How has South Africa fared after apartheid?

Mar 2012
1,579
Following the breeze
#41
Hi there aggienation :) .

To quote from the very source which you provided:
Necklacing was reserved not for the white men who supported the apartheid system, but those deemed as traitors to the black community.
The key word there being "Community". Meaning that these acts were carried out by the community themselves and not the ANC or MK.

Not to mention that all of this was limited to a small part of the country within the community of Soweto, which is a region in Gauteng province.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2016
8,981
USA
#42
Hi there aggienation :) .

To quote from the very source which you provided:


The key word there being "Community". Meaning that these acts were carried out by the community themselves and not the ANC or MK.

Not to mention that all of this was limited to a small part of the country within the community of Soweto, which is a region in Gauteng province.
So blacks aren't part of a community? You understand that community includes civilian?

If Mandella's terror group was murdering civilians and not military using means designed clearly as a form of terrorism, then it means your previous statement was incorrect, that the other poster's statement was correct, that Mandella was the leader of a terrorist group.

"MK did not go after civilian targets, as you will notice from my above statement to Shtajerc"

Are the human beings that were executed by a tired filled with gasoline wrapped around their necks and then lit on fire for a gruesome minutes long death civilians? Yes or no?

What about these bombings perpetrated by MK?

Are you really sure you can call out other individuals for their lack of knowledge? Because as it appears, you're either ignorant of these matters or lying by omission to distort the historical record of what actually happened, which implies not a small bias.

Which is it?
 
Mar 2012
1,579
Following the breeze
#43
So blacks aren't part of a community? You understand that community includes civilian?

If Mandella's terror group was murdering civilians and not military using means designed clearly as a form of terrorism, then it means your previous statement was incorrect, that the other poster's statement was correct, that Mandella was the leader of a terrorist group.

"MK did not go after civilian targets, as you will notice from my above statement to Shtajerc"
Aggienation I think that you might need to read what Shtajerc said and how I responded again, because you seem to have completely misunderstood the point.

MK/uMkhonto weSizwe was an organisation, a branch of the ANC established to go after military and infrastructural target, not civilians.

The Necklacing incidences which you keep referring to were conducted by people, as in normal everyday civilians. They were not "operations" authorized and conducted by uMkhonto weSizwe. Therefore you can not use the Necklacing incidents as proof that MK attacked civilians.



Are the human beings that were executed by a tired filled with gasoline wrapped around their necks and then lit on fire for a gruesome minutes long death civilians? Yes or no?
This was not done by MK. It was done by common civilians and had nothing to do with MK.

In fact the source which you provided goes the extra mile of saying the Nelson Mandela and other members of the ANC actually directly opposed these acts of "Necklacing".

To quote from your source:
Nelson Mandela’s party, the African National Congress, officially opposed burning people alive.

Desmond Tutu, in particular, was passionate about it. A few days before Maki Skosana was burned alive, he physically fought off a whole mob to keep them from doing the same thing to another informant. These killings made him so sick that he almost gave up on the movement.
What about these bombings perpetrated by MK?

Are you really sure you can call out other individuals for their lack of knowledge? Because as it appears, you're either ignorant of these matters or lying by omission to distort the historical record of what actually happened, which implies not a small bias.

Which is it?
You do realize that the source which you quoted above actually proves exactly what I have been saying, yet again?
 
Last edited:
Jul 2016
8,981
USA
#44
Aggienation I think that you might need to read what Shtajerc said and how I responded again, because you seem to have completely misunderstood the point.

MK/uMkhonto weSizwe was an organisation, a branch of the ANC established to go after military and infrastructural target, not civilians.

The Necklacing incidences which you keep referring to were conducted by people, as in normal everyday civilians. They were not "operations" authorized and conducted by uMkhonto weSizwe. Therefore you can not use the Necklacing incidents as proof that MK attacked civilians.

This was not done by MK. It was done by common civilians and had nothing to do with MK.

In fact the source which you provided goes the extra mile of saying the Nelson Mandela and other members of the ANC actually directly opposed these acts of "Necklacing".

To quote from your source:

You do realize that the source which you quoted above actually proves exactly what I have been saying, yet again?
This is what i realize:

1) Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), which Mandella was a co-founder and leader of, absolutely positively, 100% did commit terrorist acts against civilians (to include simple murder or necklacing as a form of terroristic intimidation against other blacks) and govt targets (mostly bombings, but other terrorist means as well).

2) You wont admit it, for whatever reason, either just plain ignorance or else bias/lying by omission/propaganda.

3) You call out others for their lack of knowledge on this subject, strange since you've been wrong for basically every post you've written in the last two pages and are still pressing ahead.

Why are you pressing so hard on a subject you are so wrong about? What is at stake in being incorrect? Is it just ego? Or will admitting that Mandella and the MK conducted terrorism affect you negatively in some other way?

I'm not here to pyschoanalyze you, so please don't respond to those rhetorical questions. Just please stop telling other posters how ignorant they are on this subject when you prove the same as well.

Thanks :)
 
Sep 2012
927
Prague, Czech Republic
#45
1) Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), which Mandella was a co-founder and leader of, absolutely positively, 100% did commit terrorist acts against civilians (to include simple murder or necklacing as a form of terroristic intimidation against other blacks) and govt targets (mostly bombings, but other terrorist means as well).

I am genuinely ignorant about this - it's not a subject I know a lot about - so from my perspective it would be much more helpful if you explained how you know the above. This would help to move the discussion along better than starting to discuss each other's motivations.
 
Jul 2016
8,981
USA
#46
I am genuinely ignorant about this - it's not a subject I know a lot about - so from my perspective it would be much more helpful if you explained how you know the above. This would help to move the discussion along better than starting to discuss each other's motivations.
Because"

1.) has been proven, its not a secret MK committed a large number of bombings and murders (to include necklacing), done against human beings in order to intimidate and terrorize. And that Mandela was the co-founder and leader of this group. And that he was imprisoned not for non-violent protests or some sort of trumped up charge but because he was an insurgent leader, something he admitted.

"I did not plan it in a spirit of recklessness, nor because I have any love for violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of my people by the whites."

Co-founder and leader of movement known to commit murder and other acts of terrorism, insurgency, crimes. Are you or anyone going to claim he's a terrorist, insurgent, criminal.

However, if his legacy is inspired only by that Mandela's side won, then he's a freedom fighter, national hero, innocent angel.

"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason, because if it does none dare call it treason."

But I bet some relatives of individuals blown up or necklaced might disagree. :think:

2.) If 1. happened and someone is denying it it means ignorance or bias.

3.) From posts 34 onwards The Cell directly attacks other posters knowledge, while at the same time repeatedly demonstrating the lack of his own.
 
Mar 2012
1,579
Following the breeze
#47
This is what i realize:

1) Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), which Mandella was a co-founder and leader of, absolutely positively, 100% did commit terrorist acts...
Forgive any grammatical errors which I may make. I have had a few beers so my grammar is not exactly perfect at the moment :eek: .

Anyway, please point to the post where I claimed that MK did not commit what would be classified as terrorist acts???

The point had nothing to do with that, but rather whether or not they targeted civilians.

against civilians (to include simple murder or necklacing as a form of terroristic intimidation against other blacks) and govt targets (mostly bombings, but other terrorist means as well).
So, it seems to me that you are basically refusing to read anything that I have said. I have pointed out to you on multiple occasions, and presented proof to you, that these incidences where not related, but you seem to be completely disregarding what I have pointed out. Thus I don't know how else to communicate what I am pointing out to you.

2) You wont admit it, for whatever reason, either just plain ignorance or else bias/lying by omission/propaganda.
If you had any idea about my background you would understand how ridiculous your statement is.

3) You call out others for their lack of knowledge on this subject, strange since you've been wrong for basically every post you've written in the last two pages and are still pressing ahead.
Again, if you knew anything about my background you would realize that what you are saying above is not only hilarious, but also completely ridiculous :lol: .

Why are you pressing so hard on a subject you are so wrong about? What is at stake in being incorrect? Is it just ego? Or will admitting that Mandella and the MK conducted terrorism affect you negatively in some other way?
Again aggienation, please point me to the post where I stated that MK did not conduct operations which would be classified as acts of "terrorism"?

I'm not here to pyschoanalyze you, so please don't respond to those rhetorical questions. Just please stop telling other posters how ignorant they are on this subject when you prove the same as well.

Thanks :)
aggienation, to try and even begin to explain to you just how much I know about this specific topic would be an immense waste of my time.

Please just study the very sources which you provided and get back to me afterwards.
 

VHS

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
4,338
Florania
#48
The discussion is about the current state of South Africa, not the background of Nelson Mandela.
Why is the situation in South Africa exacerbating?
 

Similar History Discussions