Unbanned Bible Publications
Defending God’s Truth in Church Doctrine and Political History – Renette Vermeulen
Britain promised them nothing that was not theirs to begin with.
Some history books state, “By March 1903, most of the nearly £19 million [what £19 million? – the figure mentioned was a measly £3 million!] have been paid out to re-establish farmers, in war damages, grants and resettlement loans, agriculture, pursuing policies of soil preparation and stock control which borne fruit by 1908 in the first maize and beef stock surpluses since the early 1890s.”
What a vast underestimation of what the farmers owned and an even greater overestimation of the compensation Britain was supposed to give, or ever gave! In practice, it seems that the distribution of the promised ‘compensation fund’ did not work very well; so-called ‘interest free’ loans did not work at all, and food was extremely expensive and in sparse supply. After the war, Generals Botha, De Wet, and De la Rey had to go abroad to raise money to repair the ravaged Republics – why would they have done that if Britain repaired their genocidal destruction in this country? I could not find a single history book or writing, which details or lists the distribution of the ‘three million pounds compensation fund’ for farmers, as agreed upon in the Peace Treaty of Vereeniging in May 1902. In 1912, the establishment of the Land Bank raised expectations that were soon shattered. Only wealthy farmers were allowed to borrow money and no one mentioned ‘grants,’ or that the loans were ‘interest free.’ In fact, small farmers and ‘bywoners,’ (or dispossessed farmers who became farm workers,) were considered a financial risk and their loan applications were forthrightly declined.
As British immigrants claimed nearly every possible government post and private job in this country, it seems that no one really knows what happened to the compensation funds for ordinary Afrikaner and African citizens, which the British had to distribute – if indeed it ever existed. Most historians say that even non-white British soldiers and non-white civilians who suffered in concentration camps received nothing from the money, which Britain supposedly allocated to them. The following copy of a file relating to “Claims For Compensating Burghers” proves that by 1911, nine years after the war, most destitute Afrikaners too, has not received a penny from the British Government:
In VAB File 8217
Vrede District. He possesses one horse and 8 sheep, earns his living
Unable to sustain their farms and homes agriculturally or financially, owners and their laborers left their family land and small towns for a squatter camp existence near a city in the hope of finding a job there. Once more, the non-white and white people of the two old Republics faced Britain’s sheer deprivation together. Their desperate existence depicted the dire living conditions of war-ravaged citizens.
South Africa’s white and non-white homeless crammed together in dirty and dilapidated shantytowns, which cluttered the once unspoiled and cultivated landscapes near the cities of the Orange Free State and the old Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek. There, they quickly succumbed to alcoholism, prostitution, and all other forms of despondency and deficiency.
STOCKHOLM SYNDROME: DEATH CAMPS WERE “MERELY A MISTAKE”
Although there had even been many complaints of poisoned food in Britain’s death camps during the ‘Boer’ war, some British-infused history books still note that “there was no truth in them: the camps were designed to intern not to exterminate.”
How could it be possible not to exterminate people when one incarcerates thousands upon thousands of dispossessed women, children, and the elderly (and old men) under such crowded and filthy conditions in torn tents on the open veldt; slowly starve them to death, and do not allow them clean drinking water or proper health care? Of course, in this early socialist/communist experiment, the camps were deliberately designed and operated as death camps!
Some deluded Boer women said, “There was just not enough food. The people died of sickness and hunger, but they were not ill-treated! [This is an oxymoron if I ever heard one!] The whole war was just a mistake…” Others remained convinced that, no matter what they suffered, or saw others suffer, “the English remained gentlemen.”
These women were either paid to declare these genocidal atrocities ‘good treatment’ and ‘merely a mistake,” or in total denial, they tried to cope with the incredible abuse — or they were the wives, children and family of freemasons and other traitors, who received special privileges for their services to high freemason-illuminist Cecil John Rhodes and his satanic colleagues. It was a completely different scenario for the other thousands upon thousands of white and non-white citizens who were intentionally and cruelly tortured to death by disease, neglect and famine.
Wikipedia Online Encyclopaedia explains the mental disease of these hallucinating men and women, stating, “Stockholm syndrome, or capture–bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages, [such as the Boers who were taken by force to the extermination camps,] express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk [and immense mass suffering unto slow, deliberate death] endured by the victims for an act of kindness. The FBI’S Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of [hostage and other captive] victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome. Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes “strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other… The bonding is the individual’s response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be a threat. This battered person is an example of activating the capture–bonding psychological mechanism, as are military basic training and fraternity bonding by hazing….”
BRITISH SEGREGATION, THE FORERUNNER OF APARTHEID
The British despised Africans and Afrikaners alike
In 1902, when Britain took the two Afrikaner Republics through socialist genocide and complete destruction of the farming industry, Lord Milner said that he wanted “the British element, both political and cultural, to be dominant in [the conquered] South Africa.” He wrote, “A good world history would be worth anything…“
Reader’s Digest wrote in ‘SA Yesterdays,’ “Milner’s ideas on race [and culture] were hardly liberal. He appointed a South African Native Affairs Commission, [to govern Africans,] an almost exclusively English-speaking body, which managed to formalize even further the existing tendency to racial segregation. It approved of ‘locations’ [dreadfully poor townships,] for urban non-whites and the separation of non-white and white in [social and] political life. A future federal legislature should have non-whites represented by whites.”
There has always been a natural tendency among all the different races of South Africa, (as those in all other parts of the world,) to stick to their own. Though it is a sad fact that whites, especially foreign whites of all nationalities, always saw the huge population of non-whites as cheap labor, it is clear that the “future federal legislature” of the apartheid regime did not originate with Afrikaners, as most people believe. Lord Milner and his fellow British war criminals forced Afrikaans and English speaking people, as well as people of other races legally into different neighborhoods, schools, colleges, universities, and workplaces first. This quickly established a social and political norm of segregation among the races of South Africa. The traditional racial custom in South Africa was now empowered and legalized by British law. The British excluded non-white people from nearly all skilled jobs in this country. However, this does not mean that jobs fell into the laps of Afrikaners and that Afrikaners were benefitted economically in any way. This excluded a small minority of Afrikaners - the ‘enlightened’ masonic brothers of the British, but in general, the English despised Afrikaners and Africans alike and, as during the Boer War, looked down on them as ‘lower forms of life.’
Continuing with their Boer War dehumanizing techniques, the British executed an extremely discriminative and oppressing policy towards Afrikaner workers, ruthlessly excluding Afrikaners to fill all skilled and highly paid jobs with British immigrants. In British estimation, Afrikaners and Africans were only good for one thing: to work their fingers to the bone for as little pay as possible.
By 1910, Lord Milner and his colleagues, under the disguised word “segregation,” had officially brought apartheid into being. Powers far beyond the reach and imagination of ordinary African, Afrikaner and brown citizens were at work before, during, and after the 1899-1902 war.
The British then proceeded to separate Afrikaners, English and Africans on the basis of language too. In later years, they ensured that neither Afrikaners, nor Englishmen, nor Africans, nor Indians could really learn one another’s languages. They prescribed an inadequate English curriculum for Afrikaners to keep them ‘stupid’ and ‘inferior.’ They taught a substandard Afrikaans syllabus to English speaking learners, as they never required British immigrants to speak Afrikaans. In addition, they prescribed an inferior school curriculum for Africans, Indians, and brown people. In later years, the apartheid regime allowed a useless curriculum for whites who chose to learn an African language. On top of that, they forced Africans to learn Afrikaans, thereby guaranteeing hatred for the Afrikaans language and its owners. [Can anyone guess the motive behind this secret agenda? In 1976, it led to the violent rioting and eventual shooting of school children protesting Afrikaans tuition, which brought about the turning point in the Communist Struggle, which catapulted the African National Congress into parliament.]
In this way, the British/Afrikaner Brotherhood caused Africans to reject their educational system; not just turning South Africa into communist hands, but ultimately stupefying all the races of South Africa, (although some more than others,) setting them forcibly against one another, especially in the ‘new’ South Africa.
CONCENTRATION CAMP STARVATION CAUSED A GREAT CLAMBERING FOR JOBS
Dr. Colman continued in ‘Committee of 300,’ “The Cabalists create social convulsions on a global scale, followed by depressions… This is an ongoing [communist] process of loosening the wealth of the world from the ‘bourgeoisie’ (the rich,) and rolling it into the laps of the Jewish Cabalists!”
This could be not more true than in early post-war South Africa.
It had been impossible for agriculture and industry to function during the war, resulting in the collapse of the economy of the two Republics, and insolvency for most workers. It is an understatement to say that now, after the war, miners, farmers, and all other workers were all ravenous for jobs.
The opening of the mines in 1902 brought nearly no relief for South Africa’s workers. A tornado of more than 39,000 ‘uitlanders’ or British immigrants roared into the cities to glean every available job. The jobs that remained were those that were the most dangerous, labor intensive, and poorly paid. British ‘outlanders’ had all the meat; the white and non-white citizens of the old Orange Free State and Transvaal were left with a bare bone.
However, scrambling for jobs was merely one of the mechanisms in the making of an industrial disaster. British exploitation of naked racism was another.
In pre-war times, the mines and other industries were managed on a pecking order of skilled white and unskilled non-white employment. After the war, the Chamber of Mines pretended to reverse this inequality by demoting, underpaying, and firing skilled Afrikaner labor to ‘benefit’ unskilled non-white labor. This executive decision was supposedly based on the belief that cheaper labor equal higher profits – which can never be the case, as unskilled workers simply cannot do the job of skilled workers unless they were trained first. However, Afrikaner workers were not replaced by non-white labor as the Chamber of Mines had promised, but by white English and other foreign workers.
Such transparent instigation of racial tension parallels great industrial violence.
Additionally, South African High Commissioner Alfred Milner did not amalgamate the South African and British economic systems as everyone expected he would do in order to salvage the faltering economy. Instead, he nationalized the independent old ZAR Railway system to unify it with British railway infrastructure.
The whole country continued to spiral into economic recession.
Unemployment worsened and began to fill every crevice in the country.
Food and other prices soared.
The lack of basic necessities became critical.
Nearly all surviving traders had to close shop.
Every industry, the mines especially, was typified by the dismal and brooding crowds that hopelessly queued for days on end at recruitment offices.
The Masonic Brotherhood had pushed not only Afrikaner and African, but also the brown and Indian populations into pathetic poverty.
Britain, one of the leaders of the Global Planners, continuing in real communist fashion, had deliberately divided the nationalities of South Africa — people of the same country; miners, shopkeepers, and cultivators of the same land, by presenting them with a common goal: all had to eat in order to survive!
THE STARVING MINERS OF 1903 PROTESTED
Shortly after the Boer War, socialism decisively took hold of the workers of the young 19th century. Marxism and its destructive doctrine socialism were trampling “the residue [of the ‘Boer’ War] with its feet,” (Dan. 7:19.) Throughout history, and especially during the last four centuries, workers have been fighting for a legitimate cause. After all, it is the right of every person to earn a living according to his personal skill and effort. God Himself commanded that humanity should ‘earn their bread by the sweat of their brow,’ and ‘if someone does not want to work, he should not eat.’ Thus, it is the basic God-given right of every person to have an honest job to earn an honest living.
Therefore, the starving white gold miners of 1903, infuriated by remorseless communist agitators, (just as in modern-day South Africa and everywhere else in the world,) downed tools, and began to protest and picket. What we need to remember, is that violent and bloody communist chaos was and never will be about the liberation of workers, or the equality of races, religions, and societies. Communist Imperialism is about allegedly ‘re-creating’ the entire planet through “constant revolution globally.” That’s how communist dictators are creating the worldwide Socialist Paradise, ruled by totalitarianism and despotism under the guise of ‘democracy.’ Bloodthirsty agitators have always, and will always exploit any kind of political, racial, industrial, economic, and civil conflict. They constantly instigate global chaos, ethnic cleansing or ‘purging’ and mass genocide to advance their global expansion of Marxism – as worldwide history itself has proven over the course of 250 years, but especially since 1945, when ‘peace’ was declared by the United Nations.
Consequently, in 1903, less than a year after the war, non-white and white miners began to skirmish. White miners wanted wages that suited the danger, effort, and skill of their jobs. To survive, non-white miners were willing to do anything for as little as they could get; they did not bother to notice who were really replacing the Afrikaners.
Mining Police quickly put down each brawl, just to face another industrial uprising elsewhere.
What these revolutionists did not realize, is that in Marxism, as in any other war, there are no winners. All were hopeless, poverty-stricken losers.