Apartheid Afrikaners
SEE SOUTH AFRICA MUSK TRUMP
ONLY IMMIGRANTS TRUMP 2?
ALEC?
WHITE GENOCIDE REBOOT?
---
trump ambush fail; bulwark chill wht wine jacob zuma and other wacko min party; agr min wht ~ 30 yrs to ANC 525
afriforum // KKK term 1, tucker
---
-=-=
afriforum // KKK term 1, tucker
amerikaaners npr 11? 25
rww --> Anna Maria Barry-Jester and Sharon Lerner @ ProPublica: Trump Officials Want to Use Human Rights Aid to Advocate for White South Africans and Right-Wing Causes in Europe
Proposed grant recipients have included a free-speech organization that has fought against bans on “gay conversion therapy” and an Afrikaner group that promotes self-governance.
726
update
update
Sharon Lerner and Anna Maria Barry-Jester
November 5, 2026,
After slashing funding for programs that documented atrocities and protected human rights abroad, President Donald Trump’s State Department is now granting one of its first new human rights awards to a controversial South African organization that promotes the disputed notion that white farmers are a violently targeted, persecuted group, according to multiple sources knowledgeable about the funding.
The group expected to receive the nearly $1 million award, AfriForum, is a nonprofit that advocates on behalf of Afrikaners, a subset of South Africa’s white population. The organization says its members, who have a “God-given calling,” fight for Afrikaner interests and self-governance. The money will be used to “document hateful rhetoric and violent acts” against Afrikaners and other minority populations in the country.
The new award comes from a State Department bureau tasked with promoting democracy and human rights internationally. Until last year, those funds were mainly spent in poor and authoritarian nations — to fight corruption in the Democratic Republic of Congo, for example, or combat child exploitation and sexual abuse in Afghanistan. Since Trump returned to office, his appointees have transformed the bureau, gutting its staff, canceling programs and reorienting some of its funding toward conservative causes in Europe.
Samuel Samson, who was appointed as a deputy assistant secretary to the State Department bureau by Trump, has claimed the U.S. has a “civilizational” connection to Afrikaners, who descend primarily from Dutch migrants and predominantly speak Afrikaans. Samson, who has met with far-right leaders in Europe since joining the administration last year, has framed the U.S. government’s financial support for Afrikaners as grounded in “a common heritage, a common culture, a common way of life, shared history and ultimately a common anthropology.”
Samuel Samson Speaks at Lex Libertas Event
Samson, left, deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, is interviewed by Ernst Roets during a Lex Libertas press conference. Lex Libertas via YouTube
There’s a long shared political history between Afrikaner groups and white nationalists in the U.S., said Audie Klotz, a political science professor at Syracuse University who has studied those connections. But, she said, “There’s no heritage connection here. It’s pure scientific racism. In the history of U.S. immigration, there’s no direct connection between South Africa and the United States.”
AfriForum met with the Trump administration in February 2025 to plead for help. The group told officials that Afrikaners are subject to racial discrimination and murders that are more frequent and asked the administration to “act strongly against hate speech that incites violence” against them, according to a statement.
South Africa is plagued by high rates of violence, and some Afrikaners have been tortured and murdered. But independent researchers have found those killings represent a tiny fraction of murders across the country, whose victims are disproportionately people living in poor urban areas, where residents are predominantly Black. Official government statistics, and two formal inquiries into the matter, do not reveal a pattern of targeted violence against Afrikaners.
But Trump subscribes to the idea that white farmers face a “genocide” and has cited disproportionate violence against them as a reason for punishing Africa’s wealthiest nation. In February 2025, he issued an executive order that cut off hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to South Africa and welcomed Afrikaners to the U.S. as refugees. Since then, the administration has opened the doors to more than 16,000 white South Africans while halting virtually all other immigration. Officials recently told Congress they plan to invite as many as 17,500 Afrikaner refugees to the U.S. in 2027.
AfriForum did not respond to specific questions for this story but said that “our understanding is that the allocation has not yet been finalised. Should the allocation indeed be awarded to AfriForum, we will make a public announcement in this regard.”
The new award is the administration’s latest show of support for the Afrikaner cause. The white South African group governed the nation for decades under a brutal system of segregation known as apartheid, which kept the Black majority an impoverished underclass until the system was dismantled in 1994. Now, with Black South Africans governing the country, white people — of which Afrikaners are the majority — remain one of the wealthiest segments of the population.
The support has caused dismay among several former high-level diplomats, who spoke to ProPublica anonymously because they fear retribution from the administration.
