View Full Version : Nelson Mandela dies
mojaveman
12-05-2013, 17:46
Nelson Mandela, revered statesman and anti-apartheid leader, dies at 95.
http://news.yahoo.com/nelson-mandela-dies-2140577.html
Hard for my throat to get lumpy over a communist-sympathizing terrorist whose wife hung burning tires around people's necks.
Bush the Younger has offered his condolences on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/sigaba#!/georgewbush/posts/642911862417876).Laura and I join the people of South Africa and the world in celebrating the life of Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela. President Mandela was one of the great forces for freedom and equality of our time. He bore his burdens with dignity and grace, and our world is better off because of his example. This good man will be missed, but his contributions will live on forever. Laura and I send our heartfelt sympathy to President Mandela’s family and to the citizens of the nation he loved.
ghp95134
12-05-2013, 18:01
Bush the Younger has offered his condolences on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/sigaba#!/georgewbush/posts/642911862417876).
Yes, but keep in mind as often reported here: Bush 43 has class!
--ghp
I give the man great credit for his actions post incarceration......someone who finds compassion for his jailers is way beyond my abilities or comprehension.
He averted what could have been a terrible civil war after the elections.
Hard for my throat to get lumpy over a communist-sympathizing terrorist whose wife hung burning tires around people's necks.
Was wondering what the QP response would be...and am glad to have Your perspective on this man, and his passing. :munchin
Holly
Was wondering what the QP response would be...and am glad to have Your perspective on this man, and his passing. :munchin
Holly
Oh, don't base your estimate of the "QP response" on mine, echoes.
I don't condone "necklacing", and I don't like communists or terrorists, but there are many aspects to Mandela's character that other Team guys may find admirable.
His death just has the same effect on me, personally, as Chavez' or Kruschev's did-none.
Wonder if Jackson and Sharpton will be able to finagle a couple slots as pallbearers? :munchin
His family is already fighting over his estimated $16,000.000 fortune.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2519040/Nelson-Mandela-death-How-family-war-10m-fortune.html
I don't condone "necklacing", and I don't like communists or terrorists, but there are many aspects to Mandela's character that other Team guys may find admirable.
Sir Dusty,
What does that mean?:( Honestly, the only real facts known to us in the general public were that he was a great leader, after being in prison for his beliefs on political grounds, and went on to become President of his country.:munchin
Holly
Sir Dusty,
What does that mean?:( Honestly, the only real facts known to us in the general public were that he was a great leader, after being in prison for his beliefs on political grounds, and went on to become President of his country.:munchin
Holly
What does what mean? Necklacing? That was Minnie's specialty-if she didn't like the way someone thought, she'd hang a tire around his neck, fill it full of gas, and throw in a match. She did a lot of it while her hubby was in the hoosegow and she was keeping house.
There's a whole lot of things Mandela, his wife and their crew did that you won't find out from Bono or Diane Sawyer, echoes.
What does what mean? Necklacing? That was Minnie's specialty-if she didn't like the way someone thought, she'd hang a tire around his neck, fill it full of gas, and throw in a match. She did a lot of it while her hubby was in the hoosegow and she was keeping house.
There's a whole lot of things Mandela, his wife and their crew did that you won't find out from Bono or Diane Sawyer, echoes.
And I was just asking, plain and simple. And I thank you for providing the information neccessary to put this death in proper perspective. My appologies if I offened you or anyone else with my post.
Holly
Watch for the adulation in the media this weekend. We don't have television, but I would bet that little to no mention was made of Margaret Thatcher's passing.
Pat
And I was just asking, plain and simple. And I thank you for providing the information neccessary to put this death in proper perspective. My appologies if I offened you or anyone else with my post.
Holly
No! Don't misunderstand! You didn't even come close to offending me, or anyone else, and I'd never purposely try to upset you.
I'm trying to imply that the general public has been painted a picture that is false, similar to Obama's case. Have you ever heard of the MK?
Look, here's a snippet:
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-nelson-mandela/
The hero of the anti-apartheid struggle was not the saint we want him to be.
The image of Nelson Mandela as a selfless, humble, freedom fighter turned cheerful, kindly old man, is well established in the West. If there is any international leader on whom we can universally heap praise it is surely he. But get past the halo we’ve placed on him without his permission, and Nelson Mandela had more than a few flaws which deserve attention.
He signed off on the deaths of innocent people, lots of them
Nelson Mandela was the head of UmKhonto we Sizwe, (MK), the terrorist wing of the ANC and South African Communist Party. At his trial, he had pleaded guilty to 156 acts of public violence including mobilising terrorist bombing campaigns, which planted bombs in public places, including the Johannesburg railway station. Many innocent people, including women and children, were killed by Nelson Mandela’s MK terrorists. Here are some highlights
-Church Street West, Pretoria, on the 20 May 1983
-Amanzimtoti Shopping complex KZN, 23 December 1985
-Krugersdorp Magistrate’s Court, 17 March 1988
-Durban Pick ‘n Pay shopping complex, 1 September 1986
-Pretoria Sterland movie complex 16 April 1988 – limpet mine killed ANC terrorist M O Maponya instead
-Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court, 20 May 1987
-Roodepoort Standard Bank 3 June, 1988
Tellingly, not only did Mandela refuse to renounce violence, Amnesty refused to take his case stating “[the] movement recorded that it could not give the name of ‘Prisoner of Conscience’ to anyone associated with violence, even though as in ‘conventional warfare’ a degree of restraint may be exercised.”
As President he bough ta lot of military hardware
Inheriting a country with criminally deep socio-ecnomic problems, one might expect resources to be poured into redressing the imbalances of apartheid. Yet once in office, even Mandela’s government slipped into the custom of putting national corporatism, power and prestige above its people. Deputy Minister of Defence Ronnie Kasrils said in 1995 that the government’s planned cuts in defence spending could also result in the loss of as many as 90,000 jobs in defence-related industries.
Mandela’s government announced in November 1998 that it intended to purchase 28 BAE/SAAB JAS 39 Gripen fighter aircraft from Sweden at a cost of R10.875 billion, i.e. R388 million (about US$65 million) per plane. Clearly, the all-powerful air armadas of Botswana weighed heavily on the minds of South African leaders…
Not content with jets, in 1999 a US$4.8 billion (R30 billion in 1999 rands) purchase of weaponry was finalised, which has been subject to allegations of corruption. The South African Department of Defence’s Strategic Defence Acquisition purchased a slew of shiny new weapons, including frigates, submarines, corvettes, light utility helicopters, fighter jet trainers and advanced light fighter aircraft.
Mandela was friendly with dictators
Despite being synonymous with freedom and democracy, Mandela was never afraid to glad hand the thugs and tyrants of the international arena.
General Sani Abacha seized power in Nigeria in a military coup in November 1993. From the start of his presidency, in May 1994, Nelson Mandela refrained from publicly condemning Abacha’s actions. Up until the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in November 1995 the ANC government vigorously opposed the imposition of sanctions against Nigeria. Shortly before the meeting Mandela’s spokesman, Parks Mankahlana, said that “quiet persuasion” would yield better results than coercion. Even after the Nigerian government announced the death sentences against Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists, during the summit, Mandela refused to condemn the Abacha regime or countenance the imposition of sanctions.
Two of the ANC’s biggest donors, in the 1990s, were Colonel Muammar Gaddafi of Libya and President Suharto of Indonesia . Not only did Mandela refrain from criticising their lamentable human rights records but he interceded diplomatically on their behalf, and awarded them South Africa ‘s highest honour. Suharto was awarded a state visit, a 21-gun salute, and The Order of Good Hope (gold class).
In April 1999 Mandela acknowledged to an audience in Johannesburg that Suharto had given the ANC a total of 60 million dollars. An initial donation of 50 million dollars had been followed up by a further 10 million. The Telegraph ( London ) reported that Gaddafi was known to have given the ANC well over ten million dollars.
The apartheid regime was a crime against humanity; as illogical as it was cruel. It is tempting, therefore, the simplify the subject by declaring that all who opposed it were wholly and unswervingly good. Its important to remember, however, that Mandela has been the first to hold his hands up to his shortcomings and mistakes. In books and speeches, he goes to great length to admit his errors. The real tragedy is that too many in the West can’t bring themselves to see what the great man himself has said all along; that he’s just as flawed as the rest of us, and should not be put on a pedestal.
Snip
Then, Minnie:
http://www.thetruthaboutsouthafrica.com/p/ancs-black-on-black-killing-spree.html
The Mandela-worship is just another example of a bunch of libs conning the masses with the aid of the predominant press, echoes.
Javadrinker
12-05-2013, 19:12
What does what mean? Necklacing? That was Minnie's specialty-if she didn't like the way someone thought, she'd hang a tire around his neck, fill it full of gas, and throw in a match. She did a lot of it while her hubby was in the hoosegow and she was keeping house.
There's a whole lot of things Mandela, his wife and their crew did that you won't find out from Bono or Diane Sawyer, echoes.
Most of which was never reported here in the US, while those of us that were in Africa it was common knowledge. I was threatened with that action in Nigeria during their civil war in the mid-late 60s. Theirs and the actions of others in Angola, the Congo, Zimbabwe (Rhodesia), Tanzania (Tanganyika), Kenya, Uganda, and others were widely reported in the newspapers throughout Africa.
Watch for the adulation in the media this weekend. We don't have television, but I would bet that little to no mention was made of Margaret Thatcher's passing.
Pat
You are very perceptive! The anointed one cannot imagine his life without the example of Mandela. Now please excuse me while I go throw up.
No! Don't misunderstand! You didn't even come close to offending me, or anyone else, and I'd never purposely try to upset you.
Sir Dusty,
Yep, and am in full agreement....(have been around here at ps for enough years to know a few things....lol.) ;):o
Have learned never ever trust the news media...b/c there are QP's who will always verify!:lifter
Holly
Peregrino
12-05-2013, 19:18
Why he wasn't condemned at trial and executed immediately has always puzzled me. A good IO campaign could have negated the "martyr" effect. Sorry - I'm with Dusty. The only good communist is a dead one.
The Reaper
12-05-2013, 19:25
Why he wasn't condemned at trial and executed immediately has always puzzled me. A good IO campaign could have negated the "martyr" effect. Sorry - I'm with Dusty. The only good communist is a dead one.
A very good question indeed.
I guess he made a good alternative to a Mugabe, should the need arise.
TR
Why he wasn't condemned at trial and executed immediately has always puzzled me.
Same reasons Obama hasn't been impeached, yet-fear of reprisal, lack of leadership capabilites in the opposition and complacency:
http://nationalreview.com/article/365566/i-word-jonathan-strong#!
will be interesting to see if Obama goes to the funeral. Since he dissed Thatcher.
Peregrino
12-05-2013, 20:27
will be interesting to see if Obama goes to the funeral. Since he dissed Thatcher.
I can't see him not going.
Mandela's past is what it is. What his wife did is recorded for those that want to dig it up.
I watched it live on TV (may have even been CNN) as he was released from prison. Little confused on the details because I couldn't remember them exactly - something about an island prison (?) and brought to the mainland?
Anyway that release had a profound affect on S. Africa and the new direction it would take - good or bad.
His being alive, I think, also had a calming affect on the country through the years. With his passing the lip has been lifted.
Monsoon65
12-05-2013, 21:45
I watched it live on TV (may have even been CNN) as he was released from prison. Little confused on the details because I couldn't remember them exactly - something about an island prison (?) and brought to the mainland?
Here you go, Pete:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robben_Island
The Mandela-worship is just another example of a bunch of libs conning the masses with the aid of the predominant press, echoes.FWIW...
I'm on cruise ship in the middle east wondering...
HOW THE FUCK IS/ARE "AMERICANS" EVEN WORSHIPPING HIM?:confused:
CNN please stop with the wise old man footage. Someone tell Christiane Amanpour she doesn't need to ramble off five sentences of how great he was every time she brings up his name.
The guy did do some great stuff. Apartheid was messed up. When a government takes young black woman from their families and sells them into prostitution for the rich, well I would go all Jihad on their ass right along with Mandela.
But he is definitely the most overrated leader in history. Plenty of people took the same risk for freedom but weren't given the credit for it. Like what Val Kilmer is to acting:D
FWIW...
Sig, I understand what you're trying to say. Bush, Ryan...who knows how many people don't see it the way I do. I'm sure some of them are QP's, even.
I make up my mind on issues such as this based on the intel I've personally gathered and processed as opposed to what has been written for mass public consumption or what someone whom I may or may not admire thinks about it.
There were a lot of folks at Stalin, Mao and Pol Pots funerals, too.
There's a whole lot of things Mandela, his wife and their crew did that you won't find out from Bono or Diane Sawyer, echoes.
There was another Man U fotbol club....Mandela United Futbol Club which Winnie ran that some allege kicked heads around from time to time. Winnie also worked on causes like AIDS to help her public image.....but some allege that Winnie skimmed money from her fake charities and organizations. And finally there is a opera named The Passion of Winnie which captures the rebellious, violent passion of Winnie Madikizela-Mandela.
"With our rubber tyres and our boxes of matches, we will liberate this land."
BMT (RIP)
12-06-2013, 09:00
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/06/Top-5-Ways-Barack-Obama-Is-No-Nelson-Mandela
BMT
Flags to Half Staff Until Sunset, December 9, 2013 – DEATH OF NELSON MANDELA
http://halfstaff.org/2013/12/06/death-of-nelson-mandela/
Hunh.
:confused:
I am with you on this. Hunh.
Streck-Fu
12-06-2013, 09:15
Flags to Half Staff Until Sunset, December 9, 2013 – DEATH OF NELSON MANDELA
http://halfstaff.org/2013/12/06/death-of-nelson-mandela/
Hunh.
