Nelson Mandela ... a great legacy being tainted.

[Kendo 2]

Uhm...Mandela is not a hero?

[Ghogiel]

Ok.

[Platton]

Ok.

No, not okay.

 

Your point is lacking substance compareing South Africa as it was during the "Apartheid" with conditions know from lenins russia.

Do you know how many tribal states existet freely during the Apartheid? What the colours on the new SA Flag stand for?

 

This was never about seperation of the races, this was about that lazy ass communists wanted to loot the proerty of the mainly whites to redistribute it to their even more lazy followers. And ofcourse the cubans, and angola and the russians had their plans by taking africa.

[Ghogiel]

 

Ok.

No, not okay.

 

Your point is lacking substance compareing South Africa as it was during the "Apartheid" with conditions know from lenins russia.

Do you know how many tribal states existet freely during the Apartheid? What the colours on the new SA Flag stand for?

 

This was never about seperation of the races, this was about that lazy ass communists wanted to loot the proerty of the mainly whites to redistribute it to their even more lazy followers. And ofcourse the cubans, and angola and the russians had their plans by taking africa.

 

 

 

Ok.

No, not okay.

 

Your point is lacking substance compareing South Africa as it was during the "Apartheid" with conditions know from lenins russia.

Do you know how many tribal states existet freely during the Apartheid? What the colours on the new SA Flag stand for?

 

This was never about seperation of the races, this was about that lazy ass communists wanted to loot the proerty of the mainly whites to redistribute it to their even more lazy followers. And ofcourse the cubans, and angola and the russians had their plans by taking africa.

 

Yes ok.

 

Rich western white guys profiting out of both Apartheid and post. Apartheid was about race and money.

[Kendo 2]

No, not okay.

 

I just let it go because as soon as you make a point and expose the LEFT for what it really is someone will b*tch and a misguided staff member will lock the thread. It is what it is. :wacko:

 

It's sad that Mandela is being portrayed as some sort of savior when in fact he was no better than the white supremacist *ssholes he replaced. Also sad that British sanctions against Rhodesia and then South Africa allowed Marxist elements to flourish in the region. Zapata said 'it is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.' Thing is, he didn't have to do it, or watch his kids starve, or have his head cut off because he resisted when a local leftist warlord decided to kidnap his sons.

[JimboUK]

 

Yeah because being a hardcore communist is that was much worse than the Apartheid backed up by western governments like the Torys in the UK.

 

 

What have the Tories got to do with anything? Labour governments were also more than happy to deal with South Africa. You seem to forget we were fighting against communism, the last thing we needed was the richest country in that area taken over by communists. Mandela was a brave man but let's not rewrite history, he was a member of the communist party in his early years and always had a leaning that way.

[Platton]

 

Rich western white guys profiting out of both Apartheid and post. Apartheid was about race and money.

The Tribal States in South Africa were autonomous areas were the black people could do business the same way the whites would do. Profiting isn't created by government spreads around wealth, profit is created by work. They refused, they were envious about the whites wealth created by hard work and then Mandela and his Gang came around and made promisses about sharing the loot with them. And soon the cake was gone and nothing was left to redistribute anymore. Soon affirmative action and these things followed, let the people think government entitles them to stuff, and now you have the situation you have.

 

This whole apartheid thing is a total phony debating point, giving communists the moral highground. And no of them ofcourse talks about Rhodesia because there is the same failed experiment without apartheid.

 

 

Labour governments were also more than happy to deal with South Africa. You seem to forget we were fighting against communism,

The Labour Party itself is a communist party. They played the International at party convents since 1925 and this stopped just a few years from now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1442684/Red-Flag-flies-again-at-Labour-conference.html

Edited July 12, 2013 by Platton

[Ghogiel]

 

 

Yeah because being a hardcore communist is that was much worse than the Apartheid backed up by western governments like the Torys in the UK.

 

 

What have the Tories got to do with anything? Labour governments were also more than happy to deal with South Africa. You seem to forget we were fighting against communism, the last thing we needed was the richest country in that area taken over by communists. Mandela was a brave man but let's not rewrite history, he was a member of the communist party in his early years and always had a leaning that way.

 

Sure was. They talked the talk and started the boycott movement, but in the 60's when they had their chance to actually do something about Apartheid they pussied out. Though AFAIK that prime minister wasn't financially invested in keeping the status quo like Thatcher's husband.

[JimboUK]

 

 

Rich western white guys profiting out of both Apartheid and post. Apartheid was about race and money.

The Tribal States in South Africa were autonomous areas were the black people could do business the same way the whites would do. Profiting isn't created by government spreads around wealth, profit is created by work. They refused, they were envious about the whites wealth created by hard work and then Mandela and his Gang came around and made promisses about sharing the loot with them. And soon the cake was gone and nothing was left to redistribute anymore. Soon affirmative action and these things followed, let the people think government entitles them to stuff, and now you have the situation you have.

 

This whole apartheid thing is a total phony debating point, giving communists the moral highground. And no of them ofcourse talks about Rhodesia because there is the same failed experiment without apartheid.

 

 

Labour governments were also more than happy to deal with South Africa. You seem to forget we were fighting against communism,

The Labour Party itself is a communist party. They played the International at party convents since 1925 and this stopped just a few years from now.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1442684/Red-Flag-flies-again-at-Labour-conference.html

 

 

It used to be, these days it's nothing more than a public sector pressure group that when in office bleeds the private sector dry. We had 13 years of their misrule, at the end we had a bloated public sector that was run for the people in it rather than the actual public who paid for it, our private sector was on it knees, millions had been trapped on welfare and the country was as good as broke.

 

 

 

 

Yeah because being a hardcore communist is that was much worse than the Apartheid backed up by western governments like the Torys in the UK.

 

 

What have the Tories got to do with anything? Labour governments were also more than happy to deal with South Africa. You seem to forget we were fighting against communism, the last thing we needed was the richest country in that area taken over by communists. Mandela was a brave man but let's not rewrite history, he was a member of the communist party in his early years and always had a leaning that way.

 

Sure was. They talked the talk and started the boycott movement, but in the 60's when they had their chance to actually do something about Apartheid they pussied out. Though AFAIK that prime minister wasn't financially invested in keeping the status quo like Thatcher's husband.

 

 

Many people had interests in South Africa, a lot of them ordinary people who had pension funds. In fairness to Labour they couldn't do much about Apartheid in the 60's, it would have been replaced by communism and nobody would have been better off.

[TRoaches]

Communism, for all of its flaws, is not inherently evil in the same way that true race-based class separation is. It is natural that people who live under a system that is obsessed with a class separation would be drawn towards a philosophy that, at its most fundamental core, seeks to end class divisions. I don't fault them for that. The rest of the stuff that you are blaming on Mandela (crimes against whites, etc) was not Mandela's fault any more so than the atrocities committed against native Americans were the fault of George Washington.