posted
Hell yeah! Good for Mugabe. And is it any surprise that the white-man's puppet, Tzaringai went running, not to South Africa and the blacks, but to his white masters, no doubt to ask what does he do now.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mugabe is a target in a proxy war being fought by Britain and the Us to recolonize Africa. That's not black-liberation propaganda, that's a fact.
Kenya is as bad off ecnominically as Zimbabwe allegedly is. THOUSANDS of people have died as a result of the electoral violence in Kenya. In Zimbabwe the number is WELL less than a hundred. HMMM, let's do the math less than a hundred versus thousands. Who's the REAL strongarm dictator who refuses to relinquish power here?
So why doesn't that British lackey who's mismanaging things in Kenya need to be thrown out too? Why doesn't the Associated Press, who's been running a non-stop free-publicity campaign on behalf of Tvzaringai, not call for the outster of Kibaki who's far worse than anything Mugabe has allegedly done?
Because Mugabe is reclaiming the land the Brits stole. Kibaki is britain's lapdog and doesn't threaten the ecnomic and politlcal hegemony the Brit squatters in Kenya have enjoyed so even though his people starve, and there's warring in the streets we don't hear about it. Yes, Mugabe only chose to finally reclaim his people's land when he realized the whites weren't going to be his buddies after all, but considering that no other African leaders have reclaimed the land for their people Mugabe's effort are certailny better than nothing. They hate that he established monuments to black independence and valor, like Hero's acre, where huge statues of African men are celebrated for overthrowing the British. They hate that more than anything, because it further humiliates the whites who live there by reminding them they're the bad guys.
Notice that there are American-accented men in that room? Mugabe is demonized because he is exactly what whites must stop from arising in africa at all costs-- a black man who will overthrow white power and will show that Africa can stand up to whtie supremacy. Today it's Zimbabwe, tomorrow it's South Africa. The day after it's Namibia and Kenya. Then all of Africa. To white power Mugabe represents a domino effect that threatens to force white power out of africa and finally get the Independence movement of the 60's restarted. If I were Mugabe I'd "suicide" Tzaringai and then lock up and kill the whites who are backing him.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tzaringai's MDC is a terrorist group. They've committed numerous acts of violence in the country, but you never hear about it, because the only news we hear out of Africa comes through the BBC. Now who's side do you think the BBC is on? The white Brit squatters.
American news outlets don't do any journalism in Africa. They merely rebroadcast the reports they get from the BBC. Enough of this fakery about the "inflation" rate in Zimababwe. This is propaganda meant to sway the opinion of the international community. The number is ridiculous. 165,000 percent inflation. Why not make it an evne 200,00. r even a million. It's just as ridiculous.
The whites own damn near all the wealth and they have all the arable land. But they're portrayed as some sort of victims whose rights must be respected above all others. These leeches have hundreds of acres of land, given to them by white power, given to them for free. I'd love to see those white scum try to buy land in Britain for pennies per acre. Because that's what they paid when the whites took over. Small wonder that no matter how badly they claim Mugabe treats them they say they're prepared to die before they leave. They stole a whole country and are determined to try to hold on to what they stole, because if they lose the stolen real estate they lose everything. Mugabe should just declare the whites resident aliens and tell them to register themselves with the government and hand over their land and businesses over to black control where they'll be able to reap a small profit, but the ownership of course being in the hands of the people they robbed. Any whites who refuse will be declared illegal aliens and deported. Either way they can't keep what they've stolen.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
My personal favortie bit of whtie propaganda about Zimbabwe is that before the evil Mugabe came to power zimbabwe was "Africa's breadbasket."
Funny, then what was Live Aid and "We aRe the World," about? What were the famines of the 80's about? Why weren't the good white folks of the "breadbasket" feeding Africa?
Because when the white media says "Africa's breadbasket," they don't mean Africa at all. They mean that the whites in Zimbabwe gave food to the white regime in South Africa.
The only reason the whites are trying to get Tzaringai in power is because they've failed to kill Mugabe, the people won't overthrow him either. So Tzaringai is their Manchurian Candidate. They'll use the very democracy the people fought and died for to re-enslave them.
To the white world Mugabe is setting a bad example. He's showing Africa that it's okay to kick the whties around and ultiamtely to kick them out. He recognizes their "human rights" rhetoric for what it is: a line of bleeding heart nonsense they pull out, but ONLY when they're about to get their cummupence. He isnt falling for it. Small wonder the whites are so furious with him. They've tried EVERY trick in the book --tricks that have worked everywhere else in the world-- but this guy just won't fall.
Mugabe understands what's at stake here and what this is truly all about. It has nothing to do with whining white famerms, (white farmers go out of business everyday in the US and in Britain, their land abandoned to the elements and nobody gives a damn!) it's not about starving people (the whole WORLD is going through a food shortage) it's not about fair elections (We're still waiting to get free and fair elections here in the US) and it certainly isn't about what's in the best interests of Africans. This is about power. The world's mineral "treasure house" is up for grabs and the white world isn't about to lose what they see as their monopoly. Not to China and certailny not to the blacks.
This is the last gasp of white supremacy in africa. If Mugabe stands firm and gives the land back to it's people and tosses the whites out, all of Africa will see this and it will spread. If the white strategy of behind-the-scenes political engineering, puppet-candidates and using their waning power to turn the populace against reformist leaders works, it will set African freedom back a generation, at least! The whites have bet EVERYTHING on this one. This is their last ditch. They can't afford to lose and that's exactly what's happening. They've been so used to getting their way it never occurred to them that a leader would actually emerge, one who would beat them by simply digging in his heels. They didn't expect Mugabe to be such an excellent chess player, especially considering that he has almost no pieces to play with. But he holds the most important piece--the KING! Everytime they think they've got some momentum he uses his position to up the stakes by threatening to nationalize the mines (a move he should have already done!) and to kick all the whites out of the country. The whites know they're on thin ice. They can't keep what they've stolen and yet they have no way to hold on to it. Here's why. The damage to the whites expectations of a permanent power monopoly has already been done. While their plots to undermine Mugabe's public support by weakening the economy may have worked to some extent, NOBODY in Zimbabwe is agaisnt the land reclamation.
Mugabe has successfully made disempowering the whites into a national imperative. Yes, the people want better economic conditions, but they also want their land back, whether Mugabe's in power or not. Tzvaringai, even if he managed to come back at the head of a British-led invasion force, would still have to contend with this idea. The people would demand Tzvaringai improve the ecnomoy AND continue the land reclamations. Of course he would do like Kibaki in Kenya and kill thousands to keep whites in power---and the BBC would have nothing to say, but in a genreation a new Mugabe-acolyte would overthrown Tzvaringai and we'd be right back where we are today. The drive to purify Africa of foreigners won't end with Mugabe. It's already taken on a life of it's own.