Newly arrived South Africans at Washington Dulles International Airport in 2025. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Two former senior U.S. officials responsible for Africa policy said that they would never have met with AfriForum, let alone funded the group, because it was considered to be politically extreme and not credible. They described the organization as cherry-picking crime statistics to create a misleading narrative. “We would certainly not have funded what we would see as a racially incendiary initiative,” said one of the officials.
The decision to direct money toward the group comes after the Trump administration halted programs that advocated for the end of violence in African countries such as Sudan, where the Biden administration determined in 2025 that there was a genocide, calling it “the world’s largest humanitarian catastrophe.”
“It’s offensive to provide funding solely to this one group after we’ve cut off funding in countries undergoing real documented crises,” said David Jandura, who managed the Africa portfolio for the State Department’s human rights bureau for several years and lost his job during the mass layoffs in 2025.
Congress has also raised questions about how the award was made. A Senate aide to Democrats told ProPublica that despite repeated requests to State Department officials, they had not received a briefing outlining the recipients of funds earmarked for democracy and human rights, which they described as “highly unusual.”
“The Trump Administration proceeded with funding fringe right-wing causes internationally despite objections from Congress,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democrat and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, who described the lack of transparency as “unacceptable.”
In response to a series of questions about the AfriForum funding, a senior State Department official wrote in an email that the department does not comment on funding deliberations and that they routinely keep Congress informed of their actions, consulting extensively on this year’s programming. “The Administration has been clear about its concern about the abhorrent race-based discrimination and violence in South Africa,” the unnamed official wrote. “Human rights protections do not depend on a person’s income or ethnicity.”
In July, ProPublica revealed that the State Department originally intended to give the $1 million research award to Lex Libertas, a small organization founded last year by a former AfriForum executive named Ernst Roets. Trump officials later expanded the potential awardees to a small pool of handpicked organizations. The plan drew outrage from Congress over the content of the award as well as plans to bypass the typical competitive bidding process. After ProPublica’s reporting, the State Department released an open call for the funding opportunity, offering $986,500 to a nonprofit organization to “create a comprehensive record of violence affecting Afrikaner and other South African minority populations.” It’s this grant that is now being awarded to AfriForum.
Both AfriForum and Lex Libertas advocate for Afrikaner rights and have developed relationships with the Trump administration. Trump’s ambassador to South Africa, L. Brent Bozell III, visited AfriForum’s headquarters in September, praising the organization for its neighborhood watch programs while criticizing the South African government for not enacting policies requested by the Trump administration. AfriForum has also met with Trump officials in Washington, D.C., drawing public criticism from South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. And in September, Roets met with administration officials.
AfriForum was founded 20 years ago and, with some 300,000 members, claims to be the biggest civil rights organization in South Africa. It says it aims to “establish self-dependence and growing self-governance” and provides some local civic services, such as garbage collection and systems for reporting pot holes and broken traffic lights. The group has said it distances itself from “white supremacist and extremist groups” and that it disagrees with Trump’s assertion that white South African farmers are experiencing a “white genocide.” But it has also said the South African government is “targeting the continued existence of Afrikaners” through racial legislation and the downplaying of farm murders, among other things. Academics and former U.S. diplomats have repudiated some of the ideas the group promotes as racist.
Members of AfriForum assemble before a neighborhood patrol near Pretoria, South Africa, in 2025. Alet Pretorius/AP Photo
It unsuccessfully challenged a ban on the “gratuitous display” of the national flag flown during apartheid, which a South African court has found to be a form of hate speech. And while the group’s leader, Kallie Kriel, has said apartheid “was wrong,” he has also said it did not constitute “a crime against humanity” as the U.N. has determined, on the grounds that not enough people were killed during that time.
AfriForum has been focusing on farm attacks since at least 2009. In 2018, during Trump’s first presidency, Kriel and Roets, who was then his deputy, met with government officials in Washington, D.C., about the issue, and Roets spoke about it with Tucker Carlson on Fox News, as the chyron below him announced in all caps, “White farmers brutally murdered every week in SouthAfrica.”
Additional research on crimes against white South Africans is an unnecessary and confusing use of U.S. taxpayer dollars, said Carolyn Holmes, a professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, who studies democracy in southern Africa. Holmes noted that AfriForum already produces annual reports on crimes against farming communities. “These data already exist,” she said. “You don’t need a new study. You don’t even need a far-right study, we have those.”
