I recorded this powerful episode with Brendi Wells—who shares her firsthand experience as a citizen living in South Africa—a few days before President Trump hosted the South African President in the Oval Office.
Its general crime and not genocide. Its just another "political talking point" designed to trigger emotional responses in people who have a disposition towards racial animus and biases. It's a ploy.
I had Harry Booyens on my show years ago (2019) from South Africa talking about this. https://sarahwestall.com/white-farmer-killings-persecutions-south-africa-w-dr-harry-booyens-1of2/ The killing has been going on for quite some time now. Also, Brendi has been trying to make this known for years as well. They are really struggling. To dismiss this as not relevant and only a psyop is very sad after the research I have done on this area.
Yes. See my whole thing is this, these are "emotional triggers" being leveled against people of lower lumens who are still trapped in the race paradigm. Nobody is wholesale killing whites in South Africa, that's fantasy talk, but it makes for a good story and creates the perception of urgency so the grifters can set up non profits to fleece the treasury. Additionally, if one wants to see a real genocide, then Gaza is where to look. We have to guess, and hear second hand stories about the supposed genocide in SA, and we don't have to guess about Gaza, we can watch it live. SA is an emotional trigger to manipulate minds.
If you listen to Duo Dissidence, they tell a different story. Murder is murder and genocide is genocide. I don't condone any of it no matter who it is or where it's happening. My only question to you: Is there a reason you and so many others are silent about the genocide/holocaust that has been happening in Gaza???
Between your silence on Gaza and your pushing pharmaceutical peptides I'm starting to question continuing to tune in.
Ignorant conclusion to assume coverage of one event means I didn't cover another or that another event is not important. You are right, I don't cover Gaza 24/7... but I also do not cover Ukraine 24/7 where more people have died. BTW, before you criticize, you should know the work I have done on Gaza. As for peptides, the company I am working with is NOT big pharma. They have to work hard to be allowed to stay open. Peptides have been suppressed for decades. You should truly inform yourself before you criticize those who work hard to get information out to people.
Thank you for your response Sarah and I will take it to heart! I am glad to hear that you do cover Gaza. It seems there's a push right now to focus on South Africa as a way to distract from the growing awareness of the absolute horror that is happening in Gaza.
Eli Lilly ( I consider them big pharma) is the maker of the peptides and I remember hearing that the pharmaceuticals are doing everything they can (via shots) to get the poisons in those that remain unjabbed. I will continue to voice my concerns and know that I am not always right. I appreciate your response and all that you do.
Eli Lilly is not the maker of peptides. Peptides are naturally occurring in the human body and are harder for Big Pharma to patent. Its why they are suppressed. You are right though, Eli Lilly is trying to control the market on Retatrutide because they see it as having huge profit potential. It will be difficult for them though because of the naturally occurring issue so there will be ways around it for the peptide companies. I need to write an article on this to inform people about the suppression of peptides and what they really are. I can see how people think its big pharma when it is not. GLP-1s have become so popular people are confusing peptides in general with Big Pharma. You gave me a good topic of discussion... thats good and helpful :)
I was seriously considering purchasing the peptides but when I followed the link and I read carefully, it said they were made by Eli Lilly? Perhaps I was redirected somehow? I will look again at what you are offering.
That's a good question and no one has the correct stats. According to the UN, 14million have fled and one estimate from the UCDP says its between 174,000 to 420,000 people have been killed from both sides (so who really knows). Also, if they count the killings in the Donbass region leading up to the war, they could add at least 15K more to the count. But this is still likely undercounted. Gaza is also bad with over 50K dead and 2million displaced.
Yes I actually read the other day somewhere that genocide experts were estimating 600,000+ in Gaza going by the amount of, not only infrastructure damage, but also the number of bombs they've dropped on such a small area. I have absolutely no reason to think they're exaggerating from what we see happening on our screens.
"The killing has been going on for quite some time" since the Europeans invaded, fyi.
How did those "white farmers" get that land? GENOCIDE. And genocide--Black genocide--is how they're keeping it. That includes the cultural genocide displayed at the White House (built by Black slaves) by Drumpf aka Trump and "Sieg Heil" Musk.
Black farmers' land stolen by the millions of acres in the USA, THAT's genocide.
Let's see how you and your guest's "research" stacks up with someone who actually knows what they're talking about:
I am alarmed at how much rhetoric I see spewed across media regarding how the current S. African President or other native S. African blacks pushing back in various means to imperialist who ancestorially do not belong on that land. I am no racist, and nor I am in favor of S. African president by in large, what I am in favor of is TRUTH, HISTORY, before austricizing a people. Lets take a step back in Factual, Researchable history, becuase it absolotuely matters when many attempt to take a side or rise up in haste objectively because a shoe is on another foot in these modern times.
Who is the indigeonous people on that land for ovet 100,000 yrs? Then, why doesnt any of those defending Trumps actions of lanbasting the visiting S. African President do some research first.
When Great Britain went to war with France in 1793, both countries tried to capture the Cape so as to control the important sea route to the East. The British occupied the Cape in 1795, ending the Dutch East India Company’s role in the region. Although the British relinquished the colony to the Dutch in the Treaty of Amiens (1802), they reannexed it in 1806 after the start of the Napoleonic Wars. The Cape became a vital base for Britain prior to the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, and the Cape’s economy was meshed with that of Britain. To protect the developing economy there, Cape wines were given preferential access to the British market until the mid-1820s. Merino sheep were introduced, and intensive sheep farming was initiated in order to supply wool to British textile mills.
The infrastructure of the colony began to change: English replaced Dutch as the language of administration; the British pound sterling replaced the Dutch rix-dollar; and newspaper publishing began in Cape Town in 1824. After Britain began appointing colonial governors, an advisory council for the governor was established in 1825, which was upgraded to a legislative council in 1834 with a few “unofficial” settler representatives. A virtual freehold system of landownership gradually replaced the existing Dutch tenant system, under which European colonists had paid a small annual fee to the government but had not acquired land ownership.
A large group of British settlers arrived in 1820; this, together with a high European birth rate and wasteful land usage, produced an acute land shortage, which was alleviated only when the British acquired more land through massive military intervention against Africans on the eastern frontier. Until the 1840s the British vision of the colony did not include African citizens (referred to pejoratively by the British as “Kaffirs”), so, as Africans lost their land, they were expelled across the Great Fish River, the unilaterally proclaimed eastern border of the colony.
Its general crime and not genocide. Its just another "political talking point" designed to trigger emotional responses in people who have a disposition towards racial animus and biases. It's a ploy.
https://jeanbaptisteguillory.substack.com/p/afrikaan-americans-now
I had Harry Booyens on my show years ago (2019) from South Africa talking about this. https://sarahwestall.com/white-farmer-killings-persecutions-south-africa-w-dr-harry-booyens-1of2/ The killing has been going on for quite some time now. Also, Brendi has been trying to make this known for years as well. They are really struggling. To dismiss this as not relevant and only a psyop is very sad after the research I have done on this area.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/SjZgi2armVnR52Yo8
My understanding is that all races are suffering many casualties as far as what I've heard from Pieter Kriel
Yes. See my whole thing is this, these are "emotional triggers" being leveled against people of lower lumens who are still trapped in the race paradigm. Nobody is wholesale killing whites in South Africa, that's fantasy talk, but it makes for a good story and creates the perception of urgency so the grifters can set up non profits to fleece the treasury. Additionally, if one wants to see a real genocide, then Gaza is where to look. We have to guess, and hear second hand stories about the supposed genocide in SA, and we don't have to guess about Gaza, we can watch it live. SA is an emotional trigger to manipulate minds.
If you listen to Duo Dissidence, they tell a different story. Murder is murder and genocide is genocide. I don't condone any of it no matter who it is or where it's happening. My only question to you: Is there a reason you and so many others are silent about the genocide/holocaust that has been happening in Gaza???
Between your silence on Gaza and your pushing pharmaceutical peptides I'm starting to question continuing to tune in.
Ignorant conclusion to assume coverage of one event means I didn't cover another or that another event is not important. You are right, I don't cover Gaza 24/7... but I also do not cover Ukraine 24/7 where more people have died. BTW, before you criticize, you should know the work I have done on Gaza. As for peptides, the company I am working with is NOT big pharma. They have to work hard to be allowed to stay open. Peptides have been suppressed for decades. You should truly inform yourself before you criticize those who work hard to get information out to people.
Thank you for your response Sarah and I will take it to heart! I am glad to hear that you do cover Gaza. It seems there's a push right now to focus on South Africa as a way to distract from the growing awareness of the absolute horror that is happening in Gaza.
Eli Lilly ( I consider them big pharma) is the maker of the peptides and I remember hearing that the pharmaceuticals are doing everything they can (via shots) to get the poisons in those that remain unjabbed. I will continue to voice my concerns and know that I am not always right. I appreciate your response and all that you do.
Eli Lilly is not the maker of peptides. Peptides are naturally occurring in the human body and are harder for Big Pharma to patent. Its why they are suppressed. You are right though, Eli Lilly is trying to control the market on Retatrutide because they see it as having huge profit potential. It will be difficult for them though because of the naturally occurring issue so there will be ways around it for the peptide companies. I need to write an article on this to inform people about the suppression of peptides and what they really are. I can see how people think its big pharma when it is not. GLP-1s have become so popular people are confusing peptides in general with Big Pharma. You gave me a good topic of discussion... thats good and helpful :)
I was seriously considering purchasing the peptides but when I followed the link and I read carefully, it said they were made by Eli Lilly? Perhaps I was redirected somehow? I will look again at what you are offering.
Hi I'm just curious what the civilian death toll in Ukraine was as of now?
That's a good question and no one has the correct stats. According to the UN, 14million have fled and one estimate from the UCDP says its between 174,000 to 420,000 people have been killed from both sides (so who really knows). Also, if they count the killings in the Donbass region leading up to the war, they could add at least 15K more to the count. But this is still likely undercounted. Gaza is also bad with over 50K dead and 2million displaced.
Yes I actually read the other day somewhere that genocide experts were estimating 600,000+ in Gaza going by the amount of, not only infrastructure damage, but also the number of bombs they've dropped on such a small area. I have absolutely no reason to think they're exaggerating from what we see happening on our screens.
i don't know the numbers but yes, another horrific war that our tax dollars are supporting.
"White genocide" = white supremacy--period.
"The killing has been going on for quite some time" since the Europeans invaded, fyi.
How did those "white farmers" get that land? GENOCIDE. And genocide--Black genocide--is how they're keeping it. That includes the cultural genocide displayed at the White House (built by Black slaves) by Drumpf aka Trump and "Sieg Heil" Musk.
Black farmers' land stolen by the millions of acres in the USA, THAT's genocide.
Let's see how you and your guest's "research" stacks up with someone who actually knows what they're talking about:
Gerald Horne - Trump's Most Shameful Act = Attack of South Africa Pres Ramaphosa in the White House: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSRWKucAHKo&pp=ygUMZ2VyYWxkIGhvcm5l0gcJCbAJAYcqIYzv
I'm sure your guest and "white farmers" in Southern Africa have shrines to Eugène Terre'Blanche, a so-called "farmer."
Did you take notice? Neither of our comments were replied to. Wonder why?
I am alarmed at how much rhetoric I see spewed across media regarding how the current S. African President or other native S. African blacks pushing back in various means to imperialist who ancestorially do not belong on that land. I am no racist, and nor I am in favor of S. African president by in large, what I am in favor of is TRUTH, HISTORY, before austricizing a people. Lets take a step back in Factual, Researchable history, becuase it absolotuely matters when many attempt to take a side or rise up in haste objectively because a shoe is on another foot in these modern times.
Who is the indigeonous people on that land for ovet 100,000 yrs? Then, why doesnt any of those defending Trumps actions of lanbasting the visiting S. African President do some research first.
When Great Britain went to war with France in 1793, both countries tried to capture the Cape so as to control the important sea route to the East. The British occupied the Cape in 1795, ending the Dutch East India Company’s role in the region. Although the British relinquished the colony to the Dutch in the Treaty of Amiens (1802), they reannexed it in 1806 after the start of the Napoleonic Wars. The Cape became a vital base for Britain prior to the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, and the Cape’s economy was meshed with that of Britain. To protect the developing economy there, Cape wines were given preferential access to the British market until the mid-1820s. Merino sheep were introduced, and intensive sheep farming was initiated in order to supply wool to British textile mills.
The infrastructure of the colony began to change: English replaced Dutch as the language of administration; the British pound sterling replaced the Dutch rix-dollar; and newspaper publishing began in Cape Town in 1824. After Britain began appointing colonial governors, an advisory council for the governor was established in 1825, which was upgraded to a legislative council in 1834 with a few “unofficial” settler representatives. A virtual freehold system of landownership gradually replaced the existing Dutch tenant system, under which European colonists had paid a small annual fee to the government but had not acquired land ownership.
A large group of British settlers arrived in 1820; this, together with a high European birth rate and wasteful land usage, produced an acute land shortage, which was alleviated only when the British acquired more land through massive military intervention against Africans on the eastern frontier. Until the 1840s the British vision of the colony did not include African citizens (referred to pejoratively by the British as “Kaffirs”), so, as Africans lost their land, they were expelled across the Great Fish River, the unilaterally proclaimed eastern border of the colony.
Just one S.African natives point of view. I do not advocate for violence from any side to be clear, but I do advocate for ALL voices to be heard:
https://youtube.com/shorts/m1Ui4mK9TYg?si=0mDQl71BYo7zq0YM