-Caveat Lector-
I obtained this from would you believe it the 'strange' library of
Johannesburg (the founder was a mr strange)
Written from a conservative (very) viewpoint, and fighting a war that has
been subsequently lost, nontheless its vcomments on propaganda are useful to
remember. The points can be used against the document itself.
Enjoy it (or hate it), it is worth reading alternative view points
John
The liberal idealist can never see that he is being used and manipulated
with cynical contempt by satanic powers, or that his potential for unwitting
debacle is correspondingly higher the more revered or important he is in his
community. The liberal never realises that he has been conditioned by
emotive writing or oratory into a masochistic and morbid hatred of self, his
own race, and his own culture. His guilt complex has been implanted in his
sub-conscious mind by constant exposure to films, books, newspapers, and
propaganda. He revels in the horrors of the slave trade, the concentration
camps, the worst aspects of colonialism, the hard-ships of the poor, the
inhumanities of the industrial revolution, the wars against the Zulus, the
extermination of the Bushmen, the
iniquities of racial discrimination, the arrogance of the aristocracy. His
guilt becomes unbearable and he searches for a paradise on earth.
Malcolm Muggeridge, once himself a liberal and the darling of the
media, underwent a conversion to Christianity while working on a satire on
Christ. He has become a thorn in the media's side, because having lauded his
intelligence they cannot now brand him
as a rightwing microcephalic, the standard technique used. Oswald Spengler
commented on the alliance of the money powers with intellect. How automatic
is the coupling of leftwing and intellectuall
Muggeridge said recently, "Liberalism will come to be seen as the
most destructive force of our time. Compared to the long-term effects of a
Bertrand Russell, an Eleanor Roosevelt or a Gilbert Murray, Hitler will come
to be seen as a Father Christmas and Stalin as a small-time gangster".
He is not exaggerating. Once the slow poison of liberalism is
injected into the body politic its death throes are imminent.
Concern for injustice and alleviation of misery are obviously
important human ideals. Eradication of evil and of suffering is highly
andesirable and ennobling. Man has a duty to his fellow man, to the God who
created him. There is perhaps no more noble
ideal than to leave the world better or richer in some way for your having
been here. This is what the true conservative desires. While acknowledging
the explosion of technical and scientific knowledge and the inevitability of
change, the conservative tries to keep hold of those things whose values
have survived the ages.
However, the conservative is sane .enough to realise that injustice
is a fact of life, that rank is a natural and wholesome thing existing not
only in all societies but in the pecking-order of the animal kingdom, that
the inequality of man is an obvious truism, and that violent revolution has
never once in the world's entire history improved the quality of life. He
knows that tradition and security are essential to man's psyche and that the
continuity of the past and the present are needed to face the future. He
tries for con-structive evolution but because he is a realist he does not
expect miracles.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a form of alienation or withdrawal
from reality. Depending on degree, the liberal is either neurotic or
psychotic. Reality to the liberal is inward and subjective. So powerful a
hold does the ideal of universal peace and brotherhood have on his
subjective imagination, that he projects it outwards and apprehends the real
world in terms of the ideal. So precious is the dream that he deliberately
excludes the harsh realities which threaten to destroy it. His attitude is
that of the dreamer willing himself not to waken. The deliberate exclusion
of : the facts of everyday life is alienation or mental illness.
Another obvious symptom of the liberal insanity is a complete
inability to reconcile one's own behaviour with the theoretical ideal, or to
see any incongruity, or to feel hypocritical. The average liberal pays his
servants minimal wages and is the very first to move out of a neighbourhood
that has turned multiracial. The liberal conscience is curiously selective.
If one Black terrorist should die at the hands of the White security police,
the liberal screams of anguish trouble the heavens. If Black terrorists
bayonet a three-month-old White baby girl, as happened in Plumtree,
Rhodesia, tossing the little corpse around in fun, or shoot down an unarmed
passenger airliner, or a Black regime slaughters thousands of its own
citizens, nothing but the mildest of mild condemnation is heard, a moral tut
tut!
Strangely enough it is not simply rank hypocrisy. It is selective
vision. Joyce Cary has given the best portrait in modern literature of this
type of mentality in his creation of Chester Nimmo, radical politician and
Labourite, in Except the Lord; Nimmo sees only
what he wants to see and convinces himself that nothing else is to be seen.
He then further blinds himself and others by the spell-binding power of his
eloquence, an eloquence based on emotional, not rational, conviction.
An obvious and very real flaw in the Utopian ideal is that not only
are individuals within a homogeneous group unequal, races themselves are,
too. The known civilisations of the world have been Yellow, Brown and White.
The Black races of the world have
never. invented the wheel, a written language, or the most rudimentary
technology. A host of ingenious but fallacious excuses are manufactured by
the one-world planners to explain away this un-comfortable fact, most of
them based on environmental disadvantage. They are ludicrously easy to
disprove. The Kenya highlands have an almost identical climate to that of
Greece. Greece produced one of the greatest cultures of all time. The Kenya
highlands produced the Mau Mau. It is not necessary to labour the point.
The American Army Alpha and Beta Verbal and Non-Verbal I.Q. tests
used on over twenty-million soldiers show beyond the possibility of
statistical error or sentimental apology that the average Negro
intelligence is well below that of the average White man. The federally
financed Coleman report on academic achieve-ment in American schools and
universities on a sampling of
600,000 students confirmed this. The discrepancy could not be
attributed to social discrimination or prejudice, because the Oriental
American, who also suffers discrimination, scored as high as,and sometimes
higher than the Whites. The Coleman report was immediately withdrawn from
circulation and is virtually unobtainable.
Scientists of the very highest academic qualification and training
who have tried to tell the truth have been vilified: Dr. Porteus, inventor
of the Porteus maze test, and Dr. Putnam, to mention just two. The truth is
that the average White I.Q. is 100 and the average Negro I.Q. 84. This
statement does not preclude the actuality of above average Negro
intelligence, nor does it imply that all Whites are intellectually superior
to all Blacks. Such a proposition is palpabIy ridiculous. What does need to
be considered, however, is whether the current drive for universal academic
education is the panacea it is supposed to be. To encourage
aspiration beyond capability is to breed frustration and hatred, and a
feeling of inferiority that finds in violence its only outlet.
It must be repeated that the money power uses liberal senti-ment to
disguise its real purposes. The call for post-war independence of the
English, Dutch, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Belgian colonies was
designed to replace stability with unrest, harmony with hatred, progress
with anarchy, and security with terror. Once the quality of life
deteriorates, a country is ripe for the taking. A Black state is more easily
controlled from outside than a White. The cries of liberty, human rights,
democracy, one-man-one-vote, majority rule, freedom, racial prejudice et
al, are merely a smoke screen behind which the take-overs of mineral rights
and political power are made in secret. The current agitation over South
West Africa (Namibia) has allegedly been occasioned by the discovery of vast
deposits of uranium oxide that the bankers naturally wish to control.
The encroachment of Communism on the African continent is
terrifying. The financial support from South Africa even more terrifying.
And still the voice of the liberal twit echoes across the land: We must make
concessions, we must give way, we have no
alternative, we must share power, we are all of us guilty, we must subsidise
more feeding schemes, give more education to the Blacks, do away with
censorship, abolish detention without trial,encourage integration and bow to
world opinion.
One-World Hegemony
World opinion is, of course, another myth - there is simply no such
thing. What there is, is the world opinion of a number of newspaper
.editorials and a vast mass of people sympathetic to South Africa or else
completely uninformed. The names of Gary Player and Chris Barnard are
associated with South Africa by many people overseas, and that, in 90% of
cases, is the sum total of knowledge.
Nothing will appease the international bankers but total surrender of our
country, and every concession made is another step down a slippery slope to
anarchy. The liberal never thinks this far. Tragically, he never thinks
beyond an immediate alleged injustice. The liberal feels. To say he thinks
at all is to give him, in the final analysis, the benefit of the doubt.
It would be fitting to conclude this chapter with Lenin's formula
for revolution, lest the critic feel I have been unduly harsh. May I
reiterate two of his remarks: "The Communist world will be built by
non-Communist hands",and, "Liberals and idealists are
Communism's useful idiots".
Lenin's formula for revolution is always the same. The exact nature
of the agitation is adapted to suit local conditions. Here it is: its Divide
the people. (Create class hatreds. Create and identify a target enemy, e.g.
landlords, Whites, Blacks, Christians, Jews,
Moslems, a particular group, the government). Get the people on the streets.
(Marches, demonstrations, protests, strikes).
Create the semblance of popular support. (Revolutionary groups to obtain
maximum publicity and media support; create martyrs).
Provoke violence and anarchy. (Arson, looting, bombing, terrorism).
Nullify opposition and liquidate potential threats. (Kill police, teachers,
priests, officials, intellectuals on the wrong side).
Take-over can now be achieved with minimal resistance.
In order to implement this plan, no holds are barred.. Grievances are
created or magnified, agent provocateurs sent m, key positions in education
and government infiltrated, saboteurs let loose, terrorists trained. Our
best defence is the enlightenment of our populace on the methods used,
instruction at nationwide level on the true nature of Communism and its
backers, and heavy penalties for papers that publish lies, distortions and
demoralising material.
Liberalism should be regarded as an evil. Emphasis should be laid on
spiritual and ethical values, on goodness, responsibility, patriotism, duty,
racial pride, integrity.virtue,
Above all, we should declare our trust and belief in God and ask
divine protection; for the power of money, of Mammon on earth, seems at
times well nigh invincible.
Chapter 3
MIND CONTROL: THE GREAT STERIOPTICON
AND HOW IT WORKS
"The vested interests of our age . . have constructed a wonderful
machine, which we shall call the Great Steriopticon (Magic Lantern). It is
the function of this machine to project selected pictures of life in the
hope that what is seen will be
imitated. All of us of the West who are within the long reach of technology
are sitting in the audience. We are told the time to laugh and the time to
cry, and signs are not wanting that the audience grows ever more responsive
to its cues . . . The Great Steriopticon like most gadgets has been
progressively improved and added to until today it is a machine of three
parts: the press, the motion pictures and the radio".*
Since Professor Richard M. Weaver wrote these words, the i fourth
part, television, has been added. The audience has indeed grown "ever more
responsive to its cues", to the extent that television has created a
twilight world where the boundary between reality and fantasy is lost in
shadows. Our understanding of the world and the events of the day, our
ideas, hopes and aspirations, our indignations and hatreds, our sympathies,
are moulded and fashioned for us by the four component parts of an infernal
machine.
