If you're going to copy/paste something, you should at least have the decency to provide the source. Which is here.
The article claims:
The author offers no evidence to support this, nor does he specify which trial is referred to here.
At Mandela's first trial he was charged with treason. It lasted 6 years and he pleaded not guilty. The judges' final verdict: not guilty.
At Mandela's second trial he was charged with inciting workers' strikes and leaving the country without permission. He pleaded mitigation. The judges' verdict: guilty.
At Mandela's third trial he was charged with sabotage and conspiracy to violently overthrow the government. He pleaded guilty to sabotage but not guilty to planning violent insurrection. The judges' verdict: guilty.
Mandela remained in prison for the next 25 years. The ANC and MK continued under new leadership. Mandela was not responsible for any terrorist activities carried out by the ANC or affiliated organisations during this time; he had no authority or capacity to direct such activities, even if he'd wanted to
I cannot find any reputable source which proves that Mandela ever pleaded guilty to '156 acts of public violence including mobilising terrorist bombing campaigns, which planted bombs in public places, including the Johannesburg railway station.' Not one.
Good post but conveniently overlooked by the daily mail readers
If only he had been in an action movie