The U.S. support offers more than a financial boost to the organization. “For some time, AfriForum has been campaigning for recognition of their claim that white people face discrimination and persecution,” said Alex Dyzenhaus, a lecturer in international relations and African politics at the University of St. Andrews. “Before, they were only getting the Tucker Carlsons and the far right of the news ecosystem. Now they have the U.S. government on their side.”
The Trump administration has made the plight of white, rural South Africans a key foreign policy issue. In addition to the early executive order, Trump held a contentious meeting with Ramaphosa in the White House last year where Trump claimed white farmers were being executed. The administration has also considered an ad campaign focused on encouraging more Afrikaners to come to the U.S.
In September, Roets of Lex Libertas met with the White House to discuss what he sees as the crisis facing the Afrikaner community and, along with the New York Young Republican Club, placed 3,000 white crosses on the National Mall to commemorate South African farm murders.
Roets declined to answer specific questions from ProPublica but, in a text message, described the murders of several Afrikaners that he knew personally. He also wrote, “I see the suffering of black people in South Africa, I am deeply moved by it, and I spend every day of my life campaigning to make things better for us all.”
Appearing at a press conference for the Lex Libertas event, Samson, the State Department official, showcased the sharp shift the administration has made in U.S. relations with South Africa. While apartheid has been understood globally as a symbol of racist oppression, Samson described the current South African government as having discriminatory “race-based” policies and a cautionary tale for the rest of the world.
At the end of apartheid, in 1994, South Africa was a “flourishing, prosperous society,” Samson said. Since then, the country has gone to “ruin.” He blamed the fall on a “radical ideological leftist movement that wears human rights, that wears tolerance and inclusivity, as a skin suit to advance their Marxist communist worldview.”
Part of the Trump administration’s solution to this perceived crisis, he said, was to provide the research funding.
Alex Mierjeski contributed research.
-=-=
-=-=
AN 10 26
Trump’s effort to rescue white South Africans from an imaginary genocide has a problem: they don't seem particularly eager to flee it, even with a straight ticket to America up for grabs.
In what appears to be a desperate attempt, State Department officials are considering spending about $335,000 to advertise the program and find out why they aren't interested, according to an internal proposal obtained by *The Guardian*.
The report reveals that applications from Afrikaners have “trended lower than expected” since the administration made it easy with an online registration launched in November 2025. Officials acknowledge they have no idea what is keeping them away from flying over.
“There’s currently little research about why Afrikaners are not applying to request referral into the US Refugee Admissions Program,” the proposal reads.
The research and advertising campaign is set to come in three stages. The first phase is to organize focus groups in several South African communities, including Pretoria, Stellenbosch and Orania, which garnered headlines as the nation’s ‘White Only’ community.
A survey of 1,000 Afrikaners would follow, testing what messages could persuade them to migrate. The final phase would be a six-month online campaign, primarily in Afrikaans, aimed at convincing people to immigrate.
The campaign plan is still just a proposal and has not been approved.
With an executive order in February 2025, Trump put the resettlement of Afrikaners at the top of his agenda. He did so on the grounds that white South Africans are being subjected to unfair property seizures and race discrimination.
The administration has been vocal in its promotion of “white genocide” talk as well, even though such claims have been roundly discredited by experts and denied outright by the government in South Africa.
South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola used Trump’s favorite term when describing the genocide allegations.
“The story of white genocide does not exist, it’s fake news,” Lamola said during a discussion in New York, adding that there is no evidence to back the White House claims.
Trump drastically cut Biden’s refugee admission cap from 125,000 to 7,500. He eventually increased it to 17,000 with Afrikaners in mind.
According to figures cited by The Guardian, the United States admitted 16,292 refugees in the fiscal year ending September 30, with nearly all being South African. That total, however, has not eased officials’ disappointment with how many are seeking to enter the program.
A State Department spokesperson defended the administration’s approach in a statement:
“We continue to process and admit as refugees Afrikaners in South Africa who are escaping the threat of government-sponsored race-based discrimination”.
“President Trump has been very clear that we are prioritizing the resettlement of Afrikaners in South Africa who are escaping government-sponsored race-based discrimination.”
Trump has had a difficult relationship with South Africa's president, Cyril Ramaphosa. Last year, when visiting the White House, Trump presented Ramaphosa with "evidence" of the mass killing of white South Africans, with pictures of burial sites, which were, in fact, showing humanitarian workers lifting body bags in Goma, Congo.
