Zen-like Todd Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=514&e=1&cid=514&u=/ap/20030130/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq Former South African President Nelson Mandela, who Bush has praised as a hero of human rights, joined the chorus of critics by calling Bush arrogant and implying the president was racist for threatening to bypass the United Nations and attack Iraq. "Is it because the secretary-general of the United Nations is now a black man? They never did that when secretary-generals were white," Mandela said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 Yep, and the racism is led by Colin Powell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Murphaaay Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 Originally posted by redman Yep, and the racism is led by Colin Powell. Colin Powell is a token. He would never challenge bush even if he felt the military action wasn't right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 Originally posted by rellim Colin Powell is a token. He would never challenge bush even if he felt the military action wasn't right. This is the most mind-bogglingly stupid, and uninformed statements I've ever seen.First off, Powell has been very challenging of Bush and the Republican party in general. Hell, the man stood up at the Republican convention and made mock of the party's stance on affirmative action. Second, the Bush presidency has lifted blacks to the highest positions in the history of American politics. Because Powell doesn't wear corn rows and recite rap lyrics doesn't make him a token. The man earned his spot and bigots like you ought to give the man his warranted due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 Is it me or is that quote not in the linked article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 30, 2003 Share Posted January 30, 2003 I was wondering the same Yomar - perhaps the story got changed/edited? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 31, 2003 Author Share Posted January 31, 2003 Looks like they changed the article. Odd. It's still in this one though. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030130/ap_wo_en_po/af_gen_south_africa_mandela_us_2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Originally posted by rellim Colin Powell is a token. He would never challenge bush even if he felt the military action wasn't right. You mean like by publicly disagreeing with Bush's stance on affirmative action not two weeks ago? :shootinth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 31, 2003 Author Share Posted January 31, 2003 As the others have already stated, that remark about Colin Powell is totally inaccurate and reeks of a prejudiced viewpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 I had no idea Nelson Mandela was so crazy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Isn't Mandela in his 80's? I think his age is showing in his comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Was South Africa in general and blacks specifically better off under apartheid than today with the fine moral center and leadership provided by a man like Mandela? One wonders whether Mandela gave Jackson his act or whether Jackson gave it to Mandela . What one shouldn't wonder about is the fact that black rule in South Africa hasn't really meant black freedom and it would be a shame if Mandela is remembered for being a symbol to help end apartheid only to subject the people of South Africa to a situation even worse. The point is, he should look to his own people before casting aspersions on ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 either way....the UN (as it already was)...is passing into the dustbin of history as another good idea with little impact or import......anyone who grew up with this organization during the Cold War knew that......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 In fairness, Art, I think Mandela did a far far better job than say, his counterparts in Zimbabwe. The Truth and Reconciliation commission along with his farsighted appointments of those of diverse ethnicities did much to avert any potential ethnic genocide like those that have swept through much of Africa. Perhaps most importantly, he oversaw a smooth transition of power to a democratically elected successor. That in itself will be a remarkable achivement if democracy endures there. Are blacks better off? Economically, probably not - though not as badly off as they might have been had he tried to nationalize all industries as some of the more militant leftists of his party were urging him to do. Quality of life has undoubtedly deteriorated as well for nearly everyone, due primarily to the epidemic of crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 RT, I hear your points here and I don't disagree. What does stand out in your statement though is that blacks probably aren't better off under black rule than under apartheid in terms of economic standing, and that blacks as well as the whole of South Africa has suffered in the quality of life category due largely to increased crime since the change of ruling factions. As I said, Mandela may well be remembered for the man who helped end apartheid and yet subjected blacks to a situation that was far worse. Clean up one's own house before talking about someone else. That shouldn't be too much to ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Displaced Fan Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 You cannot be serious about people in Africa being better off under apartheid. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 DF, It's not so much that I'm serious about it so much as the reality of the situation there is what dictates a seriousness about it. The sad reality is the people of South Africa, and Africa in general, were better off under colonialism and apartheid than they are presently under existing leadership. Legitimately, the people of South Africa, including the blacks in that nation, were better off under apartheid than they are right at the moment. That's a sad fact that leaders like Mandela need to focus their insight toward changing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godeatgod Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 You can make a case that India and Malaysia were better off as colonies than they were 10 years after gaining independence. No way that case will stand as of today. The colonies vacated by British and French after WWII have progressed very well in past 50 odd years. Colonialism may have been an economic arrangement for the occupiers but it greatly damaged the colonies' social structure and left too many scars. You can easily make a case today that Asians, Africans and dogs had no business visiting clubs,occupying high bureaucratic positions and/or owning businesses in colonies but the assumption that they'll be able to construct a forward looking westernized society, once freed from colonialism, in a couple of years is fallacious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Skinna, ..."but the assumption that they'll be able to construct a forward looking westernized society, once freed from colonialism, in a couple of years is fallacious." So, what you're saying is, you completely agree with me that Mandela should be focusing his attention homeward to improve the lot of his nation since it is presently worse off than it was a decade ago, right? I realize you are of the mind that 10 years is not enough time to improve the situation, and that's fine. But, the fact is, that nation has deteriorated since the end of apartheid and you recognize that. Therefore, you understand the point I was making, do you not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godeatgod Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Yes, I agree with you there. I think South Africa is following the trend of country like India that regressed after independence but progressed after it achieved political stability. ( I think political instability and/or Mugabe are undoing of Zimbabwe). As far as Mandela is concerned, i don't think he holds any office in SA and is simply too old to recognize and appreciate the current world order. I think his paranoid observations are derived more from his 27 years in jail than on current reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 After Aparthied all I've seen is warring tribes/factions trying to be a major power which was the case the moment Mandela was released since the ANC and others no longer could use him as a legend behind bars. All blacks that arent liberals are considered Tokens by stupid A$$ black democrats which is why I launch into them for making those statements especially when one tried to call me one when I decided to vote GOP. They ignore the fact that the black leader in Louisiana didnt support the newly reelected senator because she wasnt going to help out blacks there and it took Brazille and clinton to go down there to help him change his stance and help get the vote out. He ignores the black candidates clamoring for positions in Nevada and New York the DNC ignored to go with white candidates yet if a black decides he has a better chance of political office as a member of the gOP he will be villified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Originally posted by NavyDave if a black decides he has a better chance of political office as a member of the gOP he will be villified. It is a great irony that minorities and pro choice Candidates are usually welcomed into the GOP with open arms, but the GOP is ridiculed as being intolerant. By contrast, the very few pro-life Dems in Congress are not allowed to ascend into any meaningful committee positions and minorities like Watts or Powell are ridiculed as being little more than tokens by the supposedly tolerant left. Sort of like the concept that Republicans apparently suffer from a gender gap among female voters (though this gap disappears among working married women) because of their lack of compassion or whatever, while the Dems huge gender gap among males isn't a gender gap at all - it's "Angry White Male" syndrome... :doh: And no, I am not a Republican... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 The dirty little secret is that the Dems need the angry white male to vote for them to succeed in the 2k4 elections. The always have 90 to 95 percent of the black vote but they need white, hispanic and asian voters to get over the top. Imagine what will happen to the Dems when blacks wake up and realise that they have been voting one way for over 30 years and nothing has changed ( look at DC) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted February 3, 2003 Share Posted February 3, 2003 I just lost RESPECT for Mandella, I guess all those years being locked up did phuck him up. State of the Union Bush pledged Billions of dollars in aid for the continent of Africa because of their AIDS problem, Mandella forgot to mention that in his speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.