Excerpt from Introduction to Belgian Law, by Hubert Bocken & Walter de Bondt (Kluwer 2000)

p. 20 IV. Belgium’s contribution to law

“The idea of the rule of law was already present in Flemish cities in the twelfth century….When count William Clito came to power in Flanders in 1127, he guaranteed the inhabitants of his cities a right judgement of the cities’ aldermen against every man and against himself [the count]. The prince is already [at this time then] subject to the laws. The 1127 city charters were not mere words. On 16 February 1128, Ivan (Iwein), Lord of Aalst, acted as the spokesman of the city of Ghent before the count. Ivan rebuked the court [sic] for not respecting the privileges he had given the burghers of Ghent and other cities. To settle the matter, he proposed [that] a special court should convene, in which the Peers of Flanders and representatives of the clergy and the people would sit to judge over the count. If this court should find the count unworthy of the countship, he would have to give it up. The count did not agree to this and Ivan and Ghent rose in revolt.

William was killed in the civil war that ensued and a new count came to power. The background of the conflict was the opinion of Ghent and other cities that there was a contractual relationship between the count and the citizens. They recognized him as their lord and he, in turn, recognized their privileges. If the count no longer respected his part of the deal by acting against the rights of citizens, they had a right to break their contract and to fight him. This contractual conception of the relationship between ruler and subjects returns in the city charters granted by William’s successor. Thereafter the counts managed to suppress it, but it reappeared at regular times in Flemish history. In 1191 the first article of a charter for the city of Ghent stated that the citizens were only subject to the count as long as he wanted to treat them justly and reasonably….The 1581 Act of Abjuration is reminiscent of Ivan of Aalst. By his failure to respect the rights of his subjects, Philip II of Spain had lost his right to rule the Netherlands.

If we're going to have a conversation about race, we should include violent black mobs in the list of conversation topics.  After all, recent mob violence is the closest our nation has come to widespread racial strife in over 50 years.

If mobs of white youths were going about chanting the phrase "white boys," beating mostly on blacks and attacking black-owned businesses, then the nation would pay attention.  Academic, media, political, and legal elites would be calling for symposia, expanded reporting, legislation, and lawsuits.

In fact, a mob of black youths in Philadelphia went about chanting the phrase "black boys," beating mostly on whites, and attacking businesses.  The same kind of racial mob violence has occurred in Las Vegas, and just last week in New York City.  Few are paying attention, and liberal elites are largely silent.

Of course, liberal elites are quick to associate white violence with right-wing politics or white supremacy.  But what happens when mob violence is carried out by favored minority groups or liberal constituents?

Time and again over the last few years, mobs of black youths attacked mostly white victims in Philadelphia.  There were at least 6 such mob scenes in Philadelphia during 2009 and 2010.[1] These black mob attacks, euphemistically named "flash mobs," have not received anything close to the attention they deserve.  In one attack, a mob of blacks beat a young white woman senseless -- a mob that had chanted "black boys" and "burn the city," according to the New York Times.[2] The 27-year-old woman, Anna Taylor, was attacked viciously last March.  According to local news reports, "a large group of male and female juveniles ganged up on her, kicking and punching her until she fell to the ground, where they continued to kick her in the face and head."[3] Someone in the mob punched her so hard, the punch "split her upper lip so severely that much of it was hanging from her face and she was unable to speak."  Some reporting has, amazingly, made the simple observation about the racial make-up of these mobs: that they are "mostly African American."

These horrible mob attacks must be viewed in the larger context of interracial violence in America.  Department of Justice statistics show that 33% of white murder victims are killed by a non-white while only 8% of black murder victims are killed by a non-black.[4] Even greater disparities exist in violent crime and robbery.[5] The disparity in interracial crime is certainly indicative of some form of extremism, racial hostility, or selective targeting.  The mobs reflect something worse: organized and widespread anti-white ethnic violence.

Read the rest of the article here.

