Fourteen years and approximately 300,000 murders after black rule devastated my homeland, the New York Times is shocked to discover that South Africa is fast disappearing down the same hole into which Rhodesia, rest in peace, was dropped. [Post-Apartheid South Africa has entered an Anxious Era, by Barry Bearak , October 5, 2008)
I guess some latitude is in order. It took decades and piles of dead bodies before Robert Mugabe lost luster in the eyes of the American MainStream Media [MSM]. By the time the megalomaniac Mugabe was conferred with honorary doctorates (1984 and 1986) and a knighthood (1994), he had already done his "best" work: slaughter an estimated 20,000 innocent Ndebele in Matabeleland (1983), with whose leader, Joshua Nkomo, he refused to share power.
The NYT claims that "The country’s power company unfathomably ran out of electricity and rationed supply." (My emphasis)
No, Eskom, the utility that supplied most of the electricity consumed on the continent, did not run out of juice. It just ran out of experienced engineers, expunged pursuant to Black Economic Empowerment policies. (Known in South Africa as "BEE", these are the equivalent of the racial quotas Barack Obama champions, only with many times the sting.)
And, of course, their enablers in the West.
Remember that when the MSM endorses Obama.
-taken from here
Ms. Mercer makes some good points (of course she is selling a book) but how sincere is she?Well, according to her biography, which can be seen here, her father was a Rabbi who, "was forced to flee (South Africa) due to his anti-apartheid activism."
The family then fled to Israel where Jewish-Arab apartheid was, and still is, official government policy.
Color me skeptical.
Never-the-less her biography plus her points on African tribal (read racial) politics makes a point in and of itself.
Adding to this is Pat Buchanan's article.
Was race a factor in the decision of Colin Powell to repudiate his party's nominee and friend of 25 years, Sen. John McCain, two weeks before Election Day, and to endorse Barack Obama?
in hailing Barack as a "transformational figure" whose election would "electrify our country ... (and) the world," Powell seems to testify to the centrality of Barack's ethnicity to his decision.
For what else is there about this freshman senator, who has no significant legislative accomplishment, to transform our politics and to electrify the world, other than the fact that he would be the nation's first African-American president?
Yet, what kind of Republican can Powell be when he professes deep concern that McCain might choose Supreme Court justices like John Roberts and Sam Alito? Every Republican in the Senate voted for Roberts. All but one voted for Alito.
The issue cannot be avoided.
After all, we are in a year where Obama defeated the wife of "our first black president," Bill Clinton, 90-10 in the black wards of Philly, and African-Americans, in one poll, are going 94-1 for Barack. And a Republican ticket that is hammering Barack on his ties to William Ayers fears to bring up his far closer ties to the Afro-racist anti-American Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Organizing a fundraiser last year for New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, an Hispanic Democrat, Lionel Sosa of San Antonio, a political strategist for Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II, said, "Blood runs thicker than politics."
Tribalism....Jungian Archetypes... "Economic Transformation"....The Fate of Nations...and the like.
While constituting approximately 2.4 percent of the population of the United States, Jews represented half of the top one hundred Wall Street executives and about 40 percent of admissions to Ivy League colleges. Lipset and Raab (1995) note that Jews contribute between one-quarter and one-third of all political contributions in the United States, including one-half of Democratic Party contributions and one-fourth of Republican contributions.
The general message of Goldberg’s (1996) book, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment, is that American Judaism is well organized and lavishly funded. It has achieved a great deal of power, and it has been successful in achieving its interests. There is a great deal of consensus on broad Jewish issues, particularly in the areas of Israel and the welfare of other foreign Jewries, immigration and refugee policy, church-state separation, abortion rights, and civil liberties (p. 5). Indeed, the consensus on these issues among Jewish activist organizations and the Jewish intellectual movements reviewed here despite a great deal of disagreement on other issues is striking. Massive changes in public policy on these issues beginning with the counter-cultural revolution of the 1960s coincide with the period of increasing Jewish power and influence in the United States.
The Jungian Archetype?
See here. (It's sarcastic but the point is made towards the end)
And it is getting more and more difficult for the naysayers to write off or disregard the above points as we can clearly see our civilization literally being disassembled right in front of our eyes on a daily basis.
And what was once called "history" drips reality into a present that is quickly becoming the same old- recycled- tragic "future"...
And to be clear, there is nothing sinister or immoral about the tribalistic tendencies highlighted above. Each and every race, from Jews to Africans to Whites, have a right, if not obligation, to do what is best for their own kind.
What is sinister, is when one group is singled out and denied this right. Or when such activities (as group survival strategies) are denied by one group or another.