Messages

[CIA Agent John Voster]

CIA Agent John Voster





In September of 1937, during the reign of the Brotherhood man, Jan Smuts, Vorster is recruited as agent for the police - in order to infiltrate the Ossewa-Brandwag - a rightwing political organisation, to which Robey Leibrant belonged (Leibrant later tried to assassinate Smuts). Vorster underwent training from the last quarter of 1937 to February 1938 - on how to infiltrate the Ossewa-Brandwag. As part of his undercover operation he objected to Smuts involving South Africa in the Second World War (on the side of Britain). He was "caught" in 1942, sent to the Pretoria Central jail, transferred to Leeukop jail outside Johannesburg and from there to Koffiefontein - to be finally released in 1944. In all three places, Vorster was visited, every week by a man by the name of Julian (or Julius) First, and they were apparently very close. First was Jew Joe Slovo's first father in law. After his release, Vorster masterminded the inclusion of the Ossewa-Brandwag into mainstream politics. And he set about selling himself as being ultra rightwing. In October 1958 Jew Oppenheimer is informed during a session of a Freemason's Lodge in Johannesburg that Vorster was a spy for the Smuts government. This revelation was done by none other than Ernie Malherbe - the Chief of Military Intelligence under Smuts. At the same time the Rupert and Oppenheimer newspapers were subtly punting Vorster for his political achievements.


In August of 1961 Vorster is promoted to Minister of Justice. He was informed of this by Verwoerd on July 24, 1961. When Vorster told his wife Tini this, she told him (she is also from a Brotherhood bloodline) that he had to inform Anton Rupert. Vorster phoned Rupert on 24 July 1961 and informed him. Now get this. Anton Rupert (Jew) told Vorster to come and see him (Rupert) at his home in Cape Town ! Rupert basically summonses one of Verwoerd's most important ministers to his house !


So who is running the country ? Vorster duly flew down to Cape Town on July 26, 1961 and met with Rupert the same day.


Two interesting things happened at this meeting :


1) Vorster is recruited as intelligence agent by the CIA. He is also promised the position of Prime Minister for the first time.
2) Vorster makes his first contact with Jew Harry Oppenheimer - when he phones Oppenheimer from Rupert's house on Rupert's instructions.


The Sunday Times, owned by Oppenheimer, announced the appointment of Vorster as minister of Justice five days later - on July 31, 1961. One day before the official announcement of Vorster's appointment ! Form then on Vorster was punted by the Rupert and Oppenheimer newspapers as one of the extremist rightwing trio of the National Party - along with HertZOG and Verwoerd.


Right. Sure. No problem.


Vorster did his bit by announcing hard core safety measures, and by fighting Communism and Liberalism with vigor. Most of his successes against Communist and Liberal organizations was due to him getting inside information regarding these organizations from the CIA (which was covertly running these organizations) and Oppenheimer (who was funding them). The result was spectacular arrests and success against banned organizations. Vorster was further assisted by the CIA and Mi6 through their covert operations. They ensured ongoing unrest, often resulting in the death of innocent black people, which in turn ensured that the safety and security situation remained a top priority with the government and the public. And he was directly involved in the murder of Verwoerd. In fact, he was the main driving force behind at least the second and successful attempt on Verwoerd's life. As far as can be ascertained, Rupert never met Tsafendas (assassin) personally, but this is not to say that such a meeting never took place. Apart from the fact that he employed Tsafendas, and continued to support him financially after he was removed from Rothmans International, his car was used on at least one occasion, driven by his personal driver, to drive a Mi6 agent to a meeting with Tsafendas.


