21 May 2011

Opening Pandora’s Apartheid Box – Part 31- De Klerk’s liberal conversion and the mindset of treason

By Mike Smith
21st of May 2011

So far we have seen that many authors describe F.W de Klerk as once being one of the most conservative in the NP government. What is it that changed him? How does one man, bordering on the extreme right wing in his party change to become one of the most liberal and hand the country over to Black Marxist terrorists? Did the change come out of his own accord or was he forced to change?

We have seen that there are several reasons why people become traitors or cross over to the other side. The main reasons are represented by the acronym M.I.C.E… Money, Ideology, Coercion and Ego or any combination of the above.

Of these the most often one is the Ego. Traitors are criminals of the worst kind and something that criminals all share is their own greed and the belief that they will never be caught out. They are narcissists who believe they are somehow special.

What was it that moved F.W. de Klerk to become one of the worst traitors of his people to date? Was it one of the above or all of the above…or was it a specific combination?

In this chapter I will explore whether F.W. de Klerk fulfilled the criteria to be called a traitor. I will not follow the letters of M.I.C.E. in the proper order but in the order of what I believe was the importance. I will start with…

The “I” for Ideology
 Several authors as well as F.W. de Klerk’s own brother Wimpie de Klerk and F.W de Klerk himself, states that F.W. never really experienced a Damascus conversion moment. With him it was a slow, gradual change. This is not entirely true. F.W. de Klerk did have a Damascus moment…well sort of…

De Klerk used to go on holiday during the time of the run-up to his speech on the 2nd of February 1990 and sit at the beach teeming out over the water doing a huge amount of introspection and reflection.

At this stage it is necessary to explore the ideology of F.W. de Klerk at the time. When we say he was conservative or religious, then we need to define HOW conservative and HOW religious he actually was. For that, we need to digress slightly and explore the general beliefs and religious convictions of the Afrikaners in South Africa.

For the most part Afrikaners are staunch protestant people. Since the arrival of the first Dutch farmers at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652, they brought their Dutch Reformed Church (Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk) NGK and Calvinistic religion with them. Highly educated ministers or “Dominees” were imported from the Netherlands. NG Kerk dominees study theology for seven years at university.

By 1834 when the Great Trek started on the Eastern Frontier in what is today the Eastern Cape, the Dutch Reformed Church (NGK) was one of the mightiest organizations at the Cape and opposed to the Great Trek.

The Farmers who trekked and who later started their own Republics namely the ZAR (Transvaal) and the Orange Free State therefore started a new Church independent from the Dutch Reform Church or NGK. This church is known today as the “Hervormde Kerk” or “Reconstituted Church”. The Hervormde Kerk (HK) also imported their own Dominees from the Netherlands.

At the time there was a debate going on in the Netherlands on whether hymns should be sung in church together with Psalms or only Psalms. The argument was, “In God’s Church, only God’s word”.

The argument was that, hymns were sometimes of unknown and therefore dubious origins and could have been inspired by Satan who urged a drunk to write a hymn in his drunken state. Actually they found that some of the hymns were in contradiction to the Calvinistic teachings, the Canons of Dort and the Belgic Confession.

A dominee called Dirk Postma arrived in the Boer Republic of the ZAR to take up service in the Hervormde Kerk, but upon hearing that he might have to sing Hymns in church, he broke away with 15 members and a short while later started a new Ultra Conservative church called the Gereformeerde Kerk or (GK) and enrolled 300 members.

So at this stage there were three of these Dutch Reformed Churches. The Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) of the Cape, The Hervormde Church (HK) of the Transvaal and the Gereformeerde Kerk (GK), the Boer Church.


One of the founding fathers of the GK church was Boer President Paul Kruger himself. Together with his15 founder brothers and 300 new members they founded the GK under a seringboom in Rustenburg in 1859.

Paul Kruger was a deeply religious man. He also believed that the earth was flat and claimed that he only ever read one book in his life and that was the Bible. He said that he did not need any other books. He knew most of the Bible off by heart.(Maritin Meredith Diamonds, Gold and War. (New York:PublicAffairs),pg 76.)

The GK or “Dopper” Chruch is still known today as the “Boer Church”.

Why is the GK church known as the “Doppers”? The word comes from the Dutch name for a small bowl. When one places such a small bowl on someone’s head and shave off all the protruding hear, one ends up with a peculiar conservative and puritan hairstyle of the time.

The Doppers calls the DRC or Nederduits Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) members, “Gatjieponders”…the word comes from “Gat-Jappon” which literally translates to “Arse-coat” referring to the tuxedo style coats they used to wear 200 years ago. But I am digressing…

Nevertheless, all three churches NGK, HK and GK are sister churches and the dogma basically the same, i.e. Calvinistic. The only difference is basically the singing of hymns in church. The GK only sings Psalms and what is called “Skrifberymings”, text out of the Bible rewritten to rhyme and given melodies.

