MovieChat Forums > Catch a Fire (2006) Discussion > This movie is a lie. Nothing more than r...

This movie is a lie. Nothing more than revisionist, Stalinist propaganda


This entire movie is a lie. It is a nasty piece of Stalinist propaganda written by Shawn Slovo, daughter of Joe Slovo, to whom the film is dedicated, who is described as a member of 'ANC Special Ops', and portrayed as a heroic man engaging in a just struggle against an oppressive government.

Joe Slovo was the leader of the South African Communist Party, a fact the film conveniently omits, just as it omits his role in the infamous 'Church Street Bombing' in 1983, a car bomb that exploded at rush hour in Pretoria, killing 19 and wounding 200 civilians, including men, women and children of all races, putting to a lie a statement uttered by a character in the film that the 'ANC does not kill indiscriminately', which is all those Stalinist thugs ever did.
This bombing was greenlit by Nelson Mandela and planned and executed by Slovo.
Of course, all the 'operatives' involved were granted amnesty at the ANC's sham Truth and Reconciliation hearings.

Other wanton acts of barbarism against civilian men, women and children by these 'freedom fighters' that didn't kill 'indiscriminately' included the Magoo Bar bombing in Durban in 1986 that killed 3 and injured 69, as well as the Amanzimtoti bombing in Durban in 1985, that exploded in a busy shopping center, killing 5 and injuring 40.
The monster responsible for the Magoo Bar bombing, Robert McBride, was taken off death row, granted amnesty and given a high ranking position in the new South African police force. I kid you not.

Throughout the 80s and early 90s there were a series of bombings detonated at various 'Wimpy' fast food restaurants that indiscriminately killed scores of men, women and children, which clearly demonstrated the savagery and thuggery of the African National Congress, as well as the evil nature of Mandela, Slovo and then head of the ANC, Oliver Tambo.

Today, under ANC misrule, South Africa has been turned into the murder and rape capital of the world, as well as the AIDS capital of the world, with an estimated 3 000 000 people infected, in a country of 37 000 000.
There is an ongoing genocide against white Afrikaner farmers, almost 2 000 of whom, men women and children, have been brutally murdered, usually tortured first, and the entire populace is gripped by a crimewave that is turning the country to rubble.
These are the realities of the ANC, and no amount of revisionist film making will change that. Philip Noyce should be ashamed of his role in this lie.

reply

not to mention that Patrick Chamusso was not even South African, he was a freakin immigrant who came there to work, after he was well into his teens, and now somehow he has more right to SA than white people whose ancestors have been there since the 1600's and built the place. What a shame! the ANC was a terroist organzation, is a terrorist organzation, and always will be. The "black" revolution in South Africa is the most ridiclous act of "political correctness" that the world has seen. The idea of Majority rule is the biggest sham of democray to ever be taken serioulsy and put into action, and now white South Africans are paying for it.

Majority rule, democracy, What a farce. 95% of the white population has a high school education, less than 20% of the black population does. 80% of the white poupulation votes, 35% of the black population votes. less than 10% of the whites live in poverty, close to 70% of the blacks live in poverty, and commmit 90% of the crime. Its the same 70% that lived in poverty under Apartheid, only they were safer then.

The ANC represents, and benefits the 30% of blacks that are educated and working, and forgets about the whites and the other 70% of improverished blacks whose lives are no better than they were. In fact they are worse, because of crime and lack of police protection.

SA is still a minority run country, only the color has changed. Its absurd.

reply

As Mel Brooks said, "It is good to be the king." I surmise from your comment that you think oppression by a minority is morally superior to oppression by a majority. You may want to think that one through a bit more before you put in for "angry philosopher of the day."

reply

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0437232/board/nest/88196951

Link to a thread which not only has info on the background of Chamusso, but also has another link to an interview with the officer portrayed in the film as Nic Vos.

Interesting reading, now if only it were in English!

reply

btw all, no one here knows me from Adam, but to my rather extensive dilettante knowledge, every assertion made by sweetbrad48 and rache2000 is correct. The ANC was founded, financed, and led by the USSR.
Their goal during the Cold War was to destabilize the one stable nation in all of Africa, which would then force the West to devote emergency resources from other places like Viet Nam, Angola, Eastern Europe, and Korea.
The USSR never had any intention of doing other than using the ANC for their purposes, then abandoning them to chaos, as the world has seen.

To those who would deride such a claim, i have but one question:

Can you name a single example of a nation which went from white/euro rule to 'self' rule by 'indigenous' 'tribes' with a record of anything since but social, economic, political, technological, educational, or medical regression and decay?

It's a trick question: there is actually only one nonwhite-euro nation in all the world which went from rule by whites/euros to self rule, and improved themselves in the doing of it. The problem is, that nation ain't even in Africa. Scroll down for answer...

The only nation to date which has bootstrapped itself from the 'oppression' of white/euro rulers is India.
With a population over 1,000,000,000; over 30 officially recognized religions; over 400 languages, with 4000 dialects; and more than 130 'native' 'tribes', India is a booming economy with all sectors growing strongly, a stable democratic republic which works with more than 50 major parties, and an emerging leader in tech, science, education, medicine, manufacturing, multi-lingual arts and letters, finance, and international affairs.

Name me the African nation run by 'indigenous' 'tribes' which can claim such things after only 50 years of independence?
If not, then just keep any opinions about 'justice' to yourselves, libbies.


reply

Can you name a single example of a nation which went from white/euro rule to 'self' rule by 'indigenous' 'tribes' with a record of anything since but social, economic, political, technological, educational, or medical regression and decay?


Singapore, Malaysia, India, Taiwan, Brunei, Israel.

Arguable:
Philippines, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka.

I'm sure there are more.

Seriously, you are full of *beep*


reply

I'm really ashamed of the unoriginal, unfounded rantings of some of my fellow white South Africans. To the non-South African's reading this board: These people are sour racists. Ignore them.

reply

Thx for your reply, foob-5, no matter how weak your argument nor how poorly expressed.

Each of the 'nations' you referenced have one or more characteristics which would appear to disqualify them prima facie from the list of nations which have successfully come from colony status to that of freedom and liberty.
To wit:
Singapore as a 'nation' is a very small island barely seperated from Malaysia by a strait only hundreds of yards across. Singapore exists at all as it now is because the British cultural, educational, and economic infrastructure gave them a leg up over their regional competitors, which were mired in their ethnic and indigenous viewpoints, traditions, and practices.

Malaysia is a mess at best in comparison to Western nations. It is only when lined up against regional geographical or cultural/religious competitors that Malaysia appears on the surface to have even a bit more stability than say, oh, Burma or Indonesia.

India was my example, my friend; please forgive me for keeping credit on that.

Taiwan has been literally propped up economically by the West for decades as a bulwark against the Chicoms, and still exists as a nation only due to US military protection.

Israel has been for decades propped up financially by the US, but that was done to keep the Russcoms off balance. Israel is also in existence still due solely to being under the military protection of the United States.

Brunei has been under the protection of the West since the end of WWII, and got the infrastructure to raise the oil on which their entire economy depends, (in Damoclean imminence), from the Brits and the US.
Oh yeah, Brunei is an outright tyranny run by one family for centuries.

Not one of the last three 'nations' would exist at all right now but for the kickstart, and protection they got for decades, from the West.
With British and/or American help and guidance on everything from education to medicine to defense to finance to infrastructure, that aint bootstrapping.

As vast as my regard is for the intensive human effort made indivdually by persons in each of them, the fact remains these nations you claim as examples of independent bootstrapping, (by ethnic populations relying only on indigenous cutural norms to do so), are in fact examples which tend to support my assertion:
The nations most successful at such colonial bootstrapping are those which adopt, to the degree most practicable, the individual cultural and moral ethics of the West.
Particularly those nations which have the deepest roots in, or the strongest economic, cultural, and military ties to the US and/or British way of life, are those nations which have indisputably done best at raising themselves from the muck of chaos to opportunity of prosperity and liberty for all.

As to your last three items: May we agree to call them 'suggestions'?

That way they could die a quiet death in what little dignity is left them.

No offense, buddy; but have you paid any attention at all to events of the last decade or so in any of the last three nations you named?
The pattern repeats: colonies freed on their terms, implementing governance using indigenous/ethnic practices and norms, result in a lack of stability in governments, incoherent governance, or otherwise ineffective policies.
This literally _imposes_ official corruption on every transaction as the only way to get anything done at all, thus making bribery normal in all transactions.

That leads to decay in every facet of the culture, as well as to the ultimate breakdown of basic infrastructure and services.
This leads inexorably to more resources wasted every day in the constant struggle to overcome the incredible individual inertia inherent within any political/economic system running thus.

As for your assertion that there must surely be 'more' examples such as those you offered above: Please, do post them.
That way we all may see even more of the workings of your genius.
Cheers!

reply

Are you dense? This is what you said.

White rule to non-white rule, with decay and regression in every field, for every country.

Can you name a single example of a nation which went from white/euro rule to 'self' rule by 'indigenous' 'tribes' with a record of anything since but social, economic, political, technological, educational, or medical regression and decay?


You long post does nothing but support my list of countries as having accomplished that. Thanks.

Are you saying Singapore has decay and regression in every field since becoming independent?

Are you saying that for Malaysia too?

Or are you going to revise your claim and say as long as one field has regression, it means the nation is worse off than before.

Taiwan is a lot better than when the Dutch left. Does western governments look to be interfering with the political control in Taiwan? Is it still a western colony? No? Then I'm pretty sure Taiwan has progressed instead of regressed.

Israel doesn't need military assistance from the USA. They don't mind receiving a few billion dollars every year of free money, since they put in the effort to "bribe" the US government.

Brunei is a monarchy. That doesn't make it a tyrannical. I think you confused the two. If it was tyrannical, you would be hearing more about it in the news no doubt. The monarchy has made themselves rich on oil, that doesn't mean the populace has not improved their lives since the British left. One thing they have is free heath care paid by oil. Unfortunately, the USA is facing one of the worst healthcare problems ever.

I have addressed your statement with a list of countries you have not refuted. Instead of blabbling on about the history of the countries and how they have received aid (which without it they will collapse and utterly be destroyed), maybe you should try and revise your absurd claims.

reply

So, do you want to tell us what axe you have to grind? You seem unnecessarily angry at the brutality suffered by native South Africans.

reply

Nah, they're just mad that indigenous Black South Africans finally fought back. Although I don't agree with using violence to deal with the problem, I'm more of the Martin Luther King school of thought than the Malcolm X school, the underlying cause was more than just, but you wouldn't get it, because you're not Black or oppressed and your race is in charge everywhere, must be nice to look down on those you opress.

reply

what does being civilized and advanced have to do with being oppressors? When we Europeans got to South Africa, there was nothing there, there was no Cape Town, or Port Elizabeth, or Johannesburg, or any other city. There was no trains, roads, or workable farmland, there was nothing but uncivilized nomadic wandering natives of various tribes. And the blacks that you say finally fought back and won, and you refer to these as indigenous!!, you need to study more, the bantu speakers are not native to South Africa, they came here from somewhere else, just like we did!, and they too "conquered" and "oppressed" if thats the way you want to see it. Furthermore, who do you think educated your black heros, where did their rescources to stage this take ove come from?, yea from white people, from white establishment, from white civilization.

I agree, every human being has a right to freedom, but thats not all that South African blacks lead by the ANC want, they want all of SA for themselves, they want what we settled and developed, and they want us gone, becuase they think it belongs to them through ancestory, which is insane, they immigrated and migrated here just like we did, they have no more right, or are no more African than we are.

And again, the "protagnoist" of this movie is not even South African, and your going to tell me that he fought for something that is "rightfully" his just because he is a black african??

reply

Yes, I understand the concept of tribal migration patterns, but it was within neighboring areas, and yes, tribal peoples would be more native African than those who settled and colonized, because they are indigenous to Africa, maybe not to particular areas, but to the continent, and probably have blended in with those who were in that area first, over a period of thousands of years, not hundreds. Just because someone doesn't have a railroad or roads in their town doesn't make them uncivilized. That's not what makes a society or civilization. Many indigenous peoples in Africa and around the world have thousands, if not tens of thousands of years of complex social and religious laws and mores they've practiced. In practical terms, of course it's not possible to get all non-indigenous South Africans out, but years of being told that your ancient homeland, wherever on the continent you may be from, is now to be run by the settlers who have no traditional place there, and not only that but they're telling you that you're going to be denied certain basic rights because your ancestry, must be enough to make you wish they would go away.

reply

Hey rosie8675,
Would you cite your factual source for your assertion above that anyone posting here is, or has been, an oppressor of anyone?
Also, your willingness to overlook the factual points made by sweetbrad48 and rache2000 seem indicative more of your own biases regarding social migration patterns than it appears to point to any sort of racism, bias, or bigotry on their part.
Can you explain precisely why the migrations of Europeans make their descendants any less native to SA than do the migratory histories of those SAns who happen to have dark skins?
How about those brought to SA against their will, and labeled for centuries past as 'Coloreds'? Do they have as much right to an equal place in SA society as do those of African ancestry?
Why have you not answered any one of the numerous factual assertions, nor any of the fact-based and very reasonable questions asked by rache2000?