A new tribe is ruling the many countries of Africa. Comfortable, well-heeled, self-satisfied; secure in their positions of power. And proudly they tout the symbol of their superiority. It’s a symbol they have even adopted as their name; an elegant, star-shaped, silver symbol - the international sign of the WaBenzi. Julian Champkin reports.

THE coup which brought the WaBenzi to power was not immediately recognised. But it established them, firmly and immovably, in control of almost every African country from Algeria to Zimbabwe, espousing philosophies from Marxist through middle-of-the-road socialist to stout capitalist.

Certain characteristics distinguish members of the WaBenzi, They are usually educated; most have studied abroad; they wear well-cut three-piece suits; their homelands are the air-conditioned offices in capital cities throughout the continent. It is rare to find them in the countryside, save possibly at election time. If describing them as fat is caricature it is also often the literal truth, for African tradition requires status to be displayed in the frequent feasting of dependents. They are known by many names; but the one most often used describes their common aspiration; WaBenzi like to ride in motorcars made by the firm of Mercedes-Benz.

WaBenzi are those who have made it to the top. If you gain their confidence they will tell you much about the people of their country, the subsistence farmers or nomads. They may say they are lazy or backward, and describe the mistakes they make. People talk a lot about peasants but no-one actually wants to be one. This is wise; a peasant’s life is one of relentless work, poverty and stupefying boredom.

Nowhere on earth is the gulf between governors and governed, capital and countryside, so great as in Africa. This is not a matter of wealth, nor of corruption, though the continent has more than its share of both. There are honest leaders in Africa; but even they cannot get close to their people. How has this gulf come about?

A leader in modern Africa has made a sacrifice not required of his western counterpart, He has sacrificed his roots. The process begins early. At school he is taught arcane facts in an arcane language. Not one of these facts will bear on the life of a peasant farmer. If he reaches secondary school he may learn mathematics, English or French and the constituent parts of the atom; he will learn nothing of the right way to plant millet or to conserve the soil. His parents may have struggled hard for his school fees, remembering the glittering prizes that fell upon the educated few at independence. It follows that to return to subsistence farming after school is to admit failure.

The semi-literacy produced in most African schools may not qualify students for high office but it certainly disqualifies them from being peasants. Their learning guarantees their unemployment. Many decline to touch a hoe again and drop out to the urban slums. The exceptional few with influence and ability get to study abroad and then drop out to urban riches. The schooling of both has given them a language not spoken by their parents and a contempt for the life they led. The wealth that paid for their expensive learning came from the countryside but precious little of it returns there.

So Africa’s elite are cut off from their roots. That is no easy life. Born into one world, trying to embrace another, they only half-succeed. Caught in between, they are pulled both ways. A doctor’s self-esteem or a politician’s power-base requires that wealth be displayed in the traditional manner. He is duty hound to support an ever-widening circle of family and dependents, pay their school fees, find them jobs (not on the land), feast the whole village when he returns there. A man is only as great as he is seen to he. So a District Officer must open a cattle-dip with pomp; a motorcade and a day of speeches. It may be that this will cost more than the cattle-dip but there is no escape.

His prestige is uncertain in the other world as well. The things that visiting Europeans take for granted represent the height of achievement in Africa. There is insecurity, the continuing need to impress; above all the fear that his new friends may find him ‘backward’. This is why governments sometimes deny the existence of famine and disease in their country. Nor is it unknown for the white WaBenzi of the international agencies to connive at the denial - politicians’ susceptibilities are more immediate than distant deaths of the nameless.

Governments, both Western and Eastern, can do business with WaBenzi. They speak the same language. Five-year plans, co-operation, industrialisation, economic growth; modernized agriculture and huge irrigation schemes; this is the vocabulary of UN-speak, the words of International Man the world over. FAO meetings in Rome; OAU conferences in Addis Ababa: discussions everywhere with the multinational company pushing yet another agri-business scheme; Africa’s elite gets from one to the other and spouts the jargon with the rest. But frequenters of the endless round of cocktail parties in diplomatic suburbs do not refer to those who scratch at dust bowls with a hoe.

