can see, this mess is mostly self-inflicted. The anti-West foreign policy realignment you mention runs completely contrary to the original values of the ANC and the new SA. Its not a sinister Western plot – it’s a tell-tale sign of the decline of the ANC. Our foreign policy stance is no longer centered on civil rights and justice; it’s based on the corruption and the enrichment of the ANC top brass. During Zuma’s tenure we’ve rejected the plight of Tibet and declined the Dalai Lama’s visits; we’ve fought to acquire Russian nuclear reactors against strident negative public sentiment; we’ve seen it fit to cozy up to African dictators such as Eq. Guinea’s Mbasogo and Sudan’s Al-Bashir (violating ICC commitments in the process); we’ve been caught using our defense force to secure mines for ANC elites in CAR and DRC and now we’re supporting supporting the Wahhabi mission by building weapons factories in Saudi Arabia!

          So @laurineleroux:disqus, I agree: we’re in a crisis and there’s a powerful Western-aligned elite that would like to not only gain greater control of SA, but also weaken the nascent BRICS alliance that has become somewhat of a potent counterpoise. However I find it very hard to fathom how they, as smart as they are, could have engineered the current political fiasco. Moreover, the very fact that we now view the West as enemies (not that they were playmates before) is a manifestation of the ignorance and corruption that has befallen the ruling party.

          Let’s not use “The West” as a scapegoat for an ANC leadership that has been severely weakened by poor leadership and corruption.

        • Edkrause

          With all due respect…This article and your reply boils down to the following: Any opposition to corrupt and badly governed peoples has now become pro-western imperialism. please grow up! This is becoming just the same as western propaganda.

          • Laurine le Roux

            There is no need to be insulting. You are suggesting that I am a child because I have a different view to you, that is not a convincing rebuttal to the points I made. I would hate to say “I told you so” in the near future .. because that is also a childish response, but since you haven’t made any actual points in your short little spat, I would suggest you might well be inviting a childish response.

            • Renier Gouws

              The onus is on you to provide proof that so called “western imperialism” is behind the problems we have in South Africa face. Perhaps it is, but then ONLY in the form of highlighting the corrupt dealings of the South African government.

    • Pingback: BRICS Under Attack: NWO Tentacles Extending into South Africa* | Hwaairfan's Blog()

    • SeaNote

      MORON ALERT: Eric Draitser

      The BRICs thought they were leading the charge when all they were doing was selling commodities to the Chinese who were leading the charge. Then the Chinese economy slowed down while they had excess capacity of commodites, and the BRICs tanked after they overspent with the expectation of more commodity revenues.

      They hit their own BRIC wall, the dummies.

    • observer111

      This article misses the point entirely. South Africa is in trouble because of our own deeply ingrained political corruption and general worthless administrative skills. The ANC started out well enough but have slowly become the corrupt cancer that is eating away at this country. The overall rotten-to-the-core nature of the ANC is legendary.

      Their love affair with China and Russia is misguided. In actual fact it is harming South Africa. Instead of developing our indigenous manufacturing sector, the current policy focuses on shipping off all our mineral wealth to China, where it is refined, processed and re-sold to us in the guise of crappy consumer goods that are so cheap that they have destroyed our domestic industries, the textile industry being but one example. I believe the US had a revolution against Britain on the same basis, no?

      America has little to nothing to do with our problems.

      The DA is the solution to SA’s malaise. You lable them as centre – right but in fact if they were an American party they would be far left. Just so that you can have a little perspective. God knows I don’t agree with the DA’s policies on many fronts (I myself am an actual right winger) but the one thing that they do provide is efficient and honest governance and service delivery. Frankly I would settle for that if it meant salvaging South Africa from the dustbin.

      • Ben Wilson

        Same thing is happening to Australia, the incredibly corrupt right wing government is doing the same thing with China

      • Bill Rood

        Who is it that pushes the “free trade” deals that allow China to export cheap goods manufactured with slave wages to countries all over the world including SA?

    • James Wherry

      Yes, yes: the money from the IMF comes with all sorts of strings, like environmental reform, wage and trade union movement reform and human rights reforms. Putin is liked and well received by the dictatorships such as Syria because he does not come with those strings. The same is true for China.

      And now the Left glorifies this alternative, after first neutering our own businesses from making money in these countries?!? Sounds like the Left has no problem with the “plutocracy,” so long as it’s run by Russia and China.

      This is the result, when you demonize America and glorify its opponents, all in the name of trying to “Stop the War! Stop the War!” You end up with an alternate reality from an alternate dimension.

      • Bill Rood

        The IMF is pushing “environmental reform, wage and trade union movement reform and human rights reforms?” Oh, right! Like in Bangladesh and Honduras, I suppose. I’d like some of what you’ve been smoking.

        • James Wherry

          You are entitled to your own opinions: you are not entitled to your own facts.

          Economic stability is the IMF’s goals. Partnership with trade unions and an emphasis on the environment is its means.

          • Bill Rood

            And you are entitled to believe all the self-serving IMF propaganda you wish.

            • Renier Gouws

              Yet you believe without anything of substance to validate your belief. Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one.

              • Bill Rood

                What goes around, comes around, eh? Yeah, I suppose factory collapses in Bangladesh and the murder of indigenous environmental activists in Honduras lack substance. Now, I realize the IMF did not directly encourage all that, but could you maybe point to concrete actions the IMF has taken to force governments to respect the human rights of labor and environmental activists, rather than just the platitudes and generalities in Wherry’s links?

          • Neil Creed

            my god you need to stop watching CNN. you do know these bafoons print money out of thin air and use this monopoly money to enslave entire nations for generations. But i suspect common sense is lost on the brain washed

            • James Wherry

              Flattering as it may be, I am not your “God.” I’ve cited my sources as the IMF, not CNN. Do a better job of reading. Finally, if you have counter-arguments or sources, cite them.

    • Did the person who wrote this even visit South Africa and speak to its people? What is happening now has everything to do with serious ongoing corruption. This is not the result of mysterious outside influences but instead a population very fed up up with a self-serving government that only pays lip service to the country’s serious problems. The student protests, revolt against the president and countless service delivery riots did not need outside influence to be sparked.

      The above is the same nonsense being used by corrupt officials here to deflect their own damaging activities. The main tactic to attack the Public Protector by those she investigates for corruption has been to call her a western spy.

      You are not fighting the new imperialists with the above article. You’re helping them.

      • Zubeir Soeker

        I am from South Africa and I agree with every you said. However, I do agree with this article that the Democratic Alliance is funded by the West and has strong ties with racist Israel. South Africa is indeed in need of a revolution and the DA is most certainly not the solution.

        • Norm

          A Black South African on Israel and Apartheid:

          • Zubeir Soeker

            Who is this guy even? What a joke. Please post your pathetic propaganda somewhere else. Read what Nelson Mandela, you know the guy that liberated this country has to say about Israel.

            • Norm

              Kenneth Rasalabe Joseph Meshoe is the President of the African Christian Democratic Party in South Africa, a South African political party founded in 1993 and consisting mainly of conservative Christians. The party’s platform is based on the biblical standard of reconciliation, justice, compassion, tolerance, peace and the sanctity of life, the individual, the family and community. Meshoe has argued against claims that Israel is an apartheid state, calling such accusations slanderous and deceptive that trivialize the word apartheid and belittle the magnitude of the racism and suffering endured by non-white South Africans during the apartheid era.

              • Zubeir Soeker

                I other word, an unknown political figure in israel’s back-pocket.

              • Bill Rood

                “Nobody could possibly have suffered as badly as my own little parochial group, eh?” Nobody here is trivializing the black SA experience, and black SAs should not be trivializing the suffering of Palestinians who must wait hours to get through checkpoints to get to hospitals in emergency situations. When Meshoe has lived in Palestine as a non-Jewish Palestinian, he might have some basis for comparison.

                • Norm

                  “…black SAs should not be trivializing the suffering of Palestinians who must wait hours to get through checkpoints to get to hospitals in emergency situations…”

                  Well, you are apparently ignorant of this…

                  See also here:

                  There is simply no comparison between what the Jews had to go through in their 2000 years of exile with the horrific cold-blooded systematic genocide of six million of them in the Holocaust, and the inconvenience of being stopped at a border crossing, having to wait in line a bit longer while thoroughly searched for hidden knives, arms, and suicide belts, as a West Bank Arab seeking daily work inside Israel or medical treatment in Israeli hospitals at a time when your own leaders are actively encouraging your terrorist acts. Remember that there was no separation wall before the murderous 2000 intifada, which actually broke out as soon as Israel offered Arafat control of more than 95% of the West Bank and Gaza.

                  • Bill Rood

                    First, I wasn’t talking about crossings of the Green Line, or even into settlement areas. I was talking about internal checkpoints in the West Bank.