Another difference is the belief of the Ultra Conservative “Dopper” Church that God personally intervenes in the lives of people and that when one prays long and hard enough, God will show one the way…show one which course to take. They believe that one can get a calling from God. In Afrikaans it is called a “Roeping”.

F.W. De Klerk was, and still is, such an Ultra Conservative Christian…a “Dopper”, a member of the Boer Church. F.W. de Klerk comes from a thoroughbred Boer family.


During his time of intense introspection, F.W. de Klerk also searched for such a sign from God, to show him the way, a calling to do something great. The sign eventually came in the form of his personal friend and Dopper Dominee, Pieter Bingle of Cape Town.

De Klerk, his wife Marike and Pieter Bingle knew each other since their student days at the Potchefstroom University. Pieter Bingle was at the wedding of his son and testified in the murder trial following the murder of former First Lady Marike de Klerk. Pieter Bingle and F.W. De Klerk are also members of the same Afrikanerbond lodge (afdeling) , Leeuwenhof in Cape Town.

At the inauguration of F.W. de Klerk as State President, Dominee Pieter Bingle gave a sermon…His text was from Jeremiah 23 verse 16 and 22.

Jeremiah 23: 16…

Thus says the LORD of hosts:
“ Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you.
They make you worthless;
They speak a vision of their own heart,
Not from the mouth of the LORD.


 Verse 22:..

“But if they had stood in My counsel, And had caused My people to hear My words, Then they would have turned them from their evil way And from the evil of their doings.”

Basically, Dominee Pieter Bingle told F.W. De Klerk to stop listening to the people and his advisers who were all “false prophets”. He told De Klerk that he was standing in the Council Chamber of the Lord; that he was an instrument of God.

He told De Klerk that he who stands in the Council Chamber of the Lord will be aggressive enough to tackle problems and challenges fearlessly.

Pieter Bingle said…

“New ways will have to be found where roads enter culs de sac, or are worn out or cannot carry the heavy traffic. Excess baggage will be cast aside. Certain will stay and others will have to be discarded. Those stuck in the grooves of the past will find that besides the spelling, depth is the only difference between a groove and a grave.”

During the sermon, Pastor Bingle said, "Mr. de Klerk, as our new President, God is calling you to do his will. Today God calls you to serve as the President of South Africa. God's commission is not to serve as the President of some of the people, but as the President of all the people of South Africa."

F.W. De Klerk was deeply moved by Pieter Bingle’s sermon. He was literally in tears. At a post inaugural meeting he told his friends and families that they should pray for him while the tears were flowing down his cheeks. He said that God called him to do a specific task…to save South Africa…To save all the people of South Africa.

He said that he knew he would be rejected by his own people, but that he had to walk this road and that his friends and family should help him. He confessed that God had called him and that he could not ignore the call.

De Klerk the narcissist felt himself special…singled out by God Almighty to do this job…to commit the ultimate treason against his people.

About his convictions, Allister Sparks quotes De Klerk in “Tomorrow is another Country”, page 100.

“I also believe that God directs things here on earth, and as a result I had to accept that my election as president was something HE wanted to happen, and therefore in my relationship-my vertical relationship- I have a direct responsibility and I must try to live according to that.”

From that day on, De Klerk knew what to do. God told him to hand over the country to a gang of Marxist terrorists.

We will see later how “God” directed De Klerk…but let’s continue on our journey through betrayal.

Whilst De Klerk enjoyed his Damascus moment…On the other side of the parliamentary benches, the Conservative party felt different. These people were also Christians who believed God told them to oppose De Klerk’s decisions such as Dr. Andries Treurnicht who was a Dutch Reform minister for 14 years himself and later became leader of the Conservative Party, the opposition of the National party.

But why was F.W. de Klerk in doubt to start off with? What cognitive dissonances were playing off in his mind at the time of his Bingle induced Damascus moment?

Well, several things played a role. For that we need to go back to the mid 1980’s and the discussions between people at grill parties (Braais) a favorite past time of South Africans. We have to backtrack into the fears and doubts of the people of the time.

In 1985 president P.W. Botha scrapped the Mixed Marriages Act and the Immorality Act which outlawed interracial marriage and interracial sex.

Since 1983 P.W. Botha split the Afrikaners down the middle with the HNP and CP on the right and the NP and the PFP on the left. The PFP was run by a liberal Afrikaner called Dr. Van Zyl Slabbert. Inside the NP itself one had three factions, namely liberal (Verligtes), Moderates (Draadsitters), and Conservatives (Verkramptes).

Around the Braais one would find friends and family with the entire spectrum of political views debating religion and politics, of which few actually had any idea. The Afrikaners of the time were for the most part political ignoramuses. Their political believes were based on Black and White racial politics and the threat of Communism which was from the Devil. Asked them what “Liberal” and “Conservative” meant, they probably would not know.