And how else can Africa get to it's feet when whites own everything? Someone has to have the steel to say, "Everything you've stolen we are taking back, and you will get NOTHING for it!" Blacks must dominate every square inch of Africa, as the whites do Europe and America. Mugabe is trying to make that happen. For my part I say let's stop bullsh*tting around. We all know how this will turn out. Toss them off the land and give them 24 hours to get out of town before sundown. If not, it'll be rwanda part two. And nobody would shed a tear for them.
BTW, I'm sure some are wondering why I'm going on and on abuot this. Simple. I see a world where blacks are being threatened on all fronts. Where we're told it's cruel for us to demand power but not for others to take ours. I see a world where in every country the people who are the majority have the most wealth and power. Then I look at Africa. And the main reason the opposite is true is because the "leaders" have refused to overturn the status quo. Mugabe was one of those spineless folks too. He played the game until he realized the game was playing him. But he's doing the right thing NOW and that's what matters. Mugabe is presenting a viable example of black nationalism--the crucial piece that has been missing from every black government in Afirca and around the world. He doesn't want to be a willing subsect of white empire. Taking back the land, the mines the resources and putting that wealth into black hands. It would be utterly unprecedented in the history of the post-Columbus world. That makes him dangerous. The white attitude is "We stole it fair and square." for this alone he should deport them all, and before it's all over I think we'll see the Africans do that. Mugabe understands what it will take to free Africa. So do his white opponents. That's why they're so afraid of him. If they can topple him then the message to africa's leaders will be loud and clear "Don't try to overthrow us. We'll use the wealth we've ammassed to turn the people against you. We'll use out international media to portray you as a dictator--we've spent a lot of time creating that myth and won't hesitate to put it to use! And if that fails, then we'll simply buy a trojan horse--some stooge who'll paly ball-- and give him all the campaign funds he needs to throw you out. Best part is everyone will say that it was "democratic!'" This is a battle of will. Mugabe has shown he can hold the line. Now he needs to organize hs people, take back the mines and the farms,and get economic progress moving. The whites now realize that assassinations, coups and politlcal engineering are out of the question. Only thing left is a "unilateral" action of some sort or another. Shades of Iraq 2002 is what I'm talking about. Right now Zimbabwe isn't ready for a war. They need to be. Mugabe needs to be.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
Y'all missing the point. This is about to get a puppet in Zimbabwe before Zuma becomes president in South Africa next year.. to make his job difficult.
May God Help Mugabe, ameen Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the name of democracy By Baffour Ankomah “He [Mugabe] was extremely magnanimous in allowing Ian Smith to go on in Zimbabwe – I wouldn’t have, I really wouldn’t – and I think that was partly because he didn’t want to alienate whites. That attitude lasted for quite a long time, 15 years or so” – Lord Carrington, the former British foreign secretary who negotiated Zimbabwe’s independence constitution at Lancaster House, quoted by Heidi Holland in her new book, “Dinner With Mugabe – The untold story of a freedom fighter who became a tyrant”, published in March 2008.
Human beings have short memories! If not, how could the Western world engage in the orgy of Mugabe-bashing that we have seen since the 29 March elections in Zimbabwe? In fact, the bashing has been going on for far longer - since 2000 when the Zimbabwe land issue blew up, after some Africans decided that enough was enough and they wanted their stolen ancestral land returned to them!
Since then, the once “blue-eyed boy” from the rolling hills of Zimbabwe, who once dined and wined with British royalty, who once received countless unsolicited honorary degrees from Western universities, and numerous awards from the likes of the Hunger Project for being “the best African president”, has sadly become a tyrant!
In her book, Heidi Holland hurls silly adjectives at President Mugabe who has now become some kind of political football worthy to be kicked and spat upon by all and sundry in the Western world. Holland’s colourful description of Mugabe include: “Naivety, emotionally immature, paranoid, no warmth, from dirt-poor childhood, loner, emotionally underdeveloped, has no conscience and sense of concern for others, monster, ruthless tyrant, a damaged person underneath, reviled politician, unstable, deluded, personality disorder, and mad”.
Holland, who now lives in South Africa, describes herself as: “A Western-orientated writer with an involvement albeit peripheral in the politics of Rhodesia and Zimbabwe.” She narrates how when she was trying to get an appointment to interview Mugabe for the book, Mugabe’s press secretary George Charamba asked her what she thought of Zimbabwe and she replied “it’s a tragedy”, Holland says: “I expected him to raise his voice again: His snarled comment: ‘So you have written a Eurocentric book’, to which I replied: ‘Of course, I can only be who I am’, seem certain to incur his displeasure.” In 1975, Holland had allowed her friend, Dr Ahrn Palley, a constitutional expert and fellow activist, to hold a secret meeting in her “ranch-style home” in Zimbabwe with Mugabe who was about to flee to Mozambique after his release from 11 years in jail. Holland says she provided “dinner” for Palley and Mugabe, and this qualifies her to regurgitate it in 2008 as a “dinner with a freedom fighter who became a tyrant”.
For those Africans who don’t know the issues at stake in Zimbabwe and who think Gordon Brown and “the international community” are jumping mad because they want Africans to have more democracy (Brown is yet to be elected by his own people anyway), please take a cue from Holland’s “Of course, I can only be who I am.” I was in Zimbabwe before, during, and after the 29 March elections, and I entreat all to read my report overleaf.
In April last year, when Nigeria’s opposition parties rejected the result of the presidential election won by Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, and alleged that the election had been heavily rigged against them, Britain and “the international community” pretended they had gone on holiday. Over 200 Nigerians died in both pre-and post election violence, yet did we see Brown or any of those jumping mad over Zimbabwe today, jumping mad over Nigeria? President Paul Biya of Cameroon, already 26 years in power, has just received parliamentary support to change the constitution again so that when his current term ends in 2011, he can run – again - for another 7 years. And “the international community” is not jumping mad about Biya. Why? Don’t Cameroonians deserve more democracy? That should make us pause and reflect. Before then, to enrich our understanding of what is happening in Zimbabwe, let’s look at some issues raised by Holland in her book. She interviewed Clare Short, the former British secretary for overseas development, whose 5 November 1997 letter repudiating British colonial responsibility for funding land reform in Zimbabwe, sparked the troubles we’ve seen in that beautiful country for the past eight years.