Most of the elite can ignore the existence of the real world encircling their dream island of a city. That portion of it that governs cannot. Its overriding preoccupation must be to remain in power. So civil servants and party officials descend on the countryside to control it. In theory these people serve their community. In practice the community serves them.

WaBenzi are good bureaucrats. And bureaucrats love uniformity. Running their countries from the top and seduced by the elegant neatness of overall plans, they ignore all diversity of climate and culture to make their subjects conform. That everyone should grow what he pleases is a policy that horrifies civil servants the world over. Agriculture, like everything else, must be brought into line with the central directives. If it has been decided that maize is needed for the towns and cotton for export. then maize and cotton shall be grown - everywhere. The whole of northern Zambia is unsuitable for maize; the agricultural authorities encourage it none the less and completely ignore millet and sorghum, the traditional crops that do well. The urge to standardize can be bizarre. It has been decreed, also in Zambia, that primary schools throughout the country shall be altered to conform to the same architectural design. There is no money to pay for pencils in the schools.

The WaBenzi of Tanzania favour uniformity too. And that means plenty of top-down control. ‘Ujamaa villages will be created by village people themselves and maintained by them’. So said President Nyerere and gave as his example a cooperative at Ruvuma that had done just that. A national body was set up to establish more Ujamaa villages. Its first action was to abolish the Ruvuma co-operative on the grounds that, having been created by village people, it must have been plotting against the party. You get more uniform villages by using the army.

Tanzania’s actions are no worse than its neighbours’, but its words sound better. Other elites - the Nguemas of Equatorial Guinea - grind their peasants without so much as by your leave. The rhetoric is in any case irrelevant. Guinea-Bissau is a country that contains no industry, no roads - only farmers and an elite which loudly proclaims its dedication to the needs of the poor. To achieve this its national plan is to build a single huge factory to centralise rice processing. The grotesquely unworkable scheme will feed the WaBenzi who run it and will spawn bureaucracy. What it will eliminate is the farmers - through bankruptcy if not starvation.

No government can do business with a peasant because even with the best will in the world, neither can understand the other. Where one sees an inefficient unit of production. the other sees a cow. To make the misunderstanding worse the government’s view is generally mistaken. A cow and the traditional community that lives off it have evolved over centuries for survival. It is unlikely to be bettered by any scheme dreamed up in an air-conditioned office. A peasant life involves feelings, traditions, neighbours. social aspirations. surroundings, ambitions and the future of the soil and of the firewood. Experts can deal only with the mere technics of seeds. But the dreamers’s urge to modernise. to improve. to practice social engineering on the grand scale, will not leave well alone a system that has evolved so complex a balance. The party instructions go out. The half-baked theories are put into action. Chaos and degradation of people and soil result. And ordered, traditional communities are reduced to a condition where only an alienated elite can govern them.

Julian Champkin is a freelance journalist who has worked for aid agencies in Kenya and Uganda and travelled throughout Africa.

This article was originally published in The New Internationalist on September 5, 1984.

Truth rarely participates in the formation of resentments; this is particularly true as regards the peculiar white-hating-white animosities that readily flow across the Atlantic.

Some Americans harshly judge white South Africans. These attitudes appear to be firmly and tragically entrenched. White American attitudes have been formed after years of being inundated with propaganda that continues to smear the character of white South Africans in the mud of white supremacy and racism. White Americans who accept this premise lack the insight to understand that it isn’t the South African that is hated – it’s the ‘white’.

White South Africans hold similar resentments towards American whites. Many white South Africans feel the United States abandoned them during their hour of need. Their arguments are multi-pronged and generally relate to South Africa’s sacrifices on behalf of the United States during the Angolan War and the United States’ subsequent refusal to support the Apartheid government prior to the 1994 election.