Typical braai conversation would be, between a liberal and a conservative Afrikaner and the liberal would ask the conservative,

“OK, so you believe in Apartheid, but when you go to heaven, would there also be Apartheid in heaven? Does God have a heaven for blacks and another for whites, or how does it work? Or do you believe that only whites go to heaven? Do blacks also have souls or only whites? What about all those converted blacks out there who converted to Christianity?”

Another question would be, “OK, so you say you are so conservative…The laws have now changed. It is now possible for whites to marry or have sex with blacks…What are you going to do when your son or daughter comes home with a black man or a coloured woman?”

So with these questions in the minds of white South Africans of the time let us consider the de Klerk family.

The De Klerk Family

 When one thinks that F.W. de Klerk was Ultra Conservative then it is still nothing compared to Marike (Willemse) de Klerk his first wife. She was an extremely benevolent person who helped the poor Afrikaners a lot, but she was even more conservative than F.W. De Klerk.

Her father, Wilhelm Willemse, was an academic and writer. He was Professor of Social Pathology and Psychology at Pretoria University.

Nevertheless, the couple never had any children of their own. They adopted three children together; Jan, Willem, and Susan, whom they obviously brought up with their religious convictions and conservative values.

Little Willem de Klerk, turned out to be the black sheep of the family.

He was about 18/19 at the time that P.W. Botha abolished the Immorality Act in 1985 that prohibited sex between whites and coloureds. He was also one of the first to take advantage of this new found freedom.

F.W. de Klerk’s youngest son had a weakness for all those attractive coloured girls down in the Cape.


While he was a student at the Cape Technikon he met a young coloured lady that took his fancy called Erica Adams. Erica was the daughter of a Coloured politician namely Deon Adams of the Labour Party. They were madly and passionately in love and wanted to get married, they got engaged, but his mother Marike flipped out. No ways that she wanted coloured grandchildren, especially not from her darling youngest boy Willempie.

She told him that he was putting his entire father’s work in jeopardy. That he was going to destroy South Africa if he continued the relationship with this coloured girl. After two years of severe pressure from his mother Willem ended the relationship with Erica.

Willem then went on to marry a White Afrikaner girl called Hermien Mostert. She was an ex teacher and at the time she held a senior post at Woolworths. At their wedding Dominee Pieter Bingle did the table prayer. ds. Kobus van der Westhuyzen moderator of the NGK in the Western Cape married them.

Nevertheless the marriage lasted four and a half years. The couple got divorced around the same time that F.W. de Klerk got divorced from Marike…more on that later.

While young Willem was married to Hermien, the owner of a very popular restaurant in Kloof Street, Cape Town, said Willem de Klerk and a woman with dark hair had visited the restaurant a month before and were openly affectionate with one another.

Who was this mysterious dark haired woman? Her name was, Nicole Norodien. Another Cape Coloured exotic beauty for young Willem De Klerk. Willem then married her in Paarl in February 2003.

He started to divorce her in 2009 (the case is still ongoing) after she had an affair with a Johannesburg Businessman, Ernest Lefebvre. Willem de Klerk sued Lefebre for R200,000 but lost.

During the divorce case she claimed that De Klerk was "unpredictable and aggressive" towards her, and that he is "emotionally and verbally abusive". Norodien described him as "regularly intoxicated", adding that he drank "excessive" amounts of alcohol. She claimed he had been having an affair and said he had had several previous adulterous relationships.

Nevertheless he had two children with Norodien.

Norodien also wanted the court to order De Klerk to pay her maintenance of R15 000 a month, as well as comprehensive medical aid cover, a car worth R300 000, a house of up to R2-million or R20 000 a month for accommodation and "household necessaries" worth R200 000.

Was Norodien right? Was Willem de Klerk now having another affair with another coloured woman? Yes.


Willem De Klerk now 44 years old has just (May 2011) settled out of court with another coloured woman named Desiré Joseph , a 27 year old midwife at the Tygerberg Hospital. She comes from the Boland town of Wellington where her parents own a furniture shop.

They met in a pub in the town of Paarl. She claimed that he was the father of her child Ana-Wilmien, but he denied it and wanted paternity tests done. Paternity test proved that he was indeed the father of the child.

Why did she leave him? She said she caught him with another coloured woman in the same pub when she was seven months pregnant.

The end result today is that former President F.W. de Klerk now has three coloured grand children. His worst fears came to life. What we spoke about around braais happened to him. His son came home with a coloured woman…several in fact…and several grandchildren.

How could he still morally justify Apartheid when his son was producing coloured grand children on a regular basis?

All F.W. de Klerk’s superior education as a lawyer, his conservative convictions, his Ultra Conservative religious beliefs that he raised his children on all came to naught when his youngest boy came home with a coloured girl and evinced a weakness for Cape Coloured beauties.

As a once Ultra Conservative politician it must have chewed F.W. de Klerk up inside. Although Willem was an adopted child, he was still raised in the De Klerk household. He attended church and Sunday school, graduated with a “Boere Matriek” called “Katkisasie”, accepted into the Gereformeerde Kerk, the Boer church, yet still he discarded all of those conservative upbringings and still went for race mixing.