The oldest part of the steriopticon is the newspaper. Alas, the
press1 As Mr. W.D. Chalmers succinctly expresses it, "It is one of the
saddest examples on the modern scene of a potential power for good that has
been used for ill. The motto of some papers might almost seem to be:
'Whatsoever things are dishonourable, whatso-
'Ideas Have Consequences, Richard M. Weaver (University of Chicago Press,
1948).
ever things are impure, whatsoever things are unlovely, think on these
things"'. * *
A newspaper is dependent on its advertising revenue, which in turn
depends upon circulation figures. To appeal to the masses, or so runs the
argument, a newspaper must deal in sensationalism and crudity. But is this
indeed so? Even if it is, does it mean catering exclusively for the lowest
tastes7 Shakespeare's plays appeal to a widely diversified audience. For the
groundlings or their modern equivalents, are scenes of blood and gore and
bawdy humour. For the intelligentsia, insight.sophisticated wit and sublime
metaphysical
The analogy is admittedly not exact, but newspapers could include
worthwhile and uplifting material without impairing circu-lation. Nor would
such material have so restricted a readership as might be imagined. Dickens
commented frequently on the solid good sense and decency of the working man
of his day. The type of reading that the working man preferred was to a
large extent of a moral or religious nature. Early trade union literature
and propa-ganda was garnished with texts and quotations from the Bible.
Simple working men would gather together to discuss and digest what they had
read.
The whole tenor of Victorian literature was moral in tone and
emphasised such virtues as self-sacrifice, patriotism, honesty and honour.
The Victorian age was one of turmoil and change but it was nevertheless a
great era because Englishmen were proud and patriotic, and the best of them
imbued with a sense of duty and responsibility. The prevailing mood was to a
large degree the result of what people read.
What we have to face today is a bemused and disoriented mass of
people brought to a wretched moral state by the media. The Great
Steriopticon has reduced man's spirituality, whetted his appetite for vice
and perversion, sung the siren values of material-
ism, confused his instincts and intellect, and encouraged hopeless-ness and
despair. It is not the newspaper that has to cater for the depraved tastes
of the masses. It is the newspapers that have them-selves created the demand
for such taste.
Were this all that newspapers had to answer for, the situation might
still be remedied. But the press is controlled by the inter-
"The Conspiracy of Truth, W.D. Chalmers (Dolphin Press, 1978).
20
national financiers and all the news agencies and wire services are in their
hands, as are the world's most influential political magazines. This does
not mean that every newspaper editor is a conscious agent of the conspiracy,
although, of course, many are. The pressure exerted on newspaper editors is
financial. Articles of which the owners disapprove are followed by threats
from major financial combines to withdraw advertising support. Reporters
quickly learn to fall into line. They realise that promotion depends on
liberal sentiment and that personal opinions or outlook must be tailored to
overall policy.
The much-vaunted freedom of the press is a strange one. Free-dom of
the press means freedom to distort, freedom to lie, freedom to conceal
facts, freedom to cast aspersion and innuendo, freedom to sow discord,
freedom to intrude on grief and privacy, and freedom to confuse.
The parameters of permitted debate are carefully set and
pre-scribed. Certain subjects are absolutely taboo. The newspapers
have scores of negatively loaded words to turn discussion away from
dangerous areas. The conditioned masses react to them like animals up
against an electrified fence, turning away in panic. Such words include
racism, neo-Nazi, prejudice, verkramp or bigoted,
discrimination, anti-semitic, extremist, neo-fascist, colonialist, Gestapo,
secret police, White supremacist, concentration camp, and a host of others.
Conversely, the positively charged words, the electric cattle-prodders,are
verfig or enlightened, responsible, liberal. democratic, freedom, new
dispensation, progressive, moderate, reasonable and tolerant.
Should any doubt that the press is controlled world wide, then he
must be able to explain how an unknown figure like Steve Biko can become a
universal martyr overnight, and why the orches-trated cries of outrage are
not heard when the Communists kill a quarter of a million people in
Cambodia.
As to the subservience of the press to money pressures, who should
know better than John Swinton, one-time editor of the New York Times. At an
American Press Association dinner he said,
"There is no such thing as an independent press in America . . . not a man
among you dares to utter his honest opinion. It is the duty of a journalist
to lie, revile, to toady at the feet of Mammon . . . We are marionettes
These men pull the strings and we dance . . .
we are intellectual prostitutes".(The New York Times, owned by the
Sulzbergers, the Washington Post, owned by the Meyers, and Time-Life
magazines, owned by Edgar Bronfman, are directly controlled by and are
agents of the money power; in addition, Sulzberger's daughter Marian Dreyfus
is married to the managing editor of Time, Henry Grunwald; Eugene Meyer was
first president of the World Bank)*.
At this stage I beg forbearance from those trained in the
disciplines of English or literary criticism. I wish to include one short
analysis of a piece of journalism taken from the Sunday Tribune (South
Africa) of July 1,19i'9, to illustrate the technique of emotive
writing. To many it will seem that I am stating the obvious, but to others
unaccustomed to critical reading, the explanation and exposure of technique
may be of value.
The article concerns an Afrikaans professor of history, who was
tarred and feathered while making an address to a university
audience, his assailants believing him to be betraying Afrikaner tradition
and heritage. The professor was stating his belief that in the interests of
harmonious race relations the Day of the Covenant should no longer be
celebrated. The Boer pioneers made a vow to God that if they were granted
victory in their battle against the
Zulus, they would celebrate that victory in perpetuity with prayer and
thanksgiving. It is not my part to weigh the merits or demerits of this
particular case. The assailants were fined by a magistrate's court. All I
wish to do is expose the blatant bias of the newspaper report. Here it is
(excerpt only):
BOER REICH MARCHES AGAIN. . . LATEST VICTIM OF A.W. B. BULLY BOYS
Professor Floors van luursveld said, hours after the fining of the
men of tar and feather: "The court's verdict removed the tar from me but
I'll carry a murk until my death". He then told of his anguish and the
nightmares which haunted him - the scars of his brush with AWB (Afrtkaner
Weerstund Beweging). But through it all the plucky Pretoria professor stands
firm - in the face of hate.
His is a no-budge stand on what he believes - the Day of the Covenant should
lose its Sunday status in the interests of all-race relations.
And right behind him is his wife, Helet, who told how her husband
shook and shivered in his dreams of torment. At night she gently touches him
and draws him from his nightmares . . .
'Re Sulzbergers, etc., see Gary Allen, Who Controls the Press.
Yes, Professor van Jaarsveld, the gentle grey-haired historian and
grandfather, shows the scars of his belief. But his words are still strong .
. .
Examine the headline first. "Boer Reich" simultaneously conjures up
the spectre of Nazism and reminds readers that many Afrikaners supported
Germany during the Second World War.
"Marches again" suggests the tramp of jackboots and the resur-rection of
Fascist philosophy."Latest Victim" and "Bully Boys" are highly loaded
emotional phrases to suggest the persecution of innocent people by
Gestapo-like sadists. The professor will carry the psychological marks of
the experience to his grave. The tar may have been removed, but he is
"haunted by nightmares", "scarred', and "anguished'. He is described as a
"gentle, grey-haired historian and grandfather". The image created
here is of a defenceless old man, an academic, gentle and
kindly-natured, assaulted and battered by young thugs. Despite his frailty
he "stands firm", he is the "plucky Pretoria professor"(all acknowledge
alliteration ability) suffering Christ-like "in the face of hate". His wife
testifies that her husband "shook and shivered in his dreams", indeed is
still "shivering and shaking" until her soft feminine touch, the hand of the
angel of mercy on the fevered brow, brings him out of his "nightmare".
To the initiated the technique is so crude as to be laughable.
Unfortunately a large number of people, in fact a majority of people read
quite uncritically. Their attitudes towards this particular incident will be
moulded and formed without their realising how or why. They have no more
independence of judgment than Pavlov's dogs.The bell has been sounded and
the liberal salivation response is initiated.
Thus the minds of men are pre-conditioned until their attitudes are
no longer their own.Emotional convictions are planted in them. Constant
repetition of emotive phrases has its deadly effects.
A lie repeated often enough becomes accepted as truth. Infinitely more
diabolic and effective is a repetition pattern of which the average
individual has little or no awareness. The man in the street is a "victim",
a victim of brain-washing and brain-processing. He
"shows the scars of his belief" in his inability to deal rationally with
life's problems.
Russia has a Department of Disinformation. Its function is the deliberate
dissemination of false data, misleading information, rumour and conflicting
reports. The name is genuine, not satirical, and testifies to the prescient
genius of George Orwell who in 1984 has "doublespeak" and a Department of
Peace to deal with war. The masters of Communism are also the masters of the
Press, so it is not unexpected that a similar technique will be found in
newspapers.
The public is fed thousands of snippets of information, some true,
some false, some relevant, some irrelevant, some corroborative, some
conflicting. No clear pattern emerges from the mosaic and the average man
shrugs his shoulders and gives up trying to understand the world situation.
Politics becomes a thing apart, as do economics and foreign policy. He turns
instead to sporting reports, the contemplation of photographed female
anatomy, or the salacious details of some divorce case. Otherwise he reads
an article such as the one analysed, where the issues are "clear cut" and
easy to understand, and he can feel the righteous indignation expected of
him. This withdrawal from active understanding of current affairs makes it
infinitely easier for the bankers to push governments in the direction they
desire.
It is not uninteresting that modem art is designed to have exactly
the same kind of effects. Because planted academics and prestigious journals
and critics praise to the skies painting and sculpture that has no
conceivable aesthetic value, the average man begins to distrust his own
judgment. Not only that but his own aesthetic appreciation is warped by
constant exposure to the ugly, the maimed, the distorted.
I can hear the howls of protest reaching a crescendo but will not
retract the statement. History abounds in examples in art and music where
new trends have been rejected and reviled before finding acceptance. This
point is conceded. But the situation today is unlike anything in the past.