The afrocentrist POV as promoted by fools such as Leonard Jeffries, H.B. Fell, and the pompous fool calling himself Maulana Karenga, underlying your usage of terms such as 'traditional'; 'native'; 'tribal'; 'indigenous'; and, 'ancestry' in order cover your own racism by avoiding use of such terms as 'white' or 'black', is far more deleterious to a future of hope for all SAns than all the history of oppression by whites which was endured by all SAns over the last few centuries.

At least tell us you will not respond substantively to any factual assertions, rather than waste everyone's time by pretending you seek reconciliation in hope of peaceful resolution of problems faced by all SAns, not just some.

reply

I don't think anyone can deny the fact that apartheid was overthrown using violent means. This also does not automatically discount the idea that apartheid was oppression...you can't possibly argue that. We can devolve this discussion into weather or not violence is a correct course of action when being oppressed (I believe it is) but that isn't the route of this thread.

As for your notion that any nation that has thrown off euro/white rule and gone on to prosper has left one, huge glaring hole in your argument. If the euro/white rule was not there in the first place no one KNOWS what would have become of the various cultures that were destroyed by colonization. You also need to redefine your perceptions of success. Just because a culture doesn't have western material advantages doesn't mean its a failure or will never re-assemble itself into something grand.

And as for rache2000 seeming racist, this is the telling comment:
"The idea of Majority rule is the biggest sham of democray to ever be taken serioulsy and put into action, and now white South Africans are paying for it." (all misspellings are his/hers)

Rache2000 shows no regard for any other SAns except the white South Africans and the idea that majority rule is a sham of democracy is just ignorant...it is the WHOLE IDEA of democracy. Now, it may not be playing itself out in SA...it isn't playing itself out correctly in the US either but these are economic and political problems...not racial (hopefully.) And please, don't call me ignorant to say race has nothing to do with it...of course it does...but don't pin all your argument on that...it is far more complex.


reply

Rache2000 shows no regard for any other SAns except the white South Africans and the idea that majority rule is a sham of democracy is just ignorant...it is the WHOLE IDEA of democracy.



Liberal democracy is a form of government, a political system.[1] It is a representative democracy in which the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a constitution that emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities (see civil liberties). A liberal democracy has elections, a multiplicity of political parties, political decisions made through an independent legislature, and an independent judiciary, with a state monopoly on law enforcemen


Show me where our rights as minority white people are being protected now with this "majority rule" scam. We are losing our jobs, our homes, etc..Crime is running wild, becuase our black leaders think its more important to be politically correct and cultrally sensitive, than to abide by the rule of law. The crime of "preceived racism" is worse than the crime itself, and this is ridiclous.

Furthermore, its historical fact that the ANC takeover of SA was and is a terroist act. The ANC was and is a terrorist organization funded by the Soviet Union for the purpose of destbalization. Both the US and the UK listed the ANC as a terroist organization. Its only ligitmacy is as a result of political correctness.

All in all, you know that you can not say that we are better off under the ANC, that would just be stupid. and I mean black and white.

reply

So, I understand rache2000 that as a white, female SAner you feel that your life has become worse under Black leadership.

But what you are putting forth in particular,
"All in all, you know that you can not say that we are better off under the ANC, that would just be stupid. and I mean black and white."

YOU are not better off. You feel less safe, you feel discriminated against, you BELIEVE that your leaders are out to get you...you SOUND paranoid, you SOUND racist. You are actually arguing that under "white" leadership these uneducated blacks were getting a chance to "assimilate" into your definition of civilization. This is classic colonialism...we had it here in America...it was called Manifest Destiny. Just because you have the technology and the means to force "civilization" on people doesn't mean they have to bend over and take (and thank you for it later.)

I hear you when you say you are less safe...well, that's too bad. If the black leadership is treating you like they were treated for years...as my Mother would say...

"You made the bed, now you lay in it."

And as for your pointing out that ANC was a terrorist organization...yup, sure they were...an oppressed people sometimes have no voice but through violence. Its something Americans don't want to hear but terrorism and guerrilla warfare is EXACTLY how we won our freedom. AGAIN that may OR may not justify the means but stop harping on the ANC for using these tactics and where their money came from (USSR) it offers you NO cache in the argument.

And as for the ANC's "only legitimacy is as a result of political correctness" ummm...what about the elections?

reply

Rache,

Then get the hell out. You white Europeans were not the original Natives anyway. Move to Holland if you don't like it.

I say if the ANC takeover was indeed a terrorist act, good for them!! They were terrorized by much more brutal means for years and years. It if took terror to fight terror, so be it.

End of the day, your people had a very ignorant idea of how a country should be governed (one that completely back-fired when the rest of the world viewed you as a bunch of morons), and it finally fell apart (surprised it took as long as it did).

The fact that you are even attempting to argue this is sad to me. It is very clear that the ugly racist scars that were burned into your brain by the former S.A. government will never heal. That is too bad for you, in more ways than one.

reply

I am not racist at all, in any way shape or form but I am stating my opinion, as are you. I'm not discussing Coloreds, I'm discussing Whutes and indigenous Blacks, which is the focus of this film. From what I'm reading, you believe that indigenous blacks are no more African than are those Whites who came from Europe and settled on the Continent. I disagree. I don't know how that makes me racist, because I didn't say that I don't like White people, s***t, I'm half-White my damn self, so it would be weird for me to hate them, but I just don't like when some White people come settle somewhere, and seem to think that right of conquest should allow them to disrepect the ways of life of people and sometimes their basic human rights, but yet don't understand why people get p***ed.

reply

The majority of South Africa's black people arrived a few hundred years (not thousands) before the first Dutch settlers, before then there were the hunter-gatherer San people but they were quickly overpowered and forced to the edges of their territory by the numerically and technologically superior pastoral Nguni groups. Africa is just like the rest of the world with people arriving and fighting with each other, and just like everywhere else, the modern demographic is very different from that 2000 years ago. White people in Africa (especially in South Africa which has a history of European colonisation stretching back to the 1600s) have as much a right to be there and be part of running the country as white people in the United States.
It really IS inherently racist to determine that white people are somehow "less African" than blacks because of the colour of their skin.

reply

The respected author Herman Gilliomee, co-author of the New South African History, written by black & white professors and the most authoritive source for the public, put it quite simply in a recent interview: We all left here 70,000 BC. Then 70,000 years later the Bantu people came, and 1500 years later the white people. So what's the big deal?