:confused:
Not mine. No fucking way.....
lol Obama just stepped in it, again.
By all rights, this mandate should precipitate an overwhelming negative outcry and start the ball rolling towards impeachment.
Let's see what Lady Gaga, MiCy and U2 as a political whole have to say about the situation, first...
Snaquebite
12-06-2013, 09:31
To fly them at half staff at this time for any foreign leader is devaluing the memory of Pearl Harbor.
So..."Zero makes a proclamation and it over-rides a Congressional Act which established Dec 7 a National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day requiring Flags to be flown at half staff.
.
Roguish Lawyer
12-06-2013, 10:40
Here you go Dusty
Here you go Dusty
lol Al, when do the bumper stickers come out? :D
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/06/Top-5-Ways-Barack-Obama-Is-No-Nelson-Mandela
BMT
I can name two ways he is like Mandela:
1. He embraces communism as a political ideal.
2. He was probably born in Africa. (Before anybody cracks out with "I need more Alcoa stock" or some other "tinfoil" quip, the only real proof I have of his citizenship is a document whose authenticity is suspect and his word. Logically, if he admitted to lying about "if you like your Dr./plan, you can keep it" a half-dozen times, and admitted it, I can't be positive he wasn't lying about being born in Hawaii.)
If you like your birth certificate, you can keep it. Period!
FlagDayNCO
12-06-2013, 11:27
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/06/Top-5-Ways-Barack-Obama-Is-No-Nelson-Mandela
BMT
Yeah, I took a photo of Old Glory about thirty minutes before i watched a guy come outside and begin the lowering. I walked over to him and asked why, to which he told me about the dead commie.
When I said "dead commie", I saw the look of fear come across the fool's face. :eek:
I spent some time working with South Africans - both colors, and learned of the sorry state of the new government. Wholesale murder of anyone that worked for or voted for the old government, which is both colors.
lol Article torn down. :D
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-nelson-mandela/
lol Can't work the Minnie link, either.
Either the snow's screwing with my search engine or the libdemons are frantically going around disabling any link to Mandela's genocidal, communistic history. :D
http://www.amren.com/features/2013/12/mandela-white-genocide-with-a-whimper/
Guymullins
12-06-2013, 14:15
CNN please stop with the wise old man footage. Someone tell Christiane Amanpour she doesn't need to ramble off five sentences of how great he was every time she brings up his name.
The guy did do some great stuff. Apartheid was messed up. When a government takes young black woman from their families and sells them into prostitution for the rich, well I would go all Jihad on their ass right along with Mandela.
But he is definitely the most overrated leader in history. Plenty of people took the same risk for freedom but weren't given the credit for it. Like what Val Kilmer is to acting:D
Where on earth did you get the idea that this ever happened? The Apartheid government, with all its faults, was completely against sex between the races and was ridiculously straight laced. Playboy magazine was banned throughout the years and all films were harshly censored for any sexual content. Apartheid was an effort to prevent the shambles that majority rule brings and it attempted to separate the development between the races. I am not an Apartheid apologist, but the western press has always sold it as prime evil instead of the possible best solution to Africas problems. Imagine an America where the ratios were the other way round. 10% white and 90% black, and you will begin to see that majority rule under those circumstances would not be great for the furtherance of the American Dream.
I am not an Apartheid apologist, but the western press has always sold it as prime evil instead of the possible best solution to Africas problems. Imagine an America where the ratios were the other way round. 10% white and 90% black, and you will begin to see that majority rule under those circumstances would not be great for the furtherance of the American Dream.
lol You just described Obama and Holder's ideal of a perfect situation.
Team Sergeant
12-06-2013, 14:32
Hard for my throat to get lumpy over a communist-sympathizing terrorist whose wife hung burning tires around people's necks.
Ditto, I was going to remove the thread but decided to keep it so the younger folks know Nelson Mandela was no better then Che. He and Castro were BFF's.
Another dead commie is fine with me.
For a different perspective on Mandela;
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-horowitz/nelson-mandela-1918-2013/
He may not be all David Horowitz says he is, but he is far from the saint he is being portrayed as. And should not Mandela be somewhat judged by the conditions he foisted on South Africans?:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/south-africa-in-the-shadows/
I am not an Apartheid apologist, but the western press has always sold it as prime evil instead of the possible best solution to Africas problems. Imagine an America where the ratios were the other way round. 10% white and 90% black, and you will begin to see that majority rule under those circumstances would not be great for the furtherance of the American Dream.Why not?
Why not?
Sig, not to divert, but did you ever live in South Africa?
will be interesting to see if Obama goes to the funeral. Since he dissed Thatcher.
You called it.
After Snubbing Thatcher Funeral, Obama and Michelle to Visit South Africa for Mandela
On Friday, the White House announced that President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama would travel to South Africa next weeks to pay their respects to Nelson Mandela. Obama has already announced that the White House will fly the flags at half-staff though December 9 in Mandela’s honor.
When former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher died, President Obama did not lower the White House flags, nor did he attend her funeral, instead sending ex-Secretaries of State George Shultz and James Baker III. The Sun reported, “[Downing] Street is most angered by rejections from Obama, First Lady Michelle and Vice-President Joe Biden.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/06/Obama-snubs-Thatcher-attends-Mandela#comment-1153123259
Fuck this guy and his whole phony administration. :mad:
The Reaper
12-06-2013, 18:01
Imagine an America where the ratios were the other way round. 10% white and 90% black, and you will begin to see that majority rule under those circumstances would not be great for the furtherance of the American Dream.
Like Zimbabwe?
TR
Fuck this guy and his whole phony administration. :mad:
And the horse he rode in on! :D
Peregrino
12-06-2013, 20:07
Like Zimbabwe?
TR
And every other majority rule country in Africa. When the Colonial administrations left or were driven out, they didn't bother to turn out the lights because they knew it wouldn't be long before they went out on their own.
GM - I sympathize. I wish I could say I can't imagine having to live through the disintegration of everything generations of your ancestors had worked to build but I'm afraid that's our inevitable path too. How many years before SA faces Rhodesia's fate?
Guymullins
12-07-2013, 03:01
Why not?
Because you would have a similar outcome to what all of Africa has. In SA, after 18 years, what hasn't been broken has been stolen. Anything that has a warm hole is raped (this week, a new-born baby and last week, a goat) and hundreds of murders a month, often for no more than a cellphone. If you want more, I could go on for days, but I am sure you get the drift. In your own country, if the ratio was reversed, you would have to accommodate a very high percentage of felons in Congress and the senate, as we do.
Guymullins
12-07-2013, 04:35
I actually didn't know Mandela had the history he did. I was one of the general admirers until learning all this. However, I would raise the question of, was he really in the same league as people like Che Guevara? Reason I ask is because the blacks were treated extremely harshly by the government in South Africa, and in that context, becoming a terrorist could be understandable in that context. For example, I read one article that said that the violent acts committed by Mandela were not anything comparable to what the apartheid government itself did. Whereas people like Che were just mass-murdering thugs.
Also I heard that Nelson Mandela later renounced the violence of the other communist governments?
Mandela never renounced violence. He was offered early release many times if he did.
If you think there is ever a good reason for becoming a terrorist (murdering women and children and innocent parties), you can believe that Mandela was justified. I think he had a case to become a freedom fighter (kill security force or police personnel), but not a terrorist. He was a member of the Communist Party of SA at the time of his conviction and leader of Mkhonto we Sizwe, the Armed Terror Wing of the ANC. In any other country, Western or Eastern Block, at the time, he would have been executed having been found guilty of the charges he admitted to. Much of his spirit of reconciliation toward the whites in later years is because he knew he was shown uncommon mercy by his enemies at his trial.
You must remember that he was in no position to enforce anything after his release. The advent of majority rule was because of the persuasion ( sanctions and isolation) from our Western friends and the dissipation of Communist power after the fall of the Berlin Wall. In a triumph of hope over common sense , the white electorate voted to include the blacks in government. This has proven to be a very costly mistake for freedom and prosperity in SA.
Guymullins
12-07-2013, 04:46
Like Zimbabwe?
TR
Yes, exactly like Zimbabwe. Despite running (walking?) the country for more than thirty years, Mugabe still blames the whites, about 1% of the population for the state of the economy. He has destroyed agriculture, employment and mining, the bedrock of the economy. He has even managed to lose his currency and the official Zimbabwe currency is the US Dollar and the SA Rand. Where have you EVER heard of a country losing its currency? And the people keep voting for Mugabe, year after year. That is majority rule, in a nutshell. The people don't understand the vote and the rulers don't understand how to rule.
Guymullins
12-07-2013, 04:56
I do not at all see it justified in becoming a terrorist, just that if one comes from a background of extreme oppression from one ethnicity, they can grow to despise that ethnicity and thus be willing to engage in all sorts of violence to any and all people of that ethnicity. It is unfortunate, but that is how humans are. It takes a very strong human usually who can be treated harshly by a particular ethnicity, etc...but then see fit to not treat the innocents of that ethnicity harshly. So while not right I think what Mandela did could be more understandable in that context. That is what makes Dr. King so admirable, as he advocated non-violent resistance.
Yes, I think King was admirable. However, he was never tested with the reins of power and he never got his hands on the cheque book. To be honest, I don't think he had a viable alternative to non-violence in America. You would have nailed him in a minute had he done the terrorist thing. Mugabe also made nice noises at the beginning, while simultaneously murdering hundreds of thousands of Matabili who were not his tribesmen. Nkrumah, Kenyatta, Kaunda all made genteel noises before and during their reigns while they raped their countries. Nice noises are cheap in Africa. Mandela also made them , but the AIDS denial and the Arms Deal corruption started with his administration. Ne never raised his voice against these abominations, ever.
RomanCandle
12-07-2013, 05:46
As a fellow South African I think Guy has said it all most succinctly. I'd like to add that as a kid in school growing up in the 80's it was telling that we had to be trained at school on how to ID the various landmines, limpet mines etc because schools were considered legitimate targets for bombing. Our streets and malls never had any refuse bins of any sort because these were prime spots to place a mine to target shoppers.
I could almost understand them regarding whites as the enemy, but seeing how Mandela's government so readily signed off on the massacre of so many Sierra Leonians and seemed so eager to see his former FAPLA allies in Angola overrun by Jonas Savimbi's UNITA in the 90's simply to spite an organisation that they felt was made up of former SADF soldiers. Of course the lure of cheap diamonds was probably also a factor, but there you go..
The Reaper
12-07-2013, 10:56
I actually didn't know Mandela had the history he did. I was one of the general admirers until learning all this. However, I would raise the question of, was he really in the same league as people like Che Guevara? Reason I ask is because the blacks were treated extremely harshly by the government in South Africa, and in that context, becoming a terrorist could be understandable in that context. For example, I read one article that said that the violent acts committed by Mandela were not anything comparable to what the apartheid government itself did. Whereas people like Che were just mass-murdering thugs.
Also I heard that Nelson Mandela later renounced the violence of the other communist governments?
Look up a few balanced perspectives on the history of the ANC, if you can find them, and get back to us.
TR
BMT (RIP)
12-07-2013, 10:58
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/africa/item/17106-in-death-as-in-life-truth-about-mandela-overlooked
BMT
In your own country, if the ratio was reversed, you would have to accommodate a very high percentage of felons in Congress and the senate, as we do.
lol BTDT
I actually didn't know Mandela had the history he did. I was one of the general admirers until learning all this. However, I would raise the question of, was he really in the same league as people like Che Guevara?
Of course not. Che slaughtered without benefit of white oppression. :rolleyes:
What a question.
Type in g-o-o-g-l-e, then Mandela Terrorist Bombing Necklacing and read to your heart's content.
Had you really not heard of MK, the Church Street Bombing, necklacing et al before this?
Mandela was on our terror watch list, for crying out loud-now King Pinnocchio's showing utter disrespect for the Pearl Harbor martys by honoring a communist murderer who was on his own Country's terrorist watch list!
That ought to be in the "only in America" list...
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/12/06/Maxine-Waters-US-Conservatives-Believed-Black-South-Africans-Were-Crazy-Murderers
:D
The Reaper
12-07-2013, 13:45
There is IMO a difference between someone who engages in murder, torture, etc...for reasons of hate built up due to oppression versus someone that just does it for the enjoyment of it or for power purposes.
Not to the victims.
TR
Not saying Mandela was justified, just that his terrorist activities could have been more understandable in the context of having been so oppressed. There is IMO a difference between someone who engages in murder, torture, etc...for reasons of hate built up due to oppression versus someone that just does it for the enjoyment of it or for power purposes.
Nope, hadn't heard of them. South Africa and all that apartheid stuff was something I have been keen to read up on and educate myself on, but otherwise have been highly ignorant about.
You sound lik a lib, dude. Murder and torture could never be "understandable" to me, regardless of context.
You and most of the brainwashed Country need to be more than keen to read up and educate yourselves: you better catch a snap before you get led by the hand into something even worse than spitting on WWII martyrs for the sake of a foreign commie brigand for the sole reasons that he's black and celebrities think he's hip.
Oldrotorhead
12-07-2013, 14:34
https://www.google.com/search?q=Crime+in+South+Africa&client=firefox-a&hs=q1P&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=-4OjUty6B-ri2gXyvoDACg&ved=0CFAQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=643#imgdii=_
Crime is higher now in South Africa than it was and it keeps rising. So how exactly are people better off? The only thing that has changed is the ruling class. FWIW Mandela is worth 16 million Rand. He must have invested well. :eek: I guess this is progress in a Progressive world.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Crime+in+South+Africa&client=firefox-a&hs=q1P&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=-4OjUty6B-ri2gXyvoDACg&ved=0CFAQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=643#imgdii=_
FWIW Mandela is worth 16 million Rand. He must have invested well. :eek: I guess this is progress in a Progressive world.
