Remove this Banner Ad

Mega Thread The Random Thoughts Thread Part 1

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
It has in the loud, extremely stupid minority :p
I would like to know how they get their figures on wages and how they come to find that women get payed less then men for the same job

Every workplace I have been in we get payed the same they have every opportunity to move up.....the only thing I can see that hinders their chance is when they have a baby...it will stall their career. If they didnt they didn't get the same opportunities they could sue the shit out if the company....

Every workplace I have been in women have been encouraged supported to move up the chain....some succeed others fail....I am baffled how they get their figures women are payed less.....in my company its a multi billion $ industry they would hate to been seen as sexist and its just not good for business.

If any women are mistreated or claim unequal opportunity I would encourage them to leave their company as there are plenty of good companies out there....
 
So when they throw up the fence around Elizabeth and turn it into a maximum security prison and Tony Abbott's plane crashes in there ... let's hope there is no Snake Plissken to rescue him. Of course by then he'll be former PM Abbott.
Elizabeth set up by the Liberals closed by the conservatives. The people who believe profits should be privatised and debts nationalised. Who shamelessly support the big end of town and govern(RULE)with ideological and religous fanaticism. A born to rule mentality that given their tract record beggars belief.
Shoehorned into power by an EX Australian whose Limited News Corporation wields frightening power by feeding the masses dross, sensational half truths and outright lies. A man who detests public broadcasting, whose idea of an independant ABC is the Andrew Bolt Club. Tony and his muppets railing against the NBN cos it threatens foxtel's monopoly. Railing against the mining super profits tax cos Gina's bankrolled them with $'s on the wink wink nudge nudge proviso that she'll be looked after.
Bah let her take her holes offshore. Could they be the heroes of tricky Triggy with an innate ability to tell lies to a mirror with a quivering lip. Maybe they inadvertly provided the template for his hate campaign against us.
Here endth the lesson
 
Elizabeth set up by the Liberals closed by the conservatives. The people who believe profits should be privatised and debts nationalised. Who shamelessly support the big end of town and govern(RULE)with ideological and religous fanaticism. A born to rule mentality that given their tract record beggars belief.
Nissan - left under an ALP government. Mitsubishi - under an ALP government. Ford - under an ALP government (at least announced under). And all that had been in longer at the times announced then the Coalition has been so far. I.e. long enough to actually have been a contributing factor. It was the ALP who had any car maker profits privatised and costs nationalised as 'co-investments'. Yeah, if you voted Labor cause your dad did, and his dad and 'dem bosses always out to screw the workers' that's fine, but a slim grasp of economics and how diverting money from industries (e.g. mining) to ones that cost (car making) makes no sense outside of 'nationalistic pride' wouldn't hurt. It's not like Ford, Holden or Toyota are Australian companies anyway!
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Nissan - left under an ALP government. Mitsubishi - under an ALP government. Ford - under an ALP government (at least announced under). And all that had been in longer at the times announced then the Coalition has been so far. I.e. long enough to actually have been a contributing factor. It was the ALP who had any car maker profits privatised and costs nationalised as 'co-investments'. Yeah, if you voted Labor cause your dad did, and his dad and 'dem bosses always out to screw the workers' that's fine, but a slim grasp of economics and how diverting money from industries (e.g. mining) to ones that cost (car making) makes no sense outside of 'nationalistic pride'. It's not like Ford, Holden or Toyota are Australian companies anyway!

Why let the truth get in the way of political bias?
 
If a musician / singer for a cover band gets asked to play for the original band they cover, are they still a cover musician?

Sent from my GT-I9305T using Tapatalk
 
When you spent 27 years in jail for the colour of your skin and come out forgiving your jailers you get some privileges.

