It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nelson Mandela's rejected love child? "Saint" or Conspiracy?

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:25 AM

A South African newspaper has published a photograph of a woman who bears a striking resemblance to Nelson Mandela alongside her family's claims that she died convinced she was the former president's secret love child.

If this claim is true, it is truly a cruel and tragic case - not quite what one would expect from the Nelson Mandela persona, promoted to virtual sainthood by the global liberal media.
Perhaps not the greatest conspiracy, but it certainly overthrows the notion of the behaviour of the Mandela clan as consistently "noble".
Some of their own members believe it was quite possible, and the total rejection of this lady's pleas to meet Mandela before her death can only be regarded as a closing of the bloodline ranks.

More questions surrounding the venerated status of Mandela follow below.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:31 AM
reply to post by halfoldman

Claim verified?!!!:

According to reports Mpho’s mother had an affair with the elderly statesman back in 1945 in Cape Town. The Pule family and media outlets have not been able to get a response from the Mandela family, but the Nelson Mandela Foundation sent the family a letter in 2009 in response to inquiries from the family reporting, “all the information provided by you has been verified.”

In that case they knew she wasn't a chancer and it was just cruel to treat her that way.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:07 AM
It appears that the Mandela sainthood is supposedly further shattered by a new book: "The Young Mandela"
This not only highlights his womanizing, but also alleged wife-beating.
But, perhaps for the context of those times, that is acceptable?

His grandson Mandla (36) engaged in similar cold-hearted behavior when he evicted an elderly relative from her home.
Next he married a second wife, as his first claimed domestic abuse and exposed the young chief's handsome financial assets.

But what of Mandela's much lauded politics? To some he will remain a communist terrorist, who refused to denounce violence, and would have hanged in most countries.
His singing of killing whites was seen as a sign of his cunning, in that an outright civil war was avoided in favour of a protracted slaughter as white numbers decreased:
One might think that these are just the views of a racist white right-wing.
But Ronald Reagan affirmed his support for apartheid SA in 1981, and labelled Mandela's ANC a "terrorist organization".
Strangely, this history has been rewritten in the US, much of which seems to imagine that it was always anti-apartheid.

David Icke links Mandela to Tony O'Reilly, and Mandela spent his 1993 Christmas at the Irish billionaire and media magnet's Nassau home in the Bahamas ("The Biggest Secret" 2001, p.279).
It has been argued that the apartheid state protected Mandela in relative luxury during it's nadir, while Black Consciousness was eliminated. Still today the ANC takes credit for BC struggle activities.

I thought he was a great President when he ruled, but apart from being a symbol of reconciliation, what did he actually do?
Well, the Mandela dynasty is already compared to Gandhi-Nehru dynasty, and such gushing hagriography can only point to manipulation.

And now there's the whole scandal of Naomi Campbell's blood diamond gift from Liberian despot Charles Taylor, which was squirreled away by the Nelson Mandela foundation. Interesting.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:18 AM
There are many conspiracies and prophecies surrounding the eventual passing away of Nelson Mandela. Most of them concern the start of racial, tribal and civil war. Perhaps this is a form of tribute to his unifying power.
The anxiety surfaced again recently, when a painting depicted the symbolic autopsy of Mandela by political figures.
The increasingly paranoid ANC labelled the piece "witchcraft".
The new Media Tribunal laws are further signs of their uneasy position after the success of former police chief Jackie Selebi's prosecution for corruption.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:33 AM
I don't much care about love children of any person, living or dead, but the rest of your analysis of the political situation is spot-on and worth reading. Actually worthy of it's own thread.

The blood diamonds squirreled away by the Nelson Mandela Foundation? Any links? Interesting.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:38 AM
Here is what I think.

Nelson Mandela did a lot of good to a huge number of people.

Whether he or not he had a love child - so what - plenty of people, including world leaders, do.

I think Nelson Mandela is as near a perfect person as we will ever go.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:39 AM
Reading this is very wierd.
Last night i was helping the kids with a project on famous south african politicians. As they have been brainwashed into doing, mandela was the ONLY person they could think of ....
So i introduced them to Jan Smuts. (many strange pre-echoes)

We had an interesting brainstorm about a lot of this, but the point kept coming back to me: WHY is Mandela such a big deal? There's no rational reason for it, he didn't DO much? Apart from what can only be described as an atrocious act of terror, that didn't even have the "military target" forgiveness that some of us may otherwise has given him (and run an illegal organisation from his prison house, something that the state MUST have sanctioned)

The recent death of his grand-daughter also opened more questions than answers, but strangely the media is most respectful of the privacy of the mandela family. The blood diamonds information coming out in the taylor trial is also very damning against the lagacy, and of course the recent behaviour of the anc undermines that he ruled over a healthy organisation.

This entire "mandela affair" contains much that's hidden, like exactly how he trumped Buthelezi as the the CIA favourite for first black president, and how he is "squeaky clean", against all odds.

Looking forward to hearing more info!

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:43 AM
reply to post by deltaalphanovember 590153.ece/Mandela-Fund-trustee-kept-Naomis-blood-diamonds%20%20

“Three small uncut diamonds were given to me by Naomi Campbell on the Blue Train on 26th September 1997,” said Jeremy Ratcliffe, also a former chief executive officer, in a statement. The statement followed testimony by Campbell at The Hague war crimes tribunal that she thought it was former Liberian president Charles Taylor who had given her a bag of diamonds, which it was argued were “blood diamonds”. Ratcliffe said he took them because he thought it might be illegal for her to take uncut diamonds out of the country. Campbell had suggested that they could be of some benefit to the fund but Ratcliffe said he told her that he would not involve the fund in anything that could be illegal. “In the end I decided I should just keep them,” said Ratcliffe.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 05:52 AM
reply to post by deltaalphanovember

Hi, was looking for a quick link of latest blood diamond developments (which have now pitted Mia Farrow against Campbell).
Two links closed on me.
Well, here is some background for now:
Things have developed since then, the Nelson Mandela foundation first denied having the stones, but the former head has now admitted it.

For me, when important royal bloodlines have love-children that is potentially important - some future leader is likely to rise out of apparent "nothingness", until you check the geneaology (easier said than done).
Furthermore (what I didn't even initially know) the claim seems verified by a reputable lab, but is still not acknowledged. And then how could they treat a pleading old lady so terribly?
Doesn't tally with the "Santa" figure wheeled out for the media, does it?

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:04 AM
reply to post by harryhaller

I wonder if the kids will ever hear of the Shell House Massacre?

In June 1995, ANC and then President Nelson Mandela claimed that he had given the order to defend Shell House, even if it should require killing people.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:05 AM
reply to post by halfoldman

OK everyone has faults.

I still think that Nelson Mendela did so much for the African people.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:17 AM
reply to post by catwhoknows

Well he did a lot for the fat-cats in his party, but yeah that is true in one sense, also as a symbol for SA and the black diaspora.
To his credit, he already bemoaned ANC corruption, as some recently discovered letters written 1993-1997 testify.
Couldn't or wouldn't do much to stop the looting apparently.
I wonder if anyone knows how to access individual letters online?

Well, as Icke points out, even if he was a principled individual upon release, he was pretty much read the agenda in the Bahamas in 1993.
So, especially as he grew very old, it is perhaps questionable how much say he had personally. At least that's what I'd like to think, that things were sometimes out of his hands, and during his last appearances I felt sorry for him. It's like they wheeled out a marketing brand with no concern for his dignity at the World Cup.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:20 AM
reply to post by halfoldman

I think Nelson Mandela as an IDEAL (like Ghandi) is more important than Mandela the man.
What he signifies (unity, forgiveness and humility) is far more important than that he once stood for. In fact, I think it is important that he was a TERRORIST and man of questionable morals. It makes Nelson (present-day) more important because it means that everyone has the ability to change for the better.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:27 AM
reply to post by halfoldman

Ah yes even i'd forgotten that one!! Thanks for the reminder.

catwhoknows, whatever right or wrong, it's your 100% faith in the man that makes me question it. he's JUST a man (with a really bad past).

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 06:46 AM
reply to post by halfoldman

I remember with the World Cup appearance there were conspiracies that he was actually deceased, and Graca waved his limp arm!
That's nonsense (although the arm was waved), but it makes me wonder whether these elderly symbols of power who belong to an organization for life are not sometimes physically abused by their handlers.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by halfoldman]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link vn20100813044723604C801771

A second woman who claims to be Nelson Mandela's love child has come forward.

AND vn20100813044527952C353737

Police have discovered at least four bodies in the Aurora Mine in Ekurhuleni, and were expected to resume the search for more bodies on Friday morning.

There could be more than a dozen additional victims, all of whom were reportedly gunned down by security at the mine owned by a grandson of Nelson Mandela and a nephew of President Jacob Zuma.

Police and emergency services personnel were late on Thursday still combing through the maze of tunnels at the Aurora Gold Mine site near Springs, where up to 20 illegal miners were allegedly gunned down by mine security guards, who left the bodies to rot underground.

Curiouser and curiouser.

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:38 AM
The bottom line is this:
Nelson Mandela did great things, but he also has great personal flaws.

The type of passive and meek person that may fit your definition of a "saint" (never did physical or emotional harm to any person, and practices all he preaches) is not usually the type of person who changes the world.

Great social change (i.e., making the world a better, fair, and more peaceful place to live) is usually done by a more active and aggressive type of personality -- and those people will come with personal flaws. It's a paradox.

[edit on 8/13/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 10:45 AM
How did Nelson Mandela change the world to a better place?

Not only did his rule signal the overwhelming collapse of public health, the collapse of education and law enforcement?

Exactly where do people get the notion that he made anything better, and not far worse?

How can Western people be so brainwashed through simple sloganeering?

[edit on 15-8-2010 by halfoldman]

new topics

top topics


log in