It's SO predictable. Publicity-craving David Cameron jets off to South Africa (What about all those nasty carbon emissions from your plane, Dave?) to get a photo-opportunity with Nelson Mandela - the patron Saint of the left. Once out there, he doesn't miss an opportunity to attack Margaret Thatcher, saying that she had been wrong to describe Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress as "terrorists".
Thankfully, Lord Tebbit put "Call Me Dave" in his place, saying that Cameron had failed to understand the circumstances of the time.
"Because of his age, Mr Cameron is looking at these events as part of history. Others of us who lived through them and had input into the discussions at the time see things very differently. The policy of the Thatcher government was a success. The result was an overwhelmingly peaceful transition of power in which the final initiative for the handover came not from foreigners but from native South Africans - Afrikaner South Africans, at that."
Oh, and he should have added that it is matter of fact that Mandela WAS a terrorist leader and the ANC was a terrorist rabble (Neck lacing, anyone?) and whilst I fully accept that the Apartheid regime was WRONG, the fawning over the ANC regime in general, and communist-loving Mandela in particular, is pathetic.
Mandela may be a living saint to some, but I think Cameron will require help from a much higher source if he thinks his gutless overseas renunciation of Lady Thatcher is going to buy him votes from authentic British Conservatives. It might make the chattering classes buzz a little louder so they can help produce useful polls, but I think the British people in general, and the English people in particular, see through Cameron - the immaterial man for all seasons.
Maybe Maggie will turn up at the Tory Conference and tear strips off this lamentable shallow opportunist.
Posted by: iluvni | August 29, 2006 at 09:24 AM
Perhaps Herr Vance you might like to explain the subtle differences Between the ANC methods
and those of the Stern gang seeing as both ended up in government.
Posted by: Submariner | August 29, 2006 at 01:53 PM
Perhaps Submariner could address the issue under discussion - was the ANC a terrorist organisation, or are your ears full of water?
Posted by: David Vance | August 29, 2006 at 03:12 PM
I'm sure it'll be on to Bishop Tutu, where Cameron will only have to be kissing rings!
Posted by: ch in tx | August 29, 2006 at 04:20 PM
Do i think that Mandella was a terrorist then the answer is no. Now perhaps you might like to address my point on the difference between the ANC and The Stern gang.?
Posted by: Submariner | August 29, 2006 at 06:00 PM
Submariner,
Mandela was a founder and commander of Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation), the military wing of the African National Congress, and MK, as it was known, was a terrorist outfit.
Which bit of that do you not understand?
Now then, having established that you cannot recognise a terrorist, why would I waste my time debating the Stern gang with you.I know that the UK considered them terrorists, but then the UK considers the IRA to be doves of peace.
Posted by: David Vance | August 29, 2006 at 06:14 PM
The UK considered them terrorists possibly because they were murdering british soldiers left right and centre.Now i will put my question to you again Do you consider the members of the Stern gang as terrorists and if not please explain what is the difference between them and the ANC.
Posted by: Submariner | August 29, 2006 at 07:03 PM
Which just goes to show that - One man's terrorist is another man's hero!
It also shows that
A) - given time, terrorism is a one hundred percent successful tactic.. and
B) - that it is impossible for any civilised society to defend itself against such tactics..and
C) - that when democracy fails by consensus, it can always be restored at gunpoint...
Sorry to intrude on your little spat...
Posted by: Ernest Young | August 29, 2006 at 08:02 PM