PDA

View Full Version : Nelson Mandela dies aged 95



Jordan
05-12-2013, 09:48 PM
408713958816624641

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25249520


South Africa's first black president and anti-apartheid icon Nelson Mandela has died, South Africa's president says.Mr Mandela, 95, led South Africa's transition from white-minority rule in the 1990s, after 27 years in prison.
He had been receiving intense home-based medical care for a lung infection after three months in hospital.
In a statement on South African national TV, Mr Zuma said Mr Mandela had "departed" and was at peace.

Rest in Peace.

lawrawrrr
05-12-2013, 09:49 PM
Just confirmed from Sky, Rusbridger (Guardian editor) and BBC News.

"Our nation has lost its greatest son. Our people have lost their father."

From earlier:

Family members have gathered two days after Mr Mandela's eldest daughter said he was putting up a courageous fight from what she called his "deathbed".

He spent nearly three months in hospital with a lung infection.

Mr Mandela, 95, led South Africa's transition from white-minority rule in the 1990s, after 27 years in prison.

The BBC's Mike Wooldridge, who is outside Mr Mandela's home in the Johannesburg suburb of Houghton, says it appears to have been an unusually large family gathering on this occasion.


Always get a bit choked up about Mandela, no idea why. Inspirational figure. May he RIP, after suffering for so long.

Threads merged by Dilusionate (Forum Moderator): As they are the same topic

Kardan
05-12-2013, 09:52 PM
You're fast. I read yesterday he was still critical but stable. And I was wondering when he dies, what the forum's reaction would be...

RIP.

karter
05-12-2013, 09:55 PM
RIP. One of the greatest leaders of modern history (despite his links to genocides and murder, still quite an inspirational figure.)

lawrawrrr
05-12-2013, 09:55 PM
You're fast. I read yesterday he was still critical but stable. And I was wondering when he dies, what the forum's reaction would be...

RIP. Jordan; beat me to it as well. Yeah, telegraph posted earlier there was a lot of activity outside his house so I had a feeling this might have been coming...

myles
05-12-2013, 09:58 PM
this is really upsetting
RIP

Yawn
05-12-2013, 09:58 PM
i wanted the thread

rip

Gina
05-12-2013, 09:59 PM
saw this just now om aw
r.i.p. to him!

Yawn
05-12-2013, 09:59 PM
rip nelson :Heart:

sex
05-12-2013, 10:01 PM
rip sunshine
x x x

xxMATTGxx
05-12-2013, 10:01 PM
What a shame, may he R.I.P

Reality
05-12-2013, 10:02 PM
FREEEEEEE NELSON MANDELLLLLLLA!!! R.I.P such an inspiration to all!!

Circadia
05-12-2013, 10:05 PM
I saw the 'breaking news on bbc one' banner and I got a bit scared

may he rest in peace such an inspirational man

Ardemax
05-12-2013, 10:05 PM
Such a great man! May he truly RIP.

Jurv
05-12-2013, 10:08 PM
ah such a shame. rest in peace mandela x

TheDoctor.
05-12-2013, 10:15 PM
Rest In Peace, He was a great man. Sad loss.

cornbix
05-12-2013, 10:18 PM
I COULD care less. http://exhalecdn.breatheheavy.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smokney2.gif

Edited by Nick (Forum Super Moderator): Pleased don't post pointlessly.

lucaskf390
05-12-2013, 10:19 PM
You have made a big difference for millions of people. Rest in peace.

wixard
05-12-2013, 10:23 PM
posting here cos you were before laura

myles
05-12-2013, 10:31 PM
rip

JaiHo
05-12-2013, 10:36 PM
R.I.P a truly inspirational guy.

j0rd
05-12-2013, 10:37 PM
I COULD care less. http://exhalecdn.breatheheavy.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smokney2.gif

The sooner you get hell banned the better.

R.I.P :(

buttons
05-12-2013, 10:47 PM
You're fast. I read yesterday he was still critical but stable. And I was wondering when he dies, what the forum's reaction would be...

RIP.
waiting for the 'who' posts on fbook but so far only been talk about how much of an inspiration he was, despite the fact majority of my fbook are racists..

anyway may he rip

Mark
05-12-2013, 10:53 PM
RIP, what an inspirational man!

lemons
05-12-2013, 11:01 PM
Rest In Peace


P.S. Who has seen Paris Hilton's tweet regarding his death.

*Edit: appaz her tweet is fake*

Kardan
05-12-2013, 11:02 PM
waiting for the 'who' posts on fbook but so far only been talk about how much of an inspiration he was, despite the fact majority of my fbook are racists..

anyway may he rip

I'm also seeing the posts how Mandela inspired them personally, even though by the time they were born he was half way through his presidency, and I reckon they only know anything about Mandela through their citizenship courses.

- - - Updated - - -


Rest In Peace


P.S. Who has seen Paris Hilton's tweet regarding his death...

I don't use twitter, what did it say?

xxMATTGxx
05-12-2013, 11:03 PM
waiting for the 'who' posts on fbook but so far only been talk about how much of an inspiration he was, despite the fact majority of my fbook are racists..

anyway may he rip

I saw someone reply to this and was like "Oh my"

408719358702403584

lemons
05-12-2013, 11:06 PM
It said RIP etc etc then it said 'your "I have a dream" was so inspiring'

I think it's a hoax anyway

Kardan
05-12-2013, 11:07 PM
It said RIP etc etc then it said 'your "I have a dream" was so inspiring'

I think it's a hoax anyway

More than likely.

lemons
05-12-2013, 11:07 PM
-------
I was in a Habbox event and one of the Habbox staff didn't know who he was

Yawn
05-12-2013, 11:23 PM
hmmm i wasnt sure who he was

knew his name, knew his face, couldnt think wat his significance was tho
(but i remember clearly now that ive been reminded)

j0rd
05-12-2013, 11:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgcTvoWjZJU

How long until this goes back to #1?

Firehorse
05-12-2013, 11:50 PM
R.I.P to a man who achieved extraordinary things in his life and positively impacted so many.

The conspiracies will start popping up soon, he died during the Mandela movie premiere tonight.

!x!dude!x!2
06-12-2013, 12:01 AM
RIP he was a good man

!:random!:!
06-12-2013, 12:18 AM
R.I.P to Mr Mandela you will be truly missed for all the great things you did and by the many hearts you have touched </3

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1993/mandela.jpg

sex
06-12-2013, 01:01 AM
rest in peace nelson (l)
http://i.imgur.com/ufJJIgH.jpg

Firehorse
06-12-2013, 01:35 AM
rest in peace nelson (l)
http://i.imgur.com/ufJJIgH.jpg

That's Morgan Freeman.

sex
06-12-2013, 01:38 AM
That's Morgan Freeman.

ummmm i know my black people and im sure thats nelson!

Firehorse
06-12-2013, 01:54 AM
ummmm i know my black people and im sure thats nelson!

I really hope you're trolling.

http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120906010622/dragonball/images/thumb/9/90/Annoyed-facepalm-picard-l.png/800px-Annoyed-facepalm-picard-l.png

Matt
06-12-2013, 03:54 AM
Rest In Peace <3

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 08:09 AM
Do all the people heaping praise on Mandela feel the same way about IRA Leader Gerry Adams?

It's not mentioned by the gushing BBC and media in general, nor the schools or the politicians, that Mandela was actually head of the armed wing of the ANC which targeted innocent people for political ends. That's why I hate the IRA. That's why I hate the UVF. That's why I hate al-Qaeda.

I'm afraid I just find the idea of using terrorism against innocent people completely unacceptable under any circumstances - sure, if the cause is noble then you can argue for using it against political leaders such as government figures. But innocent people? No, I can't justify it and nor should anybody else.

His legacy? South Africa is now a much poorer country today than it was, conditions for ALL citizens of the country (apart from corrupt ANC leaders) both white and black have worsened and the country is now virtually one of the worst countries in the world for HIV/Aids and crime in general. Despite all that though, I will give him this - that he managed to bring both sides together rather than engage in a Mugabe-type crackdown after gaining power. What worries me most about his passing though is what the whites in South Africa will now face now that he is gone.

It's not a popular opinion to hold but you know, at least it's one that's been made after hearing ALL the facts.

karter
06-12-2013, 08:11 AM
-------
I was in a Habbox event and one of the Habbox staff didn't know who he was

ugh so what, tell them who he is. why is this a big deal

- - - Updated - - -

A lot of people don't know who people are so better so stop with your "Oh My" comments bc that's fake as hell and you're stupid if you think that not knowing someone makes a person dumb. shut the hell up

paris hilton's tweet btw

https://24.media.tumblr.com/96a96dc97fd3e019f1fe7acaf1428afc/tumblr_mxcy1g1CuG1ri94fho2_500.jpg

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 08:40 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC8qQE4Y2Js&feature=youtu.be

Wonder if the BBC will be playing this in their hysterical broadcasts?

Kardan
06-12-2013, 10:20 AM
When I said in my first post 'I wonder how the forum will react' it was mainly based on if anyone from current affairs would say how much of a bad person Mandela was.

I wasn't wrong. I wonder if we'll have an important death where the forum actually has nothing bad to say... We didn't get that with Michael Jackson, Margaret Thatcher or Nelson Mandela.

sex
06-12-2013, 10:27 AM
When I said in my first post 'I wonder how the forum will react' it was mainly based on if anyone from current affairs would say how much of a bad person Mandela was.

I wasn't wrong. I wonder if we'll have an important death where the forum actually has nothing bad to say... We didn't get that with Michael Jackson, Margaret Thatcher or Nelson Mandela.

Just wait for justin bieber to die no one will DARE speak a bad word

Kardan
06-12-2013, 11:24 AM
Just wait for justin bieber to die no one will DARE speak a bad word

I'm not so sure :P Maybe the Queen...

wixard
06-12-2013, 01:32 PM
was waiting for undertaker to post since the minute i heard

was not disappointed!

Tidan
06-12-2013, 02:30 PM
R.I.P Nelson,

Great man, great leader and a great inspiration.

Futz
06-12-2013, 02:33 PM
worrying how people thought sex was serious

anyway

rest easy

Yawn
06-12-2013, 02:36 PM
there r pics of morgan freeman all over my twitter feed

v funny

The Don
06-12-2013, 04:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC8qQE4Y2Js&feature=youtu.be

Wonder if the BBC will be playing this in their hysterical broadcasts?

Why would they when this was way before Mandela renounced violence and is completely irrelevant to what he later became famous for?

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 06:10 PM
Why would they when this was way before Mandela renounced violence and is completely irrelevant to what he later became famous for?

Er what? the left in general was supportive of Mandela as he was committing these acts of terror - hence his close links with Communists both in Africa and around the world. The video above also looks like it was taken way after he was released from prison. Peter Hain (a former Labour Minister) was one of those campaigning for his release from prison - something that would have happened sooner had Mandela agreed to renounce violence like the South African President had asked of him. Mandela refused to renounce violence.

There's so much more you could comment on with this man - the fact he, back around 2000, said that the IRA shouldn't decommission it's weapons or the fact he remained silent on what Mugabe was doing in neighbouring Zimbabwe - or even the record of Winnie Mandela with her necklacing (type that phrase in on Google images to see what it means) ....... the man certainly isn't what he is painted to be.

He's also the man who said this when asked why he was visiting the terrorist and despot Gaddafi -


In 1994 Gaddafi, then still a world pariah, was invited to attend then President Nelson Mandela's swearing in ceremony. Responding to Western critisim of the new ANC government's close relationship with the Gaddafi regime Mandela stated that:

“Those who feel irritated by our friendship with President Gaddafi can go jump in the pool."

Just type in 'Nelson Mandela truth' on Google and you'll find shedloads of documentation that you weren't taught in school and certainly won't ever hear on the BBC or in the rest of the media. Everything i've stated here in this thread is factual which you and others can find with a simple search or even I can provide the links if you so wish. It speaks volumes to me that all of the Telegraph blogs today have all had their comments sections closed to the public - if the man is so great and there's nothing unsavoury about his past, then why the censorship?