-=-=
MMA
Tucker Carlson complains that Wikipedia describes white genocide as a conspiracy theory
10/01/26
TRUMP LET IN A NEW BATCH AFRIKAANERS 10 26
-=-=
-=-=
South Africa-Trump row: US limits visas for officials over alleged anti-white discrimination
BBC 9 26
-=-=
rww --> Anna Maria Barry-Jester and Sharon Lerner @ ProPublica: Trump Officials Want to Use Human Rights Aid to Advocate for White South Africans and Right-Wing Causes in Europe
Proposed grant recipients have included a free-speech organization that has fought against bans on “gay conversion therapy” and an Afrikaner group that promotes self-governance.
726
---
AN 1 26
One religious scholar is warning that the 2026 midterm elections could prompt a violent response from far-right evangelical Christians.
During a Monday interview with Zeteo host John Harwood, Public Religion Research Institute founder and president Robert P. Jones – who holds an M. Div from the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and a Ph.D. from Emory University — spoke about how President Donald Trump's MAGA movement has captured a vast bulk of Christian evangelicals. Harwood asked Jones whether MAGA Christians were excusing Trump's "brutality and cruel behavior" due to innate racism, or if they were simply people fearing becoming a demographic minority and overwhelmed by the "loss of life they were accustomed to."
"Do you feel sorry for the people who are embracing what the Trump administration is doing because they're scared or what?" Harwood asked.
"Well, I should just say I am those people. These are my people. Like I said, I grew up in the deep, deep South," Jones said. "... This is deep for me, and personal. It's a big mix of emotions ... I feel some anger about it, for sure. But I also feel some compassion, mostly because I feel like what has happened is they have let their own fears take control of their lives, and they let it snuff out the primary vision of Christianity, which is supposed to be about love."
"There's even now, in some white evangelical circles, a straightforward and serious theological attack on the virtue of empathy," he continued. "Like that's where we are, right? They're deconstructing empathy because Elon Musk has cast empathy as the great weakness of the Western world ... I think those people are sincerely lost. They're lost religiously, they're lost politically, and I'm hoping we can call enough of them back to the fold in order to save the country."
Harwood then asked questions from viewers, including one who wanted Jones' perspective on whether the United States was on the brink of civil war given the Trump administration's actions in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The viewer pointed to Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and residents of Minneapolis asking local police to confront U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, calling it "extremely dangerous."
Jones responded by pointing to parallels from the 19th century, in which Christian denominations frequently split into North and South factions due to fundamental disagreements over the issue of chattel slavery. He added that the Episcopal Church felt compelled to dismantle its refugee resettlement program entirely due to its disagreement with the Trump administration prioritizing white Afrikaners from South Africa over Brown and Black refugees from other countries.
"So we're already seeing some moves, and even breaks within the Christian world," Jones said. "I think we may be heading for some very difficult days."
"You mean actual violence or do you mean very, very intense political disagreement? Harwood asked.
"I'm deeply, deeply worried about the midterm elections being a flashpoint for violence in this country," Jones responded.
Watch the segment below
---
SEN CHRIS M? PT OUT TO RUBIO IGNORE GENO IN SUDAN/GAZA, MAKE ONE UP IN SA
---
AN 5 25
South Africans are wearily attuned to governments’ Orwellian misuse of language. After all, South Africa is a country where a one-time government passed a law (the Natives Abolition of Passes and Coordination of Documents Act of 1952) which extended rather than abolishing the notorious pass system. This made it compulsory for black South Africans over the age of 16 to carry a passbook. And the same government passed the Extension of University Education Act of 1959 which made it more, not less, difficult for black students to register at “open” (or white) universities.
So perhaps they should not be unduly surprised that the government of the US has imported 49 Afrikaners and labelled them as “refugees”. The claim is that they are escaping from the persecution of Afrikaners – and white people more broadly – in South Africa today.
The Trump administration knows perfectly well this claim is a complete fabrication. As President Cyril Ramaphosa and his government have pointed out, there is no evidence whatsoever that Afrikaners or white people more generally are subject to genocide.
True, South Africa has one of the highest murder rates in the world. But it is poor black South Africans – not whites – who are principal victims of such deadly violence. Nor are Afrikaners/whites subject to persecution. Along with all other South Africans, their human rights are protected by a constitution. This is no mere piece of paper. Its provisions are (albeit imperfectly, and unlike in the US these days) largely enforced by the courts.
Furthermore, genocide implies the deliberate elimination of a people on racial, ethnic, or religious grounds. Therefore, if a genocide of whites and Afrikaners was taking place, we might assume that their numbers would be falling. In fact the reverse is true. The white population has continued to grow (albeit slowly) in absolute numbers since 1994.