South Africans who condemn white Americans for failing to come to their aid are equally blind to the liability attending any implication that ‘white’ Americans should have or could have interfered with the destiny of millions of black South Africans.

In fact, white Americans were then, as now, hostage to Black Nationalists groups whose intense hatred for white South Africans is matched only by their hatred for whites everywhere.

Frankly, white South Africans were sacrificed in the name of racial harmony.

The United States is about to be hit by a cultural mega tsunami. The forces that created the wave originated years ago; now they will cross the nation from one shoreline to another, a pulsing wave of human madness.

American history is doused in the fuel of discontent. Now and then that discontent is alighted. Fortunately, until now, the results have been inconsequential – A few burned cities; work stoppages; clashes between opposing forces. In the history of history these events are little more than footnotes in the chapter titled, “Madness”. When this next wave comes, however, it may deserve a chapter title of its own.

The tragedy in this upcoming tale of woe is that Americans have a perfect visage of their future in the troubled nation of South Africa. They’ve missed an historical opportunity to avoid the casualty-laden processes that have reduced South Africa to an unrated serfdom.

The character and history of the United States and South Africa are remarkably similar. Both nations were carved out of raw nothingness. Megalopolises rose out of dustbowls and medical miracles, such as the world’s first heart transplant and a cure for polio, poured out of scientific brain trusts. The values that defined the character of one nation were identical to those that guided the other. For all intents, South Africa and the United States were mirror images of one another.

America’s warning arrived the same moment Obama was sworn in as president of the United States. White Americans were oblivious to Obama’s declarations that his ideology is modeled after Nelson Mandela, W.E.B. DuBois, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King.

It isn’t by mistake that Obama melds Malcolm X and Martin Luther King: They are the core of Black Liberation Theology (BLT), a quasi-religion designed by Dr. James Cone, a white-hating, America-hating psychopath. The church Obama attended for twenty years advocates BLT –

Obama’s admiration for the African National Congress (ANC), South Africa’s Communist party, flows through his book. Obama considers Mandela nothing less than an historical icon to be admired and emulated.

The most dangerous aspect of Obama’s ‘admiration list’ is, of course, Malcolm X – A devout, white-hating, America-hating, radical Black Nationalist whose mentor, Elijah Mohammad, advocated ‘death to all white devils’. Malcolm X shares a number of characteristics with Obama, including loyalty to the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party – both white-hating, Jew-hating, Black Nationalist groups.

Obama’s arrival might have been less noble had white Americans understood, even remotely, that Obama intended to use the power of the presidency to affect the promise of a nation modeled after the ‘great successes’ that have occurred in South Africa since the ANC took over. Let’s examine the similarities.

· Mandela promoted a vast expansion and empowerment of unions – Obama, ditto.

· Obama has divided the nation by administering loyalty to his Black Nationalist friends through programs that appeal to ‘universal fairness’ - South Africa, ditto.

· Obama has significantly shifted the direction of all federal law enforcement agencies: Their lone goal is to find and destroy any white who remotely resembles a ‘racist’: Attorney General Eric Holder, an unwavering, dangerous Black Nationalist, recently told congress that the continued pursuit of the New Black Panthers who threatened white voters was a disgrace to ‘his people’. Holder refused to prosecute the racist, pig-dog panthers – South Africa, double ditto.

· The ANC is corrupt, inept and channeling stolen white resources to inept, incompetent, loyal black – Obama, triple ditto.

Until recently, white appeasement tempered the rage of America’s Black Nationalists. The arrival of Barack Obama and his selection of other Black Nationalists to head the most vital administrative positions in government have roused the quieted intensity of Black Nationalists.

The energy of Black Nationalist ideology is conceptually derived from the creation and manifestation of the ‘oppressed-oppressor’ relationship. Without an oppressor blacks cannot be oppressed and without oppression blacks would be forced to face the consequences of self-imposed misery.

Black Nationalist identity feeds on blame and blame validates virtually every ill that afflicts black culture. America’s blacks demand a unique identity - but not without an element of ‘white’ to blame for continued cultural afflictions. The paradox is that blacks continue to be dependent upon whites to rationalize their behavior. The concept of personal responsibility, it seems, is conveniently absent from Black Nationalist identity.

As South Africa continues its downward slide to infamy all the ills afflicting blacks and the nation are blamed on the lingering presence of Apartheid. Black Americans, whose centuries old struggle for identity, continue to blame their plight on slavery. This ‘casting of blame’ is signature Black Nationalist as it removes blacks from being responsible for their behavior. The consequences to whites for these poisoned attitudes is an impressive, expanding onslaught on whites.

A dangerous reality is changing the dynamics of America’s race relations. Black Nationalists have joined hands with other minority groups – Latin Americans and American Indians – to form a triumvirate that draws its energy from mutual disdain for ‘white’.

The ‘oppressed-oppressor’ relationship has bound groups with competing interests for centuries. The concept has been assimilated by members of the triumvirate and, to nobody’s surprise, virtually every other element of American society that stands to benefit from that shameful ideology. Unions, social justice groups and other Progressive organizations, with membership numbering in the tens of millions, claim they, too, share a common misery derived from a common oppressor. South Africa – ditto.

Black Nationalists formerly referred to whites as ‘oppressors’ or ‘captors’ or ‘slave masters’ – Regardless of the moniker the concept is the same. To avoid alienating unions and white Progressive groups, Black Nationalist’s abandoned this tongue. Whites are now ‘colonialists’ or ‘capitalists’ or ‘rich’ – Colonists colonize their victims; capitalist exploit their victims; the rich rob their victims - without losing an ounce of manipulative context the oppressed-oppressor theme remains intact. These labels preserve the theme and, even, favorably expand on the negative connotations without alienating naïve white supporters.

The United States is much closer to economic annihilation than South Africa. Even if America’s whites wanted to appease their detractors the ability to do so has faded - along with the value of the dollar. The economic status of either nation is irrelevant, however. The oppressed masses are far less interested in the accumulation of wealth than driving the colonialist-capitalist into destitute, economic enslavement.

If, per chance, whites suffer misery and privation, well, that’s the price tag for ‘social justice’ and ‘economic justice’. As Obama notes in his book, Dreams from My Father, “the consequences to whites don’t mean squat”. (Paraphrased for effect.) The ANC has demonstrated the same lack of concern, especially towards Boer farmers who are being slaughtered like nuisance flies by blacks.

This past week Louis Farrakhan, the spiritual leader of America’s Black Nationalist movement, remarked that America is about to experience a ‘hell storm’ (Again I paraphrase). This warning comes on the heels of union marches all over the country.

Obama’s insistence that the leaders whose countries are under siege by raging mobs avoid using force to quell the disturbances sent a message to the oppressed masses: It is open hunting season on the United States.

The Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, and even the American Revolution, drew their energy from the oppressed-oppressor relationship. In the last two hundred-plus years the game has become far more sophisticated, the players wiser and more cunning. Obama’s affinity for mob rule forebodes eventualities that will bring oppressor and oppressed in the United States past the brink of war. It was mob rule, after all, that forced a premature transfer of power in South Africa.

Since the ANC gained power, South Africa’s government has become a playground for corruption, deceit and, most importantly, the disenfranchisement of ‘white’. Obama has pursued these same ends with remarkable acumen and concealment. Fortunately, white South Africans and white Americans are no longer dosed into a coma by opiates like political correctness and the need to ‘appease to please’. This awakening is stressing the efforts of Black Nationalist groups and their ‘friends’ who hoped that with Obama in office the downfall of America would be swift, bloodless and certain.

Obama will gladly lower America’s flag and surrender her constitution if, in the end, his insane vision of a de-racialized world is achieved, and his ‘brothers and sisters’ are endowed with unearned, unappreciated wealth - And he, of course, is crowned emperor or savior for life.

In 1994 South Africa, once the jewel of capitalism and creative energy underwent a ‘soft revolution’. With the distorted icon of Mandela’s sage image serving as black South African’s moral essence, blacks had no choice but to show patient regard for the transitional process. Whites were hostage to the suicidal elixirs of political correctness.

Moralists choose to believe that decency rather than prudence has restrained the ANC from disenfranchising South African whites. With Julius Malema begging the ANC to guillotine whites, when the moral insulation provided by America’s international influence comes to an end, it seems likely the ANC and Malema will construct guillotines on every street corner.

The ANC has pursued a vision of total black empowerment even when doing so has collapsed infrastructure, nurtured crime and, especially, fed animosity towards whites.

America’s Black Nationalists don’t care how they achieve the redistribution of wealth so long as the diminution of the ‘colonizer-capitalist’ is part of the bargain. With the help of unions, Progressive groups and Obama, the triumvirate will draw blood – there is no gentler way to put it.

This summer when unions, the triumvirate, and Progressives fuel the flames of discontent; when America’s capital is held hostage by a mob; when the pent-up rage in urban areas devours suburbs and rural areas alike; when Obama refuses to unleash government troops to prevent the collapse of the federal government – What will happen in South Africa? The United States is perfectly primed for a madness that will rapidly spread to nations all over the world – including and especially South Africa.

With the United States fighting for its moral existence, raging opportunists will rape the world with guiltless disregard for the consequences to anyone but themselves. ‘Madness’, after all, is contagious.

In these decisive moments South African whites and American whitews will be bound by fate – mirror images of one another. If the power of lingering resentments is sufficient to keep the wedge that separates them in-place, the consequences will taint the heavens as one oppressor soul after another becomes a wasted casualty.

The detractors of colonialist-capitalist-oppressors will be fighting for wealth and power and the squaring-up of history’s long-deceased wrongs. Rest assured, there will not be an iota of moral rightness in the wrongs they pursue or pity for those upon whom they exact their rage.

The world cannot be left to suffer the misguided ambitions of maniacal madmen who will drive humankind into the darkest of dark ages. The ugly history our forefathers created then left is not our burden. Vicarious liability for another man’s sins is sin; it nurtures an endless spiral of blame. This is the lesson we have painfully learned; a lesson too precious to perish - What is done cannot be undone.

Oppressors were born into a duty they did not earn; a duty bound by fate. But it is upon us and if we hope to salvage mankind from the wreckage of the present we must loose ourselves from the folly of the feud that, after all, was contrived for us not by us. That wedge was meticulously fabricated by the very madmen who now intend to finish the job they started. Black Nationalists have known for decades that the only way to destroy the oppressor is to bankrupt his governments AND put wedges between whites: It was Black Nationalists who urged white South Africans to resent white Americans, and vice versa –

If tragedy there be, it is that we were so easily drawn to blame one another, so readily fooled. It seems odd that during these times, when we share a nearly identical fate, we would allow the connivances of our detractors to shred our bonds. Still, wiser men and greater cultures have made similar mistakes - but not without a descent into oblivion. With this knowledge, it would seem, we would drop our wedges, if only long enough to prevent our mutual extinction.

On 7 and 8 April 2010 the United Nations at their head office in New York observed the 16th annual commemoration of the Rwanda Genocide during which an estimated one million innocent people were slaughtered.

In his commemoration address secretary-general Ban Ki-moon stated:

"Today, we observe the sixteenth commemoration of the genocide in Rwanda. We cherish the memory of more than 800 000 innocent people who lost their lives. Our thoughts are also with the survivors, whose haunting testimony woke us to the reality of a tragedy that was all too preventable."

In September 2005, world leaders came together at a United Nations Summit to review progress since the Millennium Declaration and to address key issues related to UN Reform. The then secretary-general Kofi Annan reported on the implementation of the Millennium Goals. His report, In Larger Freedom, proposed a bold agenda of “highest priorities” for the September Summit.

Significantly, it urged heads of state and governmens to embrace the *'responsibility to protect” as a basis for collective action against genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.

The killing of 6 million Jewish people during the Jewish Holocaust is still regarded as one of the world's most horrible crimes against humanity and a crime never to be repeated.

Not even Hitler and his gas chambers could match the efficacy of the Rwandan genocidal killing machine. On average, they killed 7 people per minute, 24 hours per day over a period of one 100 days. It is estimated that they raped between 285 000 and 400 000 women. One person was murdered every 8,5 seconds and one woman raped every 20 seconds 24 hours per day for 100 days. Nothing in recent history has yet matched that brutal Rwandan extermination machine with a killing rate 25 times as fast as that of Hitler. In contrast to this extremely effective Rwandan killing machine, the South African ANC Communist revolutionary killing machine opted to use crime as their cover and means to clandestinely murder South Africa's white farmers who have been slaughtered, raped, tortured and executed in the most inhumane manner. Not even the life of the recently executed Willemientjie Potgieter (2) was saved by this brutal killing machine.

Although the ANC genocidal regime has been executing its genocide in low-intensity form, with “crime” providing an alibi for the brutal murder of 3 700 white farrmers, we cannot underestimate the efficacy of its genocidal campaign. More than one million white South Africans have already emigrated to Australia, New Zealand, Canada and other Western countries. Unlike Rwanda, the ANC brutal regime has signed most if not all international treaties for the prevention of genocide and other inhumane atrocities. The ANC leadership has opted for a clandestine crime-based genocide because they fear international legal prosecution.

During the United Nations' high-level plenary meeting of the 60th session of the UN General Assembly of 14 -16 September 2005, a working document on the Prevention of Genocide was adopted by all state parties, including South Africa.

The report's central theme was "The Responsibility to Protect", the idea being that sovereign states have a responsibility to protect their own citizens from avoidable catastrophe, but that when they are unwilling or unable to do so, that responsibility must be borne by the broader community of states. When sovereign states deliberately fail to protect their citizens such as in the case of South African farmers and the broader white community now suffering from the worst pandemic of violent crimes ever committed against them as an ethnic group, The UN Responsibility to Prevent and Intervention becomes a life-saving priority.

For the last sixteen years since 1994 many ANC political revolutionaries and radicals have been calling for the killing of the Boer and the farmer. When interpreted in the widest sense, it represents a call for the murder of all white people living in South Africa.

The UN report “The Responsibility to Protect” emphasizes that resources must be devoted to early warning and analysis of genocide.

The report states:

“Preventive action is founded upon and proceeds from accurate prediction, but too often preventive analysis, to the extent that it happens at all, fails to take key factors into account, misses key warning signs (and hence misses opportunities for early action), or misreads the problem (thereby resulting in application of the wrong tools). A number of distinct problems weaken analytic capacities to predict violent conflict: the multiplicity of variables associated with root causes of conflict and the complexities of their interactions; the associated absence of reliable models for predicting conflict; and simply the perennial problem of securing accurate information on which to base analyses and action.”

The above analysis does not apply to the South African situation where the element of the crime of “incitement to commit genocide” are found in Julius Malema's cries. Public incitement by genocidal murderers the likes of Julius Malema reverberates through the electronic media (nationally and internationally) as if it were legal to call for the murder of a specific ethnic group in South Africa. Yet the UN and the International community refrain from any intervention or protective action.

The vision of the office of the The Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide is very clear and can be summarized in one word: PREVENT.

The warning signs for Genocide are stipulated as:

• the country has a totalitarian or authoritarian government where only one group controls power;
• the country is at war “or there is a lawless environment in which massacres can take place without being quickly noticed or easily documented”.

In South Africa during the last 16 years, the ANC government has deliberately created a lawless society for the purpose of performing a genocide of the white farmers and all whites in South Africa, under the clandestine and covert cover of extremely high crime rates.

The Rome Statute, which is international law and law in South Africa by virtue of the “Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act 27 of 2002, 18 July 2002”, is ignored by the SA government and nobody in SA ever mentions the act.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948 and which was ratified and signed by the SA Government clearly defines the crime of “Incitement to commit Genocide”, yet the SA Government despite International Conventions, the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court appointed Mr. Gilbert Marcus, S.C. to make the case for inciting genociding. On 29 November 2010 in the Southern Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, in an attempt to legalize one of the most hated and most heinous international crimes of all – genocide – Marcus argued that singing songs encouraging the shooting or killing of whites and Boers was “part of ANC history and culture”.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide unambiguously states:

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

Article 4

Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

Yet, Julius Malema and his followers were never charged.

During the last 16 years more than 3 600 commercial farmers have been murdered, but the UN is as quiet as before the Rwandan massacre, without teeth, without political will or the conviction to protect.

Shall we in future commemorate, in New York at the UN Head Quarters, the UN International day of reflection on the Afrikaner Genocide and shall we have another UN Plenary session where the nations of the world discuss a document on the Prevention, Intervention and Protection of innocent citizens murdered in the South African Afrikaner Genocide?

Shall the secretary-general state: “Our thoughts are also with the survivors, whose haunting testimony woke us to the reality of a tragedy that was all too preventable."

Yes, without a doubt we will!

The UN has no teeth. The UN at best must be regarded as a talk shop on international affairs and the largest paper tiger on planet earth.

The UN has always been an excellent onlooker and bystander at evil genocides committed by various nations and states.

For the UN does not protect, the UN commemorates.

By Johann Swift

The author of the article casually titled, “South Africa to Become America’s 51st State”, or something to that ill-effect, gave little regard to the substance of his argument or the undue misery it would inflict upon untold masses of victims. I must proffer a sane retort as doing otherwise only serves to heighten the ambitions of those lowly sots who show little regard for the majority population defecating in that once beautiful nation.

Contrary to the author’s assertions, South Africa is a glowing beacon of hope for the downtrodden masses of Africa who yet suffer under the lingering ravages of colonialism. When, in 1994, freedom was achieved, the scheming arguments of detractors opposed to South Africa’s freedom were illuminated by the revealing necklaces embracing Mandela’s brilliance. In those few moments of history, the world was provided another vision of man’s ability to create impossibilities from possibilitie; as one vacuous prospect after another unfolded, the null set of South Africa’s rebirth offered but a glimpse of South Africa’s unbridled, future effluvium!

South Africa’s tenantless decency affirms no arguments save those daily presented within the homes of Boer possessors whose dedication to disquieted praise for South Africa can only be tempered by machete or gun. These are the new lungs of South Africa - lungs filled with the life-blood of souls freed from worldly concerns - Anyone seeking denunciation of South Africa’s dolor need go elsewhere than Boer communities to garner affirmation; the Boer population, above all others, is particularly blessed by the limitless feculence bestowed upon them by a grateful, sanguinary nation.

The United States does not yet deserve, nor has it earned, the internecine culture promulgated by South Africa’s ruling majority. Even a casual view of South Africa’s extirpated terrain reveals a nation and a culture nearly at peace with itself – The realized vision of imperceptive visionaries!

Yes, South Africa is not a perfect nation. It has been adversely affected by the ecological calamities caused by global warming; yet, the natural promulgation and enhancement of brutishness caused by global warming is minutia when measured against the ANC nurtured injection of unrestrained effluent into South African communities. Any author who suggests South Africa is anything other than a bastion of opprobrium only affirms the insufficiency of his evidence. That South Africa is destined to become America’s fifty-first state is folly: The United States is not yet prepared to castigate itself to the extent necessary to receive such a gracious denouncement!

As this new nation-state describes the concourse of its unwavering dedication to self erasure there can be no doubt that until South Africa is completely extirpated it will seek neither marriage nor union with any nation that would halt its successful progression towards full abasement. Let no man - or no nation - doubt the promise of South Africa’s extrication from the oppression of emancipation.