Nelson Mandela wrote about his feelings when he left prison in 1990:
“As I walked out of the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew that if I didn’t leave my bitterness and hatred behind, I’d still be in prison.”
Unfortunately, 1990 is where Mandela’s history begins and in 1999 is where it ends for most people. There is more.
Nelson Mandela was a terrorist.
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa — Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s first black president, is a giant in the world of liberation heroes, up there with Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.
But unlike Gandhi, who said that nonviolence and truth were inseparable, and King, who famously declared that violence was immoral, Mandela embraced armed struggle to end the racist system of apartheid.
Mandela was instrumental in the use of violence in South Africa:
An irony of Nelson Mandela’s life is that the African National Congress freedom fighter will forever be remembered as a man of peace. That could not have been envisioned in 1961, when Mandela helped persuade the ANC that violence was necessary to get whites to share power with South Africa’s black majority.
Mandela was co-founder of the MK, or “Tip of the Spear”, an organization created to conduct guerilla warfare against the South African government. Mandela is reported to have written an MK manifesto including the following:
“Our men are armed and trained freedom fighters not terrorists.
We are fighting for democracy—majority rule—the right of the Africans to rule Africa.
We are fighting for a South Africa in which there will be peace and harmony and equal rights for all people.
We are not racialists, as the white oppressors are. The African National Congress has a message of freedom for all who live in our country.”
Mandela’s MK killed many people:
Landmark events in MK’s military activity inside South Africa consisted of actions designed to intimidate the ruling power. In 1983, the Church Street bomb was detonated in Pretoria near the South African Air Force Headquarters, resulting in 19 deaths and 217 injuries. During the next 10 years, a series of bombings occurred in South Africa, conducted mainly by the military wing of the African National Congress.
In the 1985 Amanzimtoti bomb on the Natal South Coast, five civilians were killed and 40 were injured when MK cadre Andrew Sibusiso Zondo detonated an explosive in a rubbish bin at a shopping centre shortly before Christmas. In a submission to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), the ANC stated that Zondo acted on orders after a recent SADF raid in Lesotho.[9]
In the 1986 Durban beach-front bombing, a bomb was detonated in a bar, killing three civilians and injuring 69. Robert McBride received the death penalty for this bombing which became known as the “Magoo’s Bar bombing”. Although the subsequent Truth and Reconciliation Committee called the bombing a “gross violation of human rights”,[10] McBride received amnesty and became a senior police officer.
In 1987, an explosion outside a Johannesburg court killed three people and injured 10; a court in Newcastle had been attacked in a similar way the previous year, injuring 24. In 1987, a bomb exploded at a military command centre in Johannesburg, killing one person and injuring 68 personnel.
The bombing campaign continued with attacks on a series of soft targets, including a bank in Roodepoort in 1988, in which four civilians were killed and 18 injured. Also in 1988, in a bomb detonation outside a magistrate’s court killed three. At the Ellis Park rugby stadium in Johannesburg, a car bomb killed two and injured 37 civilians. A multitude[citation needed] of bombs in “Wimpy Bar” fast food outlets and supermarkets occurred during the late 1980s, killing and wounding many people. Wimpy were specifically targeted because of their perceived rigid enforcements of many Apartheid-era laws, including excluding people of colour from their restaurants. Several other bombings occurred, with smaller numbers of casualties.
Mandela’s tenure in prison softened him and he turned away from violence, but so not his wife. She continued on, seeming to endorse a particularly brutal tactic known as “necklacing.”
The following five years were increasingly controversial. In 1986 she made a speech in which she talked about achieving liberation from apartheid by using “necklaces” – a reference to the brutal murder of suspected collaborators by putting tyres round their necks and setting them alight. There was also the matter of an opulent £125,000 house built in one of the poorest areas in the country.
Winnie Mandela also maintained a gang of enforcers:
The most serious allegations, however, stemmed from the activities of her personal bodyguards, the so-called Mandela United Football Club. Reports of their brutality were commonplace in Soweto and her house was attacked in 1988 by local people who had had enough.
Mrs Mandela refused to curb the team’s activities, however, and the following year came the decisive incident. A 14-year-old activist, Stompei Seipei Moketsi, was kidnapped by her guards and later found murdered. The ANC leadership declared that she was out of control but Nelson Mandela, in jail and in ill-health, refused to repudiate her.
They divorced in 1996.
Necklacing was a punishment exacted on blacks who were believed to be collaborators with the apartheid regime:
The practice became a common method of lethal lynching during disturbances in South Africa in the 1980s and 1990s. Necklacing sentences were sometimes handed down against alleged criminals by “people’s courts” established in black townships as a means of circumventing the apartheid judicial system. Necklacing was also used to punish members of the black community who were perceived as collaborators with the apartheid regime. These included black policemen, town councilors and others, as well as their relatives and associates. The practice was frequently carried out in the name of the African National Congress (ANC), and was even interpreted to have been implicitly endorsed by Winnie Mandela, then-wife of the imprisoned Nelson Mandela and a senior member of the ANC, although the ANC officially condemned the practice.
The first recorded victim of necklacing was the young girl Maki Skosana in July 1985
“ Her body had been scorched by fire and some broken pieces of glass had been inserted into her vagina, Moloko told the committee.
Mandela was apprehended, tried and convicted of sabotage in 1964 and sentenced to life in prison.
In 1985 Mandela was offered amnesty in return for renouncing violence but he refused, insisting that apartheid be dismantled first.
Later in 1985 South African President P.W. Botha initiated a series of meetings with Mandela, with Kobie Coetsee as his representative. The negotiations led to a meeting between Mandela and Botha in 1989, and Mandela’s release seemed certain. FW de Klerk became President in 1989, lifted the ban on the ANC and promised an end to apartheid and white rule. Mandela was then released in 1990.
There is a very interesting conversation with Coetsee here. It’s worth your time.
Mandela became President in 1994 and served until 1999. His legacy is the end of apartheid and white rule but it would be very wrong to believe South Africa’s problems are over. What came of those changes?
South Africa is a mess.
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa — Nelson Mandela didn’t coin the term “Rainbow Nation” or the phrase “Proudly South African.” But the optimism, determination and compassion of the country at its best owed everything to him.
In recent years, however, South Africa under the leadership of the African National Congress that Mandela loved is often quite different — shoddy, corrupt and incompetent. In short, depressingly like other African countries betrayed by liberation movements.
While life has gradually improved for many, problems once attributed to apartheid stubbornly remain. Nearly two decades after the ANC took power, poor education and healthcare systems still hold back many blacks. The police, no longer dominated by whites, are still brutal. Government departments still treat people with callous disregard.
Despite the existence of a powerful black elite and the growth of a modest black middle class, 40% of the population gets by on less than $40 a month per family member. Whites still earn six times more than blacks. And some analysts say the absolute electoral dominance of the ANC weakens South Africa’s democracy.
The ANC rules, but it doesn’t seem to care.
“We’ve been betrayed by our brothers and sisters,” said Sibusiso Zikode, spokesman for a grass-roots organization of shack-dwellers. “There’s no difference from the apartheid government. It’s a question of human dignity. Treat me as a human being.
“While I’m waiting 20 years for a house, give me water,” he said. “Why would I not get water?”
Bongisisa Gwiliza, a laborer who lives in a shantytown outside Rustenburg, said South Africa’s new leaders did not keep their promises to narrow the gap between rich and poor.
“There’s no sanitation. The place is so dirty,” he said. “The shacks have got holes. When it rains, it floods. There’s a lot of rain coming in. When there’s wind, there’s a lot of wind coming in, and it’s very cold.”
Crime is rampant.
The levels of extreme violence and crime remain high, particularly crime against women. In several cases this year, teenage girls were raped, mutilated and left to die.
During the apartheid years, South Africans living in black townships feared and loathed the police force that the white minority government used as a tool of oppression. When police killed 34 protesting miners outside Johannesburg in 2012, the echo of apartheid-era police brutality shocked the nation.
In early 2013, several police were charged with murder in the death of a Mozambican taxi driver, who was handcuffed to a police car, dragged hundreds of yards along a road and beaten, in an incident caught on cellphone video. The victim died that night of horrific injuries.
Statistics from the independent police watchdog group suggest those incidents are the tip of the iceberg, with 720 deaths in police custody reported in 2011-12. Analysts are uncertain why South Africa’s police force remains so violent. Some blame the policies of former chief Bheki Cele, who sought more powers to deal with heavily armed gangs in a country with one of the globe’s highest rates of violent crime.
Anti-white violence has reached epidemic proportions:
Thousands of white people in South Africa are subjected to atrocious acts of racist violence by black population while South African authorities and media keep silent and reticent. Somehow, the same media stirs tumult over human rights when it comes to the Sahara conflict, usually accusing Morocco of human rights abuse and lobbying against its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
“If your house is made of glass, don’t pelt others with stone.” It seems that South Africa doesn’t apply this golden rule when it goes blind to the increasing ‘black on white’ violence and deaf to the cries of hundreds of children, women, and men killed, tortured or raped by the black people.