He also said that apartheid is just a footnote in history and nothing major. And they also compared the blacks deaths per thousand inflicted by the white government and found that per capita we were the lowest in the world in terms of genocide, right along with Israel and North Ireland. And we were also less a police state than England, USSR, North Ireland, with up to 16 times less police per person than the USSR. So, for the UN to have labelled us a crime against humanity but not China, USSR, Cuba, Combodia, is simply incorrect and ridiculous.

reply

and yes, tribal peoples would be more native African than those who settled and colonized, because they are indigenous to Africa, maybe not to particular areas, but to the continent, and probably have blended in with those who were in that area first, over a period of thousands of years, not hundreds.


Okay well if you want to get absolutely technical, based on human ancestry, we are all African, have you ever heard of the cradle of civilization, or of the super continent Pangea? As humans evolved, we migrated, mostly moving northward, from Africa, which was the main catalyst of the continental Drift Theory. Technically the natives of America are Asian, and Russian, well they were from the central and western part of what is now Russia and Siberia, they migrated through the land bridge that once connected in the Bering Strait. Furthermore, one way or the other we are all settlers and colonists, that’s what settled the world, that’s what made the countries we all live in today.

I find it very interesting that Blacks are "allowed" to claim these ancient ancestral roots based on the fact of a majority population on a continent, and based on skin color, that sounds sort of racist to me. You seem to think its okay for blacks to lay claim to Africa based on skin color, but deny whites based on the fact that they are white, and are "settlers".

I was born in South Africa, the protagonist of this story was not, what rightful claim does he have over SA that would be more than mine?, and you want to call white people racist?, while saying that just because Patrick Chamusso is black, he has more claim to SA! Because of "Ancient" and Tribal" ancestry to the continent of Africa, Rubbish! We all have ancient ancestry to Africa.

I'm not saying Apartheid was the right thing forever. I'm of English ancestry, and don't hold the same level of nationalism as the Afrikaner, but at the same time, during that time other than the ANC terrorist, we were safe, crime was not near as high and in all actually a large percentage of the more than 70% of black Africans who have a bad life now had a better life then. The Ironic thing is that the only blacks that are really benefiting from the policies of the ANC, are the same blacks that were benefiting when the Apartheid government was in power.

Furthermore, you want to bash the "white oppressors", do you know many of your black "chiefs" were made wealthy by the apartheid government, in order to "settle" the homelands? yes these were blacks who worked with the white government, they took what the white people had to offer, they took the education, and yes they also took the power. They too "terrorized" the townships, it wasn’t just the white people "oppressing".

The Apartheid government and the ANC government are almost one in the same, the percentages for the ANC are slightly higher representing roughly 30% of the population while the Apartheid represented roughly 12-15% of the population, but both were and are minority governments, pretending to be majority representation based on geographically placed demographics, its a sham either way. Even some of the polices are the same. The forced removal of parts of the same impoverished 70% of black Africans continues. We still have job discrimination based on race etc.., we still have housing discrimination, the townships are still poor and dangerous, with poor education and poor job prospects, nothing has really changed, all we did was hand our government over to bigger thugs.

reply

I think if white Europeans would have stayed in their own damn country...
Get over yourself. I doubt anyone here who has posted is South African or can even locate it on a map.

reply

I think if white Europeans would have stayed in their own damn country...
Get over yourself. I doubt anyone here who has posted is South African or can even locate it on a map.


Whatever!, what a silly statement. kak!! what are you an African American? chop!! china you should'nt make assumptions like this. However, seeing how the protagonist of this movie was not South African either, and he was "fighting" to liberate the country, I think non-SA's have a right to post whatever they want. I mean according to some of the comments here, all it takes is black skin and everyone one of you are "more" South African than me, (more rubbish).

Europeans discovered and settled the world, what are you talking about staying in their own country?? humans have migrated and immigrated, and emigrated since the beginning of time. do you have anything to say about the movie?

Furthermore, watch the movie, and pay attention to the wedding scene at the beginning, if you look in the background, you will see a couple of "native" black people dancing on a small hill, this is what we europeans encounterd when we arrived here.

Americans always want to try and compare the Black Africans here, with the Blacks in America, and its totally diffrent, its no where near to being the same. The better comparison would be to the Native Americans, who were wandering tribes with their own civilzations, their own languages and their own ways of living, The same for the blacks here. Additionally you Americans have roughly 4 million natives, we have something like 40 million. However, what precentage of your natives are successful and live a good life?, I will tell you less than 3%, meanwhile, about 30 - 35% of the Black Africans here are doing well and that number is climbing becuase of the reverse discrimnation in the name of Affrimative Action, and Black Empowerment. And now some ANC officials want to remove us white women from the list of minority's so that affrimative action will not apply to us anymore, they think we have enough representation in the work force. really!!

We have roughly 70% of our "Native" Black African population that are not educated, and are un-employable, they join gangs, and they commit crime. They live in the same townships they have always lived, and they are still being removed and moved around, this being done by the ANC government, "their people".

The ANC governemnt does not care anymore about them than the Apartheid government did. Crime is rampant in the townships, because the ANC governemnt as to appear not to be racially profiling to the rest of the world, becuase of this gone wild political correctness will not do anything about it, they have decided that crime itself is better than preceived racism, so they pretned everything is okay, menawhile we have become one of the most dangerous countries in they world.

One more reason this movie was so dumb, is that it was so onesided, for the most part it showed us the 30% of black, and coloured South Africans , who cultrually, economically, and educationally were being assimilated into and participating freely in South African society, and tried to depict these people as being rpresentative of the "oppressed Black Africans" this was such a Hollywood move of trying to sell the world, a "presentable" black image. How much more racsist can one get??? What they did not show was the 70% of "Native" black africans, the ones that are not assimilated, the ones that are not educated, and the ones that are not working, the ones that are commimting crime now, the ones that are attacking and killing white farmers, and rapping babies, because it cures AIDS.

They did'nt show these people, becuase then where would the sympathy and understanding be? it would'nt be, the rest of the world would have understood more of the problems of civilized South Africa, and its battle against the uncivilized native segment of our society, if these people would have been shown, then in all actuality we would have probbally gotten more support for what we were trying to do. And when I say civilized South Africa, I'm not only talking about Whites, I am also including the 30% of Black Africans I have already talked about, I am including the Coloureds and the Indians, and the Asians, and everyone else who lives a civilized productive life in SA.

Americans just need to visualize having say 20-30 million natives as opposed to the 4 million you have, then maybe you will get a better understanding of what South Africa is all about and what we have to deal with.

reply

South Africa? Is that a show on the Comedy channel?

