Gee, I never saw this on CNN or any other news media.  I was watching BBC world news over the weekend and the top story was the 35,000 white farm owners that are getting "racially cleansed" by their black countrymen.  Just like what we saw in Bosnia and Kosavo.

What, no F117 bombing raids to save them?

Now, I know we have racial tensions and attrocities all over the world.  By why is this story completely ABANDONED by the US media?

They went on to talk about the land redistribution policies set up by the current government.  But I guess the black gov't has instituted a "hands off" policy by pulling back military and police protection, thereby allowing the black population to murder and terrorize the whites into fleeing.  

Oh yeah, and the NO GUNS allowed policy has helped to institute this policy.

Call me paranoid, but I can't even find a mention of the story on the BBC website...

nevermind

Shush, how dare you! Your not allowed to speak of such things,Liberals and Blacks won't allow it. Our dirt bag news agencies go through the trouble to hide these news worthy stories from the public, and here you go, on the internet, showing the whole world how our low down and dirty news agencies filter the news.  It's enough to make a Demo-Crap.

It's as if "the white farmers deserve it..."

Puh-leeze

The really sad part about the whole Mugabe mess is that Ian Smith, the former (white) Prime Minister of Rhodesia [sic], stepped down so the country would be spared from further civil war.

Following that, the blacks proceeded to carry out a civil war against each other. Following which they have begun another war against white farmers.

The real mess is that Rhodesia used to be a great supplier of food for the whole African continent. Now Zimbabwe is a net IMPORTER of food!

[i][b]Destroy the Cities, and they will be rebuilt.
Destroy the Farms, and grass will grow in the streets of the Cities.[/b][/i]

Eric The(ImagineThat!)Hun[>]:)]

You probably never heard a word about this in our wonderful socialist brainwashing machine called the news."The latest school violence report comes from gun-hating Japan.  The toll is 8 dead and 15 wounded in a rampage that terrorized an elementary school. In Japan, guans are all but outlawed, so the killer used a kitchen knife.  He also managed to do all this in less than 15 minutes...."

Actually, I read about the Japanese killings on CNN the day it happened and a few days afterwards as the details worked themselves out.

One thing I have been very impressed with about the BBC is the fact that on the radio news broadcasts they have dialogue after the story and it's never one sided, which is unlike our media here.

God Bless Texas

Is this what you were talking about?




[url] http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_833000/833303.stm [/url]

[url] http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_834000/834486.stm [/url]

[url] http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_720000/720887.stm [/url]


[url] http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/08/21/zimbabwe.leaders.reut/index.html [/url]

Its funny how we have a FREE media but the BBS a goverment controled news shows more of the truth
pretty damn scarey if you ask me


"I dont even know"

Really, what the hell do you expect from Africa?

The entire continent is in flames at their own hands. I am in no way in favor of Aparthied, but once the white government was replaced, what happened? The entire place turned in to a homicidal, lawless, every gangster for themself nightmare.

These militants knocking off the whites aren't there to replant the farms and to provide for their own, they murder the owners, rape then murder the women, then loot and burn the whole friggin' place down.

South Africa used to be a major leader on that continent, on an international level. Now the only thing S.Africa leads at is total lawless chaos.

Nothing of significance comes from Africa, and there's no need to go there to save nothing of significance. The whites need to read the [b]BOLD[/b] writing on the wall, and get the hell out. Thier land or not, it's all going to be blood and flames if they stay.

Of course, Africas historical downward spiral will do nothing but continue on full force.

Here is the story.

[url]www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/08/19/zimbabwe.land.reut/index.html[/url]

Hell, we are hostages in our own country.  Anybody remember CavVet?  He didn't like the CBF being on the state flag of Georgia (which a part of the Georgia Precision banner) so he left the forum forever.  At least he just ran away like a baby and didn't try to make everybody else change their history and beliefs to please him, which is what most blacks would have done.  

Been to a city lately?  Most white people got the hell out of the cities because the blacks go on a burn, rob, and loot rampage anytime something doesn't suit them.  Look what happened after the whites left DC.  Highest murder rate in the country, streets that haven't been paved in decades, city in debt up to its eyeballs to the federal government.  It is a sad truth that whenever blacks run anything it goes to shit and fast.  You dare not drive through certain areas of DC for fear of being shot and robbed, just because you are white.  

South Africa anybody?  Highest [b]number[/b] of rapes in the world.  A woman living in SA is statistically guaranteed to be raped at least once in her lifetime.  Meanwhile, the government (which is entirely black) completely denies that there is a problem.  Most of the whites who had a any money got the hell out of that country when the blacks took over, they saw what was coming.

But we dare not speak or write of any of this, because we can't offend the black folk.  Doesn't matter if everything stated above is fact, it is just pure racism and evil and must be purged........

I don't condone the present violence, however I find it amusing that in your racist view you all seem to conveniently forget all the blacks killed by the whites as they ethnically cleaned that part of Africa it so they could settle there.

Well, besides that statement not being entirely true, we haven't forgotten.  That happened how long ago?  200 years?  I think that there is a statute of limitations on revenge.  We are commenting more on how stupid these people are.  They destroy the farmers, don't know how to farm themselves, and now are suffering a famine.

By your logic, we should all still feel guilty for slavery and repay the blacks at every chance we get, despite the fact that [b]whites[/b] ended slavery 136 years ago.

Looks like [i]you[/i] for got a major fact MOD...
Slavery exists, today, in Africa on a scale that dwarfs the earlier European slave trade at it's peak. Slavery in Africa is part of their heritage, plain and simple. It is a thriving business among their own that has seen no historical equal, in America or anywhere else.

Whites may have participated hundreds of years ago, but before they showed up and until this very day, Africans have been enslaving their own people like it's their national past time.

And by the way, since when is pointing out facts [i]racist[/i]? Hop off the P.C. bandwagon and take a good look at what's going on before your ignorance speaks louder than anything you type here.

Dont you all know that the white british and european colonials stole the land from the blacks and then proceeded to make the areas agriculturally productive and set the groundwork for democratic societies to form??

And now, of course, once the hard work has been done, it is time to give it back to the minority. Hey, fair is fair!!!

Zimbabwie (Rhodesia) farmers used to produce enough food for export.  Today, there are talks of famine.  

The blacks take over a farm and just shut down production.

Its nice to know a few people out there can see the evidence before their eyes.  Its not "racist" to recognize that no negro-coltrolled society has ever been worth living in.  Just look at America's inner cities. Aparthied may have not been fair, but White-controlled South Africa and Rhodesia were the best hope Africa ever had, or will ever have. Its going to get ugly folks, this is just a preview.  Prepare yourselves, because it will happen here unless we say enough is enough.  

The original inhabitants of South Africa were the Hottentots and Bushmen. When the whites settled there, these peoples were squezed between the whites and the blacks who were migrating South at the time.

Rodesia was a somewhat different matter, but I believe that most of the blacks who ended up there migrated into the area after the whites settled.

"ethnically cleaned" is [i]way[/i] too much sliperly (i.e., poorly defined) CNN-speak for my taste. The fact is, early white settlers and early black (Bantu) settlers fought each other on and off for land that had originally belonged to others. The whites won the battles, but after several hundred years gave control of the region to the blacks, who then seriously missmanaged it.

The concern now is how to get the Whites out with the least amount of bloodshed.  There is no way to keep them in there homes without killing soo many people that would make Hitler and Stalin look like pikers.

And this is only phase one, phase two will be evacuating the 3[i]million[/i] Whites from South Africa when this insanity spreads.  And it will.  The rank and file ANC members think Mugabe and what he is doing is great.

Post from M4 -

You are correct, Sir. But pray tell us WHERE these dear folks will go. I doubt that the USA would have the political will to accept these renegade whites with their 'laager' mentality!

I mean that there must be 5 million or more, white SudAfrikaners, but I can't really tell cause all the gov't websites for SA absolutely do not parade figures for racial breakdowns on their sites!

These volks are pretty adept at making something out of nothing - Australia should give 'em the Outback!  The Afrikaners would have a stock exchange at Ayers Rock within a couple of years!

And the Aussies might just be able to get back their semi-auto rifles with these 'new voters'!

Eric The(OrNorthernMexicoIsPrettySparse!HeHeHe)Hun[>]:)]


Eric The(I'llTakeAFew,ButThat'sAll)Hun[>]:)]

I'd vote to take them all.  And with the current administration, and the current makup of the house, a emergancy exemption to the immigration law could be passed.

I don't think I can add anything to this, since it's already been said. But I'll try.

Negro control of anything goes downhill fast. And the attrocities committed in Africa on a daily basis by negros upon other negros, is worse than anything the whites have ever done. Child mutiliation comes to mind. And they have the gall to blame whites for their problems.

That's right, Austrailia would be the place. The obvious place.

As white family living in almost anywhere in AFrica, that's like standing in a dry river bed holding a match, while a tidal wave of gasoline is rushing down stream. Doesn't take a genius to figure this one out. Run for Austrailia, and let the whole place incinerate.

Austrailia would like imigrants like them, but there is also room here in Arizona too. I would much rather have Afrikaner emmigrants living next door than some Kalifornia lawyer- or worse.

