The True History of Africa and South Africa

White History Stolen

Nigerian colonial flag. All you need to know.

Who ran the slave trade?

Well... The biggest slave port in Benin (i.e. on the Slave Coast) was called Judah and Ouidah.

Today I'd like to present an excerpt from a book , The Plot Against South Africa (1989) by Klaus D Vacue, CHAPTER 1 The Rule of the Boers. I'll let it speak for itself.

....

When the Dutch pioneers first set foot on South African soil in 1652 under the leadership of Jan van Riebeeck they had neither the desire nor the intention to subjugate the native inhabitants or rob them of their possessions. Their task was simply to establish a refreshment station for the ships of the Dutch East India Company carrying the riches of the East to Europe via the Cape of Good Hope.

That was a year before the founding of New York and a hundred and fifty years before the settlement of Australia and New Zealand by British immigrants.

Now that a regular mud-slinging campaign is being waged by the USA and the UNO [United Nations Organisation] to which it plays host, it is only fair to mention, not without irony, the fact that the execrated Boers did not exterminate millions of Indians (for which read blacks) - of the estimated ten million original inhabitants of North America there are now only about four hundred thousand- or filch their land from them and pen the survivors up in reservations. Nor did they import Black slaves; with their own hands they set about clearing and cultivating the almost uninhabited country. Apart from small groups of nomadic Bushmen and Hottentots, it was a hundred years later, in 1770, that they first encountered Black tribes on the banks of the Great Fish River, a thousand kilometres north of Cape Town. Those tribes formed the spearhead of the Nguni peoples, who had originated in the region of the Great Lakes in Central Africa, hundreds of years before they began their migration southward.

By then some of the people employed by the Dutch East India Company had become "free burgers" who, together with 150 Huguenots who had fled their native France, settled an area of 170 000 square kilometres; about six times the area of the present-day Netherlands.

After a few skirmishes and several border wars they eventually came to terms. The Boers left the black migrants in possession of the territories where they had settled, and which are now the "homelands" that they themselves have chosen.

If South Africa now has problems with its present black majority proportions, that in itself is clear evidence of the difference in humanity between the pious Boers and the white subjugators of America, Australia and New Zealand, who would never have allowed any such disproportion to exist. It is the very pinnacle of hypocrisy that those countries should now be in the forefront of those who accuse South Africa of gross violations of human rights.

The news of the remarkable abilities of the white man and his technical achievements soon had the effect of bringing more and more blacks into the territories occupied by the Boers in quest of work, protection and medical treatment. The white man did not come to Africa to take their land from them, as is often asserted. He could not take from them their schools, their hospitals, their roads or their railways; for of course they had no such things.

As we have said, he entered an almost uninhabited country, a wilderness of desert and bush with little to offer but wild beasts, a pleasant climate and some fertile coastal strips. The few indigenous peoples that he encountered lived in a state of barbarism, their principal occupation being to smash in each others' skulls at regular intervals. They did not use the wheel; they had no writing; they lived as they had lived a thousand years before.

Let me put it quite bluntly: Everything that the black man now possesses in South Africa he owes to the technical knowledge, the initiative and the creative talents of the white man. The white man owes him absolutely nothing. It is sheer nonsense, as is often alleged, that the whites owe their prosperity to the cheap labour of the blacks. Europe did not need to wait for "cheap'' foreign labour to be imported to acquire its wealth and civilization. The contrary rather. It is not more necessary than ever before to spend more and more on welfare payments and unemployment benefits to over-prolific migrant workers raised through higher and higher taxes? Are there not more crime and social problems than ever before?

...

In addition I present another documentary dealing with South Africa's land history. Disrupted Land.

Disrupted land is a new documentary that pushes the boundaries of truth in South Africa today. It's a good summary of South Africa's land history from the time of the first Dutch East India halfway station settlement at the Cape of Good Hope to the current day. Currently the film is only available on Youtube. If interested ,and possible, downloading is recommended before the producers, Afriforum, are forced to remove or alter the film under pressure.

This is the kind of truth the likes of the EFF (Economic Freedom Fighters), ruling ANC (African National Congress) and radical BLF (Black First Land First) don't want people to know as it is seriously damaging to their claims of original countrywide land occupation by blacks and subsequent theft by settler whites.

In this film you also learn when blacks arrived in South Africa, where they first settled and that although there were wars between black and white that it was black on black genocidal eradication campaigns such as the Mfeqane and Difeqane campaigns that nearly depopulated South Africa and left the vast empty stretches the whites encountered as they moved further inland. There were no blacks in large areas from which land could be stolen and any land acquired in black areas were either by deal and arrangement or direct conquest which, under black tradition, transfers the land rights to the victor so it is not stolen either. Thus claims of original stolen land (aside from those made during the Apartheid era) has no merit.

The original intentions of Apartheid are also explained but Apartheid is only briefly touched on before moving to the issues today. As an attack point by critics on this film insufficient coverage of the land and relocation events during Apartheid is used but this film is about the overall land history of South Africa and not just the Apartheid Era. That would require an entirely different full length documentary.

The African perceptions of land occupation and ownership are also explained.

Overall it's a good overview of South Africa's land history and does well to dispell the lies and propaganda surrounding the land issue in South Africa after 25 years of ANC rule.

Below is also included the Youtube description.

Disrupted Land - Documentary - 1:17:48
Forum Films
Published on Mar 10, 2019



Disrupted Land is a documentary film about the history and future of land ownership in South Africa. The film deals with the controversial history of land in South Africa and views it is a matter that has been distorted for political gain by politicians and land reform activists. The film investigates the question of how white farmers obtained land in South Africa and exposes the extensive failure of the South African government’s land reform initiatives. Disrupted Land refutes the claim that there is a large-scale hunger for rural land among black people in South Africa. The films also point out that the situation would deteriorate if the ruling ANC and its alliance partners were to succeed with its push for expropriation of private property without compensation.

The film was produced by Forum Films, in cooperation with AfriForum.

Last Edited by WhiteFly on 03/10/2021 03:18 PM

Bump

Bump for South Africa

SA was better under apartheid.

Wow OP!!!

Very nice links and descriptions in your presentation.

Most excellent.

Then honkeys came and fixed all the problems

Made crops , dams, and progress

Then blacky got mad and killed them

Oh wait that was America

We had problems, but we had law and order...and hope. We got sold a lie...we have much bigger problems now.

Thank you all for your comments. It was quite a revelatory insight for me as well as I've been deprogramming myself of lifelong lies.

Today I want to touch on slavery and present some facts about Apartheid in South Africa.


Facts about slavery they don't teach you in school - 9:16




Thomas Sowell on Black History myths promoted by the left - 10:22




Apartheid

Apartheid is widely portrayed as being a creation of the white Afrikaners. The Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd is called the "Father of Apartheid" but that is not true. In the Timeline of Apartheid it is shown that the British are the real architects of Apartheid and already begun to create the system in the early 1800's. Long before Verwoerd was ever born.

This is a timeline of Apartheid

[link to southafricatoday.net (secure)]

In his book, Stephen Goodson’s HENDRIK FRENSCH VERWOERD – SOUTH AFRICA’S GREATEST PRIME MINISTER, he details mind-blowing information every South African should know about Apartheid, Rothschild bankers, and Verwoerd who was a man of fairness, dignity, and wanted equality for everyone.

The question is whether Verwoerd is responsible for apartheid, based on the perspective order of events.

• 1809 – The Native Pass Law of the British Government at Cape of Good Hope passed compel black people to carry a passbook.

• 1865 – British-born Sir Theophilus Shepstone prohibited blacks in Natalia from having any voting power.

• 1894 – Cecil John Rhodes prevented a colored man Krom Hendriks from joining the national cricket tour to England.

• 1895 – Cecil John Rhodes compelled schools in the Cape to teach separate for whites in English and Blacks in English. (Verwoerd was not born yet)

• 1901 – 8th September 1901 in Amsterdam.

• 1913 – The British Native Land Act 2 prohibited black people to own land. (Verwoerd 12 years of Age)

• 1915 – National Party of South Africa 2nd July 1915.

The ideology of apartheid was never the ideology of the Boers but was a secret agenda propagated by the paid British press and their agents in the “Broederbond” to keep control over South Africa for Britain via the Nationalist Party, which shows a deliberate falsification of history in order to keep control over South Africa by design with conflict. The aforesaid is in addition confirmed by the Nationalist Party secret funds, mostly channeled to home in Britain, in institutions like Barclays Bank or the Bank of England who was affirmed by the “one stream” ideology of Jan Smuts and his predecessors with the land grab and dehumanizing legislation that preceded the Nationalist Party rule who had to content with the gross human right violations and a systemic ruggedness with secret control prevent change.

Away from the Smuts/Brittan ideology JBM Hertzog (Minister of Justice) employed a two stream ideology propagating equal rights towards English and Afrikaner Communities which was reflected in the election where Jan Smut (South Africa) seats were reduced from 67 to 54, Thomas Smartt (Unionist) maintain 39 and JBM Hertzog (National Party) gained 27.

• 1918 – Establishment of the “Afrikaner Broederbond” (Jong Zuid-Afrika) by the British as a secret extension of their influence in the same way it was portrayed in the film of Mel Gibson “The Patriot” ( Verwoerd was not a member)

• 1925 – British minister HW Sampson promulgated the Labor Demarcation Act to divide black and white. (Verwoerd 32 years of age and not in politics)

• 1927 – Immorality Act was promulgated in Natal controlled by Britain prohibit intimacy between black and white ( Verwoerd 34 years of age and not in politics). British Union Genl Jan Smuts promulgated

• 1936 – Separate representation in parliament. (Verwoerd was 43 and editor of a newspaper)

• 1945 – The Native Urban Area Act prohibited blacks to stay longer than 72 hours in a white urban area (Verwoerd was 52 years of age into politics but without a portfolio)

• 1948 – Nationalist Party took over on 4 June 1948 with the Pass Laws and No Voting rights and other discriminate laws still intact, established by the Britain.

• 1958 – Verwoerd 2 September 1958 in office as prime minister of South Africa. (State President–Charles Roberts Swart)

• 1966 – Verwoerd was murdered because he started to give the land progressively back to the black people who were against the rugged British plan, which was disowned by The British Native Land Act 2 passed in 1913, for which he was killed. He was not killed by a disgruntled black group or activists’ which is eminent from the following factual events;-
o Establishes “Black education” as a national law. Many African countries haven’t achieved that to date
o the inflation rate was 2% or less
o Interest rate was 3%
o there was peace as a result of the transformation and restoration process
o the national growth was 7.9% the second highest in the world.
o the living standards of blacks was rising by 5.4% versus the 3.9 % of whites
o had no needs for foreign loans and/or indebtedness versus the current indebtedness of approximately 50% and overall indebtedness approaching 70%. At present, the repayment to banks by the government is approximately R500 million per day.
o [Dimitry] Stafendas worked for Anton Rupert in London prior his appointment as a messenger in the parliament while an illegal immigrant, appointed by Hendrik van der Berg who was promoted ±6 ranks by John Vorster as minister of Justice at the time, to put him in control of security of the parliament.
o It is well known that Verwoerd was assassinated by the Banking Cartel arranged through John Vorster with specific input from the Rupert’s and the Oppenheimer’s being controlled from London promoting Vorster to the prime minister.

• 1970 – Implementation of skimming from policies owners of Old Mutual Via Old Mutual Bank a non-entity and stash money across the globe for relocation and take over.

• 1989 – Implementation of SARB Act, Section 33 clause to suppress all evidence

• 1992 – ANC agree to take Political Power only and sign away all economic survivability of SA. [Whitefly - Now they want the economic power too and so the idea of "white monopoly capital" was created to justify stealing all economic power and opportunities from whites and white managed corporations and municipalities with disastrous results. It's been amply proven to date that they are incapable of managing the economy without resorting to corruption and thuggery. Corruption is driving the country into the ground] (Old Mutual, ABSA, SAB, de Beers, etc.) – MAS 57/08/92 – Pretoria North Case ref, investigation officer – Lt. Col. AE Botha conducted an investigation into the irregularities, but it was never made public or brought to court.

• 1994 – Project Hammer completed, ANC agree for Political Control only.
More at [link to www.politicsweb.co.za (secure)]

Last Edited by WhiteFly on 03/12/2021 12:22 PM

being from there and his personal interest.. I think you will find Whitefly an interesting source.

It is so true. Look who tries to guilt white South Africans.

British
American (leftists)
and Australians.

South Africa's problems actually arise from having provided the Bantu peoples TOO good of a life, which caused their population to grow literally off the charts, at about 3 times the rate of white and colored populations, over a 100 year period!

If they had done what Australia had done, a century ago, there would be no 'race issue' in South Africa today.

BTW, according to South Africa's race laws, Chinese count as black.

I am sure even the black people in South Africa don't realize this.

This is to help facilitate the Chinese take over of South Africa's mining industry.

I read the first chapters.

It's quite ironic that that famous author of King Solomon's Mines, She, and Allan Quatermain, who was also an administrator for the Brithish colonial forces in South(ern) Africa, wrote very disparagingly about the Boers, accusing them of not being civilized.... it's telling for the relations between Boers and British.

You can find it on the net.

Read "The Washing of the Spears". Excellent book, no punches pulled. True history the old way - good and bad.

There are 3 categories in South-Africa: whites, blacks, and colored (everything else, including Indians).

I am sure Chinese are not counted as blacks but as colored.

Are you from South-Africa?

What happened in Rhodesia will happen to the USA soon, South Africa is going through this too

[link to metallicman.com (secure)]

Julius Malema, "youth leader".

OP, something kind of related to your research....there is an anthropologist named Robert Sepher. He has some kickass books and a really wonderful YT channel (although I'm surprised it's still up) on the true History of whites and Africa and this whole bs narrative of 'out of Africa' they're pushing.

I think this would dovetail nicely with this research.
The true history is occulted and kept from the uninitiated. But if one has the intuition that the world is not how it appears, there is ways to find out the truth.

I believe 'they/them' that gatekeep occulted knowledge and history do it not only for power, but also as a kind of filter so only people wise and clever enough to be deemed worthy of learning it, find it.

The start of Apartheid seems to have been connected to a deed of atrocity committed on a white boy, as mentioned by a poster here a few weeks ago. I don't know about the accuracy of this info however.

No.. obviously my grammer was incomplete.. I was refering to OP.. I was born and raised and continue to live in Colorado... I always wanted to visit people I know in Africa though... I do know something about Whitefly and his African knowledge from his being a native there and his interest. I have read his works before.

Racist garbage from a racist. Congratulations

Well, you can be sure all you want.

You can also be wrong.

[link to www.wsj.com (secure)]

Its ok, I accept your apology.

the dumb in your statement if obvious.

Here's a link - [link to samisdat.info (secure)]

You know what a racist is? A racist is a person that has solidarity and identifies with his own race. It's not someone antagonistic towards other races. The true meaning of the word has been inverted. Therefore, according to correct definition, everybody is racist. And it is also correctly applied except when whites are involved. So please explain to me why only whites can be "racist" under the wrong definition of the word and none other.

Oh yes, and something else. Since I live here in South Africa and have observed blacks first hand my whole life, I know Verwoerd is right. Everything he said has come to pass. We are living it. The man was a highly insightful visionary.

Last Edited by WhiteFly on 03/13/2021 03:38 PM

The word racist was popularized by the No. 3 Commie of the 20th century, Leon Trotsky.

Well done falling for Communist subversion.

You are half right.

The word 'racist' replaced the term 'in-group preference' which you are correct, every person on Earth exhibits.


It means you enjoy the company of people like yourself, in terms of values and culture and food and dress, the type of music you like, and so on. EVERYONE is like that.

Would you go to dinner at someone's house if you knew you didn't like the type of cuisine they will be preparing?

Would you go to a concert of a type of music you despise?