I am amazed that i really could be anyone else's, in this case part of "Mugabe's ranting propaganda" machine, implying that i do not have my own mind to see things from my own perspective, even similar or inseperable from that of veteran nationalist Mugabe.
Here is what one Jan from AfricanCrisis writes of the story "Malema: West's new bogeyman":
FROM Mugabe's Propaganda machine - The Herald - Zimbabwe: Malema - the West's New Bogey Man - Mugabe reads AfricanCrisis for sure - They HATE Jan Lamprecht's analysis - Did I save Julius Malema's life?
Here is a brilliant piece of Mugabe's ranting propaganda. Now enemy propaganda is always worth studying - with an analytical and skeptica mind. There are interesting things in it. They also disseminate as many lies as they can too by presenting fiction as fact. I'll give some examples below. There are very interesting references in it. I advise people to study it closely, but with a SKEPTICAL MIND. If you are a regular AfricanCrisis reader and you really follow things closely, you might see something extremely interesting in some of the comments in this article that indicate that Mugabe's people are reading AfricanCrisis. They even try to comment directly on something that was published here recently that annoys them intensely. I came up with an analysis that they don't like at all. I've found something and they just don't like what I've found. Now they want to claim its "malicious". Well, that's their stupid attempt to slander my analysis, because my analysis does not suit their propaganda. This is the only article they can possibly be referring to. Here's the piece they HATE: S.Africa: Who is going to kill Julius Malema? Can General Julius Malema defeat the ANC & President Zuma on his own? I made the sentence in THE HERALD article below bold so you can spot it. Read the way they tried to interpret it, and compare it with what is inside my analysis…This ranting piece attempts to shore up support for Malema from Zimbabwe. THE HERALD is Mugabe's personal propaganda machine these days, and it has vile articles in it attacking Rhodesia and so forth. The Rhodesians, mind you, were hardly COLONIALS, because WE BROKE WITH BRITAIN. We openly broke with Britain and Britain worked against us. Ian Smith and the Rhodesians who fought Mugabe were NOT COLONIALS - WE WERE WHITE AFRICANS WHO WANTED TO STAY JUST LIKE THE BOERS WERE. But Mugabe needs to flog that dead horse, Britain, whenever he can because it is the only thing that gives some meaning to his worthless rotten life for which I hope he spends an eternity in hell - which he richly deserves.Inside Mugabe's political propaganda, you see hints that might or might not be true. For example, Mugabe claims that MDC-T is supported by WHITES IN SOUTH AFRICA. They talk of "White capital". Mugabe's nightmare, and his deepest fear, is when white people back black political parties. Nothing scares him more than this, and this white/black partnership has nearly destroyed him - TWICE in the last 10 years. I won't mention the occasions. What Mugabe hates with a passion is when the whites don't support HIM. When they did, he was fine with that, but the moment the whites seemed to move elsewhere, he perceived them as a tremendous threat. Mugabe *HATES* whites in African politics because of the punch we can pack. White Africans are the most dangerous thing Mugabe has ever faced and he fears us more than he fears America or Britain or anyone else. Mugabe knows that if we can land a knock-out blow on him to remove him from the picture, decisively, for once and for all - we will. I don't mean we want to assassinate him - in fact, keeping him alive may be as logical as it was to the allies to keep Hitler alive (another story worth telling that I saw on THE HISTORY CHANNEL some time back). But Mugabe needs to be defeated decisively politically. It seems Mugabe worries about the whites in South Africa because some of us, do reach out to touch him from time to time, and we annoy him and put a spanner in his plans whenever we can. Among one of the many lies below I should especially point to the one that "Whites resettled blacks in inhospital regions". I'd like to know what inhospitable regions even exist in that beautiful country that this slimeball ruined. It has far better rainfall than South Africa... As I recall, the transformation of Zimbabwe into a semi-desert was the work of Mugabe. Prior to him, the country was beautiful with lush vegetation and enormous numbers of wildlife and farm animals. I doubt there were any "inhospitable regions" anywhere in the entire country. But Mugabe and his fiends need to constantly try to promote the lies about us whites. I don't think Mugabe and the ANC like my analyses at all, and yet, I think I have quite a splendid track record of beating many to the mark many times. Years before Jacob Zuma became President and Mbeki was deposed, I was writing my analysis which many people thought was the work of a nut. But the nut was closer to the mark than anyone else. And on this matter of race war, genocide, and the actions of Malema and Zuma, I'm too close for comfort to the mark.I hope that Western Intelligence digs deep and hard into President Zuma's actions. I say he's a liar and he's been murdering blacks from Zimbabwe and he was going to try to nail the White Farmers and the big mines in South Africa. These issues should not be taken lightly.Whites must press forward for self-defence. We'll be needing it. Jan
- Agreed i actually follow the Jan's site for the sole reson why he says "enemy propaganda is worth studying"
Of course i take, just as he would do, the same with a pinch of salt.
In this particular instance i also note that his "analysis" is fraught with emotion and lies (not everything though, which is perfectly human).
Jan tries to trash the idea that blacks were condemned to arid and inhospitable areas.
The Rhodie (which he admits he is), probably forgets about the 1930 Land Apportionment Act, which created white and black areas and reserves, etc.
This heinous piece of legislation led to the more formalisation of land segregation as blacks were bandied reserves such as Gwaii, Shangani, Tsholotsho, etc.
The law created land which blacks could purchase (which they couldn't afford, anyway).
Europeans would not have found this land quite appealing.
As for the claim that Zimbabwe does not have any arid area, it's either Jan did not do his geography or agriculture well.
Had he done, he could well be informed of what are called "the Natural Farming Regions", a 1-5 scale for agric suitability.
It is known that Regions 3-5 are generally the lower end of the scale with the latter being only fit for animal ranges.
This include Hwange and Gonarezhou, which are in fact huge vestiges of wildlife.
Then there is this sick joke that Smith and co are not colonials.
They are white Africans, Jan tells us.
We know when the whites set foot on African soil they they said they had found a home, just like other aliens in the mould of Australians and Americans, did in the aborigine and Indian lands.
The present generation of these people might not have partaken of colonialism, plunder, rape, murder...but they are the progeny of those ills.
In the same vein, Jan's Rhodies of the Smith era - and the Boers - were colonials because they inherited colonial property.
It makes them no less criminals and enemies and robbers.
God had given them and their kind the miserable areas, which they abandoned for other belessed parts of the world.
Their influence in our politics, in this era of Independence, is of course poisonous and any right thinking person would not want to give them enough elbow room.
The reason is simple: buoyed by paternalistic politics, they involve themselves, and eventually after posturing to be Africans, they will reverse the gains of our liberation and consign us back to slavery and colonialism - not in the more savage ways of the earlier era of course.
This is precisely the reason why Americans would not want black "Americans" to have influence: they will reclaim their humanity lost since slavery.
For the same reasons, Rhodies and Boers and other upshots of vice should not be given space in today's Africa.
It is only prudent to consolidate what Independence has brought by raking up what is still in the hands of the minority.
No comments:
Post a Comment