It’s blatantly hypocritical of the South African government to claim it is defending the rights of the Sahroui people while human rights have been continuously abused since 1994, when the National African Congress took over government of South Africa. Maintaining the apartheid practices at home and claiming the defense of human rights abroad is simply a double standards and hypocritical approach.
Since the eve of 2013, 230 ‘black on white’ attacks were reported on the South African soil according to CNNiReport. 97 were murdered, 17 women and 2 men were raped usually by a whole gang, 3 people were left with permanent brain damage and one person paralyzed.
There were also 102 farm attacks during which 30 people were murdered. Morocco World News has obtained a detailed list of 55 white women murdered by unknown black males since 15 May 2012 to date in South Africa. This appalling genocide, white South Africans claim, has been going on for the past 20 years while the world kept quiet and enjoyed the show.
It goes largely ignored by the media. More can be seen here.
The problems in South Africa are exacerbated by the election of two successive buffoons:
Mbeki denied the link between HIV and AIDS, and was slow to distribute life-saving antiretroviral drugs. AIDS activists had to take his government to court to force the distribution of medication to prevent mother-to-child transmission of the HIV virus.
And Mandela’s ringing moral authority stood in sharp contrast to Zuma, who has battled corruption charges and questions about his personal behavior. He was acquitted of rape in 2006, but was criticized for having unprotected sex with an HIV-positive family friend about half his age.
Zuma once claimed that he could reduce his chances of contracting AIDS following engaging in unprotected sex with an HIV positive woman by taking a shower.
Zuma has done well for himself as President.
A newspaper investigation found that Zuma’s family had extensive high-level corporate ties and dozens of their own businesses, many of which were established after Zuma became leader of the ANC in 2007.
Needing an enemy as a distraction from the woes he helped create (does that sound familiar?), Zuma assures South Africa that he will seize the economy away from white males:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlxsBYnJErQ[/youtube]
In Zimbabwe, Mugabe did much the same thing to disastrous results.
Here Zuma sings a song about killing Boers (white farmers)
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlxsBYnJErQ[/youtube]
To his credit, Mandela dabbled in capitalism and sought foreign investment but his successors have only made things worse:
When he became South Africa’s first black president after winning the nation’s first multi-race elections in 1994, Mandela actively wooed foreign investors. Instead of nationalizing companies, he persuaded the ANC to move away from its socialist ethos and embrace a free and open economy, which fueled South Africa’s economic growth for years.
Today, however, that legacy is under fire. Unemployment remains at nearly 25 percent; whites on average earn six times more than their black counterparts. The ANC youth wing has lobbied hard for the nationalization of banks and mines; according to the Municipal IQ, a Johannesburg-based research group, last year there were a record 173 protests, many of them violent, over a lack of housing, jobs, and basic services. According to World Bank statistics, South Africa remains one of the world’s most economically unequal societies.
A couple of other observations. A man named Tony Hollingsworth claims to be the person who transformed Mandela from terrorist to beloved icon.
Hollingsworth, now 55, envisaged a star-studded concert that would transform Mandela from outlaw to icon in the public’s mind, and in turn press governments adopt a more accommodating stance.
He approached Archbishop Trevor Huddleston, president of the British Anti-Apartheid Movement, to pitch his musical strategy.
“I told Trevor that the African National Congress and the anti-apartheid movement had reached their glass ceiling; they couldn’t go further.”
“Everything you are doing is ‘anti’, you are protesting on the streets, but it will remain in that space. Many people will agree, but you will not appeal them.”
“Mandela and the movement should be seen as something positive, confident, something you would like to be in your living room with.”
While Hollingsworth dealt with artists, Mike Terry — head of the movement in London — dealt with the ANC and the sceptics in the anti-apartheid movement.
And there were many, including Mandela himself, who asked several times that the struggle not be about him.
Many others insisted the focus remain on sanctions against the apartheid regime.
“A lot of people were criticising me for sanitising it,” Hollingsworth remembered.
Eventually Terry convinced the ANC and Hollingsworth convinced Simple Minds, Dire Straits, Sting, George Michael, The Eurythmics, Eric Clapton, Whitney Houston and Stevie Wonder into the 83-artist line up.
With that musical firepower came contracts for a more than 11 hour broadcast.
“We signed with the entertainment department of television (stations). And when the head of the department got home and watched on his channel that they were calling Mandela a terrorist, they called straight to the news section to say, don’t call this man a terrorist, we just signed 11 hours of broadcasting for a tribute about him.”
“This is how we turned Mandela from a black terrorist into a black leader.”
In a mystifying act, Mandela is seen in 2006 participating in a song calling for the killing of whites:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiePbTcAfY[/youtube]
FYI- it was George W. Bush who removed Mandela from the Terror Watch list.
Nelson Mandela lived two quite different lives. One of violence and death and one of peace. His violent past has been almost totally purged by the media. His greatest achievements came through peace. Mandela could have spent more time being as critical of his successors as he was of the United States. Who was better off being in South Africa? Know anyone who wants to live there? While Mandela is to be admired for the good he did, it is important not to sanitize his life:
From their perspective, Mandela’s critics were right to distrust him. They called him a “terrorist” because he had waged armed resistance to apartheid. They called him a “communist” because the Soviet Union was the ANC’s chief external benefactor and the South African Communist Party was among its closest domestic allies. More fundamentally, what Mandela’s American detractors understood is that he considered himself an opponent, not an ally, of American power. And that’s exactly what Mandela’s American admirers must remember now.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 40 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 45 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter who is in the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@DrJohn: Boy, you are one mean nasty guy.
Pathetic, really.
You seem to forget the percentage of terror reigned upon Loyalists was far greater that the terror reigned upon this who had supported the use of violence, rape and murder against people because they were black.
But, you are a doctor, an author of over 70 studies.
Undoubtably brilliant.
Like Shockley and Chomsky.
@PhillipMarlowe:
I forgot nothing, Phil, but thanks.
You left wing weirdos really are intolerant of the return fire. You love to throw epithets around but get your panties in a twist when they are returned in kind and you do as Tom does- ignore the facts.
I showed you how ugly you liberals really are and I’m the nasty guy.
But I have come to know that that is how liberals operate. It’s all they know.
@Tom:
Washington didn’t attack soft targets. The MK did.
@Tom:
He was a terrorist. There is no question about it. It is that truth which you cannot accept. I did not say he IS a terrorist. I said he was a terrorist.
LA Times.
And as I said, his greatest work came when he embraced peace and left the hate behind. Mandela wrote:
I included that, not you.
@DrJohn:
You label him a terrorist and site an LA Times article that doesn’t include that word at all. Or are you stating that advocating the use of force to achieve a political means is synonymous with terrorism? If that’s the case, then by your definition, George Washington certainly is a terrorist. But of course you don’t mean that. You only mean Mandela is a terrorist. You just can’t prove it. So you cite an article that has nothing to do with your statement and hope it sticks, because – let’s be honest – your readers generally don’t care about annoying little facts, they’re here for the red meat. It’s your typical misdirection, your typical playing loose with facts, your typical dishonesty. But if you ever want to actually muster factual proof for something you’ve written, please feel free. There’s always a first.
So now that we’ve dispatched that annoying, paper-thin veneer of “factual reporting”, are we really going to continue with the pretext that this is anything more than another in your series of posts designed to allow your readers to vent about about their perceptions of black on white violence lurking around every corner?
@DrJohn:
Except the question of factual proof that he ever personally ordered or carried out a terrorist act. Except for the proof that the ANC was a terrorist organization, rather than freedom fighters. Except for placing the goals and actions of the black freedom fighters within an honest historical perspective of what was happening in South Africa for decades to them at the hands of a brutal regime that imprisoned, tortured and murdered thousands of people because of their race. Just a few loose ends, no doubt.
@Tom:
How is it you can be so utterly refractory to facts?
Washington didn’t hit soft targets. Mandela’s MK did. Winnie’s group’s treatment of blacks considered collaborators was atrocious, but black on black violence escapes liberals as so many things do.
And it’s pretty obvious that you read none of the citations. There is an elite black class in South Africa that rules over the rest. They’re not making the lives of the rest any better.
You never, ever use facts for your arguments. You just spit.
@Tom:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umkhonto_we_Sizwe
http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/on-this-day/June/Nelson-Mandela-Sentenced-to-Life-in-Prison.html
@Tom:
Yeah, he was a terrorist, in the same vain the American Revolutionaries were terrorists. Back in the day, it was unheard of to target officers in the field, we took out British officers all the time. We fought at times in terms the British believed to be barbaric. We used privateers to take British ships……we were considered terrorists. But we look back at history and see that we were fighting for freedom. Mandela was fighting for freedom. At the time, the communists were the only people that backed Mandela and the ANC. Upon his release from prison, Mandela rejected communism and forgave everyone. He was a great man and we need more like him.
@Aqua:
So you are equating the targeting of military officers, who were on the battlefield, with the willful slaughter of civilians? That’s quite a stretch, isn’t it?
Surely you jest. Mandela was, and remained, Communist to the core who embraced not only Arafat, but Castro and every Communist leader in Europe.
Great men, Aqua, leave their countries in better shape with greater freedom for all citizens. So before you try to rewrite history, as was done with Che Guevera and Fidel Castro, and bestow sainthood on Mandela, I suggest you look at the disaster that is South Africa.
Mandela may have turned from violence but he never turned from Communism.
@Tom: 40
So it wasn’t slavery and it was okay since it was only a small number? Peabrain logic
@Aqua:
Agree with everything you wrote, although I think the word “terrorist” carries a pejorative connotation that isn’t deserved in the cases of people like Washington or Mandela. DrJohn obviously has two different defintions, based on whether he likes the person or not. Military (or para-military) actions should be analyzed in their contexts and weighed against reasonable alternatives.
Is there a generally understood political injustice or threat being perpetrated upon a recognized group of people by another group?
Has the group in power used violence or the threat of violence to maintain the power dynamic?
Is the injustice and/or threat overwhelming or existential in nature?
Is the use of force entirely in the cause of a well-defined political goal remedying the injustice?
Are there reasonable non-violent political alternatives?
If the answer to all those questions are “Yes”, “Yes”, “Yes”, “Yes”, No”, I can’t consider that leader a terrorist in the popular sense. People who would fall into this ‘non-terrorist” category include Mandela, Washington, Sitting Bull. People who would fail the test: Bin Ladin, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Timothy McVeigh. I refuse to place those individuals in the same category.
@Redteam:
No, peabrained logic is using a small number of black slave owners born into a slave owning society as some sort of justification for enslaving millions of black people.
@DrJohn: You really are off the charts here, Dr. John.
You have this weird sexual fetish, feeling the need to suppress your feelings and channel them into calling your opponents women with your “panties” line. As though calling a man a woman is intelligent or insightful.
And you accuse “liberals” of hateful speech.
From what you write, one would think Nelson Mandela firebombed cities in Japan and Germany.
Violence is K only when your side does it.
If the other side retaliates, or even just raise their arm to deflect your blow, they are evil terrorists.
I saunter over to FloppingAces to see how demented some people get. It’s like visiting my former student at prison.
@retire05: @DrJohn:
The first target of the campaign was an electricity sub-station. Umkhonto we Sizwe undertook other acts of sabotage in the next eighteen months. The government alleged more acts of sabotage had been carried out and at the Rivonia trial the accused would be charged with 193 acts of sabotage in total.[7] The sabotage included attacks on government posts, machines, power facilities and crop burning.[5]
Sound military policy, like in Vietnam.
“A critical, independent and investigative press is the lifeblood of any democracy. The press must be free from state interference. It must have the economic strength to stand up to the blandishments of government officials. It must have sufficient independence from vested interests to be bold and inquiring without fear or favor. It must enjoy the protection of the constitution, so that it can protect our rights as citizens.”
“If there is a country that has committed unspeakable atrocities in the world, it is the United States of America. They don’t care for human beings.”
“The current world financial crisis also starkly reminds us that many of the concepts that guided our sense of how the world and its affairs are best ordered, have suddenly been shown to be wanting.”
“Gandhi rejects the Adam Smith notion of human nature as motivated by self-interest and brute needs and returns us to our spiritual dimension with its impulses for nonviolence, justice and equality. He exposes the fallacy of the claim that everyone can be rich and successful provided they work hard. He points to the millions who work themselves to the bone and still remain hungry.”
“There is no doubt that the United States now feels that they are the only superpower in the world and they can do what they like.”
“It is said that no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones.”
“Overcoming poverty is not a task of charity, it is an act of justice. Like Slavery and Apartheid, poverty is not natural. It is man-made and it can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings. Sometimes it falls on a generation to be great. YOU can be that great generation. Let your greatness blossom.”
“We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.”
“No single person can liberate a country. You can only liberate a country if you act as a collective.”
“If the United States of America or Britain is having elections, they don’t ask for observers from Africa or from Asia. But when we have elections, they want observers.”
“When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in, he has no choice but to become an outlaw.”
On Gandhi: “From his understanding of wealth and poverty came his understanding of labor and capital, which led him to the solution of trusteeship based on the belief that there is no private ownership of capital; it is given in trust for redistribution and equalization. Similarly, while recognizing differential aptitudes and talents, he holds that these are gifts from God to be used for the collective good.”
Source: en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nelson_Mandela
@PhillipMarlowe:
Not true. I have little doubt you wear panties, especially given your “liberal” use of straw men. And this is but another distraction from the topic.
I made no comparisons or contrasts to others. You did. And there is no hate speech like liberal hate speech. And there is no racism like liberal racism. And absolutely no one is more full of sh*t.
@Tom:
recall that it was the brother blacks in Africa that enslaved them and sold them. They were put into slavery by their own race and brothers. Who gets the credit for inventing and enslaving the black race? The blacks themselves.
@PhillipMarlowe:
Your former students ended up in prison? what were you teaching them? Shoplifting? or armed robbery?
@PhillipMarlowe:
Ah, so that explains why we don’t have a critical, independent and investigative press, because we are not a democracy,but a Republic, I wondered how that came about
@retire05:
Not for the time. During the revolutionary war, things were a little different and even wars were fought with gentleman’s rules. We can certainly move forward to the Civil War and see atrocities against civilians. You have to look no further than William Sherman.
Yet he had the power to completely reform South African politics, set up a Politburo, and proclaim himself supreme leader for life. He did not. He even made de Klerk a deputy president. I’m not saying I agreed with his politics, but I certainly agreed with his principles.
Before he was president, no black person was truly free, they were second class citizens. That is not the case today. Now we can certainly argue about his economic policies for the country, but you can’t argue about the fact that people are freer. What they choose to do with that freedom is up to them.
@Aqua: Yet he had the power to completely reform South African politics, set up a Politburo, and proclaim himself supreme leader for live. He did not. He certainly had the power to make things ‘better’, he did not. While blacks may be ‘freer’, and that is a stretch, they don’t have a pot to piss in.
You admit he was a terrorist, how do you become a non-terrorist?
@Tom:
Explain to the nice people here why it was called the “slave trade” with emphasis on the participants.
Thank you in advance.
@Redteam: RedTeam, you are such a sweetheart.
Go back and read, “student”, just one.
But there was another kid who was taken in for 1st degree. But he didn’t learn that from me, but rather from his equally delinquent father who came up to the school believing his boy’s tale that I kicked him in the butt.
As Harry Callahan said, “You can tell I didn’t touch him.” “He looks too damn good.”
@DrJohn: Still stuck on sex, Dr. John?
Live up to your name and come over to 14th Street NW Washington DC.
In the meantime, what’s an address for you in order that I can send you a Victoria’s Secret thong for you to cream on.
@PhillipMarlowe:
The one who got caught.
@PhillipMarlowe: ,
You’re big on beating up school kids are you? And your student learned from you and ended up in prison? Great role model!!!!
@Aqua:
Really? Then perhaps you should do a little more studying of the Revolutionary War. Banastre Tarleton was not called “Bloody Ban” for no reason, while his fellow Loyalist/British military comrades turned their backs toward, and gave silent approval to, what he did.
Including his “principal” of turning his back on what was happening, the rapes, the murders, the child rapes, in his own nation where he had been elevated to status of saint? To think that Nelson Mandela held no power or influence after he left office is to deny reality. Mandela was an educated man, yet the level of education provided to his people is a national shame. Women, in South Africa, have a greater chance of being raped than they do of learning how to read. The number of children under seven that are raped because South Africans believe that by having sex with a child they will be cured of AIDS shows only how little success Mandela had in dragging that country out of the first century.
No, now, still living in the first century, those same black people who were “second class” citizens, are committing genocide against the Afrikaners. If freeing blacks from oppression only to allow them to slaughter others is your idea of progress, well, I guess we will never agree.
@Redteam:
@DrJohn:
Oh, dear.
I was severely mistaken.
I thought this place was a hangout for unrepentant racists, homophobes, and the right wing tin hat brigade.
From this, I take it that you guys (not so sure on the former gals) are dumb. I have this vision of the two of you snickering and ha-ha-ing like Beavis and Butthead.
Well, there’s a mass tomorrow night for the Feast of The Immaculate Conception, as well as a penance service on Wednesday. I’ll place the two of you as well as retiredfromwhat? in my intentions, as well as your children and spouses.
Tom, Aqua,
it’s a lost cause unless the Lord works a miracle.
@retire05: retired, under you?Reagan/Thatcher, they would never be free.
unless they proved their worthiness.
@PhillipMarlowe: Thank you!
@PhillipMarlowe:
Don’t know how much God listens to apostates, but then, you’re free to try. I would suggest you beg forgiveness for your own sins, such as being so hateful toward others, as you constantly are. No doubt you are a cafeteria Catholic, if in fact, you are really Catholic. In the Democrat party, there are no other kind.
Nope, Phillip, there is always hope that you will repent and be forgiven. A tall task, I admit, but with the Lord, all things are possible.
@retire05: Hateful to others?
No, not really.
You’re projecting, retired.
As for the “cafeteria” attack, you would had a conniption at Mass this morning when the Franciscan priest complimented Nelson Mandela.
No doubt you would have stoned King David.
@DrJohn: You are welcome, Dr. John.
I’d wear that carpet out praying for you, but I can’t kneel anymore.
@retire05: Also, if you wish to cast one as hateful, pick up Redteam.
But you failure to speak to his apostasy shows more than you think it does.
@PhillipMarlowe:
And you’re in denial.
What does the priest’s order have to do with you being a cafeteria Catholic? Oh, that’s right, not one damn thing.
Again, you probably should ask forgiveness for slamming others with your unfounded slurs. Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Now, are you telling us that you support traditional marriage and are against abortion, as a Catholic, that is?
@PhillipMarlowe:
Why? Is that your old shell game? Look over there, not over here. Your “Judge others and ignore me” mentality?
I will address Redteam when I choose to, not when you tell me to. You also seem to be guilty of the sin of arrogance.
@PhillipMarlowe:
Phillip, why do you think Tom and Aqua are a lost cause. God forgives anyone.
@PhillipMarlowe:
You’re giving up on the muslims?
reddie and retirey:
USCCB President Mourns Death Of Nelson Mandela, Notes Passing Of Icon, Era
December 6, 2013
WASHINGTON—Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz, said the death of Nelson Mandela marked the passing of an era and an icon, Dec. 6, the day after the South African and world leader died in his homeland.
His statement follows.
Christians, people of faith and all people of good will mourn the news of Nelson Mandela’s death, the passing of an icon and an era.
In his struggle against apartheid rule, Nelson Mandela was a light for peace and equality in his country and for the whole world. His years of imprisonment exemplified the suffering experienced by so many who seek justice. As president of South Africa, Mandela sought to undo the structures that marginalized and impoverished people – work Pope Francis is now challenging the entire world to imitate.
The prayers of the bishops of the United States are with the Mandela family and with the people, the Church and the bishops of South Africa. We thank God for his brave witness and for all men and women who work against injustice and seek, in the words of Pope John XXIII, “to make the human sojourn on earth less sad.”
#####
Redteam says:89
@PhillipMarlowe:
Tom, Aqua,
it’s a lost cause unless the Lord works a miracle.
Phillip, why do you think Tom and Aqua are a lost cause. God forgives anyone.
Oh boy, again.
You don’t read very well. In the language of this site, that makes you a public school graduate.
As Tom and Aqua recognise, trying to present facts and reason with you is a lost cause
@PhillipMarlowe:
I’d wear that carpet out praying for you, but I can’t kneel anymore.
You’re giving up on the muslims?
It would take a lot of praying, in this case being done while kneeing on the carpet at church.
@retire05: Which means never. Selected outrage, typical.
@PhillipMarlowe:
So when are you going to answer my questions? Do you support traditional marriage and oppose abortion, or are you just a cafeteria Catholic?
@PhillipMarlowe: Same old song and dance, I’ll bet you’re still two-stepping to his tune.
yes, the opposite of the rejoicing they do when they know someone is going to heaven to spend eternity with their God. Yes they mourn his passing because they know he is beyond redemption and will spend eternity in hell, where he should be. (not that I’m passing judgment, just an observation)
Netanyahu, Peres mourn the loss of Mandela, ‘a freedom fighter who opposed violence’
The Jerusalem Post ^ | 12/6/2013 | Jpost.com staff
Posted on December 7, 2013 at 1:17:17 AM EST by Colonel Kangaroo
Israeli leaders mourned the loss of former South African president Nelson Mandela, who died on Thursday evening.
Mandela was “the father of his nation, a man of vision, a freedom fighter who opposed violence,” Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu wrote on his Facebook page late Thursday night.
“He posed as a personal example to his people in the many years he spent in jail, and never became haughty,” Netanyahu wrote. “He worked to heal the tears in South African society and succeeded with his personality to prevent outbreaks of racial hatred.”
“He will be remembered as the father of the new South Africa and as a highly important moral leader,” the prime minister concluded.
President Shimon Peres, who met the South African leader when he visited Israel in 1999, also eulogized Mandela.
“The world has lost a venerable leader who changed the path of history,” Peres said.
“Nelson Mandela fought for human rights and left his mark on the war against discrimination and racism,” the president added. “He was a strong proponent of democracy, a valued arbitrator, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and above everything he was a builder of bridges of peace and dialogue.”
“Mandela’s legacy to his people and to the world will remain etched in the pages of history and in the hearts of all of those whose lives he touched, and who will remember him forever,” Peres concluded.
Washington D.C., Dec 7, 2013 / 01:14 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Church leaders in the United States offered prayers for the late Nelson Mandela
Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, Archbishop of New York, called Mandela “a hero to the world.”
“His bravery in defending human rights against the great evil of apartheid made him a symbol of courage and dignity, as well as an inspiration to people everywhere.”
He noted that Bl. John Paul II, in his visit to South Africa, called Mandela “a silent and suffering ‘witness’” of his people’s “yearning for true liberation.” The Pope had said Mandela had to “shoulder the burden of inspiring and challenging everyone to succeed in the task of national reconciliation and reconstruction.”
Carolyn Woo, president of Catholic Relief Services, said the U.S.-based international relief agency mourns Mandela’s passing, calling him “a champion in the struggle for justice and equality for all.”
“His life inspires all of us to re-dedicate ourselves to helping the oppressed find their voice and their way to lives of meaning and dignity. His personal example of forgiveness and non-violence will challenge us to work for peace and reconciliation even in the midst of deep conflict.”
Mandela, who served as South Africa’s president from 1994 to 1999, died Dec. 5 at the age of 95 of a lung infection. The former prisoner won world recognition for opposing the oppressive racial segregation of the South African government’s apartheid policy.
Mandela had been a campaigner against apartheid since 1952, when he organized protests across South Africa against the policy. He was arrested on treason charges in 1956, and acquitted after a five-year trial. He then secretly sought help from other African nations and in England.
After the South African government banned the party in 1960, the movement against apartheid became an armed struggle led by Mandela. In 1962 he was sentenced to five years in jail for inciting a strike and for leaving the country without a passport. Additional charges of sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government in 1964 led to a sentence of 27 years behind bars.
@PhillipMarlowe:
then why are you trying? You’re the one that said Tom and Aqua were a lost cause, I was just agreeing.
@PhillipMarlowe:
church, not mosque? then you really did give up on the muslims.
Mandela was ever-mindful of church role in South Africans’ struggle | National Catholic Reporter
Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in prison to emerge an international icon — and become the first black president of a democratically elected government in South Africa. He died Thursday at his home in Johannesburg at age 95.
The role played by the clergy in the creation of a “new” South Africa — and Mandela’s innate faith in God — remains an untold, yet pivotal, chapter in his story. In his declining years, presidents and kings came to pay homage. In life, it was to churchmen he turned for advice.
When Mandela was released from prison Feb. 11, 1990, the white minority government was well aware that the only way forward would be a negotiated dispensation that would ensure equal rights for all.
For South Africans, fueled by generations of racial division and mistrust, the task ahead was formidable. But when Mandela stood outside Cape Town City Hall to address the thousands who had come to see him on the day of his release, his message was not one of anger or revenge, but of reconciliation and peace.
“Today the majority of South Africans, black and white, recognize that apartheid has no future. It has to be ended by our own decisive mass action in order to build peace and security,” he told the jubilant crowds.
The negotiations were not destined to be peaceful. Almost from the start, violence flared up between the Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) and the mainly Zulu Inkatha Freedom Party with suspicions of a third force sponsored by the white minority government at work.
In one of the worst cases, on the night of Jan. 12, 1991, 39 people were killed in Sebokeng outside Johannesburg. There was trouble in 27 townships around South Africa in the next few years, leaving hundreds dead.
But it was the assassination of Chris Hani, leader of the South African Communist Party, by white right-wingers that brought the country to the brink of civil war. Mandela saved the situation.
In a televised interview, he said he was reaching out to every South African, black and white, from the very depths of his being.
“Our grief is tearing us apart. … What has happened is a national tragedy that has touched millions across the political and color divide,” he told the nation.
Then, just as progress was being made, another problem arose, and the talks stalled again. This time, the proposed Truth and Reconciliation Commission, aimed at dealing with apartheid-era human rights violations, was the stumbling block.
The National Party government wanted the same blanket amnesty given the ANC — with a guarantee of a general amnesty written into the interim constitution. Neither then-President F.W. de Klerk nor Mandela were ready to back down. The day was saved by the clergy.
The Franciscan archbishop of Durban, Wilfrid Napier, later to be cardinal, remembers there was a genuine fear that violence would erupt once again.
“We were afraid that if the holdup was not sorted out quickly, the fighting and the killing would start all over,” Napier recalled. “So we approached de Klerk and Mandela and told them we knew they were having difficulty. Could we meet privately?”
The men agreed. After an afternoon with the churchmen, consensus was reached. De Klerk and Mandela decided to appear on television within 24 hours to tell the country how the problem would be solved. The nation could breathe again.