Holland reports that Clare Short tried to shift the blame, first on Peter Hain, the South African-born British minister for Africa at the time. “I think the rhetoric of the UK [on Zimbabwe] was badly handled by Hain, of all people,” Holland quotes Short as having said. “I remember being in my bedroom in Birmingham and hearing him on the radio. I thought, ‘Peter, you sound like a colonial master speaking up for white farmers’. And of course, the media here loved that.”
Short went on: “One of Britain’s errors was the noisy rhetoric. We should have kept it right down, not tried to take a leading position, and we should have made sure that the neighbouring countries were absolutely clear as to how much money was on offer and how strongly the case for redistribution was supported internationally. We should have made that our rhetoric. I absolutely don’t accept that the letter I wrote was seminal, although of course I would take it away if that could stop the destruction and suffering that has gone on in Zimbabwe. But it is definitely Mugabe who is responsible.”
Well, the man Short’s department employed to investigate the Zimbabwean land issue, does not think so. Soni Rajan is an independent London-based consultant on international development who was employed by the ODA to investigate land redistribution in Zimbabwe on a number of occasions, both under the Tories and during Clare Short’s time.
Rajan told Holland “It was absolutely clear from the attitude of her [Clare Short’s] staff towards my recommendations that Labour’s strategy was to accelerate Mugabe’s unpopularity by failing to provide him with funding for land redistribution. They thought if they didn’t give him the money for land reform, his people in the rural areas would start to turn against him. That was their position; they wanted him out and they were going to do whatever they could to hasten his demise.”
What really strikes me in Holland’s book is her description of our late president, Kwame Nkrumah, as “a revered premier”. Since when did Nkrumah become a “revered” figure? Between 1960 and his overthrow in February 1966, and even long after his death in April 1972, Nkrumah was “a Mugabe” in the eyes of Western governments and their writers. All the adjectives and insults that Holland heaps on Mugabe today were hurled at Nkrumah! It is a mark of the versatility of the human mind that today, when history has absolved him, Nkrumah could be fondly looked at as a “revered” figure. He wasn’t “revered” when the West wanted him out!
Zanu PF will look back on the 29 March elections with trepidation at its own suicidal tendencies. In the midst of a deteriorating economy, and shortages of essential goods and services, the March elections were always going to be crucial to the destiny of the country. And yet Zanu, a party of such impeccable liberation credentials, went into the elections riddled with destructive infighting which saw – and this is no laughing matter – in some constituencies, two Zanu PF candidates fighting for the same seat and confusing their voters, and thus allowing the opposition to win the seat (or seats) by default.
Sabotage by the business community which increased prices in the run-up to the elections also did not help. There are still 400 British companies based in Zimbabwe and who dominate the economy. The government can shout as much as it likes, but the companies are private and they make their own decisions – which are not always in favour of the government. By increasing prices in the weeks leading to the elections, they sent a strong message to the electorate. The government’s tendency to allow things to drift, even in the face of clear signs of sabotage, also added to its electoral woes. The government watched on, apparently unconcerned, as commercial banks allowed long queues form at counters and ATMs in the crucial weeks leading to the elections. This was a sure way of creating disaffection among voters who were forced to queue for hours to withdraw their own money. The time they spent in the queue gave them the opportunity to talk and damn the government.
Zanu PF’s message at the rallies was also not very effective. It was long on the liberation war and short on the way out of the economic hardships. While the history was fine, people were yearning to hear about their stomachs and how the current difficulties were being, or going to be, resolved. That message was lacking.
‘Morgan is more’
In contrast, MDC-Tsvangirai ran a slick campaign and promised that their “friends” abroad had $10bn at the ready to heal the economy at a stroke, in the wake of a Tsvangirai victory. In certain instances, though, their adverts on the state-owned ZBC TV and radio, and even in the state-owned print media, were better and sharper than Zanu PF’s. The simple catchphrase: “I am Morgan. You need more. And I need your vote”, caught attention better than Zanu’s many long-winded messages.
Tsvangirai’s campaign was also hugely aided by six anti-Mugabe weekly newspapers (three based in Harare, two from South Africa and one from the UK, and all freely distributed in Zimbabwe’s urban areas). They tore Mugabe and Zanu into shreds week after week. There were also the Voice Of America’s Studio 7 broadcasting propaganda into Zimbabwe from Washington DC, and SW Africa Radio doing the same from the UK. All together, this gave “Morgan Is More” an advantage over Zanu PF in terms of media messages.
All said and done, the much expected presidential run-off is going to be a very interesting election.
posted
What's disappointing though is the fact that the MDC party led by Tsvangirai got more votes than ZANU. One could understand why: the economic and credit sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe by the West really affected the economic lives of the people especially the urban dwellers.
The goal was to create unrest in the streets or provoke a coup. Those plans did not work but the soft coup by way of the ballot almost worked. Those people who voted for the MDC were just willing to hand the country back to the British and the West just so they could shop for the imported goods they were accustomed to.
The MDC was formed in 1999 with European money and membership(local whites)--and the goal was to privatize everything. The land seizures was a big blow to plans because it meant that the agribusiness goals had to be put on hold.
The point is that historically too many blacks/Africans have allowed themselves to be used as instruments for the realization of European goals. From the Atlantic trade by way of colonialism up to neocolonialism--it hasn't been too hard to get targeted blacks to be used as instruments in European projects.
Now the bribes and the cajoling of the SADEC members by the U.S.-U.K. and the whole EU cabal is full steam ahead. And many are starting to make the right noises--music to Western ears.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: The White Man is desperate!
From the Guardian [Fascist-Zionist-Nazi news paper, which oddly many people consider it leftist paper. Don't ask how ]
Do you support military intervention in Zimbabwe?
and you can cast your vote by answering yes/no Here
Yep, Zionism, fascism, Marxism/socialism (white leftys) are all the same. I hope I haven't upset any trolls in here who will reply with their standard line:
posted
Wow Arwa . I voted on the Guardian.co.uk poll and guess what the cumulative results were? Do you support military intervention in Zimbabwe? 64.7% Yes 35.3% No
Racist Brits. Typical melonheads (white versions of akoben08).
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by HORUS^*^: Wow Arwa . I voted on the Guardian.co.uk poll and guess what the cumulative results were? Do you support military intervention in Zimbabwe? 64.7% Yes 35.3% No
Racist Brits. Typical melonheads (white versions of akoben08).
I wonder how you voted... Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, there are Brits who want to go into Zimbabwe? Guess that's why they want to pull out of Iraq so badly.