Nothing is more beautiful than nothing.

reply

Here we go again. Here's why you ARE a racist:

"I'm not saying Apartheid was the right thing forever."

NO, no, no, no, NO. Apartheid was WRONG from the beginning. Never at ANY time was it humane, correct, right OR even clear-headed. It was the sanctioned, government run RULE OF LAW of discrimination. That's like saying,

"Slavery wasn't so bad. It brought some black people to 'civilized' countries."

No human being has any right to legislate against another simply because of race or any perceived difference. Do you NOT see that?

No, you clearly don't or you wouldn't be making these arguments. You have a traditional colonial mindset. Represented here, again,

"Furthermore, you want to bash the "white oppressors", do you know many of your black "chiefs" were made wealthy by the apartheid government, in order to "settle" the homelands? yes these were blacks who worked with the white government, they took what the white people had to offer, they took the education, and yes they also took the power. They too "terrorized" the townships, it wasn’t just the white people "oppressing"."

This too is a classic colonial argument. What we did was okay because the oppressed people took part in the action. Of course they did! Black SAns aren't saints (no one said they were) and you can't expect human beings to not try to profit or better themselves when the opportunity presents itself (because most of us are greedy bastards.) Just because the entire black community didn't stand up as one perfect (impossible) whole to denounce you doesn't excuse or mitigate ANYTHING that went on. The root of the problem was the discriminatory policies in place (and, please, don't say I'm defending the blacks that participated in those atrocities...I'm not...just don't use them to defend your weak position.)

reply

Interesting to read some of the ignorance that passes for intelligent discourse here. Definitely from Americans who profess to know everything, but know very little. The previous responder, 'apone' probably couldn't name all fifty U.S. states or find what's left of South Africa on a map, but now passes him/herself off as an expert on not just South Africa, but slavery and colonialism as well.

I began this thread not to debate the wrongness off apartheid, but to point out the lies, half-truths and revisionist bullsh*t in the movie 'Catch A Fire'.
Nowhere in this Marxist fantasy is any mention made of Slovo's allegiance to and membership in the South African Communist Party, nor of his active role in the murder of scores of innocents, both black and white. Doing that would alienate most of the core audience, something that happened anyway as very few people turned up to see this crap.

Mandela's ANC so-called government is one of the most corrupt, imbecilic, illegitimate regimes of Earth, and really nothing more than a motley band of thugs, many Soviet and Cuban trained, who are content to loot the country and enrich themselves whilst the scourges of AIDS, murder, rape and robbery reduce what was a first world country to yet another majority ruled African toilet, same as happened after all wars of 'liberation' in places like Uganda, Kenya, Mozambique and Zimbabwe, where president for life, Robert Mugabe, is in his third decade as president and Zim has been reduced to rubble, a precursor of South Africa's fate.

The ANC is a criminal gang made up of morons like health minister Tshabalala-Msimang, who believes garlic and beetroot cure AIDS, thieves like billionaire Tokyo Sexwale who has enriched himself with discriminatory, apartheid like policies of BEE and AA, and ignorant sociopaths like deputy president Jacob Zuma, who believes it's ok to rape the HIV positive DAUGHTER of a family friend because he took a shower afterwards. This moron, a goat herder with a fifth grade education, is probably South Africa's next president.
Comparing the ANC's so-called struggle to the American war of independence is like comparing apples to oranges, and rotten oranges at that.
The Americans fought a just war of liberation against an oppressive regime, and replaced it with the first, and greatest, democracy in history. The ANC has replaced institutionalized racism with a Communist kleptocracy and another form of institutionalized racism and is fast turning South Africa into a state sponsor of terror.

Regarding the subject of Colonialsm, it will come to be regarded as the golden age of Africa. Under the various European colonies, Africa worked and flourished. All cultures are not equal, sorry, and Western culture is superior to African culture, which is why the West put a man on the moon and Africans believe that sex with virgins cures AIDS.
In not one country that has devolved into African rule has it ever worked. Not one. Every majority ruled African country has become a maelstrom of disease, corruption, war, murder and violence. All blamed on the ever useful 'legacy of Colonialism/Apartheid.'
You can call that racist, but it's also fact.

reply

Sweet. That is rich...you calling my deconstruction of YOUR OWN WORDS lack of intelligent discourse. I actually stay to the point, use calm logic and your own language as examples and YOU throw *beep* emotion-based vindictive around.

I've never professed to be an expert on anything...except calling someone out when they're acting like a child (see above.) All you continue to do is demonstrate here, where everyone can see, your ignorance in "intelligent discourse."

And as for your original intent...who cares? I never said your examples were WRONG I was pointing out how wrong-headed your ideas on HUMANITY are and how SOME of your so-called arguments are *beep*

ANOTHER FINE EXAMPLE:

"All cultures are not equal, sorry, and Western culture is superior to African culture, which is why the West put a man on the moon and Africans believe that sex with virgins cures AIDS."

And I'm talking to the people here, 'brad48', so just sit back and relax.

Here we have the colonialist mindset that cultures can even BE rated. He chooses to remove any context of any other culture than he can understand simply. He chooses to let wealth and material be the guidelines as to wether or not a culture succeeds. He chooses to remove harmony, equality, comparative standard of living, and just about everything else to judge cultures. Apparently the only thing worthy of consideration as "success" of a culture is wether or not they have put a man on the moon. So 99.99% of ALL cultures that ever existed have been failures.

And here's my second fave out of his earlier statement...continually PROVING BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT HE IS A RAVING RACIST...is found in the end of the previous quote. "...Africans [BLACK Africans clearly...as he identified himself as African in a previous rant] believe that sex...etc..."

I'm not denying that a bunch of thugs and ignorant *beep* in Africa believe this is true...I'm just pointing out the fact that good 'ole brad up there NEVER makes the distinction. He always uses generalizations when "discussing" the black population of not ONLY South Africa but ALL of Africa...and these generalizations are all prejorative.

See you soon, sweetie...hope you stay the ignorant, racist pig that you are...I'm actually having fun laughing at your attempts to defend yourself.

I'll be happy to let the fine readers judge.

reply

sweetbrad is another racist S.A. with "Sour Grapes" because his side lost.

You sound like a bitter American from the south who still waves his confederate flag.

Get over it. You lost and you're a racist.

