Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Second Boer War

  1. #1

    Second Boer War


    The Boer War Remembered



    The Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902 was more than the first major military clash of the 20th century. Pitting as it did the might of the globe-girdling British Empire, backed by international finance, against a small pioneering nation of independent-minded farmers, ranchers and merchants in southern Africa who lived by the Bible and the rifle, its legacy continues to resonate today. The Boers’ recourse to irregular warfare, and Britain’s response in herding a hundred thousand women and children into concentration camps foreshadowed the horrors of guerilla warfare and mass detention of innocents that have become emblematic of the 20th century.


    The Dutch, Huguenot and German ancestors of the Boers first settled the Cape area of South Africa in 1652. After several attempts, Britain took control of it in 1814. Refusing to submit to foreign colonial rule, 10,000 Boers left the Cape area in the Great Trek of 1835-1842. The trekkers moved northwards, first to Natal and then to the interior highlands where they set up two independent republics, the Orange Free State and the South African (Transvaal) Republic. The Boers (Dutch: “farmers”) worked hard to build a new life for themselves. But they also had to fight to keep their fledgling republics free of British encroachment and safe from native African attacks.


    Their great leader was Paul Kruger, an imposing, passionate and deeply religious man. The bearded, patriarchal figure was beloved by his people, who affectionately referred to him as “Oom Paul” (Uncle Paul). Born into a relatively well-to-do Cape colony farming family in 1825, he took part as a boy in the Great Trek. He married at the age of 17, became a widower at 21, remarried twice, and fathered 16 children. With just a few months of schooling, his reading was confined almost entirely to the Bible. He was an avid hunter, an expert horseman, and an able swimmer and diver.


    Over his lifetime, Kruger repeatedly proved his courage and resourcefulness in numerous pitched military engagements. When he was 14 he fought in his first battle, a commando raid against Matabele regiments, and also shot his first lion. While in his twenties he took part in two major battles against native black forces.


    Four times he was elected President of the Transvaal republic. His courage, honesty and devotion helped greatly to sustain the morale of his people during the hard years of conflict. A contemporary observer described Kruger as a “natural orator; rugged in speech, lacking in measured phrase and in logical balance; but passionate and convincing in the unaffected pleading of his earnestness.” note 1



    Gold and Diamonds

    The discovery of gold at Witwatersrand in the Transvaal in 1886 ended Boer seclusion, and brought a mortal threat to the young nation’s dream of freedom from alien rule. Like a magnet, the land’s rich gold deposits drew waves of foreign adventurers and speculators, whom the Boers called “uitlanders” (“outlanders”). By 1896 the population of Johannesburg had grown to more than a hundred thousand. Of the 50,000c white residents, only 6,205 were citizens. note 2


    As often happens in history, important aspects of the Anglo-Boer conflict came to light only years after the fighting had ended. In a masterful 1979 study, The Boer War, British historian Thomas Pakenham revealed previously unknown details about the conspiracy of British colonial officials and Jewish financiers to plunge South Africa into war. The men who flocked to South Africa in search of wealth included Cecil Rhodes, the renowned English capitalist and imperial visionary, and a collection of ambitious Jews who, together with him, were to play a decisive role in fomenting the Boer war.


    Barney Barnato, a dapper, vulgar fellow from London’s East End (born Barnett Isaacs), was one of the first of many Jews who have played a major role in South African affairs. Through pluck and shrewd maneuvering, by 1887 he presided over an enormous South African financial-business empire of diamonds and gold. In 1888 he joined with his chief rival, Cecil Rhodes, who was backed by the Rothschild family of European financiers, in running the De Beers empire, which controlled all South African diamond production, and thereby 90 percent of the world’s diamond output, as well as a large share of the world’s gold production. note 3 (In the 20th century, the De Beers diamond cartel came under the control of a German-Jewish dynasty, the Oppenheimers, who also controlled its gold-mining twin, the Anglo-American Corporation. With its virtual world monopoly on diamond production and distribution, and grip on a large part of the world’s gold production, the billionaire family has ruled a financial empire of unmatched global importance. It also controlled influential newspapers in South Africa. So great was the Oppenheimers’ power and influence in South Africa that it rivaled that of the formal government.) note 4


    In the 1890s the most powerful South African financial house was Wernher, Beit & Co., which was controlled and run by a Jewish speculator from Germany named Alfred Beit. Rhodes relied heavily on support from Beit, whose close ties to the Rothschilds and the Dresdner Bank made it possible for the ambitious Englishman to acquire and consolidate his great financial-business empire. note 5


    As historian Pakenham has noted, the “secret allies” of Alfred Milner, the British High Commissioner for South Africa, were “the London ‘gold-bugs’ — especially the financiers of the largest of all the Rand mining houses, Wernher-Beit.” Pakenham continued: “Alfred Beit was the giant — a giant who bestrode the world’s gold market like a gnome. He was short, plump and bald, with large, pale, luminous eyes and a nervous way of tugging at his grey moustache.” note 6


    Beit and Lionel Phillips, a Jewish millionaire from England, together controlled H. Eckstein & Co., the largest South African mining syndicate. Of the six largest mining companies, four were controlled by Jews. note 7


    By 1894, Beit and Phillips were conspiring behind the backs of Briton and Boer alike to “improve” the TransvaalVolksraad (parliament) with tens of thousands of pounds in bribe money. In one case, Beit and Phillips spent 25,000 pounds to arrange settlement of an important issue before the assembly. note 8



    The Jameson Raid

    On December 29, 1895, a band of 500 British adventurers forcibly tried to seize control of the Boer republics in an “unofficial” armed takeover. Rhodes, who was then also prime minister of the British-ruled Cape Colony, organized the venture, which Alfred Beit financed to the tune of 200,000 pounds. Phillips also joined the conspiracy. According to their plan, raiders led by Sir Leander Starr Jameson, a close personal friend of Rhodes, would dash from neighboring British territory into Johannesburg to “defend” the British “outlanders” there who, by secret prior arrangement, would simultaneously seize control of the city in the name of the “oppressed” aliens, and proclaim themselves the new government of Transvaal. In a letter about the plan written four months before the raid, Rhodes confided to Beit: “Johannesburg is ready … [this is] the big idea which makes England dominant in Africa, in fact gives England the African continent.” note 9


    Rhodes, Beit and Jameson counted on the secret backing in London of the new Colonial Secretary, Joseph Chamberlain (father of future Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain). Upon taking office in the administration of Prime Minister Salisbury, Chamberlain proudly proclaimed his arch-imperialist sentiments: “I believe in the British Empire, and I believe in the British race. I believe that the British race is the greatest of governing races that the world has ever seen.” Clandestinely Chamberlain provided the conspirators with rifles, and made available to them a tract of land as a staging area for the attack. note 10


    After 21 men lost their lives in the takeover attempt, Jameson and his fellow raiders were captured and put on trial. In Johannesburg, Transvaal authorities arrested Phillips for his part in organizing the raid. They found incriminating secret correspondence between him and co-conspirators Beit and Rhodes, which encouraged Phillips to confess his guilt. A Transvaal court leniently sentenced Jameson to 15 months imprisonment. Phillips was sentenced to death, but this was quickly commuted to a fine of 25,000 pounds. (Later, after returning to Britain, the financier was knighted for his services to the Empire, and during the First World War was given a high post in the Ministry of Munitions.)


    Although it proved a fiasco, the Jameson raid convinced the Boers that the British were determined, even at the cost of human lives, to rob them of their hard-won freedom. The blood of those who died in the abortive raid also figuratively baptized the alliance of Jewish finance and British imperialism. note 11


    Jan Christiann Smuts, the brilliant young Boer leader who would one day be Prime Minister of the Union of South Africa, later reflected: “The Jameson Raid was the real declaration of war in the Great Anglo-Boer conflict … And that is so in spite of the four years truce that followed … [the] aggressors consolidated their alliance … the defenders on the other hand silently and grimly prepared for the inevitable.” note 12



    Preparing for War

    Undaunted by the Jameson Raid disaster, British High Commissioner Milner, with crucial “gold bug” backing, began secretly to foment a full-scale war to drag the Boer lands into the Empire. While publicly preparing to “negotiate” with President Kruger over the status of the “uitlanders,” Milner was secretly confiding his intention to “screw” the Boers. At their May-June 1899 meeting, he demanded of Kruger an “immediate voice” for the flood of foreigners who had poured into the Transvaal republic in recent years. As the talks inevitably broke down, Kruger angrily declared: “It is our country you want!”


    Even as the “negotiations” were underway, Wernher, Beit & Co. was secretly financing an “outlander” army of 1,500, which eventually grew to 10,000. As Thomas Pakenham has noted: “The gold-bugs, contrary to the accepted view of later historians, were thus active partners with Milner in the making of the war.” note 13


    Horatio Herbert Kitchener, the illustrious warlord who commanded British forces in South Africa, 1900-1902, later privately acknowledged that a major factor in the conflict was that the Boers were “afraid of getting into the hands of certain Jews who no doubt wield great influence in the country.” note 14


    For Britain’s leaders, bringing the Boer republics under imperial rule seemed entirely logical and virtually pre-ordained. On the prevailing mind-set in London, historian Pakenham has written: note 15


    The independence of a Boer republic, bursting with gold and bristling with imported rifles, threatened Britain’s status as a “paramount” power. British paramountcy (alias supremacy) was not a concept in international law. But most of the British thought it made practical sense … Boer independence seemed worse than absurd; it was dangerous for world peace … The solution seemed to be to wrap the whole of South Africa in the Union Jack, the make the whole country a British dominion …


    Most of Britain’s leading newspapers pushed for war. This was especially true of the Jewish-owned or Jewish-controlled press, which included the influential conservative organ, The Daily Telegraph, owned by Lord Burnham (born Edward Levy), Oppenheim’s Daily News, Marks’ Evening News, and Steinkopf’s St. James Gazette. note 16


    Reflecting the official consensus in London, on August 26, 1899, Chamberlain delivered an uncompromising speech directed against the Boers, and two days later sent a threatening dispatch to Kruger. The British Colonial Secretary was, in effect, asking the Boers to surrender their sovereignty. In preparation for war against the republics, the Salisbury government resolved on September 8 to send an additional 10,000 troops to South Africa. When the Boer leaders learned a short time later that London was preparing a force of 47,000 men to invade the their lands, the two republics jointly began in earnest to ready their own troops and weapons for battle.


    With war now imminent, and Boer patience now exhausted, Kruger and his government issued an ultimatum on October 9, 1899. Tantamount to a declaration of war, it demanded the withdrawal of British forces and the arbitration of all points of disagreement. Two days later, after Britain had let the ultimatum expire, the war was on.



