Do the British far right do enough about condemning racist extremism?

[flamingjimmy]

Because, regardless of definition, it is a word with only negative connotations

duh! It's a negative part of his history. He may have been justified, but blowing up buildings is not a very positive thing to do.

used to demonise people

And how do we change that? By using it in its proper context. By pointing out examples like Mandela and Hiroshima and Nagasaki as examples where terrorism may have even been the right course of action.

and I feel it plays into the hands of racists by simply labelling Mandela as a terrorist (just as the Apartheid government did), without mention of the evil he was fighting against.

By all means mention the evil he was fighting against, that's entirely appropriate, put it in its proper context, but don't claim that he wasn't a terrorist, that's just wrong. From your posts I think I'm totally on your side on issues like this in general, but I think you take away credibility by refusing to acknowledge that Mandela did commit acts of terrorism.

[Halibut]

Do the far right do enough about condemning extremist racism? No, of course not - it's their job to promote it.

[2pac]

I have yet to hear a word from the BNP or EDL condemning the recent attacks and mass murder.

Do the British far right do enough to stop terrorism and should they be more vocal in their condemnation?

(Or even mention it at all.)

 

yes they should be more vocal, there silence says they aggree with such vile evil. Just like other groups that show there aggrement with vile actions that happen over and over and over again and they say nothing ever.

[shims]

duh! It's a negative part of his history. He may have been justified, but blowing up buildings is not a very positive thing to do.

And how do we change that? By using it in its proper context. By pointing out examples like Mandela and Hiroshima and Nagasaki as examples where terrorism may have even been the right course of action.

 

By all means mention the evil he was fighting against, that's entirely appropriate, put it in its proper context, but don't claim that he wasn't a terrorist, that's just wrong. From your posts I think I'm totally on your side on issues like this in general, but I think you take away credibility by refusing to acknowledge that Mandela did commit acts of terrorism.

I honestly couldn't care less and I'm not saying that with any offence intended at all. To clarify: the only people I've ever found describing Mandela as a terrorist are those racially prejudiced white supremacist types who miss Apartheid and the days when African people were not allowed to express an opinion. If by dictionary definition he is one (and this is the case), so be it but I'll not refer to him as such. If any credibility is taken away because of this, it's only my own, since I only speak for myself and as I stated, I'm cozy enough with that.

[Arguendo]

Because, regardless of definition, it is a word with only negative connotations, used to demonise people and I feel it plays into the hands of racists by simply labelling Mandela as a terrorist (just as the Apartheid government did), without mention of the evil he was fighting against.

 

**BS***

 

Anders Behring Breivik is a criminal/mass murderer sick individual not a terrorist; Unlike Nelson Mandela, or in fact individuals like Gerry Adams & Martin McGuiness, who are all now either respected politicians, or in Nelson Mandela case a Nobel peace prize winner & world statesman. Nelson Mandela & his ANC organisation committed many far more sickening atrocities against his own people & white Afrikaans than Anders Behring Breivik has ever committed; this doesn’t in anyway excuse what he’s done & hopefully his punishment will be appropriate, however as far as I’m concerned people such as Nelson Mandela have escaped answering for their crimes of which many do-gooders conveniently either omit from his biography/history or discussion.

 

 

You can not excuse the atrocities of one & then condemn those of another, either way you look at it whether it be Anders Behring Breivik or Nelson Mandela they both have/had an Ideology, they both have/had a political persuasion, we may disagree or agree depending on which side of the political fence you are, however unlike many people who agree or disagree with the views they both took away innocent lives, in the case of Anders Behring Breivik he undertook his ‘actions’ by his own choice, a choice many who may agree with specific political points he makes, many if not the majority will wholley disagree with & condemn his actions, however Nelson Mandela also undertook his ‘actions’ by his own choice but he also persuaded a whole nation to follow, as result South Africa has & will continue to struggle & suffer.

 

A bit of an insight into the world of Mandela prior to rise as a statesman; http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=5704

[melthebell]

**BS***

 

Anders Behring Breivik is a criminal/mass murderer sick individual not a terrorist

 

oh give over, his action was to terrorise his own country into changing its political system

the people on that island WERE terrified for their lives, i know wouldve been

[boyfriday]

You can not excuse the atrocities of one & then condemn those of another, either way you look at it whether it be Anders Behring Breivik or Nelson Mandela they both have/had an Ideology, they both have/had a political persuasion, we may disagree or agree depending on which side of the political fence you are, however unlike many people who agree or disagree with the views they both took away innocent lives, in the case of Anders Behring Breivik he undertook his ‘actions’ by his own choice, a choice many who may agree with specific political points he makes, many if not the majority will wholley disagree with & condemn his actions, however Nelson Mandela also undertook his ‘actions’ by his own choice but he also persuaded a whole nation to follow, as result South Africa has & will continue to struggle & suffer.

 

A bit of an insight into the world of Mandela prior to rise as a statesman; http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=5704

 

On that basis anyone who goes to war is a terrorist.

[boyfriday]

**BS***

 

Anders Behring Breivik is a criminal/mass murderer sick individual not a terrorist; Unlike Nelson Mandela, or in fact individuals like Gerry Adams & Martin McGuiness, who are all now either respected politicians, or in Nelson Mandela case a Nobel peace prize winner & world statesman. Nelson Mandela & his ANC organisation committed many far more sickening atrocities against his own people & white Afrikaans than Anders Behring Breivik has ever committed; this doesn’t in anyway excuse what he’s done & hopefully his punishment will be appropriate, however as far as I’m concerned people such as Nelson Mandela have escaped answering for their crimes of which many do-gooders conveniently either omit from his biography/history or discussion.

 

Mandela was a trained solicitor with his own practice, who gave that up and the best part of his life because he was prepared to take a stance against a regime that had taken over his country and denied the vote and equal opportunities to non whites.

 

I'd say he's paid a very heavy price for his 'crimes'. Only a simpleton would believe otherwise.

[Arguendo]

Mandela was a trained solicitor with his own practice, who gave that up and the best part of his life because he was prepared to take a stance against a regime that had taken over his country and denied the vote and equal opportunities to non whites.

 

I'd say he's paid a very heavy price for his 'crimes'. Only a simpleton would believe otherwise.

 

Taking a stance is one thing, internal & worldwide political demonstrations, attempting to gain a change in your countries political practices, through peaceful endeavours & gaining support from individuals/governments in other countries yes, but not by kidnapping, torturing & murdering your own people, placing them in ‘re-education schools’, bombing, terrorising communities, car bombing, murdering whole families, the placing of burning tyres around the necks of informants, or opposition opponents. And whether Nelson Mandela took part or not; he had full knowledge of what was going on, he divorced his wife Winnie (a social worker) when she was convicted of kidnapping and torture because it was affecting his Saint Mandela image, & to this day he is yet to appologise.

 

 

@your bold, I’d say those who continue to suffer & those who lost their lives as a result of his & the ANCs’ actions paid the heavier price; murderers irrespective of who they are, in my opinion should receive capital punishment, whether that be, Nelson Mandela or Anders Behring Breivik.

[boyfriday]

Taking a stance is one thing, internal & worldwide political demonstrations, attempting to gain a change in your countries political practices, through peaceful endeavours & gaining support from individuals/governments in other countries yes, but not by kidnapping, torturing & murdering your own people, placing them in ‘re-education schools’, bombing, terrorising communities, car bombing, murdering whole families, the placing of burning tyres around the necks of informants, or opposition opponents. And whether Nelson Mandela took part or not; he had full knowledge of what was going on, he divorced his wife Winnie (a social worker) when she was convicted of kidnapping and torture because it was affecting his Saint Mandela image, & to this day he is yet to appologise.

 

I think you need to read up on the history of South Africa and how the ANC came about. In case you forget, even in recent history the Thatcher government resisted the application of sanctions against South Africa, the ANC's struggle against the apartheid regime started in 1912, by the time Mandela became involved in the 40's it was clear gaining change by "peaceful endeavours & gaining support from individuals/governments in other countries" wasn't going to work. Mandela and the ANC leadership had resisted direct action for many years, however they believed it became a necessary evil to facilitate change.

 

I wonder what Mandela's detractors would do if the UK was controlled by Islamists who denied non Muslims the right to vote, made them live in the worst areas, denied them the freedom to associate with whoever they pleased, denied them equal access to education and health care?

 

@your bold, I’d say those who continue to suffer & those who lost their lives as a result of his & the ANCs’ actions paid the heavier price; murderers irrespective of who they are, in my opinion should receive capital punishment, whether that be, Nelson Mandela or Anders Behring Breivik.

 

So you're a pacifist then?