Perhaps we should start writing legislators now?

When I talk to my European friends, they just can't see why I would want to own an M16.  In their societies, immigration is strictly controlled and those that move in become part of their society.  But what about the US?

If it were not for immigration, the US would have a net declining population, same as Russia and most of Europe.  But due to immigration, per capita, we have [B]THE FASTEST GROWING POPULATION IN THE WORLD, EVEN FASTER GROWING THAN CHINA AND INDIA[/B].  Now I'm not against immigration, we all come from immigrants.  But we are all Americans now.  Today's immigrant may or may not consider themselves American, and the status quo is that this is ok.

It is not.

If the trend continues like this, in 10 or 20 years we will have a large population (don't we already?) of residents that hold no allegiance to this country or our form of government.  Then who is in control?  Those with the guns.  

Explain that to someone from Sweden.  They just don't get it.

Back in the good old days of International Bolshevism, it was always said that the Capitalists would sell the 'Socialists' the rope that was to be used to hang themselves.

Well, it amazes me that with everything that's ordinarily gone the way of the socialists in THIS country, the very ONE issue that they have NEVER been able to defeat handily is the RKBA.

Thus, the very means of easily defeating all of the machinations of these socialists is not only doing fine and well in our Republic, but more and more rifles, shotguns and handguns are being transferred To The People every single day and new ones are being manufactured to take the place of weapons lost, destroyed or confiscated.

So the People are acquiring the very tools that are necessary to utterly defeat and destroy the socialists. And every gun show and private sale that occurs is just one more brick in the wall against a socialist takeover in this Country.
Political victory comes out of the barrel of a gun!

If I were an Anti-gun socialist, I would be worried! Very worried!

Eric The(IFeel'Tingly'AllOverNow)Hun[>]:)]

I guess the truth hit a nerve with some of the racists here.  Lets be honest, both the Dutch settlers (Boers)and Brits were foreigners.  They came in and moved the native people off the land sometimes without force and sometimes with.  The Boers felt that they (like the Blues Brothers) were on a mission from God to settle that area of the world (where have we heard that before?).
Be that as it may, the racist system they set up, aprthied, was worse than Jim Crow in the US and made sure the blacks were largly kept un-educated and un-skilled b/c what better way is there to keep a people down.  An interesting aside is the fact that Ghandi got his start working for human rights in S.A. as a lawyer protesting aparthied.

So my question is, if you keep a people ignorant and unskilled for so long and take their land what do you expect when they finally get self rule w/o being prepared for it?  Essentially the same thing happened to the slaves here in the US, they were more or less cut lose at the end of the civil war.

So now South Africans(native) are educated and skilled since the end of Apartheid? You can thank Nelson Mandela for making SA a 3rd world nation when it was once 1st world.

Apartheid ended only in the last decade.  Large changes in education and skill in entire populations take a generation or more to achieve.

I agree with MOD.  The native South African culture was tribal and rural, having little exposure to modern living.  White South Africans, who considered themselves cultured and civilized, had the last 100 years to work on educating and integrating the black population into a modern society, or at least ensuring the emergence of a large black middle class which would be their ally.  Instead they worked vigorously in going in the opposite direction, segregating them and treating them like subhumans.  Inevitably, enough black people woke up, realized their overwhelming numbers and fought for their freedom.  Now every person suddenly has the franchise, but not every person has developed the mindset for participating in a civilized republic with individual liberties.  Chaos is the result.

I feel sorry for the white South Africans and Rhodesians trapped in this mess, but they bear some responsibility for where they are now.  They voted in the apartheid monsters, after all.  If you were a black person and were treated like dirt under apartheid, you would not feel much sympathy for the plight of the white folk either.

Most of the natives of S.A. are still not skilled or educated but is that all Mandela's fault, no I think not and frankly why would it be?  This situation is similar to India after the Brits left.  Things did get worse and stayed that way for a time but they have gotten better.  However, I for one would rather be free and poor than well off as a second class citizen in my own land.

Some folks need to do a fact check.  Europeans were in the South of Africa BEFORE the tidal wave of "blacks" that live there today arrived.

When Portugese, English and Spanish arrived around 1430, the indigneous population was San (Bushman), Hottentot and Xhosa, yellow-skinned nomadic hunter gatherers.

The Bantu "blacks" arrived in the South of Africa in a population tidal wave in the mid 1600's.  The Bantu tribes exploded out of Central Africa, enabled by cultivation of a millet that allowed more than subsistence agriculture.  The Bantu's moved east then south along the African coast until they reached South Africa.