Under Apartheid laws F.W. de Klerk’s son would have been in prison.
F.W. de Klerk had to make peace with this and that his grand children would be coloureds. One can almost have sympathy with him today. His Ideology changed from Ultra Conservative to Liberal. A rare occurrence, for normally it is the other way around.

The “E” for Ego

 We have already seen that F.W. de Klerk thought of himself in a narcissist way as singled out by God to save South Africa.

Nevertheless. During the early years of F.W. de Klerk’s presidency he traveled to London where in 1989 his friend Dawie De Villiers, former Springbok Rugby player, turned liberal politician and at the time ambassador to London, introduced him to a Greek couple Tony and Elita Georgiadis.

Tony Georgiadis and his brother are the owners of a shipping company operating out of London called Alandis.

During the sanction years against South Africa, Tony Georgiadis went out of his way to deliver oil to South Africa. He bankrolled the National Party and defied international sanctions to deliver oil to our country.

However, Tony Georgiades name appeared again when Independent Democrats leader Patricia de Lille released her "arms deal dossier" in 1999, identifying him as a lobbyist for German arms ¬companies.

In 2008 the M&G revealed that Georgiadis received at least $22-million from ship-builder Thyssen for lobbying fees and paid more than three amounts of R500 000 to the ANC and two charities linked to Nelson Mandela and his wife, Graça.

Tony Georgiades and his former father in law George Lanaras, the father of Elita are business partners and were the targets of German investigations into the arms deal.

Elita married Tony Georgiadis in 1971, but divorced him in 1998 to marry former South African president FW de Klerk. Georgiadis had in the meantime begun transferring his circle of contacts to the new Mandela government.

Marike and F.W. de Klerk became good friends with the Giorgiadis couple. They became frequent visitors to Greece where they were the guests of the Giorgiadises on Tony’s luxury motor yacht.


Elita was a spoiled woman. She grew up rich and had a privileged life and was bored of all the luxury. She started to have an affair with the very religious and conservative F.W. de Klerk. Apparently God turned a blind eye at the time, because De Klerk was still the chosen one…

By 1994, Georgiadis suspected his wife of having feelings for De Klerk and confronted the outgoing president about it. De Klerk agreed to sever contact with Elita, but he did not. Maybe if he prayed and asked the Lord to show him the way, he would have had another Damascus moment.

Nevertheless during the entire time of the Codesa negotiations, also known as the “Roelf and Cyril show”, De Klerk was disinterested. All he had on his mind when our country was handed over to Marxist terrorists gangsters was his Greek mistress.

De Klerk was totally obsessed with Elita. He followed her around like a lost puppy. He was so besotted that he was not thinking rationally. His entire country was slipping into the hands of criminal Marxist scum, his people about to be slaughtered, yet De Klerk could not care less. De Klerk was betraying his friend Tony, he was betraying his wife Marike, he was betraying God and it was only natural that he would eventually betray his people too.


To understand what type of person De Klerk is, one has to remember that he left his wife Marike on Valentine’s Day 1998 to live with his mistress. Six days after the death of Marike he married Elita.

In her emotional biography, Marike: A Journey Through Summer and Winter, ghost-written by Maretha Maartens, the former first lady described the closing chapter of the couple's marriage.

Of the day the former president left, she wrote:

"He walked to the front door with his suitcases and we stretched out our arms to one another, hugged one another and shook like reeds in the north wind.

"He cried, so did I. I told him: 'If you change your mind, I'll forgive everything - up to 70 times seven.'

"... He whispered: 'I'm certain about my decision. Stop hoping.'"

Where was Dominee Pieter Bingle to intervene and chastise his friend F.W. de Klerk? Instead of preaching to him about skanks such as Jezebel or Delilah he searched for a fig leaf to cover F.W. de Klerk’s sins. He told the people not to judge De Klerk and that those without sin should throw the first stone.

The “M” for Money

 Was F.W. paid to hand over South Africa? How did he gain financially?

Well, he obtained half of the Nobel Prize which is about $1,4 million dollars. It means F.W: got about $700,000 officially for handing the country over. He wrote a biography and got royalties from other books about him. He travels the world and delivers speeches as the chairman of the F.W. de Klerk Foundation and the chairman of the Global Leadership Foundation and obviously makes a bit of money like that.

This is all legal. The question we need to ask is was he paid a specific sum? How much was he paid and most importantly who paid the piper and called the tune?

In a report in the Citizen , Steven Motale reported that former president P.W. Botha in an interview with a Dutch Newspaper a few days before his death alleged that De Klerk received “Millions of dollars” to hand over the country to the ANC.

P.W. Botha made the same allegations to author Jan Lamprecht
when Lamprecht visited him at his home “Die Anker” in George. The amount was not even that big. $3 million or something to that effect.

Apparently P.W. Botha said he knew about the offer, because the same offer was made to him. He did not accept. He also did not say how big the offer was or who the donor/s were.