It was also possibly that Rupert supplied the R5 000 that Tsafendas was paid to commit the murder. R5 000, assuming an average of 15% decrease in the time value of money, is some R500 000 in today's terms. (As a practical example, a 4.1 Chevrolet family car cost about R1 200, new, in 1971 - an average family car now costs about R120 000). In addition to this Rupert was present at the meeting held at Harry Oppenheimer's house in Parktown at 18h00 on July 27, 1964. It was during this meeting that Vorster was drawn into the murder plot, firstly by again promising him the post of Prime Minister after Verwoerd, and secondly, by threatening him to make public his involvement with supplying the CIA and Mi6 (spying for them) with sensitive information from the inner circles of parliament and the Broederbond. A look at Vorster's profile will show that this was not the only covert activities that he was involved in. The meeting started at 16h30 and lasted till 20h00.Vorster was apparently hesitant at first, but after the threats and promises, as well as a reminder of his duty as a Freemason, concurred. Present at this meeting was Oppenheimer, Rupert and Quinton Whyte (CFR, CIA and SA Institute to Race Relations) as well as an unnamed Mi6 agent. It was also during this meeting that Whyte handed over to Vorster a final blueprint as to how he was to run the country after Verwoerd's death.


http://www.africancrisis.org/Article.php?ID=611168&


For overseas readers - Verwoerd's policies had two main opponents. One was a Jew named Harry Oppenheimer, the other a Jew named Anton Ruppert. Both controlled banking monopolies in the country, and wanted "rights" extended to black South Africans for the purpose of extending their money lending business. Oppenheimer had ties to the Jew Rothschild banking family and to the US CIA, which throughout the 1970s through 1990s supported the overthrow of white South African rule, at the direction of the Jew Henry Kissinger.

[A Real Case Against Christianity - Part 1]

In summarizing the book, I thought the title below to be appropriate - it will be in four parts for easier digestion 


A Real Case Against Christianity - Part 1


I have read many books on the origins of Christianity and it never ceases to amaze me how this new religion was forced down the throats of White Pagans by brutal force and intimidation until they were duped into believing it to be the religion of the White Race. The question that always comes to mind is why this "religion" had to be enforced on people ? If you`re going to create a new religion at least give people a choice if they want to accept it or not, and at least use your own symbolism, mythology and days of celebrations. Did these early Christians really think that they would be able to suppress the truth from those whose mission it is to search out the truth about the origins of Christianity and its twisted history ? The problem with anything that gets forced down your throat through fear, torture and intimidation, lies in the fact that there is something unnatural about it, something the people would not want to accept, something untrue. And this is exactly what we find when we examine the origins of Christianity, and fortunately for us, its all pinned down in historical facts, symbolism, mythology and days of celebrations which points to an earlier White Pagan spirituality. By stealing these elements from an earlier time, Christianity exposes itself as a fraud. Christianity changed natural, spiritual Paganism into materialized Christianity.


Although the early Christians lived in Rome, they made no attempt to assimilate into Roman culture, and like the Jews, they segregated themselves and saw themselves above the law. They were seen as traitors to the Roman state when they refused to profess loyalty to the Roman pantheon of gods. The Christians quickly became hated by the Romans and we read in Smiths` "The Death of Classical Paganism" the following : "They were 'the ultimate filth', a gang 'of ignorant men and credulous women', who 'with meetings at night, solemn fasts and inhuman food' made up 'a hole-in-the-corner, shadow loving crew', 'silent in public but clacking away in corners', 'spitting on the gods and laughing at holy things". Can you imagine ? Here we have a new religion that sees itself above the law and instead of moving out to a new land, they huddle together, spit and laugh at things which the Romans considered holy. Now you know why they were eventually fed to the lions. And this, a religion as late as 450, which still had at least 200 different gospels circulating in his own diocese. We read in the Catholic Encyclopedia that the "idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, has no foundation in history" and, "In all the departments forgery and interpolation as well as ignorance had wrought mischief on a grand scale". Before I continue, there is another excuse that Christians so often use when defending Christianity, and that is the falsehood that "these things you mention was done by the Catholic Church and not the Christians". To this I say, the roots of Christianity lies in Catholicism. Catholicism is definitely not Islam or Judaism (the only three monotheistic religions), and although the authors are the same, Catholicism was early Christianity. In a similar way, a Protestant is not a Methodist or Presbyterian, but the one is an earlier form of Christianity.