Putting one on the greatest
  1. article-2347173-0067371800000258-495_634x408.jpg
Nelson Mandela lands a playful punch on the chin of former World Champion boxer Muhammad Ali in Dublin, Republic of Ireland, June 21, 2003. Mandela and Ali were in Dublin to attend the 2003 Special Olympics World Summer Games

And getting to give a supermodel a good squeeze.

campbell-farrow-mandela_0.PNG







Probably my favourite shots of Nelson - which other world leader could have worn their countries sporting top instead of a suit to the presentation of a world championship sporting event, and then celebrate so joyously after giving your countries captain the trophy and not get criticised for his actions.

  1. 130625140303-10-mandela-gallery-ap-0625-horizontal-gallery.jpg



And the dancing at his inauguration



always saying something wise

  1. 130625153424-01-mandela-quote-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg
But we all come to an end

  1. _71567154_71567153.jpg
 
Yeah he went to jail not because of the colour of his skin, he killed innocent people....he pleaded guilty to 156 counts of violence and terrorism (torture and necklacing)

What he achieved is nothing short of greatness...how he did it leaves a sour taste...but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire...

but he had a goal a positive one made the world a better place
 
Yeah he went to jail not because he was black he killed innocent people....he pleaded guilty to 156 counts of violence and terrorism (torture and necklacing)

What he achieved is nothing short of greatness...how he did it leaves a sour taste...but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire...

but he had a goal a positive one made the world a better place


He didn't kill people I think you need to do a bit of research he didn't plead guilty to 156 acts of killing people.

Mandela and his colleagues were charged with four counts of sabotage and conspiracy violently to overthrow the government. The Judge found Mandela and seven of his co-accused guilty on all four charges, sentencing them to life imprisonment rather than death.

Read the following about the Rivonia trial

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mandela/mandelaaccount.html


Yutar delivered the opening statement for the prosecution:
The accused deliberately and maliciously plotted and engineered the commission of acts of violence and destruction throughout the country. The planned purpose thereof was to bring about in the Republic of South Africa chaos, disorder and turmoil, which would be aggravated, according to their plan, by the operation of thousands of trained guerrilla warfare units deployed throughout the country at various vantage points....Their combined operations were planned to lead to confusion, violent insurrection and rebellion, followed, at the appropriate juncture, by an armed invasion of the country by military units of foreign powers. In the midst of the resulting chaos, turmoil and disorder, it was planned by the accused to set up a provisional revolutionary government to take over the administration and control of this country...

Listening to Yutar's address, defense attorneys realized (as Joel Joffe later recounted in his book, The State vs. Nelson Mandela: The Trial That Changed South Africa) that "for most of the accused the only possible verdict was 'guilty.' The case was therefore, as far as we were concerned, a battle to prevent the death penalty from being carried out." The defendants had other goals, however. Many of them saw the trial as the first and last opportunity to explain to the nation why they felt compelled to do what they did for the sake of South Africa's oppressed.


......


"I am the first accused," Mandela said, and began telling the story of his life, the reasons he joined the struggle for racial equality, and of his gradually arrived at conclusion that non-violent protest must give way to more violent approaches if the goals of a multi-racial democracy in South Africa were ever to be achieved:

At the beginning of June 1961, after a long and anxious assessment of the South African situation, I, and some colleagues, came to the conclusion that as violence in this country was inevitable, it would be unrealistic and wrong for African leaders to continue preaching peace and non-violence at a time when the Government met our peaceful demands with force. This conclusion was not easily arrived at. It was only when all else had failed, when all channels of peaceful protest had been barred to us, that the decision was made to embark on violent forms of political struggle, and to form Umkhonto we Sizwe.


http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mandela/mandelaaccount.html

Here is Mandela's full defence statement to the court April 20 1964.

http://www.un.org/en/events/mandeladay/court_statement_1964.shtml

but these 2 bits are important

I deny that Umkhonto was responsible for a number of acts which clearly fell outside the policy of the organisation, and which have been charged in the indictment against us. I do not know what justification there was for these acts, but to demonstrate that they could not have been authorized by Umkhonto, I want to refer briefly to the roots and policy of the organization.