These "blacks" got to South Africa hundreds of years AFTER Europeans colonized and developed that area.

The original indigenous tribes today are being ethnically cleansed by the contemporary black political regime in SA who view them a different people (which they are) and an embarrasment to "black culture".

To argue Europeans "Stole" the land from blacks is either naieve or disingenuous.  It is the blacks who are "stealing" the land.

Arock is correct.  The blacks have not been there as long as the whites.

Claiming that you have a right to land just because some ancestor of your was there first is (IMHO) silly.  It is kind of like slavery reparations.

Why is everything about color?

If a man rapes a woman, isn't he a criminal, no matter what the race?

If a group of people gang up on another group of people and kill them, aren't they a murderous mob, no matter what color they are?

My opinion... establish rigorous criteria for entry into the US... I say we go to these African countries in crisis and grab all the honest, hard working people we can... save em all if possible...I don't care what color they are AT ALL...they can be transparent for all I care, let's just get them over here...we need more honest working people to pay for all the "entitlement programs" the federal government pays out to the worthless lazy crap indigenous to our beautiful "US of A"....

perhaps we could backfill for the folks we remove...with the lazy, self-entitled crowd over here.... again, totally color blind.

So you admit that there were indiginous people already there. If there were then by what right did the Europeans have to take their land?

The history I saw said, "The first known inhabitants of present-day South Africa were San and Khoikhoi hunters and gatherers;  they were followed southward by
     Bantu-speaking peoples between AD 1000 and 1500. In 1488, Portuguese mariners led by Bartolomeu DIAS rounded the Cape of Good Hope.
     The Dutchman Jan van Riebeeck established the first European settlement at Table Bay (now Cape Town) in 1652 as a station for the Dutch East
     India Company.  Dutch pioneers spread eastward, and in 1779 war broke out between Xhosas migrating south and the Dutch near the Great Fish
     River."
Source:  http://www.gateway-africa.com/countries/safrica.html

So it sounds like there were plenty of people there before the Europeans.  If the blacks in S.A. should forget what happened to them I think you should also tell all the Southerners in the US the same thing.

Because color allows the racists here to say that is the once difference that makes them better.

MOD - you are taking the easy way out....

We need to all treat each other in a manner that permits change... a man labelled "racist" will keep that mindset as long as he feels attacked...you need to stimulate thought in a provocative, yet non-threatening manner.

Note -my ancestors were "oppressed" by another sect... I don't hold it against them or feel entitled to anything what-so-ever from members of the oppressive sect's progeny... who here can't say the very same thing? I bet just about every single person on this discussion has this in common...it is a start.

I bet most of us are American, gun owners, willing to fight side by side to defend our freedom..even if it means a potential fashion violation, mixing white, yellow, red and black in the same "trench"...

See, just about every one of us has more in common with each other than we do with either shade of human busy killing each other in some foriegn nation....

MOD, perhaps you need to update your history text.  The contemporary text of choice is the 1997 publication by John Reader, "Africa: A Biography of the Continent", published in Great Britain by Hamish Hamilton and in the USA by knopf.  You will find it enlightening.

Another great book by [b]Ian Smith[/b] is called:  The great Betrayal

It's called, "We want it, we have the power to take it, so get the fuck out!"  Welcome to real fucking life my friend.  No land has been maintained by any one race for any extended period of time, ala history.

Sorry, you lose.

I do agree that keeping blacks out of government increased the tendency towards a downward spiral.  The problem is that blacks in this country have been invlolved in politics have had [b]ample[/b] oppurtunities given to them by gov.org, yet whenever blacks run a given area, it goes to shit.  New Orleans, DC, Camden NJ......

Sub-Saharan Africans lived in a stone age hunter-gatherer existence until whites arrived and introduced the concept of civilization.  Right or wrong, that is what happened.  The real question to ask is not, "Did we do a good enough job civilizing these people?" it is, "Can these people, who have lived in tribal societies forever, be civilized?"  I would submit that the answer is no.  Slavery, ethnic slaughter, and civil war are perrennial problems in Africa.  These things were going LONG before whites ever arrived on the continent.

Am I racist, no.  I do not fear or hate anybody based on ethinicity.  I am a realist.  I observe the actions of groups of people and come to conclusions.

My overall conclusion is that the most socially evolved, civilized race are the Asians.  Followed by the whites, then the Middle Eastern peoples, way down the list are African blacks.  Does this mean that they are not capable of great things?  No.  I do not believe anybody is bound to their heritage, but you will notice that most legitimately successful blacks do not define their existence by their race.