The leader of the HNP Willie Marais wrote a letter to De Klerk asking for his explanation and why the money was not declared. De Klerk threatened with lawyers in the light of libelous accusations, yet he never went through with it. The National prosecuting Authority and the Scorpions simply ignored these allegations and it was never investigated.

What we do know is that in 2008 De Klerk owned a prestigious wine farm in the Cape called “Wildepaardejacht” which was his residence for ten years. It had 14 hectares of vineyards and 7 hectares of olives and fruit orchards. It went on the market for R35 million.

After this De Klerk bought himself a R20 million mansion in Fresnaye in Cape Town where he is still living today with his Greek wife.

Have no doubts. F.W. de Klerk is not a poor man today.

Whether he took the money that was offered to him and P.W. Botha, is hard to say. Whether the NPA will ever investigate it fully is another question. What concerns me more is who could have been the possible sponsors?

A glimpse of this comes from two books. The first one I already touched on, namely, “Tomorrow is another Country” by Allister Sparks, formerly a journalist from the Anti Apartheid newspaper the Rand Daily Mail and the man who exposed the Muldergate, Eschel Rhoodie so called “Information Scandal”.

Sparks tells us that the secret negotiations between prominent Afrikaners including F.W. de Klerk’s brother Wimpie was sponsored by Consolidated Gold Fields, a British Mining Company established in 1887, 12 years before the British went after the gold in the two former Boer Republics of the ZAR and the Orange Free State.

On page 82, Spark says that there were twelve of these secret meetings, between November 1987 and May 1990. Eleven of them took place at Mells Park House, in the village of Mells, near Bath, Somersetshire, a luxury estate belonging to Consolidated Gold Fields.


Sparks mentions that the man behind it all was the director of public affairs at Consolidated Goldfields, Michael Young.

He was the mediator or facilitator in these secret meetings. It was his job to find the role-players for the secret meetings. It was his job to get Professor Willie Esterhuyse and Thabo Mbeki amongst others drunk on Glenfiddich, telling jokes and yarn swapping so they could see that in their drunken state they were all the same. All the the air fares, food and liquor were sponsored by Michael Young and Consolidated Gold Fields. A small price to pay for all the gold in South Africa.

You can read about The Briton who facilitated the secret meetings over here. Today it is hardly a secret anymore; In 2009 they produced a movie for BBC Chanel 4 called “Endgame” telling us everything about the secret meetings facilitated by Michael Young. At the time the meetings were ultra secret, illegal and participants talking to a terrorist organization such as the ANC would not only lose their jobs, they would be imprisoned. The ANC was on the CIA’s list of the ten worst terrorist organizations in the world…not that it actually mattered, because the CIA was funding them.



The French have a saying, that if you want to hide something, all you have to do is put it in the centre of the picture and nobody will notice it.

This model or method of getting role players secretly together to betray their countries worked so well in the case of South Africa that Michael Young wants to export it to capture other nations.


Who needs war nowadays? As Prof. Willie Esterhuyse told his students afterwards, these things nowadays get decided over a bottle of single malt whisky. The end result is the so-called “Peace” we have in South Africa at the moment.

The other players in this game are exposed in the book, „Really Inside Boss“ by P.C. Swanepoel, a retired senior National Intelligence Services agent (Director of Research) who discovered the role of the CIA in funding the ANC and other terrorist organizations in South Africa through various front companies and conduits in the UK and South Africa as well as through student organizations in South Africa.

When Swanepoel went to his boss, “Lang Hendrik” van den Bergh to tell him what he had discovered, General van den Bergh, also known as “The Tall Man” turned a blind eye. He refused to even read the reports.

William Rourke “Big Bill” Jordan, who ran a company called IMCO in the centre of Sandton City Centre, Johannesburg, was the head of the CIA’s Special Operations in South Africa at the time.

Big Bill was a personal friend of General Van den Bergh. He uses to spend his Sundays on General Van den Bergh’s farm driving his tractor around to get some fresh air. (pg99).

Today one shudders to believe the naiveté of our former National Intelligence masters. In those days we believed that the West was our friends. We were always Pro-Western and even fought on the side of the West in two World Wars. It was incomprehensible that these people would one day betray us.

It is wrong of us to say today that “The Americans betrayed us” or “The English were at it again like in the Boer war.”

The average American or Englishman today has no idea of what their hidden governments; the Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute of International Affairs were up to. They are as much victims of the same organizations as we are in South Africa.

It appears as if these people, The Anglo American Establishment of the CFR and the RIIA through their agents, the CIA and MI6, in co-operation with big business, were the ones who made the offers to P.W. Botha and F.W. De Klerk. If F.W. de Klerk indeed took any of the money it would be interesting to find out if it was declared and whether he paid taxes on it.

The “C” for Coercion

 So we have covered the M, the I and the E of M.I.C.E.

However, what did the C in M.I.C.E stand for again? It stood for “Coercion”…meaning what did they blackmail him on?

