Zindzi Mandela racist tweet


Honorary Master
Jun 25, 2010
Just going to group these articles:


SACC calls on De Klerk to retract his apartheid remarks and apologise
The South African Council of Churches has called on FW de Klerk to retract his recent statement that apartheid was not a crime against humanity and apologise.

SACC secretary general Bishop Malusi Mpumlwana said a statement by the FW de Klerk Foundation that apartheid was not a crime against humanity, but a Soviet propaganda ploy, cannot go unchallenged by the SACC.

Mpumlwana said apartheid was not only a crime, but was more than that.

“It was a gross sin against the image of God in the humanity of black South Africans, generally called non-whites, who were legally treated as sub-human, and without the basic rights due to normal human beings.

“Apartheid made all South African whites and their future generations, its beneficiaries in superabundance. Even so, the victims of apartheid accepted a magnanimous approach that does not pursue retribution and wholesale racial blame.

“But for the De Klerk Foundation, representing as it does, the last leader of that apartheid regime, to tell us, in blind acquiescence to its patron De Klerk, that apartheid was no crime against humanity, but a Soviet propaganda ploy, is an insult to the millions of South Africans who suffered apartheid, and a slap in the face of those who seek justice, peace and universal progress for all,” Mpumlwana said.

He said both De Klerk and his foundation are at odds with the spirit of the Nobel Peace Prize of which De Klerk is a recipient.

ANC condemns FW de Klerk Foundation for denying apartheid was a crime against humanity
JOHANNESBURG - The African National Congress has condemned the statement by the FW de Klerk Foundation "denying that apartheid was a crime against humanity as a blatant whitewash".

"Mr FW De Klerk’s assertion in the interview, 25 years into our democracy, which denies that apartheid was a crime against humanity, flies in the face of our commitments to reconciliation and nation-building," ANC spokesman Pule Mabe said in a statement on Sunday.

"The ANC calls on Mr De Klerk and his foundation not to undermine the compact that forms the foundation of our democracy, which is that we deal with the past through institutional mechanisms and the rule of law," he said.

The decision and the motivation by first the Organisation for African Unity (OAU) and then "the whole world through the United Nations" to declare apartheid a crime against humanity had been well documented. The foundation, instead of "continuing to plead blind ignorance", would do well to research this history.

The ANC would not abandon the project of nation-building. Despite these deeply ill-advised statements by the foundation, the ANC would not be derailed from the project of continuing to rebuild the nation from the ashes of apartheid and its legacies of poverty, unemployment, and inequality, Mabe said.
Some opinion:

EFF was correct in demanding De Klerk's removal from SONA
The anger directed at FW de Klerk, South Africa’s last apartheid president and its biggest denialist, at the State of the Nation Address on Thursday night, is more than justified.
De Klerk spat in all our faces when he denied that the apartheid government committed genocide against black people, during a television interview earlier this week.

Instead, he shockingly said more blacks were killed by fellow blacks than those murdered by the National Party government. Black-on-black violence, he called it.

As those words left his mouth, De Klerk lost any remaining respect or good faith some South Africans may have had in him. With those incredibly insensitive, irresponsible, unforgivable utterances, he slapped the hand of reconciliation that black South Africans, led by Nelson Mandela, had extended to him.

His attitude demonstrated De Klerk was not genuine in his apology for apartheid and its gross atrocities. The words he had said on many platforms, locally and internationally, now ring hollow.
BLF being BLF, amongst various other stances on this... Just to add FW de Klerk response to the EFF, this snip,

First we have to look at the origins of the charge: In November 1966 the UN General Assembly declared apartheid to be a crime against humanity - and in 1973 it adopted the Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid signatories were, according to Freedom House in New York, “not free”. Six were partly free - and only two were free. Ironically, South Africa was classified as “partly free” - and had a better human rights score than 27 of the signatories.

The 109 states that subsequently joined the Convention included none of the core democracies. According to the United States delegate:

“Deplorable as it is, we cannot, from a legal point of view, accept that apartheid can in this manner be made a crime against humanity. Crimes against humanity are so grave in nature that they must be meticulously elaborated and strictly construed under existing international law...”

The idea that apartheid was ‘a crime against humanity’ was, and remains, an ‘agitprop’ project initiated by the Soviets and their ANC/SACP allies to stigmatise white South Africans by associating them with genuine crimes against humanity - which have generally included totalitarian repression and the slaughter of millions of people.
I don't know why they went into depth, like bringing the Soviets into this than sticking only to the charge per se, but it is best to investigate the charge and I have previously mentioned that it came down to genocide on an observational basis and excluded individual prosecution.

Unless the EFF and supporters are trying to invoke the law introduced in 1998 I don't know where they are going with their activism... Will they try to prosecute 'any and everyone' involved with the state pre-1994 and also try to include Israel in all this? It is a dead-end, smoke, mirrors and all that.

I have to wonder why now? De Klerk has previously denied genocide without this much controversy, opinion and opposition. Odd timing that his name was dropped in the time Zuma's pressure mounted. Besides de Klerk is too old to go to prison, isn't that right Malema?

There are so many wrongs, back then and now, which cannot solely rest on the National Party.


Honorary Master
Nov 1, 2003
Bell Pottinger 2.0 at work... A trained eye can see it clearly.

We now know Malema is involved as an actor. Is Ramaphosa also part of this? Is the EFF perhaps a secret ANC project? All the seats the ANC lost, the EFF gained. Is the EFF the catch-all party for voters discontented with the ANC?

Has the ANC decided a full-on race conflict is better than taking the blame for the economy tanking? Are they setting all the evidence on fire in one fell swoop? Expropriation without compensation will do the trick. This race-baiting will do it too.
Last edited:


Honorary Master
Jun 5, 2006
Any justice she faced wouldn't be worse than dying.
I dunno - you think she's being punished in the afterlife?
Justice while she was alive would serve as a lesson to other racists, one would hope.


Honorary Master
Dec 15, 2009
I dunno - you think she's being punished in the afterlife?
Justice while she was alive would serve as a lesson to other racists, one would hope.
She would never have had to face justice and knew it.


Expert Member
Jan 13, 2013
Oh wait, so @Hemi300c didn't randomly necro the thread. Damn son, you're on point with the news.

Well any ways, Good riddance to bad rubbish. I await all the black-racist apologists to flood in like they did at the beginning of this thread.
The usual suspects.


Honorary Master
Aug 4, 2008
I dunno - you think she's being punished in the afterlife?
Justice while she was alive would serve as a lesson to other racists, one would hope.
I don't know but I'm sure she'd take a racism fine over dying.