BNP leader Nick Griffin calls Mandela a "murdering old terrorist"

[karrie]

Id say terrorism is a tactic rather than an ideology. Using fear to intimidate the other side and targeting non-combatants. People have done that both to advance a political agenda and a human rights agenda.

Ah, but we weren't discussing what terrorism is, we were discussing what a terrorist is.

For example, a scientific researcher is someone who engages in research, but does engaging in research, make you a scientific researcher? No. Pretty much every country that's ever fought in a war or engaged in a military action, has engaged in 'terrorism' (Hiroshima fits your description of terrorism nicely, no?). But that doesn't necessarily mean they are terrorists.

 

[BaalsTears]

After Mandela is gone I think his conciliatory attitude toward South African whites will disappear from the African National Congress.

 

[Blackleaf]

To Blackleaf, George Washington was a traitor and a terrorist.

All the American "freedom fighters" were traitors. They were Britons fighting Britain. They sound like traitors to me.

And George Washington was also a terrible military leader. He couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.

To my crazy way of thinking....

Terrorists are people who use violence to try to force their political agenda.
(environmental issues, religious adherence, which party governs)

Freedom fighters are people who use violence to try to force an inarguably human rights agenda that has failed in democratic routes.
(freeing slaves, ending apartheid)

It's hardly as cut and dry as that, is it?

Have you never heard the saying: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"?

A terrorist is only a terrorist and a freedom fighter is only a freedom fighter depending which side you're on.

Black South Africans may see Mandela as a freedom fighter but many Western countries - and those white farmers in South Africa who Mandela and his thugs murdered and terrorised - saw him as a terrorist.

It's the same with the Mau Mau. I see them as terrorist murderous thugs. The Mau Mau see themselves as freedom fighters.

 

[JLM]

BNP leader Nick Griffin has called ailing Nelson Mandela a "murdering old terrorist" on Twitter.

He said: ‘Saint #nelsonmandela on last legs it seems.

‘Make sure to avoid BBC when the murdering old terrorist croaks. It’ll be nauseating.’

In another message Mr Griffin wrote: ‘Statesmen must be judged on results not rhetoric.

‘Before Mandela, South Africa was safe economic powerhouse. Now crime ridden basket case.’

Another tweet said: ‘No surprise #Mandela’s lungs are shot - all those burning tyres. Smoking necklaces very bad for the health.’


Read more: ¿Murdering old terrorist¿: BNP leader Nick Griffin¿s Twitter insult about ailing Nelson Mandela sparks fury | Mail Online

Kind of lends credence to the old saw....... "Believe 10% of what you see and nothing of what you hear"!

Ah, but we weren't discussing what terrorism is, we were discussing what a terrorist is.

For example, a scientific researcher is someone who engages in research, but does engaging in research, make you a scientific researcher? No. Pretty much every country that's ever fought in a war or engaged in a military action, has engaged in 'terrorism' (Hiroshima fits your description of terrorism nicely, no?). But that doesn't necessarily mean they are terrorists.

I believe a terrorist commits terrorism! -

 

[Blackleaf]

If you look at the comments left by readers of the article on that Daily Mail page you will see quite a lot of them agreeing with Nick Griffin - ¿Murdering old terrorist¿: BNP leader Nick Griffin¿s Twitter insult about ailing Nelson Mandela sparks fury | Mail Online

A friend of mine from Cape Town said that things are worse there now in that country than they have ever been. She said there is so much violence. More than before.
- Sandy Brown , London
*******************************

Glad someone said it - and he is correct about the drivel the BBC will come out with.
- DG , Windsor
************************

Well he's not exactly wrong is he?
- Sarza314 , Kent, United Kingdom
***********************

Another truthful fact. Mandela was a terrorist no matter how much one rewrites history.
- Major Bill , Chesterfield
***********************

Griffin is quite right. Those who know the real history of Mandela, not the sanitized media version - will be in full agreement with him. Mandela was a convicted terrorist who was responsible for the deaths of innocent people, directly or indirectly. He was a pathetically-poor leader of S. Africa and many in that country will not shed a tear for him.
- Michael, Liverpool
**************************

It's easy to forget that FW de Klerk engineered the end of apartheid and won the Nobel Peace prize alongside Mandela for it.
- Rufus McDufus, London
**************************

He is right, Mandela was a terrorist. His wife was utterly revolting too.
- Piers England, Leicester, United Kingdom
************************

He is correct Mandela was a terrorist. He was sent to prison. Amazing what a few misguided pop stars and celebs can do.
- Barry, Chelmsford
**********************

I can't stand Nick Griffin or anything that he and his party stand for, but I have to admit that I think he's got a point here. Nelson Mandela may have been fighting for the right reasons but he went about it the wrong way. The ANC was a terrorist organisation and committed terrorist acts.
- barbie, Birmingham
**************************

Never could and never will understand the fuss about Mandela.
- ME, Wiltshire, United Kingdom
***************************

I can remember the Limpet mines on ships and the tyre necklaces etc. Younger people like to praise him when they know nothing about him
- nook , Barnsley
***********************

What Griffin says is 100% correct. The media shamefully portray Mandela as a hero and a statesman when in most peoples eyes he is no different to Martin McGuinness. Celebrating a death is wrong-it seems his death could be imminent-however I remember a few weeks ago the far Left mocking Lady Thatcher's death and I know several who will rejoice in communist Mandela's demise. Communism is evil and people need to stop having this romantic memory of it.
- Craig, Lancs
************************

Theres no escaping the facts, whereas,Mandela was not tried for murder personally so evidently theres no evidence to the contrary. However, he did lead the ANC's terror group who definitely carried out a lot of cold blooded murders. Nic Griffin is entitled to state his opinion, he is not wrong, and when 'uncle nelson' does die and the BBC are putting out their messages on his 'greatness' there will be a lot of people from the right age groups that will definitely switch off
- Normal-Bloke, Hull, United Kingdom



​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[#juan]

Amazing how Mandela found time to be in prison for about 27 years as well......

 

[JLM]

Amazing how Mandela found time to be in prison for about 27 years as well......

- I'm not sure that there was a choice!

 

[Zipperfish]

Well this thread is certainly overflowing with stupid. South Africa under apartheid was terrible. Saying "it was better then" is like the Alabama good ol' boys saying that "Our coloreds were happier when they were in chains."

 

[WLDB]

Ah, but we weren't discussing what terrorism is, we were discussing what a terrorist is.

For example, a scientific researcher is someone who engages in research, but does engaging in research, make you a scientific researcher? No. Pretty much every country that's ever fought in a war or engaged in a military action, has engaged in 'terrorism' (Hiroshima fits your description of terrorism nicely, no?). But that doesn't necessarily mean they are terrorists.

Thats why I think the "war on terror" is ultimately futile as it is war on a tactic. You can wipe out Al Queda, the Taliban and however many other groups you want but there will always be someone somewhere doing it. Even the allies referred to their own attacks on cities as "terror bombings." Intentionally killing civilians or non-combatants to spread fear and demoralize the enemy is terrorism. If people use that tactic - then im fine with calling them terrorists. You can give some people or groups a nice semantic loophole out of the term but ultimately they both do the same thing.

Well this thread is certainly overflowing with stupid. South Africa under apartheid was terrible. Saying "it was better then" is like the Alabama good ol' boys saying that "Our coloreds were happier when they were in chains."

It was better for the white racists. Now they have to share things and have competition. How sad for them.

I believe a terrorist commits terrorism! -

Ditto.

 

[L Gilbert]

Um, there's no worldwide consensus on the definition of "terrorism". Oxford dictionary's version says, "the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims".
Personally, I don't think acting against a gov't using violence is necessarily terrorism (but it depends upon the motive). Acting against a country's people in order to coerce their gov't is.
Mandela led bombing campaigns against gov't targets (like the SAAF), not civilian targets (even though civilians were killed). And for that reason he was labeled a terrorist by other gov'ts. His motive was the "dismantling the legacy of apartheid through tackling institutionalised racism, poverty and inequality, and fostering racial reconciliation." (Wikipedia) So obviously, his concerns were for the people of SA, not against them. Anyway, he served time for sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the SA gov't, but he triggered the abolishment of apartheid.
Anyway terrorism is a bit more complex than just being a tactic, IMO.

 

[WLDB]

Um, there's no worldwide consensus on the definition of "terrorism". Oxford dictionary's version says, "the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims".
Personally, I don't think acting against a gov't using violence isn't necessarily terrorism (but it depends upon the motive). Acting against a country's people in order to coerce their gov't is.
Mandela led bombing campaigns against gov't targets (like the SAAF), not civilian targets (even though civilians were killed). And for that reason he was labeled a terrorist by other gov'ts. His motive was the "dismantling the legacy of apartheid through tackling institutionalised racism, poverty and inequality, and fostering racial reconciliation." (Wikipedia) So obviously, his concerns were for the people of SA, not against them. Anyway, he served time for sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the SA gov't, but he triggered the abolishment of apartheid.
Anyway terrorism is a bit more complex than just being a tactic, IMO.

Targeting military targets seems legitimate in a conflict. If he had targeted civilians deliberately and killed them on purpose rather than military and government targets then I would agree that he was a terrorist. Had he done that its very unlikely that he would have the great reputation he has now. He probably would have been killed.

Interesting definition though. What would it mean by "unauthorized"? Nearly every attack has someone "authorizing" it or it wouldnt happen.

 

[JLM]

Um, there's no worldwide consensus on the definition of "terrorism". Oxford dictionary's version says, "the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims".
QUOTE]

I would amend that to "the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation"-

 

[L Gilbert]

Targeting military targets seems legitimate in a conflict. If he had targeted civilians deliberately and killed them on purpose rather than military and government targets then I would agree that he was a terrorist. Had he done that its very unlikely that he would have the great reputation he has now. He probably would have been killed.

Interesting definition though. What would it mean by "unauthorized"? Nearly every attack has someone "authorizing" it or it wouldnt happen.

Not sure what Oxford meant by that. Thought it was a bit strange, too.