Former Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers is a victim; he’s the victim of racial discrimination against terrorists. You see, there is no real difference between him and Nelson Mandela. Mutually shared love for Communism, Marxism, Fidel Castro, Yasser Arafat, bombings, etc. etc. The ideological similarities between the two men are virtually mirror images of one another, save for one thing – their skin color. Yet, Ayers is identified as an unrepentant terrorist and Mandela is practically revered as a saint by the left and given a casual pass by many on the right.
Both Ayers and Mandela committed and sanctioned multiple acts of terrorism that resulted in deaths and destruction of property. Both men later stopped. Ayers did so not because he repented but because he thought it more effective to go a different route. Bombings were not only proving ineffective, but detrimental to the cause. Ayers himself narrowly escaped going to prison for a long time, on a technicality.
After pleading guilty for his role in more than 150 acts of terrorism, Mandela rightfully went to prison. Four years prior to his release, he saw opportunity. As we all know, when mixed with preparation, that leads to ‘luck’. South African officials began a move toward non-racial elections and Mandela was part of these negotiations. In other words, for four years, Mandela was able to reinvent himself; he was able to construct a conciliatory figure that could yield great dividends. Why, he could become president of South Africa!
There are figures on the right who concede that Nelson Mandela was a communist and a marxist who revered Arafat and Castro but then qualify those traits with a ‘but’. Breitbart’s Joel Pollak provides the perfect example – a conservative who thought it better to go easy on the unrepentant terrorist, while praising him for a spirit of reconciliation and calling his legacy ‘complex’.
Last year, Pollak made a big deal about Obama’s 2005 attendance at a Bill Ayers barbeque. In 2013, Brietbart’s Senior Editor-at-Large didn’t seem to have a problem with Obama’s attendance at Mandela’s memorial.
Mandela was not repentant. Had he been so, he would have rejected Yasser Arafat and Fidel Castro, both murderous men who mastered the art of terrorism. Instead, he embraced them – consistently – after his release. The difference between Mandela and Ayers in this regard is that the latter was honest about his non-repentance, even saying on a 2002 radio program that he always considered himself an ‘anarchist’ and a ‘marxist’. There is one other difference too; Mandela was black.
There is a reason why leftists incessantly play the race card. Despite over-playing it, the technique works. In large part, the skin color of Barack Obama has neutered elected Republicans who may have problems with his usurpations but have a bigger problem with how they would be portrayed after making honest attempts to stop those usurpations, or even identifying him for who he is, regardless of his skin color.
Hence, we have the reconstruction of Nelson Mandela and an unwillingness on the part of people like Joel Pollak (he’s not the only one), to avoid sugar-coating the truth. That is what makes those who see elected Republicans as unwilling to tell the truth about Obama but who themselves refrain from telling the truth about Mandela, hypocrites.
The only logical explanation for anyone on the right to massage the legacy of Mandela is a fear of the race card, a fear they claim not to have when criticizing Obama.
The reality is that in order for Mandela to benefit to the great degree he did, he had to seek reconciliation publicly but not privately; he had a motive to do that. Ayers didn’t need to do so. After all, upon hearing the verdict that “improper surveillance” techniques would make him a free man, Ayers infamously said, “Guilty as sin, free as a bird. America is a great country”.
The truth is, according to South African missionary Peter Hammond – who personally met with Mandela – and multiple other sources, that Mandela pleaded guilty to 156 acts of terrorism and Amnesty International wouldn’t even come to his aid because the charges were so clearly legitimate. Mandela has the blood of innocent women and children on his hands. Does it really matter if he sought reconciliation to become president?
Letting a terrorist and a murderer out of prison after several years for good behavior is one thing. Putting that terrorist in charge of a nation after doing so is something else entirely.
Any unrepentant terrorist would expediently express faux repentance if that was the payoff (unrepentant terrorists usually know how to lie).
As for Ayers, he should feel slighted; he’s now a victim of racial discrimination.