                    Yes, I understand that you feel the Holocaust gives Jews in Israel the right to do anything they want to non-Jews. I disagree, as do many Holocaust survivors. The “murderous 2000 intifada” began with many Palestinian deaths before the first Israeli was killed. As to “Barak’s generous offer” and your claim of 95% Palestinian control, those are more Zionist lies. Here’s an easy to grasp set of graphics from Gush Shalom:

                    … and here’s a more detailed analysis:

                    • Norm

                      Well, you specifically talked about hospitals, these are mostly inside the green line. From 1967 and up until the first intifada in the 1980s, Palestinians and Israelis could travel freely anywhere with no checkpoints whatsoever. Palestinians could find plenty of work in Israel and many Israelis used to shop in the WB and Gaza. The Oslo Accords in the early 1990s were immediately followed by a wave of terrorism instigated by Palestinians, not by Israelis: At Camp David in July 2000, Ehud Barak offered Arafat an eventual 91% of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip. Arafat’s response was a 2nd intifada with more than 1000 Israelis blown up by Allahu Akbar-screaming jihadist “human rights activists”… Hence the checkpoints and all.

                      Now I never said “the Holocaust gives Jews in Israel the right to do anything they want to non-Jews,” this is nothing but your own strawman. FYI, 20% of Israelis are in fact Muslim Arabs, many of whom are actually senior doctors in those Israeli hospitals. Other Israeli Arabs are top engineers, hi-tech entrepreneurs, lawyers, judges, members of Israeli parliament, and even judges on the Israeli Supreme Court whose rulings can intervene in IDF military operations. What an apartheid state… In comparison: “Lebanon’s Palestinians are banned from 72 professions and largely denied citizenship. They cannot own property and are without representation and many basic human rights. They are systematically discriminated against and have, on several occasions, been the victims of brutal violence.” See also this: Funny how we never see any leftists ever suggesting a BDS against Lebanon…

                      • Bill Rood

                        You’re a real scream, Norm. You keep reconfirming my claim that, as Herzl made clear in his diary in 1905, dissembling and outright lying is a core value of Zionism. My first reaction to your first 4 sentences was recollection of an Israeli website I saw in about 2000 that had a table of Israeli deaths as a result of terrorism. It showed a steady decline through the 1990s, after the signing of the Oslo Accords. Unfortunately, that website is no longer available, but I’ve occasionally seen even-handed articles in Forward, so I decided to look at your link. It verbally confirms the website I recalled, so I’m going to bookmark it. Thanks. However, even that article completely ignores the large number of Palestinians killed by Israeli violence and over-reaction. Here’s a web page that shows all deaths resulting from violence in Israel-Palestine since 2000:

                        The graph doesn’t show the detail of the first year, but I recall that the killing was initiated by Israel when it killed 4 Palestinians during a demonstration in which no Israelis were killed. The totals in 2000 were 282 Palestinians and 41 Israelis killed. Far more than just 4 Palestinians were killed before the first Israeli was killed, but I’ve been unable to find that statistic, as the media rarely reports anything negative about Israel.

                        I already cited 2 websites that prove you are lying about “Barak’s generous offer.” He wanted the Palestinians to indefinitely cede a large security zone along the Jordan River to Israeli control, and movement within the Palestinian cantons would continue to be tightly controlled by Israeli checkpoints.

                        But keep lying big, Norm. And be sure to endlessly repeat your lies.

                        As to Lebanon, the issue at hand is Israel, not Lebanon. If Lebanon treats refugees that were created by Zionist ethnic cleansing worse than Israel treats its own non-Jewish citizens, the world should justifiably be outraged, but that in no way justifies the continued oppression and murder of non-citizen Palestinian women and children by Israeli authorities. Note also that Israel’s own Kahan commission found that Israeli military personnel were indirectly responsible and Ariel Sharon personally responsible for arguably the worst atrocity committed by any Lebanese force against Palestinian refugees, the slaughter of hundreds of women, children and old men at Sabra and Shatila after US diplomat Philip Habib had guaranteed their safety as a condition for the removal of Palestinian fighters from the camps:

                      • Norm

                        Yeah, I’m looking at your link. It says “At least 1,217 Israelis and 9,271 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000.” I wonder why that site fails to mention that the 1,217 Israelis were mostly innocent civilians blown up on busses and in restaurants, while the majority of the 9,271 Palestinians were mostly either the suicide-bombers themselves and/or their commanders who perpetrated the above acts of terror, or else the hapless women and children forced at gunpoint to serve as human-shield for those terrorists while Israel was under yet another barrage of thousands of Hamas rockets. And there was no deliberate ethnic cleansing of Arabs in 1948, otherwise we wouldn’t see them comprise 20% of Israelis today. I’m sure you know very well who it was who rejected the UN Partition Plan and who ordered the Arab residents to leave temporarily to neighboring Arab countries so as not to stand in the way of the “momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongol massacres” ( ) that was planned for the Jews…

                        Meanwhile, what I also don’t see posted in your link is the fact that, as we’re so obsessed counting precisely the number of Arab terrorists killed by Israeli self-defense, we have anywhere from 400,000 to 800,000 brutally slaughtered by Arabs in Syria since 2011 alone, together with tens of millions displaced and untold numbers raped, tortured, gassed, and/or starved to death, and absolutely no one in the entire world – including you – gives a s­­­­h­­­­i­­­­t about it. Have you even heard about Yarmouk Camp? Care to explain whether your obsession solely with Israel is just standard hypocrisy or simply double-standard anti-Semitism?

                      • Bill Rood

                        As usual, Zionist hypocrisy wants to claim Israeli fatalitities are mostly civilian while refusing to acknowledge the same can be said for Palestinians. It’s only natural I suppose, as you deny the humanity of all Palestinians.

                        …who ordered the Arab residents to leave temporarily to neighboring Arab countries so as not to stand in the way…

                        OMG, you’re trotting that old lie out again. It was discredited in 1961:

                        Even your own historians agree there was ethnic cleansing in 1948. Benny Morris thinks it was merely intentional (because nobody made a serious effort to end the atrocities), while Ilan Pappe thinks it was deliberate, but both agree it happened. Morris thinks it was a good thing.

                        You are so desperate, you have to justify your own immorality by citing atrocities in other countries. Pretty weak, especially since Israel has been encouraging the bloodshed in Syria since it started. I’m not solely concerned with Israeli atrocities. I’ve spoken out against US atrocities all my life. They aren’t all associated with support for Israel, though many have been. You are one of two commenters who brought the off-topic issue of Israel to this thread, not me.

                      • Norm

                        “I’ve spoken out against US atrocities all my life. They aren’t all associated with support for Israel, though many have been.”

                        “Atrocities” largely imaginary and/or are taken out of the larger context, like ending WWII in Hiroshima and Nagasaki by saving the lives of one million American soldiers and many more millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians. But have you ever, even once in your life, tried to consider the very real atrocities of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and Che, Saddam Hussein, both Assads father and son, and all the horrendous atrocities of Sharia law? I doubt it…

                        You see, it’s not at all about “justifying” one immorality by pointing to another. It’s about people like you spinning bogus “atrocities” claims around a kernel of distorted out-of-context half-truths, amplified by conspiracy theories like “Oded Yinon” and “9/11 truthing”. And, given the situation on the ground in Syria and sheer numbers of “Arab Spring” victims, you still haven’t clarified whether your obsessive anti-Israel deep hatred views and your casual acceptance or even actually rooting for fanatic Islamic jihadism arise from hypocrisy, anti-Semitism, or because your guiding principle is “everything anti-American is cool”…

                      • Bill Rood

                        My heavens, you are bonkers, throwing in all sorts of issues that were not addressed in the original articles, nor in any of my replies to your lies and distortions. I will address only one issue here, which I failed to address earlier, and which you have now brought up a second time: anti-Semitism.

                        This is a canard and conflation you Likudnik apologists constantly throw out whenever any non-Jew criticizes your government’s policies. It is specious and everyone knows it. It’s not working anymore. If the critic is a Jew, you call them a “self-hating Jew.” They are far more “Jewish” and are far more faithful to what I’ve been told are “Jewish values” than you are.

                        Regardless of what you may claim or believe, neither you nor your government speak for all Jews. I don’t claim to speak for all Jews, either, but I’ve personally known several Jews, and are aware of many more, who are thoroughly disgusted with what you represent. Here are links for several Jewish or Jewish-led organizations or individuals who oppose Israeli government policies:

                        These groups are quite visible. They are courageous people, proud of their belief in the universal rights of all human beings, rather than the “right” of one group or nation to lord it over others. Many of them have put up with threats, ridicule and ostracism. They are not self-hating; they simply know that to deny any individual his/her human rights and dignity ultimately results in the destruction of the rights of all.

