'There's no white genocide in SA', Trump's top pastor says
'What is real is the devastatingly high crime rate across the country, with most of the victims being Black South Africans.'
The founder of The NOW Television Network has debunked United States (US) President Donald Trump's claims of a 'white genocide' in South Africa after meeting with white farmers in the country.
Last week, with a line of reporters in the room, Trump ambushed President Cyril Ramaphosa by playing a video of EFF leader Julius Malema — theatrically, almost like a Bond villain — startling those present with footage he believed supported his claims of an alleged white genocide against farmers.
'White genocide'
The US president showed videos of Malema chanting 'Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer' to support his false belief in genocide against whites in the country, asking why the red berets leader has not been arrested.
However, Trump's claims have been dismissed by Pastor Mark Burns, who, according to his X profile, has been labelled by Time Magazine as 'Trump's Top Pastor'.
ALSO READ: 'There is doubt in Trump's head about genocide in SA,' Ramaphosa says [VIDEO]
Trump's 'top pastor'
Burns' post was shared by South Africa's head of public diplomacy, Clayson Monyela.
'A Whitehouse insider and President Trump's 'Top Pastor' visited South Africa to get the actual truth. He engaged white farmers. Here's an eyewitness account,' Monyela said.
'No white genocide'
Burns shared details about his meeting with farmers in South Africa.
'I'm here in South Africa, meeting with white farmers, white business owners, and even some former apartheid leaders, and here's what they're telling me: President Donald J. Trump is a great president, but there is no 'white genocide' happening here. They were genuinely surprised that this claim even made it to the international stage'.
'They do agree that the song sung by Julius Malema, 'Kill the Boer,' is divisive and shouldn't be part of the national conversation. It fuels unnecessary tension. But when it comes to actual targeted killings or a genocide of White South Africans, that's just not the reality on the ground,' Burns said in a post on X.
Crime rate
However, Burns stressed South Africa's 'high crime rate.'
'What is real is the devastatingly high crime rate across the country, with most of the victims being black South Africans. Unemployment is crushing, and poverty is driving violent crime in all communities.
'Thanks to the Oval Office meeting between President Trump and President Ramaphosa, three powerful things have happened:
The 'White genocide' claim has ironically united the country. Black and white South Africans are standing together saying, this isn't who we are.
It has forced crime and safety to the top of the national agenda. South Africans are demanding solutions.
It has led to a long-overdue conversation about revisiting BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) to make sure it benefits everyone, not just a select few.
White South Africans
Burns said comments were not coming from black South Africans.
'Here's the most important part. These perspectives aren't coming from black South Africans. They're coming from White South Africans. They love their country, and many of them believe President Trump was misinformed by people who wanted an excuse to leave.
ALSO READ: WATCH: Donald Trump ambushes Cyril Ramaphosa in Oval Office
Truth
Burns said the 'truth is more complicated, but South Africans, black and White, are working together to move forward.'
'President Trump sparked a conversation, and now South Africa is responding with the hopes that he will attend the G20 in South Africa to receive the baton from President Ramaphosa as the G20 will be in the United States next,' Burns said.
Trump to attend G20
Writing in his weekly newsletter on Monday, Ramaphosa said one of the key outcomes of the 'substantive discussions' he and his delegation had with Trump was agreeing on an 'economic cooperation channel between the US administration and South Africa to engage further on tariffs and a broad range of trade matters'.
'President Trump agreed that the US should continue playing a key role in the G20, including attending the G20 Leaders' Summit in Johannesburg later this year, where South Africa will hand over the presidency of the G20 to the US.'
Ramaphosa said he and his delegation went to Washington to meet with Trump to establish a 'basis for greater economic cooperation and to address some of the challenges' that have recently arisen in relations between the two countries.
Ramaphosa said in this context, it was critical for Pretoria to engage directly with the US administration to correct misinformation and provide a true account of the progress 'we have made as a democracy and the many and complex challenges we still face'.
ALSO READ: US visit came amid 'increasing strain' between two countries, Ramaphosa says
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
10 minutes ago
- TimesLIVE
Trump: No requests to pardon Sean ‘Diddy' Combs, but will look at facts
US President Donald Trump said on Friday no-one has asked him to pardon Sean 'Diddy' Combs but he would look at the facts of the hip-hop mogul's case. Trump's comments at a White House news conference came as Combs attended the 13th day of testimony in the rapper's criminal sex trafficking trial. The Bad Boy Records founder has pleaded not guilty to five felony counts of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. During a press conference at the White House, Fox News reporter Peter Doocy asked Trump whether he would consider pardoning Combs, noting the businessman-turned-politician said during a 2012 episode of his Celebrity Apprentice reality show that he was friends with the rapper. 'Nobody's asked. You had to be the one to ask, Peter,' Trump said. 'I think some people have been very close to asking. 'First, I'd look at what's happening — and I haven't been watching it too closely, though it's certainly getting a lot of coverage.'