All humans are basically the same.  It is deeply ingrained social values that hold any one particular race back in the modern world.  Blacks are not any less intelligent than white people, but their social values (particularly blacks in America) frequently hold them back.  Some blacks complain about their place in the nation, even though as individuals many have never personally sought to bette their [i]own[/i] situations.  It is not my job as a white (a term I find to be rather offensive and untrue anyway) to make sure blacks get a fair shake.  Nor is it the government's job.  Blacks need to get into the schools, work hard, seek to acheive, and work up in the job market before they ever expect to see any change in their situation.  The problem is that many blacks who are failing blame their failure not on their lack of educational values, but on "white racism."

Racism is a convienent crutch for lazy people.  

It's not all about color.  I ALWAYS try and judge a book by it's cover.  But when you go to the ATM at night, you aren't afraid of racism, you are afraid of the 3 young black youths behind you that are 100 times more likely to mug you than the indian, chinese, white, or Malaysian kids.

I feel sorry for the portion of black America that bears the stigma caused by a certain portion of the black population.  But when I see 95% of the black population justify mass violence against whites (do I dare say ethnic cleansing like we saw in the LA riots) that portion of our society loses much respect in my eyes.

I would talk to well educated blacks that knew OJ was guilty, and they just didn't care.  It was "payback time" and they didn't care if you do volunteer work at the NAACP on the weekends, if you had light skin, you got a brick through your window.

And, Aroc is right, the white settlers where there before the current blacks that live there now.

You are completely right MOD. How could these racists be so blind? Those white guys took the land from the rightful black owners. Now the descendants of those evil devils are being slaughtered like they ought to. Ahhhh, I get a warm feeling in my heart when I think about the day the Native Americans will take their land back. First we steal their land and kill their women and children. Then we continue the harm them through racist policies. Hey, all of the problems that the Native Americans are experiencing today are obviously the fault of the white land owners. They have been held back long enough. I hope that my great-great grand children are raped and tortured, then murdered by the descendants of those who had their land stolen. Hey, what did all you white kids think was gonna happen? What goes around comes around.

To racial cleansing, and the perpetuation of hate!

Edited to add that I was being sarcastic before somebody starts to bitch.

I am willing to recognize the information from a better text.  I think that my point still stands that the Europeans were still taking the land from indiginous people. We should at least be honest about what took place. I think that to a certain extent the white people of S.A. are reaping what their ancestors sowed as we in the U.S. are.  As I also said earlier, I don't condone violence but given the history what do you really expect?

To quote Homer Simpson "DOH!"

The news reports on Al Sharpton and the million man march, so obviously, every man with black skin thinks exactly the same ...NO

"The news leads you to the conclusion that the motivation of the inner city black man is "kill whitie" so you believe it?

I can tell you as someone that just happens to have light skin that it doesn't work that way.  I worked as a medic in the inner city for a while... what I saw contradicted every pre-conceived notion you guys seem to have...

I collected my facts first hand...

If you base your opinions on something other than first hand, you are a victim of the press and I pity you.

I would not be the least bit scared to have three men with black skin walk up to me in my home town, however, if three white men walked up to me in the city I worked in as a medic, while at the ATM at night... I'd have been very alert...

It's not the color of the skin....it's the mentality of the man....color is not a reliable or acceptable way of determining criminal disposition.... (IN MY OPINION) it DOES make you a racist if you stereotype based on skin pigment....don't worry, you are not special, there are tons of racist in the ghetto that are JUST LIKE YOU.

LA riots and genocide...what the heck are you talking about?

What is a Negro controlled society?  I think I know what you mean, but most inner cities are "controlled" by the same government that control your suburb or whereever you live.  It's pussy footin' liberals that make it easy for the individuals that live in those areas to claim foul, of course the media just gives it more fuel.  The reason it's always a Black and White issue is because people always make it that.  There are underlying issues cause it to seem the way it does.  The media sells it, because people take the ball and run with it.  "Dirty Laundry" as Mr Henley said.  If one was raised to believe that it's ok to steal, or disrespect other humans, he'd grow up to steal and disrespect others, probably without remorse.  It's not racial or ethnic, it's economic.  Usually.  I used to believe that one usually grew to understand that there is a difference between right and wrong.  That isn't necessarily true.  If one grew up amongst jackasses, and always ran in circles with jackasses, he'd probably be a jack ass.

You are absolutely correct.  It is not "your" job as a "white" to ensure "blacks" get fair shakes.  It is everybody's job to ensure that there is fairness for everyone.  Selfishness and greed has run rampant in this world and causes most of our problems.  
How do you think the term "reverse discrimination" was coined?  I hate it because of what it suggests.  
Racism is a crutch for lazy people, true., but also for the selfish and greedy.