I have already mentioned that I was one of the persons who helped to form Umkhonto. I, and the others who started the organization, did so for two reasons. Firstly, we believed that as a result of Government policy, violence by the African people had become inevitable, and that unless responsible leadership was given to canalize and control the feelings of our people, there would be outbreaks of terrorism which would produce an intensity of bitterness and hostility between the various races of this country which is not produced even by war. Secondly, we felt that without violence there would be no way open to the African people to succeed in their struggle against the principle of white supremacy. All lawful modes of expressing opposition to this principle had been closed by legislation, and we were placed in a position in which we had either to accept a permanent state of inferiority, or to defy the Government. We chose to defy the law. We first broke the law in a way which avoided any recourse to violence; when this form was legislated against, and then the Government resorted to a show of force to crush opposition to its policies, only then did we decide to answer violence with violence.
But the violence which we chose to adopt was not terrorism. We who formed Umkhonto were all members of the African National Congress, and had behind us the ANC tradition of non-violence and negotiation as a means of solving political disputes. We believe that South Africa belongs to all the people who live in it, and not to one group, be it black or white. We did not want an interracial war, and tried to avoid it to the last minute. If the Court is in doubt about this, it will be seen that the whole history of our organization bears out what I have said, and what I will subsequently say, when I describe the tactics which Umkhonto decided to adopt. I want, therefore, to say something about the African National Congress.

( and the incident that changed them from non violence)

In 1960 there was the shooting at Sharpeville, which resulted in the proclamation of a state of emergency and the declaration of the ANC as an unlawful organization. My colleagues and I, after careful consideration, decided that we would not obey this decree. The African people were not part of the Government and did not make the laws by which they were governed. We believed in the words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that 'the will of the people shall be the basis of authority of the Government', and for us to accept the banning was equivalent to accepting the silencing of the Africans for all time. The ANC refused to dissolve, but instead went underground. We believed it was our duty to preserve this organization which had been built up with almost fifty years of unremitting toil. I have no doubt that no self-respecting White political organization would disband itself if declared illegal by a government in which it had no say.

In 1960 the Government held a referendum which led to the establishment of the Republic. Africans, who constituted approximately 70 per cent of the population of South Africa, were not entitled to vote, and were not even consulted about the proposed constitutional change. All of us were apprehensive of our future under the proposed White Republic, and a resolution was taken to hold an All-In African Conference to call for a National Convention, and to organize mass demonstrations on the eve of the unwanted Republic, if the Government failed to call the Convention. The conference was attended by Africans of various political persuasions. I was the Secretary of the conference and undertook to be responsible for organizing the national stay-at-home which was subsequently called to coincide with the declaration of the Republic. As all strikes by Africans are illegal, the person organizing such a strike must avoid arrest. I was chosen to be this person, and consequently I had to leave my home and family and my practice and go into hiding to avoid arrest.

The stay-at-home, in accordance with ANC policy, was to be a peaceful demonstration. Careful instructions were given to organizers and members to avoid any recourse to violence. The Government's answer was to introduce new and harsher laws, to mobilize its armed forces, and to send Saracens,2 armed vehicles, and soldiers into the townships in a massive show of force designed to intimidate the people. This was an indication that the Government had decided to rule by force alone, and this decision was a milestone on the road to Umkhonto.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

They blew things up
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mandela/mandelaaccount.html
The campaign began on December 16, 1961 when Umkhonto we Sizwe saboteurs lit explosives at an electricity sub-station. Dozens of other acts of sabotage followed over the next eighteen months. (Indeed, the government would allege the defendants committed 235 separate acts of sabotage.) The sabotage included attacks on government posts, machines, and power facilities, as well as deliberate crop burning.

sabotagedpylonS.JPG


http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mandela/mandelaaccount.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivonia_Trial

Charges were:
  • recruiting persons for training in the preparation and use of explosives and in guerrilla warfare for the purpose of violent revolution and committing acts of sabotage
  • conspiring to commit the aforementioned acts and to aid foreign military units when they invaded the Republic,
  • acting in these ways to further the objects of communism
  • soliciting and receiving money for these purposes from sympathizers in Algeria, Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria, Tunisia, and elsewhere.
"Production requirements" for munitions for a six-month period were sufficient, the prosecutor Percy Yutar said in his opening address, to blow up a city the size of Johannesburg.