A sour, bitter racist. Ewwwww - doesn't get much worse than that!

reply

Is "racist" the only argument everyone has? What about reading a few history books covering 1652 - 1910?

http://www.unomaha.edu/itwsjr/ThirdXV/TheAfrikaners.pdf

reply

The title of 'most ignorant' is almost a three way tie between Rosie, cornerboy and apone. None of these morons has a clue, thus the liberal brandishing of the label 'racist', because that's all they have.
I'm going to give the prize to apone, though, who believes that harmony, equality and blah blah blah are indicators of the worth of a culture, and not wealth and materialism, not realising that wealth and materialism are the only ways to ensure harmony and equality, which is why the USA is the greatest country on Earth. Also, the word is 'whether', not 'wether'.
Another gem is the inference that whites and 'Coloreds' were one culture separated by the previous government in what used to be South Africa, and were somehow two parts of a black whole.
This idiocy diplays the writer's ignorance of the South African situation. Blacks and South African Coloreds are two completely separate cultures in South Africa, with their own customs, history and diet, much the same way Kenyans and Haitians are separate, or Jews and Italians are, though they share the same hue of skin.
Yet another gem is the opinion that only 'a small band of thugs' believe that sex with virgins cures AIDS. That 'small band of thugs' is particularly, but not exclusively, the entire Zulu nation, who's witchdoctors (I'm not making this up) instruct the menfolk with this piece of cultural wisdom. Yes, I can see how such a culture is equal to one that puts a man on the moon.
But all that is of no consequence.
No one has actually addressed the central question of this thread, which is, why is no mention of Slovo's (and Mandela's)allegiance to Communism, a far worse evil than apartheid, bad as that was, made in this movie?
And why does a character utter the revisionist lie that the 'ANC does not kill indiscriminately', when the statistics tell a different story?

reply

Yes, about the coloureds in South Africa. They are descendents from Maylasian slaves, and some had children with the native Bushmen. But they share nothing with the ethnic line of the Africans. That is factually incorrect, so he can share his ignorance somewhere else. Coloureds even speak the same language as the Afrikaners - how does he explain that? Plus, the laws toward coloureds and Indians were far less severe, and they had full parlimentary representation in 1983 along with the Indians. Their per capita income was over US$ 6,000 in 1995.

reply

No one has actually addressed the central question of this thread, which is, why is no mention of Slovo's (and Mandela's)allegiance to Communism, a far worse evil than apartheid, bad as that was, made in this movie?
And why does a character utter the revisionist lie that the 'ANC does not kill indiscriminately', when the statistics tell a different story?


yes none of this was answered, becuase no one that has read this thread has really bothered to even read what you and I and a few others have written, they immeadaitly just want to jump on the calling us racists bandwagon, but anyway, most of the post have come from Americans who really don't know anything about South Africa.

And for the poster that said I should go to "Holland", I don't want to go to "Holland", additionally, its called Netehrlands, Holland is not a country, its a province within the country of the Netherlands. Futhermore, I'm of English and French descent, and not all of us are "Afrikaner".

Also throughout this whole discussion, the only reason I ever brought up the whole "black" issue, is becuase like this movie, and becuase of "political" correctenss no one wants to talk about what the ANC reall is and what they have done and not done. This movie picked a very small slect demographic to show what SA was like, its very "Hollywood" movie. It does nothing to show the diffrences between the Coloureds, and the Black South Africans, etc.. Futhermore, as this discussion progressed I tried to talk a little bit about contemporary South African Society, but none of you want to hear about or tackle those issues, so if the ANC is so much better for SA, than why won't any of you answer any of these obeservations. We are still a minority run country, the roughly 35% of the educated and asimilated Black African population, which includes roughly 75% of the Coloured population, about 10-15% of the Coloured's vote for the DNC. Anyway, the 35% run ANC treat the 75% of improverished Black Africans, about the same as they were treated under the Apartheid government, not much has really changed.

reply

[deleted]

why the USA is the greatest country on Earth.


Not from where I sit, my friend, and I live here.

Yes, I can see how such a culture is equal to one that puts a man on the moon.


Any culture that invests its people's money in space exploration while 37 million of its people are living in poverty is not "great." I consider NASA a shameful waste of money. Take a look at the situation on the ground instead of wishing you could get away from all the poor people.


Go ahead, call me a liberal. It's the only tool you have, I understand. I'm proud to be someone who cares more about other people than materialism.

reply

I live in the USA now too, genius. For the last seventeen years. I have a perspective on this that you couldn't even fathom, because I know the difference.
Nobody in the USA has any reason to complain. You can become anything you want in this country. Literally.
Those 37 million people living in poverty? It's their choice to live that way, and there are countless programs and handouts in the form of government welfare to help them along, so you can drop the 'cruel, uncaring government' pretense. The USA not only supports 37 million of its own citizens that for one reason or another don't want to work, but also supports millions of others in other countries in the form of foreign aid.
The money spent on necessary space exploration is a drop in the ocean comparitively.
In apartheid South Africa, I saw people that were really discriminated against and lived in real poverty.
Don't worry, I won't call you a liberal. Liberals at least are capable of critical, objective thinking.

P.S. You can't care about others if you don't care about materialism first.

reply

And here we go again. "No one has any reason to complain in America" is this REALLY the drum you are beating? ALL 37 million people just decided not to work? Your goofy generalizations are just getting annoying and not worth responding to sweetbrad. You made some points in the past but now you are just showing how shallow you are.

Here are your values...expressed in this thread:

1. Money is the only judge of societies and people.

2. People can just "decide" to be successful and "decide" to change their lives regardless of circumstance.

3. America is great (which I agree with...but not for the same reasons)

and lastly, my favorite tactic of all bullies who hide behind keyboards...

4. Name calling wins arguments.

Hey...at the end of the day I'm glad I joined this "discussion" I learned a lot more about the situation in SA, about the weaknesses of the movie, but in the end with people like you, sweetbrad, it almost don't make it worth it.

You live in your bubble, bathing in money or whatever it is you do with your "materialism before people" philosophy...and leave the rest of us to actually care about human beings and actually solve problems.



reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

"I'm going to give the prize to apone, though, who believes that harmony, equality and blah blah blah are indicators of the worth of a culture, and not wealth and materialism, not realising that wealth and materialism are the only ways to ensure harmony and equality"

Yeah...because CHINA whose economic growth is unparalleled in HISTORY whose wealth is enormous has the greatest "harmony and equality" (that's sarcasm btw I know you have a problem identifying it.) And I suppose you will now say that its only that way because of Communism (another fav of yours)...so let's hear how money, wealth and prosperity stacks up against the last of the communist giants.

And, ummmmm, a small note in history you are forgetting that refutes your pet theory that all you need is cash to ensure harmony and equality...you might have heard of the Roman empire? maybe? You know, at its peak when it collapsed? Monetarily at its peak at least...some would say bereft of moral obligations to harmony and equality. Some version of democracy, yes, but a very, very corrupt one ...kinda like America now...maybe?

and the word is 'realizing' with a 'z' not an 's'...oops that's your British roots showing...

reply

Both above entries by apone...sorry was logged in under wife's account...just taking responsibility.

reply

Apone - you really are clueless, aren't you? Not just about South Africa, but all things American, too. Yes, in the USA, one can 'just' rise above poverty. Ask Whoopi Goldberg, who had enough of being a welfare mother, depending on handouts from the cruel American government that doesn't care about its unfortunates, and became, all by herself, an Academy award winning actress and millionaire.

I can't understand your invocation of Communism as if it's something I advocate, because, after militant Islam, it's the most dangerous form of totaliterianism ever unleashed on humanity. The ruins of South Africa are just the latest example of the suffering left in its wake.
Damn right I place prime importance on materialism and wealth, because without them one cannot accomplish any kind of aid to alleviate the suffering or poverty of others, unless you believe that good intentions and kindness are an end unto themselves. If you do, I've got bad news for you; without any kind of financial backing, all the kindness and happy thoughts in the world won't make an iota of a difference.

Your analogy of ancient Rome and Communist China with the Democratic United States is not just idiotic, but also lays bear the one dimensional thought process of your mind. The wealth created in the United States is largely due to individual achievement under a functioning Capitalist system. The 'glory' that was Rome, as well as the 'economic growth' in China, were and are a house of cards. Rome collapsed under the weight of its corruption and excesses, as will China eventually, much the same as their partners in thuggery, the former Soviet Union did, after decades of failure trying to make their system work, at the cost of millions of lives.

But let's get back to what's left of South Africa. You're fond of quoting statistics from the former apartheid regime, so let me quote a few of my own and see if you can explain them away:
The ANC came into power and promised 'A Better Life For All'. Since then, South Africa has descended into the rape and murder capital of the world. Key government officials are constantly on trial for crimes ranging from embezzlement to rape and murder.

The recently elected head of the ANC, Jacob Zuma, who previously stood trial for the rape of the HIV positive DAUGHTER of a family friend, is about to stand trial again on corruption charges. This thug is the next president of South Africa. Aside from the fact that he was Soviet trained and is a former goat herder with a fourth grade education, such a character, with so much legal baggage, would not even be considered for any kind office in the civilised world (whoops, there's my British roots again).

South Africa is the AIDS capital of the world, and the government's response is the health minister, Tshabalala-Msimang, another Soviet trained thug, advocating the use of beetroot and garlic as a cure. I kid you not.
Johannesburg has been turned into one of the most dangerous cities in the world, and has become a squatter camp to the millions of illegal aliens that have streamed into South africa from the rest of Africa, which too was freed from the evil white colonialists and delivered into the glory of black majority rule. Oh, and by the way, every one of those illegals has the right to vote in the new and proud South Africa. The ANC will never give up power.

Apartheid has been reinstituted, but now it's called Affirmative Action and Black Economic Empowerment (AA and BEE). Every facet of South African life has to reflect the demographic of the country, regardless of achievement, worth or common sense. Race is everything. The ANC has threatened to disallow a South African team to compete in the Beijing Olympics if the team does not field enough black athletes, regardless of who runs faster, jumps higher or further or who is physically superior.
BEE and AA are the economic tools that the government is using, in conjunction with the home invasions, murder and crime, to legislate the Afrikaner, their historical nemesis, out of existense. It is now virtually impossible for a white Afrikaner to get a job. They have, in effect, been legislated to live in permanent poverty.
All this is happening simultaneously with a cultural genocide, as the Afrikaners' history is being wiped out with cities, streets and towns now being renamed after the likes of Fidel Castro, Che Guevera and Yasser Arafat. Look it up.
You're so fond of defending these monsters, so why don't you put your money where your mouth is and take a vacation in Johannesburg?






















reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

They had a life before you Europeans arrived. They had their farmlands and their civilizations. it just wasn't in the form that the Europeans had in mind. Europeans were not right in coming to a country enslaving the people who lived there to make another Europe on land that didn't belong to them. So what if they brought Cape Town or Port Elizabeth or railroads. They were doing fine without your imposing lifestyles. "Uncivilized nomadic wandering natives of various tribes?" Go back to school. The only thing that was brought to them by the "great whites" was pain, disease, and sorrow, by people who didn't have the sense to realize, that this was a different land, a different country, and a different culture, one that was destroyed by petty greed.

reply

Well so who do we have here slitherng over on the IMDB? The ghosts of Daniel F. Malan and J.G. Strijdom. My god I can't believe folks like you are still around, Did someone tell you it was ok for you to come out of that cave you have been living in all of these years? Well they were wrong.

See for the whites to live in South Africa in a way attuned to the carefree lazy lifestyle they yearned for and gotten use to they figured on a few things they have to do.

1) They had to implement a system designed to oppress the rights of blacks while maintaining white supremacy within the ranks of the government as well as society.

2)Keep the black south Africans in constant fear for their lives and separate them from the white and have them live on squalor. So you enact laws like
a)The 1950 Population Registration Act
b}The Bantu Authorities Act of 1951
c)Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Public Safety Act in 1953

3)Make sure they separate the lighter skin blacks from the dark skin blacks. Even give them another name and call them Colored so they will not get together and form a powerful force against he the small minority of devils who are running the place.

4) You they have to keep them separated because the white minority knows exactly how evil they are and how badly they treated them.


5)Use the black South African for cheap labor to built a beautiful country that only the white can take advantage of. Similar to the US using slave labor to build cities.

Gee no wonder you are mad. Just think no more Free labor. Abusing human beings at your will. Why now you might have to get a real job, No more wife sitting around while her black housekeeper s cleaning her house and taking care of the kids for nothing, The little lady must not like it too much either. For the frst time she has to act like real wife and a mother. No more of you going in to the shed and having your way with the black housekeeper anymore.

Then to top it off you have the audacity to imply that the ANC and the Soviets was a bad. You all sound like Uncle Adolph's Nazi's hating the Communists. Like your regime is any better! How delusional can one get! At least the Communists helped win WW2. You animals do not have any redeeming qualities, not one. You animals do not understand that the Jews and the black South African probably would of welcomed living under a system that was implemented by by 12 headed monster with fire coming out of his mouth from Jupiter then you devils.