    A People’s War

    Boer men were citizen-soldiers. By law, all males in the two republics between the ages of 16 and 60 were eligible for war service. In the Transvaal, every male burgher was required to have a rifle and ammunition. At a military parade held in Pretoria, the Transvaal capital, on October 10, 1899, in honor of Kruger’s 74th birthday, ranchers from the bushveld, clerks and solicitors from the cities, and other battle-ready citizens rode or marched past their leader. Joining them were foreign volunteer fighters who had rallied to the Boer cause, including a thousand Dutchmen and Germans, and a contingent of a hundred Irishmen (including a youthful John MacBride, who was executed 17 years later for his role in the Dublin Easter Uprising). note 17


    Even as they prepared to face the might of the world’s foremost imperial power, the Boers were confident and determined. Although outnumbered, their morale was good. They were fighting for their land, their freedom and their way of life — and on familiar home territory. As British historian Phillip Knightley has written: note 18

    The Boer, neither completely civilian nor completely a soldier, alternating between tending his farm and fighting the British, lightly armed with an accurate repeating rifle, mobile, able to live for long periods on strips of dried meat and a little water, drawing on the hidden support of his countrymen, unafraid to flee when the battle was not in his favor, choosing his ground and his time for attack, was more than a match for any regular army, no matter what his strength.


    Boers fighters were also chivalrous in combat. A few years after the end of the war, when passions had cooled somewhat, the London Times‘ history of the war conceded: note 19

    In the moment of their triumph the Boers behaved with the same unaffected kindheartedness … which they displayed after most of their victories. Although exultant they were not insulting. They fetched water and blankets for the wounded and treated prisoners with every consideration.


    Although the Boers scored some impressive initial battlefield victories, the numerically superior British forces soon gained the upper hand. But even the capture of their main towns and rail lines did not bring the Boers to capitulate. Boer “commandos,” outnumbered about four to one but supported by the people, launched a guerilla campaign against the invaders. Striking without warning, they kept the enemy from totally subjugating the land and its people.


    Mounted on horseback, the Boer “commando” fighter didn’t look anything like a typical soldier. Usually with a long beard, he wore rough farming clothes and a wide-brimmed hat, and slung belts of bullets over both shoulders.



    ‘Methods of Barbarism’

    Lord Kitchener, the new British commander, adopted tactics to “clean up” a war that many in Britain had considered already won. In waging ruthless war against an entire people, he ordered his troops to destroy livestock and crops, burn down farms, and herd women and children into “camps of refuge.” Reports about these grim internment centers, which were soon called concentration camps, shocked the western world.



    Britain’s new style of waging war was summarized in a report made in January 1902 by Jan Smuts, the 31-year-old Boer general (and future South African prime minister):

    Lord Kitchener has begun to carry out a policy in both [Boer] republics of unbelievable barbarism and gruesomeness which violates the most elementary principles of the international rules of war.

    Almost all farmsteads and villages in both republics have been burned down and destroyed. All crops have been destroyed. All livestock which has fallen into the hands of the enemy has been killed or slaughtered.

    The basic principle behind Lord Kitchener’s tactics has been to win, not so much through direct operations against fighting commandos, but rather indirectly by bringing the pressure of war against defenseless women and children.

    … This violation of every international law is really very characteristic of the nation which always plays the role of chosen judge over the customs and behavior of all other nations.



    Shooting Prisoners

    John Dillon, an Irish nationalist Member of Parliament, spoke out against the British policy of shooting Boer prisoners of war. On February 26, 1901, he made public a letter by a British officer in the field:

    The orders in this district from Lord Kitchener are to burn and destroy all provisions, forage, etc., and seize cattle, horses, and stock of all sorts wherever found, and to leave no food in the houses of the inhabitants. And the word has been passed round privately that no prisoners are to be taken. That is, all the men found fighting are to be shot. This order was given to me personally by a general, one of the highest in rank in South Africa. So there is no mistake about it. The instructions given to the columns closing round De Wet north of the Orange River are that all men are to be shot so that no tales may be told. Also, the troops are told to loot freely from every house, whether the men belonging to the house are fighting or not.


    Dillon read from another letter by a soldier that had been published in the Liverpool Courier: “Lord Kitchener has issued orders that no man has to bring in any Boer prisoners. If he does, he has to give him half his rations for the prisoner’s keep. Dillon quoted a third letter by a soldier serving with the Royal Welsh Regiment and published in the Wolverhampton Express and Star: “We take no prisoners now … There happened to be a few wounded Boers left. We put them through the mill. Every one was killed.


    On January 20, 1902, John Dillon once again expressed his outrage in the House of Commons against Britain’s “wholesale violation of one of the best recognized usages of modern war, which forbids you to desolate or devastate the country of the enemy and destroy the food supply on such a scale as to reduce non-combatants to starvation.” “What would have been said by civilized mankind,” Dillon asked, “if Germany on her march on Paris [in 1870] had turned the whole country into a howling wilderness and concentrated the French women and children into camps where they died in thousands? All civilized Europe would have rushed in to the rescue.” note 20



    Arming the Natives

    British Commander-in-Chief Herbert Kitchener’s “scorched earth” policies against the Boers included burning their farmsteads, destruction of their crops and livestock, and herding their women and children into concentration camps.


    Defying the prevailing racial sensibilities of the period, General Kitchener supplied rifles to native black Africans to fight the white Boers. Eventually the British armed at least 10,000 blacks, although the policy was kept secret for fear of offending white public opinion, especially back home. As it happens, the blacks proved to be poor soldiers, and in many cases they murdered defenseless Boer women and children across the countryside. The fate of the Boer women and children who escaped the hell of the internment camps was therefore often more terrible than that of those who did not.


    In his January 1902 report, General Smuts described how the British recruited black Africans:

    In the Cape Colony the uncivilized Blacks have been told that if the Boers win, slavery will be brought back in the Cape Colony. They have been promised Boer property and farmsteads if they will join the English; that the Boers will have to work for the Blacks, and that they will be able to marry Boer women.


    Arming the blacks, Smuts said, “represents the greatest crime which has ever been perpetrated against the White race in South Africa.” Boer commando leader Jan Kemp similarly complained that the war was being fought “contrary to civilized warfare on account of it being carried on in a great measure with Kaffirs.” note 21 The arming of native blacks was a major reason cited by the Boer leaders for finally giving up the struggle: note 22

    … The Kaffir tribes, within and without the frontiers of the territories of the two republics, are mostly armed and are taking part in the war against us, and through the committing of murders and all sorts of cruelties have caused and unbearable condition of affairs in many districts of both republics.



    Concentration Camps

    Britain’s internment centers in South Africa soon became known as concentration camps, a term adapted from the reconcentrado camps that Spanish authorities in Cuba had set up to hold insurgents. note 23


    A crusading 41-year-old English spinster, Emily Hobhouse, visited the South Africa camps and, armed with this first-hand knowledge, alerted the world to their horrors. She told of internees “… deprived of clothes … the semi-starvation in the camps … the fever-stricken children lying… upon the bare earth … the appalling mortality.” She also reported seeing open trucks full of women and children, exposed to the icy rain of the plains, sometimes left on railroad siding for days at a time, without food or shelter. “In some camps,” Hobhouse told lecture audiences and newspaper readers back in England, “two and sometimes three different families live in one tent. Ten and even twelve persons are forced into a single tent.” Most had to sleep on the ground. “These people will never ever forget what has happened,” She also declared. “The children have been the hardest hit. They wither in the terrible heat and as a result of insufficient and improper nourishment … To maintain this kind of camp means nothing less than murdering children.” note 24


    In a report to members of Parliament, Hobhouse described conditions in one camp she had visited: note 25

    … A six month old baby [is] gasping its life out on its mother’s knee. Next [tent]: a child recovering from measles sent back from hospital before it could walk, stretched on the ground white and wan. Next a girl of 21 lay dying on a stretcher. The father … kneeling beside her, while his wife was watching a child of six also dying and one of about five drooping. Already this couple had lost three children.

    Hobhouse found that none of their hardships would shake the Boer women’s determination, not even seeing their own hungry children die before their eyes. They “never express,” she wrote, “a wish that their men must give way. It must be fought out now, they think, to the bitter end.”


    Deadly epidemics — typhoid, dysentery and (for children) measles — broke out in the camps and spread rapidly. During one three week period, an epidemic at the camp at Brandfort killed nearly a tenth of the entire inmate population. In the Mafeking camp, at one point there were 400 deaths a month, most of them caused by typhoid, which worked out to an annual death rate of 173 percent.


    Altogether the British held 116,572 Boers in their South African internment camps — that is, about a fourth of the entire Boer population — nearly all of them women and children. After the war, an official government report concluded that 27,927 Boers had died in the camps — victims of disease, undernourishment and exposure. Of these, 26,251 were women and children, of whom 22,074 were children under the age of 16. Among the nearly 115,000 black Africans who were also interned in the British camps, nearly all of whom were tenant workers and servants of the better-off Boers, it is estimated that more than 12,000 died. note 26


    After meeting with Hobhouse, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, leader of the Liberal Party opposition (and future Prime Minister), publicly declared: “When is a war not a war? When it is waged by methods of barbarism in South Africa.” This memorable phrase — “methods of barbarism” — quickly became widely quoted, provoking both warm praise and angry condemnation. note 27


    Most Englishmen, who supported their government’s war policy, did not wish to hear such talk. Echoing the widespread sentiment in favor of the war, the London Times editorialized that Campbell-Bannerman’s remarks were irresponsible, if not subversive. The influential paper’s reasoning reflected the prevailing “my country, right or wrong” attitude. “When a nation is committed to a serious struggle in which its position in the world is at stake,” the Times told its readers, “it is the duty of every citizen, no matter what his opinion about the political quarrel, to abstain at the very least from hampering and impeding the policy of his country, if he cannot lend his active support.” note 28


    David Lloyd George, an MP who would later serve as his country’s Prime Minister during the First World War, accused the British authorities of pursuing “a policy of extermination” against women and children. Granted, it was not a direct policy, he said, but it was one that was having that effect. “… The war is an outrage perpetrated in the name of human freedom,” Lloyd George protested. He also expressed concern over the impact of these cruel policies on Britain’s long-term interests: note 29

    When children are being treated in this way and dying, we are simply ranging the deepest passions of the human heart against British rule in Africa…. It will always be remembered that this is the way British rule started there [in the Boer republics], and this is the method by which it was brought about.


    During a speech in Parliament on February 18, 1901, David Lloyd George quoted from a letter by a British officer: “We move from valley to valley, lifting cattle and sheep, burning and looting, and turning out women and children to weep in despair beside the ruin of their once beautiful homesteads.” Lloyd George commented: “It is a war not against men, but against women and children.” note 30


    “The conscience of Britain,” historian Thomas Pakenham later observed, “was stirred by the holocaust in the camps, just as the conscience of America was stirred by the holocaust in Vietnam.” It was largely as a result of public outrage in Britain over conditions in the camps — for which Emily Hobhouse deserves much of the credit — that measures were eventually taken that sharply reduced the death rate. note 31



    Propaganda

    In this war, as in so many others, propagandists churned out a stream of malicious lies to generate popular backing for the aggression and killing. British newspapers, churchmen and war correspondents invented hundreds of fake atrocity stories that portrayed the Boers as treacherous and arrogant brutes. These included numerous shocking claims alleging that Boer soldiers massacred pro-British civilians, that Boer civilians murdered British soldiers, and that Boers executed fellow-Boers who wanted to surrender. “There was virtually no limit to such invention,” historian Phillip Knightley has noted.


    A widely shown newsreel film purported to show Boers attacking a Red Cross tent while British doctors and nurses treat the wounded. Actually this fake had been shot with actors on Hampstead Heath, a suburb of London. note 32



    Exposing the War-Makers

    Courtroom scene from the 1980 Australian film “Breaker Morant,” which highlighted the British policy of shooting Boer prisoners during the war in South Africa. The film dramatized the case of several Australians serving with the Bush Veldt Carbineers, a special “anti-commando” unit, who were tried and executed in February 1902 for having shot twelve Boer prisoners. In the award-winning film, Edward Woodward played the role of Lt. “Breaker” Morant.


    In the United States, as in most of Europe, public interest in the conflict was keen. Although public sentiment in these countries was largely pro-Boer and anti-British, the government leaders — fearful of the adverse consequences of defying Britain — were publicly pro-British, or at least studiously neutral.


    William Jennings Bryan, Andrew Carnegie and many other Americans were embarrassed by the striking parallel between US and British policy of the day: just as Britain was forcibly subduing the Boers in southern Africa, American troops were brutally suppressing native fighters for independence in the newly-acquired Philippines. Echoing a widespread American sentiment of the day, Mark Twain declared: “I think that England sinned when she got herself into a war in South Africa which she could have avoided, just as we have sinned in getting into a similar war in the Philippines.” In spite of such sentiment, the government of President McKinley and the jingoistic newspapers of William Randolph Hearst sided with Britain. note 33


    But even in Britain itself, there was considerable opposition to the war. In the House of Commons, Liberal MP Philip Stanhope (later Baron Weardale) introduced a resolution expressing disapproval of Britain’s military campaign against the Boer republics. In tracing the war’s origins, he said: note 34

    Accordingly, the [pro-British] South African League was formed, and Mr. Rhodes and his associates — generally of the German Jew extraction — found money in thousands for its propaganda. By this league in [British] South Africa and here [in Britain] they have poisoned the wells of public knowledge. Money has been lavished in the London world and in the press, and the result has been that little by little public opinion has been wrought up and inflamed, and now, instead of finding the English people dealing with this matter in a truly English spirit, we are dealing with it in a spirit which generations to come will condemn …


    Opposition in Britain to the war came especially from the political left. The Social Democratic Federation (SDF), led by Henry M. Hyndman, was especially outspoken. Justice, the SDF weekly, had already warned its readers in 1896 that “Beit, Barnato and their fellow-Jews” were aiming for “an Anglo-Hebraic Empire in Africa stretching from Egypt to Cape Colony, designed to swell their “overgrown fortunes.” Since 1890, the SDF had repeatedly cautioned against the pernicious influence of “capitalist Jews on the London press.” When war broke out in 1899, Justice declared that the “Semitic lords of the press” had successfully propagandized Britain into a “criminal war of aggression.” note 35


    David Lloyd George, an influential Member of Parliament who would later serve as his country’s Prime Minister during the First World War, accused Britain of waging a “war of extermination” against Boer women and children.


    Opposition to the war was similarly strong in the British labor movement. In September 1900, the Trades Union Congress passed a resolution condemning the Anglo-Boer war as one designed “to secure the gold fields of South Africa for cosmopolitan Jews, most of whom had no patriotism and no country.” note 36


    No member of the House of Commons spoke out more vigorously against the war than John Burns, Labour MP for Battersea. The former SDF member had gained national prominence as a staunch defender of the British workingman during his leadership of the dockworkers’ strike of 1889. “Wherever we examine, there is the financial Jew,” Burns declared in the House on February 6, 1900, “operating, directing, inspiring the agencies that have led to this war.”


    “The trail of the financial serpent is over this war from beginning to end.” The British army, Burns said, had traditionally been the “Sir Galahad of History.” But in Africa it had become the “janissary of the Jews.” note 37


    Burns was a legendary fighter for the rights of the British worker, a tireless champion of environmental reform, women’s rights and improved municipal services. Even Cecil Rhodes had referred to him as “the most eloquent leader of the British democracy.” It was not merely the Jewish role in Capitalism that alarmed Burns. To his diary he once confided that “the undoing of England is within the confines of our afternoon journey amongst the Jews” of East London.note 38


    Irish nationalist Members of Parliament had special reason to sympathize with the Boers, whom they regarded — like the people of Ireland — as fellow victims of British duplicity and oppression. One Irish MP, Michael Davitt, even resigned his seat in the House of Commons in “personal and political protest against a war which I believe to be the greatest infamy of the nineteenth century.” note 39


    At the age of 23, Cecil Rhodes wrote of his great goal: “Why should we not form a secret society with but one object, the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilized world under British rule, for the recovery of the United States, for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire? What a dream, but yet it is probable, it is possible,” (Source: A. Thomas, “Rhodes,” 1997, p. 6.)


    One of the most influential campaigners against the “Jew-imperialist design” in South Africa was John A. Hobson (1858-1940), a prominent journalist and economist. note 40 In 1899 the Manchester Guardian sent him to South Africa to report first-hand for its readers on the situation there. During his three month investigation, Hobson became convinced that a small group of Jewish “Randlords” was essentially responsible for the strife and conflict. note 41


    In a Guardian article dispatched from Johannesburg just a few weeks before the outbreak of the war, he told readers of the influential liberal daily: note 42

    In Johannesburg the Boer population is a mere handful of officials and their families, some five thousand of the population; the rest is about evenly divided between white settlers, mostly from Great Britain, and the [native black] Kaffirs, who are everywhere in White Man’s Africa the hewers of wood and the drawers of water.

    The town is in some respects dominantly and even aggressively British, but British with a difference which it takes some little time to understand. That difference is due to the Jewish factor. If one takes the recent figures of the census, there appears to be less than seven thousand Jews in Johannesburg, but the experience of the street rapidly exposes this fallacy of figures. The shop fronts and business houses, the market place, the saloons, the “stoops” of the smart suburban houses and sufficient to convince one of the large presence of the chosen people. If any doubt remains, a walk outside the Exchange, where in the streets, “between the chains,” the financial side of the gold business is transacted, will dispel it.

    So far as wealth and power and even numbers are concerned Johannesburg is essentially a Jewish town. Most of these Jews figure as British subjects, though many are in fact German and Russian Jews who have come to Africa after a brief sojourn in England. The rich, rigorous, and energetic financial and commercial families are chiefly English Jews, not a few of whom here, as elsewhere, have Anglicised their names after true parasitic fashion. I lay stress on this fact because, though everyone knows the Jews are strong, their real strength here is much underestimated. Though figures are so misleading, it is worth while to mention that the directory of Johannesburg shows 68 Cohens against 21 Joneses and 53 Browns.

    The Jews take little active part in the Outlander agitation; they let others do that sort of work. But since half of the land and nine-tenths of the wealth of the Transvaal claimed for the Outlander are chiefly theirs, they will be chief gainers by an settlement advantageous to the Outlander.


    In an influential book published in 1900, The War in South Africa, Hobson warned and admonished his fellow countrymen: note 43

    We are fighting in order to place a small international oligarchy of mine-owners and speculators in power at Pretoria. Englishmen will surely do well to recognize that the economic and political destinies of South Africa are, and seem likely to remain, in the hands of men most of whom are foreigners by origin, whose trade is finance, and whose trade interests are not chiefly British.


    Anti-imperialist and working-class circles acclaimed Hobson’s widely read work. Commenting on it, the weekly Labour Leader, semi-official organ of the Independent Labour Party, noted: “Modern imperialism is really run by half a dozen financial houses, many of them Jewish, to whom politics is a counter in the game of buying and selling securities.”note 44 In a January 1900 essay, Labour Leader editor (and MP) J. Keir Hardie told readers: note 45

    The war is a capitalist’ war, begotten by capitalists’ money, lied into being by a perjured mercenary capitalist press, and fathered by unscrupulous politicians, themselves the merest tools of the capitalists … As Socialists, our sympathies are bound to be with the Boers. Their Republican form of Government bespeaks freedom, and is thus hateful to tyrants …



    Defeat

    As the year 1900 drew to a close, British forces held the major Boer towns, including the capitals of the two republics, as well as the main Boer railway lines. Paul Kruger, the man who personified his people’s resistance to alien rule, had been forced into exile. By the end of 1901, the Boers’ military forces had been reduced to some 25,000 men in the field, deployed in scattered and largely un-coordinated commando units. The hard-pressed defenders had only a shadow of a central government.


    In the spring of 1902, with their land almost entirely under enemy occupation, and their remaining fighters threatened with annihilation and militarily outnumbered six to one, the Boers sued for peace. On May 31, 1902, their leaders concluded 33 months of heroic struggle against greatly superior forces by signing a treaty that recognized King Edward VII as their sovereign. President Kruger learned of the surrender while living in European exile, far from his beloved homeland. After devoting his life to his cherished dream of a self-reliant white people’s republic, he died in 1904 in Switzerland, a blind and broken man.



    Conclusion

    Sir Alfred Milner, appointed British High Commissioner for South Africa. When the fighting began in October 1899, the British confidently expected their troops to victoriously conclude the conflict by Christmas. But this actually proved to be the longest, costliest, bloodiest and most humiliating war fought by Britain between 1815 and 1914. Even though the military forces mobilized in South Africa by the world’s greatest imperial power outnumbered the Boer fighters by nearly five to one, they required almost three years to completely subdue the tough pioneer people of fewer than half a million.


    Britain deployed some 336,000 imperial and 83,000 colonial troops — or 448,000 altogether. Of this force, 22,000 found a grave in South Africa, 14,000 of them succumbing to sickness. For their part, the two Boer republics were able to mobilize 87,360 fighters, a force that included 2,120 foreign volunteers and 13,300 Boer-related Afrikaners from the British-ruled Cape and Natal provinces. In addition to the more than 7,000 Boer fighters who lost their lives, some 28,000 Boers perished in the British concentration camps — nearly all of them women and children. note 46


    The war’s non-human costs were similarly appalling. As part of Kitchener’s “scorched-earth” campaign, British troops wrought terrible destruction throughout the rural Boer areas, especially in the Orange Free State. Outside of the largest towns, hardly a building was left intact. Perhaps a tenth of the prewar horses, cows and other farm stock remained. In much of the Boer lands, no crops had been sown for two years. note 47


    Even by the standards of the time (and certainly by those of today), British political and military leaders committed frightful war crimes and crimes against humanity against the Boers of South Africa — crimes for which no one was ever brought to account. General Kitchener, for one, was never punished for introducing measures that even a future prime minister called “methods of barbarism.” To the contrary, after concluding his South African service he was named a viscount and a field marshal, and then, at the outbreak of the First World War, was appointed Secretary of War. Upon his death in 1916, he was remembered not as a criminal, but rather idolized as a personification of British virtue and rectitude. note 48


    In a sense, the Anglo-Boer conflict was less a war between combatants than a military campaign against civilians. The number of Boer women and children who perished in the concentration camps was four times as large as the number of Boer fighting men who died (of all causes) during the war. In fact, more children under the age of 16 perished in the British camps than men were killed in action on both sides.