The Roman philosopher Celsus had the following to say about the falsification of Christian writings in the second century, "Some of them, as it were in a drunken state producing self-induced visions, remodel their Gospel from its first written form, and reform it so that they may be able to refute the objections brought against it". Scholars have shown that all four canonized Gospels have been doctored and revised, despite Church prohibitions against any further research into the origins of the Gospels. The question arises, "Why prohibit research into the origins of the Gospels ?" Sounds like the Holocaust story. Once again Christianity exposes itself devoid of truth, but yet followers are to believe it`s the word of God. The Church continually found cause for changing that truth, while claiming that truth was static in nature and had been revealed only once, but despite all the efforts, attempts at uniformity did not entirely succeed. When looking at the four canonized Gospels, they contradict one another. Jesus goes from an aristocrat descended from David via Solomon to a being from humble stock to a poor carpenter. He gets visited by kings in Matthew during his birth and by shepherds in Luke. In Mark and Matthew we are told that Jesus's last words were "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ?" According to John he said "it is finished", and according to Luke, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit". When we look at the resurrection scene we also find contradictions as to what people saw. 


Roman Emperor Constantine saw in Christianity a pragmatic means of bolstering his own military power and uniting the vast and troubled Roman Empire. This man who had his own son executed and his wife boiled alive, found the Church`s insistence upon uniformity very appealing. The new religion incorporated Paganism into their beliefs, their Son (Sun) of God based on the Pagan Roman Mithra, who was closely related to the sun gods Helios and Apollo. Although Christians still don`t have any evidence when Jesus was born, the day that was chosen was the 25th of December, close to the winter solstice, the birthday of Mithra. Other similarities to the Mithra story includes the shepherds, the last supper and the ascension, being the most prominent. The Christian holiday of Easter, correlating to the sun's return to prominence around the spring equinox was stolen from Mithra's ascension. A cave-temple dedicated to Mithra in Rome on the Vatican Hill was taken over by Christians, making it the seat of the Catholic Church. Pater Patrum, soon became the title for the bishop of Rome, Papa or Pope, the title of the Mithraic high priest. Once again the question arises : Why steal the Pagan gods for your new religion ? When confronted with this plagiarism, the fathers of Christianity explained the remarkable similarities of Mithraism as the work of the devil, declaring the much older legends of Mithraism to be an insidious imitation of the one true faith. How can older myths be stolen from later ones ? Also interesting to note the use of the devil concept which  is exclusive to monotheism. The symbology was once again stolen from the Pagans, Pan the horned, cloven hoofed and flute-playing god. The difference between the Christian devil and Pan was that the former was used as an instrument of fear and intimidation for the weak of mind, while Pan like all the Pagan gods, was simply a personification of Natural Force.

The worship of Mary resembled the worship of faces of the Goddess, particularly that of mother/son traditions such as Isis/Horus, Juno/Mars, Cybele/Attis, and Neith/Ra, because Christianity paralleled Mithraism. To discourage her association with older pre-Christian faces of the Goddess, Mary's significance was diminished. Sacred sites and temples, once dedicated to pre-Christian goddesses, were rededicated or replaced with churches for Mary. Cybele's temple in Rome on the Esquitine hill was replaced by the the Santa Maria Maggiore. Isis's sanctuary, near the Pantheon, was adjoined to a church dedicated to Mary while another was built on a site which had been dedicated to Minerva. The temple of the Phoenician goddess Tanit was supplanted by the Santa Maria on the Capitoline in Aracoeli. Shrines that were Aphrodite's hallowed ground easily became those of Mary, who to this day is still called Panaghia Aphroditessa in Cyprus. Pagan temples were destroyed and pillaged. In the "The Death of Classical Paganism" we find written protest in 386 to the Roman government of Christian pillaging : If they [the Christians] hear of a place with something worth raping away, they immediately claim that someone is making sacrifices there and committing abominations, and pay the place a visit—you can see them scurrying there, these guardians of good order (for that is what they call themselves), these brigands, if brigands is not too mild a word; for brigands at least try to conceal what they have done : if you call them brigands, they are outraged, but these people, on the contrary, show pride in their exploits ... they believe they deserve rewards !


