Amazon.com Widgets
  • In a good way, he was just fighting Anglo-Saxon rule

    Yes, people seem to forget that Apartheid started under Anglo-Saxon rule, not Dutch rule. 1948. Anyways, Mandela was just fighting injustice. He was a terrorist in a good way. But I don't think he was a good leader. He has caused South Africa to go down the drain. But yeah. (Funny, Denmark didn't go against South Africa when it was Anglo-Saxon, but once it became a free Dutch country, they pose sanctions against them. Sounds like KKK racism to me).

  • Yes he was, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that.

    People in the West (America especially), have some sort of negative knee-jerk reaction to the word terrorist. You CAN be a terrorist, and be morally justified.

    Many colonialists were "terrorists" when fighting Britain. The Native Americans were "terrorists" when fighting colonials. Blacks were terrorists when fighting oppression in America. The French underground were "terrorists" against Nazi occupation. Many Arabs in the Middle-East are "terrorists" against foreign occupation, and Mandela was a "terrorist" against apartheid.

    That doesn't make ALL terrorism in the face of oppression justified, but the issue is more complicated then its frequently portrayed.

  • Also corrupt and racist

    Mandela was responsible for a number of bombings that killed innocent people, as he himself admitted in his trial.

    Besides being a convicted criminal, Mandela, as every leftist leader, is also responsible for setting up the post-apartheid corrupt MO South Africa now operates in. Additionally, he is responsible for a number of post apartheid racist laws, most notably one that forbids any "white" person of establishing a company, without having a "black" partner.

  • One word: necklacing

    The violent and vindictive terrorist and his brutal and sadistic wife used terrorist acts against their own people to overthrow a government that was bringing prosperity and glory to the nation. Without the people the Mandelas labeled generally as "the white man" the nation would have been in even worse shape. Racists. Dangerous racists who advocate violence against white South Africans, this is all fueled by Mandelas carelessness. No wonder the murder rate is so high. Those who consider the terrorist a martyr are deluded. He's just a self-entitled racist pig. The country would be better off if he rotted in jail. Filthy savage who incited violence. Now look at the state of affairs in SA. Worse and worse.

  • A good act does not wash out the bad not a bad act the good

    He bombed innocent white people for being white and innocent black people for collabrating with blacks. Terrorist attacks his organization conducted killed children. He suggested cutting the nose of black people who collaborated with black or buying tires around them neck to signify their acceptance of slavery.

    He didnt directly confront apartheid leaders he just instilled fear among public like a terrorist.

    He even supported dictators like Gaddafi, Castro. But western liberal/ not just western even eastern media loved his story so much for standing upto good old evil white people that they ignored these facts.

    A GOOD ACT NEVER WASHES AWAY THE BAD NOR A BAD ACT WASH AWAY THE GOOD.

  • Deny the truth

    Deny the truth, deny the man. He was a terrorist. He was responsible for so many innocent deaths, that included all races. That did not help 'the cause'. BUT he admitted his crimes, and served his time. He came out of prison a fully reformed South African patriot and, I personally believe, he was responsible for the country's reasonably peaceful transition to democracy. What made him great was that he never hid or denied his crimes, he expressed regret and personal growth. People ignoring the bad also ignores the fact that he had to challenge and change everything to become the peaceful man he became.

  • Facts are facts

    He pleaded guilty to 156 acts of public violence including terrorist bombs in public places, including railway stations, a cinema, banks and malls. Women and children, were the primary target of these attacks.
    They were killed by Nelson Mandela’s orders. If you truly want to go against "the man" do not go for targets like that. You are a terrorist.

  • Amnesty international considered him, a terrorist and he himself pleaded guilty to 165 terrorist acts. Where's the discussion?

    Anything but a pacifist, he commissioned the deaths and maiming of hundreds of people and most of them were innocent black men, women and children. A committed Communist and advocate for Stalinist style communism (NOT socialism) , he supported most of the vile and murderous dictatorships of the world including Gaddaffi, Saddam Hussein, Yasser Arafat, and Kim Jong-il.

    Nelson Mandela was also the head of UmKhonto we Sizwe, (MK), the terrorist wing of the ANC and South African Communist Party. 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, a cinema, banks and several shopping malls. Many innocent people, including women and children, were killed by Nelson Mandela’s MK terrorists.
    South African President P.W. Botha had, on a number of occasions, offered Nelson Mandela freedom from prison, if he would only renounce indiscriminate terrorist violence. He refused. Amnesty International were asked to consider his status as a political prisoner, they looked into the facts of the case and judged his crimes justified his sentence and they never considered him a political prisoner. Surely this fact alone should prompt some questions from those who consider him a saint?

    If the above (all checkable facts) were not enough to tarnish this man's undeserved halo, consider his support for his ogre of a wife Winnie Mandela; a woman who mobilised children to kill other children in support of the protection rackets she ran in the townships, ostensibly in support of the ANC but in fact to enrich herself at the expense of the dirt poor. (look up Stompie Moeketsi). It was under her leadership that the "Winnie Mandela Football Club" developed the practice of "Necklacing" suspected informers. This involved placing a tyre filled with petrol around a person's neck and burning them alive. Mandela never once tried to dissuade her from her murderous excesses and even remained married to her for 6 years after he was released.

    Sorry to burst your bubble guys but all of the above can be verified from contemporary and reliable sources, including the ANC's own Truth and Reconciliation hearings.

    It may be that you still consider killing innocent people to be acceptable if the cause is such that the end justifies the means. If so, then you must accept, without complaint, that your own family is a legitimate target. If not, what you are saying is that my family is a legitimate target and it is acceptable to kill other people's children but not my own. A rather arrogant point of view and one that does not stand up to any kind of intellectual scrutiny.

    Yes, he was a terrorist...... Just like all the others who commit murder to further their own agenda.

  • Terrorist? Yes... Or no......

    I think that Mandela was a terrorist, but was he was a terrorist before he went to jail. He had a good cause, but he let the good ideas out in a bad way. He killed many innocent people by the violent campaigns he led, and he sent South Africa down the drain, but he did it for a good cause.

  • Mandela was a terriost

    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.”

  • A person who employs terror, targets civilians and uses fear to achieve an objective.

    Esp as a political weapon. Nelson Mandela didn't blow trains or people up. He didn't disrupt or maim innocent citizens lives. A terrorist uses terror and fear to achieve an objective. He strived to do thing peacefully. He told followers to throw their guns into the sea. He faced his enemies head-on through speech and demonstrations, not through firing weapons and detonating bombs. A terrorist is a coward who uses violence and fear to achieve their aims.

  • Of course not.

    Nelson Mandela is definitely not a terrorist, no matter what conservatives would have you believe. Without him, it's entirely possible that even today black South Africans wouldn't be free. Arguments that Mandela was bad because he was Communist (technically he was a Democratic Socialist, not a Communist) are ridiculous, and are the kind of argument you'd expect during the 1950s, not the 21st century. Mandela was a South African hero, and a great man.

    (I meant to write this when I put up the question, but forgot :P)

  • Anyone who calls Mandela a terrorist is feeling threatened for all the wrong reasons

    After he was freed, Mandela supported nonviolent resistance to oppression. Before his imprisonment, he did participate and endorse some violent protests, but all in the name of peace and abolition of apartheid. Presidents such as Republican Ronald Reagan – who called the African apartheid state essential to liberty – put him on a terrorist watchlist.

  • Nelson Mandela is a freedom fighter

    Nelson Mandela is a freedom fighter who fought for the rights of his people by any means necessary. Although he participated in, Encouraged and employed illegal activities in his pursuit of racial equality for South Africa and the abolition of the Apartheid government, It was all for a good cause. There are not many people who can say that they changed the world, But Nelson Mandela is certainly one of them.

  • He wasnt a terrorist

    He was just protecting his kind ela a terrorist?
    52% Say Yes
    48% Say No
    In a good way, he was just fighting Anglo-Saxon rule Yes, people seem to forget that Apartheid started under Anglo-Saxon rule, not Dutch rule. 1948. Anyways, Mandela was just fighting injustice. He he wasnt a terrorist

  • Nelson Mandela was a freedom fighter.

    Mandela was no terrorist.He fought against minority white rule,under a REPRESSIVE regime that denied rights to blacks and limited their social, vocational, educational, economic lives in every way shape or form that could be imagined. Sure, he was a militant at some stage, as was the ANC that he so dearly fought for, but to call him a political terrorist is just not quite accurate. A socialist, yes, maybe, some might say. But just consider the impact that he has had on the world after spending 27 YEARS in jail for opposing the white-dominated government who forced "their" supposed idiosyncratic beliefs on an oppressed minority. You MIGHT disagree with his policies(as some do) but please don't call the man a terrorist!

  • Yeah yeah yeah

    He isn't a terrorist you pricks, he was a good guy that did things that were politically correct! You dumb fucking cunts, whoever says he's a terrorist should just drop dead you homos, silly little arabs! Stop saying he is!! God damn, you pathetic willy head mongerals, go die scrubs

  • I'm doing this for an assignment

    I think he is not a terrorist because he was humble and fought for freedom. He used his words and not violence. Even tough people say he was a communist, Nelson strived to do thing peacefully. Mandela supported nonviolent resistance and fought for justice. He was fighting for a cause.

  • Helping people in need

    A terrorist is a man who finds a way to use violence to get his way. Nelson Mandela however even after out of prison he did not result to fists, he did not fight the whites who did harm to him. He did not strike fear into the white people. He used words not fists.

  • I personally think that Nelson Mandela was a freedom fighter.



    I personally think that Nelson Mandela was a freedom
    fighter. I believe that he was fighting
    for a just cause. I must admit, at some
    points in his life, he used some of the tactics that a terrorist might
    use. But, I believe that the honor he
    was given after he was released from prison shows that he was a freedom
    fighter.



Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.
>