Worse, the characterisation of Afrikaners as refugees at a moment in time when the people of Gaza are daily subject to a regime of death, terror, and murder inflicted on them by the Israeli government is not merely an absurdity but a downright insult to those genuinely subject to genocide.
So, what is really going on?
The drivers
Extensive commentary has correctly highlighted the motivations of the Trump administration.
First, the administration has launched an attack on what it terms the “tyranny” of “diversity, equity and inclusion” policies across the entire spectrum of public and private institutions in America. Critics argue this is driven by an appeal to Trump’s white Christian nationalist political base. Because post-apartheid South Africa, rightly or wrongly, has become the poster-country of diversity, equity and inclusion policies internationally, because of its constitutional commitment to non-racialism and diversity, it has been singled out for attack.
Secondly, labelling Afrikaners as refugees plays to the insecurities of Trump’s political base. This finds the idea of a white minority being ruled by a black majority government difficult to swallow.
Third, characterising Afrikaners as subject to genocide is a very deliberate response to South Africa’s charging of Israel as guilty of genocide against the Palestinian people before the International Court of Justice. But this is unacceptable to the US Christian nationalist right. For them the existence of Israel represents the realisation of Biblical truth – the return of Jews to the Holy Land.
Trump is saying that the US can and will play the same game, using it to clobber South Africa regardless of the groundlessness of the charge. But, being Trump, he will balance pandering to his support base against what economic benefits he can extract from South Africa.
The landscape
But what of the 49 Afrikaners themselves? Why have they chosen to accept the opportunity offered to them by the US government? After all, extensive attention in the South African media has been given to Afrikaners who have defiantly stated that
. VID]
The reasons they give are that it’s their home. And they fully accept that, at least formally, South Africa has become a non-racial democracy.
Likewise, as I have detailed in my book on Whites and Democracy in South Africa, Afrikaners and whites have not only survived in democratic South Africa but, generally, have prospered economically. Furthermore, whites as a “population group” (to use outdated apartheid-era terminology) have participated fully in South African democracy. They are more highly disposed to voting in elections than other racial groupings, and de facto, they are well represented in parliament and local government by the Democratic Alliance, which is a vigorous defender of their interests.
But (there is always a but), if we want to guess the motivations of Trump’s 49 “refugees”, we need to bear in mind the following.
First, until we know more about the personal circumstances of the individuals involved, we cannot really know what has driven them to take the drastic step of leaving families and their personal history behind by moving to America.
Second, most whites have responded to the arrival of democracy pragmatically. They have their numerous complaints, notably about equity employment (affirmative action policies in favour of blacks) which they view as discriminatory against whites. But they have continued to enjoy high rates of employment. Indeed they continue to occupy the higher ranks of employment in the private sector in disproportionate numbers.
However, although many whites continue to live in a de facto overwhelmingly white world, both at work and at their homes in suburbia, there remains a minority which has remained wholly unreconciled to the changes which have taken place politically and economically since 1994. The armed opposers linked to the far-right have long been defeated. But we may presume the 49 belong to a broader category of passive resisters who have withdrawn into a white world as much as possible.
Third, although most whites continue to do well economically, the changes which have taken place since 1994 have led to the re-appearance of a small class of largely uneducated poor whites who feel excluded from employment by equity employment legislation. And who generally feel the loss of their racial status under democracy.
Opportunists, not refugees
Having said all that, some interesting questions remain.
Presumably the Afrikaner 49 belonged to that category of whites which, for one reason or another, is disposed to leave South Africa. However, emigrating requires jumping through numerous hoops; meeting educational and professional qualifications, getting a job offer, having sufficient financial resources to take with them to support themselves and their families before they can qualify for recipient countries’ social security systems, and so on. Apart from the emotional costs involved, emigration is not always the easiest of options, even for those who wish to “escape”.
The evidence suggests that the heads of household among the Afrikaner 49 are drawn not only from that minority of Afrikaners who are totally unreconciled to democracy, but who – quite simply – are opportunists who have availed themselves of a short cut to emigrate.
Roger Southall, Professor of Sociology, *University of the Witwatersrand
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
---
an 5 25
MAGA is furious at the Episcopal Church for refusing a directive from the federal government to help resettle white South Africans granted refugee status.
Newsweek reports the church submitted its refusal days after almost 50 South Africans arrived at a U.S. airport under a fast-tracked refugee program that appears to only serve white south Afrikaners. Other groups, including Black Sudanese refugees fleeing religious violence — who are also from Africa — are not similarly fast-tracked.
The new arrivals are minority descendants of mainly Dutch and French colonial settlers who created the segregationist system of apartheid in 1948, which allows white people to legally steal land and resources from the majority Black population, who were relocated to segregated overcrowded, townships of lean-tos and shacks.
READ MORE: Top Senate Republican issues Trump an ultimatum
Data show 73 percent of privately owned land in South Africa is white-owned despite white people comprising only 7 percent of the population. In corporate South Africa, white individuals also occupy 62 percent of top management positions while 17 percent of leadership roles are held by Black managers.
Critics say Trump’s decision to expedite resettlement of Afrikaners bypasses an onerous refugee system that leaves thousands from conflict zones stuck in a years-long vetting processes and dangerous conditions.
Rev. Sean W. Rowe, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, confirmed in a letter to church members that the government contacted the church and expected it to resettle some of the South Africans under terms of a grant. But Rowe said the request posed a moral dilemma for the Episcopal Church, which has deep ties to the Anglican Church of Southern Africa and counts the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu — an outspoken apartheid opponent — among its spiritual forebears.
"In light of our church's steadfast commitment to racial justice and reconciliation and our historic ties with the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, we are not able to take this step," Rowe wrote. “… Accordingly, we have determined that, by the end of the federal fiscal year, we will conclude our refugee resettlement grant agreements with the U.S. federal government."
READ MORE:'Embarrassment:' Trump admin asks judge to hide it's tactics for mass layoffs
Right-wing figures roasted the Episcopal Church, with conservative political activist Charlie Kirk posting on X: "I guess you aren't a refugee if you are white. According to the Episcopal Church Jesus doesn't love white people."
Conservative commentator Alex Jones, a conspiracy theorist who settled a lawsuit with families of Sandy Hook victims after calling the mass shooting a “hoax”, wrote: "All Federal Funds MUST Be Pulled From The Episcopal Church. It's Time To Enforce The Separation Of Church And State."
Read the full Newsweek report here.
---
GGL 5 25
The Intercept
How Trump’s Embrace of Afrikaner “Refugees” Became a Joke in South Africa
1 day ago
The Guardian
White South African ‘refugees’? The jokes write themselves
1 day ago
The Guardian
US senator says giving Afrikaners refugee status turns asylum system into global apartheid – video
Video1 day ago
Also in the news
CNN
Trump fast-tracked processing of White South African refugees. But not everyone wants to leave
1 day ago
NPR
Why Baptists in North Carolina agreed to resettle Afrikaners as refugees
1 day ago
More news
[### 'I didn't come here for fun': Afrikaner defends refugee status ...
BBC
https://www.bbc.com › news › articles](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c98p3eple9eo)
7 days ago — In February, Trump signed an executive order granting refugee status to Afrikaners, such as Mr Kleinhaus, who he said were being persecuted. Mr ...
[### Addressing Egregious Actions of The Republic of South ...
The White House (.gov)
https://www.whitehouse.gov › ... › Presidential Actions](https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/addressing-egregious-actions-of-the-republic-of-south-africa/)
Feb 7, 2025 — (b) the United States shall promote the resettlement of Afrikaner refugees escaping government-sponsored race-based discrimination, including ...
[### Trump Ambushes South African President With Video of ...
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › World › Africa](https://www.nytimes.com/article/afrikaner-refugees-trump-south-africa.html)
16 hours ago — Why are Afrikaners being granted refugee status? Refugees can often wait years before they are processed and approved to travel to the United ...
[### White South Africans arrive in US under Trump refugee plan
BBC
https://www.bbc.com › news › articles](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crljn5046epo)
May 12, 2025 — A group of 59 white South Africans has arrived in the US, where they are to be granted refugee status. President Donald Trump has said the ...
[### Afrikaner “Refugees”
Caledon Citizen |
https://caledoncitizen.com › afrikaner-refugees](https://caledoncitizen.com/afrikaner-refugees/)
1 hour ago — Afrikaner “Refugees”. May 22, 2025 · 0 Comments. by GWYNNE DYER. As my flight landed in South Africa on Sunday, I looked in vain for the plane that was due ...
[### afrikaner-act-text.pdf
Representative Troy Nehls | (.gov)
https://nehls.house.gov › evo-media-document › a...](https://nehls.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/nehls.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/afrikaner-act-text.pdf)
To designate residents of South Africa as Priority 2 refugees of special humanitarian concern, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of ...
4 pages
Images
---
https://kpfa.org/episode/letters-and-politics-july-16-2019/
harry bridges strike
connects many dots eg bin ladin
angola--> // war on terror?
---
http://www.exposedbycmd.org/2017/06/28/reagan-vs-cities-battle-south-african-apartheid-lessons-trump-era
With the Trump administration threatening to withhold federal funds from cities and states offering protections to undocumented immigrants, a new report details similar tactics used by the Reagan administration to pressure cities and states to abandon anti-apartheid sanctions and divestment legislation.
The report “Reagan vs. Cities: The 20th Century Battle Over South African Apartheid & Lessons For The Trump Era” provides historical examples of how cities and states can wield power in the face of threats of retaliation for local policies that defy a president’s political agenda.
Between December 2016 and June 2017, researchers from Jobs to Move America combed through thousands of pages of declassified documents from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library — legal memos, policy guides, court briefings, and correspondence between companies and the Reagan administration.
“Reagan Vs. Cities and States: The 20th Century Battle over South African Apartheid” tells the story of how cities and states joined the fight against apartheid in South Africa and won even as the Reagan administration and special interest groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) sought to suppress those efforts.
ALEC was an early opponent of divestment efforts, distributing a report against divestment to federal, state, and local officials. As this new report details, ALEC was imbedded in the Reagan Administration’s push back on the sanctions movement and was considered by White House insiders to be crucial to providing the intellectual “firepower” for the push back in cities and states. ALEC opposed divestment throughout Reagan’s entire term and up until the dismantling of the apartheid regime, applauding Oregon for rolling back divestment in 1991.
ALEC has never apologized for those activities. ALEC has also long opposed socially responsible investing by states and cities, and to this day has been opposing shareholder responsibility efforts.
Now, the Trump administration is borrowing an idea from the ALEC playbook, threatening “sanctuary cities” with the removal of federal funds if they continue to aid immigrants. ALEC has long had a “model bill” condemning sanctuary cities.
From the report:
By 1991, 28 states, 1 territory, and 92 cities had imposed sanctions, divestment, or other measures on companies doing business in South Africa, costing U.S. corporations substantial sums — in order to stand up for the human rights of black South Africans repressed by a white supremacist regime. The Reagan administration continued to oppose these local efforts, as it had in the case of the New York City law, by implementing measures to undercut cities and states including the threat to withdraw federal funding for many local initiatives.
Notwithstanding the Reagan administration’s efforts, sustained opposition to the apartheid system caused its downfall in 1991. The sanctions and divestment movement is credited for playing a critical role in apartheid’s demise.
In 2017, President Donald Trump’s advisors have revisited the Reagan playbook to advance his bid to engage in mass deportations of undocumented immigrants working in the U.S. A few days after assuming office, Trump signed Executive Order 13768, “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States.” The Order requires state and local officials to share information about individuals’ immigration status with federal immigration officials. Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from cities that provide “sanctuary” to undocumented immigrants and do not abide by the Order. Although San Francisco and several other U.S. cities brought legal challenges to the order, the Trump administration continues to look for ways to implement their policies.
In the Trump era, as cities and states around the country prepare to challenge the White House, they can look to the example of the anti-apartheid movement, when grassroots groups and activists joined together with cities and states to fight the federal government’s threats and together helped the movement of black South Africans triumph over a repressive regime.
The report was written by Jobs to Move America, a national organization uniting community, labor, faith, civil rights, philanthropic, academic and environmental groups and the Center for Media and Democracy. CMD’s Executive Director, Lisa Graves, JMA’s Madeline Janis, and Dr. Mary Frances Berry, a leader of the Anti-Apartheid movement, participated in a call to announce the findings of the report this week.
---
==
bill mck RS 8/12 climate one des tutu, 3 bill % divest SA
So pure self-interest probably won't spark a transformative challenge to fossil fuel. But moral outrage just might – and that's the real meaning of this new math. It could, plausibly, give rise to a real movement.
Once, in recent corporate history, anger forced an industry to make basic changes. That was the campaign in the 1980s . It rose first on college campuses and then spread to municipal and state governments; 155 campuses eventually divested, and by the end of the decade, more than 80 cities, 25 states and 19 counties had taken some form of binding economic action against companies connected to the apartheid regime. "The end of apartheid stands as one of the crowning accomplishments of the past century," as Archbishop Desmond Tutu put it, "but we would not have succeeded without the help of international pressure," especially from "the divestment movement of the 1980s."
The fossil-fuel industry is obviously a tougher opponent, and even if you could force the hand of particular companies, you'd still have to figure out a strategy for dealing with all the sovereign nations that, in effect, act as fossil-fuel companies. But the link for college students is even more obvious in this case. If their college's endowment portfolio has fossil-fuel stock, then their educations are being subsidized by investments that guarantee they won't have much of a planet on which to make use of their degree. (The same logic applies to the world's largest investors, pension funds, which are also theoretically interested in the future – that's when their members will "enjoy their retirement.") "Given the severity of the climate crisis, a comparable demand that our institutions dump stock from companies that are destroying the planet would not only be appropriate but effective," says Bob Massie, a former anti-apartheid activist who helped found the Investor Network on Climate Risk. "The message is simple: We have had enough. We must sever the ties with those who profit from climate change – now."
---
blog:
http://www.williambowles.info/guests/2006/0206/abramoff_apartheid.html
jack Abramoff had actually first visited South Africa in 1983, as head of the College Republicans National Committee (CRNC). South Africa’s Mail and Guardian reported on February 10, 2006: “The IFF was officially headquartered in Washington, where the South Africans were given entrée into the American political establishment by Abramoff and the Young Republicans. But, it was effectively run from Johannesburg…Newsday reported that the Johannesburg office was “the nerve centre of IFF operations worldwide”.
Ambramoff then enlisted in South Africa’s cultural war and suddenly found himself as the head of Hollywood movie studio called Regency Enterprises. The idea was to make anti-communist films that could denigrate the anti-apartheid movement. Poof, Jack wrote a screenplay.
The movie was “Red Scorpion” starring the very Aryan-looking Dolph Lundgren. It pictured African liberation fighters as surrogates for Soviet totalitarians. The plot: “A Russian KGB agent is sent to Africa to kill an anti-Communist black revolutionary.” The tagline: “He’s a human killing machine. Taught to stalk. Trained to kill. Programmed to destroy. He’s played by their rules… Until now.” Jack Ambramoff’s alter ego and fantasy was now on the screen.
The movie was made in South African-occupied Namibia. It was denounced by Hollywood supporters of the cultural boycott like Martin Scorcese, Spike Lee and Robert DeNiro for supporting apartheid. Other critics called it “homoerotic” and overpatriotic.” He later executive produced a sequel, Red Scorpion 2.
Ambramoff has a pattern of first denying sleazy practices until forced to admit them. At first, he publicly denied South African financing. This past week the Mail & Guardian quotes one-time apartheid spy Craig Williamson as now admitting that the money came directly from the South African military:
“Among Abramoff’s South African projects was the anti-communist film Red Scorpion, made in South African-occupied Namibia and, according to Williamson, funded by the South African military.”
Why the military? The newspaper reveals: “The IFF was ostensibly founded as a conservative think-tank, but was in reality part of an elaborate South African military intelligence operation, code-named Operation Babushka. Established to combat sanctions and undermine the African National Congress, it also supported Jonas Savimbi and his rebel Angolan movement, Unita.”
The movie was modeled romantically on Savimbi’s “War for Freedom” but also riddled with stereotypes and propaganda, Sample exchange: “Colonel Zayas: Are you out of your mind? Lt. Nikolai: No. Just out of bullets. [Burps].”
Abramoff turned to his connections and got a soviet-made WWII-era T-34 tank with a 76mm canon for in the final battle sequence.
An amateur reviewer posted an insightful comment on a film website which may have foreseen the off-screen drama that Ambramoff himself is now starring in. “Looking beyond the mindless action scenes (which, despite the countless guns and explosions), there is a good fable about the possibility of manipulating truth, and how appearance is not always truth.”
Another citizen-reviewer noted” Yes, the same man who bribed over 60 congressmen and senators, robbed several native American tribes blind, tried to take out life insurance policies on tribal elders with himself as the beneficiary, and called the Choctaw tribal council “Monkeys” and “troglodytes,”had an interesting earlier career.
“He was disqualified from the student government election in his Beverly Hills elementary school for exceeding spending limits. He took over the young Republican movement in college with his schoolmates including Ralph Reed of the Christian Coalition, and longtime republican insider Grover Norquist.”
Last week, pictures of Abramoff and President Bush, photos whose existence was first denied by the White House, turned up on the internet. Yes, they knew each other and met several times.
Still to come are images of Abramoff on his African “liberation” safari taking up the white man’s burden in the name of discrediting Nelson Mandela. The African National Congress leader’s freedom was demanded by millions at the time, with the exception of then Congressman Dick Cheney who voted against a Congressional resolution calling for his release from prison. (Cheney also opposed overturning Ronald Reagan’s ban on sanctions against South Africa, a ban Jack Ambramoff worked to support.)