And what is their excuse going to be? That they care about Democracy? Then what about in Kenya where thousands have died trying to oust Britain's lapdog Kibaki? I saw a propaganda piece on YouTube called "Land of Revolution?" where they tried to say it's a civil war in Zimbabwe. Well what the hell do the Brits call what's going on in the Congo and the Sudan? What they call it is no threat to their power.
It reminds of what Dr John Henrik clarke said in his "Black Athena" debate on Youtube. "This propaganda assault is meant to prepare the minds of the international community for the military re-conquest of Africa." He said that 12 years ago, and now it's coming to pass. Push has come to shove. Does Mugabe have what it takes to push back? So far, not really. The whites have already decided that they'll settle for nothing less than total victory. Mugabe needs to accept that this is not some war with rules--it's a streetfight. Winner take all. The whites have the desire to overthrow him but not the ability. But if he lets them remain in the country they will keep agitating until they have that ability. Already they've given up on a soft coup and are trying to get Africa's leaders to press their case. The African "leaders" (read: professional white ass-kissers) who are criticizing Mugabe are doing so largely because of Zimbabwe's economy. not to mention most of them are entirely dependent on white money to keep their own countries economies out of the crapper. Mugabe needs to start acting like he's trying to win a streetfight instead of a popularity contest. The whties are desperate. That's why they're pulling out all the stops to force an all-or-nothing fight for control. He's done right so far by confusing their plans by arresting MDC foot soldiers for subversion. But why has not even one white been arrested or deported? Because even at this late stage Mugabe still doesn't compleltey understand the danger he's in. He still thinks there can be some sort of modus vivendi. He's still thinks he can somehow talk his way out of this one. He doesn't want to accept responsibilty for running the state. He still wants whites to do it. Well, they've made it clear they're not looking for partners, they're looking for puppets. He's not fine with that, but it seems he thinks he can get them to calm down and let him keep power. He doesn't realize they've already decided he's to be ousted and killed afterwards. Why? Because he's humilated them, and set an example of blacks using force to kick whits out of power. He's committed an unpardonable sin. The only way to save himself now is to sacrifice them.
Look, we all know this is a war to stop the domino effect Mugabe's land reforms represents. Half the MDC's supporters are bought and paid for by the whites, the other half are the victims of the whties economic manipulation and don't realize they're pawns in the game.
Mugabe also is trying to tiptoe through this minefield. He thinks he can take baby steps toward freedom, and minimize the damages of dislodging the entrenched white power base, when it should be clear by now that the ONLY way he can come out of this alive is going to be to charge forward with all his might. There's no "gentle" way to remove a rotten tooth, you have to rip it out in a single instant! He needs to get his agricultural act together (get blacks in place to take over the farms, and develop the countryside) and oust ALL the whites. He doesn't have the luxury of time here. That's the lesson of Idi Amin. The Indians were put out and no foreigners had enough money to mainpulate Uganda by attacking the economy. When they aren't in the country they can't plan assassinations, nor can they support lapdogs nor engineer "soft" coups.
The sooner the whites are out of Zimbabwe the less position the Brits will have to call for anything. Shove the whites into South Africa where they'll have no land and no political clout. This will neutralize them. The whites in S Africa are already under pressure from the threat of Jacob Zuma becoming president. Seeing the whites cast out of Zimbabwe will serve as lessson to the Dutch squatters of what can happen when you mess with an African leader.
Expeling the whites also solves another of Mugabe's problems. Whites in Britain and the US are so hot to see him out in order to maintain the sham that the white farmers "belong" in Zimbabwe. By putting them out military action aimed at keeping the whites to power is no longer an option. The Brits understand that military action is perhaps saleble but only so long as the whites are in the country or own the land. Sad that Mugabe doesn't understand that. If Mugabe goes ahread and gives the land back to the Zimbabweans no amount of BBC propaganda will sway opinion on that. Zimbabwe would go back to status quo ante .Africans everywhere would be up in arms if the Brits tried a second invasion aimed at putting whites in power. Once the whtis are out not even the most bought-and-paid-for lapdog like Tzvaringai would dare say, "Run the blacks off the land, let the whites back in." They woulnd't even be able to use sneaky laws to institute any such plan.
BTW Any Brit who voted to go into Zimbabwe should be the first one the Royal Marines draft and send in. THEN see how many of those hardheaded whites are so eager for military intervention. Kill 'em all I say, let God sort 'em out!
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mineral exports, agriculture, and tourism are the main foreign currency earners of Zimbabwe.[57] Zimbabwe is the biggest trading partner of South Africa on the continent.[58] The downward spiral of the economy has been attributed mainly to mismanagement and corruption of the Mugabe regime and the eviction of more than 4,000 white farmers in the controversial land redistribution of 2000.[59][60][61][62] Since this land redistribution began, agricultural exports, especially tobacco, have declined sharply. The Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force released a report in June 2007, estimating 60% of Zimbabwe's wildlife has died since 2000. The report warns that the loss of life combined with widespread deforestation is potentially disastrous for the tourist industry.[63]
Inflation rose from an annual rate of 32% in 1998 to an official estimated high of 100,580.2% in January 2008,[64] a state of hyperinflation. Local residents have largely resorted to buying essentials from neighbouring Botswana, South Africa and Zambia. IMF economists estimated inflation at about 150,000% in Dec 2007.
quote: Freedom of association and assembly curtailed
The Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and the Miscellaneous Offences Act continued to be used selectively to prevent the political opposition and civil society groups from meeting or engaging in peaceful protest. Hundreds of human rights activists were arrested or detained under these laws during the year. Freedom of expression
Repressive laws, including the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Broadcasting Services Act, were used to curtail freedom of expression. In July the government introduced the Interception of Communications Bill in Parliament which if passed into law would further restrict freedom of expression. It would allow the authorities to intercept both telecommunications and mail, and raised fears that the government would use it to spy on the activities of human rights organizations and the political opposition.
The trial of trustees and staff of Voice of the People, an independent radio station that broadcast from outside Zimbabwe but maintained offices in the country, started on 25 September. The state withdrew charges against the individuals and was to charge the Voice of the People Trust under the Broadcasting Services Act for broadcasting without a license.
Mugabe is an idiotic tyrannical despot unfit for any leadership position as it has been proven disastrous for his country. There are no freedoms political or economic in Zimbabwe and his people continue to suffer as a result of his ineptitude and corrupt government.
The really sad thing is that not only is his country in shambles, some are actually *defending* his regime here.