And one last thing it doesn't matter where the subject of this movie came from, All that is important to know is that he did not come from the depths of hell like you and your ancestors. Now go back into that cave before you end up on the wrong side of a Museum exhibit.

reply

Marbleann, I tried to read your posting, but couldn't make much sense of it. Take some writing classes, moron.

reply

Oops! My mistake! How in the world could I have possibly thought that a cave dweller, such as yourself, would be able to understand anything that was not written on a wall. My bad.
Now do yourself a favor and pick up that club you just dropped and whack yourself in the head a few times, just for thinking you could mingle with the rest of civilization if only for a day or two. Alas.

reply

More "intelligent discourse" from everyone's favorite racist! That reply is a new low for you. Ummm...do you understand sarcasm or, maybe, counter argument? Now, sarcasm IS considered a high form of comedy...so maybe it flew a bit over your head.

And how, exactly, was THIS hard to understand?

"2)Keep the black south Africans in constant fear for their lives and separate them from the white and have them live on squalor. So you enact laws like
a)The 1950 Population Registration Act
b}The Bantu Authorities Act of 1951
c)Criminal Law Amendment Act and the Public Safety Act in 1953

3)Make sure they separate the lighter skin blacks from the dark skin blacks. Even give them another name and call them Colored so they will not get together and form a powerful force against he the small minority of devils who are running the place. "

Its a numbered list with FAIRLY clearly expressed examples and opinions that you could attempt to refute or counter...why so difficult to grasp?

But, alas, your highly intelligent response was to call the poster a "moron" (that 'highly intelligent' bit is sarcasm as well...figured I'd point that out to you as you are having a problem with the concept.)

Have a wonderful day in your cave.

reply

So sad.

Listening to some folks around here, I tend to think that Stephen died for nothing. Ah! And, probably, of a pneumonia.

*beep* off, nazis.

reply

I do not agree with violence directed against civilians but I do feel that people are entitled to resist dictatorship by whatever means are available to them.
You seem to want to distort the truth and somehow imply that the ANC took it into their heads to start acting violently for no apparent reason. I mean what could they possibly have had to complain about?

The Truth and reconciliation proceedings granted amnesty to a large number of security services personnel who commited multiple murders in defence of the apartheid system but that doesn't seem to bother you at all.

The evil Mandela was of course in prison from 1963-90 with very little contact with the outside world and he definitely was not "masterminding" any campaigns of any sort during that period. In fact he was such a vicious thug that he insisted the only way for the country to move forward was through forgiveness and reconciliation rather than seeking revenge for the wrongs of the past.

As for wanton acts of barbarism, the apartheid era South African government was responsible for various massacres, innumerable acts of torture and murder and imposing a racially based dictatorship on an unwilling population.

Murder is abominable and whoever commits such a crime deserves the harshest of legal penalties. However the suggestion that there is some form of genocide taking place is laughable. Is there a concerted plot to wipe out the white population? Are whites murdered at a higher rate than everyone else? Has a substantial proportion of the white population been killed off? The answer to those questions is of course, no.

reply

Nukush, you write very well, so I can't decide whether you're a closet moron, or are merely one of the duped millions that bought into the Mandela myth and sees and understands only what fits into your one dimensional PC universe.
Mmmmm...now that I think about it, probably equal meaures of both.
The thrust of this posting is not to excuse the atrocities committed by both sides under apartheid, but to point out the revisionist lies in this movie.

'Catch a Fire' presents a sanitized, noble portrait of the ANC, encapsulated by the aforementioned statement by a character, "We (the ANC) do not kill indiscriminately." That is simply not true. The then South African Defence Force (SADF) are portrayed as racist, wanton killers. That's not true either. Anybody has a right to rise up against oppression, violently if necessary, but if a dramatic record (movie) is made describing those events, I believe that it's inherently moral and a duty of the film makers to present the events as factually as possible. This movie does not do that.

Interesting that you should bring up the ANC's sham, so-called 'Truth and Reconciliation' hearings, which was merely a kangaroo court, where hearsay masqueraded as 'truth' and revenge was disguised as reconciliation. Go onto the TRC website and take a look at the percentage of ANC killers granted amnesty as opposed to amnesty granted to former South African security personnel.
Case in point is convicted killer and fraudster Winnie Mandela given a free pass, as opposed to former 'Vlakplaas' mastermind Eugene De Kock, who is now serving multiple life sentences.
De Kock's targets were 'legitimate' operatives, whilst Winnie Mandela's included a fifteen year old boy murdered in her home, merely because there was suspicion he was a collaborator.
Winnie Mandela, by the way, was Nelson Mandela's conduit to the outside world, passing her coded instructions, which were then passed onto the ANC's armed wing.
My advice to you, genius, is also to check your facts, as there most certainly is a concerted genocide against whites (and the wider population) in what's left of South Africa now. Like I said, you see what you want to see, as I listed some stats describing this genocide in my original posting.

Once again, for your benefit: almost 2000 white South African farmers have been tortured and murdered, with nothing being stolen in the commission of these atrocities. Rape, murder and torture home invasions in predominately white areas are commonplace, also with robbery not a motive.
The ANC's response to this is the security minister telling whites in parliament "If you don't like the crime, simply leave the country."
Charming.
People are wantonly murdered, raped and robbed and the population is living under a virtual siege.

Interesting that you never touched the issue of Mandela's allegiance to the former Soviet Union, as well as to his allegiance with Cuba and its brutal ruler, a like minded thug named Fidel Castro.

You have a nice day now.

reply

[deleted]

I sided with Tim Robbins's character. I hated the fact the movie him to be the villain when he was trying to stop terrorists while Derek Luke is the hero. This is so typical of liberal's fanatsy world where the facts don't matter. I'm glad Joe Slovo is gone. He was nothing more than a terrorist. I also wonder why we didn't see the ANC's hatred of Blacks who opposed them and sided with the Boer. No one will argue Apartheid need to go but the fact remains, the Boer were not possible capable of genociding the Blacks, 4 million Afrikkaners versus 30 million Blacks. The Boers are the underdogs.

reply

Who cares? People always start crying and B*tchin when its their turn to get screwed. No one asked those assh*les to come there. The Natives didn't ask to know them. If this happened in a white country most of you b*tchin would go apesh*t. People who think like you always mess with people and cry when they do something back.

reply

to KEVY10667

WOULD YOU SAY THAN THAT PAUL REVIRE WAS AN AMERICAN TERRORIST TO THE BRITISH....?

reply

Comrade Slovo is a HERO, no less! He will always be remembered as a hero of the struggle.

Why be violent with a regime that refuses to be non-violent? The only solution can, and always will be, to meet that regime with a violence and savagery that they understand.

Mugabe justice to the white Afrikaner farmers of South Africa is coming!

reply

You racist rednecks are funny.

reply

Wow. Hate and discontent from both sides. Everybody should just kill each other and call it good. Then there will be the peace and brotherhood of the mass grave.

reply

[deleted]