Nelson Mandela

Detecting the Scam



Read Preface
and Chapters 1-3





Personalized—$25 (includes shipping and handling within USA)




Sign up for latest news on scams and latest audio and video material and upcoming radio schedule.



Obama, Osama and Trump — And Nelson Mandela's Ghost

(May 7, 2011)


Tell a Friend

a brief overview of Apartheid (Part 1)

To fully appreciate what Nelson Mandela faced in his historic negotiations with the South Afrfican government is to understand "apartheid" and what it stood for. The following is an extract from Detecting the Scam: Nelson Mandela's Gift...

* * * * *

Apartheid literally means “apartness” or “separateness.” For three hundred years, most Afrikaners simply believed that the white race was superior to all others. The racial supremacy that apartheid sought to legislate represented their white South African values of three hundred years. They saw any threat of the removal of apartheid as a threat to their fundamental personal and cultural identity. As Nelson
Mandela and his colleagues began their negotiations for the peaceful removal of apartheid, they understood what they faced.

In 1948, the National Party, led by Dr. D. F. Malan, won the all-white election. They ran on the apartheid platform relying on white fear and anxiety—and there was plenty of that to spare. As the new prime minister acknowledged victory, he addressed the “colored question” and reflected the attitude of a majority of Afrikaners:

“The colored question is rapidly increasing in seriousness and urgency. I consider apartheid—that’s the separation policy—to be South Africa’s last chance to remain a white
man’s country…It lays a tremendous responsibility upon those who govern the country. A responsibility which the white man feels is his duty to help these underdeveloped people who are not capable of governing themselves. It would fall to pieces if we were not there to look after them.”

In fairness, not all Afrikaners embraced apartheid’s goals. The outgoing prime minister, General Smuts―himself an Afrikaner—saw apartheid as “a crazy concept, born of prejudice and fear.” He was correct.

How best to describe the injustice and horror of apartheid? After apartheid ended, South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission issued a report. The introduction to Volume 7 would help shine a light on the evil that was apartheid:

“This volume is a tribute to the victims of Apartheid and a living monument to those who sacrificed so much in order that we could all enjoy the fruits of democracy. It contains the stories of those who came forward to speak of their suffering…

These summaries cannot do justice to the magnitude of the violations experienced by victims. They do not always convey a sense of the lasting impact of the violations, nor do they describe the wider picture of abuse, discrimination and human rights violations that Apartheid wreaked primarily upon the black citizens of the country.

It has been very difficult to describe acts of torture in these summaries. In most cases, acts of torture have been abbreviated to state that a person was tortured without
necessarily specifying each method such as electric shocks, suspension from a tree, the ‘helicopter’ method, attempted suffocation by the ‘tubing’ method, submersion in water and so on.

Although rape and other forms of sexual torture were undoubtedly part of the repertoire of torturers, details are generally not included.

Where details are specified in the summaries, these should serve to remind readers of the full horror and scope of the use of torture in South Africa during the mandate period.”


* * * * *


In Part 2, we will explore what Nelson Mandela faced...