As I said earlier - he had a redeeming quality in that he at least brought people together after apartheid had ended. But on a scale of Gandhi to Gerry Adams? He's firmly near Adams in that both he and Adams murdered innocent people to bring about their political aims whereas Gandhi utterly rejected that and brought about his political objectives through admirable tactics.


http://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.1421997.1370685298!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_940/image.jpg

And what fool -repped me saying Mandela wasn't comparable to the IRA? Hello!?


http://i915.photobucket.com/albums/ac357/Baytch/sf_mandela.jpg

The Don
06-12-2013, 06:55 PM
I’m not in the mood for a drawn out debate with you regarding whether or not it’s right to fight violence with violence, although revolutions do tend to be bloody. The video you've linked is absolutely ridiculous and has been taken grossly out of context. He’s stood next to a white guy in the video for god sake and I'm pretty sure he had the opportunity if he wanted whilst president of South Africa to “kill whites” which obviously never happened. I'm pretty sure the song he's singing is some resistance song.

In regards to the IRA comment you've taken out of context, here’s what was actually said

During a news conference Monday in Dublin, Mandela was asked about his views on the IRA "I would like to see the British government and the IRA adopt precisely the line we have taken," he replied. "There's nothing better than opposites sitting down to resolve problems by peaceful means." A reporter asked Mandela if he knew that the IRA was backed by only a small minority, even in Northern Ireland.
"That's not the issue," he said. "The issue is that people are slaughtering one another when they could sit down and discuss the problems in a peaceful manner."Wow, what a hardcore terrorist, advocating that people peacefully discuss their issues...

Oh, and I -repped you, I thought you had VIP otherwise I would've left my name on it.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh and here's a photo of Churchill with Stalin

http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article7582985.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/Joseph+Stalin+and+Winston+Churchill.jpg

doesn't mean they are comparable, what stupid logic

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 07:11 PM
I’m not in the mood for a drawn out debate with you regarding whether or not it’s right to fight violence with violence

I never made that point. OF COURSE it is right to fight violence with violence, often it is the only way to break chains. The key difference though which i'm talking about is terrorism against innocent people - the idea that you purposely target innocent people in a campaign of terror to bring about political objectives.

I reject that notion and believe that the only targets should be that said regime. Do you?


although revolutions do tend to be bloody. The video you've linked is absolutely ridiculous and has been taken grossly out of context. He’s stood next to a white guy in the video for god sake and I'm pretty sure he had the opportunity if he wanted whilst president of South Africa to “kill whites” which obviously never happened. I'm pretty sure the song he's singing is some resistance song.

Well that's explained in the comments that apparently the man in the video is Jewish and some Jews consider their Jewishness as an ethnic group rather than being classed as white. I don't share that view but it's a view held inside Jewish circles and outside of them.

Either way, what's being taken out of context? I posted a video where he's singing kill the whites. The only person commenting on the video is you, I haven't actually said anything but have let it speak for itself. You seem incredibly defensive like you don't want it to be the truth.

But your problem is, it is true.


In regards to the IRA comment you've taken out of context, here’s what was actually said
Wow, what a hardcore terrorist, advocating that people peacefully discuss their issues...

*facepalm* Mandela was famous for making vague statements like that, anybody is capable of making a statement like that - it's worthy of a Miss World speech. Here's what he said in relation to the IRA when he was pressed by reporters on what he really thought -

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/ed-curran/nelson-mandela-was-against-ira-decommissioning-29384673.html


In April 2000, the political row over the IRA's unwillingness to decommission its weapons was dominating the political news during that visit to Dublin; so much so that, before Mandela came to lunch, he had met the Sinn Fein leadership.

"What advice, Mr Mandela, did you offer them," asked the late Aengus Fanning, editor of the Sunday Independent, another guest at lunch.

Mandela did not answer the question directly, but instead embarked on a long explanation of the position in which he found himself in South Africa on the same issue.

He outlined how he faced a wide spectrum of factions within the African National Congress, ranging from liberals, who said all guns should be handed over swiftly, to the mainstream, who felt they should be kept and that such a compromise could not be contemplated so soon.

Fanning repeated the question more pointedly: "But what was your position, Mr Mandela, on decommissioning weapons? And what advice would you give Gerry Adams?" Mandela's mood turned suddenly steely. He looked seriously and sternly at Fanning. "My position, my position... my position is that you don't hand over your weapons until you get what you want... "

The editors around the table were stopped in their tracks. Here was the other Mandela, unflinchingly gritty, never to be taken lightly, who commanded the respect of a huge revolutionary force inside and outside his prison cell.

That evening, I travelled back to Belfast and to the Culloden Hotel, where the Belfast Telegraph Business Awards were taking place. I arrived late off the evening Enterprise train and took my seat apologetically beside the then Secretary of State, Peter Mandelson, who was anxious to know what Mandela had said about Northern Ireland.

Mandelson was visibly shocked when I suggested Mandela did not share the unionists', or British, view on IRA decommissioning and that he thought David Trimble needed to show more political confidence and courage, because he had so much support from London. Mandelson was clearly annoyed at the prospect of such an influential global figure as Nelson Mandela showing sympathy for Sinn Fein and the IRA's position on decommissioning.

So is he still not comparable to the IRA or do you need more information fed to you? How about we discuss the bombings that his armed group engaged in against innocent people - like the IRA - to bring about a political aim?

As for the Churchill-Stalin picture, erm hello? Stalin was the commander of a huge army of a country that was involved in a make or break war in 1945. Gerry Adams was one of the leaders of a ragtag terrorist group that was targeting innocent people via roadside bombs. I think the comparisons are quite different. But beside, pictures aren't that important you are right - what's important is what Mandela has said on the IRA and which I have quoted above. Or even what his wife said -

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bds5OMecczU/T8YdToBqaRI/AAAAAAAAALw/jfAjzQp-oyc/s1600/winnie+mandela+murdurous+witch.jpg

Again, look up what necklacing is - look at the images, it'll give you a better idea.

The Don
06-12-2013, 07:19 PM
The Telegraph has summed up better than I could why they are not comparable so I shall quote that

"The comparison is odd for a number of reasons, but the fundamental difference is that black South Africans, a majority, had no democratic alternative to armed struggle, being unable to vote. Catholics in Northern Ireland could. And until the government gave Sinn Fein an effective veto on all policy (which they now have) they mostly voted for the SDLP, which represented a clear rejection of violence from the Catholic population.

To talk about Northern Ireland and apartheid South Africa in the same breath is also absurd if one compares how Britain treated Catholics with how South Africa treated blacks. The Government spent huge amounts on Northern Ireland; indeed as Kevin Myers pointed out in the brilliant Watching the Door, the English taxpayer effectively bankrolled the Troubles, making it perhaps the only welfare state-funded conflict in history (the IRA received a great deal of money from building firms which were paid huge amounts by Whitehall to rebuild property destroyed by the IRA)."

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 07:25 PM
The Telegraph has summed up better than I could why they are not comparable so I shall quote that

"The comparison is odd for a number of reasons, but the fundamental difference is that black South Africans, a majority, had no democratic alternative to armed struggle, being unable to vote. Catholics in Northern Ireland could. And until the government gave Sinn Fein an effective veto on all policy (which they now have) they mostly voted for the SDLP, which represented a clear rejection of violence from the Catholic population.

To talk about Northern Ireland and apartheid South Africa in the same breath is also absurd if one compares how Britain treated Catholics with how South Africa treated blacks. The Government spent huge amounts on Northern Ireland; indeed as Kevin Myers pointed out in the brilliant Watching the Door, the English taxpayer effectively bankrolled the Troubles, making it perhaps the only welfare state-funded conflict in history (the IRA received a great deal of money from building firms which were paid huge amounts by Whitehall to rebuild property destroyed by the IRA)."

Ah yes, the brave Daily Telegraph that is closing down all the comment sections on it's articles.

But in reponse to what you say on votes and so on, that excuses targeting innocent people does it? Even the Soviets in revolutionary Russia felt no need to wage a campaign of terror against the people of Russia - rather they waged a campaign of terror against the government and it's defences. The people of Tsarist Russia didn't have a vote.

In the dying days of British rule in India, Gandhi rejected any violence being used - even against British forces and troops - and indeed I read earlier that when his followers started to do just that, he went on hunger strike until they ceased a campaign of terror.

If Mandela has targeted solely the South Africa government in a campaign of terror then that's fine - but to purposely target innocent people just as the IRA and UVF did? Vile and sickening. I clearly reject such tactics whereas you endorse them - our disagreement is clear.

The Don
06-12-2013, 07:26 PM
As for the Churchill-Stalin picture, erm hello? Stalin was the commander of a huge army of a country that was involved in a make or break war in 1945.

I see you've edited your post where you insinuated that Mandela was comparable with the IRA due to the photo. I obviously understand the context behind my example.

- - - Updated - - -


Ah yes, the brave Daily Telegraph that is closing down all the comment sections on it's articles.

But in reponse to what you say on votes and so on, that excuses targeting innocent people does it? Even the Soviets in revolutionary Russia felt no need to wage a campaign of terror against the people of Russia - rather they waged a campaign of terror against the government and it's defences. The people of Tsarist Russia didn't have a vote.

In the dying days of British rule in India, Gandhi rejected any violence being used - even against British forces and troops - and indeed I read earlier that when his followers started to do just that, he went on hunger strike until they ceased a campaign of terror.

If Mandela has targeted solely the South Africa government in a campaign of terror then that's fine - but to purposely target innocent people just as the IRA and UVF did? Vile and sickening. I clearly reject such tactics whereas you endorse them - our disagreement is clear.

You keep saying that Mandela targeted innocent people but you have yet to provide proof for these claims, post some and I will actually be able to respond... And could you highlight which part of my posts endorse the murder of innocent people? Because I don't remember writing that and it sounds like a cheap shot and a poor debating tactic.

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 07:30 PM
I see you've edited your post where you insinuated that Mandela was comparable with the IRA due to the photo. I obviously understand the context behind my example.

Eh? I edited just after I posted as I usually correct spellings etc afterwards, I haven't changed anything I said in that post as I stand by it all - ask a moderator to confirm this is the case (if that's possible) if you wish.

Mandela refused to condemn the IRA, willingly met with it's leaders (pictures) and when pressed, stated that the IRA shouldn't surrender it's weapons until it had achieved it's objectives. That to me sounds like somebody who was rather sympathetic to the IRA - don't you think? Why heap praise on a man who is seemingly very comfortable associating with a group that murdered and terrorised the people of these islands?

Besides that's not even why he's comparable - he's comparable because he headed an organisation that targeted innocent people rather than solely targeting government figures as he should have done. Just like the IRA.

Just because you agree with an aim doesn't mean you have to endorse the killing of innocent people to bring about that aim - I am a very strong British Unionist like the UVF yet I think they are murderous scum on the same level as the IRA for targeting innocent people. The same applies to all the other Unionist terror groups in Ulster.

The Don
06-12-2013, 07:49 PM
Eh? I edited just after I posted as I usually correct spellings etc afterwards, I haven't changed anything I said in that post as I stand by it all - ask a moderator to confirm this is the case (if that's possible) if you wish.

Mandela refused to condemn the IRA, willingly met with it's leaders (pictures) and when pressed, stated that the IRA shouldn't surrender it's weapons until it had achieved it's objectives. That to me sounds like somebody who was rather sympathetic to the IRA - don't you think? Why heap praise on a man who is seemingly very comfortable associating with a group that murdered and terrorised the people of these islands?

Besides that's not even why he's comparable - he's comparable because he headed an organisation that targeted innocent people rather than solely targeting government figures as he should have done. Just like the IRA.

Just because you agree with an aim doesn't mean you have to endorse the killing of innocent people to bring about that aim - I am a very strong British Unionist like the UVF yet I think they are murderous scum on the same level as the IRA for targeting innocent people. The same applies to all the other Unionist terror groups in Ulster.

You keep saying that Mandela targeted innocent people but you have yet to provide proof for these claims, post some and I will actually be able to respond... And could you highlight which part of my posts endorse the murder of innocent people? Because I don't remember writing that and it sounds like a cheap shot and a poor debating tactic.

Kardan
06-12-2013, 07:52 PM
Did Mandela's party even kill civilians when he was out of jail? All I've read about is 'Sabotage', like burning crops etc.

-:Undertaker:-
06-12-2013, 07:56 PM
You keep saying that Mandela targeted innocent people but you have yet to provide proof for these claims, post some and I will actually be able to respond... And could you highlight which part of my posts endorse the murder of innocent people? Because I don't remember writing that and it sounds like a cheap shot and a poor debating tactic.