The State Security Council

During the time of P.W. Botha, he formed what was called the State Security Council. It was a group of about 100 civil servants from various departments. Its function was to advise the government on formulating and executing national security policy. Botha himself chaired the SSC. F.W. De Klerk was a member of the SSC from 1985-1989.

These were the people who decided how the enemies of Apartheid should be “removed”. They were the ones who gave the orders to hit squads such as the Civil Cooperation Bureau (military) and Vlakplaas’ unit C10, later called C1 (Police) and later denied having any knowledge of atrocities and human rights abuses.

Today the head of Vlakplaas Eugene de Kock is serving a 212 year prison sentence for doing the jobs nobody else wanted to do and which he was instructed to do by the SSC.

Minutes of the meetings of the State Security Council shows that F.W. de Klerk was present when the decision was taken to “Remove” Mathew Goniwe.

Goniwe and the so called “Cradock four” were abducted, beaten and murdered by three Black Security Branch policemen a Sergeant Faku, Sergeant Mgoduka, and one Sakati . They burnt the bodies in the car that Goniwe was traveling in.

The three policemen themselves who participated in the killing of the activists were later killed in a car bomb blast at Motherwell in 1989.

The usage of semantics such as “Remove” would later emerge to be simply meaning offering the person a job in the Transkei or something to that effect…it never meant “Kill”. These were the word games De Klerk was playing when he personally ordered the killing of five sleeping teenage boys in 1993 when the Codesa negotiations were coming to a close.

Funny enough, when political opponents of the NP turned up dead one after the other, after the SSC ordered them to be “Removed”, no enquiry was ever made. No investigations, no arrests…nothing.

De Klerk had many skeletons in his closet, not just his love affair with his Greek mistress at the time (that nobody knew of).

A few years later his former wife Marike wrote two books. Her second book, “A place where the sun still shines” was an attempt to help women who are going through the same as she went through with F. W. de Klerk.

She wrote an entire chapter on F.W. de Klerk. She was bitter and suffering from depression.

The editor of Marike de Klerk’s two books, Maretha Maartens of publishers Carpe Diem, sent a copy of the chapter to F.W. de Klerk. The chapter was called, Grotgesprek (Cave Conversation).

F.W. De Klerk was livid. Maartens confirmed to Afrikaans newspaper Rapport that the chapter was deleted at FW’s request adding that a compromise was reached whereby some portions were published while others, the more bitter elements, were withdrawn.

Both F.W. de Klerk and Rapport has a copy of the original chapter. It is being kept from the public. What was it that Marike de Klerk wanted to reveal in her book? An anonymous source provided Rapport with the chapter, where Marike warns Elita that she too will die alone.

Marike was brutally murdered under mysterious circumstances at her Bloubergstrand sea view apartment at the Dolphin Beach complex on the fourth of December 2001.

I have heard from a person who was close to her that Marike was working on a third book in which she would “Reveal all” about F.W. de Klerk’s treachery.

Marike was growing more and more desponded with the crime situation in South Africa and she knew that F.W. de Klerk had a big part in betraying South Africa and its entire people. She was married to him for 39 years after all. She would know exactly how much money he received and by whom it was paid.

To use F.W.’s semantics…for this she was “Removed”.

Summary

 In my analysis it is clear that the entire scope of MICE was used to get De Klerk to capitulate and commit the ultimate treason. His sins were covered up into the finest detail. For instance he incessantly chews gum to hide that he is a chain smoker of Stuyvesants.

The public was duped. The F.W. de Klerk that we saw on television was a tall clean shaven intelligent man always with a smile on his face. The people were taken in by him. He was the new broom, and boy was he sweeping clean…getting rid of all those cob-webs of the old Apartheid era. The real F.W. de Klerk was a different man. Inherently a traitor of note.

Today F.W. de Klerk is fully aware of the fact that white South Africans and other minorities consider him as a traitor. In August 2010 F.W. de Klerk was interviewed by Murray La Vita of Beeld and F.W. said that the name “Traitor” doesn’t bother him.

The man simply has no conscience. No remorse about what he has done to his people. At least Judas hanged himself after betraying Jesus, but F.W. de Klerk is still with us. He doesn’t see himself as a traitor. He sees himself as something like Jesus reincarnated…An example to the world…The savior of South Africa…

The world acknowledged it after all when he received second prize at the Nobel prize ceremony, next to God Mandela.

De Klerk is unrepentant. He still firmly believes that he did the right thing in the interest of all South Africans. If one considers the corruption and misrule of the ANC, the high crime rate the discrimination against whites and other minorities in South Africa, then it becomes hard to understand De Klerk’s reasoning. The question begs, “Is the man blind?”

During the Anglo Boer War, the Boers used to execute his type by firing squad.

24 comments:

  1. Wow! Incredible research and analysis; as usual! Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  2. A long read but worthwhile....I know we all have feet of clay and so did De Klerk...I think maybe there could be other letters in the acronym:

    M.I.C.E.T.I.N.A

    (There Is No Alternative)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous1:40 pm

    Well done Mike.... A word of WARNING : Be carefull, the 'enlightened' ones knows we know too much !

    ReplyDelete
  4. I keep saying it is very difficult to say FW De Klerk did not divert a war that could have been very costly however you see it he did a job that was needed,he should be paid for it and be given a golden handshake too.I am not standing up for him . I am only saying leave him alone there are far bigger criminals already in our midst like Malema and Zuma too to name a few as is Mugabe not yet take account for Gukurahundi ,euphemestically called "The Matabele uprisings" by the crappy Liberal Western World.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous3:16 pm

    Very good shit, but like usual the masses just keep on, there was never a black problem in South africa only a white problem! Whites had the situation in control, its unfortunate that SA lies on the largest platinum, gold and diamond mines. SA will either be heaven or hell, they want hell in SA because then the spoils are cheaper than when it was heaven and things were too expensive.

    From day one of the brits winning (via concentration camps) in the boer war, the boere/afrikaaner or any white was just going to be a pupit

    But what is your opinion of Chinas role in Africa as they are now the leading nation supplying money and all to umaAfrica....

    Surly there is a role there?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous6:03 pm

    So to summarise... De Klerk is white trash which happens to have lots of money.

    Excellent article as always, Mike. Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous8:38 pm

    Thanks Mike. There is nothing to add, but a sincere thanks.

    Dingo

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jamboth11:03 pm

    Excellent Mike! One question still remains unanswered, however: Who was and is behind it all?

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is absolutely brilliantly written!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous4:20 am

    To Jamboth: You can trace this all back to the Illuminati - Money power etc. etc...This happens all over the world and the pope laughs in his chair... We are entering end times ! You can not fight them, sleeper cells are waiting to be unleashed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous5:30 am

    Interesting, but ignores the political context. The only choices facing FW were: (1) bunker down and fight to the end while the economy sunk to the bottom of the ocean amid strikes, stay-aways, sanctions and violence or (2) capitulate. FW inherited a mess from PW. Vorster made the first moves away from "grand apartheid". It is false to believe that FW had some of kind of "religious experience" or conversion that made him "jump tracks" out of the blue.

    Apartheid was a giant con trick. As early as the 1920s, government studies said that black urbanisation and integration into the industrial economy were unstoppable trends - and nothing that Malan, Strijdom, Verwoerd or Vorster did changed that. Eventually, as is the case with cons, the truth came out. Apartheid bought whites 40 more years after colonialism ended - and that sealed the fate of whites in Africa. FW's deal with the ANC has bought whites a bit more time before the ANC under Malema implements the ANC's real agenda. Bought white more time to do what? To get out of SA.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous7:10 am

    The same anti-white shit is happening all over the world. Look at London, Paris, New York!

    There is no point leaving South Africa. We need an independant homeland.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous8:36 am

    Very good and informative article Mike,thx again for the endless hard work you've put into this.Keep it coming.

    ReplyDelete
  14. PreatorianXVI11:31 am

    As always down to the facts, your analysis of the subject is excellent, really looking forward to your book, would make a nice Coffee table book.

    I can already anticipate the intense conversations around it.

    Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous2:46 pm

    Hey Mike,
    have you considered publishing "Opening Pandora’s Apartheid Box" as a book. I am sure it will be well received. Keep up the good work my friend.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dachshund4:40 am

    Adopted kids often don't work out too well, sad but true. FW was a bastard to dump his wife. He didn't set much of a role model for Wimpie.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous11:45 pm

    Well done Mike . What I detest the most of these arseholes is that most families , if they had boys , would have to send them in to Angola and war . Whilest ordanary families lost brave boys on the border , or got them wounded + traumatised , Im pretty sure FW`s boys did not go through that . Neither did PIk Botha`s boy`s serve time on the border ! A war they pretty well knew would serve no purpose ! I salute every one of those brave men . I thank them for what they did. I am also sorry that they went through it . Disgusting politicians !

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hi Mike,

    Thank you for an interesting, and informative, article.

    I would like, with your permission, to republish this article on http://www.feintandmargin.com.

    You will retain all copyrights and accreditation. It's something I feel deserves greater exposure.

    I look forward to hearing from you soon,

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous12:41 pm

    Mike, you remind me of S E D Brown who published the SA Observer in the 'sixties and 'seventies. When de Klerk was a junior parliamentarian Brown exposed him, together with more than a dozen other NP politicians of the time, I forget them all but remember Pik Botha's name, who had been identified by the CIA as their preteges to assist with the destabilization and hand-over of South Africa.

    Going back even further, I realise how carefully and meticulously the advent of the new world order has been planned and executed. When FW was a little boy, his mother bragged about the day that he would become State President. How else could she have known had she not been confided to by her husband, whose genes (together with those of his wife) had long since been identified to be suitable to produce the type of leader/traitor that would be required to do the job.

