home Featured Did FNB Fund The EFF Trip To London? Also, Why Was Johann Rupert So Angry?

Did FNB Fund The EFF Trip To London? Also, Why Was Johann Rupert So Angry?

by BO Staff Writer
date: 15 April 2016

The three FNB shareholders castigated by Rupert are alleged to be Paul Harris, TG Ferreira and Laurie Dieppenaar.

Shocking evidence has emerged that Julius Malema of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) may be working with bankers and powerful white businessmen to destabilise South Africa in the quest to replace President Zuma before his term ends. President Zuma has fallen out of favour with white business, more so those who control the South African economy based in London. The ‘big five”corporations which dominate the SA  economy are listed in the London Stock Exchange. President Zuma is perceived to have abandoned the West for the “Look East” policy. White business seems to have found in Mr Malema a willing and able ally who has many stones to grind with President Zuma. If the plan and strategy works out then South Africa is headed to a possible mass protest akin to the one seen in Brazil recently where the protestors called for the removal of the President. The same modus operandi shall be applied in South Africa, where the Gupta family and President Zuma are increasingly projected as the epitome of corruption by the privately owned media.

The regime change plan was in all likelihood hatched in October 2015 in London, where the discourse of “state capture” was christened as the main propaganda piece to justify the removal of President Zuma. Sources have alleged that at least three major shareholder of the First National Bank (FNB) are implicated as possible funders of the EFF’s trip to London. In a bizarre turn of events, in December 2015 at the Leopard Creek Gold Club, the South African richest man, Johann Rupert, is alleged to have confronted and questioned these alleged EFF funders in an angry and loud exchange. He is said to have asked: why do they “elevate a Mosquito”. Rupert was angry that three shareholders had funded the EFF London trip. The three FNB shareholders castigated by Rupert are alleged to be Paul Harris, TG Ferreira and Laurie Dieppenaar.

It would seem that the saga around the appointment of the South African Minister of Finance has jolted Rupert to appreciating the position assumed by those who are alleged to have funded EFF leaders Malema’s London trip.

Johann Rupert has denied allegations that he was at the Leopard Creek Golf Club at the same time with the three shareholders. He claims to have last seen them five years ago. We put ten questions to Mr Rupert and both the questions and his responses are indicated herebelow:

1. Where you at the Leopard Creek Golf Club in December, 2015, where you had a conversation with the main shareholders of Rand Merchant Bank, (being) the following gentlemen: Paul Harris, Laurie Dippenaar and GT Ferreira?”

Rupert’s response:  NO – THEY WERE NOT AT L/C IN DECEMBER

2. When last were the four of you in the same place at the same time?

Rupert’s response: 5 YEARS AGO AT A BIRTHDAY PARTY

3. Why were (you) so agitated about a mosquito during your conversation with these gentlemen?


4. Is it true you called Julius Malema a mosquito in the presence of these gentlemen?


5. Have you made peace with Mr Malema after your known fall out a few years ago?

Rupert’s response: NEVER MET OR SPOKE TO HIM

6. Is Julius Malema your mosquito now?

Rupert’s response:  NEVER MET OR SPOKE TO HIM

7.  Is it true that you were angry that the three were funding a mosquito?


9. Did these gentlemen fund Julius Malema’s trip to London last year?

Rupert’s response: OBVIOUSLY NOT TRUE!

10.  How much did the three gentlemen give Malema from your knowledge?

Rupert’s response: OBVIOUSLY NOT TRUE!

Similar questions were sent to the three shareholders. Laurie Dippenaar has since responded through his personal assistant. Dippenaar’s interesting response is reproduced hereunder in its entirety:

“I have been made aware that you sent Mr Johann Rupert an e-mail with the same or similar questions. I have taken cognisance of Mr Rupert’s response and I am in full agreement with his reply.

Laurie Dippenaar”.

Wait! So after questions were sent to Johann Rupert he called his buddies and made them aware that someone is sniffing around about their Leopard Creek affair? Why did Mr Rupert think it necessary to share questions meant for him with individuals he is accused of being plotting with? We should have never been surprised. This is how South Africa’s white business operates. It has a deep culture of collusion, conniving, conspiracy to silence, covering up for each other, ganging up against the truth and price fixing. If we recall, Mr Rupert alleges that he had not seen the FNB shareholders in five years. If this is true, why did he think it was important to share the questions and his answers with them? Is this not a clear case of concealment? A justifiable inference must be made that these gentlemen have a lot to hide and they are making sure that they all sing from the same hymn book. That’s how South African white business operates.

The conspiracy of deception to avoid the truth found complete rhythmic synch when Ferreira finally sent his response. This response which is also worth full disclosure and reproduction is indicated below:

“With reference to your emailed questions to me regarding the so-called “Leopard Greek Golf Club affair”.  I wish to briefly respond as follows:

No such meeting ever took place and consequently I cannot respond to most of your questions.

I have never met or spoken to Mr Malema in my life, nor have I been party to funding his trip to the UK.

I trust that the above information will convince you that the story of the “Leopard Creek Golf Club affair” is a figment of some-one’s imagination and, while I must admit I am curious as to where, and how, such a story originated as well as what the authors of this story wish to achieve with this fairy tale, I have nothing to add.

