10/10
good movie, but disgusting comments
14 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
First of all I must say I'm currently filled with disgust with many of the comments expressed here. There is no reason for whites to take pleasure debasing themselves for acts they haven't personally been part of. If readers involved are so humane to forgive blacks for their past faults against whites (some of them portrayed in this very documentary), why can't they reciprocate this forgiveness for white men as well. The answer is more than obvious: their "humane" anti-racism is nothing more than mindless anti-WHITE racism using a rehashed Marxist rhetoric.

That being said, this unique documentary tries to cover the critical period when, caught between a climate of social unrest in their home countries (fuelled by "progressives" of the above type) and soviet-backed rebellions in their colonies, Europeans powers started to withdraw from their possessions. While doing so, they left behind their houses, their roads, their cities, their electricity, their civilization and never forgot to pour in billions in foreign aid for what soon became a hungry continent. How did the post-colonial regimes reciprocate? - They raped and massacred white nurses, who came there to provide FREE MEDICAL CARE for them. When a couple of white mercenaries went into a rescue mission and captured the ones involved in these unspeakable acts, one of the misguided viewers feels empathy for the black murderers (but none at all for the massacred white nurses)...

  • They seized white estates using a "Africa for the Africans" rhetoric. Not a single "anti-racist" objects to this RACE right, although if we'd claim exactly the same for ourselves that would be, in their mind, "racism". Absolutely no compensation was given to the owners, as the movie shows. Once occupied by their "rightful" owners (according to anti-racists), estates went into normal African dereliction, horses were eaten and farmlands yielded no more crops. In no time, the same nation was begging for white man's MORAL DUTY TO HELP, although no amount of white financial compassion seems able to curb the "white devil" holly truth. Fact is, as the movie shows, each and every black African country followed exactly the same path: whites' properties seizing, dictatorship, bloody civil wars, begging for foreign aid, then while cashing in for the aid complaining that whites try to resurrect the colonial system by keeping blacks in a receiving state... Zimbabwe is the most recent example, while the acclaimed "new" South-Africa, where whites have been compelled through draconian international sanction to hand over the country they've built to its "rightful owners", represented through the voice of black communist leaders taught how to apply class struggle theories to a race struggle reality.


  • They tried to line up and execute all remaining whites (Congo), only to be narrowly rescued by an US Commando. This act caused international uproar not because of Afro-Communist Congolese government's intention, but for US' intrusion into a sovereign nation's businesses...


  • Soon upon consuming what whites left behind, African nations developed into Marxist dictatorships, as practically all of the "liberation movements" were backed by Soviet Union. The "dear leaders" imposed draconian control over their subjects, becoming unspeakably rich communists, while their naturally apathetic African subjects sunk into even greater destitution. The absurd linear borders, who kept rival tribes within the same country, while splitting others between two countries, have also contributed to an intrinsic lack of stability in African countries, where ethnic-based militia battle for dominance on ruins of a former colony.


Ultimately, this movie is unique among its own kind by showing glimpses of empathy for whites, which is quite simply considered RACIST (!) these days.
23 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed