RIP Nelson Mandela

[GDS_Starfury]

^^^  exactly.

[Gusington]

I have to be honest I did not know a lot about Mandela's past. I have seen a lot of comments on what he had done earlier in life that I had never seen before.

[LongBlade]

I have to be honest I did not know a lot about Mandela's past. I have seen a lot of comments on what he had done earlier in life that I had never seen before.

I knew he took up arms. I am unclear as to what terrorist acts he committed.

[Dolan50]

3 Things You Didn't (Want To) Know About Nelson Mandela.
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-nelson-mandela/

The hero of the anti-apartheid struggle was not the saint we want him to be.

The image of Nelson Mandela as a selfless, humble, freedom fighter turned cheerful, kindly old man, is well established in the West. If there is any international leader on whom we can universally heap praise it is surely he. But get past the halo we've placed on him without his permission, and Nelson Mandela had more than a few flaws which deserve attention.

He signed off on the deaths of innocent people, lots of them

Nelson Mandela was the head of UmKhonto we Sizwe, (MK), the terrorist wing of the ANC and South African Communist Party. At his trial, he had pleaded guilty to 156 acts of public violence including mobilising terrorist bombing campaigns, which planted bombs in public places, including the Johannesburg railway station. Many innocent people, including women and children, were killed by Nelson Mandela's MK terrorists. Here are some highlights

-Church Street West, Pretoria, on the 20 May 1983

-Amanzimtoti Shopping complex KZN, 23 December 1985

-Krugersdorp Magistrate's Court, 17 March 1988

-Durban Pick 'n Pay shopping complex, 1 September 1986

-Pretoria Sterland movie complex 16 April 1988 – limpet mine killed ANC terrorist M O Maponya instead

-Johannesburg Magistrate's Court, 20 May 1987

-Roodepoort Standard Bank 3 June, 1988

Tellingly, not only did Mandela refuse to renounce violence, Amnesty refused to take his case stating "[the] movement recorded that it could not give the name of 'Prisoner of Conscience' to anyone associated with violence, even though as in 'conventional warfare' a degree of restraint may be exercised."

As in most wars-One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter would probably be more appropriate.

[GDS_Starfury]

oh FFS thats not what he went to prison for.
this is:

• One count under the South African Suppression of Communism Act No. 44 of 1950, charging that the accused committed acts calculated to further the achievement of the objective of communism;

• One count of contravening the South African Criminal Law Act (1953), which prohibits any person from soliciting or receiving any money or articles for the purpose of achieving organized defiance of laws and country; and

• Two counts of sabotage, committing or aiding or procuring the commission of the following acts:

1) The further recruitment of persons for instruction and training, both within and outside the Republic of South Africa, in:

(a) the preparation, manufacture and use of explosives—for the purpose of committing acts of violence and destruction in the aforesaid Republic, (the preparation and manufacture of explosives, according to evidence submitted, included 210,000 hand grenades, 48,000 anti-personnel mines, 1,500 time devices, 144 tons of ammonium nitrate, 21.6 tons of aluminum powder and a ton of black powder);

(b) the art of warfare, including guerrilla warfare, and military training generally for the purpose in the aforesaid Republic;

(ii) Further acts of violence and destruction, (this includes 193 counts of terrorism committed between 1961 and 1963);

(iii) Acts of guerrilla warfare in the aforesaid Republic;

(iv) Acts of assistance to military units of foreign countries when involving the aforesaid Republic;

(v) Acts of participation in a violent revolution in the aforesaid Republic, whereby the accused, injured, damaged, destroyed, rendered useless or unserviceable, put out of action, obstructed, with or endangered:

(a) the health or safety of the public;
(b) the maintenance of law and order;

(c) the supply and distribution of light, power or fuel;
(d) postal, telephone or telegraph installations;
(e) the free movement of traffic on land; and
(f) the property, movable or immovable, of other persons or of the state.

Source: The State v. Nelson Mandela et al, Supreme Court of South Africa, Transvaal Provincial Division, 1963-1964, Indictment.

[Dolan50]

I didn't state that was his sole reason for going to prison.
Do I think He qualified as a terrorist -Yes!

[GDS_Starfury]

I know you did state that.  Ive been seeing tons of crap on fb and its been annoying as hell.

[LongBlade]

There is no excuse for terrorism.

I will say that I choose to focus on what he did - and did not do - after his release from prison.

After 27 years in what was effectively solitary confinement he was released.

He was given the reins to lead the government and the transition to peaceful, integrated democracy.

Almost every other regime on the planet would have (and has) descended into horrible civil war.

Instead he guided South Africa to peace.

That isn't to say his past wasn't bad.

But it is to say that the bloodbath that could have followed after his release would have made his past actions before imprisonment a drop in the ocean.

I choose to see him not for the evil young man he was, but for the great man that he became. Because he had a choice, and made the better, more difficult, and peaceful choice.

Do not forget that.

[Smuckatelli]

Do not forget that.

LB, Havel didn't resort to terrorism.

Mandela's historical time frame matches Martin Luther King (he also didn't resort to terrorism).........major difference between those two men. The Black Panthers used the same tactics that Mandela used back in that time period.

The media and Hollywood has put Mandela on a pedestal that he should not be on. It could have been over guilt feelings with our Jim Crow Laws. That really doesn't make a difference, terrorist target buildings, infrastructure, military & police forces......usually innocent civilians get killed in the process.

The President actually ordered the Flags to fly at half mast for Mandela. 

[LongBlade]

Do not forget that.

LB, Havel didn't resort to terrorism.

I will submit that Czechoslovakia was more tightly controlled than South Africa, and therefore an armed resistance was impossible, had he so wished to exercise the option. See Hungarian uprising for further detail.

[Smuckatelli]

Do not forget that.

LB, Havel didn't resort to terrorism.

I will submit that Czechoslovakia was more tightly controlled than South Africa, and therefore an armed resistance was impossible, had he so wished to exercise the option. See Hungarian uprising for further detail.

Why go to Hungary?

Why not go to the Prague spring?

1968 is when the country became tightly controlled. BTW, Havel never wished to exercise that option that is the major difference between Mandela, Havel, & King.

[Keunert]

I have to say I am surprised about the high morale ground here. i hope we all mourn as much about all innocent killed kids and women in every conflict. i hope we despise all the collateral damage done and all innocents that died miles away from any battlefield by drone attacks or cruise missiles. i remember completely different stances when it came to killed kids taped on video and published by some traitors.

Those terrorist acts: they happened while Mandela was in jail. Did he have the means to plan these from jail? or was he taking responsibility for the armed conflict? after all they offered him to go out just in those years? (mid 80's)

[GDS_Starfury]

the ones I posted were the charges from his trial before he was in jail.

[Keunert]

South Africa could have had a Milosevic type of leader. Mandela was more like Tito: a resistance fighter that turned civil once he reached power.

[LongBlade]

South Africa could have had a Milosevic type of leader. Mandela was more like Tito: a resistance fighter that turned civil once he reached power.

That is an interesting comparison. You are probably right.