In 392 the Christians took their new religion to greater madness by prohibiting ancient, multi-dimensional Pagan worship, and made it a criminal activity. Christians believed in but one face of God, it was now legally enforced, due to one religion. Because they believed God controlled in an authoritarian manner, they set about finding a way in which they, in God's name, could exercise similar authoritarian control. Strangely enough, Judaism remained the only other legally recognized religion. Strange ? Not at all. Is this not what the Jews wanted, authoritarian control ? Is this not what we see today in our chaotic world of politics around the globe ? Indeed. But the control was to get far worse. In order to compel obedience the Church also developed a doctrine which justified its use of force and it was not long before the Church needed that doctrine to defend its violent suppression of heresy. Early heretics lent doctrinal validation to the Church's control of the individual and society in response to the tenets formulated. The heresies led to particularly significant new doctrine, especially the ones surrounding Pelagius, Origen, the Donatists and the Mannichaeans. By opposing Pelagius, the Church adopted Augustine's idea that people are in need of strong authority because they are incapable of choice and inherently evil. By castigating Origen's theories of reincarnation, the Church upheld its belief that a person has but one life in which to obey the Church or risk eternal damnation as well as its belief in the unique physical resurrection of Christ. With the Donatists, the precedent of using force to compel obedience was established while the Church demonstrated its willingness to abandon its own beliefs for political expediency with the Mannichaeans.


Activity in the fields of medicine, technology, science, education, history, art and commerce all but collapsed as the Church assumed leadership. Europe entered the Dark Ages. What was defined as civilization disappeared, but in spite of this the Church amassed immense wealth during these centuries. The Christian Visigoths sacked Rome which had held strong for 620 years and criticism of the new religion intensified. Could you blame the Romans ? Although Christian scholars fiercely defend Christianity in Roman times, historical facts shows that the new religion played a huge role in the collapse of the Empire. The eastern Roman Empire, also called the Byzantine Empire, fared better under Emperor Justinian's rule (527-565), but in 540 the bubonic plague struck claiming 10,000 people a day. In the end it is thought to have taken 100 million lives - the Roman Empire never recovered. The Church was the first to take advantage of the situation and further cement it authority by explaining that the plague was an act of God, and disease a punishment for the sin of not obeying Church authority. Justinian was branded a heretic and the field of Greek and Roman medicine was declared useless in fighting the plague, and to be heresy. As the Church strengthened with people flocking to the Church in terror, the plague assured the downfall of the Roman Empire. So it was no surprise that the Church dominated the formal discipline of medicine after the plague. A common medical practice between the sixth and sixteenth centuries used for every malady became "bleeding", and Christian monks taught that bleeding a person would prevent toxic imbalances, prevent sexual desire, and restore the humors. This practice would kill tens of thousands each year, yet, when a person died during blood-letting, it was lamented that treatment had not been started sooner and performed more aggressively. The Church could never be wrong, how could they ? They were Gods representatives on earth !


With the Church becoming the most cohesive power in Western society, technology disappeared. Extensive aqueduct and plumbing systems vanished, after all, Orthodox Christians taught that all aspects of the flesh should be reviled and therefore discouraged washing as much as possible. Disease became commonplace as sanitation and hygiene deteriorated with the disappearance of toilets and indoor plumbing. Epidemics decimated towns and villages for hundreds of years while the Roman central heating systems were also abandoned. In the scientific community the losses were monumental. The burning of books and repression of intellectual pursuit by the Church set humanity back as much as two millennia in its scientific understanding. Pythagoras had come up with the idea that the earth revolved around the sun in the sixth century B.C.E.; Aristarchus had outlined the heliocentric theory and Eratosthenes had measured the circumference of the Earth by the third century B.C.E.; and Hipparchus had invented longitude and latitude and had determined the obliquity of the ecliptic by the second century B.C.E. It would not be until the sixteenth century C.E. that Copernicus would reintroduce the theory that the earth revolves around the sun. Galileo was tried by the Inquisition in Rome when he attempted to promote the heliocentric theory in the seventeenth century, and the Church would only revoke its condemnation of Galileo in 1965. In Lloyd M. Grahams` book "Deceptions and Myths of the Bible", we read St. Augustine echoing the Church's stone age understanding of the world : "It is impossible there should be inhabitants on the opposite side of the earth, since no such race is recorded by Scripture among the descendants of Adam".


This clearly debunks the Christians` false notion that the White Race made huge advances under the new religion. With the rise of the Christian church came a severe economic collapse throughout the western world. By stigmatizing usury, which made funding economic ventures extremely difficult, they left the doors wide open for the Jew to amass enormous wealth and get control of the money system. Ancient academies of learning were closed and education for anyone outside of the Church came to an end. The little education there was during the Dark Ages were limited to the clergy, and was advocated by powerful kings as a means of providing themselves with capable administrators. One of the world's greatest libraries in Alexandria, said to have housed 700,000 rolls, were burned down by the Christians in 391, together with all the books of the Gnostic Basilides, Porphyry's 36 volumes, papyrus rolls of 27 schools of the Mysteries, and 270,000 ancient documents gathered by Ptolemy Philadelphus. This was the Christian holocaust against education and learning in action. In 398 bishops were forbidden to even read the books of gentiles by the Fourth Council of Carthage. Once again the question arises, why the need for the suppression of education and learning ? When confronted with these questions the Christian religion jumps from one excuse to the next. The answer is simple, a new order of control was being implemented, which today is clearly visible. The same questions were being asked in the Dark Ages and the same lies given, and the same actions implemented by the Christian followers. In his "Seven Books of Histories against the Pagans", Augustine's disciple, Orosius, demonstrated that the evils of the time could not be blamed on Christianity because earlier times had experienced even worse calamities. Through distortion and the rewriting of history, the impression was given that Christianity had not only lifted society from harsher, more barbaric times, but that a social structure of hierarchy and domination had always existed and was therefore inevitable. This was a lie. It was shown that Democracy originally date back not to the Greeks, but far earlier to the neolithic age, and these cultures show no evidence of hierarchy as we know it; they knew no war, organized oppression or slavery. For those interested can read "The Chalice and the Blade", "Merlin Stone" and "When God Was a Woman" by Riane Eisler. The problem with most Christians is that they do not know the origins of their religion. The tragedy is that when someone shows them the truth about the origins of Christianity, you get labeled an anti-Christ. So be it.


https://rahowadirectory.com/sacreativity/a-real-case-against-christianity-part-1/

[Nelson Mandela Was a Revolutionary - These Jews Made Common Cause With Him]

Nelson Mandela Was a Revolutionary - These Jews Made Common Cause With Him


In 1963, after South African police arrested six Jews and seven blacks in a raid on an African National Congress hideout in the Johannesburg suburb of Rivonia—a sweep that eventually landed Nelson Mandela in prison for more than 25 years—a white nationalist newspaper asked whether Jews were unhappy in South Africa. The community's Board of Deputies responded unequivocally that the opposite was true, promising that South Africa's Jews were loyal and patriotic. "No part of the community can or should be asked to accept responsibility" for the actions of a few, the board insisted in its official reply.

In time, of course, Mandela became a hero, and the actions of those few became a point of pride for South African Jews. Beginning with his years at Johannesburg's more or less integrated University of the Witwatersrand—aka "Wits"—and later as an apprentice to a Jewish law firm, Nelson Mandela had a political life that was profoundly intertwined with those of Jewish activists who, to varying degrees, found in their Jewish identity the imperative to object to a system that, while almost completely welcoming to them, treated blacks in a way that many of these children of European refugees found discomfitingly familiar.

While most South Africa Jews took the silent, implicitly conservative position of the Board of Deputies, the great majority of white South Africans involved in "the struggle" were Jewish. Many were Communists. Most were lawyers. A few had money. But all faced what has been described as a "double marginality": not fully accepted as white, while also alienated from an organized Jewish community beholden to the powers that be.

That so many Jews surrendered the comforts of their own relatively privileged lives—indeed, in at least one case, surrendered life itself—to join Mandela and the ANC, though they had little material stake relative to their black comrades, is in itself a testament to the radical legacy these Jews brought with them out of Europe to the other end of the globe. With a new film starring Idris Elba recounting Mandela's long struggle, we look at those Jews who stood with him, and marched with him, every step of way.

Lazar Sidelsky, the South African-born son of refugees from Lithuania, grew up in the Transvaal highlands and paid his way through Wits by playing violin in a jazz band called Skoenie and his Connecticut Yankees. By the early 1940s, he was partner in one of Johannesburg's biggest law firms, where he ran a program helping black South Africans get mortgages they were otherwise denied. One day in 1942, an ANC member named Walter Sisulu brought in Nelson Mandela, then 24, whom Sidelsky hired as an articled clerk, enabling Mandela to qualify as an attorney—a radical move for an established firm at the time. "It was a Jewish firm," Mandela later wrote in his memoir, Long Walk to Freedom, "and in my experience I have found Jews to be more broad-minded than most whites on issues of race and politics, perhaps because they themselves have historically been victims of prejudice." Mandela worked at Sidelsky's firm while earning a B.A. by mail order and later while studying law at Wits. In 1952, Sidelsky loaned Mandela seed money to start South Africa's first black law practice, and when Mandela married his second wife Winnie in 1957, he brought the wedding procession past Sidelsky's home as a sign of respect. At a kosher lunch in Mandela's home a few years before Sidelsky's death in 2002, at 90, the first black president of South Africa still referred to his former mentor as "Boss."

Nat Bregman, a cousin of Lazar Sidelsky, became a clerk at Sidelsky's firm the year before Mandela joined. The building had segregated elevators, but Bregman, a member of the Communist Party, rode with Mandela on the one reserved for blacks. In his memoir, Mandela describes Bregman—"Natie"—as his first white friend. Bregman schlepped his skeptical friend to Communist get-togethers in the early years of their friendship—gatherings populated almost entirely by blacks and Jews—but while Mandela was impressed by the "lively and gregarious group of people who did not seem to pay attention to color at all," he later wrote that he was put off by the Party's "antipathy to religion" and emphasis on class rather than race. As time went on, Bregman became religiously observant, moonlighting from his legal career as a comedian at weddings and bar mitzvahs and particularly renowned for his imitations of Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt. Bregman died of kidney failure in 2011.

Arthur Goldreich was born in 1929 to a family proud to belong to the Anglo-Jewish elite. At the school he attended in the northern Transvaal province, a German-language instructor once passed out Hitler Youth magazines, prompting young Arthur to write to Prime Minister Jan Smuts asking permission to be taught Hebrew instead—a wish Smuts granted. Goldreich began studying architecture, but in May 1948—the same month the National Party won parliamentary elections, commencing the era of official apartheid in South Africa—he sailed to Israel on a small boat, packed with Holocaust survivors, to join the Palmach. In 1954, he returned to South Africa and joined the underground Communist Party. A notorious dandy, Goldreich wore tweeds and riding boots and hung around the polo club, but it was all a cover: Goldreich's Gatsby-like persona allowed him to travel the world raising money for the ANC and provided the perfect cover for purchasing a farm outside Johannesburg from which the ANC's militia wing, the Umkhonto we Sizwe—translated as "Spear of the Nation"—could plan and execute a campaign of violence against the state. Mandela moved to the farm, called Liliesleaf, in 1961, disguising himself as a gardener. After the 1963 raid on the farm, the government called Goldreich "the largest fish netted"—partly because of his role in drafting battle plans, based on his experience with the Palmach, but also because of the prevailing assumption that it was Jews like him who were encouraging blacks to rebel. Goldreich avoided trial alongside Mandela by bribing a guard with 4,000 rand—the kid wanted a new Studebaker—and fleeing to Tanzania. Goldreich eventually settled in Herzliya, Israel, and he founded the architecture department at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design in Jerusalem. He later became deeply critical of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, describing the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as "bantustanism" in an interview with the Guardian. Goldreich died in Tel Aviv in 2011.

Harold Wolpe became politicized after participating in a Socialist-Zionist youth project of teaching at a local night school for blacks, where he witnessed firsthand the dehumanizing effects of a racist society. He befriended Mandela and other activists while studying law at Wits and became one of Mandela's primary lawyers beginning with the seminal 1955 political summit, the Congress of the People—filing a lawsuit to bar the police from the premises—to Mandela's final arrest about a year before the raid on the Liliesleaf farm, when Wolpe himself was detained before escaping with Goldreich. Wolpe settled in England and became a sociologist, writing a highly influential 1972 paper, "Capitalism and Cheap Labour-Power in South Africa," which melded the political and economic criticisms of the regime by demonstrating how apartheid effectively suppressed the development of an urban proletariat and therefore differed in kind, not only in degree, from ordinary racial segregation. Dan O'Meara, a South African activist and historian now based at the Université du Québec à Montréal, has written that Wolpe's work "quite literally reshaped the way in which vast numbers of people saw apartheid South Africa, and in doing so, made a huge contribution to doing away with it." Wolpe moved back to South Africa in 1991 and directed education policy at the University of the Western Cape until he died at the age of 70 in 1996.

Yossel Mashel Slovo, known as Joe, joined the Communist Party in 1942 and then lied about his age to join the South African army, with which he fought in Italy. After the war, Slovo became active in the radical Springbok Legion veterans' association and studied law at Wits, where he met Mandela. Just before graduating, he married Ruth First, the daughter of a Communist Party leader. "We took off half an hour from our respective offices to get married," he later wrote in an unfinished autobiography, according to the recent book Ruth First and Joe Slovo in the War Against Apartheid. Their home served as a center for radical organizing, discussion, and parties. When the police conducted one of their regular searches of the house in the 1950s, they confiscated a copy of Stendhal's The Red and the Black solely because of the title. Indeed, Joe was the primary link between the Communist Party and ANC in the late 1950s and was Mandela's partner in organizing the Umkhonto we Sizwe militia. Both Slovo and First were arrested and prosecuted in the Treason Trial of 1956, which was partially conducted in a converted Pretoria synagogue—the only record of either First or Slovo having ever entered one. Abroad at the time of the Liliesleaf raid in 1963, Slovo was eventually joined in London by First and their children. Though in his early years he was an ardent Stalinist—much more so than First—by the late 1980s Slovo had become more critical of "socialism without democracy." Returning to the country in 1990 after Mandela was released and the prohibition on the Communist Party was lifted, Slovo crafted the power-sharing agreement credited with making the transition to majority rule after the end of apartheid in 1994 relatively smooth. Mandela, Slovo's last visitor the night before he died in 1995, delivered an emotional eulogy at the memorial service. At the gathering, Khoisan X, a black activist a generation younger than Mandela, recalled hearing his son's friend once ask, after seeing a photo of him and Slovo together, "Why is your father shaking hands with a white man?" The son answered: "That's no white man. That's Joe Slovo."

Ruth First was born in 1925 to Latvian immigrants who had helped found South Africa's Communist Party. The first in her family to attend college, First—described by her best friend as "sharp-tongued and shy"—founded the Progressive Students' League at Wits, where she also befriended Mandela, whom she later described as "good-looking, very proud, very dignified, very prickly, rather sensitive, perhaps even arrogant." Often compared to Rosa Luxembourg for her devotion to the struggle, First edited and wrote for various radical newspapers throughout the 1940s and 1950s, and was active in revolutionary politics. In 1963, First was arrested at the Wits library and endured a four-month detention, which she wrote about in a memoir, 117 Days. First's Xhosa comrades called her yimazi ephah neenkati—a mare that keeps up with the stallions. While exiled in London, First became a United Nations observer to Africa and edited Mandela's writings and speeches into a book, No Easy Walk to Freedom. In 1977, she moved with Slovo to Maputo, Mozambique, where she lectured and remained active in the anti-apartheid movement. First was in her office at the Eduardo Mondlane University in Maputo on August 17, 1982, when she opened a package addressed to her—sent, it turned out, by the South African security agents. It exploded in her face. She was 57.

James Kantor was one of Johannesburg's most famous lawyers in the 1950s. He wore English suits, drove American cars, and lived in a big house with a pool and a Portuguese chef. Described by First as a "socialite yachtsman," Kantor dated models—until he married one, Barbara. But his sister was married to Harold Wolpe. Though Kantor claimed in his memoir not to know Wolpe was engaged in illegal activities—specifically, laundering money to help Goldreich purchase the Lilesleaf farm—he hired Wolpe at James Kantor & Partners, enough to make him accessory to the conspiracy, as far as the state was concerned. After the Rivonia raid, with Wolpe in jail, Kantor served as Mandela's lawyer until he, too, was arrested—just after Goldreich and Wolpe's escape. It was assumed by many in the movement that Kantor, who up until that point had not been a member of the resistance movement, was being held hostage until the escapees returned. In jail, he shared a cell with Mandela, who agreed to be godfather to Kantor's child. On the morning the judge in the trial, Quartus De Wet, was to issue a ruling on the motion for Kantor's release, Mandela found Kantor pacing up and down their shared cell. Mandela suggested they exchange ties for good luck. When De Wet dropped the charges against him, Kantor raised his borrowed tie toward Mandela "as a kind of salute and farewell," Mandela wrote in Long Walk to Freedom. After his release, Kantor renounced the legal profession and moved to London, where he died of a heart attack in 1974, just 47 years old.

Helen Suzman, née Gavronsky, was for many years the only member of the South African Parliament opposed to apartheid. She was frequently the target of sexist and anti-Semitic attacks— "Go back to Israel!" she was told, though she was born in the South African mining town of Germiston—as well as subject to eavesdropping by the security forces, which she foiled by loudly blowing a whistle into the mouthpiece of her phone. Once, when a parliamentary colleague said her line of questioning was embarrassing the country, Suzman shot back, "It is not my questions that embarrass South Africa; it is your answers." Exercising her parliamentary privileges, she paid eight visits to Mandela in prison, bringing international attention and legitimacy to his cause. Suzman was distant from the Jewish establishment and critical of its silence on apartheid, according to the historian Gideon Shimoni, and when the Board of Deputies presented Suzman with its annual humanitarian award in 2007, she said flatly, "It's about time." Though twice nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, she was heavily criticized for her opposition to sanctions and divestment—"I don't see how wrecking the economy of the country will insure a more stable and just society," she said—and pursued by accusations of prolonging apartheid by participating in a blatantly unjust political system, which made her enemies inside and outside South Africa. Suzman died on New Year's Day 2009.

http://tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/145636/mandelas-jewish-helpers

Oh, vey ... the "sufferink" under Adolf Verwoerd was a tragedy for this malayan bitch !  :'(

[Zuma : If ANC Goes Down, So Will SA]

Zuma : If ANC Goes Down, So Will SA


Johannesburg – President Jacob Zuma on Wednesday admitted that the ANC had been shaken and was in trouble. "The youth league has been shaken but also the mother body has been shaken," he told delegates at the ANC Youth League consultative conference in Soweto, Johannesburg. "We admit that the organisation is in trouble." Zuma was referring to discussions held by the African National Congress's combined national working committee and national executive committee meeting on Tuesday. "I can guarantee you that if everything goes wrong with the ANC, everything will go wrong in this country. There is no doubt about it." Zuma urged youth league members to defend the African National Congress. Before Zuma arrived, delegates sang songs praising the president, "lead us Zuma", they sang in isiZulu. When he entered the hall the ANC Youth League delegates cheered and started to sing "Umshini wam" (bring me my machine gun).


https://rahowadirectory.com/sacreativity/zuma-if-anc-goes-gown-so-will-sa/