    How do I know this? My late parents knew the family (they were not friends!!) and overheard the conversation. They told me about it about 55 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous10:44 am

    Thank God this pink piece of scum has not sown it's seeds and that there's no genetic offspring of this traitor that may continue his destruction over generations.

    ReplyDelete
  21. And how many of us know the involvement of the OPPENHEIMERS in this saga:
    This excerpt from a man that was on the "Inside"
    http://www.withmaliceandforethought.com/html/sa_secret_history.html

    UN, IMF, ANC, Mandela and South Africa (1989)

    In 1989, the UN came back to the SA government with an ultimatum again and the IMF offered up the muscle. We were already a nation divided with ministers in government and officers in the military working for the UN, IMF and/or ANC. The UN demanded that Mandela be released since he was the new "poster boy" for worldview change. The IMF offered to flood the market with Russian diamonds and destroy the South African economy if South Africa didn't comply. DeKlerk knew what was going on, he was Oppenheimer's (Rothschilds) bought man, so he did the thing they wanted, bought the diamonds with the country's money and extended the Reserve Bank, but he didn't release Mandela, because the plan was that he needed an excuse to say, "It's the only thing we could do to save the country." Hollow words since he knew he would eventually get the Nobel Prize with that other traitor Mandela. DeKlerk knew the plan and it wouldn't be much longer until SA went over the edge, so a couple of weeks after the diamond deal, the IMF came back on schedule while Oppenhiemer pretended innocence and "informed" deKlerk of the next part of the plan for SA, they would flood the market with gold and destroy the economy if Mandela wasn't released.

    Conclusion

    And there we have it, the unknown history of the capitulation of South Africa, sold to the IMF and the UN by traitors like deKlerk through the pressure of worldview manipulation using Mandela, the poster boy for terror as the poster boy for peace, go figure?

    South Africa, a nation built of the blood and sweat of settlers and a land mass that was not really occupied by anyone. A nation now usurped by IMF control to the detriment of everyone. The deKlerks, Mandelas, Mbekis, Zumas, all of them are simply meat puppets, not unlike Harper and Obama, that dance to the tune of their master, the IMF (read Rothschilds). Corruption, disease and murder run rampant and unchecked while infrastructure collapses and taxpayer money is funneled into political pockets and IMF debt schemes (read ponzi scams).

    My CO, Colonel Jordaan, said to me, "Once is happenstance, twice coincidence but three times is enemy action." We are well beyond three times. I could tell your readers a lot more, but we all need to keep our "insurance" and hope it stays working.

    The day the Helderberg was destroyed, November 28, 1987, was the last day the people of South Africa had any form of self determination, it was the beginning of the end. Remember the date, not only for the loss of the country but for the loss of the innocent victims that died that fateful night, their families that still search for closure and those who continue to die on the human stage the IMF and UN constructed from greed of Rothschilds and their spawn.

    But cheer up, the worst is yet to come.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous12:36 am

      Well put Rudolph, some additional stuff.....

      This is all being done with the Hegelian Dialectic.

      The muslim is running this whole thing. They are the third party to this mess. They are all about control, money and shariah law.

      Ultimately the muslim is under control of the illuminati,as well as the rockefellers, rothschilds, and the council of rome.

      Look at Obama. He is destroying the US economy (as a confessed muslim) for muslim control of the country, and ultimately the world.

      He sponsored the muslim brotherhood that has destroyed structure and control in the middle east with US taxpayers money.

      He co-sponsored the largest muslim mosque in the southern hemisphere in Midrand.

      De klerk was bought. He was not forced or coerced, Just plain bought.

      Obviously there were promises made made to rid his past of any stones in his and the communist's shoes, same as verwoerd was closed to stop and change certain policies and actions in the country.

      In the "apartheid" days indians were not permitted to own property or businesses, and certain white traitors put muslim businesses on their names for muslim to make money, to later buy the country in totality.

      I know five of them in our little town.

      That is what the yes/no vote started.

      Communism in Russia was destroyed for this because communism does not allow any religion beyond state sponsored religion, so islam was not permitted and now russia is on of the biggest muslim (and growing) countries around.

      I can dish more facts with proof here but space and time restrict me at this time.

      Delete
  22. OH, go read this.....Do you remember the "HELDERBERG"
    http://www.withmaliceandforethought.com/html/my_story.html

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous2:37 pm

    http://www.whitenationnetwork.com/paper/?p=38310

    A short extract from link article:

    "Interesting: Also mentioned as a point of interest during this audio tape recording- is that FW De Klerk STOLE R 12 billion rands from the public- and that our Reserve gold – 3000 tonnes- was stolen by the ANC/NP cospirators out of Zurich – and sent to New York to help the Jew banksters there- the amount of gold was R 2- TRILLION." (sic)

    Let's put aside Goodson's controversial views. Thing is, I'm not aware of any intent to sue him in terms of these statements! Maybe some truth there? If so, that could answer a few questions!

    ReplyDelete