Kind regards”

The vehemence of the refutations notwithstanding, we are nonetheless left with many doubts. We are still left to wonder about the sharing of responses. The innocent have nothing to hide. Ferreira’s response is curious in that it seeks to know the source of the story. It’s a subtle intimidation move. It must be remembered here that we are dealing with the upper crust of South African white capital. This group has the means to bring governments down and destroy individuals. What is of significance about Johann Rupert is that he is on record for calling Mr Malema a “mosquito” and in turn Malema has called him“the Stellenbosch Mafia”. It seems that by December 2015 Rupert was still angry with Malema. However events soon led to the burying of the hatchet and Rupert endorsing the programme that was either hatched, conceived or funded by the FNB shareholders. In matters of business and politics there are no permanent enemies.

It would seem that the saga around the appointment of the South African Minister of Finance has jolted Rupert to appreciating the position assumed by those who are alleged to have funded Malema’s London trip. It would appear that a section of the South African white business had already lost trust in President Zuma long before the Nhlanhla Nene saga. To this end they were already looking for his replacement or at least to support those who would assist to unsettle President Zuma. Johann Rupert had not caught on the whole plan yet, but was triggered into action by the “Nene Saga” (as the controversy around the hiring and firing of the Finance Minister has come to be known). If in last December Rupert was calling Malema a “mosquito”, in March 2016 he had fully crossed the floor and was openly calling for the removal of the President. This raises a big question: was Rupert converted and then promptly assumed leadership for the campaign?

Malema has in turn been very forthcoming about the need to work with Rupert. After Rupert called for the president to resign, there was very little that separated Malema’s long term desire to see Zuma out of office and the now publicly stated position of Rupert. Malema called directly on Rupert at a press conference after the Constitutional Court decision. He was direct:

“Rupert, your call for Zuma to step down should translate into action and see the closure of business to allow workers, including yourself, to join the march to remove Zuma. it’s time to go to the streets. Let unions join the march. We need combined resources – financial and human – to mobilise the necessary strength to remove Zuma.”

This détente between Malema and Rupert follows a pattern that could have been hatched in London most likely by men like Lord Robin Renwick – a known coup plotter and regime change veteran who may or may not have been linked to the FNB shareholders. Malema’s crew met Renwick under the secretive imperial rule of Chatham House and the transcript or footage of the meeting has been promised but never made public. The only evidence of the meeting are leaked photographs that shows Renwick in deep conversation with Malema.

After the London trip the EFF has decisively shifted policy on a number of fronts most notably on President Mandela. It was in London where Mandela’s legacy was vilified. It was also in London that the EFF for the first time critised the President of Zimbabwe and denounced the land revolution. The most shocking move was the decision to unify the opposition parties. The main opposition party in South Africa is the pro-white and racist Democratic Alliance (DA). It’s a party of white big business, whereas the EFF is supposedly the party of the poor, the unemployed and the exploited workers. The Constitutional Court decision which found that both the President and the National Assembly did not follow the Constitution when dealing with the report of the Public Protector has emboldened the moves to unify the opposition parties on a “Zuma Must Go” ticket. This falls well with the overall London agenda.

The unity between the DA and the EFF would have been sealed on 5 April 2016 where a joint meeting between the EFF and the DA was planned to be held. Malema confirmed the meeting on twitter. This would not have been the first time that the two parties had met. The Sunday Times had reported on on-going secret meetings between the two parties since the London trip. It’s not the first time that in South Africa political parties on the right of the political spectrum are forced into unity by the London influential financiers. The political career of Dr Mamphele Ramphele was killed by the kiss of death she was forced to give the leader of the DA after yet another London trip.

What is left to be explained is how the alliance between a renowned capitalist and a Marxist Leninist Party would work or on what is this alliance founded.  Well, what unites Julius Malema and Johann Rupert is ultimately money. Rupert and the rest of the South African based white capitalist class is upset at Zuma for three main reasons. Firstly, Zuma has this new thing of “looking East” for what some have called “a family feast”. This has led to a second reason, that is, Zuma no longer takes calls from the London based white capital. Thirdly, white capital is upset because Zuma is seen as having opened doors for the Gupta family who are increasingly encroaching in the mining sector which in turn is the sole preserve of white capital. Malema is a man of expensive tastes. So an anti Zuma alliance is possible based on these considerations. Rupert has the money, Malema has the will and ear of the excluded masses.

In the next few months clarity shall be gained on whether the Brazilian option can be realised. What is clear is that the motion to impeach the President in Parliament was calculated to start a psychological preparation for a possible call to the streets under the theme of Zuma Must Go! Only time shall tell if this move shall gain traction. The ANC inside Parliament has too big a majority for any motion of no-confidence to succeed. However, a sustained mass action which could take advantage of the real anger of the poor masses is unpredictable. What is clear is that whatever happens in the streets, Rupert shall have a big role in it.

In the next instalment, we shall look at the two main factions inside the ruling party and how they are orientated towards the grand plan of regime change hatched in London. On the one side is President Zuma’s “look East”faction and on the other is the Cyril Ramaphosa, Pravin Ghordan and Blade Nzimande London fuelled faction now supported outside the ANC alliance by the EFF, DA and Johann Rupert.

Show Buttons
Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Linkdin
Share On Pinterest
Share On Youtube
Share On Reddit
Share On Stumbleupon
Contact us
Hide Buttons