                        Nowhere have I advocated denying you your human rights or your right to continue living wherever you now live; I simply speak historical truths and demand that Israel respect the equal rights of all individuals residing in territories over which it exercises de facto control. I have a right to make that demand, as my country contributes $3 billion/year to Israel’s violations. Only a pathological liar
                        would mischaracterize that position as
                        “anti-Semitic” or Jewish critics of your country’s policies as “self-hating Jews.”

                      • Norm

                        “I simply speak historical truths…”

                        Let’s see… You tout here silly “Oded Yinon Plan” conspiracy theories of a “Greater Israel” myth which are totally incompatible with all historical facts of Israeli pullouts from Sinai, South Lebanon, Gaza, and repeated offers for same in the West Bank. You insist that Israel’s enemy ISIS is actually being backed and puppeted by Israel, as a tool for Israeli expansionism into the Shiite crescent, or something… You rely on Ilan Pappe, on whom even Benny Morris has this to say: You completely disregard who has been vowing to totally annihilate whom throughout the entire 130 years of this conflict, and the fact that the tiny New Jersey-size state of the by now merely 6 million Jews – their only homeland on this earth – is being existentially threatened by over 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide, 400 million of whom are Arabs with 22 different states of their own stretching for thousands of miles from the Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf, who would zealously slaughter anyone suggesting giving up even “a single grain of Holy Muslim sand from the river to the sea”…

                        “I simply…demand that Israel respect the equal rights of all individuals…”

                        Yet you completely dismiss and brush aside the fate of the hundreds of thousands of Arabs butchered by Arabs and the millions of displaced, raped, starved, and tortured individuals there in the last 5 years alone, as if it’s just a minor insignificant issue you couldn’t be bothered with given the infinitely more pressing “unthinkable suffering” of having to stand in line in Israeli checkpoints as a result of murderous jihadist intifadas….

                        “Only a pathological liar would mischaracterize that position as “anti-Semitic”…

                        What else do you call a Double-standard Delegitimizing Demonization of Israel, then?

                      • Bill Rood

                        Once again, asked and answered on the consistency of the Lewis/Yinon/Perle plans to split ME countries into squabbling statelets. Pullouts from Sinai, South Lebanon and Gaza were not voluntary. The only thing Israel understands is force or excessive cost. You want to go back 130 years, eh? I don’t see you addressing Herzl or any of the other “political Zionists” who from the first promised to “transfer” the indigenous resident.

                        You have the hypocritical chutzpah to whine about “a Double-standard Delegitimizing Demonization” after first denying the existence of Palestinian Arabs, then claiming that the vast majority of them are terrorists? The hypocrisy of whining about factual sources I cite while relying on your own biased sites? Once again, you are the one who brought off-topic
                        Israel into this discussion a month ago, to which I responded only 3
                        days ago. You made Israel the topic of conversation,
                        not me.

                        Go away. We’re not going to convince one another. World opinion is changing, and BDS is starting to hurt. I’m not worried; Israel will be forced to recognize equal individual rights for all, rather than the collectivist rights of its chosen group. I sincerely hope this occurs before you create so much hatred and thirst for vengeance that you are forced to leave the land you choose to call home.

                      • Norm

                        So you chose, three days ago, on your own accord, to unsolicitedly join a discussion in which I briefly responded one month ago to others attempting to falsely equate Israel to apartheid SA, and you did it by replying not just to a single post of mine there but to two of them… opting for some reason to address to me your quite lengthy and detailed rants against Israel (a topic you obviously spend a lot of time on and discuss a lot with others for years). And now you’re trying to fake an indignant tone saying it was me who had insisted on making Israel the topic of our back-and-forth that ensued? Let me also remind you that as soon as I brought up Lebanon, Syria, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. into our discussion, it was you who immediately complained that I’m trying to evade the topic at hand, which for you all along has been: Jews and Israel…. ( )

                        Now, regarding your evidence-free claim that the Israeli pullouts were not voluntary, recall that Israel did not right away annex any of the territories it captured in 1967, a war forced on Israel simultaneously by its neighbors supported by the entire Arab world, intending quite literally, yet again, to annihilate Israel and massacre all the Jews there, as explicitly stated in fiery speeches by Nasser and most other Arab leaders at the time, and in consequence of which, Israel had every reason to hold on to it by annexing them forever. Instead, in stark contrast to the many occupations currently in force around the world which you couldn’t care less about, mostly unprovoked ones that don’t in the least arise from any threats to the very existence of the occupying force (e.g., China in Tibet, Turkey in Cyprus, Morocco in Western Sahara, Russia in Georgia, Chechnya, and Crimea, etc), Israel has always considered the captured territories as bargaining cards to be traded for a peace treaty with the Arabs. In fact, it was the Likud government under Begin himself that managed to achieve just that with Egypt, and it was none other than Sharon who single-handedly conceived and implemented Israel’s unilateral pullout from Gaza, both leaders ordering a total dismantling of all Jewish settlements in those areas… So my question to you remains: How does that square with your “Yinon’s Greater Israel Plan” pet theory? And don’t give me that double-standard BS of: “The only thing Israel understands is force or excessive cost.” Are you comparing it to the famous “altruism” of Arabs, renowned for always willing to cede “Muslim lands” for peaceful coexistence compromises with infidels and for their tolerant consideration of everyone’s human rights? See:

                      • Bill Rood

                        I reply to comments I see. Not having seen the article “BRICS under attack…” until 3 days ago and comments defaulting to newest first, I missed the anti-Semitic thread spawned by tapatio and it didn’t register that you were responding to a comment by Zubeir and a rather tangential comment about Israel in the original article. I should have noticed that, so I apologize for saying you were the one who initiated the discussion of Israel. You are half right in that the topic at hand between you and I has been Israel. I never made it about Jews in general except to deny your claim that you and other Zionists speak for them. Yes, I do think about Israel-Palestine a lot because my country provides billions of dollars of aid to Israel every year and is constantly destabilizing and therefore weakening neighboring states, often as a result of lobbying by Israel and its supporters.

                        It seems to me there’s very little evidence one way or the other whether withdrawals from Sinai, Lebanon or Gaza were “voluntary.” Neither you nor I can read the minds of the Israeli leaders who set those policies. However, as I recall the Yom Kippur War was quite a shock to Israel and things were going quite badly until the US re-supplied Israel. I once read an account of a US seaman who claimed to have witnessed US naval aircraft being repainted with the Star of David. Sadat wasn’t the only one who wanted the Suez Canal re-opened, so your suggestion that Israel’s subsequent withdrawal from Sinai was all Begin’s doing seems a bit naive. The attempt to re-occupy South Lebanon in 2006 didn’t go too well, either. In any case, you alleged all those withdrawals were “voluntary,” so it’s really up to you to provide the evidence.

                        Annexation is pretty meaningless for a state that has never defined its borders, and as far as Israel being willing to negotiate land for peace or a two-state solution, Netanyahu was pretty clear on that when he admitted a year ago that Israel would never permit the establishment of a Palestinian state. If there’s never going to be a two state solution, then the only viable solution is a single bi-national state with equal rights for all residents. That means no more BS of having a state land authority whose administration is actually controlled by an ethnically exclusive organization like the JNF, and other subterfuges that disguise real discrimination as accidental.

                        I repeat, you and I aren’t going to convince each other. I imagine your entire schooling has been the patriotic narrative, as it is with all countries. You really ought to read more by Benny Morris than just his New Republic article slamming Ilan Pappe. My understanding is they are in basic agreement as to what happened, but disagree on why and whether it was justifiable. I’m about 1/6 done with Morris’ Righteous Victims, and I just received my copy of The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949. He’s obviously a committed Zionist, so we’ll see if he can convince me that my thinking is in error.

                      • Norm

                        OK, I can see now how you got confused on the thread topic issue. No problem. FYI, I don’t believe in coercing people’s thinking by propaganda and disinformation. I gather neither do you. Which is why I’m so intrigued by your replies and want to understand what it is exactly that you’re trying to say. I’m sorry to report that thus far I’m still at a loss to make any coherent sense of it.

                        Let me begin by noting that you obviously come across as a leftist who considers the US and Israel to be the bad guys, with the Muslims being as pure as the driven snow…. I suppose you see Western civilization as an evil unscrupulous bunch of overbearing greedy colonialists, as opposed to the ‘noble savage’ fat-cat oil-rich Arabs, whom you view as ‘indigenous’ living off the earth in perfect harmony with nature…. It’s a complete mystery to me how anyone who purports to adhere to the principles of secularism, freedom of expression, multiculturalism, respect for the “other”, nondiscrimination and equality under the law, gender equality and LGBT tolerance, social justice, environmental protection, and – most importantly – scientific literacy and fact-checked evidence-based critical thinking, can even begin to maintain some of the views that you’ve expounded on here, given that the entire thought-process and cultural tradition in the Arab world (Palestinians included…) is diametrically opposite to each and every one of the above. Moreover, from your various replies thus far I gather you’re not in the least concerned about the monstrous carnage going on in the last five years in the Middle East due to the unfolding colossal Sunni-Shiite conflict, except inasmuch as you feel you can lay some of the blame for it on the US and Israel in however unsubstantiated a manner (e.g., tens of thousands of jihadist Muslims flocking in droves to ISIS from all corners of the world solely to carry out an all-encompassing “Greater Israel Yinon’s Plan”…. jihadists bought and paid for of course by “The Jewish Lobby”-puppeteered Congress and WH using American taxpayer money, or something….)

                        So let me ask you this: Are you for real? This is what you’ve managed to come up with after your years of researching this issue? You really expect people to believe you’re so concerned with the “devastating” Palestinian “suffering” of having to wait in line at Israeli checkpoints while leisurely reading their smartphones until called to be body-searched for possible hidden knives and suicide belts, that you absolutely have no time for the barbaric genocide of millions going on – as we speak – just 130 miles to the North-East (distance of Ramallah to Damascus), including but not limited to the more than 100,000 of, wait for it, . . . Palestinians in Yarmouk Camp? Really… (Please note that this is not a “whataboutism” excuse in favor of Israel. The sheer magnitude of the Syrian atrocities involved precludes it.) And then you’re telling me with a straight face that you firmly believe all the mess over there will immediately disappear the minute Israel is replaced with a “single bi-national state with equal rights for all residents”, and with a Muslim majority to boot…. Well, I guess you base this prediction on the numerous examples of Muslim states around with equal rights for all their non-Muslim residents…. Has no one ever told you that “man-made” democracy is forbidden under “God-given” Sharia law, except as a disposable one-time vehicle to permanently grab power? Have you seen the popular support polls of Hamas vs. PA in the WB? And what about Iran and Hezbollah if Israel is replaced not only with yet another Sunni-dominated state but one that is also populated with millions of defenseless Jews? You think they will stand idly by (cf. Syria, Iraq, and Yemen…) or perhaps you believe they will intervene in yet another bloodbath against the Sunnis there to maintain the safety and “equal rights” of the Jews….

                        And please don’t take my blunt criticism personally – you’re clearly not the only leftist around with such insane views. While I can certainly understand how and why any anti-Semite would obviously cheer a Hamas-dominated “bi-national state” final-solution plan for the Jews ( ) I’d be quite interested to hear your explanation of how you arrived at such an astonishingly crazy notion.

                      • Bill Rood

                        I’m so intrigued by your replies and want to understand what it is exactly that you’re trying to say…. you obviously come across as a leftist….

                        I initially took that as sincere curiosity about who I am, what my political/social philosophy is and what life journey has brought me to a point that you see as self-contradictory, so here goes:

                        The first thing I should say is that I’ve long felt betrayed by Israel and Zionism. I fell for the whole Leon Uris Exodus narrative of Zionists attempting to live with Arabs when I was a kid. It’s been a long 50 year journey of discovery for me, and with every lie that’s been debunked, such as the non-existent Arab radio broadcasts encouraging Palestinians to flee, Joan Peters’ lies in From Time Immemorial or the false flag Lavon Affair, I get angrier. So if a few things I’ve written border on polemical, that’s why.

                        I self-identify as a “left-libertarian.” For purposes of this discussion, that means I believe in equal rights for all individuals. I believe the only legitimate purpose of government is to guarantee equal rights to all inhabitants of its geographical area and to insure that no individual or group of individuals violates the rights of any other individual. I believe governments gain legitimacy by successfully serving that purpose and that the Israeli government fails that test and has failed it ever since its inception, largely due to its founding political philosophy.

                        I believe rights are not collective. That is, nations, tribes, religions and cults do not have a “right” to a state of their own, nor the “right” to control the government of the geographical area in which they live. The conflict between the natural rights of man and the supposed collective rights of groups is something Western civilization has been struggling with for the last 250 years. In an effort to gain or regain their own individual equal rights, groups coalesce around identifying characteristics such as race, culture, language or religion and act as a group. As long as the focus is on equal rights for their individual members vis a vis the rights or privileges of other individuals, that’s legitimate. But when the group begins to claim “rights” as a group (nationalism), it becomes dangerous. When they begin to use political or economic power gained through such collectivism to exclude others or grant themselves privileges not granted to others, that’s a problem. A government de-legitimizes itself to the extent such privileges are granted. Here is a website describing the contradictions between equal rights and special privilege in Israel and how Israeli law is structured to privilege (sometimes covertly) Jews:
                        Here is a lay summary of the discriminatory effects of such laws:
                        And here is an article from the Jewish Forward discussing entrenched housing discrimination in Israel:
                        The links above discuss Jewish privilege vs discrimination against Arab citizens and other non-Jewish residents of Israel within the Green Line. They don’t even touch on the misery of non-citizen Palestinians.

                        So much for where I’m coming from. You move from conciliation to invective quite rapidly:

                        Muslims being as pure as the driven snow

                        I’ve never said anything even remotely like that. What I’ve said is that Arab and Muslim sins in their own countries are irrelevant to and certainly do not justify Israeli sins in Israel and neighboring states it has invaded. To be sure, the Gulf States and neo-Ottoman regime that the US and Israel have allied themselves with are vile, illegitimate entities. That ideology is at odds with mainstream Sunni thought, to say nothing of its hatred of the Shia. Mainstream Islam of both sects was light years ahead of Western Europe in its religious tolerance until the 18th Century when Europeans decided they no longer wanted to endure horrors like the Thirty Years War. Since then, Muslims have lagged behind in their attitudes, but they were making progress until recently. Sunni and Shia lived together in peace (in mixed neighborhoods with mixed marriages) in Baghdad until the US, threatened by a developing alliance between Muqtada al-Sadr and Sunni Fallujah, ordered John Negroponte and James Steele to implement the “El Salvador option” and encouraged sectarian dopes to blow up mosques like the Golden Dome. In Palestine, Jews, Arabs and Christians lived together in relative peace for a thousand years until the arrival of political Zionism with its Western, nationalist ideology.

                        But let’s take a look at your hypocrisy:

                        It’s a complete mystery to me how anyone who purports to adhere to the
                        principles of secularism, freedom of expression, multiculturalism,
                        respect for the “other”, nondiscrimination and equality under the law,
                        gender equality and LGBT tolerance, social justice, environmental

                        Really? You’re going to lecture about secularism, respect for the “other”, nondiscrimination and equality under the law in defense of a state that systematically privileges adherents to its chosen religion and withholds those privileges (ie, discriminates against) the “other?” You’re going to speak of multiculturalism in a state in constant fear of the “demographic bomb” that might lead to minority status for its chosen culture, and where leaders like Benny Morris are hinting that further “transfers” might become necessary to head off the threat? Environmental protection while the JNF plants non-indigenous species unsuited to the arid climate in an attempt to hide the remains of villages wiped out in 1947-49?

                        Don’t lecture me about fact-checked truths until you’ve learned about your own country’s history and political philosophy. Here are some authors you might want to check out:
                        * Benny Morris. I disagree with his morally bankrupt justification for the Nakba and ongoing cleansing, but I believe he wrote the Truth as he believed it to be, at least in his earliest works. For that, the world owes him a debt of gratitude.
                        * Israel Shahak, a Holocaust survivor who lived in Israel for the remainder of his life.
                        * Yosef Grodzinsky, especially In the Shadow of the Holocau8st
                        * Tom Segev, especially The 7th Million

                        The fundamental truths about political Zionism may be found on p. 21 of Benny Morris, Righteous Victims, a History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict 1881-1999:

                        In 1899 he [Herzl] wrote to the Arab notable Yusuf Zia al-Khalidi of Jerusalem that Zionism did not pose a threat of displacement for the Arab inhabitants of Palestine; rather, the arrival of the industrious, talented, well-funded Jews would materially benefit them…. But in private Herzl sang a different tune—one of displacement and trans­fer…. In 1895 he wrote in his diary: “We must expropriate gently.. . . We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our country…. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out dis­creetly and circumspectly.”

                        Numerous other quotes from early leaders of “political Zionism” demonstrate that two of its core values are deception and ethnic cleansing. The Palestinian Arabs were not stupid. They quite quickly detected the deception and reacted with both anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, having been confused by Zionists as to the difference.

                        I checked out your Hamas link. You’re very good at pointing out the moat in the eye of the “other,” aren’t you? Where’s your link to Jabotinsky’s infatuation with Mussolini, the log in your own eye? Again on p. 21 of Morris’ book, “…Herzl recognized that anti-Semitism could be harnessed to his own—Zionist—purposes….” Let’s remember once again that Israel largely funded Hamas in its beginning, as a counter to the more secular PLO. But I’m not sure Hamas is sufficiently anti-Semitic for Israel’s purposes. The link indicates they just want to get rid of the “Zionists,” not all the Jews in Israel, and I imagine even current Zionists will be welcome to stay as long as they’re willing to renounce discriminatory practices and accept a democracy with ironclad protections for minorities.

                        I won’t respond to any more of your rants until I see some evidence you are aware of the actual history of Israel and political Zionism, rather than the narrative pumped into you in nationalistic public schools.

                      • Norm

                        Well, I must say you’re getting more and more bizarre by the post, Bill. So now you’re simply a “disillusioned” former supporter of Israel who “fell” for the “Z­­­­i­­­­o­­­­n­­­­i­­­­s­­­­t narrative” as a kid… and spent 50+ years before you “discovered” you’ve been “lied to”? Is that it? Are you some kind of a “Truman Show” hero in your own eyes? You must be either the most naive person alive or else you’re not being entirely sincere here.

                        Yet how willingly you now allow your “disillusioned” self to so easily fall – hook, line and sinker – for all the “Yinon Plan” nonsense, “ISIS-are-Mossad” pathetic libels, Pappe’s demonstrable fabrications, and all the rest of the anti-Semitic Pallywood actual lies….. Amazing: No disillusions at all there… Nope, none whatsoever.

                        Let’s take just one example from your post: “….with every lie that’s been debunked, such as the non-existent Arab radio broadcasts encouraging Palestinians to flee” – So where have you seen this “debunked” exactly? Revisionist “historian” Pappe told you so? And here you’re not in the least concerned about being lied to? FACT: A plethora of evidence demonstrates that Palestinian Arabs were indeed told to leave their homes to make way for the invading Arab armies:

                        And then you claim you “believe in equal rights for all individuals”. Hmm… Does that include also the “equal rights” of terrorized s­­­­e­­­­x slave Yazidi women and little girls, or the “equal rights” famously enjoyed by the entire 800 million Muslim women worldwide under Sharia? How about the “equal rights” of gays in Iran to be hanged from cranes? Or even of Shiites in Sunni-majority countries and Sunnis in Shiite-majority ones? Or of Boko Haram’s victims? Or in Darfur? Or perhaps you simply couldn’t care less about all that because, as you say, “Arab and Muslim sins in their own countries are irrelevant to and certainly do not justify Israeli sins” and, as you’ve just “discovered”, the “Israeli sins” are so much incredibly egregious in comparison to anything else in history ever before or since, …..

                        You say you believe “nations, tribes, religions and cults do not have a right to a state of their own.” Of course, except for yet another Arab state, in addition to their 22 existing states of their own, exclusively dedicated for a newly-invented national tribe called “Palestinians” that belongs to a religion that already fiercely controls 57 states of its own, and which has become a cult for the leftist-progressive and left-libertarian anarchists to adore….

                        “I won’t respond to any more of your rants until I see some evidence you are aware of the actual history of Israel and political Zionism…” – That’s ok. No one is forcing you to respond. There are plenty of answers you should be giving first and foremost to yourself. Just let me know when you finally realize sometime in the next 50 years or so how delusional you’ve been today. Take care.

            • Lewellyn Zille

              James se mase poes man. He is paid by Legatum

              • sumiam

                Nou praat jy!

            • sumiam

              Zubeir, ignore this dom doos . He is a paid Khazarian Mafia troll.

          • Rasputin

            Shut up you sold out fool.

        • James Wherry

          America spends a lot of its time and money at USAID working to fund Rule of Law programs which include democracy programs, but NOT funding any particular political organization or party. There is, however, nothing “racist” about Israel. It confronts the religious bigotry of Islam, nothing more or less.

          • Zubeir Soeker
            • James Wherry

              Well, there is a comparison to Apartheid: Arab Muslims from Morocco to Pakistan drove Jews out of the lands they lived in, 1000 years before the coming of the Arab Muslims. 900,000 of them. As a result, the Jews were not allowed to VOTE in their countries, HOLD OFFICE in their countries, or even LIVE in their countries. They were stripped of their property because Shraiah says that any non-Muslim leaving Dar al-Islamyiah may be stripped of their property.
              Now THAT is a perfect description of Apartheid: the Jews had their rights stripped away from them in their own countries.

              • Zubeir Soeker

                What on Earth is your fascination with Muslims? This article has absolutely nothing to do with Islam. Are you getting paid to spew this hate and bigotry?

                • James Wherry

                  You complain about taking land through use of military force. It was something once done by everyone to INCLUDE Arabs and Africans. You pretend you were not part of the same disease you condemn. That is the connection. YOU were the one trying to “blame Europeans” and now we see that native Africans, Arab Muslims and Native Americans all did the same thing. We have agreed as a world community that this is no longer acceptable, not that it was once universally practiced. The same is true for slavery.

                  • Zubeir Soeker

                    Okay James, I’ve come to the conclusion that you are getting paid to post comments on site like Mint Press News. Thus, I am implicit in your remuneration for this job if I continue this discussion. I therefore have no choice but to exit here.

                  • Bill Rood

                    There is a slight difference, though. In 1945 the world defeated efforts to expand a country’s boundaries through military action and to ethnically cleanse indigenous populations. The Nuremburg trials and UN Charter declared that these sorts of actions should never again be allowed.

                    The expansion of the Jewish state beyond the boundaries set by the UN in its partition plan was the very first violation of these principles after WW II. Your little map and its caption notwithstanding, most of the Jewish emigration from Arab countries to Israel did not start until 1950, long after the Nakba. Nor did the Arab countries commit the sorts of atrocities committed by Zionists in Palestine, slaughtering entire villages. Yes, Arab countries did encourage the emigration, and Jews did legitimately fear the anger of their non-Jewish countrymen, especially after Zionist provocations like the Lavon Affair. But Israel also encouraged the migration, in dire need of labor after having expelled its own Arab population. In fact, some of the anti-Semitic provocations in Iraq and elsewhere were false flag Zionist operations:

              • Rasputin


          • Zubeir Soeker

            Go comment on European issues. Stay out of Africa, your ancestors have raped this continent enough.

            • Norm

              Benjamin Pogrund was brought up in Cape Town. He began a career as a journalist in 1958, writing for the Rand Daily Mail in Johannesburg, where he eventually became deputy-editor. The Rand Daily Mail was the only newspaper in South Africa at that time to report on events in black South African townships. In the course of his work he came to know the major players in the apartheid struggle and gained the respect and confidence of leaders such as Nelson Mandela. He was author of a 1965 series on beating and torture of black inmates and maltreatment of white political prisoners. During his career reporting on apartheid in South Africa he was put on trial several times, put in prison once, had his passport revoked and was investigated as a threat to the state by security police. “It is wrong to refer to Israel as an Apartheid State” says Benjamin Pogrund. “It fails to recognize the conscious and deliberate policy that made South Africa unique. The attempt of so-called liberals and pro-Palestinian groups to label Israel as Apartheid is a lazy attempt to win support by piggy-backing on this popular international revulsion against Apartheid in the 80’s rather than to consider the more complicated reality of the situation in the Middle East.”

              • sumiam

                IsraHell is worse than an apartheid state.

                • SonOfSA

                  Rubbish just Islam again trying to justify their hate!

              • Bill Rood

                You are apparently ignorant of the core values of Zionism: 1) the eventual “transfer” of non-Jewish Palestinians either to separate areas within the boundaries of a single state (Eretz Israel) or to areas outside the (current) confines of Eretz Israel and 2) the deception of claiming to try to live with the Arab population and to respect their land and culture. This is embodied in Theodor Herzl’s diary entry from 1905:

                We must expropriate gently.. . . We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our country…. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out dis­creetly and circumspectly.”

                If that doesn’t express a “conscious and deliberate policy” I don’t know what might. Noam Chomsky has said that Israel’s policies are actually worse than Apartheid.

                Having written a HS term paper on South Africa over 50 years ago and being quite angry and disillusioned with my own country’s transgressions, I can understand your jealous protection of South Africa’s infamous legacy: “No country can match my own country’s exceptionality.” I can also understand that this is, after all, a thread about SA. However, you really should show some generosity and give credit where credit is due.

                • Norm

                  The entire raison d’être of Zionism is the establishment of a Jewish homeland for the people who perhaps deserves it the most in history. And don’t forget that in Herzl’s days there were no “Palestinian” people whatsoever in the world to begin with, and absolutely no notion of any future “Palestinian” state. This entire “Palestinian” hoax was only conceived in the mid 1960s with the realization by the dictators of the Arab world that they will never be able to defeat Israel militarily. This is nicely explained by a leading PLO official here:

                  • Bill Rood

                    Thank you for demonstrating the 2nd core value of Zionism as expressed in Herzl’s diary. Lie big and lie often.

                    The person you quoted out of context is a pan-Arabist, who wanted no subdivisions within the Arab “nation.” He was not saying there were no residents of Palestine in Herzl’s days. He was simply saying they were part of the Arab nation and that Palestine should be part of an Arab nation-state.

                    Palestine is a name commonly applied to the area in question since Roman times. Zionists can choose to call it anything they want, but the land still exists. Similarly, the people who lived there in Herzl’s day can be called anything you want, but they still existed. Many people choose to call them “Palestinians” because they lived in “Palestine,” just as Benjamin Franklin was a “Philadelphian” because he lived in “Philadelphia.” Notice that my use of quotation marks did not make several million people living in SE Pennsylvania disappear, either.

                    Herzl knew very well there were people residing in the area he wanted to claim for Eretz Israel. Why else would he write in his diary of their “removal?”

                    • Norm

                      The region was called Judea until the Roman Emperor Hadrian wiped the name off the map and replaced it with “Syria Palaestina” in year 135, following the Bar Kokhba revolt and subsequent ethnic cleansing of Jews for some 2000 years.

                      FYI, the person I quoted happened to be a senior PLO leader… It’s true that he didn’t say: “there were no residents of Palestine in Herzl’s days”. Neither did I. What he did say is: “The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity.”

                      Let me quote another person who is much more knowledgeable than both you and I on the true “Palestinian” aspirations regarding their own state. Fathi Hammad, Hamas Minister of the Interior: “We shall liberate our Al-Aqsa Mosque, and our cities and villages, as a prelude to the establishment of the future Islamic Caliphate. Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are at the threshold of a global Islamic civilization era. The fuel and spearhead of this era will be Gaza, and its mujahideen and leaders will be from Gaza, Allah willing…Come join us, the legions of the believers, which have translated the Koran into victory, the law of the Prophet’s ancestors into glory, and Jihad into liberation.”

                      • Bill Rood

                        The issue is not what one jerk or another might say about the indigenous residents of the area belonging to this or that group or having their own group. The issue is whether or not those indigenous residents exist. They do, and they were ethnically cleansed in 1948. It’s a fact demonstrated by your own unashamed Zionist historian, Benny Morris, and you can’t alter it no matter how hard you try to delegitimize them.

                        As to Hamas, Israel originally backed those religious extremists in an attempt to weaken the secular Arafat. Just like Israel now backs ISIS in an attempt to break the Shia crescent and Hezbollah’s ability to resist Israeli aggression in Southern Lebanon. Ben-Gurion wanted all of the area south of the Litani River as part of “greater Israel,” and Israeli leadership has never given up on that dream. But the Shia crescent stands in the way, and Israel will ally with the most vile creatures in an effort to implement the Yinon Plan and revive the dream.

                      • Norm

                        OK, I see, you’re another “Yinon Plan” conspiracy guy convinced that ISIS are covert Israeli Mosssad out to invade and take over Tehran as part of a Greater Israel… Explain returning the entire Sinai to Egypt, the unilateral pullout from Gaza, the Barak and Olmert offers to Arafat and to Abbas regarding the West Bank, and so forth. Doesn’t look like a brilliant plan to implement a “Greater Israel”, now does it?

                      • Bill Rood

                        Do you deny the existence of Oded Yinon’s essay? I realize nobody expected a Holocaust survivor like Israel Shahak to translate it or any of the other services he performed for mankind, but he was a true humanitarian rather than simply “chosen.” A Clean Break is pretty much a seamless sequel:

                        Of course, the prequel was Bernard Lewis’s “arc of crisis” (Lewis was also a Zionist). The policy of setting ethnic groups against each other all across MENA has been consistent for decades. Of course, it’s not just a Zionist policy. It’s also been US and UK policy. The most cynical policy goals anybody will quietly admit to is “divide and conquer,” but it’s really all about justification for arms manufacturers and military/foreign policy bureaucracies. Here, educate yourself as you’re as much a victim as anybody else:

                      • Norm

                        Of course the conspiracy theory is not the existence of Oded Yinon’s essay, it’s the alleged existence of a covert “Oded Yinon Plan” for an alleged “Greater Israel” myth, which has become a sort of modern-day substitute (sometimes a supplement…) to the anti-Semitic fraudulent “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”. Have you ever even bothered to check, except for googling Israel hate groups that are quoting other Israel hate groups, on Oded Yinon’s actual background, what he himself has said, and how influential on Israeli politics and decision making he actually was?

                        And you still haven’t even attempted to answer how returning the entire Sinai to Egypt, the unilateral pullout from Gaza, the Barak and Olmert offers to Arafat and to Abbas regarding the West Bank, and so forth, could have contributed to any “Greater Israel” strategy… We both know that the only thing that has made Israel’s tiny territory somewhat larger than that of the UN Partition Plan is the belligerence of the entire Arab world’s self-professed vow to annihilate Israel: First, in 1948, then again in 1967. Their 3rd attempt, the unprovoked sneak attack in 1973 should have cemented a consensus Israeli view that the green-line borders are totally indefensible. Yet the Israelis invited their archenemy Arafat, negotiated the Oslo Accords with him, pulled back from Gaza, and were twice ready to pull out of the West Bank in exchange for a truly peaceful co-existence. They got a 2nd intifada in response…

                      • Bill Rood

                        Mostly asked and answered, including the continuity of the Lewis-Yinon-Perle plans and territorial aspirations in Lebanon. I’m not going to answer any more questions designed to waste my time, but Israel gave up the Sinai because a resurgent Egypt was a real existential threat and it didn’t want a repeat of 1973, plus Egypt agreed to help control Gaza’s borders. I imagine there was a guarantee from the US as well, which the US likely would not grant without withdrawal.

                        BTW, Arab armies did not enter the areas designated as Jewish by the UN partition plan of 1947, but Zionists had already cleansed large parts of the Arab designated areas. The only way anybody can characterize Arab actions of May 15 as aggression is by assuming Israel had a right to the entire mandate area. Zionists can not both claim to have accepted the partition plan, then turn around and claim Arab aggression on May 15 when Zionists had already committed atrocities like Deir Yassin in the areas reserved by the UN for an Arab state.

                      • Norm

                        LOL… “Arab armies did not enter the areas designated as Jewish by the UN partition plan of 1947…The only way anybody can characterize Arab actions of May 15 as aggression is by assuming Israel had a right to the entire mandate area…”

                        Really? One day after Israel’s Declaration of Independence on May 14th, 1948, the Egyptian Air Force attacked Tel Aviv (on May 15th 1948). One Egyptian plane was downed and there were 5 casualties on the Israeli side. The deadliest air raid attack took place on May 18th, when the Tel Aviv central bus station was attacked and 42 people lost their life. Egyptian air raid attacks on Tel Aviv continued up until June 3rd, 1948:

                        “…when Zionists had already committed atrocities like Deir Yassin”

                        See eyewitness account, here…..


                      • Bill Rood

                        OK, I get it. reports, “A study by Bir Zeit University,
                        based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab
                        civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 ‘fighters.'” One of the videos on your link describes people being shot as they slept. But we can agree there were no rapes, so it’s all good?

                        Once again, the timeline:
                        1 Deir Yassin April 9, 1948
                        2 Extensive ethnic cleansing and house demolitions in West Jerusalem suburbs in late April, early May, 1948. The entire area was designated as Arab or international.
                        3 Arab states did not intervene until May 15, 1948.

                      • Norm

                        In addition to the fact that there were no rapes, I think we can also agree on the following: ( )

                        1. During the phase of the civil war known as “The Battle of the Roads” that preceded the end of British rule in Palestine ( ) the Arab League-sponsored Arab Liberation Army (ALA) attacked Jewish traffic on major roads in an effort to isolate the Jewish communities from each other. The ALA managed to seize several strategic vantage points along the highway between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv—Jerusalem’s sole supply route link to the western side of the city (where 16 percent of all Jews in Palestine lived)—and began firing on convoys traveling to the city.

                        2. The Deir Yassin assault occurred as Jewish militia sought to retaliate against the blockade of Jerusalem by Palestinian Arab forces during that time. Deir Yassin was a village situated on a hill west of Jerusalem, 800 meters above sea level overlooking the highway entering Jerusalem, in the exact same area used as a base for Arab militia to shoot at Jewish convoys. Arab militiamen had thought to set up camp inside the village by trying to recruit villagers there, and were conducting armed raids on nearby Jewish communities in the meantime. Irgun fighters said they encountered at least two foreign militiamen during their April 9 attack on Deir Yassin. The villagers tried to resist the attack, and Deir Yassin fell only after fierce house-to-house fighting. The Bir Zeit University study you’ve mentioned concluded there were 13 Arab “fighters” there.

                        3. By March 1948, the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway road was cut off and Jerusalem was under complete siege. In response, the Haganah launched Operation Nachshon to break the siege in an effort to secure strategic positions. On April 8, Deir Yassin youth took part in the defense of al-Qastal, an Arab village two kilometers north of Deir Yassin also overlooking the highway, attacked by the Haganah a few days earlier: the names of several Deir Yassin residents appeared on a list of wounded at al-Qastal compiled by the British Palestine police.

                        4. The Deir Yassin killings were condemned by the leadership of the Haganah—the Jewish community’s main paramilitary force—and by the area’s two chief rabbis. The Jewish Agency for Israel sent Jordan’s King Abdullah a letter of apology, which he rebuffed.

                        Well, hardly a deliberate premeditated cold-blooded massacre of defenseless civilians by an evil cabal of Jews, bent on always grabbing more land and subjugating to their devious sinister plans an entire unsuspecting world as they sit on piles of money laughing at the peasants and sipping blood of non-Jewish small children, while perusing their “Yinon’s Greater Israel Plan” instruction books….

                      • Bill Rood

                        Well, this is mostly at least a reasonable comment. I do wonder what the “convoys” contained. Arms and munitions for the Haganah units in Jerusalem? The Brits still had a presence in Palestine, why were they not escorting convoys of food and medicine? So, I followed your second link. Let’s review what you didn’t mention:
                        * End of November, 1947, partition plan approved by UNGA
                        * December 2–5 Jerusalem riots which Brits fail to control. 70 Jews and 50 Arabs are killed. Not exactly totally one-sided.
                        * No entries in the timeline for most of the rest of December. I conclude it was quiet.
                        * December 30 – Haifa Oil Refinery massacre. Irgun militants hurl two bombs into a crowd of Arab workers. Net result is 6 Arabs, 39 Jews killed.
                        * December 31 – January 1 – Balad al-Shaykh massacre. This Palmach attack was authorized by the Jewish Agency in retaliation for Haifa, which was provoked by Irgun. Casualty estimates vary (Haganah estimated 70) but Benny Morris says orders were ‘kill maximum adult males’.
                        * January 4 – Lehi set off a truck bomb outside Jaffa’s Town Hall, killing 26 civilians.
                        * January 6 – Semiramis Hotel bombing carried out by Haganah.
                        * January 16 – 35 members of the Haganah killed attempting to carry supplies across country to Kfar Etzion. (This was clearly a military operation, as Zionists from Kfar Etzion had attacked a nearby Arab village in December and were frequently attacking both British and Jordanian troops under British command). Kfar Etzion was also within the area that had been designated as Arab by the UN.
                        * Winter and Spring – “Battle of the Roads”. The road from Ramle to Jerusalem was entirely within the Arab area except for the last bit within the international area.

                        So, according to the timeline you cite, there was plenty of Zionist instigated violence before the “Battle of the Roads” began. It’s pretty clear from this website: that Deir Yassin had maintained peaceful relations with nearby Jewish settlements like Givat Shaul for several months and had resisted Arab Higher Committee pressure to join the fighting. “On February 13, an armed gang of Arabs arrived to attack Givat Shaul, but the Deir Yassin villagers saw them off, the result of which was that the gang killed all the village’s sheep…. Benny Morris writes that it is possible some militiamen were stationed in the village, but the evidence is far from definitive, in his view.” The Nimrod guy has no credibility at all, having been in Irgun. OK, so maybe there were 13 actual armed defenders in that peaceful village. Maybe 2 were Syrian or Iraqi volunteers there without the permission of the village. You’re going to tell me it was necessary to kill over 100, some while they slept, and expel the rest?

                        Your last paragraph is just more of the same anti-Zionist=anti-Semitic BS. I never claimed or would claim any truth to the Blood Libel, and you know it. I’ve even in the past defended so-called “cultural Zionists” who wanted Jews to be allowed to make aliya but were not in favor of creating a “Jewish state” or driving out the Arabs, though I’ve recently discovered many of them were not sincere, as shown by Albert Einstein’s secret letter to Nehru asking support for the UN partition plan.

                        I stand by my contention that Zionist ambitions are extensive: especially including Golan oil and Litani water, or do you consider that site a false flag site to discredit Israel?

                      • Norm

                        Of course the convoys contained supplies to the Jews under siege in Jerusalem. Of course this included arms and munitions beyond food and medicine – there was a civil war going on all over the country! And you expected the Brits – the only West European country to abstain on the UN Partition Plan vote – to intervene? See:

                        And of course there were plenty of attacks and counter-attacks in the months leading up to the official end of the British rule, subsequently morphing into an all-out war as soon as all the Brits left and the Arab armies invaded. Did you expect the Jews to sit tight and await their “war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongol massacres” (promised to them by Arab League’s secretary-general Abdul Rahman Azzam) to happen without even attempting to secure as many strategic positions as possible beforehand, as did also the other side? Don’t forget Israel didn’t yet have Iron Dome and “roof knocking” back then… In fact, it hardly had an army.

                        “You’re going to tell me it was necessary to kill over 100, some while they slept, and expel the rest?”

                        My main question to you here is this: Had the five Arab armies managed to carry out their plan of the “momentous Mongol massacre” of 700,000 Jews, would you be constantly criticizing it and demanding the dismantling of the entire Arab world like you do for Israel, or would you simply shrug your shoulders and yawn like you now do when Arabs are wholesale-slaughtering a similar number of other Arabs in Syria and throughout the Middle East? Think about it….

                      • Bill Rood

                        Of course this included arms and munitions

                        Thank you for admitting these were military invasions of the area that had been designated for an Arab state. I had no hard evidence, just logical inference, but it’s the only thing that makes sense. Not even Ilan Pappe provided me with that information. Maybe he’s just a “limited hangout” after all. Do you have a link or a source? I’d love to have one.

                        The logical conclusion is that the Jewish Agency claimed to accept the partition plan, but with its actions immediately violated the plan. Yes, the Brits were losing control daily. Why is that? Were the Zionists begging them to stay in order to enforce the partition, after having bombed the King David Hotel in 1946? Is that why military outposts like Kfar Etzion were attacking troops under British command? Was there absolutely no contact possible between the Jewish Agency and the Arab High Committee whereby real humanitarian convoys could have been inspected at a checkpoint, then allowed travel under a flag of truce? Not even a back-channel through the Brits? Clearly, there was not universal hostility between Palestinian and Jewish populations in the Jerusalem area, since as noted earlier there were good relations and even mutual protection between eg. Deir Yassin and Givat Shaul prior to April. Although there was a voluntary Arab Liberation Army formed to protect the Arab designated area, Ilan Pappe claims the Palestinian population as a whole was passive, as born out by the aforementioned relations of Deir Yassin with its neighbors before the massacre.

                        Over the years, Arab leaders have been remarkably adept at feeding the Zionist propaganda machine and the “poor, spunky little out-gunned Israel on the verge of a 2nd Holocaust” narrative. Azzam Pasha is certainly an example: His words have been repeatedly distorted over the years by leaving out the initial phrase, “I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war,…” However, gotta give the Jerusalem Post credit for reporting that he also said, “Whatever the outcome, the Arabs will stick to their offer of equal citizenship for Jews in Arab Palestine and let them be as Jewish as they like.” You really ought to read the entire Wikipedia article and the referenced Haaretz article by Tom Segev. Ben-Gurion sounded the alarm on the “2nd Holocaust,” but he was really never worried about the military situation. If the Zionist leadership had been the least bit worried, they would not have allowed the Irgun and LEHI to continue operations in 1946-47 and drive the British out, nor would they have blocked peace negotiations in 1948 by assassinating Count Folke Bernadotte.

                        As I said in my earlier comment, I won’t respond again unless there’s some indication you’ve done some additional study of your own honest historians. You’ve ruled out Pappe, so I’ll rule out Efraim Karsh. As things stand, you’re too easy. All I really have to do is critically read the links you provide or find links from them to other articles. Isn’t the internet wonderful?

                      • Norm

                        “Do you have a link or a source? I’d love to have one.”

                        You mean after all your 50+ years of obsessive research as soon as you “discovered” you’ve been “lied to” as a kid, you failed to come across this?

                        I shudder to think what your reaction would be when you learn one day that babies are not really delivered by storks…

                      • Rasputin

                        Ken O Keefe will put you straight on this.

            • James Wherry

              When? America never had a “colony” in Africa. Complain to the Europeans. And remember: it was the Muslims who started the black slave trade and even edited hadiths of Muhammad to keep black Africans as slaves, even if they converted to Islam. The brutality of Muslims toward black Africans was truly horrific.

              • Zubeir Soeker

                So you’re saying you’re of Native American decent? Get out of the bubble you European fool.

                • James Wherry

                  Why yes: my mother and father were both born and raised here in the USA, as was I.

                  Are you saying you are an African who sold his brothers and sisters into slavery, after taking them in tribal warfare? Or, are you a Muslim who sold black Africans into slavery?

                  • Zubeir Soeker

                    Okay so your ancestors (from Europe) raped and pillaged the American land to allow your family line to be raised on the bones of the original inhabitants. That sound familiar or do you deny your own history?

                    • James Wherry

                      Native Americans did the exact same thing to ne another. What’s your point? So did Africans who made war on one another. Or, do you deny your own history and the history of Islam?

                      • Zubeir Soeker

                        You’re missing the point Mr. Europe. It’s their land to fight over. They are the natives. Your ancestors came from Europe (it’s the land on the other side of the ocean) to come and take the land. Same deal with Africans. They are the original owners. Your misdirection has no power here. Keep smoking your socks.

                      • James Wherry

                        You’re missing the point, Zubeir: there was a disagreement about who owned the land, so one of the parties did NOT own the land. It is a “distinction without a difference:” settlers lived right next to the land they were taking through military conquest.

                        Unlike YOU Arab invades who illegally invaded Africa and STOLE the land after WE had given you food and shelter in Ethiopia. And yes: as an Apostolic Pentecostal, those WERE my people whom YOU enslaved and sold and brutally murdered, after WE gave you shelter.

                      • Zubeir Soeker

                        Yup, still smoking your socks.

                      • James Wherry

                        While you claim to be a web designer from Cape Town, your first name is Arabic.

                        You DO agree that you Muslims stole Jewish land from the Jews, correct? Honestly: you ought to name it and claim it. You imposed APARTHEID on the Jews by driving them from their own countries and stealing their rights to vote, hold public office and own their own land.

                      • Zubeir Soeker

                        Get a life man.

                      • James Wherry

                        You were the one who started out “Go comment on European issues. Stay out of Africa, your ancestors have raped this continent enough.” My ancestors are Americans and helped end French, English, German, Italian and Dutch colonialism in Africa.

                      • Bill Rood

                        Even Ben-Gurion believed that Palestinian fellahin were the descendants of ancient Jews, and here’s a JPost article admitting that an overwhelming majority of Palestinians are descended from Jews:

                        Muslims stole no Jewish land from Jews. In fact, it is Ashkenazi Zionists who have stolen the land from their Palestinian cousins.

                      • James Wherry

                        Muslims are converts from Arab pagans, Christians and Jews. That’s pretty much all there was in the area in the 7th and 8th centuries.

                        As to Muslims stealing no land from Jews, in 1948, 100% of all Jews were ethnically cleansed from the West Bank and Gaza. No compensation was given to them, at all. Sounds like theft, to me.

                        23 Arab nations drove 1 million Jews out of those nations through massacres, murders, riots, pogroms and expulsion orders. It is Shariah that Muslims HAVE THE RIGHT to strip all non-Muslims who leave “Muslim land” of all of their property. The Caliph Omar said to the Jews of Israel, “You are our treasury.” Are you not aware of these things???


                      • Bill Rood

                        Zionists started the cleansing in 1947, almost immediately after the partition plan was announced. During the period between announcement of the partition (Nov. 29, 1947) and British departure from Palestine (May 15, 1948), the Haganah, Irgun and LEHI were well armed, while the Palestinians had been largely disarmed by the British at the end of the 1936-39 revolt. The Deir Yassin massacre and cleansing of Arabs from West Jerusalem occurred in April, 1948, before any Arab national armies intervened.

                        Ben-Gurion had a deal with Abdullah that Jordan would be allowed to occupy the West Bank in exchange for Jordan staying out of other areas. There were almost no Jewish settlements in those areas, but many Jews did flee or were cleansed from East Jerusalem after Jordan intervened on May 15, 1948. The houses of fleeing Jews were commandeered by Arab refugees who had been cleansed from West Jerusalem by Zionists in April. What were they to do, sleep on the street outside the empty houses?

                        In 1895 Theodor Herzl wrote in his diary: “We must expropriate gently.. . . We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our country…. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out dis­creetly and circumspectly.”

                        Any fool can see from that quote that ethnic cleansing and deception were two core values of Zionism from the very beginning. There are countless other examples of Zionists writing in their diaries or private correspondence that it would be necessary to “transfer” the indigenous population, but publicly they maintained the fiction of attempting to live with Arabs and respecting Arab rights and culture. In Ottoman times, Zionists used exclusivity — the “conquest of labor” — and the purchase of land from “tax farmers” to drive Arab tenants off land they had cultivated for generations, even when there was a shortage of Jewish labor. That was the root cause of the early land purchase laws, cited by your Zionist link, that forbade land purchases by non-citizen Jews and Lebanese attempts to suppress Zionist activity.

                        Zionists knew their 1947-48 actions would be condemned by the world if the truth were ever understood, so they told endless lies to cover their tracks, such as that most Palestinians were migrants or recent arrivals, or that Arab leaders had encouraged the Palestinians to flee the conflict zone in anticipation of an Arab attack on Jewish areas. The lies about Arab radio encouraging flight were exposed by Erskine Childers as early as 1961, but he was ignored by the media. It wasn’t until Benny Morris and other “new historians” exposed the truth of intentional ethnic cleansing by Zionists that the massacre at Deir Yassin could appear in print without being preceded by “alleged.”

                        It’s important to understand such deceptions, and that lying is a core value of Zionism, when reading links such as the one you cited. The link headlines the expulsion of Jews from Arab countries from 1920-1970, but substantiates very few actions prior to 1947, and most of those actions were to discourage Zionism, not Jews in general. It also appears to conflate the treatment of all non-Muslims in Islamic societies such as Egypt with concepts of citizenship. Non-Muslims (Dhimmi) citizens do have some restrictions in such societies and must pay jizya, but they are also exempted from certain prohibitions such as alcohol consumption and duties that must be fulfilled by Muslims, such as military service and the zakat tax. We might not like that such societies don’t have completely secular government, but to conflate that with anti-Semitism is wrong. Jews in Arab countries were not treated poorly or expelled prior to 1947.

                        In fact, most of the Jewish emigration to Israel from Arab lands did not occur until after 1950, when the Zionists discovered they had a labor shortage after expelling the Palestinians, even after the resettlement of European holocaust survivors. And some of the alleged “pogroms” and “atrocities” against Jews in Arab countries were actually the work of the Zionist underground or later the Mossad. The last Jews did not leave Egypt until after 1953, when there was indeed a wave of anti-Semitism after the exposure of Mossad’s false flag operation, Susannah, and the subsequent Lavon Affair.

                        It’s important to understand the history of all these lies and deceptions when evaluating the current Israeli propaganda as well, such as their justifications for “lawn mowing” in Gaza or the claims that all Palestinians killed on the street were wielding knives.

                  • Zubeir Soeker

                    But wait it gets even better. Europeans brought slaves from Africa to America, and today they are known as African-American, why aren’t the Europeans also labelled as such, European-American?

                    • James Wherry

                      There are those who have tried that, and often white Americans claim the titles of “Irish-Americans” and “Italian-Americans.” The rest of us do not believe in “hyphenated Americans” and only use the term “black” or “African” Americans, when discussing unique issues faced by black Americans. It’s impossible to discuss police stop and search policies that disproportionately target black Americans without finding a term to use that adequately describes the affected class.

                  • pmurgs

                    As a white male born and current living in South Africa, yes, we have a major corruption problem especially with the ANC, but we also clearly are under attack by western forces trying to break up the BRICS. I wish the DA would distance themselves from their western backers who do not have South African interests at heart, but I will still vote for them in the upcoming elections since overall they would govern better than the ANC. But us South Africans still have to deal with westerners trying to control us and make us do their bidding for their benefit.

                    • James Wherry

                      I think America’s National Public Radio just ran a story this morning about a corruption scandal investigation partly clearing some people accused.

                      If there is an effort to “control” South Africa, I happily condemn it. Military isolationism (which I believe in) includes political isolationism. But no, I simply have no clear evidence to support the allegation against the USA. We have a liberal, black, Democratic President. If you made the charge against my own party (which is neither liberal, nor black but very Republican), I might believe you, but I fail to see that lack of good will toward SA that you describe from our current administration.

                  • samia

                    James stop saying muslims , the Arabs yes then Islam came and reformed slavery . Do your reserch and particularly on bilall at the beginning of Islam .

          • RaisingMac

            Israel oppresses Palestinians of all religions, not just the Moslem ones.

        • You have a point. But all our politicians are tangled with somebody. The Presidency tried to push through a Russian nuclear deal without proper procurement processes, even resulting in the disastrous firing of Minister Nene. The EFF occasionally gets spotted taking helicopter rides with mining houses.

          But the assertion that the country’s problems are due to some Western backers influencing matters is total nonsense. Anyone who is in South Africa can see that and articles such as the above just continue to embolden the corrupt leaders that have caused the mess.

          The DA may or may not have questionable backers. But it wasn’t the party that put SA in the deep hole it finds itself.

    • SeaNote

      The USA uses it’s superiority to keep the wide range of third rate countries and their mediocre “cultures” in line.

    • tapatio

      Henry Ford was right…………………

      “Corral the 50 wealthiest Jews and there will be no wars,”

      Today, one would have to throw in a few of us Gentiles, who have joined the war profiteering Zionists. But, for almost 300 years the ONE PRIMARY CAUSE OF WAR HAS BEEN PROFIT FOR THE JEWISH ROTHSCHILDS.