Bit late

 

So the whites go free, nothing new there then.

I suggest you take your own advice and look a little further back.

 

You clearly didn't read Martins post before posting the above, or you chose not to understand the points made in it. Many more blacks and people of colour - many many multiples - died as a result of the racist policies implemented in SA both before and during Apartheid than were killed by any actions of the military wing of the ANC. That's context.

Sometimes oppressed people are left with no other choice and bad things need to be done to upset the status quo for the greater and longer good.

If you choose to continue to be so blinkered then you are a grade A fool.

 

Hopefully Julius will do something to stifle ANC corruption, in a peaceful way


But he shouldn't be promising disaffected youth jobs, where there are none

 

http://www.spainvia.com/sarahmandela.htm
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things...elson-mandela/

 

Jonc, do you not think that all these 'publications' are just bit 'out there'. Not exactly the oracle are they?

 

Shame the internet wasn't around when he was born 95yrs ago, but obviously there were no atrocities committed then because the south africans were all whiter than white.

 

Why are they a 'bit out there'? Is because they the don't portray him according to your point of view? What part of these publications do you dispute?

 

From the first article

Under Apartheid, blacks and whites went to separate hospitals but they received world class health care, whatever their colour. Now the facilities are collapsing or non-existent. Black children went to different schools than white children, but they received an education, something which is now a privileged luxury. When they grew up, their bosses may have been white, but they had jobs and a living wage, as the recent violence shows us, such security is but a memory for most South Africans.

I saw a documentary the other day on the life and work of the war photo journalist Don McCullin.

He covered Vietnam in the 60's but in the 70's concentrated on the internal wars in Africa, Congo, Biafra etc which where often prosecuted by white mercenaries. In the documentary he recounts asking these mercenaries why they where in African countries contributing to the pain and suffering

The most honest answer came from one mercenary who simply said "because we like killing blacks"

And as that first "article" and post on here show some people just don't like blacks

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...n-8433309.html

 

Facts are facts he was a terrorist and up until 2008 was on the U.S terrorist watch list . If Bin Laden was still alive who knows in 20 years time he could have had a Nobel peace prize and we could all be blinkered towards his previous history.

 

Maybe that tells you more about the US terrorist watch list

 

Mandela did not deliberately target civilians, OBL did. Secondly, is an internal fight against apartheid morally correct versus an attempt to perpetuate Islamism through terror? I'd say the former is objectively good and the latter evil.

 

Really

Landmark events in MK's military activity inside South Africa consisted of actions designed to intimidate the ruling power. In 1983, the Church Street bomb was detonated in Pretoria near the South African Air Force Headquarters, resulting in 19 deaths and 217 injuries. During the next 10 years, a series of bombings occurred in South Africa, conducted mainly by the military wing of the African National Congress.

In the Amanzimtoti bomb on the Natal South Coast in 1985, five civilians were killed and 40 were injured when MK cadre Andrew Sibusiso Zondo detonated an explosive in a rubbish bin at a shopping centre killing five people, including three children, shortly before Christmas. In a submission to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), the ANC stated that Zondo acted on orders after a recent SADF raid in Lesotho.[9]

A bomb was detonated in a bar on the Durban beach-front in 1986, killing three civilians and injuring 69. Robert McBride received the death penalty for this bombing which became known as the "Magoo's Bar bombing". Although the subsequent Truth and Reconciliation Committee called the bombing a "gross violation of human rights",[10] McBride received amnesty and became a senior police officer.

In 1987, an explosion outside a Johannesburg court killed three people and injured 10; a court in Newcastle had been attacked in a similar way the previous year, injuring 24. In 1987, a bomb exploded at a military command centre in Johannesburg, killing one person and injuring 68 personnel.