You have thus far refused to say that you agree with me on the principle that targeting innocent people to achieve political aims is wrong and unforgivable - instead you wittered on about the Northern Irish having a vote whereas the South Africans didn't to which I provided the counter examples of Gandi + British India and the Soviets vs the Tsarist forces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe#Bombings

Again, why are you arguing this when you are seemingly unaware of the activities of the organisation he headed? The part of the page I linked to contains information on the bombings, as does the entire Wikipedia page. This is all without even going into the necklacing that Winnie Mandela endorsed along with the executions (without trial) that took place in ANC bases against both blacks and whites.


Did Mandela's party even kill civilians when he was out of jail? All I've read about is 'Sabotage', like burning crops etc.

Absolutely, and as the link states - it was active from 1961 to 1990 and the TRC found that -


...torture was "routine" and was official policy – as were executions "without due process" at ANC detention camps particularly in the period of 1979–1989

The Don
06-12-2013, 08:12 PM
You have thus far refused to say that you agree with me on the principle that targeting innocent people to achieve political aims is wrong and unforgivable - instead you wittered on about the Northern Irish having a vote whereas the South Africans didn't to which I provided the counter examples of Gandi + British India and the Soviets vs the Tsarist forces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe#Bombings

Again, why are you arguing this when you are seemingly unaware of the activities of the organisation he headed? The part of the page I linked to contains information on the bombings, as does the entire Wikipedia page. This is all without even going into the necklacing that Winnie Mandela endorsed along with the executions (without trial) that took place in ANC bases against both blacks and whites.



Absolutely, and as the link states - it was active from 1961 to 1990 and the TRC found that -

So failing to state one's own opinion is the same as endorsing one? Another gaping hole in your logic there, Dan. Both your examples are rubbish, Why are you using examples when you are seemingly unaware of the events that happened in them? No innocent people were murdered in the Russian Revolution? Are you forgetting about the murder of the entire Tsar Royal family? The Purges of the Red Army by Stalin? The Millions of people sent to the Gulags? The Eradication of the Kulaks? The Bolsheviks death count is almost endless, Maybe you should pick better comparisons in the future....

The Page which you linked seems to suggest their military campaign was against the government and military? Other than a few isolated incidents which contain no evidence to suggest Mandela had any part in... I'm sure if we compared the death toll from the Soweto Uprising (where the South African Government massacred school children) as well as the various other massacres perpetrated by the Government, I'm sure the death toll from the ANC would frail in comparison.

Kardan
06-12-2013, 08:57 PM
You have thus far refused to say that you agree with me on the principle that targeting innocent people to achieve political aims is wrong and unforgivable - instead you wittered on about the Northern Irish having a vote whereas the South Africans didn't to which I provided the counter examples of Gandi + British India and the Soviets vs the Tsarist forces.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe#Bombings

Again, why are you arguing this when you are seemingly unaware of the activities of the organisation he headed? The part of the page I linked to contains information on the bombings, as does the entire Wikipedia page. This is all without even going into the necklacing that Winnie Mandela endorsed along with the executions (without trial) that took place in ANC bases against both blacks and whites.



Absolutely, and as the link states - it was active from 1961 to 1990 and the TRC found that -

All the bombings stated on that link were after Mandela was jailed.

GommeInc
06-12-2013, 10:33 PM
I'm not so sure :P Maybe the Queen...
I'd actually laugh, that's no joke :P Seeing how mentally unstable he is it will probably be completely random and involve a string of weird events, if not - an overdose or some sort of STI/STD gone septic.

As for the topic. He lived quite a full life. But seeing as he was a terrorist at one stage in his life it seems a bit strange to consider him a saint, a "shining star" in the world. I can only conclude with the quote "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," because that's he was.

Daltron
07-12-2013, 12:23 PM
RIP.

-:Undertaker:-
07-12-2013, 12:26 PM
So failing to state one's own opinion is the same as endorsing one? Another gaping hole in your logic there, Dan. Both your examples are rubbish, Why are you using examples when you are seemingly unaware of the events that happened in them? No innocent people were murdered in the Russian Revolution? Are you forgetting about the murder of the entire Tsar Royal family? The Purges of the Red Army by Stalin? The Millions of people sent to the Gulags? The Eradication of the Kulaks? The Bolsheviks death count is almost endless, Maybe you should pick better comparisons in the future....

Oh my lord, are you serious? when I say the Russian Revolution, i'm talking about the revolution itself not the aftermath - do keep up. To bring down the Tsarist regime, did the red forces and public feel the need to set off bombs in public places to simply terrorise the population? No, they did not - the only terror acts that took place were those against the Tsar himself (numerous attempts on his life) and finally attacks on Imperial forces who were protecting the palaces and government installations.

And state your opinion instead of skirting around the bloody issue. Is it or is it not right to target innocent people in bombings to bring about a political objective? Yes or no.


The Page which you linked seems to suggest their military campaign was against the government and military? Other than a few isolated incidents which contain no evidence to suggest Mandela had any part in...

Had no part in? are you out of your mind!? the man was the co-founder and one of the main leaders of the armed group. Listen to yourself, you're talking complete garbage and won't even give a straight answer to me on whether or not it is right to target innocent people for political aims.

I can give an answer - no, it's never acceptable.


I'm sure if we compared the death toll from the Soweto Uprising (where the South African Government massacred school children) as well as the various other massacres perpetrated by the Government, I'm sure the death toll from the ANC would frail in comparison.

Who said the South African regime was any better? I certainly didn't, indeed I have labelled the South African 'Government' a regime in this thread because I can see that the ANC and SAG are no much better than one another. I can firmly say that just as I can say that, even as a Unionist, the IRA and UVF are no better than one another.

You seemingly can't make that judgement as you don't want to tarnish Saint Mandela.


All the bombings stated on that link were after Mandela was jailed.

And? Do you really think he had no links to the group when in jail seeing as he was the leader and co-founder of the group? But anyway, he admitted in his trial to signing off on terror acts -

http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-nelson-mandela/


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.”

How much evidence (from him supporting the IRA which waged a war of terror against the peoples of these islands, to his wife placing people in tyres and setting them alight) does it take for people to drop the worship of this man?

The truth is only a click away on the internet yet even when it's being presented, people still don't want to hear it because it's completely counter to what they've been brainwashed into believing since primary school. I luckily knew the other side of the ANC and Mandela early on thanks to my family who used to live in South Africa.

Kardan
07-12-2013, 02:21 PM
Loads of text...

And? Do you really think he had no links to the group when in jail seeing as he was the leader and co-founder of the group? But anyway, he admitted in his trial to signing off on terror acts -

http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-nelson-mandela/



How much evidence (from him supporting the IRA which waged a war of terror against the peoples of these islands, to his wife placing people in tyres and setting them alight) does it take for people to drop the worship of this man?

The truth is only a click away on the internet yet even when it's being presented, people still don't want to hear it because it's completely counter to what they've been brainwashed into believing since primary school. I luckily knew the other side of the ANC and Mandela early on thanks to my family who used to live in South Africa.

As I've said, I don't deny that. He signed off on terror acts in HIS TRIAL (In the 60's), but did any of those, before he went into jail, actually kill anyone? I've already said that I'm aware of the attacks his group carried out when he was in jail - and they killed many people.

-:Undertaker:-
07-12-2013, 02:46 PM
As I've said, I don't deny that. He signed off on terror acts in HIS TRIAL (In the 60's), but did any of those, before he went into jail, actually kill anyone? I've already said that I'm aware of the attacks his group carried out when he was in jail - and they killed many people.

He wasn't put into prison originally for terror acts as far as i'm aware. At least not those.

Besides, why does that matter? He ordered (from prison) bombs to go off to murder innocent people. When he ordered them or whether it was inside or outside of prison is as relevant as what Gerry Adams was having for tea the night he ordered bombs to go off in Northern Ireland.

According to Wikipedia the charges in the 1960's trial were;


- recruiting persons for training in the preparation and use of explosives and in guerrilla warfare for the purpose of violent revolution and committing acts of sabotage
- conspiring to commit the aforementioned acts and to aid foreign military units when they invaded the Republic,
- acting in these ways to further the objects of communism
- soliciting and receiving money for these purposes from sympathizers in Algeria, Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria, Tunisia, and elsewhere.

Kardan
07-12-2013, 02:54 PM
He wasn't put into prison originally for terror acts as far as i'm aware. At least not those.

Besides, why does that matter? He ordered (from prison) bombs to go off to murder innocent people. When he ordered them or whether it was inside or outside of prison is as relevant as what Gerry Adams was having for tea the night he ordered bombs to go off in Northern Ireland.

According to Wikipedia the charges in the 1960's trial were;

Can I see some quotes from Mandela saying he told people to carry out the acts whilst he was in prison?

It's may also be worth noting that the initial trial may not have been the fairest trial in the world, considering the government was heavily racist.

-:Undertaker:-
07-12-2013, 03:45 PM
Can I see some quotes from Mandela saying he told people to carry out the acts whilst he was in prison?

It's may also be worth noting that the initial trial may not have been the fairest trial in the world, considering the government was heavily racist.

Er what? He refused to renounce violence when the President promised to release him upon doing so. How can he be directly quoted when he wasn't all that well known back then when people didn't fawn over his words?

Even the TRC after apartheid fell investigated the crimes of the ANC and it's terrorism.

You just don't want all this to be true so everytime I post the evidence on this man you just move the goalposts.

Kardan
07-12-2013, 04:02 PM
I'd actually laugh, that's no joke :P Seeing how mentally unstable he is it will probably be completely random and involve a string of weird events, if not - an overdose or some sort of STI/STD gone septic.

As for the topic. He lived quite a full life. But seeing as he was a terrorist at one stage in his life it seems a bit strange to consider him a saint, a "shining star" in the world. I can only conclude with the quote "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," because that's he was.

When I read this, I thought you were on about the Queen, and I thought you were the one going crazy :P But then I realised you meant Bieber :P

- - - Updated - - -


Er what? He refused to renounce violence when the President promised to release him upon doing so. How can he be directly quoted when he wasn't all that well known back then when people didn't fawn over his words?

Even the TRC after apartheid fell investigated the crimes of the ANC and it's terrorism.

You just don't want all this to be true so everytime I post the evidence on this man you just move the goalposts.

I've not moved the goalposts once, here's my first post:


Did Mandela's party even kill civilians when he was out of jail? All I've read about is 'Sabotage', like burning crops etc.

As we've established, they didn't. I'm not arguing against what they did whilst he was in jail, that's clear to see.

And on a second thought, if Mandela is such a bad man, surely that means Bush, Obama, Blair, Thatcher etc. are even worse?

-:Undertaker:-
07-12-2013, 04:18 PM
And on a second thought, if Mandela is such a bad man, surely that means Bush, Obama, Blair, Thatcher etc. are even worse?

I have been one of the biggest critics on this forum of Bush, Blair, Brown, Cameron and Obama's foreign policy - foreign policy is exactly one of the biggest reasons why I didn't endorse either Romney or Obama in 2012 and instead endorsed Ron Paul. The same can be said for Labour and the Conservatives. Afterall if you think back, who was one of the only one's on this forum arguing against ANY military involvement in both Libya and Syria at a time when a lot of the forum backed action there. It was me and I think events have proved me correct don't you?

But here we're talking about Nelson Mandela and his bombing campaigns against innocents and i'm glad that we've finally established that he did indeed order bombings against innocent people and isn't the man he's being portrayed to be, aka another Gandhi.

Kardan
07-12-2013, 04:32 PM
I have been one of the biggest critics on this forum of Bush, Blair, Brown, Cameron and Obama's foreign policy - foreign policy is exactly one of the biggest reasons why I didn't endorse either Romney or Obama in 2012 and instead endorsed Ron Paul. The same can be said for Labour and the Conservatives. Afterall if you think back, who was one of the only one's on this forum arguing against ANY military involvement in both Libya and Syria at a time when a lot of the forum backed action there. It was me and I think events have proved me correct don't you?

But here we're talking about Nelson Mandela and his bombing campaigns against innocents and i'm glad that we've finally established that he did indeed order bombings against innocent people and isn't the man he's being portrayed to be, aka another Gandhi.

I seemed to have missed that part of the thread...

Demi
07-12-2013, 04:40 PM
RIP to a great man.

The Don
07-12-2013, 06:32 PM
Lol you keep saying he ordered the murder of innocents from prison, proof please :) he admired to sabotage not murder, nice try though dan.

myles
07-12-2013, 06:53 PM
this is a bit old now i think its time we leave him to rest in peace and talk about something nicer

-:Undertaker:-
08-12-2013, 12:37 AM
I seemed to have missed that part of the thread...

Then I simply cannot do more, you're determined to see him as a Saint despite the overwhelming evidence.

A man once defined hell as a place where there is no reason, and you've just dragged me into hell.


Lol you keep saying he ordered the murder of innocents from prison, proof please :) he admired to sabotage not murder, nice try though dan.

So the organisation which he led and co-founded was completely out of his control? Are you really saying that?

The courts to my knowledge found otherwise.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/12/peter-hitchens-todays-child-snatchers-are-as-evil-as-philomenas-nuns.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


A hero we shamefully ignored

A great tidal wave of syrup swept across the surface of the Earth as soon as the death of Nelson Mandela was announced. I am sure Mandela himself would have been embarrassed by it. One of the many good things about him was his modesty. Another was his genuine forgiveness of those who had wronged him.

May he rest in peace. It is those who overpraise him who are my targets here. He simply was not the perfect being they claim.

He chose to adopt the path of violence. He did not have to. Apartheid South Africa was a political and moral slum, but many fought it without resorting to gun or bomb.

And it is not just nasty, reactionary me making this point. Amnesty International, that great campaign for silenced and imprisoned voices of liberty, took up a then-peaceful Mandela’s case in 1962. But after his turn to violent tactics, the British group reluctantly decided that he could no longer be called a prisoner of conscience.

For years the African National Congress has used Mandela as window-dressing. It’s not a nice organisation. Its armed wing, Spear of the Nation, is notorious for its brutality.

The ANC was dominated at every level by the South African Communist Party, the most rigidly Stalinist movement outside North Korea, and grovelling supporters of Kremlin repression.

This is the real point of the whole exaggerated Mandela cult. Anyone looking at the world in the second half of the 20th Century could see that the harshest and cruellest regimes on the planet were Left-wing ones, in Moscow, Peking and Havana. But the fashionable Western Left will never admit that. They are interested only in ‘Right-wing’ repression and secretly think that Left-wing oppression might actually be justified.

That is why there was nothing like this fuss on the death of another giant of human liberation, Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Solzhenitsyn was at least as great as Mandela – and, in my view, greater.

He never wielded anything more deadly than a typewriter, yet he brought down an Evil Empire, with all its concentration camps, tanks, guns and bombs. But when he died in August 2008, I don’t recall hours of eulogies on the BBC, or his face on every front page. Ask yourselves why.

The Don
08-12-2013, 01:34 AM
Then I simply cannot do more, you're determined to see him as a Saint despite the overwhelming evidence.

A man once defined hell as a place where there is no reason, and you've just dragged me into hell.



So the organisation which he led and co-founded was completely out of his control? Are you really saying that?

The courts to my knowledge found otherwise.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2013/12/peter-hitchens-todays-child-snatchers-are-as-evil-as-philomenas-nuns.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Have you ever heard the phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? A Peter Hitchens column in the mail on sunday is hardly evidence to support such claims, and in fact nowhere does it provide evidence to your claims. Considering that any of the bombings and murder of innocents you've linked previously were perpetrated whilst Mandela was locked away in Prison, far from being the ring leader you so desperately want him to be, I'm going to assume you're grossly mistaken. I'm all for a debate but when the best you can come up with is "WELL HE MUST'VE DONE IT SINCE HE WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM!!1!" your argument loses all validity. Oh, and to answer you question, I am indeed against the murder of innocents for political gain, but again, hearsay or guilt by association isn't going to prove whatever point it is you're trying to make.


So the organisation which he led and co-founded was completely out of his control? Are you really saying that?
Yes, I am suggesting that whilst he was incarcerated he wasn't the one planning the bombings of innocents, and unless you can prove otherwise your claims are invalid and simply conjecture

peteyt
08-12-2013, 12:47 PM
I have been one of the biggest critics on this forum of Bush, Blair, Brown, Cameron and Obama's foreign policy - foreign policy is exactly one of the biggest reasons why I didn't endorse either Romney or Obama in 2012 and instead endorsed Ron Paul. The same can be said for Labour and the Conservatives. Afterall if you think back, who was one of the only one's on this forum arguing against ANY military involvement in both Libya and Syria at a time when a lot of the forum backed action there. It was me and I think events have proved me correct don't you?

But here we're talking about Nelson Mandela and his bombing campaigns against innocents and i'm glad that we've finally established that he did indeed order bombings against innocent people and isn't the man he's being portrayed to be, aka another Gandhi.

I'm a bit late on here but I wanted to touch on some of the things that "Undertaker" had brought up.

I don't know what to think of Nelson Mandela mainly because I've heard both sides of the stories but don't know enough to make my own decision currently. However my problem is that most of the side Undertaker has brought up, I've heard/learnt from online. For me the big problem isn't the fact that the news and etc is supporting Mandela after his actions, its the fact they aren't even discussing these actions.

Obviously some people will find Mandela a good person and even an inspiration but surely people who are that influenced by his good work, should at least be able touch on his bad work. It does seem like a lot of people are burying their heads in the sand and pretending there isn't a debate and that's the real problem for me. If all these people don't think he was a terrorist for example, at least tell us why you think this and touch on the whole terrorism angle rather than just pretending there isn't a debate to be had. Googling did bring up that at some point in 2008 Mandela was on the US terrorist watch list http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/12/07/why-nelson-mandela-was-on-a-terrorism-watch-list-in-2008/

Oh and I also wonder how many of the people, especially young people on Facebook/Twitter, know what Mandela actually has done when they post tweets like you where a big inspiration and stuff.

-:Undertaker:-
08-12-2013, 12:52 PM
Have you ever heard the phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? A Peter Hitchens column in the mail on sunday is hardly evidence to support such claims, and in fact nowhere does it provide evidence to your claims.

Considering Hitchens is a former foreign reporter, he has pretty good standing when it comes to foreign affairs - especially concerning the end of the Cold War which he covered extensively.

Either way, what Hitchens wrote isn't the main point - the main point that you cannot refute (because it is true) is that even Amnesty International refused to associate with this man as he clearly crossed the line from a peaceful fighter against a regime to a violent one who sought to blow up innocent people to achieve his aims.


Considering that any of the bombings and murder of innocents you've linked previously were perpetrated whilst Mandela was locked away in Prison, far from being the ring leader you so desperately want him to be, I'm going to assume you're grossly mistaken. I'm all for a debate but when the best you can come up with is "WELL HE MUST'VE DONE IT SINCE HE WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM!!1!" your argument loses all validity. Oh, and to answer you question, I am indeed against the murder of innocents for political gain, but again, hearsay or guilt by association isn't going to prove whatever point it is you're trying to make.

You know as well as I do that just because you are locked in a prison that does not mean you lose contact with the outside world - look at the mafia. But even so, here's yet more evidence that apparently Mandela admits in his book 'Long Walk to Freedom' that he signed the Church Street bombings off - https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=cr&ei=xxxLUumlFITVtAaj1YDQBA#q=mandela+church+street+ bombing+long+walk+to+freedom

So he admits signing that bombing off, he associated with the scum in the IRA and didn't think they should hand over their weapons, he associated with Communist forces, his wife murdered people by placing them in petrol filled tyres, he also ordered the doctoring of a report which led to him ordering South African forces into the neighbouring Lesotho Kingdom which then results in a deal being signed that allowed South Africa to exploit it's water resources. (http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=16330)

Even the CIA and British Government had him on their terrorist lists. Why? because he was.


Yes, I am suggesting that whilst he was incarcerated he wasn't the one planning the bombings of innocents, and unless you can prove otherwise your claims are invalid and simply conjecture

As above, he apparently admitted to the famous Church Street bombings. And even if he didn't sign them off (which he clearly did) - he refused to condemn them and was in agreement with them taking place, hence why he rejected the offer of release from prison if he renounced violence.

There are many references in this article you may find interesting which reference books by academics charting his history and what he really got upto - http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/africa/item/15888-saint-mandela-not-so-fast


I don't know what to think of Nelson Mandela mainly because I've heard both sides of the stories but don't know enough to make my own decision currently. However my problem is that most of the side Undertaker has brought up, I've heard/learnt from online. For me the big problem isn't the fact that the news and etc is supporting Mandela after his actions, its the fact they aren't even discussing these actions.

Exactly, we can debate his legacy - as i've said earlier, I admire him for the way he at least brought people together after apartheid fell rather than do what Mugabe did in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).

But it just annoys the hell out of me that when you bring up what are facts abut his history that portray him to be a very different man to what the media circus are saying, you are met with utter disbelief because people simply cannot comprehend that he isn't what they've been brought up to believe.

GommeInc
08-12-2013, 01:28 PM
I'm not sure why people are arguing he is an absolute saint. Not even the BBC could take that view (entirely). They aired his dark history the other night. He had his good bits and his bad bits. To the end he was good which was a redeeming feature, but it doesn't erase the fact he did order innocent people to be killed, albeit on his behest.

The Don
08-12-2013, 01:41 PM
I'm not sure why people are arguing he is an absolute saint.

I really don't think you've been reading my comments correctly if you think that's what I'm saying.

- - - Updated - - -


Either way, what Hitchens wrote isn't the main point - the main point that you cannot refute (because it is true) is that even Amnesty International refused to associate with this man as he clearly crossed the line from a peaceful fighter against a regime to a violent one Yes, this is all correct so far


who sought to blow up innocent people to achieve his aims.
And you've lost me, if by innocent you mean those working for the SA Government/Military at the time, then me and you clearly have different ideas of what innocent is.


You know as well as I do that just because you are locked in a prison that does not mean you lose contact with the outside world - look at the mafia. But even so, here's yet more evidence that apparently Mandela admits in his book 'Long Walk to Freedom' that he signed the Church Street bombings off - https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=cr&ei=xxxLUumlFITVtAaj1YDQBA#q=mandela+church+street+ bombing+long+walk+to+freedom

Ah yes, the bombing which went off earlier than planned and was aimed to target the SAAF (Not random civilians) in retaliation for the murder of 42 ANC supporters and civilians. Whilst tragic, I think you're missing the fact that this wasn't aimed at innocent civilians which is the entire and only point i'm arguing. I also can't find where Mandela apparently confessed to signing them off?

Obviously Mandela wasn't 100% good, the world isn't black and white and it would be silly to argue otherwise. I personally think he contributed more good than bad and was indeed a very important figure in the ending of apartheid, regardless of the shady things the people he was linked with in the past may have done.

GommeInc
08-12-2013, 09:06 PM
I really don't think you've been reading my comments correctly if you think that's what I'm saying.
That wasn't directed at anyone in here in particular. It seems the BBC, ITV and even C4 in their main news feeds seem to be suggesting he was without sin and public opinion is following suit. It's quite misleading, really. That said, the coverage of Thatcher was pretty positive. Maybe they have dignity and respect for the dead, and won't just slander him? :P

Ardemax
08-12-2013, 10:23 PM
That wasn't directed at anyone in here in particular. It seems the BBC, ITV and even C4 in their main news feeds seem to be suggesting he was without sin and public opinion is following suit. It's quite misleading, really. That said, the coverage of Thatcher was pretty positive. Maybe they have dignity and respect for the dead, and won't just slander him? :P

Hardly. Didn't they show a documentary of his "darker" side? I'm on about the BBC now.

peteyt
08-12-2013, 10:50 PM
Hardly. Didn't they show a documentary of his "darker" side? I'm on about the BBC now.

Any idea what the name was would love to see it?

Thanks

Ardemax
08-12-2013, 11:01 PM
Any idea what the name was would love to see it?

Thanks

I have no idea sorry :P I think it might have been in a two-parter and I think the last one may have been called 'From Prison to President' or something like that.

-Moniquee.
08-12-2013, 11:22 PM
He did so much for South Africa. Fought for what he believed in. What a great inspiration. RIP Nelson

GommeInc
11-12-2013, 04:09 PM
Hardly. Didn't they show a documentary of his "darker" side? I'm on about the BBC now.
Apparently they did. I didn't see it but mentioned it earlier (I think?) to Undertaker, or was meant to and forgot.

Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!