Kantor was discharged at the end of the prosecution's case.

......

Eight ( of the 10) defendants were sentenced to life imprisonment; Lionel Bernstein was acquitted.

"There was no surprise in the fact that Mandela, Sisulu, Mbeki, Motsoaledi, Mlangeni, and Goldberg were found guilty on all four counts. The defence had hoped that Mhlaba, Kathrada, and Bernstein might escape conviction because of the skimpiness of evidence that they were parties to the conspiracy, although undoubtedly they could be prosecuted on other charges. But Mhlaba too was found guilty on all counts, and Kathrada, on one charge of conspiracy. Bernstein, however, was found not guilty. He was rearrested, released on bail, and placed under house arrest. Later he fled the country."[18]

Denis Goldberg went to Pretoria Central Prison instead of Robben Island (at that time the only security wing for white political prisoners in South Africa) where he served 22 years
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivonia_Trial

Goldberg was white and that's why he didn't go to Robben Island.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

REH

mandella pleaded guilty behind bars

his wife was responsible for necklacing


http://m.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/the-dark-side-of-nelson-mandela/story-fni0ffxg-1226778174719

this is one of many articles that tell it how it is. I will get you more credible ones when I get time.

the only difference is mandellas causes were for good not evil.....and the man did great things


Winnie was no Nelson. She embraced some awful violence of her own people. Nelson's actions of walking away from here after a brief period of freedom says more than his silence of not criticizing her for actions.

Ah an Andrew Bolt article. I don't know what he pleaded guilty to if Bolt wasn't lazy he could of given more info. Not surprised he would have sanctioned acts of violence when he was locked up and treated like crap.

You reckon Andrew Bolt wouldn't have done the same thing?
 
The only time I saw Nelson upset was when Clinton visited in the middle of the Lewinsky scandal and Gaddafi was playing up and a US reporter asked him why he hadn't criticised Gaddafi and was still friendly with him.

Nelson in a stern tone said that when things were desperate Gaddafi was a friend and helped out his people. I have the news clipping from that presser in my copy of Long Walk to Freedom. He then said

"We had a government that slaughtered our people, massacred them like flies. it was repugnant to think we could sit down and talk to these people - but we did, we said let's talk peace."

27/3/98.

The reporter who asked about Gaddafi went very quiet and was put in his place.

Maybe that is also why he didn't do what Bolt wanted him to do when he writes

Mandela's support for other leaders of violence is even less forgivable. He maintained close ties to Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and backed Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat. As president in 1997, he gave his country's highest award for a foreigner to Libya's dictator, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who'd donated $10 million to the ANC. He gave the same award to the corrupt Indonesian president Suharto, who he said had donated $60 million.

He supported Nigerian coup leader Sani Abacha, refusing to say a word publicly to stop the 1995 hanging of activist Ken Saro-Wiwa.

I repeat, Mandela did great things. But many of his more radical supporters in the West now use that greatness to wash clean his record of political violence - and his support for dictators who'd used it..
 
Winnie was no Nelson. She embraced some awful violence of her own people. Nelson's actions of walking away from here after a brief period of freedom says more than his silence of not criticizing her for actions.

Ah an Andrew Bolt article. I don't know what he pleaded guilty to if Bolt wasn't lazy he could of given more info. Not surprised he would have sanctioned acts of violence when he was locked up and treated like crap.

You reckon Andrew Bolt wouldn't have done the same thing?
REH....I did say in my original post you have to fight with fire sometimes....

Mandella said he was forced to fight violence with violence....

I do think what mandella did was for a noble cause....but to say he was in prison because of the colour of his skin is not entirely true...

the media is the difference between a freedom fighter and terrorist
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom