17 August 2010

Opening Pandora’s Apartheid Box, Part Twenty Three. Behind the Paper Curtain ...And Beyond.


By Mike Smith

17 August 2010

The Apartheid years are basically contemporary to the “Cold War” years. After WWII, Stalin drew an “Iron Curtain” between the Communist and the Western worlds. In China, Korea and Vietnam they spoke about a “Bamboo curtain”. Germany was divided into two countries in an experiment to see which system works the best amongst intelligent whites. The Berlin Wall was raised around the same time as another curtain was drawn in the world…As Dr. Eschel Rhoodie called it in his book, a curtain of “truth” or a media, “Paper Curtain” was drawn on South Africa. Unlike the Communist who drew their own curtains to hide the truth and their lies, the Paper curtain was drawn on South Africa by the local and International media to hide the truth and spread the lies about South Africa..

The effect of this propaganda about South Africa can still be seen today. In the 2010 Soccer World Cup people found it difficult to believe that beautiful cities like Cape Town, Durban, Pretoria, Bloemfontein, etc can even exist in Africa. When you tell them, show them pictures of the houses in which white South Africans live then they refuse to believe it. When they see white South Africans living better than European Whites, our National roads in better condition than European Autobahns it totally upsets their mental model of what they created in their brains about South Africa.

If you tell them that South Africa was a nuclear power with a space program during Apartheid, they think you are lying. The highest development they imagine for SA is one storey dwellings, game reserves, some mines and a few farms.

Another image people from the rest of the world have about South Africa is that it is full of white racists that severely suppress blacks and keep them as virtual slaves.

How did the world reach this false and negative picture of South Africa? We have the media to thank for that.

In her book, “People’s War”, Dr. Anthea Jeffery explains the “Twenty-to-Two” rule that Jill Wentzel spoke of in her book, “The Liberal Slideaway” on pages 114-116.

Journalist who wanted to write about Left-wing violence such as the horrific necklacing murders and Marxist terrorist bombs blowing up innocent people of all races had to first write twenty sentences explaining the “Evils” of Apartheid and why the violence was necessary before they wrote two sentences on the Marxist violence. It was like saying grace before a meal. This Twenty-to-Two rule fostered a self-censorship in the media but was also used by organisations such as the UDF and the Black Sash Movement to which Helen Zille, current leader of the opposition Democratic Alliance, belonged. For every two sentences of left-wing violence there would be twenty sentences on Police beatings.

But the lies of the media went further than that. Les de Villiers documented it in his book “South Africa, A skunk amongst Nations”. He writes on page 149…

“Black children scrambling for coins dropped in a garbage can by enterprising journalists became examples of deprivation. Black mineworkers secured to rocky slopes down a gold mine to prevent them from slipping were paraded in glossy magazines overseas as slave workers chained to their jobs.”

Blacks sleeping on the lawn in a park were filmed by international TV crews and presented to their audiences as “dead blacks” with whites walking past nonchalantly.

De Villiers further states, “The press does not have to lie to damage a country’s reputation-or an individual’s. Truth can be quite honestly perverted by concentrating on the negative to the almost complete exclusion of the positive.”

It is called “Selective Negativity” or “Advocacy Journalism”.

During the time of the Sharpeville shooting incident, these international journalists stomped around South Africa with great excitement. They created nonsense such as that dum-dum-bullets were used by the police.

Norman Phillips of the “Torronto Daily Star” was instructed in no uncertain terms, by his headquarters in Canada, via cable to his Johannesburg Hotel: “Give us the blood and guts”.

He did not disappoint. He was so eager to please his bosses that he ventured into a firsthand “battle scene” account of a bloody riot in Cape Town while himself was living in the relative ease of his medium class Durban Hotel room – 700 miles away. Problem is that some of the events he reported on never took place. Phillips was detained in jail under special emergency orders until the next flight left for Canada.

A few months later he released a “war diary” called, “The tragedy of Apartheid” and was recognised as an authority on Apartheid South Africa.

The journalist game during Apartheid was simple and straightforward, “Praise the protesters and abuse the authorities. Every black protester was inculpable and every policeman a headbreaker.

After General Smuts’ United Party was beaten at the polls in 1948 by the almost exclusively Afrikaans speaking National Party it presented the English press in South Africa and the world with a new stick and another dog to beat. The Nazi-invective was drawn.

Shortly after the May 1948 election, the London Daily express set the tone and their reporter cabled London, “South Africa is in the grip of Nazi tyranny”. Malan and his supporters were pictured as arch enemies of both Jew and Anglo Saxon at home and abroad.

The rhetoric to link the Apartheid government to the “Hitlerian Totalitarianism” continued unabated despite South Africa at the time being one of only eight countries in Africa allowing an opposition to function freely, the other 35 countries were under dictatorial rule.

The biblical or Teutonic sounding names of Afrikaner leaders were emphasized and their English names ignored. Prime Minister John Vorster was always referred to in this manner in the Afrikaner press, but the English press stuck to his second name, Balthazar. There was no end to pulling the Nazi-invective on the Afrikaners.

Truth is that 60% of the South African troops who fought courageously and died valiantly on the side of the English-speaking world against the forces of Nazi Germany were Afrikaners. D.F. Malan’s government was actually one of the very first to recognise the new state of Israel. He was the first head of state to visit the newborn country.

Since 1967 – and especially during the Yom Kippur War of 1973 substantial financial support flowed from South Africa to Israel. The seven million dollars contributed by Jews and many Afrikaners and the willingness of the South African government to allow the transfer of such capital, in view of balance of payment problems, was a tribute to the warm-heartedness of South African whites for Israel.

Yet the Nazi image persisted. The New Zealand “Listener” and “Christchurch Press” expressed fear for their “English speaking brethren in South Africa.

When J.G Strijdom succeeded Malan, the overseas pundits said that English speaking South Africans would lose their language rights and would be treated as second class citizens. None of it ever happened. They called Strijdom “Openly Anti-British…a fierce demagogic and capable speaker, who is at his best or worst in his favourite language, Afrikaans – a rudimentary language not well adapted to the finer nuances of meaning”…

Such was the hate speech against the Afrikaners, yet these hypocrites claimed that the benevolent and pious Afrikaners were the worst evil that ever walked the earth since the Nazis. That they built concentration camps and gas chambers for blacks.

In “The Paper Curtain”, Dr Eschel Rhoodie recalls on page 194 an argument he had with a Professor at Trinity College (Hartford, Connecticut) and whose belief in concentration camps for the Blacks in South Africa was unshakable. Dr. Rhoodie says…

“Finally I suggested that he should visit South Africa and if he could bring back one photograph of such a camp I would personally pay his expenses. The next day he announced to the student newspaper that the Government of South Africa had invited him to an “all expenses paid tour” of South Africa.”

Today no one can point out even one concentration camp for blacks, no gas-chambers and no mass graves from the Apartheid era…It simply never existed.

When the Nazi invective did not work the media tried to paint white South Africans as “Slave Masters”.

The British journalist Adam Raphael of “The Guardian” started investigating British business interest and wages paid to Blacks in South Africa. His inspiration was a book called “The South African Connection” written by the Communist Ruth First, wife of arch Communist Joe Slovo and editor of the “Anti-Apartheid News”.

Wages of Black mine workers were described as “Near starvation level”, despite mountains of free, calorie-rich food heaped on the worker’s plates three times a day. The Guardian published eight editorials under headings such as “Scandal of African Labour” and “Time to audit or shame and serfdom in South Africa”.

Other journals in Britain picked up on this theme. In the second week of March 1973, 30 articles about black wages in South Africa appeared in the Fleet Street press alone, the following week it climbed to 66 articles and by the end of March 1973 it soared to 77 articles. During April 188 articles on Black wages in South Africa were published.

The British Parliament took over from Raphael and the Rogers commission started probing Black wages in South Africa.

They were tackling the dust on the furniture in South Africa whilst ignoring the grime on the floors elsewhere where Britain had business interests. On South African sugar plantations, Black South Africans were earning five times the wages paid to tea leaf pickers in Sri Lanka (Ceylon). In Hong Kong, a British crown colony, more than thirty thousand child labourers were slaving away when it was suppose to be illegal. Chinese workers doing the same work as Europeans were paid 1/70th to 1/100th of the European wages…by British companies.

Wages for unskilled black labour in South Africa were five times higher than that in former British colonies such as Kenya, Uganda or Ghana and on par with wages paid in Liberia. The Rogers Commission further found that Britain was paying Jamaicans, Indians and other coloureds in its Merchant Navy wages well below the Plimsoll line set for Whites at a time that the South African Merchant Navy of Safmarine was paying British officers three times more than what South Africans were earning on the same ships for doing the same job.

These hypocrites from Britain and the USA issued guidebooks on what Blacks in South Africa should be paid. They came to a figure of $140 per month. Someone took the trouble to go to the Washington`s Census Bureau to determine how many Americans were earning wages below that level. Back came the answer: Twenty-four million – mostly Black!

When South Africa executed two Blacks for killing a court witness it was front page news all over the world. When 69 rioting and dangerously armed blacks were killed while attacking the police station at Sharpeville it sent the international media into frenzy. When 11 out of control armed and looting blacks were killed at a mine in Carletonville the international media called it a “Mini Sharpeville” and went almost crazy….

When 70,000 blacks were killed in Cameroon in 1964 the reports hardly made the papers. When a 100,000 blacks per year lost their lives in strife in the Sudan it made some inside pages. At the time of Sharpeville the death toll in Burundi, Uganda and Nigeria topped a million, but it hardly managed to stir the press pundits of the world.

In Uganda Idi Amin expelled 40,000 Asians…something that never happened in South Africa, but apparently the Liberal International press finds Black racists less offensive than white racists.

In the early 1960’s Fred Friendly of CBS TV set out to produce a special on South Africa. He promised the SA authorities that it would be an unbiased and objective review of current affairs. The end result was titled “Sabotage in South Africa”. It might as well have been called “Sabotage of South Africa”.

Strings of Anti South African movies were made by the British. Their names speak for themselves, “The Colour line; Whiter than Thou; The Dumping Grounds; South Africa loves Jesus; Last grave at Dimbaza and The good ladies of Johannesburg”.

Along came two British producers, John Morgan (Thames TV) and Hugh Burnett (BBC-TV) who made a film each titling the two productions, “The Afrikaner”. Morgan subtitled his celluloid treatise, “Where Sport and politics go hand-in-hand”.

It was mainly a program on sport in South Africa filmed during the 1968 British Rugby tour of South Africa. John Morgan portrayed the Afrikaner sportsman as a dour brute bent on avenging the Anglo-Boer War by bashing his British opponents into bloody submission. By mentioning that the Springbok Captain, Dawie de Villiers, also happened to be a religious minister (Dominee), the Afrikaner was further vilified as a political and physical brute and religious fanatic all rolled into one.

After seeing the film, Mary Morgan of the Daily Mirror wrote about the Afrikaners…

“Those Dutch farmers in far off South Africa had faith in “God and the referee” to ensure victory. God works best in bodies, made harder and fitter, it seems; and these dour church-going “dogged Dutch” were sold with the will to win, and a sense of mission that to win is their task.”

Burnett’s “Afrikaner” portrayed “The white tribe that rules South Africa” as isolationist Bible-pounders on the defence. He carefully selected “Official spokesmen” like Gert Yssel to proselytize on the evils of the mini-skirt…obscure men who were ridiculed by their own people.

In other movies, isolated outbreaks of diseases such as marasmas, palarga, kwashiorkor, and malnutrition were blown up to portray it as the norm in South Africa. Some movies like “End of Dialogue” were given amateur looks and presented as made by black “freedom fighters” such as the PAC, but were in fact made by White Liberals.

The Swedes Per Sanden and Rudi Spee came up with a shock treatise on “The Massacre of Caprivi” in South West Africa (Namibia). Relying on the tales of one black man and parading a series of unidentified human skulls, the Swedes proclaimed with horror that no fewer than 105 defenceless blacks were massacred by South African troops in 1968. Reacting to strong challenge from South Africa, the producers first reduced the “death toll” to sixty-three, and then decided that “perhaps there may have been two massacres instead of one. How can anyone take these foreign journalists seriously?

In Haiti political opponents of President Duvalier were simply lined up against a wall and shot without a trial. In Algeria opponents of erstwhile President Ben Bella, including some men who helped him to power were tried in secret military courts, without the right of counsel and without the right to appeal. In the USSR execution of political prisoners was common place. People founding to be practising capitalism were simply shot. In Indonesia offenders were heard in secret by President Sukarno’s judges and sentenced in secret. The sentences were also carried out in secret. In several Middle Eastern countries such as Yemen, opponents of the government in power are shot out of hand or beheaded in public. In Morocco in early 1965, fourteen Nationalists were tried and executed in secret by a military court.

In South Africa on the other hand, a person accused of sabotage or treason like Nelson Mandela, could obtain legal counsel from anywhere in the world, was tried in public with the press and judges of foreign countries invited to sit in on the proceedings. The accused were tried by a Supreme Court Justice, who is not the nominee of a political party, and have the right of Appeal. He was not tried for “Opposing the Government” (there are millions of people and several newspapers opposing the Government every day), but for Specific Crimes like blowing up Post Offices or Power Stations, smuggling arms from aboard, or assisting an armed attempt to overthrow the government, etc…

The examples are legion, but for now it will suffice.

Maybe many of these media people were actually trying to be truly objective, but their objectiveness and political centre lies somewhere between left and far left. The Right for them is an unknown land. Personally I think it was a matter of vultures descending on a carcass. Most of these journalists knew exactly what they were doing and how they were knifing the whites of South Africa in the back.

People will ask what the South African government did as counter measures to this anti-South African propaganda. Did they not defend themselves?

They certainly did, but it was a super-jet that was shot down before it could take off. As usual the betrayal came from within. The man who sunk the project was none other than future Prime Minister, State President and dictator, P.W. Botha.

For those who have followed this series, you will agree that there is no doubt that South Africa was under a full scale onslaught from all over the world. The United Nations, The British Commonwealth, The World Council of Churches, the electronic and printed media, were all trying to bury the Whites of South Africa so that International Financiers could get their grimy paws on our mineral riches.

The responsibility for South Africa’s image fell on the Department of Information. The Minister of Information at the time was Dr. Connie Mulder, father of Freedom Front Plus leader and ANC collaborator, Dr Pieter Mulder.

The time was the 1970’s. The Prime Minister of South Africa was John Vorster. Minister of Defence was P.W.Botha.

Dr. Eschel Rhoodie was the Secretary of the Department of Information. A brilliant and highly intelligent man, Dr. Rhoodie established a task team with major players like his own brother Deneys Rhoodie and personal friend Les de Villiers. They would be the spin doctors that would polish South Africa’s image with truth and objectivity…countering the lies and subjectivity of the international media, the UN, etc.

About 70 Million Rand (about the same in dollars at the time) were made available from the defence budget to fund secret projects such as establishing the magazine “To the Point” in Europe and the newspaper “The Citizen” in South Africa and buying the Washington Star newspaper in the USA to counter the lies coming from the David Rockefeller newspaper, The Washington Post.

This is nothing new. Every single government does this. The Netherlands government for instance sponsors several Newspapers on both the right and the left to paint them in a rosy picture. The English South African Newspaper, The Rand Daily Mail, belonging to Anglo American/De Beers, who felt under threat from The Citizen “Exposed” the so called “Information Scandal” as misappropriating funds for clandestine operations.

P.W. Botha saw his opportunity to seize power. He could swat two flies with one blow, namely his own party rival Dr. Mulder, Leader of the NP in Transvaal as well as the then Prime Minister John Vorster. Both resigned along with Dr. Rhoodie and P.W. became the new Prime Minister. Pik Botha, Minister of Foreign Affairs and personal friend of Henry Kissinger took over the Department of Information.

Dr Rhoodie fled to Ecuador, then to the UK and eventually was arrested in France. He was witch hunted and made the scapegoat for projects that P.W. Botha knew fully about and secretly funded in the best interest of South Africa. By 1979 Rhoodie was found guilty of fraud and sentenced to 12 years in prison. The sentence was later reversed and Rhoodie was absolved from all blame by the Bloemfontein Appeals Court and set free. He then left for the USA and worked in advertising until his death in 1993.

P.W. Botha would become the man that would steer South Africa into the abyss. A virtual dictator, he is the one who took South Africa from the original National Party policy of Dr Verwoerd’s “Separate and Equal Development” to “Power Sharing” with Blacks….But more on that in the next edition.

If only the likes of Dr. Rhoodie and Les de Villiers were allowed to run their projects, South Africa today would have had a much different image in the world but it is water under the bridge and cowboys don’t cry.

We have come to learn that when one door closes on the white man another one opens. For us it came in the form of Dr. William Bradford Shockley, who invented the transistor and was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1956.

Dr David Duke mentions the Shockley phenomenon in his book, “My Awakening”.

Shockley was not only a highly intelligent scientist, he was also well aware of racial issues and racial intelligence. Shockley knew that the White race was and is under threat and if we do not do something, the White race will cease to exist.

As Dr. David Duke says…Dr. Shockley’s invention of the transistor enabled us to have Personal Computers, lap tops and the internet today. Dr. Shockley handed us an electronic Excalibur to smite the world of lies out there. Today the internet is in our hands and we can actively participate to counter the lies of our beautiful country, South Africa.

Let us not be unrealistic or delude ourselves. Apartheid had its faults like all political systems in the world. There is no paradise on earth, but in Africa the Republic of South Africa under White rule was the closest thing to it…

Main Sources:

The Paper Curtain – Dr. Eschel Rhoodie

South Africa; A Skunk Amongst Nations – Les De Villiers

People’s War – Dr. Anthea Jeffrey

P.W. Botha; The last Betrayal – Dr Eschel Rhoodie

Verrat an Südafrika – Klaus D. Vaqué

My Awakening – Dr. David Duke

8 comments:

  1. Wow... am loving the series.. and constantly amazed at all I don't know! Thanks for all the research and info! Really an incredible series.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And lookie here.... I thought you may find this interesting...
    *************************
    JOHN KANE-BERMAN: ANC’s media clampdown is not the leopard changing his spots

    TWENTY years ago this month the South African Institute of Race Relations organised a seminar whose proceedings were published under the title Mau-Mauing the Media: New Censorship for the New SA.

    Published: 2010/08/16 07:35:23 AM, BusinessDay

    TWENTY years ago this month the South African Institute of Race Relations organised a seminar whose proceedings were published under the title Mau-Mauing the Media: New Censorship for the New SA.

    Among the speakers were several prominent journalists. They described the terror to which they were subjected if they criticised school boycotts and other coercive strategies that formed part of the “people’s war” launched by the African National Congress (ANC) and its allies to gain power. Some were so scared they referred to the ANC only as “a certain organisation”.

    Now that the revolutionaries are in power, terrorisation of the kind recently visited upon a Sunday Times reporter is (so far) the exception, not the rule.

    Censorship legislation and media tribunals will be much more widely deployed to silence critics.

    Yet it is striking how surprised many journalists seem to be about the proposed clampdowns.

    How, one editorial asks, could a party of such “noble traditions” as the ANC do this to the press?

    The current attack on media freedom by the ANC and the South African Communist Party (SACP), we are informed by another editor, “is consistent with the core values of neither party”. Not too many communist parties in history can have received such an accolade.

    These claims about noble traditions and core values can be made only by airbrushing out the history of the people’s war and/or embracing the view that the leopard has changed his spots. To make such claims also necessitates turning a blind eye to the ANC’s continued — and indeed advertised — commitment to a “national democratic revolution”.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Part 2
    *********************

    It would be a mistake to assume that the present wave of hostility to the press arises only from recent exposés of corruption, though these have intensified that hostility.

    The antagonism of both the ANC and the SACP to critical newspapers is deeper. It is ideological.

    Back in 1997 at a conference in Mafikeng, then president Nelson Mandela depicted the media as having “set itself up as a force opposed to the ANC”. The conference adopted a document in which it described itself as the vanguard of the national democratic revolution. Though the party noted it had significant support in the media, it also said most editorial rooms were not sympathetic either to the ANC or to the national democratic revolution.

    More had to be done to win the “battle of ideas”, inter alia by implementing a “cadre policy (aimed at) ensuring that the ANC plays a leading role in all centres of power”, both within the government and in key structures of civil society.

    Two years later an article in the ANC journal Umrabulo blamed continued press criticism of the government on “weak cadre deployment policies” and “failure to prioritise the transforming of key ideological centres, such as universities, the privately owned media, and private research and policy institutes”.

    Eight years down the road at the ANC’s Polokwane conference in 2007 some of this thinking was translated into the resolutions to establish a statutory tribunal and otherwise curtail media freedom.

    Some of the criticism the ANC has levelled against the media is justified. Some is probably shared by more people than the media would like to admit. But the two ruling parties’ ambition goes beyond remedying obvious defects. It is to turn the media into an instrument of the national democratic revolution.

    There has never been any secret about this and the journalists who find it so surprising have simply failed to be vigilant enough.

    Business, with the acquiescence of most of the media, has to a large extent been turned into an instrument of black economic empowerment, which is also part of the national democratic revolution agenda. If the media are brought to heel, renewed efforts to “transform” the judiciary (including making it less willing to set aside government decisions) and subordinate civil society will move up the agenda.

    Perhaps it is time to write less about noble traditions and more about the national democratic revolution.

    And to recognise that one of the ruling parties’ stated core objectives is a compliant media.

    - Kane-Berman is CE of the South African Institute of Race Relations
    http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=118072

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous1:26 am

    Mike,
    I found an article on the internet which mentioned Tony Ehrenreich, one of the leaders of COSATU, calling for land redistribution. Another article mentioned Jeremy Cronin, a leader in the SA Communist party. Neither of those men are black, right? What kind of persons are actually formulating policy in the SA Communist Party and COSATU?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just got your link now..A spectacular insight into our sorry past. I'll stay tuned.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous5:06 pm

    "In Uganda Idi Amin expelled 40,000 Asians…something that never happened in South Africa, but apparently the Liberal International press finds Black racists less offensive than white racists."

    Yes and most of those Indians went to the UK. Surprise surprise, they built up themselves again.

    Turns out it had nothing to do with blacks being exploited by 'racists', just a bunch of people who are successful and happen not to be black. Sound familiar?

    Idi Amin wasn't only a black racist. He was also a muslim. Remember, he died in exile in Saudi Arabia? Maybe he saw it as part of jihad. The same jihad who caused 10 MILLION Hindus to be slaughtered in the Hindu Kush ('kush' means 'slaughter' btw).
    http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/09/03/the-muslim-conquest-of-india

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous3:25 pm

    If you really want to educate people, especially the black race do your homework from the very beginning. Rather than misleading them. You should be convincing them of the truth, rather than trying to justify your own race over them. History has shown us that in fact it was the 'Arabs' and muslims that were the real slave traders of the past. When the 'White man' came to the shores of africa, it was the Arabs that sold them the first black slaves. You should be more worried, fearful and focus on the Radical muslims isalmist than black people. While you are fighting against your unknowing friends, they are slowly surrounding you both and waiting to rid winner. You think you have all the answers, but are making a grave, suicidal mistake against your own kind, in the end your famous last words will be> "I failed, and didn't see it coming, we have destroyed ourselves" I hope you have nightmares, which will bring you to your senses, before it's too late.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous6:31 am

    The whole world knows about the radical Muslims and their terrorist agenda. However there are many righteous minded Muslims on earth who have been able to follow their religion in a true spiritually minded manner and that is just how Mohammed intended it to be. Jihad is a spiritual holy war against the infidel (disbeliever in righteousness)and not personally against our natural fellow human beings. Just like the Holy spiritual Christian Bible of the West the true spiritual meanings within the Koran has been conveniently and cunningly naturalized and then utilized to achieve natural personal power and gain by the evil forces of this world. The major super powers of the world, the majority of the massive financial organisations and the Muslim radicals etc ...etc are all underhandedly aiming to achieve full and exclusive natural control of the world. They have a sickness that stems from the mind and the true Spiritually minded followers/members of righteous religions have to reluctantly bare the brunt and the consequences of their counterparts tainted and greed motivated deeds. Naturally speaking their greed for natural power and riches will eventually destroy them and their natural world altogether. Spiritually speaking they have destroyed the truth of two great and Holy Spiritual prophets and lost their salvation in the process. Ultimately they will lose everything and yet the fools still bow to their greed in anticipation of ruling the world one day in the future. Greed is the greatest destroyer of mankind and there will never ever be a man made weapon to match it.

    ReplyDelete