In this rare interview Mandela recognizes Cheney and his cohorts for what they are.

[mfcorey1]

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/NM091002.html


In a rare interview, the South African demands that George W. Bush win United Nations support before attacking Iraq

NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE

Sept. 10 — Nelson Mandela, 84, may be the world’s most respected statesman. Sentenced to life in prison on desolate Robben Island in 1964 for advocating armed resistance to apartheid in South Africa, the African National Congress leader emerged in 1990 to lead his country in a transition to non-racial elections. As president, his priority was racial reconciliation; today South Africans of all races refer to him by his Xhosa clan honorific, Madiba. Mandela stepped down in 1999 after a single five-year term. He now heads two foundations focused on children. He met with Newsweek’s Tom Masland early Monday morning in his office in Houghton, a Johannesburg suburb, before flying to Limpopo Province to address traditional leaders on the country’s AIDS crisis. Excerpts:



NEWSWEEK: Why are you speaking out on Iraq? Do you want to mediate, as you tried to on the Mideast a couple of years ago? It seems you are reentering the fray now.

Nelson Mandela: If I am asked, by credible organizations, to mediate, I will consider that very seriously. But a situation of this nature does not need an individual, it needs an organization like the United Nations to mediate. We must understand the seriousness of this situation. The United States has made serious mistakes in the conduct of its foreign affairs, which have had unfortunate repercussions long after the decisions were taken.

Unqualified support of the Shah of Iran led directly to the Islamic revolution of 1979. Then the United States chose to arm and finance the [Islamic] mujahedin in Afghanistan instead of supporting and encouraging the moderate wing of the government of Afghanistan. That is what led to the Taliban in Afghanistan. But the most catastrophic action of the United States was to sabotage the decision that was painstakingly stitched together by the United Nations regarding the withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan.

If you look at those matters, you will come to the conclusion that the attitude of the United States of America is a threat to world peace. Because what [America] is saying is that if you are afraid of a veto in the Security Council, you can go outside and take action and violate the sovereignty of other countries. That is the message they are sending to the world.

That must be condemned in the strongest terms. And you will notice that France, Germany Russia, China are against this decision. It is clearly a decision that is motivated by George W. Bush’s desire to please the arms and oil industries in the United States of America. If you look at those factors, you’ll see that an individual like myself, a man who has lost power and influence, can never be a suitable mediator.

What about the argument that’s being made about the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and Saddam’s efforts to build a nuclear weapons. After all, he has invaded other countries, he has fired missiles at Israel. On Thursday, President Bush is going to stand up in front of the United Nations and point to what he says is evidence of...

. . . Scott Ritter, a former United Nations arms inspector who is in Baghdad, has said that there is no evidence whatsoever of [development of weapons of] mass destruction. Neither Bush nor [British Prime Minister] Tony Blair has provided any evidence that such weapons exist. But what we know is that Israel has weapons of mass destruction. Nobody talks about that. Why should there be one standard for one country, especially because it is black, and another one for another country, Israel, that is white.

So you see this as a racial question?

Well, that element is there. In fact, many people say quietly, but they don’t have the courage to stand up and say publicly, that when there were white secretary generals you didn’t find this question of the United States and Britain going out of the United Nations. But now that you’ve had black secretary generals like Boutros Boutros Ghali, like Kofi Annan, they do not respect the United Nations. They have contempt for it. This is not my view, but that is what is being said by many people.

[spanone]

1. k&r...

[90-percent]

2. Scott Ritter

He was a well informed WMD truth teller before the invasion. I think he may have had some dubious illegal hobbies that led to his entrapment and arrest? His excellent WMD knowledge, that COULD HAVE PREVENTED THE IRAQ INVASION if taken seriously, was completely nullified by his creepy secret life. If he had been a squeaky clean boy scout the march to war could have changed direction.

DO NOT BECOME A WHISTLE BLOWER like Scott if you have human foibles!

Which brings up a profound point; Lets say that you like porn, exotic dancers, 420 and experimented with freaky sex. Or download movies or pirate software. The NSA has permanently stored all electric correspondence you've ever had in your life about your sleazy hobbies, you dirty perv, you.

Then you decide to do some whistle blowing against your government. VIOLA! All your dirty little secrets from your entire life time will become public knowledge and possibly ruin your life. Loose your job, wife family home career etc. IT doesn't even have to be whistle blowing. Participation in an Occupy Protest or other protest or a letter to the editor or Republican friends that want you silenced could do it too.

The govt has this almost lifetime meta data on EVERYBODY and you better believe they will use it if you threaten them!

Selective enforcement blown and on fuel.

All justified in the name of "keeping us safe". From terrorists, maybe. From your own government, no fucking way! I think Thom Hartmann once said America looses more people every year from household BATHROOM ACCIDENTS than we did on 9-11! Does anybody think "keeping us safe" is the main rational for the build up of this national surveillance state since 9-11?

-90% Jimmy

[karynnj]

7. I would not say that follows

It is highly likely that he would have been picked up in the massive effort to stop child pornography and to work against adults trying to pick up kids on the internet.

If looked at that way - he could have stayed quiet and still been arrested. It would have been less news worthy - as he would be far less known - and there would have been no one believing that he was framed. In reality, there would have been no reason to frame him. The war was ongoing and it was apparent that there were no WMD. Ritter was absolutely no threat to the Bush/Cheney administration already relabeling their invasion as for "spreading democracy". The Downing Street memos proved - what Ritter could never prove - that Bush et al were never motivated by likely WMD.

For the most part, people are not all bad or all good. If you believe, as most do, that children should be protected from sexual predators, you have to agree that in this part of his private life he was a pretty bad person. Yet, there were likely people very close to him who never saw that side of him and were stunned to see a man they respected being charged with actions that they could not accept. In fact, that people close to him were surprised shows Ritter himself knew these actions were not acceptable.

In addition, his comments that ended up being proven as accurate were undercut because in 1999 or 2000, he was saying pretty much the opposite to the Congress because he thought it important - after the inspectors left before the Clinton bombing - to have the inspectors back in. This means many of the same people listening in 2002/2003 were people he told almost the opposite only a few years before AND no inspectors had been there in the interim.

In fairness, you could say his motives in both time periods were the same - he was for inspections - he was not for war.

[dionysus]

20. smoking dope and being a pedophile are two very, very different things. nt

[Martin Eden]

3. More:

But people like Dick Cheney . . . I see yesterday there was an article that said he is the real president of the United States of America, I don’t know how true that is. Dick Cheney, [Defense secretary Donald] Rumsfeld, they are people who are unfortunately misleading the president. Because my impression of the president is that this is a man with whom you can do business. But it is the men who around him who are dinosaurs, who do not want him to belong to the modern age. The only man, the only person who wants to help Bush move to the modern era is Gen. Colin Powell, the secretary of State.

I gather you are particularly concerned about Vice President Cheney?

Well, there is no doubt. He opposed the decision to release me from prison (laughs). The majority of the U.S. Congress was in favor of my release, and he opposed it. But it’s not because of that. Quite clearly we are dealing with an arch-conservative in Dick Cheney.

[malthaussen]

6. But Jeebus rode dinosaurs!

Dinos are good!

-- Mal

[Martin Eden]

12. Seen real live Jeebus or dinosaurs lately?

Dick Cheney, however, still lives and breathes.
I blame Mother Nature, for extincting the wrong creatures.

[Cha]

15. "arch conservative" being code for

extreme asshole. that's the only way I can read it.

[Martin Eden]

16. Mandela was being polite.

But I think he had in mind warmonger who butchers innocent people to enrich the MIC, which is orders of magnitude worse than your run-of-the-mill extreme asshole.

[Cha]

17. Exactly.

[SHRED]

4. k and r

[G_j]

5. K&R!

for truth

[Baitball Blogger]

8. Gees, looking at it from Mandela's point of view, the US Foreign policy can be

referred to as the Viking strategy.

[UtahLib]

9. Nelson Mandela was being kind

when calling the malignant and vicious Dick Cheney merely an arch conservative.

[Coyotl]

10. VIDEO: Nelson Mandela Condemns George W. Bush and War With Iraq

[skydive forever]

13. Wow

I never heard this before. Stunning speech. Can't understand why this wasn't on FOX News. NOT!

[BlancheSplanchnik]

11. brillant. such a clear analysis.

I'm even sadder he had to leave, now.

[johnnyreb]

14. Yeh but

all that plunder, murder, torture, hypocrisy, disinfo, misdirection, lies, arms merchants, evil and loss of stature and stuff is so yesterday's news.

[G_j]

18. ---

[countryjake]

19. K&R!

[grahamhgreen]

21. So, a war for profit;

George W. Bush’s desire to please the arms and oil industries in the United States of America.

[Octafish]

23. ' Money trumps peace.'

Last edited Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:59 AM - Edit history (1)

And then he laughs.

The very words of George W Bush on Feb. 14, 2007, uttered at a press conference in which not a single of the callow, cowed press corpse saw fit to ask a follow-up.

I remember Cindy Sheehan tried to bring it to our nation's attention.

As for his Poppy: Bush Sr told the FBI he was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.

[grahamhgreen]

24. Forgot about that one! Thanks, where are the prosecutions. Iraq was a crime.

[Octafish]

25. And lying America into an illegal, immoral and unnecessary war is treason.

They, and their bosses, the banksters, walk free.

[sibelian]

22. I fully agree with his race-based interpretation of that period of contempt for the United Nations.

It makes perfect sense to me.