[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Neocon Nuttery See other Neocon Nuttery Articles Title: 'This is just plain wrong' (U.S. Congress + Nelson Mandela TODAY) Source: Independent Online (South Africa) URL Source: http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?art_id=nw20080508194409871C255207 Published: May 8, 2008 Author: JESSE J. HOLLAND Post Date: 2008-05-09 02:21:04 by X-15 Keywords: None Views: 1170 Comments: 52 Washington - The US house of representatives voted on Thursday to remove apartheid-era travel restrictions and terrorist designations from Nelson Mandela and other African National Congress (ANC) members for fighting against their country's white minority rule. "Despite recognising two decades ago that America's place was on the side of those oppressed by apartheid, Congress has never resolved the inconsistency in our immigration code that treats many of those who actively opposed apartheid in South Africa as terrorists and criminals," said Howard Berman, a Democrat and chairperson of the house foreign affairs committee. The house approved by voice vote legislation to give the state department and homeland security wide latitude to disregard the ANC's anti-apartheid activities when determining whether to allow members and former members into the United States. The bill also adds the ANC to a list of groups that should not be considered terrorist organisations. "Despite his legacy as a hero of the anti-apartheid movement, despite the fact that he is a Nobel Peace Prize recipient...despite his election as president, we still require Nelson Mandela to apply for a visa waiver to enter into the United States just for a visit. This is just plain wrong," said Barbara Lee, a democrat. The ANC is the ruling party in the democratic, post-apartheid South Africa, but was considered a terrorist organisation by the apartheid white minority government. "The ANC is not a terrorist organisation now," said Lamar Smith, a Republican. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asked Congress last month to pass the legislation. She called it "embarrassing" that she still has to waive travel restrictions when Mandela and other ANC leaders visit the United States. Other ANC members have been refused entry into the United States. For example, Barbara Masekela, the former South African ambassador to the United States, was denied a visa to visit a dying cousin in the United States in 2007, lawmakers said. A similar bill is moving through the Senate. - Sapa-AP Poster's comment: notice the Republican BS I bold-typed above. Expect the three stooges in the Senate to fight over who loves Nelson Mandela more. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 15. #2. To: X-15 (#0) -- Nelson Mandela A great man, one of my heroes. It is outrageous to have him on a terrorist watch list. During the struggle to boot the Bloody Nats out, I belonged to Eugene Free South Africa. Seeing the ANC come to power was a dream come true. Long live the ANC. Amandla Awetu! Ferret Mike  posted on  2008-05-09   3:09:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #3. To: Ferret Mike (#2) Long live the ANC. So how's that working out down there in South Africa? How far has life expectancy has gone up? mirage  posted on  2008-05-09   3:19:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #4. To: mirage (#3) How has the decades of oppression, leadership decapitation, disenfranchisement from land, jobs and even citizenship helped to make South Africa better? The ANC inherited a world class mess from the terroristic South African Government that had practiced the fascist policy of Apartheid. I have studied South Africa and plan on going there someday to see that country for myself. Current problems have their genesis in the oppression of the Apartheid era and it was well known recovery from that era would be multi generational. I know who is at fault for the current and past problems in South Africa, and most of them were Afrikaners. I support the ANC and the current government of South Africa, and I am glad to see the Nationalist Party's rule to finally be in the dustbin of history. Ferret Mike  posted on  2008-05-09   3:29:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #5. To: Ferret Mike (#4) I know who is at fault for the current and past problems in South Africa, and most of them were Afrikaners. South Africa is now the rape capital of the world. They also don't have electricity in many parts of the country anymore. The roads are falling to crap and the unemployment rate is going up. The transition was - what - nearly 20 years ago when it started? The Afrikaners are not responsible for ALL of that and you know it. So, things got worse and you're happy. Got it. I don't understand why people advocate for policies that make things worse and are happy as a result. One would think that increased crime, death, and misery would be results that scream "TOTAL FAILURE" but the difference between me and a stock leftist is that I'm data driven and they're driven by emotions. Those two methods of looking at a situation don't reinforce each other. I'm going to start using a new tagline: Change doesn't always make things better. Often times, it makes things a heck of a lot worse. mirage  posted on  2008-05-09   4:01:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #6. To: mirage (#5) On the contrary, things are better then they were in Apartheid South Africa, a whole lot better. People are not deprived basic citizenship and shipped to remote and desolate parts of the country. People are not banned, unable to discuss and work in political advocacy and endeavors only being allowed to meet one person at a time. Black leaders are no longer routinely tortured and murdered in order to keep the Black and Colored (South African racial categories of that time) disorganized and oppressed. What is being reaped now is a crop of problems sowed decades ago by the oppressive, fascist and racist Apartheid government of the Nationalist Party. Things will improve there, and the country has it's collective soul back and finally has hope for a decent future. You may disagree, but you obviously have no understanding of the scope and depth of oppression under Apartheid and what it had done to that country. Israel hates the ANC too by the way, as they had a real cozy relationship militarily with the Apartheid Government and they found them to be quite like minded. If you do not like Zionists, I find it incredulous you can support and defend their closest partners militarily on the African Continent. You really need to do allot more Googling and reading on the topic of South Africa and other history and area studies of the surrounding countries to in in the South of Africa. Ferret Mike  posted on  2008-05-09   4:17:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #7. To: Ferret Mike (#6) (Edited) There is very little that I support on the African Continent, mostly because the residents, power-brokers, and thugs there are busy turning it into one of the larger hell-holes on the planet. The question, as always, is one of results. Are things on the whole better now than they were then? On the whole, no, they are not. So, we turn to history and see what voices were there speaking and we find Ian Smith whose basic comment was that the electorate needed to be educated before control was handed over to them. In a lot of ways, Smith was proven correct, especially in his comments about Mugabe. He deserves a second look, especially with the catastrophic failure that is Zimbabwe. Then again, the folks screaming up and down about Rhodesia deserve a full measure of responsibility for the hellhole there they helped create by forcing a transition before the country was ready for it. They helped put in a dictator who is busy making things worse. Where are these "for freedom!" people now? Under rocks, I would imagine, and afraid to admit they might have made an error. Likewise, the folks who pushed for rapid change in South Africa (like your group) deserve a full measure of responsibility for what it has turned into and owe the South African people an apology as well as some assistance to help dig them out of the pit they are getting into. Will that ever come? Not a chance. Will there ever be an admission that perhaps they made an error? Not a chance. People with causes don't take responsibility for their actions, particularly when things go badly. And so, South Africa is all alone again, but with a bunch of smug Americans convinced they've done right. When lining things up, the "terrorism" against the "terrorists" in SA pales against the number of rape cases. Before the switchover, rape was practically nonexistent in South Africa. Today, there are tens of thousands per year and there are now lots of child rapes, mostly due to the misbelief that "sex with a virgin cures AIDS" Sounds like terrorism. How many ANC people were beaten versus how many rapes? Do you really want to go there? The change needed to come a lot slower so there was time to ramp the society up to be able to handle it. Doing it in the manner it was done took SA from a first world country to a second world country. If they aren't careful, they'll turn it into a third-world country. On the whole, if a change causes a wholesale downsizing of living standards, it is a FAILURE. Instead, what went on in South Africa was a slow-motion crash and burn rather than a slow-motion ramping up. Will anyone learn from this? Of course not. People with "causes" don't care about what happens after they win. They wash their hands of it and move on to the next cause. I do process analysis all the time; they needed to do some before going whole-hog into this. A little forethought and a little incrementalism, then some monitoring, then another change, and doing it that way over time would have made the transition work a lot better and the downsides to it could have been mitigated. But when has any "for a cause!" organization ever done that? Certainly not here in the USA, so there is no expectation of that anywhere. Heck, in the USA you can't even get one of the "for a cause!" groups pushing for change to take responsibility for a failure, which is a primary reason why I put them under a microscope. People or groups who are pathologically incapable of admitting they made an error or taking responsibility for their actions are not deserving of support. That includes the current US Administration in case you're curious. It seems that in recent history, whenever Americans "with a cause" desire regime change, it creates a hellhole. Zimbabwe, Iran, Iraq, and Rhodesia are the most recent examples of this. Worked out really well all-around, hasn't it? mirage  posted on  2008-05-09   4:54:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #8. To: mirage (#7) Bull. The Apartheid government made sure the people on the whole were decapitated from their leaders, were made to study in a language not their own with inadequate funding and basic infrastructure for schools, and the slots and funding for education were just not there quite deliberately. As for Ian Smith, this man was a fascist and liar and had no desire or intent to cater to anyone in his country except for the White elite, and he was not of South Africa which makes me wonder how you can be so confused as to feel he is germaine to a discussion of South Africa. True, The Nationalists of South Africa just worked for the Afrikaner elite much as Smith's government did in his country. But we are not talking about Smith's country here. There was nothing good about good old fascist, racist South Africa. Those were the bad old days. The problems stemming from ignorance and violence emanate from the effects of Apartheid policy, and as time passes and the situation evolves giving more opportunities and more people became better educated then they ever would of been in racist South Africa, the problems of post Apartheid South Africa will dissipate. I go will go there and do a great deal of travel by bicycle. I have full confidence I will enjoy the experiance, and I look forward to going. Ferret Mike  posted on  2008-05-09   5:18:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #9. To: Ferret Mike (#8) Nothing good in either SA or Rhodesia before the switchover? In Harare now, they have signs saying "Bring back Ian Smith" because under him, at the very least, the people had jobs and food. Now they have neither. You seem to think this is an improvement. Like Iraq, American intervention in Rhodesia and South Africa has caused more problems than it has solved. People need to get it through their heads to stop trying to improve others' worlds. It leads only to heartache and disaster. Both SA and Rhodesia would have come to the same conclusion eventually regardless and eased in a transition that would have been better and not seen people suffer as a result. Unfortunately, smug Americans bent on improving the world caused both countries to become casualties of American arrogance. Iraq and Iran likewise have gone downhill. So, it hasn't worked out and the groups involved deserve a full measure of responsibility. Is yours going to take any or is it going to try and rationalize things as you've tried to do on this thread? Are you going to continue to advocate for intervention in others' affairs or are you going to learn from Iraq and leave well enough alone now? Just asking. No answer is needed. Just note that the results from all four interventions have been the same. The country went to hell. The "for the cause" people refuse in all four cases to take responsibility for their actions. Good luck in SA. Crime is rising so don't get mugged. Read the State Department warnings in detail. Gangs are on the rise there in SA as are random shootings. mirage  posted on  2008-05-09   5:28:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #10. To: mirage (#9) "Nothing good in either SA or Rhodesia before the switchover?" Smith would of been wiser to not try to hold onto power for the 12 years he did after breaking from Great Britain. The problems in Zimbabwe are not quite the same as South Africa, but yes, it is far better to see the Smith Government gone. I do not support Robert Mugabe or like him, but he came about as a result of the oppression and racism of allowing no political say or franchise to a population that outnumbered privileged whites twenty to one. You and I are not likely to suddenly agree on many things in regard to South Africa, so I am not going to repeat myself other then to say I have confidence their future is far brighter now that Apartheid is gone, and that their leadership is a far cry better then that of the thug Robert Mugabe. Ferret Mike  posted on  2008-05-09   6:08:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #15. To: Ferret Mike (#10) You and I are not likely to suddenly agree on many things in regard to South Africa, so I am not going to repeat myself other then to say I have confidence their future is far brighter now that Apartheid is gone, and that their leadership is a far cry better then that of the thug Robert Mugabe. Well, that's your opinion. Smith was right about Mugabe and as such deserves a second look. That's just being honest about history and not trying to hide one's head in the sand. As for the future of South Africa, just look at the results so far. Dismal. Where you take joy in causing damage and turning a country into a problem, I see failure. The difference between how you and I view things is simple. I look at whether the people have food, roads, electricity, medicine, etc. You look at whether or not your cause won and ignore the aftereffects. Sending people into hell for a few generations is just fine for you. Here, it gets labeled as being a failure. In that, you and Bush do have something in common. Both of you have advocated regime change that has lowered peoples' standards of living, decreased life expectancy, destroyed basic services, killed off many, increased crime, and sent many to the unemployment and begging lines. You and President Bush see "victory" in demolishing peoples' lives and making them worse off. Be proud of that. You're in rare historical company now. mirage  posted on  2008-05-09   12:08:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 15. #19. To: mirage (#15) You and President Bush see "victory" in demolishing peoples' lives and making them worse off. Jorge, McNuts and the rest of the luciferian rockefeller Gay Old Party leadership these days are RATS...World Socialists. FOH  posted on  2008-05-09 12:12:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #20. To: mirage (#15) Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group. While precise definition varies among genocide scholars, a legal definition is found in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Article 2, of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide robnoel  posted on  2008-05-09 12:12:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #21. To: mirage (#15) 15 years after independence, the Republic of Ireland (or the Irish Free State, as it was then called) looked like a failure. Likewise India, 15 years after independence. aristeides  posted on  2008-05-09 12:13:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   End Trace Mode for Comment # 15. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]