The bombing campaign continued with attacks on a series of soft targets, including a bank in Roodepoort in 1988, in which four civilians were killed and 18 injured. Also in 1988, in a bomb detonation outside a magistrate's court killed three. At the Ellis Park rugby stadium in Johannesburg, a car bomb killed two and injured 37 civilians. A multitude[citation needed] of bombs in "Wimpy Bar" fast food outlets and supermarkets occurred during the late 1980s, killing and wounding many people. Wimpy were specifically targeted because of their perceived rigid enforcements of many Apartheid-era laws, including excluding people of colour from their restaurants. Several other bombings occurred, with smaller numbers of casualties.

 

I'm sure theres plenty inter tribal killing, it hasn't and won't stop now - the Zulus are bloodthirsty lot. We were living in fear when my girlfriends nephew decided to try his luck and get into SA through the backdoor, in Josa. Suspected Zimbabeans had been necklaced the previous months. Cos even though spoke same language they can pick up your ndebele and not Zulu.

Doesn't take away from Central tenent of what was being sort - equal rights black and white

 

You got to remember also, any uppity left wing radical in the 50's was by default a communist and therefore the enemy.

 

Were these attacks ordered by Mandela?

 

There's nothing there for after 1990

 

As he was co-founder of the organisation he was responsible.According to Nelson Mandela, all of the founding members of the MK, including himself, were also members of the ANC. In his famous "I am prepared to die" speech

 

He had been rehabilitated and the peace talks started on the 2nd of February

 

Most of the bombing's Mandela was involved in where disruptive not deadly, he was a saboteur not a terrorist. Either way, I think to judge a person by the things they may have done as a young man rather than the 10's of thousands of lives they had a huge part in saving later in life is unfair.

Would you rather those bombing's never have happened and million's of people still being oppressed today? Im sure most in South Africa wouldn't as they all seem rather keen on him!

 

Up until 1990 the ANC was a terrorist organisation of which Mandela was co-founder and a part of this is fact. Are you in denial of this ???.
Yes I would rather not see innocent civilians be murdered by indiscriminate bombs being set off in public places, if you were not aware setting bombs off in a public place will most likely harm civilians.
Would you rather the facts about the ANC be oppressed .
Yes I agree it was wrong that people were being oppressed in SA but the murder of innocent civilians was not necessary in my opinion.

 

Sorry Jonc, but any article that describes Apartheid has 'racial tension' is clearly grinding an axe

 

Would you rather none of that happened, and that blacks still didn't have the vote is the question you have to ask yourself.

Even today judiciary is not free from prejudice

 

The question you should be asking yourself is was it necessary to kill innocent civilians to arrive where they are today or should that part not be mentioned in Mandela's struggle???.

 

I'm not getting too involved in this as it would just end up where most threads end up when emotions run high, but to Xx-Ian-xX I would ask one question.

You were very vociferous in the past on here over your condemnation of the rise of Islamism in the UK and opined as much on several threads a few years ago.

So if the UK was evntually taken over by extremists claiming to operate in the name of Islam and their interpretation of Sharia law was passed as the law of the land preventing you from doing all the things you might enjoy such as driniking alcohol, having sex outside of marriage etc. and passing laws such as how people must dress and generally forcing their version of the Muslim religion and an extreme way of life on the homogeneous population you would not condone fighting with any form of violence to get YOUR country back?

If you can honestly answer that you wouldn't then your views on this thread are fair enough, if not then you are a hypocrite for that scenario while still a far cry from what happened in SA is at least comparable!

 

.
I would not lower myself to the level of my oppressors no. When I leave this earth I will go knowing I was not party to the murder of innocent civilians. Everyone will have an opinion on Mandela F1 I hope mine hasn't offended anyone

 

Are you afrikaans by any chance

 

A fair answer and no, you've not offended me, but I vehemently disagree with your opinion of Mandela which is fine as we are allowed to disagree!

 

Opinions are like arseholes F1 everyone has got their own . I will read Mandela's book though. If you are into your reading get The Rogue State that's a real eye opener.

 

I will look it up, cheers

A book I enjoyed a good while ago now is "Cry, the Beloved Country" by Alan Paton. It's actually a novel set in SA during the era of apartheid and is very neutral in its viewpoint, but reaveals a lot about how SA was in those times for whites and blacks alike.