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
Cosatu: assessing the SANDF's capacity to fulfil its constitutional mandate
In a few weeks, Cosatu along with many other South Africans celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Freedom Charter drafted at the historic Congress of the People in Kliptown by the African National Congress led Alliance. This visionary document, that declared boldly, that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, provided the foundation for our internationally respected Constitution and much of what government seeks to achieve. A discussion needs to be held on whether the South African National Defence Force is able to fulfill its constitutionally mandated role today of defending the Constitution? The worrying answer that has been appearing over many years is that it may struggle. All nations require the capacity to defend themselves not only from other nations' governments' adventurism but increasingly from non-state threats. These may come in the form of foreign terrorists using South Africa as a training base as was seen with some Libyans in Mpumalanga or Isis or Al-Shabab elements utilising South Africa for money laundering, to foreign vessels looting fishing stock from South African waters. It takes years to build a coherent defence capacity. Having an internationally respected defence capability is equally key to deterring such threats to our sovereignty. South Africa has a long history of being one of the most formidable military powers in the continent, including playing its role in defeating Nazi Germany in North Africa and Italy in World War Two to since the democratic breakthrough playing a leading role in peace keeping missions in Africa. It was natural for government since 1994 to drastically reduce funding spent on defence. Military conscription ended for white men and there was a new democratic state committed to peace with the region and the brutal apartheid regime was over. Equally there were pressing socioeconomic challenges inherited from three and a half centuries of systemic neglect of 90% of the population that needed to be prioritised. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Mistakes were made when the arms deal package were the focus was on arming the SANDF for conventional war and less for peacekeeping missions. As is well ventilated, corruption seeped in. Today the price of those mistakes has become painfully clear, and they pose a real threat to workers, not only those employed in the SANDF but across the economy. The conditions of the SANDF's bases, both at home and abroad, leave much to be desired with buildings falling apart, soldiers living in over cramped and unhygienic conditions, security lax at best and enabling criminals to enter secure premises. Training is often inadequate and more critically, too little is provided. Machinery and vehicles are deteriorating with no funds to maintain or repair them. Air Force pilots are not being provided with the number of flying hours required to remain top of their game, and even placing their flying certification at risk. The air fleet, in particular the Gripens, suited for conventional warfare is barely functioning. the SANDF lacks the airlift capacity to deploy and collect peacekeeping forces in remote locations. Army personnel in these remote areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Mozambique and elsewhere are unprotected with little if any, helicopter assault or deployment capacity. A similar depressing picture exists with the SA Navy where mistakes were made to purchase a fleet better suited for conventional warfare but with little capacity to protect our waters from the mass pilfering of fishing stock by foreign trawlers, and also by local criminal syndicates for endangered species. The spread of Somali pirates to the Mozambique Channel in the past decade, highlighted the need for a navy with rapid deployment capacity. The tragic loss of three sailors in a training exercise off Simonstown in 2024, was a painful reminder of the real cost in life to SANDF personnel and their families for the neglect of the SANDF. A discussion needs to be held about the age profile of the SANDF. SANDF personnel need to be young and fit to state the obvious. It is not an institution where one goes to retire. Yet over the years, its age profile has risen well past 35 years and has become increasingly top heavy. During the Mandela Administration dedicated programmes were put in place to equip SANDF personnel with the training and skills they would need to find decent jobs in the economy upon exiting, e.g. as mechanics, finance managers, law enforcement etc. The SANDF has begun to revive this programme and also announced its intention to help train unemployed youth as part of its contribution to the economy. The situation is salvageable. The members of the SANDF are patriots and committed to serving the nation. But we need to give them the tools needed to fulfill their mandate. Equally we need to agree on what is that mandate. The SANDF has several fundamental tasks. The first is ensure the security of the state against foreign and domestic enemies. Then we need to give it the funds necessary to train our pilots, to have working planes, radars etc. Second is to support the police as needed. This requires fit and well trained army personnel with working and secure transport. They need to be trained specifically in law enforcement as maintaining peace during riots at home is different from dealing with enemy combatants overseas. This support includes its role in assisting in domestic disaster management, e.g. floods, fires. Third is to secure our borders in collaboration with the Border Management Authority and the SAPS. We have over 4400 kilometres of land borders and even larger territorial waters. They need working vehicles, drones and field bases as well as a coast guard fleet and radar capacity. Fourth is to support peacekeeping across the continent. This requires extensive training, fit personnel, airlift and defence capabilities, armoured and mobile land transport amongst others. The SANDF has a critical role to play. Its personnel represent the best of us. It is time that we give them our support and the resources they need to fulfill their constitutional mandates. Solly Phetoe is the general secretary of Cosatu. Solly Phetoe is the general secretary of Cosatu. Image: File BUSINESS REPORT Visit:
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
The Unintended Consequences of US Refugee Policy for South African Minorities
Members of the Khoi and San community camped outside the Union Building in 2019 demanding that their rights be recognised. Image: Oupa Mokoena/African News Agency (ANA) Clyde N.S. Ramalaine The recent resettlement of 49 South Africans, described as 'Afrikaners', to the United States under refugee status via the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) has drawn public ridicule, suspicion, and commentary. While some predict their imminent return to sunny South Africa, the event offers an unexpected opportunity to examine how USRAP's criteria could inadvertently apply to other historically marginalised South African groups, particularly the KhoeSan and Coloured communities. This article does not support or validate the ideological narratives of groups like AfriForum or Solidarity, who claim persecution under terms like 'white genocide.' Such claims are unsubstantiated, racially selective, and morally indefensible. Instead, this article offers a literal and policy-driven reading of USRAP's eligibility framework, focusing not on its intentions but on its possible implications for marginalised non-white South African identities. USRAP eligibility criteria Under Executive Order 14204, USRAP permits applications from South Africans who meet three conditions: Must be of South African nationality; Must be of Afrikaner ethnicity or a member of a racial minority; Must articulate past persecution or fear of future persecution. Although influenced by racialised narratives of white Afrikaner persecution, the policy does not explicitly exclude non-white groups. This opens an interpretive doorway that, when read literally and consistently, may qualify KhoeSan and Coloured South Africans—groups with longstanding, legitimate claims of marginalisation. South African nationality - A contested construct The idea of a unified 'South African nationality' is not neutral or straightforward. South African identity has been deeply shaped by colonial conquest, apartheid-era racial division, and selective post-apartheid nation-building. Far from a cohesive category, 'South African' is an ongoing site of contestation, haunted by economic inequality, cultural marginalisation, and incomplete reconciliation. Under apartheid, nationality was fractured across pseudo-ethnic 'homelands.' Today, the uncritically adopted 'Rainbow Nation' rhetoric fails to conceal the persistence of racial and spatial disparities. For many, especially KhoeSan and Coloured South Africans, national identity remains fractured, imposed, and weaponised against their claims to full inclusion and recognition. Afrikaner identity - An exclusionary social construct The term 'Afrikaner' has always been a politically fluid concept. It was only in the 20th century, under apartheid, that it solidified as a synonym for white Afrikaans speakers. However, Afrikaans itself is a Creole language born at the Cape from African, European, and Asian linguistic influences. Millions of non-white South Africans—particularly the KhoeSan and Coloured communities—speak Afrikaans as their mother tongue and have made significant contributions to its literary and cultural legacy. If 'Afrikaner' is used to denote those rooted in Africa who speak Afrikaans, then the most authentic claimants are arguably the KhoeSan and Coloured peoples. To exclude them is to perpetuate apartheid's racial gatekeeping. The USRAP, though likely intending to privilege white identities, inadvertently opens space for those previously denied recognition within the very cultural matrix it seeks to protect. The notion of a "white Afrikaner" as a uniquely persecuted category is built on historical erasure. Afrikaner culture is not racially homogeneous. Its racialisation is a mid-20th-century political invention, not a cultural or linguistic truth. If USRAP implicitly assumes whiteness under the 'Afrikaner' identity, it contradicts its own stated openness. Racial minorities - Recognition beyond whiteness The policy's second clause, which asserts, 'or a member of a racial minority', broadens the scope for inclusion. Here, the KhoeSan and Coloured groups qualify, both as racial minorities and as communities subjected to historical persecution and contemporary marginalisation. The KhoeSan, South Africa's first people, have endured centuries of displacement, genocide, and erasure. Today, despite growing self-identification, they remain denied official indigeneity and reparative justice. Their exclusion from land reform and identity recognition makes them textbook examples of persecuted minorities. Coloured South Africans, a category created by apartheid to obscure Indigenous ancestry and maintain social control, also remain in a state of political liminality. This imposed identity, still used in state policy, has allowed the post-apartheid government to deny both their indigeneity and their oppression, framing them as 'beneficiaries' of apartheid while excluding them from targeted redress. Post-1994 policy continues to maintain racial categories rooted in apartheid logic. In practice, this has meant retaining the 'Coloured' label to contain indigenous claims and limit state accountability. Despite Steve Biko's inclusive definition of Black Consciousness, embracing all non-white oppressed peoples, the state's operational framework reserves 'African' identity for Nguni-Bantu groups, excluding KhoeSan and Coloured communities from full African identification and associated redress. A policy that outruns Its intentions The original purpose of the USRAP criteria appears to have been the protection of white South Africans fearing political and land displacement. However, its language is broad enough to permit reinterpretation. A literal application of its three criteria—nationality, minority status, and persecution—clearly allows for KhoeSan and Coloured inclusion. If USRAP is truly about offering refuge to marginalised South Africans, then KhoiSan and Coloured communities not only qualify but arguably embody the policy's intent more authentically than the white Afrikaners it was implicitly designed to protect. The US Refugee Admissions Program, though politically motivated and ideologically framed, unintentionally exposes the contradictions in South African identity politics and racial categorisation. Its criteria, if interpreted without racial bias, could provide an unexpected platform for historically marginalised communities like the KhoeSan and Coloured peoples to assert claims long denied by the South African state. This article is not an endorsement of emigration as a political solution. Rather, it is a call to critically examine how refugee policy, constructed with one ideological target in mind, might unintentionally illuminate deeper questions of identity, marginalisation, and justice. USRAP, as worded, opens a policy loophole. This gateway challenges racialised assumptions about Afrikaner identity and repositions the conversation around who truly qualifies as persecuted in post-apartheid South Africa.