Millions of zimbabweans are suffering under his regime and yet some here are blaming this on "evil white people in the west" that's incredibly ignorant and disrespectful to zimbabwes people.
Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Oh, and Mmmkay, brotha nice try but I'm gonna havta go with sb over what you stated on this one for now and
quote:The Zimbabwe Conservation Task Force released a report in June 2007, estimating 60% of Zimbabwe's wildlife has died since 2000. The report warns that the loss of life combined with widespread deforestation is potentially disastrous for the tourist industry.
And how does this demerit Robert Mugabe considering the power struggle as stated by Sportsbilly on Mugabe & Zimbabwe, and also stated by rasol and my Uncle (on the true basis for Iraq war)?
UK and the US are some of the most heavily industrialised nations in the world with Germany (which not to long ago - along with much of inland/Western/Northern Europe was forest and plains, with various animals) now having barely any wildlife at all.
And I don't mean birds that poop on cars and buildings either.
Oh, ohmy not us, let's expect freakin thrid world countries to preserve the wild-life and save our white asses.
This reminds me of the US telling India and other Asian nations getting ready to heavily industrialise - not to drive cars.
This is not even addressing the validity of the ZCTF's numbers peeps.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
yep, its official Mmmkay is the most reactionary, naive, ignorant negro in here. Not that I am surprised though. I mean AI? Please!
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The interesting thing here is that nobody has even denied/disproven the data that suggests Mugabe is in fact, a corrupt and tyrannical ruler who is starving and politically/economically depriving his own people. Somehow that slipped over your heads.
Who's ignorant then?
quote: Oh, and Mmmkay, brotha nice try but I'm gonna havta go with sb over what you stated on this one for now
Can't agree on everything Atleast your one of the few sane voices left here.
P.S. Despite the cockroach above's idiotic comments (some babbling on about MLK) that was a good and inspiring video Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another short speech folks, but this one's for MMMkay's eyes alone.
Mmmkay,there's a lot of people like you out there who believe anyhting that's put in print, or broadcast over the air, because you don't want to think for yourself. We saw this when the American media decided it wouldn't question Bush's rationale for war. Now it's the BBC's and their non-stop Mugabe bashing.
The same British government that's ready to piss their pants if Mugabe isn't hanged doesn't give a rip about thousands dead and CHILDREN being tortured. I have yet to hear the BBC accuse Mugabe of torturing children--though I'm sure they're culling the streets of Harare desperately looking for anyone who'll start such a rumor (an MDC source, no doubt). They don't give a damn about Africans starving or dying. If they did they would have jumped on Sudan and the Congo by now where two MILLION plus Africans have either been killed or STARVED to death.
Now, the hook the BBC is using to fool simple-minded folks like you into siding against Mugabe is to say Mugabe's a theif who's stealing or otherwise mismanaging the Zimabbwean treasury for his own personal gain, and this is why the country's economy is in the shape it's in. That's funny, because the same BBC, and the same British government, didn't think he was a thief for the prior twenty years when he was doing the Brits bidding. You want to tell me you actually believe in the last eight years he suddenly decided to turn to a life of crime? And that the BBC's sudden choice to "report" this has nothing to do with the 2000 land reforms? Because they didn't start bashing Mugabe until he did that. Does the BBC's bullshit actually sound plausible to you?
Let's talk about the economic hardships going on in Zimbabwe and why it's really happening. Here's a hint--It's not the economy, stupid! First of all, the British are the main ones who brought about the economic sanctions that are hurting the Zimbabwean people. If they really cared about the Zimbabweans economic well-being, why not lift the sanctions? Because the goal isn't to see the Zimbabweans better off, it's to get Mugabe out of there. He could stop all his policies tonight and they'd still want him out becausae they don't want any African thinking they can stand up to white power without losing their position. This is about making an example of Mugabe. What you're seeing now should not come as any surprise. It's exactly what the white power elite in ALL these African countries threatened to do if the Africans ever tried to overthrow them. The whites have ALWAYS had the Zimbabwean people behind the eight-ball, just as they have the rest of Africa behind the eight-ball. They control the industries and the wealth. That's been their leverage for thirty years. What's happening in Zimbabwe isn't some local struggle as the BBC has so easily convinced you it is. This is a test case for the entire continent of Africa on whether a ruling white elite can be overthrown. Whenever the blacks demanded the right to nationalize the mines or take back the farmland the whites always threatened to destabilize the economy by shutting down the mines and sending food prices through the roof by stopping food production. Any of this sounding familar to you MMMkay? Every African state has been under this white ecnomomic terrorism, and the same BBC you love so much hasn't reported on it. Rather than ask why Mugabe should remain in power you should be asking why the BBC has suddenly gotten all hot an bothered over this when they havne't made a peep over Sudan. The economy of Sudan in the tank and they're in the middle of a civil war where blacks are being run off their land and slaugtered by the hundreds of thousands. So let's not pretend this has anything to do with the welfare of the African people, or economic conditions, or even white squatters "rights." This is about making sure Africa's resources remian under white European control and that the blacks don't get any funny ideas about changing that.
If the Africans ever hope to overthrow the whites then it goes without saying the whites will play the economic card, it's the only card they've got. The whites will never let the Africans prosper to the point that they could toss the whites out with minimal hardship, so this fight would HAVE to happen, like this, one way or the other. Economic squeeze is the only weapon the whites have got. The line has to be drawn here.
Now, as for the BBC. They're carrying out the Britsh governments political agenda. Making as much noise as possible in order to sway the opinion of the international community--that's the audience they're talking to. The goal is to give Mugabe enough bad press that the African leaders will feel pressured to turn on him in order to keep their own white ruling classes happy. And the matter will hyped to the sky so that the UN feels rushed into "doing something" about a manufactured crisis. The result will be that when Britain announces they're going to send in the British military to "restore democracy" everyone will allow it to happen, because Mugabe is SUCH a bad guy. The exact same strategy Geroge Bush used in 2002. Or do you still believe Sadaam had WMD?
Read my post above where I point out that in England British farmers are losing their farms left and right, and it's not Mugabe who's kicking them off their land, it's Britain's Inland Revenue Service. These are farmers who the British people depend on for food, not the white farmers who only fed the whites in South Africa. Yet, who do the Brits (who are going through the same food shortage as the rest of the world) feel more strongly about? White farmers in Africa who have never fed a single Brit in England. The power of the media.
Mugabe has been in charge for nearly thirty years and for the first 20 we didn't hear a peep about "ecnomomic mismanagement." That phrase only came about when in 2000 he started throwing white farmers off African land. THEN we started hearing how horrible he was at managing Zimbabwe's economy. So after 20 years of great management he suddenly became "corrupt" and "incompetent?" Are you really so dense you can't tell when white power has tired of a lackey and wants a quickie regime change? From Allende's Chile, to Vietnam to Iraq, this is a textbook case of the whites making friends with leaders, then turning on them when they find they can't control them.
The BBC is using a cheap psychological trick. They mention politlcal unrest, economic malaise and white squatters being evicted, all in the same sentance, over and over and over. They do that to build a false association in people's minds. They want people to associate the land reforms with a bad economy so that when Mugabe is out their puppet president will quietly eliminate the land reform program and no one will be the wiser. Now what will this result in? The same cycle of poverty the Zimbabweans have been trapped in. In other words, more of the same. Oh, but cooking oil will be $1.35 again! Guess that makes it worth it.
Tell me MMkay, when Tzaringai's MDC (who is ENTIRELY backed by white money) won seats in the Zimbabwean government, why is it that the whites came running back to the farms they'd been evicted from? They weren't calling for "reconciliation" or a "unity government." They totally disrgarded the government's order and went back to squatting. Tzaravingai is their puppet, who's ONLY job is to make sure they don't lose the land they stole. They were so sure he'd get them back all their lost power and privilege. They don't give a damn about the Zibabwean people, though you seem to think they do. The only choices the whites are offering the Africans is slave-wages or none at all. Now don't you think they deserve a better choice than that? Blame Mugabe for not having done the land rforms 20 years ago, that's legitimate. Blame him for not hainvg black farmers ready to move in the second the whites were put out. That's legitimate. But don't you dare blame him for the fact he's doing this at all.
Mugabe is the white's worst nightmare. They can't intimidate him, threaten him or overthrow him. They're helpless to oust him. Mugabe's example will embolden other African leaders who have been itching to get rid of the white ruling class. Do you know how much money Britain stands to lose if that happens? Hundreds of Billions, Mmmkay. Starting to see why the expatriates in Zimababwe have no trouble getting the BBC to tow the line? White power-mongers stick together.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mmmkay: ^ The interesting thing here is that nobody has even denied/disproven the data that suggests Mugabe is in fact, a corrupt and tyrannical ruler who is starving and politically/economically depriving his own people. Somehow that slipped over your heads.
Who's ignorant then?
quote: Oh, and Mmmkay, brotha nice try but I'm gonna havta go with sb over what you stated on this one for now
Can't agree on everything Atleast your one of the few sane voices left here.
P.S. Despite the cockroach above's idiotic comments (some babbling on about MLK) that was a good and inspiring video
Girl child please, I've enough experience with simpletons like you to know that engaging you in facts is pointless. When you spout ludicrous propaganda lines like there are no freedoms political or economic in Zimbabwe you reveal your ignorance of the situation. No wonder you go for proven white front organisations like AI. It would never even occur to you to broaden your knowledge by reading New African magazines etc, or even your own congress woman Cynthia McKinney because they are not sanctioned by your master. See Mmmkay I had you figured out from day one. Girl you are a waste of time.
He says he wants peacekeepers, but "he was not calling for military intervention." What a joke. What, are the peacekeepers supposed to be there to coutn the votes? This is it folks! The fall of white supremacy in Africa begins here. Thank GOD for Robert Mugabe finally seeing the light.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
This morning this traitor said he wanted international peace corps into the country and monitoring the election
quote:Originally posted by sportbilly: Hey, breaking news! Tzvaringai has slitherd out of his white master's den.
I'm waihttp://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=reply;f=15;t=000419;replyto=000026 EgyptSearch Forums: Post A Replyting for him to vow that if the white squatters are tossed he'll set himself on fire.
posted
Read above post. He still is! And sorry, I was adding/editing that in my post when you were quoting me.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, Zuma is making sure S African Pres. Thabo Mbeki (another white lapdog) doesn't try any overt moves agaisnt Mugabe. If Mbeki does Zuma will benefit from it. Because he too is riding a wave of black disconent which will ulitmately take the form of land reclaimation. Mugabe's example is spreading! Only 48 hours to go until he's victorious. I'll bet there's going to be hell to pay afterwards too.
And aren't the white powers that be SO angry the so-called African Union (a weak, petty organization the Euorpeans created BTW) don't have the ability to stop a kindergarten brawl, much less a political strongman? The only way to stop Mugabe now would be a British-led invasion, which is politcall untenable at the moment. Guess that's why they're trying to pressure the UN to let them.
You try to put a real leader into a corner he's going to fight his way out of it. Good for Mugabe. Now, if he would just start seizing the mines and expelling the foreginers wholesale.
I'm hoping he's just waiting until after the elections on Friday.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's wait until Friday, and I hope nothing will happen to Mugabe.
Mugabe is lucky to have the support of military and the public.
I spoke to a friend of our family few weeks ago, and he is from Zimbabwe, and visited the country recently for a year and two. I asked him if the situation got worse or if the situation in country is like what we see on TV. He said people are well aware of the situation on the country and frankly people are not worry. They consider this a battle between an old man and rich white people. And that is the problem with the White Man. He thinks that Africans are incapable to see through their plan.
I am very proud of people of Zimbabwe and I'll be more proud on Friday Posts: 2198 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sure Mugabe will not be assassinated, but he's 84 year old. How much longer can he last?
He needs to finish this now, expel every white in the country, nationalize the mines, and pack the government with reform-minded hardliners. If he lets the whites stay they will slink into the shadows, wait for Mugabe's successor, and try to buy him off. If that fails they'll try to assassinate him, or claim he's a dictator. We'll be right back where we are today.
Mugabe needs to finish this now!
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mugabe's situation is the same as Castros's. Neither are US/European puppets, so they both get embargoed and massive demonetization from the anglo press. If Chavez wasn't sitting on an ocean of oil, he'd be in the same predicament.
Mugabe and Zimbabwe need to form closer alliances with South America and Cuba. Perhaps form an alternative power block which come trade on each others strengths. The won't have to try to buy Mugabe or Castro's successors off. They are probably already in the wings groomed and waiting waiting.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mugabe's trying to buld an alliance with China, but I find it disturbing that every time he mentions China he does so in the context of, "We are turning our backs on the west, and looking east." Then he doesn't do anything. It's as if he's giving the whites one last warning or something.
I think he's still trying to reach some sort of modus vivendi with the whites. He still hasn't completely accepted that he must make a TOTAL break with them.
You're right though, meninarmer. Mugabe neends to reach out to reformers like Chavez and bring in the Chinese for supply and advice. Time to put the whties behind him--things have LONG since gone past the point of no return. So far he's only talked about it, but I don't see any damns or bridges being built. I don't see any black-owned farm consortiums eithre.
Mugabe must accept that the future of Zimbabwe doesn't have any whites in it. They've had every chance there is. It's time for them to go.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ This only makes sense. If Zimbabwe were able to achieve even moderate success in merging it's economy with the South American power block, other African nations would follow. This scenerio would definitely help Zimbabwe with it's current farming crisis. Cuba has successfully implemented some radical green farming programs to sustain them under the US embargo.
The Chinese could prove to be very useful to enabling certain financial flows into Africa, but I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw an elephant.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Links are already there with China, Cuba and Latin America. However it is not rational to think you can delink totally from the west and expel every white. It is not even necessary. The success of China and Latin America are precisely because of the trade she has with the west. The reality is trade with the west has huge benefits for Africa. Lets not get carried away. Africa needs only to throw away the bad policies that have led to western companies ripping off the continent. Let Europe know that the old master/slave relationship is over and she will have to pay for what she wants in Africa now. It will take some time to get use to but the west will eventually have to deal with this new Africa as she does China now.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
1) Mugabe took 20 years before he started moving on the land issue because he was waiting for the British to keep their promises--solemly agreed to during the Lancaster House accords The final straw was that letter from British official Clare Short who just wrote that Britain had no obligation to follow up on Lancaster House. Before that time the British were busy massaging him with all kinds of honorary doctorates and even a knighthood.
2) Some argue that Mugabe didn't move on the land issue until 2000 because he didn't want to create a storm while the end of Apartheid was being negotiated
3)The argument being used by the kith and kin West that elections should be postponed because of--as they claim 'violence'is disingenuous. Elections were held in Sierra Leone during the heights of the civil war there some years ago. Almost the same for Liberia and Sudan.
4) Some years ago elections were held in Algeria and an Islamic party won The West quickly seconded it when the government just annulled the election
5) The inflation in Zimbabwe is directly caused by the huge credit squeeze and denial of access to Euro credit and money. As you know, to import things in any African country requires Euro money, the so-called 'hard currencies' local currencies are always valued according the going exchange rates. The question is always: how many Zim dollars for eqch Western currency unit. Thus the scarcer the Western currency the more local currency you must come up with to get just one unit of the Euro money--just to trade. The West refuses categorically to accept African currency--except the SA Rand. So I wonder why SA never thought of extending the Rand to all of Southern Africa. In West Africa, the CFA is used across many countries but sadly it's controlled by the French treasury.
One of the problems with many blacks is that they have no shame. Example: Tsvangirai running into that Dutch embassy to seek 'refuge'--as he claimed. And by the way the Afrikanners, the architects of Apartheid are of Dutch origin.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excellent point lamin about the Dutch and apartheid! Beautifully stated.
We can all agree that one doesn't have to look far to find out why the Western powers that be are trying to make Zimbabwe into some sort of "crisis." At this point I think they can see they've lost this one. But will Mugabe capitalize on it? We'll see.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:The interesting thing here is that nobody has even denied/disproven the data that suggests Mugabe is in fact, a corrupt and tyrannical ruler who is starving and politically/economically depriving his own people. Somehow that slipped over your heads.
Still no answers. Sportbilly and our resident cockroach provided nothing in the way ofa real refutation of my above points.
On Mr Mugabes Recently Built Palaces: Since His Tax Base is Screwed Over, He Receives "Donations" From Other Countries to Cover the Cost of his Extravagance
quote: While the poor people of Zimbabwe fight for a days meal, this is how the President of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe lives.
* Arab artists spent a year decorating the ceilings * 3 acres of accommodation * Estimated 26 million USD to build * 25 en-suite bathrooms * Neighbours in Borrowdale, Harare, have been told to sell up and leave to protect Mugabe’s security * China has donated the glazed blue tiles that cover the roof. * Malaysia has donated the timber * there are underground rooms reinforced with concrete * It is 3 times the size of the State House. * has 44 acres of landscaped grounds * A Serbian construction company built it - Energoproject - to a Chinese design. Mugabe said in interview that the Serbian company donated their material and labour * 50 crack riot response police guard it on a 24 hour watch
quote: For those who still think that Robert Mugabe is a hero, think again. This writer has come across people in the past who have proudly stated that Mugabe is about the only African leader who has had the guts to face up to Tony Blair and other western leaders. It isn't Tony Blair or the British subjects he governs that are starving today or fleeing like refugees to South Africa and Mozambique. It isn't Tony Blair that is currently overseeing an economy that has been in continuous decline for the past seven years.
You guys are simply insane if you make this man out to be anything other than a total monster. No amount of western propaganda can create thousands of refugees leaving Zimbabwe as we speak.
This guy needs to be taken out. Both Zimbabwe and Africa will be better off in the end. Jesus.
Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did you not see Lamin put the socio-economic situation in context, you dufus? It went straight over your head didn't it? Which is why you are convinced your propaganda went unanswered.LOL Jesus girl you are so pathetic.
AI reports, like those from the right wing AEI, are not worth the paper they are written on. Even your crack head article talks about "Mandela doctrine" (LMAO!) which is supposed to "right wrongs" yet it cannot explain the contradictions of high crime, farm attacks, and poverty in this country that supposedly benefited from this "doctrine"! LOL please girlchild just go away you're too annoying.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
On a side Akoben88 already has over 600 posts LMAO at his stats right now lol
Looking at lamins points, again, keys realities are bypassed to make him look favorable. The fact that mugabe is a dictator who restricts his peoples economic freedoms, builds mcmansions, and beats and jails political opponents is completely ignored.
I'll even make it easy. Simply answer these questions with a satisfactory response:
1) why is he building mansions while his people are starving?
2) why does he rig elections or otherwise make it impossible for anyone to win other than himself, thus continuing his 20+ year reign?
How many times must I bring these points up? I want an answer from someone other than mr. cockroach above. He's on ignore.
posted
Hey, girl child, first you have to prove he is a "dictator" rigging elections, i.e. explain the presence of an opposition in parliament and anti-government news papers. Show that it is only MDC being attacked and how the sanctions and credit squeeze are unrelated to the present economic situation. Merely spouting propaganda as if it is truth by default will not do. Youre such a simpleton which is why no ones takes you seriosuly. Me, I like having fun b***h slapping you around.
Oh btw, you also have to prove your propaganda pics:
posted
BOOM! Smackdown! Great job Akoben. Must break Mmmkay's heart to think his precious western media might have--gasp!-- lied to him.
Mmkay, Akoben has already answered your question, as have I. The west/white powers want a puppet, ike Kenya. They want someone who will not take their stolen land or mines. Darfur is a crisis. The Congo is a "crisis". Nightline is doing a piece on the Congo tonight. Watch it, and then come back and tell me that the British aren't trying to use "democracy" and made-up human rights claims as a smokescreen to stop the return of land and recources to the african people. You can't afford to be this naive, you know.
Mugabe is not a "dictator." Dictators don't lose seats in their own government as he did in March. Dictators don't allow their opponents to run against them, and not take their names off the ballots. Dictators "suicide" their opponents, like the president of the Ukraine who was radiation poisoned by the Russians. In a dictatorship a ruling class has ALL the money and owns ALL the land and has relegated the people to second-class citizen status. Has Mugabe done that, or the whites? Dictators do ballot-stuffing and intimidations at the polls. Like the Republicans in the US.
Posts: 248 | From: Way Down South | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kay, trust me, sportsbilly is a seasoned politics veteran on this forum. He's been paying attention the whole time, which is a lot better than speculative conclusions based on grazing propaganda - especially if the one doing so doesn't seem to have been paying attention the whole time.
Though the claims were slanderous,
quote:* 50 crack riot response police guard it on a 24 hour watch
^And? He's Mugabe. The fact that this would be considered "rash" or "extreme" to anyone says alot about how knowledgable they are on this subject.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:1) why is he building mansions while his people are starving?
2) why does he rig elections or otherwise make it impossible for anyone to win other than himself, thus continuing his 20+ year reign?
How many times must I bring these points up? I want an answer from someone other than mr. cockroach above. He's on ignore.
1) Who knows whether the cost of that mansion is $26 million? After all one can build a 10 bedroom house in Africa for less than $200,000. You will be surprised at how many big mansions you will see in Africa built by successful businessmen, athletes, politicians, diamond and gold dealers, etc. Labour and local materials are cheap. The only expensive stuff would be the steel rods and the imported add-ons like toilets, etc. There were even claims made by British journalists that Mugabe had a castle in Scotland. It was false.
2)If Mugabe is so adept at rigging elections. Then why didn't he just rig this one?
3)The only reason that Mugabe is the best known African leader now is simply that the British and other Europeans are enraged that despite all those honorary doctorates and honorary knighthood he chose to restore the stolen lands to 300,000 landless Zimbabweans.
4) In terms of luxurious living and length of time in office Mugabe is easily outdone by presidents like Mubarak of Egypt, Bongo, Dos Santos of Angola, Ali of Tunisia, etc. all friends of the West.
This is no brief for Mugabe but if you check the record you will see that Mugabe greatly extended the education base of Zimbabawe at al levels post independence. The roads are usually in good shape and clean. Visitors to the Zimbabwe Book Fair now suspended by the West always commented on the orderliness and good roads in Zimbabwe.
As I said, it's just that Mugabe took all that massaging from the West yet in the end he just took back the lands the settlers stole--and handed them over to 300,000 Zimbabweans.
The economic problems in Zimbabwe are directly caused by the Western action of blocking Zimbabwe's access to foreign exchange credit. How else can you ever get such a high inflation rate? It had to be externally generated.
There was droughts in Southern Africa over the last years and that explained problems with the maize harvest.
The people who voted for the Euro party, MDC[all the top officials except Tsvangirai are Europeans]are doing so out of desperation with the economy. Exactly as the West wanted: starve them out so that they riot or stage a coup. If this does not happen then simply have "our man" Morgan ready to vote Mugabe out.
We can then get Morgan to make it easy to get the land back and we will then make Zimbabwe safe again for white business.
It should be remembered that Europeans have always operated on the principle that "what is ours is ours but what is yours is ours too". That's why they just can't understand why an African like Mugabe doesn't understand that.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
btw nice song/vid, I favorited it a couple days ago (or a day ago, can't remember), is it your vid?
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Mmkay, Akoben has already answered your question, as have I.
He has'nt answered anything, (as usual). I'm not even paying attention to him. His posts are troll-bait and a waste of time.
quote:The Congo is a "crisis". Nightline is doing a piece on the Congo tonight. Watch it, and then come back and tell me that the British aren't trying to use "democracy" and made-up human rights claims as a smokescreen to stop the return of land and resources to the African people.
Nonsense. There is a real problem in eastern Congo and if you Google "sexual violence Congo" there over 1,000,000 results. But thats beside the topic of this thread.
Look I understand what you are trying to do. Yes the west is responsible for alot the political intrigues and conflicts raging across parts of Africa today in some way. Western governments have financed coups, assassinations, rebel gangs etc since the 1960's cold war era and post independence.
But the fact remains africa with a few exceptions (tunisia, bostwana) is currently one of the most corrupt regions in the world and one of the least economically free.
quote: Dictators don't allow their opponents to run against them, and not take their names off the ballots.
Thats a narrow concept of dictators. Mugabe has been in power for over 20 years. In America the term for presidents is 8 years. In Zimbabwe there is no term limit. I wonder why.
quote: In a dictatorship a ruling class has ALL the money and owns ALL the land and has relegated the people to second-class citizen status. Has Mugabe done that, or the whites?
He owns mansions. He owns the elections. He owns the fear of his own people. He is a dictator.
I'll address lamins post when I have more time. Unlike akoben88 I'm not on call here 24/7 lol.
Posts: 426 | From: Cali-for-nia | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Thats a narrow concept of dictators. Mugabe has been in power for over 20 years. In America the term for presidents is 8 years. In Zimbabwe there is no term limit. I wonder why.
So being elected to office over and again makes you a dictator?! LMAO @ this little girl's twisted logic to justify her lies. You have yet to prove he has rigged elections and is responsible for the economic crisis. You are a proven liar, posting propaganda pictures.
And hey, simpleton, corruption in Africa doesn't exist in a vacuum, and like other parts of the non-white world it's always linked to the west e.g. billions went missing in Iraq and Bush and Co. are no doubt still stealing from Iraqis. The mere fact that you have to grudgingly admit western intrigues ("in some way" LOL) and proclaim Africa least economically free, without even attempting to explain why, shows you're a simple, uninformed reactionary, the typical negro propagandist.
So for your lies and simple-mindedness you deserve another
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
]
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Arwa . I voted on the Guardian.co.uk poll and guess what the cumulative results were?
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Atleast your one of the few sane voices left here. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic