June 24, 2018 by Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane (photo above) for Executive Intelligence Review
The Obama Foundation, headquartered in Chicago, is not coy about its mission. It has, for example, Bernadette Meehan as its executive director of international programs. She was formerly a vice president of private banking at J.P. Morgan, then special assistant to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then served on killer Obama’s National Security Council.
On the South African side, the Nelson Mandela Foundation is headed by novelist Njabulo Ndebele, who spent years with the Ford Foundation in New York, a foundation associated with regime change projects.
But there is more on Obama’s agenda in South Africa than a lecture on July 17 at Johannesburg and a meeting with President Cyril Ramaphosa. He is bringing with him his friend—his former ambassador to South Africa—Patrick Gaspard, who is now the president of George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, notorious for their involvement in regime change around the world. At the time of this visit the Obama Foundation will convene 200 of Obama’s chosen acolytes of the Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI) from around the African continent for five days of training and workshops in Johannesburg. The New York Times of April 23, in referring to this, said that “Obama is inaugurating his most significant international project as an ex-president.”…
When Obama reaches South Africa he will be stepping into a country in which he and others have already been at work to engineer a bloody conflict from the prevailing, difficult circumstances. A large but unknown percentage of all South Africans—but well over ten percent—live in shacks put together from assorted materials, occupying land illegally around the cities where many of them have jobs. There is often no electricity and no running water; there are no street lights, no paved roads and often only pit toilets. They are regularly driven off by the police, who demolish their homes. The price of urban land is sky-high.
The frequency of these events—and other poor people’s confrontations, protests and destruction of public property—is rising, as poverty becomes worse in South Africa.
The leader of Black First Land First (BLF), Andile Mngxitama, promotes confrontation and urges the shack dwellers to seize more land. Mngxitama was formerly a Ford Foundation Fellow in the Sociology doctoral program at the University of the Witwatersrand, the center of the Eddie Webster network of regime change specialists.
Julius Malema—leader of the so-called Economic Freedom Fighters, with 25 seats in the National Assembly—harangues large crowds with a racial pitch, encouraging the seizure of land, including seizure of farms owned by white South Africans. At present, farmland is not being seized, but the murders of white farmers continue. Sometimes the farm family is tortured before being killed. Malema, who calls the whites “cry babies,” enjoys the patronage of Lord Robin Renwick and the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
A right-wing Afrikaner organization, Suidlanders (Southlanders), is preparing to fight in a racial “Armageddon” in South Africa. It has sent its spokesman, Simon Roche, on tour in the United States to raise money for his organization.
In contrast, the largest association of shack dwellers, Abahlali baseMjondolo (AbM), led by its president, S’bu Zikode, is committed to nonviolence, and has repeatedly urged the government to make land available. Many of AbM’s leaders have been assassinated—killings that are often paid for by property developers. But the call for land is not the right demand. It is not enough, and by itself it will feed into British intentions. AbM’s leaders understand that land is not simply a market commodity; they should be asking for a larger, more comprehensive change in the economy. This is all grist in the British imperial mill. The British plan is to use tumultuous disorder and bloodletting as the pretext for a multi-party “government of national unity and peace” that they can control. While South African commentators are talking about a coming “Arab Spring,” it would actually be a bloodbath.
South Africa is the chair of the BRICS this year by rotation, as it was five years ago in 2013. The BRICS annual summit of heads of state and government—and associated events—will be held in Johannesburg, July 25-27. Nine other African governments will participate, along with Argentina, Indonesia, Jamaica, and Turkey, under the “BRICS Plus” concept. The BRICS association must accelerate its work for the sake of Africa and the world. Obama, his foundation, and his partners in crime—the Soros Open Society Foundations—must be exposed and defeated. http://africanagenda.net/the-empire-plans-to-knock-south-africa-out-of-brics-with-a-bloodbath/
…………………………………………………......................................
6-29-18 by Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane
If the British, their flunkies, and their dupes have their way, we could find ourselves in the beginning a staged “race war” by that time. As a patriot, I urge calm discussion of some basic truths: The Radical Economic Transformation policy is flawed, because it does not consider what it proposes in the context of an overall agro-industrial policy for the nation.
If we do not have a defined agro-industrial policy actually in place, one that provides long-term, low-interest credit—that is, one unconstrained by London and Wall Street and their institutions of control, such as the IMF—ownership of land will not deliver the dreamed-of benefits, and, what’s worse, the expropriation of land would play into the British “race war” trap. The question of land ownership can only be discussed in this context.
There is no approach to the challenge of creating greater prosperity and opportunity for all South Africans, black and white, that does not begin by addressing the reality of British imperial control of what should be a sovereign economy. That control works through agents and assets in South Africa, but their power does not even derive from their domestic wealth or assets, but via their service to the London-centered imperial elite.
These agents’ power does not solely derive from property titles, and it is simplistic to believe that merely taking away their property will solve the problem of endowing our people with national sovereignty. That said, our government, in the name of sovereignty, does have both the right and obligation to confiscate and re-assign property titles whose ownership obstructs and subverts the national interest, and to determine fair compensation, if any.
A property title, as properly understood, is a contingent right granted by a national economy that does not establish an unlimited right to do whatever the holder wants but requires that it serve a positive national purpose. When that title is abused, or used against the national interest—when land or other property is held back from development and misused against the interest of the people, which sovereign government is constitutionally bound to protect—the title holder can lose his or her title rights and the title can be transferred to someone else, under lawful due process.
For example, large amounts of land owned by the mining companies could most definitely be expropriated without compensation—or rather, without further compensation—through an orderly procedure. The companies have had plenty of compensation already.
Alongside the question of property titles there is much to be done to make land serve a function. Urban and peri-urban land must have infrastructure—water, sewerage, roads, electric power. Owning farmland does not mean much if there is no infrastructure and you can’t get a bank loan to buy farm equipment, seed and fertilizer. Land transfers must not be to the detriment of productivity. Land expropriation will only work if long-term, low interest credit is available.
Placing the emphasis solely on expropriation and redistribution of property titles puts the cart before the horse and opens the door to Brutish inspired “class warfare” and racial conflict. By placing the issue of redistribution in the proper context of a national agro-industrial development policy, and debating that policy, we will expose the racist British Empire and its assets as the enemy of our nation’s progress.
What we propose is to give blacks—and whites—the opportunity for productive, meaningful lives. Blacks must have ownership of their own destiny; the shackles of their economic oppression must be removed. That oppression is a relic of the continued presence of the British Empire. Let us forget about the false term “White Monopoly Capital” and call it by its proper name—the British Empire and its dying financial system. That the representatives of this imperial elite are white, and have names such as Rupert, Gray, and Oppenheimer is not as important as that they collectively serve British imperial interests.
It really does not matter whether you are white, black, or purple—if you serve the British Empire, you are enemy of the future of our nation. The British are fond of pointing to all the blacks they have trained to run commerce and political life. All they have done is create a caste of Royal-rump-kissing traitors whose ideas have infected our leadership and through the media, our people.
Such people have committed and are continuing to commit serious economic and other crimes against our nation and our people, black and white. They should be exposed and prosecuted, and if convicted, enjoy years behind bars. This is what a nation must do to obtain its sovereignty.
These are the issues that we must address. This is what I and the LaRouche movement intend to make sure happens. In the end, you are either a patriot, or an asset of the British Empire. Many of you call yourselves patriots, but you wave the banners and repeat the slogans devised by the British Empire to foment “race war.” The time has come to wise up to their game of divide and control, and choose which side you are on. The future of our nation and of all Africa, depends on your choice. ramasimongt@hotmail.com
………………………………………………….…..........................
7-13-2015 by David Cherry and Ramasimong Phillip Tsokolibane
The leaderships of the Metalworkers and other smaller unions have been targeted for years by the Gene Sharp (of Oxford U.) apparatus in South Africa, moving them increasingly into outraged opposition to the government and the ruling ANC NUMSA General Secretary Irvin Jimhas called the ANC gangsters and tsotsis (thugs). At a conference organized by NUMSA to form a “United Front for Socialism,” held December 13-14, 2014 in Boksburg, near Johannesburg, NUMSA reportedly declared that the United Front will bring the “democratic regime change” that South Africa needs to free its citizens from neoliberalism.
NUMSA had been accused in November of seeking regime change.9 At least one public figure outside NUMSA had answered the accusation: Barney Pityana, Fellow, Kings College London, and rector of the Anglican College in South Africa, told a Dec. 4 meeting in Johannesburg, “Indeed we do want regime change, because that is what democracy is all about.” No, Reverend Pityana, you are lying. Regime change is all about trashing constitutions, laws, and elections. The Johannesburg meeting was convened by Democracy Works, an organization linked to the pernicious U.S. NED, one of Sharp’s funders. In South Africa, as elsewhere, “regime change” is a threat of much more than a change of regime. Consider the background: The British oligarchs—not the British people—had hoped for a race war as the outcome of the liberation struggle. Why? Prince Philip and the old families have no use for Africans in a world that has too many people for their comfort. In 2009, their Optimum Population Trust (populationmatters.org) released a study calling for reducing world population by 3 to 5 billion people by 2050. http://africanagenda.net/south-african-agents-of-destabilization-color-revolution/
………………………………………………………………………
4-14-2017 Tsokolibane wrote to Trump on March 16, 2017. His letter said, in part, “I ask that you authorize a thoroughgoing investigation of individuals and organizations, both inside the U.S. government and outside, especially those U.S.-based organizations associated with Mr George Soros, regarding their involvement in coup and ‘regime change’ activity against the elected government of President Jacob Zuma of South Africa. I also ask that you to order all U.S. government agencies and individuals, including those associated with the U.S. State Department, and including left-overs from the Obama Administration, to immediately cease all support for regime change activities directed against the government of South Africa.”…
Regime change or “color revolution” is a way to win wars without having to fight them. It is a form of war. Its history in imperialist practice has been examined in earlier EIR articles.2
The April 7 demonstrations across South Africa were largely under the aegis of “Save South Africa,” which managed its operations through international big business, with the Oppenheimer family’s Anglo American Corporation taking leadership. But it would be wrong to seek to understand such regime change operations as being ultimately controlled by and for big business. They are, rather, controlled by and for the oligarchs— the elite of the elites—and big business is a tool with extensive capabilities that is well aligned in outlook.
The “Save South Africa” operation—which has promised to deliver more and bigger demonstrations in the coming days and weeks—is led by the British-trained Sipho Pityana, chairman of the board of Anglo- Gold Ashanti (17% owned by Anglo American), with input from George Soros’ Open Society network, British agent Richard Calland, and others. In early September 2016, in forming Save South Africa, Pityana brought together a core of like-minded big-money people in business--the academics, political opposition leaders and NGOs were brought in later.
Pityana is not well qualified as a righteous critic of the wrongdoing of others. He joined the board of AngloGold Ashanti--one of the world’s biggest gold mining companies--in February 2007 when it was 42% owned by Anglo American.
In August 2008, War on Want, the British NGO, published “Anglo American: The Alternative Report,” in which it said of AngloGold:
Trade unionists who have stood up against AngloGold Ashanti mining operations in Colombia have been murdered by military units assigned to protect the company, while the company’s links with armed groups responsible for human rights abuses in the DRC have raised serious questions over its continuing presence there.
In January 2011, AngloGold was named the world’s “Most Irresponsible Company” at the Public Eye Awards in Davos, Switzerland and was accused there of a history of “gross human rights violations and environmental problems.” GhanaWeb’s news report on the event is titled “Anglo- Gold Is World’s Most Evil Company.” https://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2017/eirv44n15-20170414/43-47_4415.pdf
……………...................................................
No comments:
Post a Comment