Again you are not making a fair comparison

 

While blacks were not having good human rights in South Africa you can't compare that with the attempted extermination of an entire race, the invasion of several countries, death camps and so on, MILLIONS died at the hands of Hitler, hundreds at best and died at the hands of the South African security forces, far too many of course, am not trivialising their deaths but it is a tiny number compared with that died at the hands of Hitler so an attempted assassination of Hitler is not terrorism it was justified

 

Actually, you can. If you are oppressed you don't sit around counting the dead and then say "Right lads, that's a million, we can start blowing stuff up now". As usual, Vic, your arguments are straight-jacketed into absurdity. I don't usually join in on threads you're involved in because they seem to descend into extremist banality, so don't expect an answer to your answer to this post!

Actually, you can. If you are oppressed you don't sit around counting the dead and then say "Right lads, that's a million, we can start blowing stuff up now". As usual, Vic, your arguments are straight-jacketed into absurdity. I don't usually join in on threads you're involved in because they seem to descend into extremist banality, so don't expect an answer to your answer to this post!

 

How many countries had South Africa invaded ? if you are going to make a comparison to Hitler at least make it realistic

 

Were they invading all their neighbours and putting them into death camps or bombing capitals with planes and so on ? NO

 

Hitler was a threat to WORLD peace, PW Botha was NOT it is absurd comparing the 2, apartheid was not nice but it was a localised problem to one country Hitler was a threat to the ENTIRE continent

whilst terrorism is wrong, im still waiting for a plausable alternative! craig... you say that you are anti aparteid, how could the black population of south africa have peacefully got out of this situation? they had had all their rights removed and wasnt aware of growing international pressure. this is one time terrorism was possibly justified.

Plenty of people use God as their inspiration for killing. Should we lock up all religious leaders as a result?

 

that wouldnt be a bad thing! especially those fanatical 'end timers'...

whilst terrorism is wrong, im still waiting for a plausable alternative! craig... you say that you are anti aparteid, how could the black population of south africa have peacefully got out of this situation? they had had all their rights removed and wasnt aware of growing international pressure. this is one time terrorism was possibly justified.

 

Terrorism damages causes and turns sympathisers against the struggle, just look at the Palestinians for an example of that, every suicide bomb hurts the Palestinian cause severely regardless of any international sympathy or help the Palestinians might deserve, terrorism and bombings are not the answer

 

There was the equivalent of apartheid almost in America with Rosa Parks and other stuff where blacks had little or no rights but did Martin Luther King set off bombs and so on for the cause ? he didn't, then look at India, some terrible $h!t went on there yet Mahatma Gandhi didn't go around letting off bombs. Mandela did so he damages his claim to be up there with MLK and Gandhi.

 

The more bombs that went off the less inclined the international community are to help and the deeper the resolve of the white population and SA's leaders

Edited August 30, 200717 yr by Vic Vega

And what did Mandela do about AIDS when he was president of South Africa ? why has he sat idly by and blindly followed Mbeki's stand on AIDS (if you eat garlic and beetroot you will be free of AIDS according to President Mbeki) which has ultimately killed more people in SA than apartheid ever did, Mandela invested nothing as president in AIDS awareness programs unlike Uganda where an AIDS awareness program has cut infections by 1/3

 

Why is Mandela not speaking out against Mugabe in Zimbabwe ? where are the "12 wise men" he created while inflation in Zimbabwe is 7000% and blacks are dying en masse of disease and starvation ? why are they not speaking out against and doing something about Mugabe ? I have never heard Mandela who is supposed to be the hero of African blacks speak out against Mugabe since 1 comment in 2000

 

The wall of silence from Mandela with regards Mugabe is very disturbing

Edited August 30, 200717 yr by Vic Vega

If Mandela is a terrorist, then so is William Wallace, George Washington, Fidel Castro, The French Resistance, the Iraqi Kurds and Chief Sitting Bull... Utter, total NONSENSE to put this great man, this great freedom fighter on the same level as scum like Bin Laden or Gerry Adams.. I have no problems with anything the ANC did (well, apart from when Winnie Mandela was going around dragging her husband's name through the mud..). Are totally oppressed, downtrodden people just supposed to take things lying down...? I rather think not, especially when it's clearly a case of the minority lording it over a majority.. The South African blacks had no voice, no right to vote, they were stripped of their dignity and treated like third class citizens in their own country.. How DARE any middle class, white european male say that the poverty-stricken South African blacks had no right to fight back.... It was the descendents of white Europeans (the Afrikaaners who originally hailed from Holland) who were responsible for the oppression, and scum like Thatcher who propped up the utterly vile, corrupt Apartheid regime... None of us have any right to say that the blacks should not have felt aggrieved and they had no right to remove this regime under any means necessary....

If Mandela is a terrorist, then so is William Wallace, George Washington, Fidel Castro, The French Resistance, the Iraqi Kurds and Chief Sitting Bull... Utter, total NONSENSE to put this great man, this great freedom fighter on the same level as scum like Bin Laden or Gerry Adams.. I have no problems with anything the ANC did (well, apart from when Winnie Mandela was going around dragging her husband's name through the mud..). Are totally oppressed, downtrodden people just supposed to take things lying down...? I rather think not, especially when it's clearly a case of the minority lording it over a majority.. The South African blacks had no voice, no right to vote, they were stripped of their dignity and treated like third class citizens in their own country.. How DARE any middle class, white european male say that the poverty-stricken South African blacks had no right to fight back.... It was the descendents of white Europeans (the Afrikaaners who originally hailed from Holland) who were responsible for the oppression, and scum like Thatcher who propped up the utterly vile, corrupt Apartheid regime... None of us have any right to say that the blacks should not have felt aggrieved and they had no right to remove this regime under any means necessary....

 

Mandela was offered release from prison by PW Botha in 1985 on the condition that he denounced violence, he chose to stay years more in prison than simply condemn bombings and murder of whites and white targets

 

He also thanked Maggie Thatcher as being one of the big reasons for his release, Mandela is better equipped to know Maggie's role in his release than anyone else, he personally thanked Maggie for her role in securing his release

 

Terrorism is not justified under any circumstances, yes apartheid was vile but diplomacy and economic sanctions however long it took was the answer not bombs and bullets

 

Gradually over the years reforms were being made slowly but surely by Vorster, Botha and then finally De Klerk which is far better than blowing the $h!t out of the white population

 

And South African blacks killed far more blacks than whites ever did, Mandela was an equatorial black African he descended from those that murdered and raped the indigenous south african black population in the early years

 

Mandela has sat on his hands doing nothing about AIDS, doing nothing about Zimbabwe, the ANC helped supply arms and training to one of the Rwandan factions that was involved in the slaughter and genocide in Rwanda

 

Mandela has a lot of blood on his hands he is not this saint that he is made out to be by left wingers

And what did Mandela do about AIDS when he was president of South Africa ? why has he sat idly by and blindly followed Mbeki's stand on AIDS (if you eat garlic and beetroot you will be free of AIDS according to President Mbeki) which has ultimately killed more people in SA than apartheid ever did, Mandela invested nothing as president in AIDS awareness programs unlike Uganda where an AIDS awareness program has cut infections by 1/3

 

Nelson Mandela did not do as much to combat AIDS as I would have liked. However, you have to bear in mind that South Africa faced a whole host of problems when he became president.

 

He has NOT blindly followed Mbeki's stance. He has been critical, albeit in his usual diplomatic way.

 

It was Mbeki's health minister who talked about garlic and beetroot not Mbeki himself. Unfortunately, when a junior minister contradicted her, it was the junior who got sacked not the health minister herself. Mandela's record on AIDS when he was president was disappointing, Mbeki's record is dreadful.

Terrorism damages causes and turns sympathisers against the struggle, just look at the Palestinians for an example of that, every suicide bomb hurts the Palestinian cause severely regardless of any international sympathy or help the Palestinians might deserve, terrorism and bombings are not the answer

 

OK, so look back a little further in the same region. The state of Israel was created in 1948 folowing various acts of terrorism by Zionist extremists. A number of the perpetrators (e.g. Menachem Begin, Ariel Sharon) went on to become Prime Minister of their country. Should we have refused to have anything to do with them? Or is this another case where you think terrorism was justified?

Edited August 30, 200717 yr by Suedehead2

OK, so look back a little further in the same region. The state of Israel was created in 1948 folowing various acts of terrorism by Zionist extremists. A number of the perpetrators (e.g. Menachem Begin, Ariel Sharon) went on to become Prime Minister of their country. Should we have refused to have anything to do with them? Or is this another case where you think terrorism was justified?

 

Again a poor comparison

 

Israel came about after a WW2 that had resulted in the deaths of millions of jews in Europe, the events in SA while unpleasant are much smaller on the scale than the attempted extermination of the jewish race and Final Solution, a safe haven for Jews was a necessity with so many displaced and murdered in WW2

 

And in terms of apartheid everyone talks about Mandela as if he was single handedly responsible for the end of apartheid and world awareness of it, rubbish, if anyone should have got a statue for them it is Steven Biko who laid down his life for his fellow blacks and who's death a year after the Soweto massacre of hundreds of protestors at a rally he organised bought about global concern for apartheid much more than Mandela did

 

Biko by Peter Gabriel was released long before Free Nelson Mandela too, if anyone bought about the fight against apartheid it was Biko not Mandela

I rather have a statue of Margaret Thatcher than Nelson Mandela, Mandela is not even British :angry:

I rather have a statue of Margaret Thatcher than Nelson Mandela, Mandela is not even British :angry:

Why should Trafalgar Square be dedicated solely to the British, as a square full of 'heroes' Mandela fits in perfectly...although I do agree that Steve Biko would possibly be a better candidate.

I rather have a statue of Margaret Thatcher than Nelson Mandela, Mandela is not even British :angry:

 

thatcher never did acheive anything like what mandela has, abe lincoln has a statue there too, why not moan about that? oh wait.. he was white <_<

I rather have a statue of Margaret Thatcher than Nelson Mandela, Mandela is not even British :angry:

 

:rolleyes:

 

Yes, let's have a statue to a woman responsible:

 

In 1981 for criminalising members of the Provisional Irish Republican Army removing their status as political prisoners to condemnation from the United Nations and several worldwide civil rights movements such as Amnesty International, which led to the hunger strikes & a rapid increase in the para-military activity leading to a significant increase in the deaths of civilians & soldiers on both sides; which only improved after her departure and a reconciliatary policy by instigated by the much maligned John Major.

 

1984/5 The destruction of the mining industry within the UK, via brutal police tactics and a vindictive government policy towards trade unions.

 

1986 The abolishment of the Greater London Council (GLC), then led by the strongly left-wing Ken Livingstone, and six Metropolitan County Councils (MCCs). The government claimed this was an efficiency measure. However, Thatcher's opponents held that the move was politically motivated, as all of the abolished councils were controlled by Labour, had become powerful centres of opposition to her government, and were in favour of higher local government taxes and public spending.

 

1988 The homophobic Section 28 amendment to the Local Government Act. "Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay".

 

1990 The Poll Tax. The most hated & reviled tax in 400 years. This was to be the most universally unpopular policy of her premiership and had the effect of limiting the number of people on the electoral register by 850,000 (probably most likely to vote for opposition parties to the Conservatives). Additional problems emerged when many of the tax rates set by local councils proved to be much higher than earlier predicted. Opponents of the Community Charge banded together to resist bailiffs and disrupt court hearings of Community Charge debtors. The Labour MP, Terry Fields, was jailed for 60 days for refusing on principle to pay his Community Charge. As the Prime Minister continued to refuse to compromise on the tax, up to 18 million people refused to pay, enforcement measures became increasingly draconian, and unrest mounted and culminated in a number of riots. The most serious of these happened in London on 31 March 1990, during a protest at Trafalgar Square, London, which more than 200,000 protesters attended. The huge unpopularity of the tax was seen as a major factor in Thatcher's downfall.

 

I was actually joking about my earlier comment :rolleyes: :rofl:

Again a poor comparison

 

Israel came about after a WW2 that had resulted in the deaths of millions of jews in Europe, the events in SA while unpleasant are much smaller on the scale than the attempted extermination of the jewish race and Final Solution, a safe haven for Jews was a necessity with so many displaced and murdered in WW2

 

And in terms of apartheid everyone talks about Mandela as if he was single handedly responsible for the end of apartheid and world awareness of it, rubbish, if anyone should have got a statue for them it is Steven Biko who laid down his life for his fellow blacks and who's death a year after the Soweto massacre of hundreds of protestors at a rally he organised bought about global concern for apartheid much more than Mandela did

 

Biko by Peter Gabriel was released long before Free Nelson Mandela too, if anyone bought about the fight against apartheid it was Biko not Mandela

 

And look at what became of Steve Biko. Killed while being "questioned" by the police.

I was actually joking about my earlier comment :rolleyes: :rofl:

 

this threads for serious discussion m8.... if anyone else had posted that trite comment it would have been deleted.

whilst terrorism is wrong, im still waiting for a plausable alternative! craig... you say that you are anti aparteid, how could the black population of south africa have peacefully got out of this situation?

 

 

....... still waiting ...... .... .... ...

....... still waiting ...... .... .... ...

 

International pressure and sanctions that hit the business interests of the white population are the answer no matter how many years it takes, there is no overnight solution and bombs are not the solution

 

What would you have suggested if you were British PM ? military action by us and America to take the country or something ?

 

Vorster, Botha then De Klerk gradually bought about reforms it was a slow process but it happened and it happened because of international pressure not because of any bombs the ANC military wing let off, any bombs damaged their cause

Edited August 31, 200717 yr by Vic Vega