There's a rumor he left all of it on the surface when he split.
Team Sergeant
12-07-2013, 15:49
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/12/06/Maxine-Waters-US-Conservatives-Believed-Black-South-Africans-Were-Crazy-Murderers
:D
I'd bet one hundred dollars she could not point out two countries on the African continent.......
I'd bet one hundred dollars she could not point out two countries on the African continent.......
Could she find even Africa on a globe?
ddoering
12-07-2013, 16:29
Like Zimbabwe?
TR
Or Detroit? Or New Orleans?
He's dead Jim
For the young'uns...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH7KYmGnj40
NurseTim
12-07-2013, 16:59
He's dead Jim
Dead as Kelsy's nuts.
Not saying Mandela was justified, just that his terrorist activities could have been more understandable in the context of having been so oppressed. There is IMO a difference between someone who engages in murder, torture, etc...for reasons of hate built up due to oppression versus someone that just does it for the enjoyment of it or for power purposes.
Nope, hadn't heard of them. South Africa and all that apartheid stuff was something I have been keen to read up on and educate myself on, but otherwise have been highly ignorant about.
I am totally okay with, given the situation that Black SAs lived under at the time, they resort to killing members of the security apparatus. The ANC went beyond killing to further their cause. They murdered and tortured with wanton abandon. That is not necessary and is inexcusable and unforgivable, IMHO.
RomanCandle
12-08-2013, 04:05
Truth is, there was law and order under the old system. Although as a social and political system it was unjust and there were at times dubious methods used to enforce it, it was an attempt to keep it a livable country.
Anyone not in denial knew without a shadow of adoubt what would happen once the majority ruled, and unfortunately despite the initial euphoria, what has happened is almost as if it was according to a script.
Many blacks in SA will openly say that they are worse off now than before, because they feel that their so called freedom is a sham. Hell as a schoolkid you could walk in the streets at any hour. Now the monsters in the dark are actually real.
Try looking up the state of public schooling for black kids and how thousands upon thousands of textbooks are found dumped in ditches. It begs the question whether the new regime has as much motivation to keep the masses uneducated as the old regime did.
We have schools, hospitals, police training organisations (SETA) and other public institutions that are all staffed and managed by cadres instead of the dedicated professionals those posts demand.
Truth is, there was law and order under the old system.
Law and order is meaningless unless everyone has the same income.
I give the man great credit for his actions post incarceration......someone who finds compassion for his jailers is way beyond my abilities or comprehension.
He averted what could have been a terrible civil war after the elections.
Agreed.
Agreed.
For 16 mil Rand, many could show compassion.
Guymullins
12-08-2013, 06:22
I give the man great credit for his actions post incarceration......someone who finds compassion for his jailers is way beyond my abilities or comprehension.
He averted what could have been a terrible civil war after the elections.
Perhaps the reason for his good attitude after incarceration has something to do with how well he was treated in prison. To have lived to 95 is a good indication that he was not abused in any way and his medical treatment was of the highest caliber.
Remember that he was a lawyer and was well aware that he should have been hanged for the crimes he was found guilty of. This would undoubtedly contributed to his appreciation of his captors.
He averted a civil war because he also knew that the whites were in a position to wipe out the entire black population had they so wished. The police and the military were firmly controlled by the whites, so if you want to dish out credit for avoiding civil war, you should look to the whites who voted , overwhelmingly, to bring blacks into parliament instead of wiping them out as many of our critics did to their native populations.
For 16 mil Rand, many could show compassion.
Just to be clear, I am not expressing compassion. I don't condone his prior actions, and I don't really mourn his loss. Things could have been so much worse.
Appreciate your perspective, GuyMullins.
Just to be clear, I am not expressing compassion.
To be equally clear, it's not your compassion to which I referred.
To be equally clear, it's not your compassion to which I referred.
Noted.;)
.
Remember that he was a lawyer and was well aware that he should have been hanged for the crimes he was found guilty of. This would undoubtedly contributed to his appreciation of his captors.
Libiocy isn't restricted to the worldview of Mandela/SA. America elected a president whose bio "Dreams From my Father" was authored by a domestic terrorist who bombed a police station.
For Mandela, Reverence, but Criticism, Too
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/07/world/africa/mandela-politics.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&hp
"JOHANNESBURG — Nelson Mandela was deeply respected in his homeland, and almost worshiped by many for his definitive role in ending white rule and installing multiracial democracy....."
An interesting read. Somewhat goes along with my point that he kept the lid from blowing off in SA. A lot of the criticism in the story is about him not going far enough after ending white rule.
I see an increase in the slide to becoming Zimbabwe South.
Snaquebite
12-08-2013, 09:32
From another forum,
I am a South African who was in South Africa during the 80's. I served in the military for a short while, and then the South African Police. The Mandela issue is more nuanced than people realise. I agree that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, but these platitudes always require closer examination. You can't simply have an ideology and expect to get your way if you use violent means. But if your ideology represents the wishes of the majority, then it stands to reason that methods will turn violent if the oppressor refuses to negotiate. Now, having said that, it would be easy to assert that Mandela was justified in using force. But you also need to consider the global political climate at the time, and the history of South Africa. The global political climate at the time revolved around the struggle between the West and Communism. South Africa was waging a proxy war, on behalf of the US, against Russians, Cubans and East Germans in Angola. The war for Africa had nothing to do with Apartheid, but everything to do with global domination by the communists. The ANC was receiving support and training from the East. There was absolutely no way the SA Government was going to negotiate a political hand over in the face of such an onslaught, and given the ANC Marxist ideology. omebody made the comment that the "oppression" of black South Africans was so bad that it may have justified a violent uprising. That is not true. It is widely acknowledged that education, medical, life expectancies, crime etc, were far better under Apartheid. However, you need to understand the progress towards a fully representative democratic state was never going to be rapid, given the state of the onslaught. Moreover, the modern South African state was built by settlers, for settlers, in a hostile environment. This is similar to what happened in the US. Over time the settlers prospered and black South Africans felt excluded. Around the 1800's the English got involved, fighting two Boer Wars, and eventually oppressing the Dutch population terribly, through the use of concentration camps, scorched earth policies and denial of employment. The white Dutch population became severely impoverished, but they had a vote. In 1948 the Dutch representative won the General Election, and the National Party came to power. Their mandate was to ensure that the Dutch people would never be oppressed like that again. This lead to Apartheid. So it never started out as a Black/White thing. So what then about Mandela? The hero worship that he enjoys is completely overblown and out of context. With the collapse of Communism, Apartheid was going to go anyway, and was already being dismantled. But the new narrative sees Mandela as being victorious over white supremacists. This is so far from the truth, that it is disturbing. The ANC came to power through a negotiated settlement. Mandela was a hopeless President, who naively held onto Marxist beliefs. His successors, Mbeki and Zuma were/are a disaster, and South Africa is in rapid decline. The white minority, a mere 8% of the population, are subjected to abuses that far exceed anything ever experienced under Apartheid. It's become a tyranny of the majority, with no end in sight. South Africa is experiencing the largest migration of skills and capital, outside of a war zone. More than 1.5 million skilled people have already left. Commercial white farmers have been placed on the Genocide Watch list, given the huge numbers that have been slaughtered. Surely Mandela could not have been blind to all of this? So what lessons can you learn from this? That's for you to decide.If you want to see Mandela's legacy in numbers, let me help you. These numbers come from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Apartheid existed for the period 1948 - 1989 (41 years). The number of recorded deaths was 7,000. Of this number, 550 (13 per year) were as a result of Security Force action. The remainder were black-on-black violence and victims of ANC attacks. For the period 1990 - 1994, which the the period after Mandela was released, and up to the first election. The number of recorded deaths is 14,000, of which 8% (1,120) are attributed to Security Force action. The remainder being mostly black-on-black violence. Ironically, the peace that Mandela advocated never materialised. So when people want to suggest heinous Apartheid attrocities, and therefore subsequent deserved retribution, where are they? And what is the justification for present day murder and rape rates? Compare this to Stalin (23 million), Chairman Mao (78 million), Pol Pot (1.7 million).
Team Sergeant
12-08-2013, 10:37
From another forum,
That is the SA I know....... funny few outside the military have any clue what really goes on in the world around them....... except Congresswoman Maxine Waters, she's a genius........:rolleyes:
IMO Nelson Mandela was a man who led many lives during a single lifetime - lawyer, activist, freedom fighter/terrorist, prisoner, president, reconciler, nation builder, visionary, 20th Century icon - depending upon one's point-of-view. History's judgment of him and his actions will undoubtedly remain controversial, a fate which befalls many who have led such impactful lives.
Newt Gingrich posted a statement upon his death and was excoriated for it. I am not a fan of Newt Gingrich, but I have always found him to be thought provoking and his responses to his critics worth pondering.
Yesterday I issued a heartfelt and personal statement about the passing of President Nelson Mandela. I said that his family and his country would be in my prayers and Callista’s prayers.
I was surprised by the hostility and vehemence of some of the people who reacted to me saying a kind word about a unique historic figure.
So let me say to those conservatives who don’t want to honor Nelson Mandela, what would you have done?
Mandela was faced with a vicious apartheid regime that eliminated all rights for blacks and gave them no hope for the future. This was a regime which used secret police, prisons and military force to crush all efforts at seeking freedom by blacks.
What would you have done faced with that crushing government?
What would you do here in America if you had that kind of oppression?
Some of the people who are most opposed to oppression from Washington attack Mandela when he was opposed to oppression in his own country.
After years of preaching non-violence, using the political system, making his case as a defendant in court, Mandela resorted to violence against a government that was ruthless and violent in its suppression of free speech.
As Americans we celebrate the farmers at Lexington and Concord who used force to oppose British tyranny. We praise George Washington for spending eight years in the field fighting the British Army’s dictatorial assault on our freedom.
Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty or give me death.”
Thomas Jefferson wrote and the Continental Congress adopted that “all men are created equal, and they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Doesn’t this apply to Nelson Mandela and his people?
Some conservatives say, ah, but he was a communist.
Actually Mandela was raised in a Methodist school, was a devout Christian, turned to communism in desperation only after South Africa was taken over by an extraordinarily racist government determined to eliminate all rights for blacks.
I would ask of his critics: where were some of these conservatives as allies against tyranny? Where were the masses of conservatives opposing Apartheid? In a desperate struggle against an overpowering government, you accept the allies you have just as Washington was grateful for a French monarchy helping him defeat the British.
Finally, if you had been imprisoned for 27 years, 18 of them in a cell eight foot by seven foot, how do you think you would have emerged? Would you have been angry? Would you have been bitter?
http://hinterlandgazette.com/2013/12/newt-gingrich-slams-critics-nelson-mandela-tribute-different-washington-fighting-british.html
Whatever anyone thinks of Mr Mandela, may he now rest in peace as the debate over the meaning of his life continues.
And so it goes...
Richard
Kudos to Newt and the guy who writes in Green.
Guymullins
12-08-2013, 13:02
[QUOTE=Richard;532822]IMO Nelson Mandela was a man who led many lives during a single lifetime - lawyer, activist, freedom fighter/terrorist, prisoner, president, reconciler, nation builder, visionary, 20th Century icon - depending upon one's point-of-view. History's judgment of him and his actions will undoubtedly remain controversial, a fate which befalls many who have led such impactful lives.
Newt Gingrich posted a statement upon his death and was excoriated for it. I am not a fan of Newt Gingrich, but I have always found him to be thought provoking and his responses to his critics worth pondering.
Whatever anyone thinks of Mr Mandela, may he now rest in peace as the debate over the meaning of his life continues.
And so it goes...
When all is said and done. Mandela, with all of his contradictions, is and was by far the best black leader we have had so far. In fact, De Klerks great miscalculation, was to presume that , because of Mandela's qualities, it was time to give the blacks the vote. The truth of the saying,"One swallow does not a summer make" is appropriate in this instance.
Whatever anyone thinks of Mr Mandela, may he now rest in peace as the debate over the meaning of his life continues.
And so it goes...
Richard
Ptooey.
If a guy kills kids and tortures and burns the heads off people, I don't need to debate over "the meaning of his life", other than to decide whether it calls for a necktie party or firing squad.
Would you middle-of-the-roaders continue to worship MLK if he'd been tossed in prison for that kind of activity?
Wait...don't answer.
GratefulCitizen
12-08-2013, 13:54
Ptooey.
If a guy kills kids and tortures and burns the heads off people, I don't need to debate over "the meaning of his life", other than to decide whether it calls for a necktie party or firing squad.
Would you middle-of-the-roaders continue to worship MLK if he'd been tossed in prison for that kind of activity?
Wait...don't answer.
I don't know enough about Mandela to make a judgement.
Did he ever address his previous actions and publicly repent of them?
There was a guy named Saul of Tarsus who did some bad stuff.
Changed his named to Paul, changed his methods, and had a profound effect on history.
But then again, Paul also expressed some remorse: "...sinners--of whom I am the worst."
I don't know enough about Mandela to make a judgement.
Did he ever address his previous actions and publicly repent of them?
There was a guy named Saul of Tarsus who did some bad stuff.
Changed his named to Paul, changed his methods, and had a profound effect on history.
But then again, Paul also expressed some remorse: "...sinners--of whom I am the worst."
PM me when you come across an epistle from Mandela to the Ehiopians or anybody else in the Bible.
Apples and oranges.
You'd have a bellringer of an analogy if Mandela,s efforts had have panned out. Ask any South Africans, black or white, what they think about it.
Gong. Fail. They're in worse shape than they were before he made his moves.
A good parallel to Obama's influence, come to think of it.
GratefulCitizen
12-08-2013, 14:14
PM me when you come across an epistle from Mandela to the Ehiopians or anybody else in the Bible.
Apples and oranges.
You'd have a bellringer of an analogy if Mandela,s efforts had have panned out. Ask any South Africans, black or white, what they think about it.
Gong. Fail. They're in worse shape than they were before he made his moves.
A good parallel to Obama's influence, come to think of it.
"Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them."
:D
"Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them."
:D
Zactly
Team Sergeant
12-08-2013, 14:18
Ptooey.
If a guy kills kids and tortures and burns the heads off people, I don't need to debate over "the meaning of his life", other than to decide whether it calls for a necktie party or firing squad.
Would you middle-of-the-roaders continue to worship MLK if he'd been tossed in prison for that kind of activity?
Wait...don't answer.
My thoughts exactly. Murdering little kids is the lowest of life forms and those who condone it are just as bad.
My thoughts exactly. Murdering little kids is the lowest of life forms and those who condone it are just as bad.
And in all honesty, to lend to the TS post, it is a shame on America that unknowing Americans have just embraced a murdering thug.:mad:
Thank God we still have QP's, Rangers, SEAL's, Recons, and Topguns....who are Our Elite, and will always Lead Our USA.
JMHO,
Holly
Family, politicians battle over "Brand Mandela"
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/family-politicians-battle-over-quot-brand-mandela-quot-110444682.html
"JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - From political posters to bottles of wine and kitchen aprons, the face and name of Nelson Mandela are a potent commercial and political brand in South Africa. Little wonder it's so sought after - and the source of occasional squabbles.
Following his death on Thursday at the age of 95, the scramble for control of the Mandela legacy - both financial and moral - will involve his family, the ruling African National Congress (ANC), and the Nelson Mandela Foundation he set up to protect his broader message.
At stake is the inheritance that will go to Mandela's more than 30 children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, some of whom already use the Mandela name and image to market everything from clothing to reality TV........"
Peregrino
12-08-2013, 17:03
I'm always amused when the true records of "Marxist inspired revolutionaries" are examined. The vast majority of their victims are the general population, usually murdered for a "lack of revolutionary zeal". The victim's "crimes" are almost always something along the lines of not being enthusiastic enough in their support of the terrorist's goals. Mass murder to "make an example" and cow the populace into acquiescence to the terrorist's goals. The playbook concentrates on the soft targets, those least able to resist. They don't have to attack targets that can resist. In fact, they can't attack hardened targets because failure weakens their message. Sadly, given the Marxist control of the MSM, they know their message is assured of a positive spin. Mandela and company can rot in Hell.
Has anyone read Mandela's books? If so, did he repent for his killings of children?
According to the Right Reverend (with no Church) Jesse Jackson, he "didn't adjust his moral compass for anyone."
Here's a link to some of the Right Reverend (with no Church) Jesse Jackson's musings, mostly about how it was all about himself, not Mandela.
(Note: There are 17,246 "I's" in this series of anecdotes. Too bad Mandela didn't bleed, so Jesse could rub some on his shirt."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/07/nelson-mandela-jesse-jackson-moral-compass
I can't remember the first time I ever heard the name of Nelson Mandela. Maybe it was in 1963. Then we were all in jail. I was in jail in Greensboro, North Carolina, he was in jail on Robben Island. Dr [Martin Luther] King was in jail that year too, in Birmingham, Alabama.
We who were involved in the civil rights movement back then were acutely aware of the parallels of the ANC struggle with our own struggles.
They were interrelated, those forces holding us back, those same racist forces opposing civil rights in the south of this country were the same as were operating in the south of Africa, big corporates, big money and interests.
As a young civil rights activist I knew how raw and ugly and violent the apartheid regime was. They were being jailed, we were being jailed. We were being killed, and they were being massacred. The courts were behaving in a similar way in both continents. It was a long time before I met him; by the time I did I had a deep kinship with South Africa.
There were tremendous parallels in our labour struggles. My first arrest was when I was 18, on 16 July 1960, at a civil rights protest at Greenville's segregated public library. We marched there and we were thinking of what had just happened a month or so before at Sharpeville. What was happening in Africa was being used as a basis to justify occupation and murder against black people in the US. Our country was on the wrong side of all this revolution, it was trying to stamp on the freedom movement. [Henry] Kissinger with his talk of terrorists' associations and threat to national security.
So you see we knew what was going on in South Africa, those bridges and links were always there, those parallels just as I saw in Nelson Mandela with our own Dr King. They had an awful lot in common: intellect, courage and high moral authority. Embracing the struggle for others as a way of life. Accepting what happened to themselves with fortitude, with non-violent intent.
Even though the ANC was pushing towards a military campaign, Mandela was a man of peace. He expressed to me that, when he and the others went on trial in 1964, they were going to do some blowing up, something was planned, and he was glad that that had failed, even though it meant he went to jail and he suffered.
And so Mandela was in prison all the time I was making links with South Africa, although I felt him around – you can see Robben Island from the city and Robben Island can see you! I was in Cape Town by chance on the day of his release. I heard the maids in my hotel beating their pots and pans and people screaming and singing, oh I could feel the change coming. It's very difficult to describe the release of glee and joy when the word got out that he was officially freed.
I was that day meeting the wife of Oliver Tambo. Tambo was in exile and we had just been marching together in Trafalgar Square in London before I had gone on to South Africa and I had met with Mrs Tambo. We heard the news and went down to City Hall in Cape Town, just to see what was going on.
Then he was there and I became the first African American to meet Mandela after his freedom from captivity. He immediately recognised me and we embraced and one of the first things he said was that he had seen the 1984 presidential campaign speech I had made where I had called for sanctions and stood up against apartheid and he thanked me.
That is the kind of man Mandela was, he would come to you, to thank you, at such a time for him. He knew everything about the struggle back home, he had followed it so closely. My children were with me that day and it was one of the proudest things that I can say, I showed you this day and you met this man.
We became friends and I hosted him in my home when he visited the United States.
It was not all politics and causes, he had a great sense of humour. He was a very funny man and he loved The Cosby Show. He understood immediately how important The Cosby Show was for African Americans, the first time a black family had been portrayed in a civil and positive light on television.
We were all used to seeing these negative stereotypes, of course, in the movies, of black people, racist stereotypes.
So the Bill Cosby show made some impact, was something we both loved to see and talk about, as well as movie distortions about black people. Boxing was what he loved best, that's what he'd rather talk about than anything. He loved Joe Louis. For a very serious man he had a great sense of humour. But he was also a very serious man who was very focused, his mind was rapier sharp, he was never tripped up in any situation.
He took tough decisions. I remember the flak he took for going to Cuba to see [Fidel] Castro, but he said calmly to the American press: "Your enemy is not my enemy." He did not get tripped up by trying to appease, he was not going to forsake those who had helped him. He didn't adjust his moral compass for anyone else.
In so far as racial reconciliation goes in South Africa, no one could do what Mandela did. There is no doubt Mandela averted a bloodbath, through his reconciliation and rehabilitation at a time when men were thirsting for revenge.
But even with his death there is unfinished business.
Africans are free but not equal, Americans are free but not equal. Ending apartheid and ending slavery was a big deal, Mandela becoming president of South Africa, [Barack] Obama becoming the first African American president was a big deal, but these are stages. We have to go deeper. We were enslaved longer than we have been free and we have a long way to go. We have unravelled our injustices in stages but they remain, in land ownership, in health and life expectancy, in certain aspects of the media and in major business.
It is time to commemorate our great men. Mandela was a great, great man. A champ and a hero with such immense stature. But he has left us unfinished business. In his name we must carry on our struggle.
Snip
Ptooey.
If a guy kills kids and tortures and burns the heads off people, I don't need to debate over "the meaning of his life", other than to decide whether it calls for a necktie party or firing squad.
Would you middle-of-the-roaders continue to worship MLK if he'd been tossed in prison for that kind of activity?
Wait...don't answer.
I'm with you, Dusty.
Has anyone read Mandela's books? If so, did he repent for his killings of children?
From his book:
In a 1979 letter to his then-wife, Winnie, Mandela reflected ruefully on the contradictions in people’s lives, and what it is to be human and fallible. An excerpt appears in his last book, a collection of notes and writings, “Conversations with Myself.”
“Habits die hard and they leave their unmistakable marks, the invisible scars that are engraved in our bones and that flow in our blood, that do havoc to the principal actors beyond repair.... Such scars portray people as they are and bring out into the full glare of public scrutiny the embarrassing contradictions in which individuals live out their lives.
“We are told that a saint is a sinner who keeps on trying to be clean. One may be a villain for three-quarters of his life and be canonized because he lived a holy life for the remaining quarter of that life.
“In real life we deal, not with gods, but with ordinary humans like ourselves: men and women who are full of contradictions, who are stable and fickle, strong and weak, famous and infamous, people in whose bloodstream the muckworm battles daily with potent pesticides.”
http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-nelson-mandela-legacy-violence-20131206,0,7919467.story?page=2#ixzz2mvkNhcZG
The muckworm made him do it?
As our esteemed voice of reason, QP Richard, has suggested, Mr. Mandela was a complex person.
IMO, the praise and adulation he's getting is due to an ignorant press and a spoon-fed population.
Not everyone (certainly not Washington, Jefferson, and Henry, Mr. Gringrich) plan and carry out cowardly terrorist attacks on civilians. Yet they still effect great changes to their nations and to the world. These are the men and women we should look to and admire.
Did Mandela have regrets? His son says he didn't. Link (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/21/world/mandela-lives-without-regrets-his-son-reports.html).
''His whole purpose in life is the struggle for a free, democratic united South Africa. So he does not regret anything.''
S.
PS - I'd never heard of necklacing before. I'm horrified that anyone would do that to another person. That is beyond evil.
The Reaper
12-08-2013, 19:00
PS - I'd never heard of necklacing before. I'm horrified that anyone would do that to another person. That is beyond evil.
The Haitians liked to perform that act as well.
TR
The Haitians liked to perform that act as well.
TR
Gah! :mad:
Pure evil.
Sig, not to divert, but did you ever live in South Africa?Dusty--
My question centers around the comparison of American blacks and black South Africans. Imagine an America where the ratios were the other way round. 10% white and 90% black, and you will begin to see that majority rule under those circumstances would not be great for the furtherance of the American Dream.This comparison was reaffirmed in a subsequent post.Because you would have a similar outcome to what all of Africa has. In SA, after 18 years, what hasn't been broken has been stolen. Anything that has a warm hole is raped (this week, a new-born baby and last week, a goat) and hundreds of murders a month, often for no more than a cellphone. If you want more, I could go on for days, but I am sure you get the drift. In your own country, if the ratio was reversed, you would have to accommodate a very high percentage of felons in Congress and the senate, as we do.The meaning of the comparison is clear: blacks are blacks however different their historical experiences may be or their contemporaneous circumstances may be. Blacks in America act the way they do (as "felons") because they're blacks, as do blacks in Africa. Race, according to this comparison and the subsequent posts in this thread which seek to re-enforce that comparison, trumps all else.
I don't agree with the comparison. I think that the explicit and implicit tolerance of it is bad for the intellectual credibility of this BB.
My $0.02.
Streck-Fu
12-08-2013, 20:43
What common factors exist between African blacks and American blacks regarding culture and behavior?
GratefulCitizen
12-08-2013, 21:00
What common factors exist between African blacks and American blacks regarding culture and behavior?
Self-appointed saviors telling them that their poverty is a consequence of others' wealth.
<edit>
Where is all the international sympathy for black Christians in Darfur?
Peregrino
12-08-2013, 21:13
What common factors exist between African blacks and American blacks regarding culture and behavior?
Try taking the following article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._communities_with_African-American_majority_populations_in_2000 and matching it with crime, poverty, illiteracy, and out of wedlock birth statistics for the affected areas. These are all communities where African-Americans are the majority population; they have exactly what they've created for themselves. Pretty easy to draw parallels with majority rule African states.
Streck-Fu
12-08-2013, 21:41
Apologies to the respondents. I meant it to be rhetorical......or to prompt Sig for a more detailed response.
This has been a very informative thread. Never know so much of the history of Nelson Mandela.
Thank you to all
RomanCandle
12-09-2013, 03:40
I'd like to add to MtnGoats last post by saying that it is good to be able to post on a disciplined board about a subject which is inherently charged with emotion without it degenerating into the hysteria typical of Religious/ Political discussions.
I think that Mandela did have good intentions for South Africa after the 1994 elections, albeit as Guy said he had no real choice in the matter at the time. There were instances where he played a role as mediator, one of which was after the assassination of Chris Hani which happened at a critical stage of the negotiations. The white population at the time was overwhelmingly in support of creating normal relations with blacks in this country, and the ANC was the obvious conduit to that in spite of trepidation in dealing with what was regarded as a brutal terrorist organisation. We have seen since control of the security apparatus has been achieved, more and more moves by the government towards a totalitarian entity.
The problems materialized as the new ANC government started making moves to place cadres in any and all senior positions in government as well as private enterprise (through Affirmative Action/ Black Economic Empowerment) this was ostensibly designed to allow blacks to normalize their participation in the South African economy/ job market. Most whites were skeptical of this being familiar with the driving mentality that controlled it. As it turned out in practice these policies were used to empower and enrich on an obscene level only a very few select cadres over and over again. Because of the quota system companies generating a certain turnover were and are forced to place blacks into a given number of positions, but because of the influence of high ranking cadres the passing over of these positions to unqualified and inexperienced blacks was expedited, and the opportunity to pass on that experience through the usual apprenticeship programmes etc was completely ignored.
This has resulted in the decline of many major industries in this country and bringing service delivery of utilities etc to the brink of collapse. The flight of so many very experienced industry operators has made this trend virtually irreversible.
Yet in spite of all this empowerment only a very few blacks of the total have benefited with the majority still living unemployed in the most squalid conditions imaginable despite demand having increased hundredfold since the 1994 elections.
Far worse for tens of millions than they were in the townships set up under apartheid. Now I am not saying that they should have been happy with living in the townships, my point is really about how much more the government who is supposed to have championed their cause has been happy to sit back and watch their plight degenerate to the point that security and safety of the country has been compromised to an unprecedented level.
Education of the youth is clearly among the lowest priorities of the government despite glowing lip service to the contrary. This is possibly the greatest long term threat in my opinion to the long term future of South Africa as tens of millions of youth reach working age each year with no prospects for a future. Their choices are therefore abject poverty or crime.
Through all of this you have the ANC on one side who has shown up until this minute that they will happily collude at the highest level with organized crime and appoint one criminal or incompetent after another into positions at the head of law enforcement and other senior positions. It seems to be almost a right of passage to have jail time for criminal activities in order to attain these positions Google Jackie Selebi, Robert McBride, Tony Yengeni not to mention the corruption supremo Jacob Zuma, among many others.
On the other hand you have increasingly militant politicians demanding that mines be nationalised and that productive farms simply be expropriated without compensation which would obviously result in the Zimbabwe-like devastation of the country's food supply.
Police under progressive number of police commissioners have been using tactics reminiscent of the old regime culminating with the killing of 44 miners and seriously wounding over 70 others with gunfire on 16th August 2012 at the Marikana mine.
The more that one delves into what the new South Africa has become the more you realise that the so called freedom is a complete sham.
The contingency views democracy not as a powerful tool to force a government to carry out the wishes of its people, but rather they remain partisan by way of racial politics and try and effect change through violent demonstrations after the fact.
We have a press which during he old regime was severely restricted and only allowed to cut and paste what the regime dictated which after 1994 became almost completely free and unfettered. Now through a series of proposed and promulgated Acts the press is under assault once again.
The real question to me when all is said and done is not what Mandela was or was not but rather is there any way to prevent South Africa from sliding into the anarchy that the rest of Africa exists in? My fear is that there is not because the will and the means simply don't exist. There are just too few reasonable non-partisan individuals to effect that type of change politically.
Guymullins
12-09-2013, 03:54
Dusty--
My question centers around the comparison of American blacks and black South Africans. This comparison was reaffirmed in a subsequent post.The meaning of the comparison is clear: blacks are blacks however different their historical experiences may be or their contemporaneous circumstances may be. Blacks in America act the way they do (as "felons") because they're blacks, as do blacks in Africa. Race, according to this comparison and the subsequent posts in this thread which seek to re-enforce that comparison, trumps all else.
I don't agree with the comparison. I think that the explicit and implicit tolerance of it is bad for the intellectual credibility of this BB.
My $0.02.
Sigaba, it is sad that this is the case, I agree, but it is plain for anyone to see that there is little difference between African Americans and African Africans when it comes to benchmarking their performance. A good example to look at is the African State of Liberia, which was created by African Americans returning to Africa to form their own independent state. This happened in 1820, the same year, coincidentally that the English settler wave landed in South Africa. It is instructive to follow the progress, or lack of progress in both countries in the intervening years. South Africa became Africas most prosperous nation and Liberia one of Africas least prosperous. How do you explain this ? While you are about it, contrast Haiti with its neighbor The Dominican Republic and explain the reason why there is such a huge difference in peace and prosperity between the two. One can have two world views on the matter. The first, that there is no difference between the races and the second that there are. The first is the nicest and most charitable, the second is harsh and gives little hope for equality between the races. I am of the opinion that the second, and uncharitable view is unfortunately the true situation.
RomanCandle
12-09-2013, 04:15
Law and order is meaningless unless everyone has the same income.
Pink font notwithstanding Dusty. The gap in wealth is a huge factor and one which politicians vying for support can and do easily use to manipulate the masses. One of the tactics that seems to be being used is to keep the masses as uneducated and ill informed as possible to the extent that school textbooks that are ordered for each school term have been found dumped in sewers and drains instead of delivered to schools. I'm not just talking about an isolated incident here and there but on a scale so massive it suggests some input from some or other extremely influential source.
Of course who needs an education when you've been told by your elected "leaders' that you can have any position because of colour.
Of course the backlash when unrealistic short term orientated promises cannot be met is seldom pretty. Usually they entail huge mobs burning tyres and an appetite for destruction.
I'm still wondering where this hard won change I keep hearing about in the media is. There certainly is a veneer but like all veneers its resilience over time is very suspect.
The real question to me when all is said and done is not what Mandela was or was not but rather is there any way to prevent South Africa from sliding into the anarchy that the rest of Africa exists in? My fear is that there is not because the will and the means simply don't exist. There are just too few reasonable non-partisan individuals to effect that type of change politically.
This is the perspective from which I'd compile an area study if I was tasked to do so.
Notice that you could interchange "Mandela" and "South Africa" in the post above with "Obama" and "America" without a pound of foil on your noggin?
GratefulCitizen
12-09-2013, 07:23
Sigaba, it is sad that this is the case, I agree, but it is plain for anyone to see that there is little difference between African Americans and African Africans when it comes to benchmarking their performance. A good example to look at is the African State of Liberia, which was created by African Americans returning to Africa to form their own independent state. This happened in 1820, the same year, coincidentally that the English settler wave landed in South Africa. It is instructive to follow the progress, or lack of progress in both countries in the intervening years. South Africa became Africas most prosperous nation and Liberia one of Africas least prosperous. How do you explain this ? While you are about it, contrast Haiti with its neighbor The Dominican Republic and explain the reason why there is such a huge difference in peace and prosperity between the two. One can have two world views on the matter. The first, that there is no difference between the races and the second that there are. The first is the nicest and most charitable, the second is harsh and gives little hope for equality between the races. I am of the opinion that the second, and uncharitable view is unfortunately the true situation.
I disagree with this assessment.
This is a false dichotomy.
The culture people choose to adopt matters.
Here in the United States, once marital status is accounted for, there is no difference in outcomes among "the races".
In England, it's a particular group of white people (native to England) that have all the problems.
Thomas Sowell recently addressed this in an article: http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/12/03/a-challenge-to-our-beliefs-n1756023/page/full
Also from the article:
Back in the 1940s, before the vast expansion of the welfare state and the ideology of victimhood used to justify it, there was no such gap on test scores between black schools in Harlem and white, working class schools on New York's lower east side.
When a "leader" convinces a group of people they are victims, they develop a victim mentality.
Culture matters.
My Vote - Culture.
If you, your friends, their friends and many times friends of friends say it's OK to knock out folks then THAT culture says it's OK to do so.
Living in my minority majority neighborhood I don't expect to be knocked out while taking my morning walk. I would say that is because the majority of homes are occupied by their owners - not renters.
So the "culture" in my neighborhood is that of Owner/Occupant.
My Vote - Culture.
If you, your friends, their friends and many times friends of friends say it's OK to knock out folks then THAT culture says it's OK to do so.
Living in my minority majority neighborhood I don't expect to be knocked out while taking my morning walk. I would say that is because the majority of homes are occupied by their owners - not renters.
So the "culture" in my neighborhood is that of Owner/Occupant.
To me, that post hits it on the head.
Ditto, I was going to remove the thread but decided to keep it so the younger folks know Nelson Mandela was no better then Che. He and Castro were BFF's.
Another dead commie is fine with me.
And I'd like to thank you and the QP's for this, the media sometimes overdoes the saint-painting image with some. There are no doubt excellent posts from the QP's on this thread, I have definitely learnt new things from this thread.
Thank You.
Guymullins
12-09-2013, 12:05
My Vote - Culture.
If you, your friends, their friends and many times friends of friends say it's OK to knock out folks then THAT culture says it's OK to do so.
Living in my minority majority neighborhood I don't expect to be knocked out while taking my morning walk. I would say that is because the majority of homes are occupied by their owners - not renters.
So the "culture" in my neighborhood is that of Owner/Occupant.
Yes, culture has a lot to do with the problem. This recent press release is from Swaziland, a small country surrounded by South Africa. It is not a joke.
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/blog/2013/05/17/swaziland-witches-banned-from-flying-over-150-meters/index.html
Yes, culture has a lot to do with the problem. This recent press release is from Swaziland, a small country surrounded by South Africa. It is not a joke.
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/blog/2013/05/17/swaziland-witches-banned-from-flying-over-150-meters/index.html
lol Not so far removed from copulation with the ground to improve crop fertilization.
It's becoming evident that respect and reverence for each and every culture is mandatory except for that of WASP males.
PedOncoDoc
12-09-2013, 12:30
Yes, culture has a lot to do with the problem. This recent press release is from Swaziland, a small country surrounded by South Africa. It is not a joke.
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/blog/2013/05/17/swaziland-witches-banned-from-flying-over-150-meters/index.html
Did HRC get a safety briefing? :D
My Vote - Culture.
If you, your friends, their friends and many times friends of friends say it's OK to knock out folks then THAT culture says it's OK to do so.
Living in my minority majority neighborhood I don't expect to be knocked out while taking my morning walk. I would say that is because the majority of homes are occupied by their owners - not renters.
So the "culture" in my neighborhood is that of Owner/Occupant.
I agree with this, but here's a little historical perspective (not that you, the other QP's, or members on this site need it), Blacks have been oppressed around the world for hundreds of years. The first slave ship on the Continental U.S. in 1619. By 1619 an estimated 1 million blacks had already been slave traded by the Spanish to the Caribbean, after Columbus had slaughtered most of the Indians on those islands. Some Africans left Africa to escape their own oppression, and some were sold by the leaders in their society. Africans were slaves in their own country in some cases, so they left with the idea they'd be freed after 7-10 years of servitude.
Whites and Blacks were intentionally separated before our country was formed by the upper class. They designed a middle class white populace to control the starving black slave/white servant majority who were forming alliances with Indians to overthrow the them. The color line was drawn by the elite, and the lower class whites took advantage of that opportunity. I think that it's a reason why the middle class, regardless of race, is so hell bent on retaining their piece of the American dream..
Lower class African Americans need to pull themselves out of the struggle they're in. They need a leader who will inspire them, to make them realize they can achieve success, rather than play victim to the cards they've been dealt. The false leader in office got their vote because they thought he would improve their quality of life, but you can't get that with social programs, unless you're using them to work towards self sustainability. Their are a lot of middle class blacks, and very successful blacks in the United States, but the problems in our inner cities are caused by their undereducated population of blacks.
The middle class conservatives understand the ploy our current administration has devised, is taking our freedom away through socialism. If we allow it, our country will become lower class, and upper class. We are giving to those who don't, and taking from those who do under the guise of equality and it doesn't address the real problem. If we had less lower class, we'd have more prosperity in this country, less taxes, more freedom etc. Add gun grabbing, debt, indifference, and stupidity to the equation and we have a real problem on our hands.
And I'd like to thank you and the QP's for this, the media sometimes overdoes the saint-painting image with some. There are no doubt excellent posts from the QP's on this thread, I have definitely learnt new things from this thread.
Thank You.
I agree, this is why I come here, to learn from those who've experienced things I have not. Thank you all for your insight, it's been very eye opening.
Pickens Co. (SC) sheriff refuses to fly flag at half-staff for Mandela
http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/24158363/pickens-sheriff-refuses-fly-flag-at-half-staff-for-mandela
I heard on the radio that Sheriff Arpaio also refused the lower the flags.
Pat
Mustang Man
12-09-2013, 17:16
Having the flag at half-staff got me mad enough when people in NJ did it for crackhead celebrity. Now people are doing it to honor a foreign communist!!:mad:
I'd like to add to MtnGoats last post by saying that it is good to be able to post on a disciplined board about a subject which is inherently charged with emotion without it degenerating into the hysteria typical of Religious/ Political discussions.
Agree. This has been an outstanding thread, and I haven't seen this quality of discussion on Mandela anywhere else. Mandela wasn't my hero, but I also didn't know the background on his terrorist activities. Thanks for the perspective, everyone.....
Surf n Turf
12-09-2013, 21:14
Blacks have been oppressed around the world for hundreds of years. The first slave ship on the Continental U.S. in 1619. By 1619 an estimated 1 million blacks had already been slave traded by the Spanish to the Caribbean, after Columbus had slaughtered most of the Indians on those islands.
What is your source for Columbus slaughtering most of the Indians on the Caribbean islands
The Spanish took the first African captives to the Americas from Europe as early as 1503, and by 1518 the first captives were shipped directly from Africa to America. The majority of African captives were exported from the coast of West Africa, some 3,000 miles between what is now Senegal and Angola, and mostly from the modern Benin, Nigeria and Cameroon
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/abolition/africa_article_01.shtml
The first twenty African-American slaves to arrive in Virginia in 1619 had all had earned their freedom by 1651, just as white indentured servants might have.
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/raceequalopportunity/ig/History-of-Black-Civil-Rights/The-Atlantic-Slave-Trade.htm .
Whites and Blacks were intentionally separated before our country was formed by the upper class. They designed a middle class white populace to control the starving black slave/white servant majority who were forming alliances with Indians to overthrow the them.
The color line was drawn by the elite, and the lower class whites took advantage of that opportunity. I think that it's a reason why the middle class, regardless of race, is so hell bent on retaining their piece of the American dream..
Lan, Please site your source(s) for these profound observations.
What is your source for Columbus slaughtering most of the Indians on the Caribbean islands
The source is Bartolome de las Casas (1484-1566), a priest who, in his youth, aided in the conquest of Cuba. He transcribed Columbus' journal and wrote a mutlivolume History of the Indies.
'When he arrived on Hispaniola in 1508, Las Casas says, "there were 60,000 people living on this island, including the Indians; so that from 1494 to 1508, over 3 million people had perished from war, slavery, and the mines"'
{from Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, 2005, page 7}
It also says on the same page, that some historians believe it could be less than 1 million, while others say it could be over 8 million.
The Spanish took the first African captives to the Americas from Europe as early as 1503, and by 1518 the first captives were shipped directly from Africa to America. The majority of African captives were exported from the coast of West Africa, some 3,000 miles between what is now Senegal and Angola, and mostly from the modern Benin, Nigeria and Cameroon
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/abolition/africa_article_01.shtml
The Spanish also took 500 Arawak Indians to Spain as slaves, only 200 made it. {page 4 of A People's History of the United States} From the same page:
"Trying to put together an army of resistance, the Arawak's faced Spaniards who had armor, muskets, swords, horses. When the Spaniards took prisoners they hanged them or burned them to death. Among the Arawak's, mass suicides began, with cassava poison. Infants were killed to save them from the Spaniards. In two years, through murder, mutilation, or suicide, half of the 250,000 Indians on Haiti were dead."
The first twenty African-American slaves to arrive in Virginia in 1619 had all had earned their freedom by 1651, just as white indentured servants might have.
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/raceequalopportunity/ig/History-of-Black-Civil-Rights/The-Atlantic-Slave-Trade.htm .
That's a silver lining I suppose lol. By 1800 10-15 million Africans had been transported to the Americas, about 50 million total to the western world by that time. It is interesting to know that the first 20 earned their freedom, the book I used to cite my claims did not mention that. It was written by a progressive, who tells our history from the standpoint of the oppressed. How convenient for him to have left that out :p
I'm not sure I can make a connection between the past oppression of blacks and the African who just passed away so I'll stop posting in this thread unless I'm called upon. I apologize if I went too far off topic.
Lan, Please site your source(s) for these profound observations.
"It was the potential combination of poor whites and blacks that caused the most fear among the wealthy white planters. If there has been the natural racial repugnance that some theorists have assumed, control would have been easier. But sexual attraction was powerful, across racial lines. In 1743, a grand jury in Charleston, South Carolina, denounced 'The Too Common Practice of Criminal Conversation with Negro and other Slave Wenches in this Province' Mixed offspring continued to be produced by white-black sex relations throughout the colonial period, in spite of laws prohibiting interracial marriage in Virginia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, the Carolinas, Georgia. By declaring children illegitimate they would keep them inside the black families so that the white population could remain 'pure' and in control." {Page 55 A People's History of the United States}
"What made Bacon's Rebellion especially fearsome for the rulers of Virginia was that black slaves and white servants joined forces." {Page 55 A People's History of the United States}
"In the 1720s. with fear of slave rebellion growing, white servants were allowed in Virginia to join the militia as substitutes for white freemen. At the same time, slave patrols were established in Virginia to deal with the 'great dangers that may... happen by the insurrections of negroes' Poor white men would make up the rank and file of these patrols, and get the monetary reward. Racism was becoming more and more practical. Edmund Morgan, on the basis of his careful study of slavery in Virginia, sees racism not as 'natural' to black-white difference, but something coming out of class scorn, a realistic device for control. 'If freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done. The answer to the problem, obvious if unspoken and only gradually recognized, was racism, to separate dangerous free whites from dangerous black slaves by a screen of racial contempt.'" {Page 56 A People's History of the United States}
Guymullins
12-10-2013, 00:04
"It was the potential combination of poor whites and blacks that caused the most fear among the wealthy white planters. If there has been the natural racial repugnance that some theorists have assumed, control would have been easier. But sexual attraction was powerful, across racial lines. In 1743, a grand jury in Charleston, South Carolina, denounced 'The Too Common Practice of Criminal Conversation with Negro and other Slave Wenches in this Province' Mixed offspring continued to be produced by white-black sex relations throughout the colonial period, in spite of laws prohibiting interracial marriage in Virginia, Massachusetts, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, the Carolinas, Georgia. By declaring children illegitimate they would keep them inside the black families so that the white population could remain 'pure' and in control." {Page 55 A People's History of the United States}
"What made Bacon's Rebellion especially fearsome for the rulers of Virginia was that black slaves and white servants joined forces." {Page 55 A People's History of the United States}
"In the 1720s. with fear of slave rebellion growing, white servants were allowed in Virginia to join the militia as substitutes for white freemen. At the same time, slave patrols were established in Virginia to deal with the 'great dangers that may... happen by the insurrections of negroes' Poor white men would make up the rank and file of these patrols, and get the monetary reward. Racism was becoming more and more practical. Edmund Morgan, on the basis of his careful study of slavery in Virginia, sees racism not as 'natural' to black-white difference, but something coming out of class scorn, a realistic device for control. 'If freemen with disappointed hopes should make common cause with slaves of desperate hope, the results might be worse than anything Bacon had done. The answer to the problem, obvious if unspoken and only gradually recognized, was racism, to separate dangerous free whites from dangerous black slaves by a screen of racial contempt.'" {Page 56 A People's History of the United States}
To give a bit of perspective on the author of the Peoples History of the United States, a Professor Zinn see this:
Zinn came to believe that the point of view expressed in traditional history books was often limited. Biographer Martin Duberman noted that when he was asked directly if he was a Marxist, Zinn replied, "Yes, I'm something of a Marxist." He especially was influenced by the liberating vision of the young Marx in overcoming alienation, and disliked Marx's later dogmatism. In later life he moved more toward anarchism.
(from Zinn's biography page in Wiki)
To give a bit of perspective on the author of the Peoples History of the United States, a Professor Zinn see this:
Zinn came to believe that the point of view expressed in traditional history books was often limited. Biographer Martin Duberman noted that when he was asked directly if he was a Marxist, Zinn replied, "Yes, I'm something of a Marxist." He especially was influenced by the liberating vision of the young Marx in overcoming alienation, and disliked Marx's later dogmatism. In later life he moved more toward anarchism.
(from Zinn's biography page in Wiki)
I knew going into it I'd be reading a book written by a liberal because he's honest about it at the beginning of the book. I will always be conservative, but I am also inquisitive, probably to a fault. Some of the 'evidence' I supplied is speculative but I don't believe it's unreasonable. I have yet to read this books opposite 'A Patriots History of the United States' but it has good reviews.
I knew going into it I'd be reading a book written by a liberal because he's honest about it at the beginning of the book. I will always be conservative, but I am also inquisitive, probably to a fault. Some of the 'evidence' I supplied is speculative but I don't believe it's unreasonable. I have yet to read this books opposite 'A Patriots History of the United States' but it has good reviews.
40% of the country would give it a good review - but that doesn't make it true.
Is it true or is it a few kernels of truth wrapped in progressive ideology?
For some input regarding Zinn's book, try this article by Thomas Sowell:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/teaching-americans-to-hate-their-country/
I have found Thomas Sowell to be an extremely intelligent and reasonable individual; and although I have not read Zinn's book myself, I trust Mr. Sowell's judgement in the matter.
RomanCandle
12-10-2013, 07:38
Obama stands to speak amid raucous cheering from the crowd at FNB Stadium, shakes hands with Raul Castro.
Obama was heaping adulation upon Mandela as if they were regular spooning partners, instead of having met once. :D
Jacob Zuma was roundly and loudly bood by the crowd every time he was shown on the big screen (In front of the world).
Wnnie Madikizela Mandela cheered by the crowd at FNB.
The news is saturated with it. Our crowds hate the right guys but love the wrong guys!
Guymullins
12-10-2013, 07:44
I only caught the tail end of President Obamas speech, but it seemed quite rousing and it was well received by an undisciplined crowd who boo'ed their own President Zuma.
Two things that struck me: President Obama seemed to quote the same poem as Timothy McVey quoted at his execution. What was that about? Secondly, President Obama went out of his way to shake hands with Raul Castro at the event. What is all that about?
Two things that struck me: President Obama seemed to quote the same poem as Timothy McVey quoted at his execution. What was that about? Secondly, President Obama went out of his way to shake hands with Raul Castro at the event. What is all that about?
:D:D:D:D
Made my year!!!
{from Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, 2005, page 7}
Now there's an unbiased source. :rolleyes:
Streck-Fu
12-10-2013, 08:17
What was the poem Obama recited? I'm not finding it in searches...
What was the poem Obama recited? I'm not finding it in searches...
Had to be Invictus.
Obama is a puredee spectacle. :D
Streck-Fu
12-10-2013, 08:34
Ok, from Wikipedia (if accurate), there is a connection to Mandela:
While incarcerated on Robben Island prison, Nelson Mandela recited the poem to other prisoners and was empowered by its message of self-mastery.[8][9]
Guymullins
12-10-2013, 09:00
Ok, from Wikipedia (if accurate), there is a connection to Mandela:
Yes, there is a Mandela connection to it, apart from the Timothy McVey co-terrorist one. There is also a "The man in the Arena" by President Roosevelt connection, which I would have thought much more appropriate for a US/Mandela speech, but what do I know?
Streck-Fu
12-10-2013, 09:12
Yes, there is a Mandela connection to it, apart from the Timothy McVey co-terrorist one. There is also a "The man in the Arena" by President Roosevelt connection, which I would have thought much more appropriate for a US/Mandela speech, but what do I know?
I agree about Roosevelt's Man In The Arena but that speaks to actions while Mandela's funeral is about revisionist pragmatic ideas....
...should that have been in pink...? :cool:
Guymullins
12-10-2013, 09:40
I agree about Roosevelt's Man In The Arena but that speaks to actions while Mandela's funeral is about revisionist pragmatic ideas....
...should that have been in pink...? :cool:
When I see the word "Revisionist" I expect red rather than pink.
When I see the word "Revisionist" I expect red rather than pink.
lol Any time everyone in a society is compelled to work for a living, something's gotta get revised.
Beautiful Poem by Maya Angelou (http://youtu.be/PqQzjit7b1w)
You'd better load up on the Kleenex
The problem with this is that there is no such thing as "race." Genetically, you could take a very black African and a very white European and another very black African, and while on the surface, skin color-wise, the two blacks look much more similar to each other than either do to the white, the reality could be that genetically-speaking, one of the blacks and the white are genetically closer to each other than the two blacks are. All are homo sapien.
If there was a marked difference in the brain of a black person from a white person, maybe this argument could be made, but there is no such difference. A black person has the same brain as a white person. Whites can be just as tribal and violent as blacks are stereotyped to be. For example, note the Germanic tribes that caused Rome trouble for hundreds of years. Or the Norse tribes ("Vikings"). In the old South of the United States, there was a practice known as "Rough and Tumble" fighting. Basically, this was a way for two men to fight for their honor, and consisted of explicitly trying to gouge out the eyeball (s) of their opponent. In addition, they would also explicitly seek to bite off the ears, nose, lips, etc...of their opponent. Ripping off of the genitalia was also practiced. Generally, this is thought of as the way apes like chimpanzees fight each other, not humans. Point is, whites can be just as backwards as any other peoples in the world.
The problems of blacks in the continental United States are due to a complex history involving problems left over from slavery, stupid social engineering on the part of the political left, drugs being flooded into poor neighborhoods, gangs that formed early on in order to fight white gangs originally and then started fighting each other, etc...
Culture is what counts. There are superior and inferior cultures. Remember there was a whole field of (pseudo)-scientific study regarding race, known as eugenics back in the 1930s, started by the Progressives and then adopted by the Nazis. The argument put forward was that eventually the white "race" would die off through continual interbreeding with the "inferior" races, basically everyone non-white (and even then, certain whites were viewed as inferior too if they were Jewish, Poles, Slavs, etc...). In Germany, it culminated in genocidal murder, whereas in the U.S., it culminated in forced sterilizations of people, forced unmarryings, etc...
lol If William B. Shockley was still around, you and him would have a rough and tumble. :)
I actually didn't know Shockley was a proponent of eugenics. You learn something new everyday.
He was actually concerned with dysgenics, whether occurring in whites or blacks.
Guymullins
12-11-2013, 03:15
The problem with this is that there is no such thing as "race." Genetically, you could take a very black African and a very white European and another very black African, and while on the surface, skin color-wise, the two blacks look much more similar to each other than either do to the white, the reality could be that genetically-speaking, one of the blacks and the white are genetically closer to each other than the two blacks are. All are homo sapien.
If there was a marked difference in the brain of a black person from a white person, maybe this argument could be made, but there is no such difference. A black person has the same brain as a white person. Whites can be just as tribal and violent as blacks are stereotyped to be. For example, note the Germanic tribes that caused Rome trouble for hundreds of years. Or the Norse tribes ("Vikings"). In the old South of the United States, there was a practice known as "Rough and Tumble" fighting. Basically, this was a way for two men to fight for their honor, and consisted of explicitly trying to gouge out the eyeball (s) of their opponent. In addition, they would also explicitly seek to bite off the ears, nose, lips, etc...of their opponent. Ripping off of the genitalia was also practiced. Generally, this is thought of as the way apes like chimpanzees fight each other, not humans. Point is, whites can be just as backwards as any other peoples in the world.
The problems of blacks in the continental United States are due to a complex history involving problems left over from slavery, stupid social engineering on the part of the political left, drugs being flooded into poor neighborhoods, gangs that formed early on in order to fight white gangs originally and then started fighting each other, etc...
Culture is what counts. There are superior and inferior cultures. Remember there was a whole field of (pseudo)-scientific study regarding race, known as eugenics back in the 1930s, started by the Progressives and then adopted by the Nazis. The argument put forward was that eventually the white "race" would die off through continual interbreeding with the "inferior" races, basically everyone non-white (and even then, certain whites were viewed as inferior too if they were Jewish, Poles, Slavs, etc...). In Germany, it culminated in genocidal murder, whereas in the U.S., it culminated in forced sterilizations of people, forced unmarryings, etc...
I am not sure there are no differences genetically as the jury is still out on the "useless" DNA that scientists have now found is not useless at all. Be that as it may. There is no denying great cultural differences and a mismatch between development between the races. I think that before one blames slavery and Apartheid and discriminatory laws around the world, it would be instructive to compare Africans who were undisturbed by the White or Yellow mans depravations. Compare Africans to Europeans when they first met and I take South Africa as an example.
There will never be equality between the races in South Africa.
When Europeans landed 300 years ago, their civilization was, at a conservative estimate, 7000 years ahead of the civilizations existing in Southern Africa at the time.
This estimate is because early writing and the invention of the wheel took place around 7000 years ago. Neither were evident in Southern Africa at the time of the European settlements here.
If SA was indeed the cradle of mankind, this means that those who left for Northern Climes 60 000 years ago, had accelerated away from the stay-at-homes at a rate of 7000 years in 60 000 years. This means that Europeans were at 67 000 years worth of civilizations progress while the Africans were at 60 000 years. Why does it seem possible, to even the most optimistic person, that Africans could make up a 7000 year shortfall in 300 years, when all the evidence shows that Europeans and Asians are accelerating away in ever faster terms from the African benchmark.In real terms, Africans are probably now 7500 years behind the rest at present.
Where are we going to find equality in these numbers?
Furthermore, if everyone was equal before the first meeting, how is it that the African allowed himself to become enslaved and second class citizens everywhere they were found? Call it cultural if it makes you feel better, (it certainly sounds less racist) but whatever the reason, biological, cultural or exposure to disease, the difference is there and the gap yawns.
RomanCandle
12-11-2013, 03:58
A case of the 99% giving the 1% a bad name? :D
A case of the 99% giving the 1% a bad name? :D
Anybody can see the parallels regarding our two Countries, but most are in denial of the obvious; they've been brainwashed by educators, revisors of history, entertainers and journalistic propagandists.
Many Americans would rather die than live in conditions such as South Africa's, but that number is shrinking.
RomanCandle
12-11-2013, 06:32
http://www.citypress.co.za/news/outcry-fake-sign-language-interpreter-mandela-memorial/
Scroll down to the clip. :D
After Cyril Ramaphosa's speech in English he switches to Zulu and scolds the crowd for booing SA President Jacob Zuma in front of the world.
The Photog got the 3 AM phone call.
He says to understand his photo you have to realize - it didn't really happen, they didn't lean together laughing as one of them snapped a picture. Keep repeating this until you believe it.
Guymullins
12-11-2013, 14:05
http://www.citypress.co.za/news/outcry-fake-sign-language-interpreter-mandela-memorial/
Scroll down to the clip. :D
After Cyril Ramaphosa's speech in English he switches to Zulu and scolds the crowd for booing SA President Jacob Zuma in front of the world.
In regard to the fake signer: This is simply an African mi-understanding. The B Team has seen in overseas videos that there is often someone waving their arms about when an important person is speaking. Sort of a silent Praise Singer, you know. They found someone who could do it quite well, so they hired him, many times and he was often a hit with his rhythmic motions that punctuated a poor speech and gave it an air of animation. Now you Eurocentric swine come and criticize a jolly good show. As for the deaf people, they are really a small minority and they really should know that minorities are unimportant in present day SA. They surely couldn't have thought that the B Team would have hired someone to speak especially to them?
Well the tribes didn't per se "allow" themselves to become enslaved. They fought back, but just like with the Native Americans, being up against an enemy with superior technology was ultimately a losing proposition.
It's a tad different with the American Indians. It was the concept of "battle" v. "war" that caused the defeat of, at a minimum, the plains tribes.
I believe the Commanche, Apache, Sioux and a few of the lesser tribes such as the Kiowa, if they could have got together and formulated a viable guerrilla warplan as opposed to being satisfied with coup skirmishes, could have kept whites out of their (collective) territory indefinitely-perhaps even to the present day. The waves of African slaves who were sold to folks here in the US (damnyankees included), were in a major part captured in raids by other African tribes as a form of commerce.
The freaking POTUS is at least half black. That should end the discrimation discussion as regards this Country permanently.
I know I'm tired of hearing about it, especially when reverse racism is the norm.
"Guns, Germs, and Steel" is an interesting book by Jared Diamond.
It was MASSIVELY popular back around 1997. I remember it as the first book at Amazon.com that shipped by the warehouse full(non Harry Potter and non Oprah book of the month).
I think he makes some great points about conducive conditions.
Basically guns that some cultures developed, germs they resisted, and steel they innovated played a huge role in their ability to project out from their home environments that possessed favourable geographic, climatic, and environmental characteristics.
-----------
Anywho, I'm looking forward to Diamond's followup books: ;)
"How the battle for Rhodesia was not actually black versus white but rather they were puppets in a three way war amongst the Soviet Union, China, and the dangerously naive west."
The main point will be "China won".
and
"The Nelson Mandela Guide to marriage"
The main points will be:
"Don't marry someone who will divorce you when you become a terrorist and criticise you decades later when the world media is building you into a demigod."
"Don't marry an admitted war criminal."
"Don't marry the widow of a genocidal African Hitler."
Sorry…I couldn't help myself…..too soon for jokes?
Flagg: "Anywho, I'm looking forward to Diamond's followup books: ;)
"How the battle for Rhodesia was not actually black versus white but rather they were puppets in a three way war amongst the Soviet Union, China, and the dangerously naive west."
The main point will be "China won".
Seriously?
The main point will be "China won".
Seriously?
From the extensive reading I've done, a civvie trip I did to the region a few years ago, and getting to know a good few Zimbabweans in some odd places since then, the perception I've developed is that the Rhodesian/Zimbabwean Bush War was a 3 way battle.
The Soviets backed ZIPRA
The Chinese backed ZANLA
The UK led West backed a naive instant institutional change
Post Independence Mugabe's ZANLA consolidated power and cut Nkomo's ZIPRA out of the power loop, quickly leading to the North Korean trained 5th brigade to inflict genocide on the Matabele people in the ZIPRA/Nkomo power base.
The UK led West wound up with a hostile regime that to this day blames it for everything and the Soviet Union took a back seat to the influence that China has had over Zimbabwe/Mugabe since taking power 33 years ago.
A young Zimbabwean I was working with in Afghan earlier this year told me about uniformed and armed Chinese in the neighbourhood where his family lived(although it sounded like security for diplomatic property/personnel).
That's at least my perception of how things developed(but still just an eager amateur on the underreported conflicts).
Not sure if you're offering feedback on my perception of things or my poor attempt at humour.
My apologies if my attempt at humour was inappropriate and I'm always keen to learn more, especially about Zim/SA over the last 40-50 years.
I've heard of Guns, Germs, and Steel. There is a very interesting book that disagrees with it's central premise however, called Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. A very interesting read (it is where I learned some of the stuff I pointed out in my last post on this thread :) ).
Cheers for that.
I've been recommended Why Nations Fail once or twice in the past year……3 times is the charm.
It will now be in the Kindle queue to read……albeit a rather long queue….I might have to bump it up after just reading Kilcullen's Out of the Mountains. I reckon it might be worthwhile to read them consecutively.
The Soviets backed ZIPRA
The UK led West wound up with a hostile regime that to this day blames it for everything and the Soviet Union took a back seat to the influence that China has had over Zimbabwe/Mugabe since taking power 33 years ago.
Very few Westerners know about this. Guess why?
(No, not commenting on your humor, just a little surprised at your conclusion that China has won.)
Very few Westerners know about this. Guess why?
(No, not commenting on your humor, just a little surprised at your conclusion that China has won.)
Hmmmmmmm…..
I'm not a big conspiracy theorist……but I do kinda believe in a couple things:
I think the Soviets particularly were exceptionally good at propaganda and strategic shaping operations:
Anti Vietnam War efforts globally
Anti Nuclear Weapons efforts in UK/Western Europe
But I'm not sure of their DIRECT role in propaganda and strategic shaping operations for Zimbabwe/South Africa.
I would GUESS that a mix of direct/indirect efforts(lots of "useful idiots" produced from socialist/communist underground influence over higher education) were directed at western mass media and higher education to undermine the west with an indefensible(at least openly) position against clear communist aggression directed at strategic mineral resources unavailable in the US and globally strategic SLOCs.
300,000 Cubans fighting and losing in Angola over decades in direct conflict with South Africa isn't even mentioned when Raul Castro's name is mentioned.
Coverage of Mandela leaves me with an additional data point leading me to believe the Cold War never ended, nor has the US convincingly won as we were told.
I don't so much see it as a battle between Communism and Capitalism as I see it a battle between and amongst rival political/economic networks/elites that share or fight over pieces of the global pie.
The deification of Mandela is easy to sell and easy to digest. The truth is too grey and takes too long to explain(like a business "elevator pitch" it has to be simple and quick) for most people who are time poor.
Sorry for the lengthly response, but that's where my "moving target" perspective li.es at the moment.
In a nutshell(finally), I'm thinking the reason why is that while we may appear to have won the conventional Cold War, we are still fighting and losing the unconventional Cold War.
Peregrino
12-11-2013, 19:24
Flagg: "Anywho, I'm looking forward to Diamond's followup books: ;)
"How the battle for Rhodesia was not actually black versus white but rather they were puppets in a three way war amongst the Soviet Union, China, and the dangerously naive west."
The main point will be "China won".
Seriously?
Yes. Unfortunately. You can thank our lack of vision, the DOS, and other lackeys. China is aggressively maneuvering to control African natural resources - and doing a damn fine job of it. Starting with oil and strategic minerals.
I would GUESS that a mix of direct/indirect efforts(lots of "useful idiots" produced from socialist/communist underground influence over higher education) were directed at western mass media and higher education to undermine the west with an indefensible(at least openly) position against clear communist aggression directed at strategic mineral resources unavailable in the US and globally strategic SLOCs.
I like the way you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKBfT--rwmc
Yes. Unfortunately. You can thank our lack of vision, the DOS, and other lackeys. China is aggressively maneuvering to control African natural resources - and doing a damn fine job of it. Starting with oil and strategic minerals.
What's both fascinating and scary is how much focus China has had on the "long game".
I've never been to Zambia…..but as I understand it the PRC has had very strong relations since the 1960's that pre-dated and remained resilient thru things like the Cultural Revolution.
And in Tanzania where I've visited the ties with PRC go back just as far.
It's the Nairobi inbound/outbound flight boards that worry me a bit. There's a rather substantial percentage coming/going to China :eek:
I only hope China continues to suck at ODA and capacity building type stuff across the spectrum that's good for the local folks.
Everywhere I've gone that the Chinese have "invested" usually involves natural resource gang rape.
I like the way you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKBfT--rwmc
Nice! Haven't seen that in a LONG time.
And here I was thinking I might need to take a couple crazy pills.
So I may not be completely crazy after all? That's a first. I must be making progress in my recovery then. ;)
RomanCandle
12-12-2013, 04:12
Hmmmmmmm…..
I'm not a big conspiracy theorist……but I do kinda believe in a couple things:
I think the Soviets particularly were exceptionally good at propaganda and strategic shaping operations:
True. It is a fact that the Nat Government in SA was terrible at PR and using/ influencing the media. We got beaten like a bass drum on that score. The ANC and others Swapo/ Zapu/ Zipra etc were pastmasters at portraying themselves as the weak and vulnerable freedom fighters who championed the cause of the people, whilst at the same time showing their communist advisers that they were ruthless enough on the ground to warrant continued support as proxies.
Anti Vietnam War efforts globally
Anti Nuclear Weapons efforts in UK/Western Europe
But I'm not sure of their DIRECT role in propaganda and strategic shaping operations for Zimbabwe/South Africa.
Bear in mind that the vast majority of training and support logistical and doctrinal training came from the communist bloc. Most of these terrorist/ insurgent leaders had had extensive away training in USSR, China and Korea including mastering propaganda. This was naturally carried over in the metamorphosis from terrorist to celebrated statesmen
I would GUESS that a mix of direct/indirect efforts(lots of "useful idiots" produced from socialist/communist underground influence over higher education) were directed at western mass media and higher education to undermine the west with an indefensible(at least openly) position against clear communist aggression directed at strategic mineral resources unavailable in the US and globally strategic SLOCs.
300,000 Cubans fighting and losing in Angola over decades in direct conflict with South Africa isn't even mentioned when Raul Castro's name is mentioned.
Coverage of Mandela leaves me with an additional data point leading me to believe the Cold War never ended, nor has the US convincingly won as we were told.
Is it possible that the cold war was never actually won in terms of the victory going to the team that got to the pitch whilst the loser's bus broke down on the way? Maybe the losers were just taking a "premium holiday" and will register for the championships again as soon as finances allow?
I don't so much see it as a battle between Communism and Capitalism as I see it a battle between and among rival political/economic networks/elites that share or fight over pieces of the global pie.
Maybe political ideology is only useful insomuch as giving a populace a "team" to belong to and to unite under fueled by propaganda and dogma. The leaders seem quite happy to all follow the money like everyone else.
The deification of Mandela is easy to sell and easy to digest. The truth is too grey and takes too long to explain(like a business "elevator pitch" it has to be simple and quick) for most people who are time poor.
Because watching the Kardashians is so much more important than real "reality" :D
Sorry for the lengthly response, but that's where my "moving target" perspective li.es at the moment.
In a nutshell(finally), I'm thinking the reason why is that while we may appear to have won the conventional Cold War, we are still fighting and losing the unconventional Cold War.
To paraphrase Tsun Tzu: Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak, and of course don't make war unless your coffers are full. Maybe that's what the East has been doing while adopting many Capitalist practices to increase economic strength and bring the West in closer?
I hope that red is not an in-appropriate colour for the above, for the life of me I cannot seem to locate the protocol on using colours!
I hope that red is not an in-appropriate colour for the above, for the life of me I cannot seem to locate the protocol on using colours!
"Pink" is normally used for sarcasm or an attempt at humor.
"Lime" is for profound, indisputable truth.
...and autocracy...
RomanCandle
12-12-2013, 07:42
"Pink" is normally used for sarcasm or an attempt at humor.
"Lime" is for profund, indisputable truth.
Got the pink. Thanks for the info on lime. while my text is neither of the above , I hope red is OK to contrast my reply with the quoted text.
So I may not be completely crazy after all?
Far from it.
I hope that red is not an in-appropriate colour for the above, for the life of me I cannot seem to locate the protocol on using colours!
RC,
Other than the use of 'pink' font for humor or sarcasm, fonts are a personal choice and can make it easier to follow a discussion among members of this BB. Some fonts, however, are more difficult to read than others - red being one, which is why I changed your comments to the 'orange' to make it easier on the eyes of the readers.
Richard
Here's one that REALLY has me scratching my head:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/11/mandela-sanitised-hypocrites-apologists-apartheid
IF I understand the author correctly, the primary reason why Mandela has been sanitized/beautified/deified is to protect those who supported Apartheid?
That just makes my brain hurt.
The brutal truth is that the US and its allies backed dictatorships from Argentina and Greece to Saudi Arabia, while Soviet support allowed peoples from Vietnam to Angola to win national independence.
Like Hungary and Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan
Cuban military action against South African and US-backed forces at Cuito Cuanavale in Angola in 1988 gave a vital impetus to the fall of the racist regime in Pretoria
http://monthlyreview.org/2013/04/01/cuito-cuanavale-angola
Link about Battle of Cuito Cuanavale as fictionally written by Ronnie Kasrils(also interviewed for article, AND senior member of ANC/MK/SA Communist Party eventually heading Saffie Intelligence post independence)
Orwell would probably be laughing and/or crying were he alive and reading this.
Such statements have barely figured in media tributes to Mandela this week, of course. The enthusiasm with which Mandela has been embraced in the western world is not only about the racial reconciliation he led, which was a remarkable achievement, but the extent of the ANC's accommodation with corporate South Africa and global finance, which has held back development and deepened inequality.
Unbelievably pathetic excuses for ANC economic failures.
Apartheid was wrong, but it's economic, technological, developmental achievements while under increasing economic trade embargo headwinds make the strong economic tailwinds of vastly improved trade/aid and commodity prices for the post independence government look quite awkward in comparison.
NO mention of how ANC cadre corruption/plundering has actually and clearly deepened the previous structural inequality. It's still the nebulous "The Man's" fault.
The article reminds me a bit of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEiyTo0
....IF I understand the author correctly, the primary reason why Mandela has been sanitized/beautified/deified is to protect those who supported Apartheid?.....
As I've said before, now that Mandela has passed the lid is off and it's full steam ahead to catch up with Zimbabwe.
Guymullins
12-12-2013, 14:11
Here's one that REALLY has me scratching my head:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/11/mandela-sanitised-hypocrites-apologists-apartheid
IF I understand the author correctly, the primary reason why Mandela has been sanitized/beautified/deified is to protect those who supported Apartheid?
That just makes my brain hurt.
Like Hungary and Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan
http://monthlyreview.org/2013/04/01/cuito-cuanavale-angola
Link about Battle of Cuito Cuanavale as fictionally written by Ronnie Kasrils(also interviewed for article, AND senior member of ANC/MK/SA Communist Party eventually heading Saffie Intelligence post independence)
Orwell would probably be laughing and/or crying were he alive and reading this.
Unbelievably pathetic excuses for ANC economic failures.
Apartheid was wrong, but it's economic, technological, developmental achievements while under increasing economic trade embargo headwinds make the strong economic tailwinds of vastly improved trade/aid and commodity prices for the post independence government look quite awkward in comparison.
NO mention of how ANC cadre corruption/plundering has actually and clearly deepened the previous structural inequality. It's still the nebulous "The Man's" fault.
The article reminds me a bit of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEiyTo0
Ronnie Kasrils, the Communist ANC one-time Minister also wrote similar rubbish in SA,s highest circulation newspaper, the Sunday Times. My reply to his letter was published the following week:
Ronnie Kasrils revision of history may get full marx at a Limpopo junior school, but it wont pass muster at a more educated establishment. His tall tales about Cuito and the fighting prowess of his hero’s the Cubans and their MPLA employers don’t bear scrutiny. This ground has been gone over many times, so I think perhaps a look at the scoreboard is all that is needed to see his outlandish claims as the balderdash they so patently are.
When establishing who the victors are in any battle, one needs to examine the aims of the parties involved, the casualties and the consequence for the military leaders after the battle.
Firstly, the broader aim of the Cubans and MPLA/FAPLA and their comrades in SWAPO and the ANC was to eventually seize power in Namibia and South Africa and install a One Party, Communist Dictatorship in both countries. If, as Ronnie Kasrils maintains, Cuito was the turning point and a great victory for the Communist MPLA/FAPLA, Cubans and ANC, and their laughable “Military wing”, MK, these aims were not achieved. Both Namibia, and ultimately South Africa became multi-party democracies, the aim of the Apartheid regime.
Secondly, looking at the casualties on either side, Cuito produced the following entirely one-sided figures.
Cuban/Fapla Killed 4 785 vs SADF Killed 31
Cuban/Fapla light armour destroyed +200 vs SADF light armour destroyed 11
Cuban /Fapla Tanks destroyed 94 vs SADF Tanks destroyed 3
Cuban/Fapla Fighter Jets destroyed 9 vs SADF Fighter Jets destroyed 1
If this looks like victory to Mr Kasrils, I wonder what defeat looks like?
Lastly, while the South African generals were sometimes criticised for not following up the victory of Cuito by routing the FAPLA Cuban forces and annihilating them to a man, the generals were feted as conquering heroes on their return to the Republic. The “Victorious” Cuban general Gen. Arnaldo Oshoa Sanchez was executed by Fidel Castro on his “triumphant” return to Havana.
How on earth anyone can turn these rather embarrassing facts into a victory for Cuba (and the rest of the gang) without blushing, is a mystery.
I suppose it is better to try and change history where actual battle took place, rather than confront the miserable record of MK at home where they were unable to accomplish anything approaching a battle, despite decades of Russian help with arms and training.
Selectively quoting Col. Jan Breytenbach, who was never afraid to speak up when he felt that the SADF had not gone far enough, is not going to change what actually happened.
As I've said before, now that Mandela has passed the lid is off and it's full steam ahead to catch up with Zimbabwe.
Speaking of Zimbabwe:
Drawing Lessons from Zimbabwe's War of Liberation
by Jephias Andrew Dzimbanhete
http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/drawing-lessons-from-zimbabwes-war-of-liberation
This fiction caused a bit of a ruckus over at SWJ, but as mentioned by a QP posting there under Outlaw09(see 1st comment below article), listening/reading enemy content has value in understanding them. And in that venue, and from that perspective, it has potential value.
What gets me about the Guardian article I linked ,and Guymullins provided greater detail on the fictional qualities of it, is that 99.99% of readers will accept it at face value as the truth.
TiroFijo
12-12-2013, 15:15
People want to think is simple terms and put everything into "good" or "bad"... normally it is not that easy. You can argue back and forth, both sides were no angels.
"One man's Terrorist is another man's Freedom Fighter" just about sums it up. He was aligned with Moscow, Beijing, Havana and the communist states of other black dictators, never saying a word of their abuses. But these scumbags were the people that helped him. I wonder how many people here would not use full, even vicious, force if in the same situation, and ally with the devil if necessary. I shake my head with all the current sanctification of Mandela by the media, but he had a few good points, specially after he took office.
I toured SA in 1982 with my rugby team, then did my post-graduate studies in Pretoria in 1991-92, and went back in 1993 to visti friends and tour the neighbouring countries backpacking. Nearly of my SA friends are afrikaner, right wing, and some are border war veterans. Some are from families that came from Rodhesia. Most of them at least respect Mandela for the paceaful transition (initially all the military was still from the old guard, so he better behave), and went on with their lives. All of them respect Mandela MUCH more than his political heirs, to say the least. What a bunch or SOBs.
SA was "the last domino" in africa in the cold war, and once the cold war ended the transition ocurred due to international pressure. Let's be realistic here, there was NO other real option than to abolish apartheid or see the country sink even deeper than it is now, and faster. The 1992 apartheid referendum (for whites only) was won with 69% of the electorate supporting the reforms, mostly because of fear of drastic economic sanctions but also because most felt it was time for change. It is not funny to oppress (and sometimes even fight) 70% of your own population and have relatives dying in border wars. The apartheid laws really came in full swing in 1948, they were a knee jerk reaction to the old boer wars and were a huge step backwards regarding race equality.
SA today is a mess today, there is an effective one party rule, and corruption is rampant. But before the ANC it was no paradise either, specially if you were black, colored, indian, etc. Probably in many ways they were better in the old days, but is VERY difficult to put a price on certain rights. Would you like to have better schools and less crime in you well run country, OR would you prefer the idea and the promise to be treated as equal, with freedom of movement and voting rights?
it is not so easy to step into democracy with a political/economical situation like SA had in 80s and 90s, it was a mixture of first and third/fourth worlds, and unsustainable after the end of the cold war. As you probably know, most political leaders are not motivated for the common good, and in fact no strangers to corruption and vicious attacks to the other factions and their political, social and economic interests. It is only in a relatively few countries in the world where strong and stable institutions manage to morigerate this behaviour. This is not the case in SA, as well as in many other countries with incipient democracies.
I was an eyewitness of the SA transition, with many close friends very well informed and connected. The SA society at the time was very similar in some ways to my home country (Paraguay), where you always have some friend/relative in certain positions if you come from a certain social/economical stratum. From my background as a south american living many years under a dictatorship I think I understand the subtleties of political change in this kind of unequal society very well. FWIW, I got a permanent resident status in SA back in 1993, but inmediatly came back to live in my own country foreseeing the decline, specially for white citizens.
I respect and agree with most of what our south african friends say here, but fot the people who want to educate themselves on this topic and look for other perspectives, take a look here:
http://www.gunsite.co.za/forums/showthread.php?41999-Nelson-Mandela-passes-on
http://www.gunsite.co.za/forums/showthread.php?42181-Is-it-a-good-thing-or-bad-thing-for-SA-that-Mr-Mandela-is-gone
Probably about 90% of the posters in this SA pro-gun site are white, most are afrikaner, and many of them with past experience with the police or military, even in the good old days.
Ted Koppel made an interesting point in the debate:
Mandela's Long Prison Term Helped Preserve His Image
...one of the keys to his exalted status is that for 27 years he was behind bars, hidden from the kind of scrutiny and decision-making that can turn heroes into mere mortals...
http://www.opb.org/news/article/npr-ted-koppel-mandelas-long-prison-term-helped-preserve-his-image/
Richard
Guymullins
12-13-2013, 00:37
Ted Koppel made an interesting point in the debate:
Mandela's Long Prison Term Helped Preserve His Image
...one of the keys to his exalted status is that for 27 years he was behind bars, hidden from the kind of scrutiny and decision-making that can turn heroes into mere mortals...
http://www.opb.org/news/article/npr-ted-koppel-mandelas-long-prison-term-helped-preserve-his-image/
Richard
And of course, Apartheid governments superb prisoner rehabilitation program. In the last few years of his incarceration , Mandela was housed in a house of his own with a swimming pool and cook while he was deciding whether to renounce violence so as to secure his release. He never did renounce violence, but was released anyway and there followed plenty of violence between his ANC party and Inkatha Freedom Party, The Xhosa and the Zulu.
TiroFijo
12-13-2013, 06:21
The SADF helped the Inkatha a wee bit... ;) thus this "blacks vs blacks" violence was really an extension of the total political/military bargaining among all parties.
Since everybody knew that Mandela would be the future president of SA after his release (and even before his release), and that the ANC would rule (likely forever), all that remained to be seen was what portion of political power was left for zulus, and whites.
Despite what most of the media suggests, Mandela spent the last 8 years of imprisonment is very good conditions, the last two in a golden jail while the discussions on the future of SA went on. There he also completed his studies to become a full flegged lawyer. Despite political differences, he was groomed to be the first black SA president because he was the only sensible choice at the time.
In the last years of apartheid the ANC leaders enjoyed a luxurry life at least comparable to the white leaders, with mansions and a fleet of luxury cars at their service, where the money came from nobody asked. It was the price that the government and the private sector payed to avoid strikes, etc.
He wasn't perfect but at least he embraced the comcept of reconciliation and unity. His political descendants are predictably one worse than the preceding one.
Like I said before, the end of the cold war was really what determined the change in SA.
Well, between the Xhosa and Zulu - the Zulu have a pretty big scalp on their coup stick.