And I know this how? Norman Finkelstein, another of Hamas’ effective spokesmen ─ left-liberal, Jewish academics often are ─ has galvanized Mandela for moral suasion in condemning Israel’s actions. The fact that Mandela made the condemnation in his capacity as a member of the UN’s “Committee of Elders” was supposed to further bolster Finkelstein’s position (made on “Russian TV”). According to Finkelstein, this particular coven includes another international holy man, Desmond Tutu (in my upcoming book, “Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post Apartheid South Africa,” I tell of the time I took afternoon tea with Tutu himself).
This is important, why? Because, even more than the Dalai Lama, Mandela is considered the moral compass of the world by the philosopher kings of this country ─ beauty pageant contestants, and contemporary conservative and liberal pundits (ranked here from most to least intelligent).
Look, I too condemn the Israeli commandos ─ for sliding one-by-one into a snake pit seething with poisonous reptiles.
But by now, even Mandela must have seen the footage that festoons the video-sharing website YouTube attesting to the savage attacks sustained by the Israeli SEALS on board the Turkish “Love Boat.” The films show disturbingly passive soldiers stabbed, pummeled and whipped with metal pipes and chains ─ even fired upon ─ by passengers on the vessel.
The ship’s security cameras have captured the human flotsam and jetsam on deck as it prepares for the attack in advance. The chief organizer of the amity armada was a Turkish outfit, the IHH, the offices of which the Turks themselves have raided because of the IHH’s close ties to Al Qaida, a cozy relationship European intelligence has confirmed. By any reasonable standards of evidence, the facts of the “case” are clear. Elementary, my dear Mandela.
Given the state of his country, Saint Mandela’s sanctimony is too rich for words.
Bit by barbaric bit South Africa is being dismantled by official racial socialism, obscene levels of crime – organized and disorganized ─ AIDS, corruption, and an accreting kleptocracy. In response, people are “packing for Perth” (as American immigration law privileges uneducated Mexican migrants, preferably with criminal records). The Rainbow Nation now includes Africans armed with automatic weapons who roam the countryside culling Afrikaner farmers. The latter, by law, must “battle their ubiquitous assailants with only a shotgun, a handgun and a limited number of rounds at their disposal.”
However short the shrift the ultra-liberal South African Institute of Race Relations gives to the evidence of racial rage etched in the mangled, violated remains of thousands of rural white South Africans ─ the SAIRR has, at least, been suitably dismayed to discover that close to one million whites had already left the country; the white population shrank from 5,215,000 in 1995 to 4,374,000 in 2005 (“nearly one-fifth of the white population”).
Chief among the reasons cited for the exodus are violent crime and affirmative action. Alas, as the flight from crime gathered steam, the African National Congress, Mandela’s crowd, stopped collecting the necessary emigration statistics. (Correlation is not causation, but … ) The exact numbers are, therefore, unknown. (Although Mandela’s message to those departing is not: He has accused whites of betraying him and of being “traitors” and “cowards.”) What is known is that most émigrés are skilled white men. Do you blame them? Writes columnist Andrew Kenny:
In South Africa, the main instrument of transformation is Black Economic Empowerment (BEE). This requires whites to hand over big chunks of the ownership of companies to blacks and to surrender top jobs to them. Almost all the blacks so enriched belong to a small elite connected to the ANC. BEE is already happening to mines, banks and factories. In other words, a peaceful Mugabe-like program is already in progress in South Africa. [Except that it’s not so peaceful.]
Has that paragon of virtue, Mandela, called publicly for a stop to the pogroms? Cancelled a birthday bash with “the hollow international jet set” – “ex-presidents, vacuous and egomaniacal politicians, starlets, coke-addled fashion models, intellectually challenged and morally strained musicians”? Called for a day of prayer instead (oops; he’s an ex-communist)?
Not that you’d guess it from the film “Invictus,” Clint Eastwood’s “over-reverent biopic,” but neither has Mandela ever raised his authoritative voice against the ANC’s unremitting assault on Afrikaans as the language of instruction in Afrikaner schools and universities.
The political posse with which “Madiba” (Mandela’s cuddly tribal nickname) surrounds himself covers up the convincing proof of racial hatred motivating the murder and mutilation of thousands of white South Africans (and their babies).
The carnage against innocents continues apace in South Africa, as does Mandela’s silence. Had Mandela wrestled with these defining issues, perhaps he’d be deserving of the monstrous statues raised in his honor (these too are in the socialist realist aesthetic tradition).
As for his stature as the world’s arbiter of what’s moral and what’s not: Mandela might want to look in his own plate before he goes passing judgment on Israel.
©2010 By ILANA MERCER