There qre no criteria, so that ludicrous situations abound, such as a
chimpanzee smearing paint around on canvas and his master having the
resultant production hung in a gallery and acclaimed as a masterpiece. (Pun
intentional). Picasso gave 90% of his profits to Communism and admitted to
hoaxing the public.
Modern art is alien, unnatural, profane, and calculated to destroy
our Western heritage and civilisation. It is a.facet of the march towards
One-World totalitarianism.
But to return to the Press. The emotional cries for Press freedom
emanate largely from the Press itself, and it is not a little ironic that
such cries are heard only in democratic or free countries. What "freedom"
has the Press behind the Iron Curtain or in the multitude of Black
dictatorships in Africa? Having played a major role in subverting and
undermining a stable democracy, the Press then becomes strangely reticient
about its own suppression. Unrestricted Press freedom leads inevitably to
unrestricted
Press restriction under a newly installed Communist regime, but no funeral
orations are heard, no elegiacs published.
"The public has a right to know" is a favourite slogan. "An informed
electorate is essential for Democracy" is another. These phrases actually
mean, divorced from their doublespeak gloss, "The public has a right to
know only what we wish it to know", and "A misinformed electorate is
essential for tyranny". As one typical illustration of what the public is,
and is not allowed to know, I cite the case of C. Gordon Tether,
distinguished former financial columnist of the Financial Times of London.
This illustration is a precis of an article by Ivor Benson in his
small book A Time to Speak (Canadian Intelligence Publications), and I
acknowledge indebtedness.
C. Gordon Tether's regular feature articles on world business and
economic trends appeared for twenty years, five times a week, prominently
displayed in the Financial Times. He enjoyed the respect and admiration of a
sophisticated and critical readership.
Then, on April 19, 1974, Tether stumbled across a Bilderberg conference held
in a French Alpine village called Megeve. The venue was Hotel Mont d'Abrois
owned by Baron Edmund de Rothschild. Nearly a thousand gendarmes with
armoured cars, rifles and machine guns ensured that no unauthorised person,
including the local villagers,approached the Hotel. Among the delegates were
Prince Bernhard, Baron de Rothschild, David and Nelson Rockefeller, Denis
Healey (British Chancellor of the Exchequer), multi-millionaire Swedish
banker Marcus Wallenburg, Helmut Schmidt, Joseph J. Johnson of the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, and Helmut Sonnenfeldt of the American
State Department.
Yet the world Press had been given no inkling of so obviously
important a meeting, and Tether, with all his twenty years of financial
journalism had not yet even heard of the Bilderbergers!
Naturally he was intrigued and began probing, bringing his keen intellect
and reporter's instincts for a scoop into his investigation. He began to
write about the Bilderbergers with increasing excite-ment.
Then things began to happen. Without a word of explanation from his
editor, Tether's features were frequently dropped. Tether naturally resented
this censorship and fought it bitterly, with the result that he was
summarily fired by the editor, M.H. Fisher. Tether stated in public on
February 2, 1975, that his articles on gold and the Bilderberg price
manipulations had been suppressed, and later challenged his dismissal in
court. The court upheld the right of an editor to dismiss an employee.*
If this is the kind of treatment that can be meted out to a man of
Tether's standing, whose name, incidentally, is in the Guinness Book of
Records as"the longest running columnist in British journalism", and
of whom Harold Wilson had spoken as being "one of the most distinguished
journalists", then the pressure on lesser mortals is easy to understand. The
public had a right to know what was behind such secrecy, such security, such
a gathering of the richest men in the world. Or so Tether thought With such
a notable example of liberal "tolerance" and "concern for truth" in
front of their eyes, how many journalists are going to have the courage to
follow in Tether's footsteps7
Another important aspect of the distortion mechanism of the Press is
to emphasise every abuse of authority and every con-ceivable injustice in
the country to be overthrown, while allaying all fears about Communist
imperialism in subjugated or imperilled lands. Let us illustrate this idea
using South Africa and Angola as examples. Here are some statements made by
a Mr. Ernest0 Mulato, a key Unita official, whose party is waging
clandestine guerilla warfare against the Angolan Communist government. Let
us admit the possibility of bias and believe only one tenth of what he says.
The picture is still horrific: 0 Every church, mission school and
hospital in central Angola has been destroyed or closed. These
institutions served over 400,000 people. The government has not
attempted to replace these vital
??C. Gordon Tether now contributes his Lombard column to the Washington D.C.
conservative weekly newspaper The Spotlight (300 Independence Ave., S.E.).
services. All those connected with the churches have lost every-thing they
ever owned. All church property has been confiscated and all clergy either
banished or imprisoned. Today all clergy in central Angola live in Unita
camps to avoid persecution, and carry on their work there.
In northern Angola all Baptist churches have been razed. It is
estimated that 200,000 of the Baptists have fled into Zaire , . . One
mission in southern Angola . . . Hualando, founded by Black Americans over
fifty years ago . . . lies in ruins . . . Angola has become a vast cemetry
and concentration camp. Concentration camps have been set up at Sao Nicolau
outside Mocamedes and near Saurimo in the Luanda district. There are
political prisons in Luanda, Huambo, Luso and Sa da Bandiera. Prisoners
include nationalists elements of the MPLA, former party officials and army
officers, Jehovah's Witnesses, followers of Simon Taco the religious leader,
FNLA and Unita sympathisers, Catholic and Protestant clergy. Recently when
Unita took over a government prison in Serpo Pinto it released 800 prisoners
who had been living in sub-human conditions.
Unita is amazed and baffled at the attitudes adopted by US
politicians and the media. With Angola turned into a vast Gulag the people
of Angola yet hear the Netto government described as 'pragmatic, moderate
and modernistic'. The Cuban occupying force is described as 'stabilising'.
(End of quote from 'The Citizen', Johannesburg, 28 June 1979; review of a
book to be published, 'A Conversation with Ernest0 Mulato').
Should Mr. Mulato read this book his amazement and bafflement might
be assuaged, for his last remark is very much to the point, and illustrates
the perplexity of those who imagine Russia and the American State Department
to be on opposite sides.
The above report was taken from the Citizen which until 1978 was a
South African Government-funded newspaper.The hysterical campaign against
the Citizen which led to the South African Information Department debacle of
1978/79, was initiated because the agents of the money power in South Africa
were panicked into action by a series of articles in that paper entitled
Secret United States War Against South Africa. The articles were written by
Aida Parker but it seems certain the material was provided by the Bureau
of State Security. Here was factual, detailed, authentic and documented
evidence of the role played by
America in "destabilising" South Africa. The articles revealed amongst other
things that the Ford Foundation had equipped reading rooms in Soweto and
other Black townships with books on Black power and the French Revolution,
that the Carnegie Endow-ment for World Peace had drawn up an attack plan on
South Africa through the United Nations, complete to the last details on
logistics, expense and troop nationalities, that the same organ-isations had
donated over one-million dollars to defend terrorists brought to trial in
the Republic, that the World Council of Churches was the chief source of
supply for terrorist funds and that this money came primarily not from
church contributions but from the Rockefellers.
Not one major newspaper in South Africa, English-language or
Afrikaans, commented on these articles, proof in itself of the truth of what
they contained. Had there been inaccuracy or error the Press would have torn
them to pieces. As it was, 'the blanket of silence' treatment was invoked,
while behind the scenes the instruction to a select committee given
unlimited funds was: "Find out who is behind the Citizen and have it stopped
quickly".
But to return to the Mulato excerpt. The Citizen at least published
an article hostile to Communism. The South African Press seldom refers to
the real state of affairs in Angola or Mozambique, preferring to talk about
economic interdependence (a euphemism for financial and technical aid from
White South Africa) and the need for "accommodation" and "good
neighbourliness". Public attention is never directed at the kind of
conditions Mr. Mulato describes. Yet were such conditions to exist in South
Africa, perpetrated by Whites against Blacks, the fury, hysteria and
ululation of the United Nations and the World Press would literally be
beyond belief.
The following small excerpt from the Pretoria News, July 20, 1979,
may illustrate the point further:
"A little boy who would have been three tomorrow was shot dead by a
lone terrorist this week after he had gallantly tried to save his
grandmother. The boy, Albertus Smit, had seen his grand-mother cut down by
terrorist bullets on Wednesday evening. According to his mother, Mrs.
Susanna Smit, little Albertus had run to his grandmother, Mrs. Susanna Botha
(SO) when he saw her shot at the Botha family farm, and had grabbed her gun.
The boy ran into the farmhouse with the gun, put it on a table, and then ran
out toward the terrorist, who shot him dead".
No comment is made by the paper on the sort of mentality that can
shoot a woman of fifty and a baby of three in cold blood, because the
terrorist was Black and the victims White Rhodesians. Public sensibility has
been so blunted that unless screaming headlings in three inch letters
proclaim a moral outrage, no reaction is forthcoming. Furthermore, the
artificially engendered guilt complex in the minds of brainwashed
Whites inhibits indignant protest.
But imagine the same scene with a change of the dramatis personae.
The grandmother and the baby are now the victims of a member of the Gestapo
during the Second World War. By now they would have been deified and
cannonised, films would have been made, songs and ballads composed, plays
written, memorials
built, streets and universities named after them, and the blood-stained
clothes probably kept in a special shrine visited by thousands of tourists
annually. Memorial services would be held every year to keep the event fresh
in the public imagination. But little Albertus Smit gets one photograph in
the newspaper and will be forgotten tomorrow by all but his parents who
witnessed the ghastly atrocity, and who must have suffered as much as it is
humanly possible to suffer.
In the United Kingdom about ninety percent of muggings are
perpetrated by Blacks on Whites. Under the Race Relations Act newspaper
reports are not allowed to state the colour of the assailant. No such law
exists in South Africa, but it is not un-interesting to see that several
newspapers have begun a policy of not mentioning colour in cases of rape,
murder, and assault, unless it is White upon Black. This is to ensure thai
multiracialism encounters no hindrance and that the unfortunate correlation
between crimes of violence and skin colour is not as immediately apparent as
it might be.
Multiracialism is not simply a liberal ideal based on the belief of
the equality of man. It is a deliberate and diabolical program to bastardise
the White races and dilute their precious gene-pool, because the resultant
rabble will be easier to control. Only one race will maintain its purity and
thereby its superiority and that race will be the Jews. We can learn a lot
from the Jews about the value of racial cohesiveness and the strength to be
derived from a sense of identity.
It is necessary once again to reiterate the conservative view-point.
The White conservative does not believe in marriages across the colour line.
Firstly he is proud of his race and the precious genetic inheritance of
intelligence and initiative passed down to
him, the qualities that have made Western civilisation. Secondly he believes
that the unfortunate results of interbreeding between races are everywhere
to be seen, and that the coloured peoples experience rejection by both
parent-races and are frequently frustrated and. unhappy. However, he does
not assume arrogant or automatic superiority over all other races. He
respects intelligence and merit in any individual displaying it and does not
object to advancing people of real ability irrespective of colour or
religion.
But he does object to a deliberate lowering of standards to
accommodate the masses, a kind of reduction to the lowest common
denominator. He believes enforced integration to be infinitely more harmful
than enforced segregation, and he has the example of the chaotic conditions
in America to bear witness to his belief. Because the conservative is a
realist and not a dreamer he realises that however attractive the ideal of
mixed residential areas might be, such areas inevitably become Blums. Real
life falls far short of the ideal and unfortunately we live in a real world.
A main function of the Press is to engender in the White man a
guilty consciousness that he is not entitled to the privileges he enjoys.
The plight of the underprivileged is constantly pubiicised and emphasis is
laid on conscience and Christian precepts. This softening-up process
facilitates the establishment of welfare projects and socialism whereby the
hardworking, the productive and intelligent elements of society are taxed to
provide funds to support drop-outs and incompetents. The plight of
Anglo-Saxon Americans or WASPS is a tragic illustration of the technique.
Not only is the economy of their country now in ruins, but they have
virtually beconie aliens in the country their forebears made great. The
tentacles of "Federal Aid" have bankrupted them to support Puerto Ricans,
Negroes,. Mexicans and half-breeds in their own country and to subsidise
Communism abroad.
The technique of implanting guilt in hitherto healthy minds depends
on emotive writing and careful selection of material. The patterns of
emphases and reticences, of volubility and silence have already been
illustrated and require no further elaboration.
However, fairly minor areas like newspaper book reviews are not unimportant.
Books aimed at undermining the status quo or which deal with White
oppression always receive maximum publicity. For example, Roots by Alex
Haley was acclaimed and lauded world
wide, reviewed and serialised in some newspapers, commented on in all.
Interestingly enough, and this has received no newspaper publicity, writer
Harold Courlander sued Haley for plagiarism recently and accepted several
hundred thousand dollars to settle out of court. Haley acknowledged that
three passages referring to the grandfather "Kunta Kinta" inadvertentlycame
from Courlander's book, The African. Courlander's lawyers, however, cited 81
plagiarised passages1
On the other hand, books which present another side of the picture
are hot reviewed at all. One of the greatest of modern English novelists is
Joyce Gary,who had practical experience of early Africa as an administrator
in colonial Nigeria. Mister Johnson, Aissa Saved, The African Witch and An
American Visitor are four really brilliant and sensitive novels that present
a balanced and sympathetic account in fictional form of the cultural clash
of Europe and Africa. But Cary is almost unknown to the reading public
because he refuses to present a doctrinaire account of White iniquity. Cary
sees both sides of the picture. Cary saw the often tragi-comic effects of
prejudice and misunderstanding and the pathos of the breakdown of tribal
society and lore, but he was prepared to show that colonialism brought
immense benefits as well, freedom from ignorance and disease, from famine
and inter-tribal slaughter, and that it ended a primitive isolation that had
impeded all progress.
The newspapers have turned the words "discrimination" and "racism"
into negatively loaded and meaningless terms. "Discriminate" means to
distinguish between good and evil or to choose a course from several
alternatives. It implies judgment and taste. It no longer has these meanings
but has become a vague synonym for bias and prejudice or even a form of
abuse. So, too; with racism. "Racism" means pride in one's race and
certainly does not imply contempt or disdain for other races, the meaning
now attached to it. Constant association of racism with fascism and the
spectre of the concentration camps has been used to discourage participation
in rightwing activities: in this way corrective steps away from the current
chaos of the twentieth century are prevented; rightwing thinking leads to
genocide/
Any book, such as Professor *'s The * of the * , which challenges
the *, is banned world wide. The book appears to be a scientific,
unemotional, carefully researched and documented explanation of why the
author believes the figure of *to be false. If he is wrong, why not subject
his every statement to searching public scrutiny and examination? Refusal to
do so and to ban the book instead can only strengthen the convic-tion of an
ever-increasing number of people that * is telling the truth. As Milton
remarked, "Who ever knew truth to be put to the worse in a free and open
encounter?" If Professor *'s book is not the truth, public debate and
intelligent analysis will quickly demon-strate the worthlessness of its
contents. Why is such debate not allowed? Why has the book not been reviewed
by any major news-paper in the world, and why is it unobtainable through
normal channels?
Another important method of engendering guilt is by skilful use of
Press photographs. Horrific pictures of starving Blacks, especially babies
and children, constantly confront the newspaper reader in South Africa.
Pictures published overseas show harrowing scenes of starvation or killing
with a caption stating that the pictures were taken in South Africa. The
gullible reader overseas never realises that the pictures are genuine
enough, only the locality is false. This technique is much used in
television"documentaries" but viewers are seeing the realities of
"independent" Black rule and not South Africa at all. Newspapers frequently
publish these photographs on a page which, apparently quite by coincidence,
has pictures of smiling Whites and luxurious homes so that an involuntary
comparison is made.
An insidious guilt-inducing technique is to insist on the right of
an indigenous majority to rule, as if numerical superiority were a magical
formula for quality and competence. The White minority in South Africa and
Rhodesia is led to see itself as an usurping power whose ancestors conquered
by the gun. Atonement for conquest and exploitation must be made. The late
Robert Kennedy attempted to arouse this kind of guilt feeling when he
visited South Africa some years ago and asked student audiences, "What if
God is Blackl" The newspapers gave banner headlines to this question. They
might just as well have asked, "What if God is a Red Indian, or a Hottentot,
or a Bushmanl" The argument is not only absurd it is profane.
,A11 nations have a history of conquest and re-conquest and to feel
guilty about what happened centuries ago is ridiculous. As a matter of
historical record, the original inhabitants of South Africa were non-negroid
Bushmen and Hottentots who were conquered by negro (Bantu) hordes migrating
south from the Congo and other parts of Central Africa. In fact,had the
White man not stepped in and conquered the Zulus there would be no other
South African
Black tribe in existence today, for the Zulus massacred all before them, as
they did, too, in Rhodesia, first under Mzilikatze and then Lobengula
."Majority rule" is a parrot formula and a demagogic screech. The majority
can never rule and have never, in fact, done so. The democracy of Greece had
extremely limited franchise, and the destiny of Victorian England was
controlled by the aristocracy whose patriotism and idealism tempered the
workings of the House of Commons. In those days a member of parliament was
unpaid and guided, therefore, by national rather than self interest, and the
prestige of being a member of parliament was a public acknowledg-ment of his
fitness for office through financial independence at least.
Egalitarian democracy is impossible. Logically, even a full and free
election is undemocratic because it implies superiority and choice. A truly
democratic system,if it sincerely professes the doctrine of equality, should
elect its office bearers by lottery. Only
a lunatic anarchist would support such a system in practice. What democracy
needs is a blood transfusion in the form of reverence for moral and
spiritual excellence. It requires leadership by superior and honourable
individuals.These leaders must disdain the hooting of the mobs and arrest
the rapid decline in standards and integrity, lifting the yoke of
materialism from the shoulders of society. In short, a return by example to
Christian values and rejection of Mammon and his foul religion of
corruption.
The task of the Press is to precondition a people for take-over, so
that actual physical conflict can be reduced to a minimum. Modern warfare is
fought in the mind, and if a nation can be under-mined psychologically over
a period of time, victory is certain. A dispirited, confused,
guilt-ridden people can offer but poor resistance. A people deprived of
spiritual vigour, of patriotism and
racial pride, will be corn before the Communist sickle. A people struggling
in the mire of materialism and perversion flounders and dies.
The function of the Press, therefore, is to undermine and corrupt.
Its aim is to debilitate and destabilise Western democracies, while
proclaiming loudly that it is the champion of freedom and the enemy of
totalitarianism. In this latter claim it ignores the realities of
totalitarian Communism, the most bloody, inhuman and absolute dictatorship
the world has ever seen, and directs all its venom against "fascism".
By the use of innuendo, smear techniques, vituperation and
repetitive associations with "Nazism", the Press undermines the rightwing
and saps the moral fibre of a nation, making it impossible to take firm
corrective steps against subversion. It supports all that is liberal,
filthy, decadent and immoral. It praises every move to abolish capital
punishment, agitates for "gun reform" doublespeak for disarming a populace -
and prints innumerable articles on the need for tolerance of extra- and
pre-marital sex, drugs, homosexuality, lesbianism and perversion. These
articles disguise a salacious pleasure in deviation with one or two moral
platitudes as empty as they are unconvincing. Stories are written in such a
way that sympathy is aroused for the criminal and not the victim of the
crime, and the attack on authority and conservatism is unremitting.
The Press vomits its bile and spleen on the right, while anointing
with unctious oil its leftwing progeny. It deifies some politicians and
crucifies others. It highlights what it wants to be seen and hides what must
be kept secret. It rants hysterically or preserves an impenetrable silence
according to circumstance and the will of its masters. It preserves an
illusion of impartiality occasionally by permitting a carefully limited
cross-section of opinion. It engenders guilt and confusion and panders to
the worst elements in man.
The power of the Press is awesome and all-pervading, pene-trating
almost every home and bastion of privacy. The cry for universal education is
designed to bring more and more of the masses under its pernicious
influence. Not for nothing have patriots and thinkers like Edmund Burke,
Disraeli, Chamberlain, Nietzsche, Wagner and Goethe cried out against it in
despair. As Cassandra of old, these men have been granted the gift of
prophecy with the curse of never being believed. Napoleon said he would
rather face a thousand bayonets than four hostile newspapers. In the light
of what the Press has been doing since his time,this remark could qualify
for the understatement of the millenium.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
