An especially bizarre and naïve fellow popped up on my blog recently, desperate to convince me that, despite all the evidence to the contrary, the Apartheid-regime version of events is actually correct, and that Kruger and the republics were indeed the poor, innocent victims of the Boer War.
Pausing for a moment to pull it out of his arse, his initial claim was that there is no way the Boer republics could have started hostilities by invading Natal and the Cape Colony, as declaring war on Great Britain would, he stated, be ‘illogical’, and therefore it could not possibly have happened. After pointing out to him that Kruger also believed the Earth was flat, and that the Old Testament was literal truth (meaning logic was a pretty alien concept to the old troll), I then asked my correspondent if he also denies that (eg) Japan picked a fight with the USA in December 1941. Starting a war against the US was pretty illogical too, but not many people deny the attack on Pearl Harbor happened, or claim that the Philippines was never invaded by Imperial Japan.
Unfortunately, we might never know his thoughts on this matter, as he failed to answer the simple question. Unable to deny that the Boer republics did indeed take the monumentally stupid decision of attacking the British Empire, he then twisted and turned, wriggling on the hook, before coming up with what must be the most ridiculous excuse ever to explain away Kruger’s invasions of Natal and the Cape Colony:
Apparently, in his fevered mind at least, ‘The British alone had the power to determine whether there would be a war or not because no matter how much some Boers might have wanted a war: it could never happen with out the intent & ascent of the British who held the balance of power. Person A could challenge person B all day to a fist fight but if Person B does not want one: it will never happen. The fight must first attain the consent & ascent (sic) of Person B in order to legitimately & truly occur. The British gave consent & ascent to a war that did not have to happen at all as they could simply have ignored the Boer Republics’ governments as they had historically done in the past’.
So, according to this utter buffoon, if a country declares war and invades one of its neighbours, it is really all the fault of the nation which is invaded, as (apparently) they have the option of simply ignoring this. Seemingly, if you do not want to fight, then an invasion cannot possibly occur, as the invaders have not ‘attained the consent and ascent (sic)’ of their target. And so, in the bizarre mindset of this clown, every nation that has ever been invaded throughout history is actually entirely to blame, as they shouldn’t have granted their ‘consent and ascent (sic)’ to the invasion.
If only this fellow had been on hand to share his infinite wisdom with the Poles in 1939, assuring them that all they needed to do was to deny their ‘consent and ascent (sic)’, and everything would have been fine. Can you imagine how infuriated Nazi Germany’s leaders would have been, had their carefully-laid plans been thwarted by the Poles simply ignoring the German divisions streaming over the border, and cleverly declining to grant ‘consent and ascent (sic)’ for the invasion to take place. The whole of modern history would be completely different if only they had realised it was that simple.
Just when you think the nonsense spewed forth by the increasingly frantic Defenders of the Myth™ cannot get any more far-fetched and surreal, an even more deluded crank pops up, and treats us to a slice of his lunacy. But I reckon this latest claim will take some topping.
 Quite how this fellow thinks climbing mountains is related to any of this, I don’t know, though it certainly adds another layer of entertaining insanity to his claims