    The boundless greed of the Jewish “gold bugs” coincided with the imperialistic aims of British Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain, the dreams of gold and diamond baron Cecil Rhodes, and the political ambitions of Alfred Milner. On the altar of their avarice and ambition, they sacrificed the lives of some 30,000 people who wanted only to live in freedom, as well as 22,000 young men of Britain and her dominions.


    At its core, Britain’s leaders were willing to sacrifice the lives of many of her own sons, and to kill men, women and children in a far-away continent, to add to the wealth and power of an already immensely wealthy and powerful worldwide empire. Few wars during the past one hundred years were as avoidable, or as patently crass in motivation as was the South African War of 1899-1902.

    ________________________________________


    Notes

    1. M. Davitt, The Boer Fight For Freedom, p. 425. See also: A. Thomas, Rhodes, pp. 143-144; F. Welsh, South Africa: A Narrative History, p. 303; “Kruger, Stephanus Johannes Paulus,” Encyclopaedia Britannica (Chicago), 1957 edition, vol. 13, pp. 506-507.
    2. F. Welsh, South Africa: A Narrative History, p. 302.
    3. A. Thomas, Rhodes, pp. 172-181; Reader’s Digest Association, Illustrated History of South Africa, p. 174; See also S. Kanfer, The Last Empire, esp. pp. 96, 101-111.
    4. See S. Kanfer, The Last Empire.
    5. J. Flint, Cecil Rhodes, pp. 86-93. See also: P. Emden, Randlords (1935).
    6. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 86-87.
    7. G. Saron and L. Hotz, eds., The Jews in South Africa, pp. 193-194.
    8. Report of the Select Committee of the Cape of Good Hope House of Assembly on the Jameson Raid (1897), pp. 165, 167.
    9. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. xxv, 87, 121; A. Thomas, Rhodes, p. 284.
    10. A. Thomas, Rhodes, pp. 284-304; S. Kanfer, The Last Empire, pp. 129-131; Chamberlain’s speech of Nov. 11, 1895, is also quoted in: Robin W. Winks, ed., British Imperialism (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967), p. 80.
    11. G. Saron & L. Hotz, eds., The Jews in South Africa (1955), pp. 193-194; Second Report from the Select Committee on British South Africa (1897), p. vii.
    12. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, p. 1. Also quoted in: A. Thomas, Rhodes, p. 337.
    13. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, p. 88.
    14. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, p. 518.
    15. T. Pakenham, Scramble, p. 558.
    16. Claire Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility” (1978), p. 4.
    17. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 90-92, 103, 104, 107.
    18. P. Knightley, The First Casualty (1976), pp. 77-78.
    19. Quoted in: Phillip Knightley, The First Casualty, p. 75.
    20. W. Ziegler, ed., Ein Dokumentenwerk Über die Englische Humanität (1940), p. 199.
    21. Reader’s Digest Association, Illustrated History of South Africa, p. 246.
    22. Reader’s Digest Association, Illustrated History of South Africa, p. 246.
    23. During the American Civil War, Union forces rounded up large numbers of civilians who were considered hostile to Federal authority and interned them in “posts.” President Truman’s grandmother, with six of her children, was held in one such “post,” which Truman said was really a “concentration camp.” Source: Merle Miller, Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman (New York: 1974), pp. 78-79. See also: M. Weber “The Civil War Concentration Camps,”The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1981, p. 143. In September 1918, the fledgling Soviet government issued a decree that ordered: “It is essential to protect the Soviet Republic from class enemies by isolating them in concentration camps.” Sources: D. Volkogonov, Lenin: A New Biography (New York: 1994), p. 234; M. Heller & A. Nekrich, Utopia in Power (New York: 1986), p. 66.
    24. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 533-539; T. Pakenham, Scramble, pp. 578; A rather detailed report by Hobhouse about the camps is in: S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, pp. 198-207.
    25. P. Knightley, The First Casualty, pp. 75-76. Source cited: UK Public Record Office, W.O. 32/8061.
    26. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 607; T. Pakenham, Scramble, pp. 578-579; Reader’s Digest Association, Illustrated History of South Africa, p. 256.
    27. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, p. 534, 540-541; S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, pp. 216, 238.
    28. S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, pp. 238-239 (note)
    29. P. Knightley, The First Casualty, p. 72; T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 539-540.
    30. In a speech on Nov. 27, 1899, Lloyd George said that the Uitlanders on whose behalf Britain had presumably gone to war were German Jews. Right or wrong, the Boers were better than the people Britain was defending in South Africa. And in a speech on July 25, 1900, Lloyd George said: “… A war of annexation, however, against a proud people must be a war of extermination, and that is unfortunately what it seems we are committing ourselves to — burning homesteads and turning women and children out of their homes.” Source: Bentley Brinkerhoff Gilbert, David Lloyd George: A Political Life (Ohio State Univ. Press, 1987), pp. 183, 191.
    31. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 547-548.
    32. P. Knightley, The First Casualty, pp. 72, 73, 75.
    33. Byron Farwell, “Taking Sides in the Boer War,” American Heritage, April 1976, pp. 22, 24, 25.
    34. Speech of October 18, 1899. S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, p. 43.
    35. C. Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility” (1978), pp. 5, 15; Robert S. Wistrich,Antisemitism (1992), p. 105-106, p. 281 (n. 10, 11). Source cited: C. Hirshfield, “The British Left and the ‘Jewish Conspiracy’,” Jewish Social Studies, Spring 1981, pp. 105-107.
    36. C. Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility,” pp. 11, 20; Also quoted in: Robert S. Wistrich,Antisemitism (1992), p. 281 (n. 11). Source cited: C. Hirshfield, “The British Left and the ‘Jewish Conspiracy’,” Jewish Social Studies, Spring 1981, pp. 106-107.
    37. C. Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility,” pp. 10, 20. Burns’ speech of Feb. 6, 1990, is also quoted in part in S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, pp. 94-95. It is also quoted (although not entirely accurately) in: R. S. Wistrich, Antisemitism (1992), p. 281 (n. 11). Source cited: C. Hirshfield, “The British Left and the ‘Jewish Conspiracy’,”Jewish Social Studies, Spring 1981, p. 105.
    38. C. Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility,” pp. 10, 20.
    39. An excerpt of Davitt’s speech of October 17, 1899, is given in: S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, pp. 33-34. Davitt also wrote a book, The Boer Fight For Freedom, published in 1902.
    40. Hobson is perhaps best known as the author of Imperialism: A Study, a classic treatise on the subject first published in 1902.
    41. C. Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility,” pp. 13, 23; J. A. Hobson, The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Effects (1900 and 1969), p. 189.
    42. J. A. Hobson, “Johannesburg Today,” Manchester Guardian, Sept. 28, 1899. Reprinted in: S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, pp. 26-27.
    43. J. A. Hobson, The War in South Africa, p. 197.
    44. C. Hirshfield, “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility,” pp. 13, 23.
    45. S. Koss, The Pro-Boers, p. 54.
    46. T. Pakenham, The Boer War, pp. 607-608; T. Pakenham, Scramble, p. 581.
    47. F. Welsh, South Africa: A Narrative History (1999), p. 343.
    48. In his honor, the city of Berlin in Ontario province, Canada, was renamed Kitchener in 1916, a move that reflected the anti-German hysteria of the day.


    Bibliography

    Barbary, James. The Boer War. New York: 1969.
    Davitt, Michael. The Boer Fight For Freedom. New York: 1902 and 1972.
    Emden, Paul. Randlords, London: 1935.
    Farwell, Byron. The Great Anglo-Boer War. New York & London: 1976.
    Farwell, Byron. “Taking Sides in the Boer War,” American Heritage, April 1976, pp. 20-25, 92-97.
    Flint, John. Cecil Rhodes. Boston: 1974.
    Hirshfield, Claire. “The Boer War and the Issue of Jewish Responsibility.” Pennsylvania State University, Ogontz Campus, 1978. Unpublished manuscript, provided by the author. A revised version was scheduled for 1980 publication in The Journal of Contemporary History. A version of this paper was published in the Spring 1981 issue of Jewish Social Studies under the title “The British Left and the ‘Jewish Conspiracy’: A Case Study of Modern Anti-Semitism.”
    Hobson, John A. The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Effects. New York: 1900 and 1969.
    Kanfer, Stefan. The Last Empire: De Beers, Diamonds and the World. New York: Farrar Straus Giroux, 1993.
    Knightley, Phillip. The First Casualty. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976.
    Koss, Stephen. The Pro-Boers: The Anatomy of an Antiwar Movement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973.
    Reader’s Digest Association [Dougie Oakes, ed.]. Illustrated History of South Africa: The Real Story. Pleasantville, New York: Reader’s Digest, 1988.
    Ogden, J. J. The War Against the Dutch Republics in South Africa: Its Origin, Progress and Results. Manchester: 1901.
    Pakenham, Thomas. The Boer War. New York: Random House, 1979.
    Pakenham, Thomas. The Scramble for Africa. New York: Random House, 1991.
    Report of the Select Committee of the Cape of Good Hope House of Assembly on the Jameson Raid. London: 1897.
    Rhoodie, Denys O. Conspirators in Conflict. Capetown: 1967.
    Saron, Gustav and Louis Hotz, eds. The Jews in South Africa. Oxford: 1955.
    Second Report from the Select Committee on British South Africa. London: 1897.
    Spies, S. B. Methods of Barbarism?: Roberts and Kitchener and Civilians in the Boer Republics. Cape Town: 1977.
    Thomas, Anthony. Rhodes: The Race for Africa. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997.
    Welsh, Frank. South Africa: A Narrative History. New York: Kondansha, 1999.
    Wistrich, Robert S. Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred. New York: Pantheon, 1992.
    Ziegler, Wilhelm, ed., Ein Dokumentenwerk Über die Englische Humanität. Berlin, 1940.


    The Boer War 1899 – 1902, Mark Weber


    Another war for the jews. There are few wars that are not for the benefit of the ‘chosen’.

    TRUTH is ANTI - SEMETIC.

    The Afrikaners are real persecuted people and yet everywhere throughout Europe, they are refused refuge.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  3. #2

    Kitchener

    Herbert Kitchener, 1st Earl Kitchener

    Horatio Herbert Kitchener, 1st Earl Kitchener, KG, KP, GCB, OM, GCSI, GCMG, GCIE, ADC, PC (June 24, 1850 – June 5, 1916) was an Irish-born British Field Marshal, diplomat and statesman popularly referred to as Lord Kitchener. He first came to public notice when he vindicated the defeat and murder of Charles George Gordon in the Sudan. He served with distinction during the Boer Wars, reorganized the Indian Army as its commander-in chief then directed Britain's war effort as Secretary for War during the First World War. Despite accepting his share of the blame for the disastrous Gallipoli campaign, he received praise for his wartime leadership. His image on recruitment posters became almost synonymous with the war itself. He never married and on his death his title passed to his brother. Debate continued regarding his sexual orientation. However, his military ability remains unquestioned and there is no doubt that his wartime leadership greatly aided the Ally's victory.


    Death of Kitchener in First World War

    At Scapa Flow, Lord Kitchener embarked aboard the armored cruiser HMS Hampshire for his diplomatic mission to Russia. On 5 June 1916, while en route to the Russian port of Arkhangelsk, Hampshire struck a mine laid by the newly-launched German U-boat U-75 (commanded by Kurt Beitzen) during a Force 9 gale and sank west of the Orkney Islands. Kitchener, his staff, and 643 of the crew of 655 were drowned or died of exposure. His body was never found. The survivors who caught sight of him in those last moments testified to his outward calm and resolution. The same day, the last Division of Kitchener's New Army crossed the channel to take up its positions in Flanders and France where, eventually, and despite numerous setbacks, they helped to defeat Germany in 1918.


    Fritz Joubert Du Quesne, a Boer and German spy, claimed to have sabotaged and sunk the HMS Hampshire, killing Kitchener and most of the crew. According to German records, Du Quesne assumed the identity of Russian Duke Boris Zakrevsky and joined Kitchener in Scotland. On route to Russia, Du Quesne signaled a German U-boat to alert them that Kitchener’s ship was approaching. He then escaped on a raft just before the Hampshire was destroyed. Du Quesne was awarded the Iron Cross for this act.



    Herbert Kitchener, 1st Earl... - New World Encyclopedia newworldencyclopedia.org 09 Nov 2018.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  5. #3

    Farm-burnings and Concentration Camps

    Farm-burnings and Concentration Camps

    P 158

    To help the British army track down commando leaders like de Wet, and to punish those who aided them, Lord Roberts had begun a policy of farm burning in the Orange Free State in June 1900. Technically those Free Staters who aided the Boer Forces were rebels, since the Republic had been annexed by the British crown in May, and between June and November 1900 more than six hundred farms were burned. Farm burning was also practised in the Transvaal, and actively prosecuted by Kitchener in his attempts to smash Afrikaner resistance. It was a policy which aroused bitter resentment among the Afrikaners and mixed feeling among the British troops that actually set fire to the homesteads.

    I went out one morning with some of my men to get vegetables, but joined the provost marshal and the sappers in a farm burning party, and we burnt and blew up two farms with gun cotton, turning out the inhabitants first. It is a bit sickening at first burning out the women and children, but they are such brutes and the former all spies; we don’t mind it now. Only those are done which belong to the men who are sniping or otherwise badly behaved.

    Captain Phillips, of ‘Rimington’s Guides’ gave another more poignant account of farm-burning in his book With Rimington published in 1902:

    I had to go myself the other day, at the General’s bidding, to burn a farm near the line of march. We to the place and I gave the inmates, three women and some children, ten minutes to clear their clothes and things out of the house, and my men then fetched bundles of straw and we proceeded to burn it down. The old grandmother was very angry. She told me that, though I was making a fine blaze now, it was nothing compared to the flames that I myself should be consumed in hereafter. Most of them however, were too miserable to curse. The women cried and the children stood by holding on to them and looking with large frightened eyes at the burning house. They won’t forget that sight. I’ll bet a sovereign, not even when they grow up. We rode away and left them, a forlorn group, standing among their household goods – beds, furniture, and gimeracks strewn about the veldt; the cracking of the fire in their ears, and smoke and flame streaming overhead. The worst moment is when you first come to the house. The people thought we had called for refreshments, and one of the women went to get milk. Then we had to tell them that we had come to burn the place down. I simply didn’t know which way to look. One of the women’s husbands had been killed at Magersfontein. There were others, men and boys, away fighting: whether dead or alive they did not know. . .

    We can exterminate the Dutch or seriously reduce their numbers. We can do enough to make hatred of England and thirst for revenge the first duty of every Dutchman, and we can’t effectively reduce the number of the men who will carry that duty out. Of course it is not a question of the war only. It is a question of governing the country afterwards.

    So far we only really hold the ground on which our armies stand. If I were to walk out from this tent a mile or two over the hills yonder, I should probably be shot. Kroonstad has been our for four months. It is on the main railway. The country all round is being repeatedly crossed by our troops. Yet an Englishman would not be safe for a minute out of range of those guns on the hill . . .

    At another farm a small girl interrupted her preparations for departure to play indignantly their National Anthem at us on an old piano. We were carting the people off. It was raining hard and blowing – a miserable, hurried home leaving; ransacked house, muddy soldiers, a distracted mother saving one or two trifles and pushing along her children to the ox-wagon outside, and this poor idle wretch in the midst of it all pulling herself together to strum a final defiance. One smiled, but it was rather dramatic all the same, and exactly like a picture.

    Farm- burning was in the short term, of some benefit to the British army. De Wet admitted as much when he wrote:

    I had to wait there ( near Heilbron) till the evening of the 31st December until the necessary wagons and oxen had been got together for carrying the ammunition with us. Wagons were now no longer easily to be got, because the British had not only taken them away from the farms but had also burnt many of them . . . even where there were wagons the women had to keep them in readiness to fly in them before the columns of the enemy, who had already command to carry the women away from their dwellings to the concentration camps – which the British called Refugee Camps. Proclamations had been issued by Lord Roberts, prescribing that any building within ten miles of the railway, where the Boers had blown up the railway line, should be burnt down.

    In the long term, however, farm-burning antagonized many South African moderates, and made the policy of post war construction more difficult, and much more expensive. Three Cape Colony editors were put on trial for criticizing this, and other aspects of British military policy, and in the fallen Afrikaner republics enraged villagers often refused to allow British dead to be buried in their cemeteries.

    But the outraged reaction to farm-burning was overshadowed by the concentration camps controversy. The camps were first established in the summer of 1900, chiefly to protect the Hensoppers (‘hands-uppers’) from the vengeance of their fellow Afrikaners. As the war progressed, however, the families of prisoners of war (who were themselves mostly sent to Ceylon, Bermuda and St Helena), of men still fighting, or simply of those whose farms had been burnt, were placed in the camps.

    There was, it must be assumed, no malevolent motive in the establishment of the concentration camps, despite the latter-day emotive connotations ot the term. The camps were up mostly in the Free State and the Transvaal, though there were also a number in the Cape and Natal. At one time they contained as many as 160,000 inmates. A direct result of the British occupation of the Boer republics and of the scorched earth aftermath of that success, they were simply a pragmatic response to certain problems.

    But by October 1901 concentration camps had acquired a terrible notoriety. Overcrowding, insanitary conditions, an insufficiently balanced diet and inadequate planning caused a tragic loss of life. Women and children, swept into the camps from isolated farms, were an easy prey to epidemic diseases, and measles, typhoid, jaundice, malaria, bronchitis and pneumonia all took their toll. In October 1901 there were as many as 3,156 deaths, and the annual average was running at 344 per thousand – 34.4%.

    Not only did the death rate in the concentration camps convince many Afrikaners that the British were bent on destroying their race, but it led to a persistent and noisy outcry in the United Kingdom. . . .

    Some twenty thousand concentration camp inmates had died by the end of the war – a bitter legacy for the ensuing era of reconstruction and reconciliation.

    The guerrilla war went on while the controversy raged over British methods of counteracting commando tactics. For some British officers the campaign had all the qualities of a pheasant shoot or a tiger hunt, with good ‘bags’ and big ‘drives’. Captain Talbot of the Royal Horse Artillery wrote cheerily in his diary early in 1902:

    The capture of Ben Viljoen is a good bag. The general opinion here is that the war ends the day de Wet is collared. Botha wants to chuck but daren’t until the Free Staters chuck. An enormous concentration is going on all round de Wet – 25,000 troops at least in about forty columns not to speak of the blockhouses, etc.

    A little later he described another determined British effort to end the war:

    The big drive is over with a total of 850 Boers and all their stock. The bag last week was 1,100, splendid, and two or three more big drives will knock them out.


    Kitchener was anxious to end the war as soon as possible. Not only was the protracted guerrilla campaign embarrassing and costly, but he was anxious to take up his next appointment, the plum job of commander-in-chief of the Indian Army. In February 1901 he met Botha at Middleburg in the eastern Transvaal; nothing came of these talks since the British government, partly on the insistence of Alfred Milner at Cape Town, were determined on the principle of unconditional surrender.

    . . .

    In May 1902 , sixty Boer delegates (thirty from the Transvaal and thirty from the Free State) met at Vereeniging forty miles south-east of Johannesburg. Jans Smuts also arrived under safe conduct from Cape Province as a legal adviser, having been lobbied by Kitchener on his way to Vereeniging. Kitchener told Smuts that he was prepared to offer surrender with honour, to disarm those Africans who had enlisted on the British side, to ensure that the question of the non-white franchise in the Transvaal and the Free State would be deferred until self-government had been restored to those territories. With the commandos’ struggle in the field becoming daily more difficult, and with the growing shortage of horses, arms and supplies, these proposals were attractive ones for the basis of a settlement. On the 15th of May the Boer leaders began their momentous conference at Vereeniging.

    P 176

    The peace of Vereeniging ended nearly two years and eight months of war. Britain lost 21,942 officers and men, and spent £250 million. The Afrikaners lost 3,990 killed in battle and 1,081 more died of wounds and illness; nearly 26,000 died in the concentration camps – 20,000 of them being under sixteen years of age.

    There were, moreover, 31,000 Boer prisoners-of-war and 116,500 Afrikaners in the concentration camps.


    P 185

    The Boer War virtually completed Britain’s annexations in Africa. From the Cape to Cairo, from Kenya to Gambia, the map was daubed with red. Yet no warrior tribe in the whole African continent had given one fraction of the resistance offered by the Afrikaners of the Transvaal and the Orange Free State. Ironically, within sixty years of the end of the Boer War, Britain’s African Empire had disintegrated, and unified South Africa, now a republic, had with-drawn from the British Commonwealth of Nations. At this last, at least, the ghosts of Kruger and de Wet must have taken some quiet satisfaction.


    Book - THE BOER WAR Denis Judd, 1977.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  7. #4

    Fritz Joubert Duquesne


    Fritz Joubert Duquesne
    Captain Duquesne, Boer Army picture. ca. 1900
    Birth name Frederick Joubert Duquesne
    Nickname(s) The man who killed Kitchener;[1]
    The Black Panther;[2]The Duke[3]
    Aliases (ca. 30 known):[4] Captain Claude Stoughton;[5] Frederick Fredericks;[6] Boris Zakrevsky(assumed the identity of the real-life Russian Duke);[7] Major Frederick Craven;[8] George Fordham;[9] Piet Niacud;[9] Colonel Beza
    Born 21 September 1877
    Cape Colony
    Died 24 May 1956 (aged 78)
    New York City
    Allegiance Boer and German
    Service/branch primarily Espionage
    Years of service 1899–1901 (Boer); 1901 (British); c1913-1942 (German)
    Rank Captain (Boer Army; South Africa)[10]
    Lieutenant (Britain; infiltrator)
    [11]
    Colonel (Germany)[12]
    Commands held Duquesne Spy Ring[13]
    Battles/wars Second Boer War:
    Siege of Ladysmith
    Battle of Colenso
    Battle of Bergendal
    — Plot to sabotage Cape Town[2]
    World War I
    — Espionage in United States[14][15]
    — Sinking of 22 British merchant ships in South America, [16] including: the Tennyson,[14] the Salvador,[14] and the Pembrokeshire[14]
    — Sinking of HMS Hampshire(disputed)[17][18]
    — Assassination of Lord Kitchener (disputed)[17][18]
    World War II
    — Espionage in United States[13]
    Awards Iron Cross, 1916 (disputed)[17][18]
    Other work commando; war correspondent; journalist


    Frederick “Fritz” Joubert Duquesne (21 September 1877 – 24 May 1956) was a South African Boer soldier, prisoner of war, big game hunter, journalist, war correspondent, Anglophobe, stockbroker, saboteur, spy, and adventurer whose hatred for the British (due to their treatment of Boer women and children) caused him to volunteer to spy for Germany during both World Wars. As a Boer spy he was known as the "Black Panther", but he is also known as "the man who killed Kitchener", since he claimed to have sabotaged and sunk HMS Hampshire, on which Lord Kitchener was en route to Russia in 1916. As a German spy, he went by the code name DUNN. In 1942, he and 32 other members of the Duquesne Spy Ring were convicted in the largest espionage conviction in the history of the United States.

    Fritz Joubert Duquesne - Wikipedia 18 Feb 2019.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  9. #5







    "I am, of course, a Zionist, and have been ever since the Balfour Declaration."
    - Churchill quoted in The Official Churchill in One Volume, N.Y. Times (Nov. 6, 1991) by Herbert Mitgang



    "Germany's unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world's trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit." - Winston Churchill, letter to Lord Boothby.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  11. #6

    Boer girl's memories of the war


    A Boer Girl in the South African Concentration Camps



    Interviews with Errol Lincoln Uys,1970




    Hester Johanna Maria Uys - "Joey" - aged 4

    Johanna, or "Joey," was born in Vereeniging, Transvaal in July 1892. Her mother died from injuries sustained in a train crash in 1896, and Joey went to live with an uncle and aunt, Michiel and Elizabeth "Lettie" Roux of Bethulie in the Orange Free State.

    The Second Anglo-Boer War broke out in October 1899. In March 1900, British troops advanced on Bethulie to capture a strategic bridge over the Orange River. With Michiel away on commando, Lettie, her children Johann Petrus and Michiel Christoffel, and Johanna fled Bethulie with a convoy attacked by the British "Tommies" near Reddersburg in the Free State.


    A fight to the last bullet


    We trekked with fourteen wagons, seventy women and children, escorted by thirty Boer commandos. Three days after leaving Bethulie, the Tommies found us.

    "O, God, ons is nou gevang!" - ("O, God, now we're caught!")

    It was daylight. I hid under a wagon. Johann and the baby, Michiel, lay on the wagon floor. They could not understand what was happening. There was confusion. People screaming. Shouts. "Rooinek vark!" - ("Redneck pig!")

    Women were shooting and killing Tommies. Tant Lettie was a crack-shot. She kept firing till she had no more bullets.



    Boer commandos in the veld - Anglo-Boer War


    Three Boers died. We ran out of ammunition. We surrendered with a white flag on a stick.

    I still see the red faces of the Tommies. They wore khaki, brass buttons, and leggings. Their heavy boots thudded as they walked.

    They gathered our men together and took their guns and horses.

    At the wagons, the Tommies searched the women and went through their belongings. The soldiers were not cruel. They had not tasted real war yet.

    When they searched our stuff, my aunt sat on a trommeltjie filled with bottles of Lennon's home remedies. The Tommy's never looked inside the medicine chest. Tant Lettie had hidden gold sovereigns under the bottles.

    After they took the men away, they made us get back into the wagons. We trekked across the veld to a station. We stayed there all night, those who could lying down, others sitting up in the wagons. In the morning, they pushed us into boxcars. I couldn't see anything. There were vents on top and one of these slammed onto my aunt's head. When the train moved off, the boxcar shook so much we fell against each other.

    Before he left for commando, my uncle Michiel had looked at me. "Never desert her," he said to Tant Lettie. "If you've one crust of bread, break it in half and give it to her."



    Bell Tents as far as the eye could see


    We realized we were going to Bloemfontein.

    "You'll get food, everything you need in the camp," the Tommies said.

    At Bloemfontein, they placed us in carts, took us three miles outside town and dumped us down on the veld.

    They put up bell-tents for us, one next to the other. Hundreds of round tents, far as the eye could see. We met one of Tant Lettie's sisters and stayed together for a while.

    A woman in the tent next to us went into labour. Her baby was born that night. The child died soon after.

    We slept on the bare ground. No bedding, no pillows, only blankets from the wagon. It rained heavily. In the beginning, we did not know we had to loosen the tent ropes in a storm. We got sopping wet. Tant Lettie and I went outside in the rain. We released the ropes and knocked in the pegs again. It was a quagmire. Exhausted, we lay down in the mud to sleep.

    We lit a paraffin lamp in the tent at night. At nine o'clock, all lights had to be out. Guards kicked and beat women if they disobeyed their orders. We obeyed.




    Boer woman and child in South African war camp Photo: The Brunt of the War - Emily Hobhouse, Metheun & Co, 1902


    We were issued ration cards and stood in line for food. We got meat, sugar, mealie meal, condensed milk. The meat was chilled. Even after cooking, it had chunks of ice in it.


    We used a paraffin tin outside the tent for a stove, same as a 'kaffir-koggel ,' with holes in the sides and irons to hold pots. We collected firewood on a kopje next to the camp. Water was brought from a river by cart. Every morning we stood in line to fill our buckets. We were always short of water.



    Tant Lettie, the two boys and Johanna were"Undesirables," a term applied to Boers who don't go voluntarily into captivity or had family members on commando. "Refugees" described displaced Boers who surrender, the "hands-uppers" and their dependents. The latter received a few extra spoonfuls of sugar, condensed milk, and the luxury of the occasional potato. In either case, rations are insufficient to stave off starvation and disease.

    Michiel surrendered at Fouriesburg in July 1900. He was sent as POW to Diyatawala, Sri Lanka, where five thousand Boer guerillas were interned during the war. The British shipped four times that number to other camps in India, St. Helena, and Bermuda.

    As Joey recounted the attack on the wagons to me, she sang a line of an old Boer War song: "Zij geniet die blouwe bergen op die skepe na Ceylon." — "They enjoy the blue mountains on the ships to Ceylon."

    Michiel Roux contracted typhoid and died at Diyatalawa in November 1900.

    In August 1901, Johanna and her family transferred from Bloemfontein to Bethulie concentration camp, where they would remain for nine months. -- The average population at Bethulie was around 4,000 souls. Between August 1901 and January 1902, more than 1,200 perished from pneumonia and measles and from hunger.



    "People died like rats."


    If we had grievances, we were taken in front of the camp commandant. Usually, we kept quiet. We did not want trouble with the Tommies.

    During the day, the women visited each other. We walked around the camp. The sun burnt us black. Our shoes wore out. Our clothes were filthy. Afterwards we got blue soap to wash our things. The toilet was horrible. A big hole with plank seats and sacking around it, you climbed up on top of the planks. No newspaper, no rags.

    The camp was lice infested. I watched Tommies take their leggings off, unwinding them like strips of bandages. They used broken glass to scrape the lice from their legs. My aunt had to cut all my hair off.

    There was a church, but I do not remember going to it or to a school begun in the camp. Tant Lettie read to us from the Bible.

    Theft was rife. There were fights between women.

    Prostitutes slept with both Tommies and Boers. One old man called De Wet was a bastard. He wanted to interfere with my aunt. She chased him out of the tent. Tommies also interfered with the women.

    I remember a short man with a gray beard. I hated him.

    My aunt became friendly with one of the Tommies. She stole someone else's skirt and walked with him.

    Thousands of newcomers arrived at the camp. Hundreds became sick. The marquee hospital tents were always full. The doctors worked day and night.

    People died like rats. Carts came down the rows of tents to pick up the dead. There were funerals every day.


    British propagandists alleged that Boer mothers were killing their children through their own stupidity and carelessness. When seven-year-old Lizzie van Zyl died of hunger at Bloemfontein, a report said her mother starved her.


    Emily Hobhouse, an English activist, spent six months in South Africa from January to June 1901 visiting Bloemfontein and six other camps. She saw Lizzie van Zyl die on an airless April day.


    "I used to see her in her bare tent lying on a tiny mattress which had been given her, trying to get air from the raised flap, gasping her life out in the heated tent. Her mother tended her. I got some friends in town to make a little muslin cap to keep the flies from her bare head. I was arranging to get a cart made to draw her into the air in the cooler hours but before wood could be procured, the cold nights came on and she died. I found nothing to show neglect on the mother's part."



    Emily Hobhouse - Henry Walter Barnett — National Portrait Gallery


    "A gigantic and grievous blunder"

    Emily Hobhouse returned to England to campaign against "a gigantic and grievous blunder caused not by uncaring women but crass male ignorance, helplessness and muddling." Her militancy brought the scorn of the British people who called her a rebel, a liar, an enemy of the nation, hysterical and worse.

    No one hated Emily more than Lord Kitchener, whose troops burnt down 30,000 farmhouses, torched a score of towns and interned 116,572 Boers, a quarter of the population.

    "It is for their protection against the Kaffirs," said the British War Secretary, oblivious to the fact that the English armed Africans against a mutual enemy. Also ignoring the fact that 115,000 "black Boers" were sent to their own concentration camps; twelve thousand of these loyal servants perished.

    Authorities refused premission for Miss Hobhouse to inspect the most terrible of all camps: Bethulie, where Johanna and her family were interned from August 1901 until May 1902.

    The concentration camps claimed the lives of 27,972 Boers. Of these, 22,074 were children like Lizzie van Zyl.



    Lizzie van Zyl, who died at Bloemfontein camp, age 7


    "A pair of yellow socks"

    We guarded the gold sovereigns day and night. After lights out, we slept next to the box where Tant Lettie had hidden the coins.

    Women could apply to the camp commandant for a pass to go into Bethulie. Tant Lettie went to buy extra food. This was all that kept us alive.

    I think of the thousands who died in the camps. I thank God that we survived.

    In summer 1902, as Kitchener's cordon strangled Boer resistance, Tant Lettie got notice that she and the children were going to another camp.

    My mother was too young at the time to know why they had been transferred, whether Tant Lettie's Tommy friend pulled strings or what other reason was behind the move. They went from Bethulie to a camp at Kabusie River near Stutterheim in the Eastern Cape, nestled in the green hills of the Amatola Range, a world away from the horrors of Bethulie.

    This time, Johanna recalled making the two-hundred-and-fifty-mile journey in a cattle truck. According to one report, refugees were supplied with tents, which they ingeniously erected on the beds of railroad cars. Others huddled under tarpaulins.

    "The former arrived more contented and less sullen. All were provided with hot water and cocoa en route."
    Doctors vaccinated us on arrival at Kabusie. Our arms swelled up. Michiel and Johann became sick but after a while we were all OK.

    We lived in a one-roomed house with a plank table, plank chairs and three plank beds with straw mattresses.

    Our days at Kabusie were happier. Farmers in the district helped the Boers. The camp was small, nothing like Bethulie. I do not recall anyone dying at Kabusie.

    A Miss O'Brien taught school in the camp. I learnt English from her. After school, she invited me to her room. My dress was in rags. Miss O'Brien cut up her own clothes to make dresses for me. She taught me how to knit and gave me a ball of wool for a pair of socks.


    Who was Miss O'Brien? Was she English or Irish as her name might suggest? Was she one of Emily Hobhouse's angels of mercy? It matters not, just that she was there, sitting with a child pretty as a flower, teaching her to knit a pair of socks.

    Today, the site of Kabusie Concentration Camp is a car park, the surface area gravelled and curbed.

    "The socks were yellow," Johanna said a lifetime later. She never forgot Miss O'Brien's kindness.




    Hester Johanna Maria Uys - "Joey" - in the 1920s







    Boer Girl in the Concentration Camps | "People died like rats." 11 II 2020.



    Boer War Concentration Camps - during the later stages of the Second Boer War, the British Empire pursued the policy of rounding up and isolating the Boer civilian population into concentration camps to break the will of the Boer commandos. The wives and children of Boer guerrillas were sent to these camps with poor hygiene, inadequate shelter and little food.


    More than 26,000 women and children died in the concentration camps, most of them were children under sixteen.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  13. #7

    16 December 1838, 464 Voortrekkers and their servants under command of Andries Pretorius defeated King Dingane’s approximately 10 000 impi



    The Battle of Blood River





    I am as honored today to tell you the story of Blood River. Before my research began, I only had a cursory knowledge of this event from a couple of pages in Richard Kelly Hoskins' book, "Vigilantes of Christendom". Researching this subject was a joy. As I collected information, I noticed some of the details had been sanitized from a variety of politically correct sources. There are those who would reduce Blood River to secular history, but the Holy Spirit will not permit me to ignore the divine ramifications and the miraculous destiny that our Lord had planned for His people.



    We don't hear too much about the tribe of Nephtali, but its heraldry of the hind parallels to that of the South African gazelle. However, it is not just coincidence of coat of arms where we find the identity of the White man in South African history. Before we look at Blood River, it's important to know what happened before that, just as circumstances were critical to the Christian foundations of America.



    One of the marks of Israel would be that we become explorers, having command of the seas and would colonize the desolate places. In 1498, Vasco daGama would sail his flagship around the Cape of Good Hope, the southern tip of Africa for a commercial trade route to India. The only civilized people who spent much time ashore were the survivors of shipwrecks. In 1662, the Cape settlement numbered about 250 White people, whom nearly half were servants of the Dutch East India Company. The company made a serious effort to encourage immigration, and by 1707, the population was about 1800 people, owning about 1,100 slaves (White). The modern Afrikaners are descended from this servant class who were freed at that time, along with about 200 French Huguenots, and being discharged from the Cape went out into the frontiers to settle the land. The commercial interest had no vision of a New Netherlands in South Africa, nevertheless, during the 18th century that's exactly what was happening to the predominate Dutch Calvinists, possessing great natural resources. By 1795, they increased to 1500 and regarded South Africa as their only home. Half of these people were the Trekboers living further into the interior, and within a few years, it became possible to take occupation of 6000 acres for semi-nomadic farming and ranching. The result was a continuous expansion twice as large as England. Some officials expressed concern over their isolation. But, like their counterparts, the American pioneers of the Old West, they were rugged individualists preserving a sound domestic morality from the Bible. They also travelled in covered wagons and formed defensive circles called 'laagers'. They were a humble, salt of the earth type entering the wilderness that would transform into a promise land of challenges and blessings.



    During these years of prosperity, South Africa was attracting the attention of British evangelicals, who were pushing to free the nonwhite races. In 1835 the damnable Brits passed an insane piece of civil rights legislation called Ordinance 50, in which all policies of racial segregation were banned, the Negro was given full citizenship to vote, severe taxes were imposed, the prohibition of their native language, Afrikaans, and the stipulation that any repeal or amendments could only be done in England. This law of race traitors left the Afrikaners (the White Christians) feeling that they had lost control over their lives and destiny to a foreign power arrayed against them on the side of those who were not of their race.



    Missionaries from the Anglican Church, headed by the Queen, preached a radical pro-Negro policy advocating interracial marriage. As an example to others, many missionaries and demented Whites in the Cape Colony married Black women and founded interracial schools. They urged the Black and White children to socialize with each other. They brazenly paraded the children through the streets with signs saying 'we are of one blood'. The Voortrekkers or Boers knew that the blasphemy of institutionalized miscegenation would doom their culture. They defied the demands of the British to return to the coastal cities, and those within proximity to the Cape Colony, unable to survive or comprehend these liberal ideas, abandoned their businesses and farms, which were quickly pilfered by wandering free Negros and British carpetbaggers grabbing property for their own use. Negro tribes were now pouring into South Africa to take advantage of the British order that no retaliation be taken against Blacks who raped, looted and murdered Whites. The colonial magistrate actually ordered that the rampaging Blacks be considered innocent because, if they were treated with tolerance, they would behave properly.



    Anna Steenkamp recorded that the British had placed the Negros on an equal footing with the Christians, contrary to the laws of God so that it was intolerable for any decent Christian to bow down beneath such a yoke "wherefore we withdrew in order thus to preserve our doctrines in purity. " Imbued with this spirit, some 12,000 Afrikaners packed their bags and loaded their covered wagons and left the colony, and started the famous 'Great Trek' into the unknown desolate lands of the north. At the same time, the Zulus were moving south into the same area. Being that they were not indigenous to this area, the land could not have been stolen from them.



    The fierce Zulu warriors were at the peak of their power and knew no mercy. Often the Zulus would pretend friendship or ask for a truce, and then would brutally slaughter the emissaries. They would surround White farming communities and attack with spears and hatchets. Women and children would be raped and then tortured to death. The most famous of massacres, which prompted Blood River, was February 5, 1838, when the Voortrekkers tried to negotiate a land settlement with the Zulu king, Dengane. As the treacherous savages received Piet Retief and 70 unarmed Boers in their encampment, that evening, while feasting and celebrating the signing of a treaty ceding land to the Whites, the Zulus butchered every single man. In the months to follow, the Zulus went on the warpath, attacking and killing as many as 500 men, women and children at several other locations in the Natal area.



    Dengane was best known for murdering Shaka and developing a highly mobile army reputed to cover as much as 40 miles in one day, and ruthlessly known for his scorched earth actions. His bloodstained reputation was personified in wanton cruelty. On November 18, 1838, the Voortrekkers undeterred by the massacres, were reinforced by timely supplies brought up by a charismatic Dutch farmer, Andries Pretorius, of which the city of Pretoria was named in his memory, becoming the capital of South Africa. However, under the Mandela-ANC regime, the city has been renamed to Tshwane, meaning Apetown. The Boers were without a leader and immediately elected Pretorius as commander general of the wagon trains. Pretorius was a combination of George Washington and Nathan Bedford Forrest and proceeded to avenge the White settlers' hell by defeating the Zulu presence in Natal and the organization of a Christian government. Pretorius developed a commando militia of 468 men in short order and began reconnaissance, scouting for the ideal logistics in which to secure the best possible advantage.



    He received reports that the Zulus were on the hunt to find them. The numbers of Zulus were estimated to be between 10,000-15,000 savages who were born and bred for the purpose of warfare, which was half of their total population. Their weapons were lethal also; arrows with an accuracy of up to 60 meters away, spears, clubs, machetes and hatchets in the hands of trained killers. In contrast, the Boers were farmers, and all they had were primitive, inaccurate, muzzle-loaded flintlock muskets, and 3 old cannons loaded with any kind of scrap metal they could find to serve as shrapnel and, their most valuable military asset . . . God.



    The Holy Spirit must have led them to the perfect spot for a fortified position, a stronghold with a deep erosion channel (what Americans in the southwest call an arroyo, and what the Boers call a donga). It was a 14 foot deep trench on one side and the Ncome River into which it flowed on the other side; on the remaining sides were open plains to easily rake with gunfire. The laager was ingeniously configurated with 64 covered wagons drawn up close to one another with the shaft of one tied firmly to the deck of the one in front and the wheels were joined with chains. A large gateway in the middle of the crescent allowed for last minute access for their animals and an exit for their cavalry. A straight wall of wagons ran parallel with the donga about 20 meters from the edge. The other wagons were arranged in a wide crescent from one end of the wall to the other end, resembling a capital D.



    Pretorius' inspiration, however, was not in the art of war; no, it was the way he forged and fortified the spirit of his men prior to the battle with a covenant made on December 9th and repeated every evening up to the 16th. They not only knelt down to pray, they were also making a solemn vow to our God in Heaven, as Sarel Cilliers, Pretorius' deputy commandant led the 464 commando pledging these words:
    "My brothers and fellow citizens, here we stand in the presence of the Holy God, creator of heaven and earth, to make a vow unto Him, that if His protection shall be with us and He give our enemy into our hand so that we might be victorious over him, that this day and date every year shall be spent as a memorial and a day of thanksgiving, just as a Sabbath is spent and that we shall erect a temple to His honor wherever it will be pleasing to Him and that we shall also instruct our children that they must also share in it, as well as for our generations yet to come. Because the Honor of His name shall thereby be glorified and the glory and honor of the victory shall be given Him. "



    The trekkers arrived at Blood River on December 14th and set camp. Within the laager were their 900 oxen, 500 horses and other livestock. On the 15th, Pretorius sent out a patrol to entice the thousands of Zulus to attack, but they retired, hoping to lure the Boers into an ambush. Pretorius, of course, declined and the Zulus' fate was that they then had to attack. One of Dengane's war leaders planned to follow the Boer horsemen, cross the river and attack them that night, but the distance was further than they thought and they kept getting lost in a thick mist on a moonless night. Many Zulus reached the laager during the night, but they had no civilized infrastructure and there was confusion. It wasn't until dawn that the dense fog began burning off and most of the Zulu army was still crossing the river. The Zulus could have laid siege to the laager by waiting until the remaining two-thirds of their forces crossed over. Instead, some of the Zulu warriors who had crossed over attacked impulsively, being cut down, charge after charge. This first wave was successfully repulsed as the morning sun began to heat the terrain.



    The atmosphere must have been incredible to the White Christians as the beating of war drums escalated. Hissing like a snake, the Zulus would dance and then begin their charge, decorated with necklaces made of human skulls and bones, screaming faces painted grotesquely. If you can imagine a thousand boom boxes playing rap music full blast at a Bloods and Crips convention, it doesn't come close to the blood curdling sounds of these maniacal aborigines. By noon the infernal temperatures could not beat back a second wave of attacks until it had almost reached the wagons. Inside the laager, a herd of cattle was threatened to stampede into the donga because of the smoke and roar of gunfire, so men were dispatched to that side and went outside the laager engaging in bitter hand to hand combat as reinforcements arrived to a few yards to the donga where the Zulus were packed solidly like sardines, and every one of them was shot dead. In spite of the downpour of spears and arrows that the spear chuckers chucked, all of the animals miraculously remained calm.



    The Zulus now attacked with even greater ferocity, crossing the river in droves. The Boers would fire and reload again and again for hours, making each shot count. When the Zulus retreated to about 500 yards, they hesitated to launch a third attack. The frenzied Blacks were in fear of what was happening to them. Where was the Zulu god that day? By this time, the slaughter was so great that the waters of the river turned red with blood. Ammo was running low, so Pretorius sent men out on horseback to draw the Zulus out. Two charges brought little results, but a third assault and counterattack of 300 horsemen split the Zulu army in half. The Boers displayed such bravery that the Zulus were terror stricken and fled with the Whites in pursuit. A late charge by the most elite of the Zulu warriors was of no avail as they became entangled with retreating cannon fodder. The Boer horsemen were able to pick off the Zulus lining the banks of the river. The final attack lasted almost an hour and, when it began to weaken, Pretorius put the Zulus to flight as his cavalry pursued them for hours. Towards midday, the pursuit was called off.



    Three to four thousand Zulu impis (the best of their warriors) lay dead. Not one White man or any of his animals were killed. There were only three minor wounds, including Pretorius himself. As the dust settled from battle and victory was realized, the men did not have a big party, but rather a solemn thanksgiving service was held. The plain and simple fact of the matter is that it was a miracle of God. According to the historical record, not hysterical antichrist propaganda, there were surviving Zulus of that day of battle and testified to witnessing an army of White soldiers firing from a white cloud that hovered above the laager all day. It sounds like the shekinah cloud of glory with the host of heaven. "Let them be as chaff before the wind, and let the angel of the Lord chase them" Ps. 35:5.



    From our own church website, FGCP.org, there’s an article by a descendant of the Boers who makes this commentary: “After the first shots, they had to wait for the smoke of the gun powder to clear. Then the second wonder happened when the smoke cleared. Something made the Zulu regiments hesitate in bewilderment. The regiments consisting of the younger warriors started fleeing, only to be slaughtered by the older veterans as they fled. Now these younger regiments knew that if they fled, they would be killed by the older warriors. The survivors related after the battle that they saw thousands of glowing giant men all around the laager that scared them into panic and scared them so much that they fled into the arms of the waiting indunas who slaughtered the younger warriors. Just around the laager three thousand corpses of dead Zulus was counted. The third wonder was that the hundreds of oxen stood quietly while the guns roared around them. In ordinary circumstances these animals would have stampeded, trampling everyone in their way to death. And the fleeing Zulus did not stop running. When Dingaan got the message of what happened, he burnt his capital and ran with them to present day Swaziland where they were killed by the Swazis. The mighty but evil reign of the Zulu nation was finally broken.”



    The Afrikaners know their survival is completely dependent on divine intervention. Blood River has been called the mythical underpinnings of apartheid rule. The Christian Boers did not ascribe the military victory to their armaments; they interpreted the battle as a sign from God. With the battle behind them, they believed even more strongly that White predominance over Blacks is the will of God. Indeed, it is their mandate; it is OUR mandate to take dominion of the earth. And to that, we should all say amen.



    December 16th is still observed by some Boers as a Sabbath called ‘The Day of the Vow’. On that day their pioneer ancestors made a pledge to God, which He honored by ordering His angelic legions to assist in the battle between the forces of light and the powers of darkness. South Africa is again facing fearful odds, who like their forefathers, will be forced to bend their knee and renew themselves as God’s covenant people.



    We in America are likewise under an oppressively dark antichrist adversary, because we have fallen away from being a Christian nation and been a whoring after strange gods. Our Blood River is coming and we will lose the battle if the Lord of hosts is not our Commander in Chief.



    I received an email from a brother in Christ and would like to close with his comments:
    ________________________________________



    “I am a 27 year old Afrikaaner (White South African), having just read your page on the Battle of Blood River. Several of my ancestors took part in that very battle. I would like to confirm that what you wrote is absolutely correct and happened just as you wrote.



    I would like to add that my great great great grandmother, Anna Smit, who was married to Jacob Smit was in the laager aiding the men by ensuring that their ammunition was supplied at the correct rate. She has written in her diary a very interesting event of which I would like to share with you:


    Women were not allowed to fire weapons or actively participate in battle unless their husbands were killed. Anna, in angst, prayed openly as the battle progressed. She asked God to use her as He saw fit to ensure His will was done.



    As she prayed, she saw a great mist above the laager with a searing light shining through. She immediately knew that although she could not fire a weapon, she could supply the men with the ammo they needed as supplies of ammo were not evenly distributed around the laager. As she moved around, she was quite open and a target for spears from the Zulu warriors. However, every time a spear was thrown towards her, the shining Presence above the laager would protect her. Not a single spear even landed within 10 feet of her. This, despite the fact the Zulu's could throw a light spear and impale an animal from 100 feet away.



    What touches me about this is what happened next.



    As she moved the ammo around, she prayed over the ammo. She writes in her diary that (translated), "I could move the crates and boxes of ammunition but I could not open them for when they were opened by the men and the ammunition removed, I witnessed the blood of Christ on it".



    Anna lived to the good age of 97 (in 1899 when she died that was an exceptional age). She had 13 children - all of whom were raised in a strong Christian home in the middle of a savage continent. It shows that nothing, NOTHING, can stand in the way of God's will. I will always honor her. Thank you for reading my email. I pray God blesses your ministry.” Johan van der Berg.







    The aftermath of the Battle Of Blood River [By Cuan Elgin]
    The Battle of Blood River | Kinsman Redeemer Ministries

    kinsmanredeemer.com/battle-blood-river

    Blood River has been called the mythical underpinnings of Afrikaner rule. The Christian Boers did not ascribe the military victory to their armaments; they interpreted the battle as a sign from God. With the battle behind them, they believed even more strongly



    05 V 2020.






    "In 1835 the damnable Brits passed an insane piece of civil rights legislation called Ordinance 50, in which all policies of racial segregation were banned, the Negro was given full citizenship to vote, severe taxes were imposed, the prohibition of their native language, Afrikaans, and the stipulation that any repeal or amendments could only be done in England. This law of race traitors left the Afrikaners (the White Christians) feeling that they had lost control over their lives and destiny,"

    and

    "The colonial magistrate actually ordered that the rampaging Blacks be considered innocent because, if they were treated with tolerance, they would behave properly"




    Same BS as today.


    The sizeable region of Southern Africa, first settled by Dutch Afrikaners in 1662, has today no room for any White people. Anywhere that the blecks reach a majority will always be the same. Whites are not going to Africa. Its Africa coming to us.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to jagdmesser For This Useful Post:


  15. #8
    Providence Planter
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    Anglo
    Subrace
    Nordic
    Y-DNA
    R1A-BY30613
    mtDNA
    U8B-K2A5A1
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Rhode Island Rhode Island
    Location
    Kentucky
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Married parent
    Occupation
    Blacksmith
    Politics
    Anti-Federalist
    Religion
    Posts
    3,701
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    8,054
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    400
    Thanked in
    347 Posts
    I knew my New York Dutch (also part Swede and German) great-grandmother and wouldn't be alive without her ancestral inclusion within English society, so am not complaining about my English ancestors and Rhodes cousins because of some bruised pride by sore losers like Jacob Leisler, or Boers elsewhere. Sure, it sucks that no attempt was made to see that Dutch be official and that the Reformed Church wasn't preserved, unlike French and the Roman Church in Quebec, but there are practical benefits from assimilation:

    1) No otherness causing prolonged friction in New England like in Canada.
    2) Germanics need to unite both hearts and minds in the face of foreigners.

    Yes, there's a Jewish Question, that should have been resolved by Zionism, as originally envisioned to be the Final Solution for expulsion from Germany rather than the ineffective strategy by Spain during the Reconquista, when Jews had nowhere to go. Maybe Churchill, son of a New York mother, would have preferred them out of his mother's home. Ever think of that? So, if at least Sephardim belong in Palestine rather than elsewhere, with the likely Khazarian Ashkenazim perhaps just fine in Siberia, how does that fit into a meaningful life for Anglo-Dutch folk to have a way forward in Africa?

    Maybe it sucked that England and Holland had four colonial wars that led to the two in ZA, but aside from resource extraction for "blood diamonds", gold and rooibos, actually settling down on the Cape with women and children was a mistake for all involved. In fact, it would have been better if the Boers went to New York, with the freedmen of Maryland and Nova Scotia in their place, rather than nation-building Liberia and Sierra Leone. I know that I would have felt more at home in the Tri-state area had there been more clogging festivals than operas and more Gouda than mozzarella. Hell, Italy could have resolved their Sicilian Question with Abyssinia.

    Either way, I'm proud of the uniform and code of ethics I had in Lord Baden-Powell's scouting movement, which was founded in the course of those wars. I'm also a fan of real men like Lord Kitchener as well as General Gordon, even if their lives were spent rather on the margins of the Empire than in immediate attention to the needs of Britain and the White Dominions. So many revisionists fail to achieve anything in life worthy of the respect and admiration given great heroes they whine and cry about. Let's see anyone who hates Churchill's guts write "A History of the Dutch-Speaking Peoples" or some such equivalent to his own Anglo-folkish magnum opus that I own and treasure near to my heart.

  16. #9

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Thursday, September 13th, 2018, 11:04 AM
  2. Book on Boer War Camps
    By FearingAfrica in forum Southern Africa
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 10th, 2011, 07:20 PM
  3. The Anglo-Boer War
    By mathydd in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: Thursday, April 14th, 2011, 03:53 PM
  4. Behind 'The Third Boer War'
    By Siebenbürgerin in forum Southern Africa
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Wednesday, January 7th, 2009, 07:16 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •