BOOK REVIEW
BENEATH THE LION’S GAZE
BY MAAZA MENGISTE
PUBLISHED BY JONATHAN CAPE, LONDON, 2010,
301 PAGES
IF ONLY MEAZA HAD READ KONJIT!
by Hilena Bayeh
Intro
The fact that more and more Ethiopians are putting ink to paper or typing away on the keyboards of their laptops and computers to produce books is turning out to be both good and bad. Good because our literature (in Ethiopian languages) and also in English can develop, our stories can be told, a heritage left for the coming generation. And bad because writers have become scribes like olden times, scribbling the praises of the power that be, spreading official lies as truth and retelling or recycling travesties of history. The absence of critical editors has made the slush pile, as they say in the publishing circles, non existent—any book is published and thanks to commercial printing and online publishing anyone can be a writer with a book or even a translator. Astute business men gauge the trend of the time, determine the selling subjects and plunge right on to “write” a book on the subject—it is very commercial. Ethiopia does not recognize international copyright laws and as such translators not only translate books without permission (many times badly) but they even change the persons to whom the writer had made a dedication and substitute their own dedication. . It is a wild and confusing world out there. That is why we find books nowadays explaining to us the history of this event or organization without ever really taking part in any one of them or without ever having made a research.
All this aside, it is, in my opinion, quite good to see Ethiopians writing in English. The new generation of writers like Dinaw Mengistu and Maaza Mengiste cannot help but write in English as they grew up abroad (in America in their case) and it is also commendable that their stories have not forgotten or ignored the Ethiopian reality (true more for Maaza than for Dinaw). I do not fully agree with the Wole Soyinka definition of the critic’s responsibilities “not merely to review an existing piece of work but also to create an atmosphere of appreciation and tolerance...” but I still say the critic has to take the writer’s reality into account to convey a fitting appraisal. In this respect, I concur with David Cook (African Literature: A Critical View. Longman 1977)) who wrote:
“All forms of the written word contribute to a major force of persuasion. All writings which argue important issues, reach a large public, and possess the literary qualities that are likely to make them more than merely ephemeral, not only deserve, but invite and demand critical analysis. The means by which a thoughtful public is convinced one way or another on crucial questions of real significance to a country or a continent”. (xi)
Still, one yearns for the old categorization of “pulp” literature, unworthy of critical concern but fulfilling the public’s tabloid hunger. Quite a number of books in Amharic and English could thus have been relegated to the sidelines though we as a people are still far away from saturation in the literary field. The books eulogizing Meles and Seyoum Mesfin, rewriting the history of the notorious TPLF, whitewashing the crimes and criminals of the Red Terror, attempting a Mein Kampf in a local language, biographies that are lies, memoirs that are fiction, etc contribute little of any literary or historical worth. Fortunately though, there are books like that of Konjit Berhane’s MIRKOGNA that appear out of the blue and fulfill our expectations by combining historical truth with fiction narration and giving us a readable, enjoyable book. I have my reasons for Saying ‘If Only Maaza had read Konjit!”.
The Young Writers
While my focus here is the book of Maaza Mengiste I would like to mention in passing The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears (titled in England, heaven knows why, as Children of the Revolution) written by Dinaw Mengistu which, tangentially dealing with the Ethiopian Revolution of February 1974 (Maaza’s central subject or back ground) exhibits a careless approach to the historical truth of the period and Ethiopia. Dinaw, in my opinion, has also failed to mine the treasure trove of the Ethiopian émigré community in Washington Dc. Worse still, as he left Ethiopia when he was one year old, he has not lived or grown up to understand the conflict that defined that time. In one passage he writes that the Mengistu regime that launched the Red Terror nailed placards on the foreheads of its victims which proclaimed “I was a Communist!” when in actual fact Mengistu and his regime considered themselves Communists and labeled their opponents anarchists or CIA agents. Or, is all this enveloped within what Maaza on her part states as “taking liberty with the reality”? If so what do we make of Lewis Nkosi’s famous assertion (in Home and Exile) cited here below on the place of the writer:
“If we assume that any competent artist who retains a minimum of objectivity in using his materials should and must reflect his society, then writers are even more important in countries undergoing revolutionary changes, where the temptations are greater to suppress any but the desirable truths”?
I am not, by any stretch of imagination, calling for a socialist realism approach to fiction--that is another subject for discussion. However, taking liberty cannot mean representing falsehood especially when the narration concerns a historical truth or a memoir. Nega Mezlekia’s sister for example has denounced him for presenting a false memoir and many Ethiopians know that an Amhara joining the sectarian and separatist Somali front (WSLF) is pure fiction. And thus the primary question as regards Maaza’s book: has she taken too much liberty with the truth that the Ethiopian reader finds herself/himself in a lurch because Maaza has boldly taken up the February 1974 Revolution as the centerpiece of her book of fiction.
Maaza’s book
Maaza is apparently burdened by the fact that she has dared to use a single family to encapsulate the momentous and bloody period. This demanded from her to create characters that are whole and represent the various trends and cleavages that convulsed families and the whole society at that period. The story of Beneath the Lion’ s Gaze revolves around a foreign educated medical doctor, Hailu, who had been awarded a watch by Emperor Haile Sellasie, his two sons-the elder Yonas conservative and inclined to praying, the youngest Dawit taken up by the underground movement of the period, the EPRP, though Maaza treads carefully and creates a non existent organization. The travails of the family, the doctor’s agreement to help a tortured revolutionary girl die, his arrest and torture and the increasing radicalization of the youngest son Dawit serve for Maaza to illustrate the tragedy of the Red Terror period. Of course the corpses of the victims were not thrown on the streets for the hyenas to feast on (it was actually to terrorize the living and their families), there were no placard nailed to the victims which said I deserved to die dear mother and no EPRP activist defying curfew and collecting the corpses at night . I assume Maaza has taken liberties here, no matter.
Maaza writes well and in a style, as a graduate with an MFA from New York University, that would surely please her western readers—of snorting hyenas, of deep brown fields, a lush patchwork of green and browns, and of a blue haze drifting down from eucalyptus trees dotting the hillsides, of clouds of dust and smoke and early morning fog. I do not agree with one reviewer who said Maaza over explains. On the contrary, some of her passages get the reader into the atmosphere of the place in the story as the following illustrates:
“Intermittent car horns melted into a long, sustained blare. Buses and trucks dodged the boys. Irritated pedestrians brushed against blue-and-white taxicabs. Everything was noisy. Sound traveled from car to pedestrian to pack animal, rising and falling over the hilly street, Aged trees dotted the roadside and drank in the cacophony. Ethiopia would remain, despite all outside influences, a mix of ancient and modern, progress and ritual sitting as uncomfortably next to each other as Communist ideals and Coptic beliefs”. (p. 116)
Except for the fact that the ideals were Soviet/ real socialism (the ideological nuance does matter) and the mix included Islamic and animist beliefs.
Maaza left the country when she was only four years old but she has evidently gone back to soak up the atmosphere though I do not know if she went back after the present vermin took over power (1991) and the city changed or before during the time of the Derg. It should be of no significance really except for the fact that she did not live that period (unlike Konjit for example) and her references (see her note and bibliography at the end) indicate not such a good choice. Maaza states, alas, that she learnt the personal and political costs of the revolution by reading Nega Mezlekia’s Notes from the Hyena’s Belly, a book of memoir that has been exposed as totally fiction by Nega’s own sister and all others who knew him (and even his authorship has been contested but that is another story). As a former EPRP leader Kiflu Tadesse’s book would rightfully be informative on the organization at that time as would be the book by Markakis and Nega Ayele while Fred Halliday, who was a Derg apologist, wrote a horrible book. Paul Henze, the former CIA and the present apologist of the Meles regime cannot be credible reference on Ethiopia of that period ( or on Ethiopia of any period for that matter) and Marina Ottaway missed the whole essence of the Revolution when she concluded so wrongly that the whole thing involved the elites and not the people. The Ottaways (Marina and David) sought to give historical and popular legitimacy to the military regime, stated the Empire was held together by the divine rule of the Emperor, denigrated the workers’ general strike that brought down the Endlakatchew government as insignificant, and Marina Ottaway, in her “Social Classes and Corporate Interests in the Ethiopian Revolution, went as far as labeling the Ethiopian workers as a labor aristocracy or an “elite privileged by the modern system.”
Bad References
In short Maaza did not have the best reference at all. Imagine someone writing on that period and failing to read the books on the Red Terror like Babile Tola’s “ To Kill A Generation: The Red Terror in Ethiopia”! This could very well explain why Maaza’s character appear cardboard and unconvincing characters to the end. Maaza has tried to remember her uncles by giving Dawit and another character the names of her uncles, Mekonnen and Solomon, but for those who knew the Revolution and the battle in the cities Dawit and Solomon appear as caricatures all the way through. For me, here is where Maaza has failed, her inability to let her characters flesh out, portray the feelings and failings of the period and its protagonists. The change of stand in Hailu and the others is not explained in a credible way. The incident at the end of the book between the main characters and the brutal soldiers is very unbelievable. Compare her characters and actions with Frehiwot and others in the Mirkogna book and the Maaza characters become, in the word of one critic, just “props”. The torture sequences are also mild though some foreign critics found them shocking and brutal. Emperor Haile Sellasie in Maaza’s book is not of course the Haile Sellasie we knew and the symbolism of the Lion, attractive as it may appear to foreigners and Ras Tafarians, is unconvincing and out of place.
Strange Coincidence?
For a writer who does not mention anywhere (neither in the Notes. bibliography or interviews) that she has previously read Hama Tuma’s much commented upon short stories collection (The Case of the Socialist Witchdoctor and Other Stories, Heinemann, London 1993) the reader is surprised to find eerie similarities in Maaza’s novel and at least one Hama Tuma story. It could be coincidence of course but strange nonetheless. In the Case of the Prison Monger Hama’s accused person is called Major Guddu—Maaza calls Mengistu Haile Mariam Major Guddu. There was of course a Guddu Kassa in another famous book. This aside, Maaza’s story opens in a hospital (Prince Makonen—now Tikur Anbesa) with a wounded boy and then with a tortured girl whom a nurse (Almaz) and the main character Doctor Hailu gives her cyanide and help her die to escape further torture. Back in 1993 Hama Tuma's one short story (Madman, Killer, Saint, You…) deals with a doctor in the same hospital who is mobilized by a male nurse and also helps his own tortured brother to die. Same hospital, almost the same scenario—strange coincidence? The world is too small. Hama wrote his story in 1993 and Maaza in 2010—how come they are almost identical except for some changes including names and gender? A troubling question indeed.
After all is said, Maaza’s book is an interesting read. She is a promising writer and we hope the next book will show more commitment to the craft, better character building and believable dialogue and plot, less similarity to other books and plots and a better grasp of the central theme she tries to tackle. She should read MIRKOGNA of Konjit Berhane to begin with. Maaza can surely be one of the writers to make us proud so long as she realizes that the pressing social problems and experiences demand that the writer becomes relevant in more ways than one.
.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Saturday, March 24, 2012
THE FARCE CALLED KONY (2012)
THE FARCE CALLED KONY (2012)
To avoid any possible misunderstanding, let me start out by stating that Joseph Kony, the notorious leader of the Ugandan rebel Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) , the relative of the equally infamous self declared witch Alice Lakwena ( frequented by many top Kenyan officials in Nairobi) is no joke at all. He is one who should not be taken lightly. For twenty years, he had led a rebellion against Ugandan leader Yoweri Museveni, committed atrocities. Kidnapped children, chopped off ears, noses and lips, and, notwithstanding those foreigners who say he has no program at all, he did plan to set up different system in Uganda with, perhaps, himself as the top prophet.
The group called Invisible Children that uploaded the film called Kony 2012 is also no joke at all. Their film on Kony was seen by millions in just 48 hours and the group raised $ 5 million in the process. The group claims the money raised would be used for positive construction work and projects in Northern Uganda (where Kony’s rebel operate) even though last year the group raised $8.6 million and used only 32% of the fund for services in Northern Uganda. The white man as the savior is a worn out and threadbare theme—money is the issue and so called charity organizations who claim to wail for us clean their crocodile tears with lots of dollars ostensibly raised to help us Africans. The Kony 2012 film has caught the attention of millions though it is superficial and glosses over the real problems of Uganda. Invisible Children NGO or Co calls for and backs American military intervention in Uganda. Obama has obliged sending a hundred Special Forces operatives to assist the Uganda army (Africa Command officers were in Uganda before). Museveni’s regime is an ally of Washington in the so called war against terror, it is presently in Mogadishu trying to fulfill America’s bidding (as is Meles Zenawi). Hence, American military presence in Uganda or any other African country for that matter does not augur well for the continent even though there are naïve African souls sleeping what Senghor called “ the great sleep of the negro” and dreaming of an American modern cavalry saving Africa. In your dreams! A coterie of Hollywood actors/stars have also joined the fray and are calling on all of us to make Kony famous so that he comes infamous and gets “taken down” not only by Angelina Jolie (who seems to think real life is a movie when she declared if left alone with Kony in a room she would take down this person—“I hate him” is what she said--) but by the big power America. Such oversimplification of the Ugandan problem or the Kony dilemma has helped the Invisible Children group to pander to sentiments and to raise money but will not help an iota in finishing off the Kony problem which is actually a Ugandan political problem.
Advocating for American military intervention in support of the Ugandan regime is more than wrong. The Uganda regime has been continuously accused of violating the human rights of the citizens, the last February general election was a fraud with Museveni violating the Constitution to run for the third time, opposition leaders are continuously repressed, the Uganda army conducting operations in the Central African Republic has been accused of atrocities against civilians. This is the army that the Invisible Children group and its Hollywood cabal want to get American military help and assistance. Here is the fact that those in the know tell us to heed:
“The adult population recalls the brutal government-directed counterinsurgency campaign, beginning in 1986, which evolved into Operation North, the first big operation in the country that people talk about as massively destructive for civilians, and which created the conditions that gave rise to the LRA of Joseph Kony and, before it, the Holy Spirit Movement of Alice Lakwena. Young adults recall the time from the mid-1990s when most rural residents of the three Acholi districts were forcibly interned in camps. The Ugandan government claimed it was to "protect" them from the LRA. But there were allegations of murder, bombings, and the burnings of entire villages: first to force people into the camps, and then to force them to stay put. By 2005, the camp population grew from a few hundred thousand to over 1.8 million in the entire region - which included Teso and Lango - of which over a million were from the three Acholi districts. Comprising practically the entire rural population of the three Acholi districts, they were expected to live on handouts from relief agencies. According to the government's own Ministry of Health, the excess mortality rate in these camps was approximately 1,000 persons per week - inviting comparisons with the numbers killed by the LRA even in the worst year”. Museveni refused to sign an Amnesty Bill proposed by his own parliament. Instead, Museveni and his allies resorted to Washington’s main poodle called Luis Moreno Ocampo of the ICC and had Kony and the LRA leadership charged with crimes against humanity.
One would imagine that genocidal criminals like Bush and Blair, Kissinger and Nguema, Meles Zenawi and Deby would be on the list of the ICC. No chance. The ICC list is one to be accused of racism even. Check it:
Bashir Abu Garda, Mohamed Ali, Abadella Banda,Omar Bashir, Jean Pierre Bemba, Muamar Gadafi, Saif al Islam Gadafi,Laurent Gbagbo, Ahmed Haroum, Uhuru Kenyatta, Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti (LRA),Thomas Lubanga, William Ruto, and many more Africans. No Anglo Saxons, no pro Washington criminals and murderers. Only fools expect that all these things happen haphazardly, by accident, by luck. Uganda has discovered oil and made a deal with Tallow oil recently—this has a lot to do with American interest in Uganda. Eastern Congolese are dying in their millions for coltan, gold and other minerals. As of recently, independent South Sudan is important because of its petrol and land. The ICC indicts Kony and not the Ugandan army or government because who pays the piper does not say objectivity or fairness. Why all the hue and cry around Kony now after so many years of his barbaric rampage and when he is weak and on the verge of collapse? The demonization of Kony with his ragtag army is at best a diversion while the rebellion and overall dissatisfaction in Uganda is a serious political Ugandan problem. It is about oil and money, about land and corruption, about tyranny and ethnic grievances. The Invisible Children group’s call for American intervention and all out support to the Museveni regime, by demonizing a rather weakened Kony and LRA, is not the right call at all. Once again Westerners are playing cynical games with our misery and fate. May the demise of Kony be soon but, more importantly, may the end of the anti democratic regime of Museveni be soon and the solutions to the basic political problems of Uganda an actuality. In the meanwhile, Invisible Children will for sure make millions with the help of its U tube, American chauvinists, actors, the ICC and duped African fellow travelers.
To avoid any possible misunderstanding, let me start out by stating that Joseph Kony, the notorious leader of the Ugandan rebel Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) , the relative of the equally infamous self declared witch Alice Lakwena ( frequented by many top Kenyan officials in Nairobi) is no joke at all. He is one who should not be taken lightly. For twenty years, he had led a rebellion against Ugandan leader Yoweri Museveni, committed atrocities. Kidnapped children, chopped off ears, noses and lips, and, notwithstanding those foreigners who say he has no program at all, he did plan to set up different system in Uganda with, perhaps, himself as the top prophet.
The group called Invisible Children that uploaded the film called Kony 2012 is also no joke at all. Their film on Kony was seen by millions in just 48 hours and the group raised $ 5 million in the process. The group claims the money raised would be used for positive construction work and projects in Northern Uganda (where Kony’s rebel operate) even though last year the group raised $8.6 million and used only 32% of the fund for services in Northern Uganda. The white man as the savior is a worn out and threadbare theme—money is the issue and so called charity organizations who claim to wail for us clean their crocodile tears with lots of dollars ostensibly raised to help us Africans. The Kony 2012 film has caught the attention of millions though it is superficial and glosses over the real problems of Uganda. Invisible Children NGO or Co calls for and backs American military intervention in Uganda. Obama has obliged sending a hundred Special Forces operatives to assist the Uganda army (Africa Command officers were in Uganda before). Museveni’s regime is an ally of Washington in the so called war against terror, it is presently in Mogadishu trying to fulfill America’s bidding (as is Meles Zenawi). Hence, American military presence in Uganda or any other African country for that matter does not augur well for the continent even though there are naïve African souls sleeping what Senghor called “ the great sleep of the negro” and dreaming of an American modern cavalry saving Africa. In your dreams! A coterie of Hollywood actors/stars have also joined the fray and are calling on all of us to make Kony famous so that he comes infamous and gets “taken down” not only by Angelina Jolie (who seems to think real life is a movie when she declared if left alone with Kony in a room she would take down this person—“I hate him” is what she said--) but by the big power America. Such oversimplification of the Ugandan problem or the Kony dilemma has helped the Invisible Children group to pander to sentiments and to raise money but will not help an iota in finishing off the Kony problem which is actually a Ugandan political problem.
Advocating for American military intervention in support of the Ugandan regime is more than wrong. The Uganda regime has been continuously accused of violating the human rights of the citizens, the last February general election was a fraud with Museveni violating the Constitution to run for the third time, opposition leaders are continuously repressed, the Uganda army conducting operations in the Central African Republic has been accused of atrocities against civilians. This is the army that the Invisible Children group and its Hollywood cabal want to get American military help and assistance. Here is the fact that those in the know tell us to heed:
“The adult population recalls the brutal government-directed counterinsurgency campaign, beginning in 1986, which evolved into Operation North, the first big operation in the country that people talk about as massively destructive for civilians, and which created the conditions that gave rise to the LRA of Joseph Kony and, before it, the Holy Spirit Movement of Alice Lakwena. Young adults recall the time from the mid-1990s when most rural residents of the three Acholi districts were forcibly interned in camps. The Ugandan government claimed it was to "protect" them from the LRA. But there were allegations of murder, bombings, and the burnings of entire villages: first to force people into the camps, and then to force them to stay put. By 2005, the camp population grew from a few hundred thousand to over 1.8 million in the entire region - which included Teso and Lango - of which over a million were from the three Acholi districts. Comprising practically the entire rural population of the three Acholi districts, they were expected to live on handouts from relief agencies. According to the government's own Ministry of Health, the excess mortality rate in these camps was approximately 1,000 persons per week - inviting comparisons with the numbers killed by the LRA even in the worst year”. Museveni refused to sign an Amnesty Bill proposed by his own parliament. Instead, Museveni and his allies resorted to Washington’s main poodle called Luis Moreno Ocampo of the ICC and had Kony and the LRA leadership charged with crimes against humanity.
One would imagine that genocidal criminals like Bush and Blair, Kissinger and Nguema, Meles Zenawi and Deby would be on the list of the ICC. No chance. The ICC list is one to be accused of racism even. Check it:
Bashir Abu Garda, Mohamed Ali, Abadella Banda,Omar Bashir, Jean Pierre Bemba, Muamar Gadafi, Saif al Islam Gadafi,Laurent Gbagbo, Ahmed Haroum, Uhuru Kenyatta, Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti (LRA),Thomas Lubanga, William Ruto, and many more Africans. No Anglo Saxons, no pro Washington criminals and murderers. Only fools expect that all these things happen haphazardly, by accident, by luck. Uganda has discovered oil and made a deal with Tallow oil recently—this has a lot to do with American interest in Uganda. Eastern Congolese are dying in their millions for coltan, gold and other minerals. As of recently, independent South Sudan is important because of its petrol and land. The ICC indicts Kony and not the Ugandan army or government because who pays the piper does not say objectivity or fairness. Why all the hue and cry around Kony now after so many years of his barbaric rampage and when he is weak and on the verge of collapse? The demonization of Kony with his ragtag army is at best a diversion while the rebellion and overall dissatisfaction in Uganda is a serious political Ugandan problem. It is about oil and money, about land and corruption, about tyranny and ethnic grievances. The Invisible Children group’s call for American intervention and all out support to the Museveni regime, by demonizing a rather weakened Kony and LRA, is not the right call at all. Once again Westerners are playing cynical games with our misery and fate. May the demise of Kony be soon but, more importantly, may the end of the anti democratic regime of Museveni be soon and the solutions to the basic political problems of Uganda an actuality. In the meanwhile, Invisible Children will for sure make millions with the help of its U tube, American chauvinists, actors, the ICC and duped African fellow travelers.
Viva Africa—They Need Us!
Viva Africa—They Need Us!
There are quite a few people, not necessarily white, who have concluded that we Africans, if only we did not have minerals and oil, rich and fertile lands up for grabbing, (we) would be quite useless and irrelevant in the march of History. France’s embattled president even said we are just at the door of civilization and the past century and not yet in though he did not say whether it is because we did not knock, or were too lazy to bother or were kept out.
French president Sarkozy is in waters deeper than the crocodile infested Nile. His win in the next French election is appearing like the dream of riches of an impoverished African. Troubled and faced with the possibility of a resounding defeat, he has desperately come up with what he considers a panacea: attack the Africans, the black and Arab hordes with the Asians thrown in. The Immigrants. Sarkozy hopes he has found the right bogeyman to frighten the French not to vote Socialist. And we all know the French voter is a strange animal who talks left and often votes conservative. Sarkozy has also jumped on the God sent issue of a lone gun man killing French soldiers (North Africans and Caribbean by origin) and innocent Jewish children going to school. He went to Toulouse and almost shed tears as he called the killing of children a national tragedy. The same day Algeria observed the 50th year of its liberation from brutal French colonialism, a day unobserved this way or that by France. Is this the same Sarkozy who ordered the carpet bombing of Libya causing the deaths of thousands? Is this the same man who sent soldiers to meddle in Ivory Coast? The same day Sarkozy was crying about national tragedy (4 people killed of whom three were children) how many died in Gaza without a word of sympathy from him? And Syria? Actually, all this is neither here nor there. Killers of children need to be condemned in all places.
The main point is that we Africans have once again become useful. They need us. Not only for our oil, gold, coltan, fertile land, uranium and diamonds but also to act as scarecrows during elections. There are too many immigrants Sarkozy cries out with indignation stealing the main slogan of the far right National Front thus pushing people ask who really is the leader of the far right—Marine Le Pen or Sarkozy? The rightists and frightened elders who are complaining that France is no longer authentic France (whatever that means), but a sort of Untied Nations of a country, are pleased. Too many “Noirs et Arabs” (blacks and Arabs) everywhere anyway, we are not safe, all meat sold is actually Halal (this is also a campaign issue believe it or not), send the immigrants packing (Norway is trying to that with Ethiopians), immigration, immigrants, they are drowning us. Once again we Africans and Arabs and immigrants have become potent. We frighten. We are not Talibans but we frighten. We are not just miserable souls being rounded up or dying at Lampadusa but living and aggressive immigrants destabilizing Europe. We clean their toilets and streets but somehow we are stealing critical jobs from them. Wow! We are not pathetic warlords being the only ones to be tried and convicted by the racist ICC but Mamadous, Getachews, Dengs and Toures strutting on the streets of Europe and making them afraid. Honor redeemed?
I have always argued that we serve Westerners of all hues by being victims. The NGOs thrive because of us (Juba is host to some 400 of them). We starve and are of use to them. They collect money using photos of our tearful and desperate and starved children and they collect million of which we do not even se a sizeable part. Take the Kony2012 fellows who collected millions and spent only a mere 32% for the Ugandans in whose name they collected the money. War on Want and others of the 1984 Ethiopian famine are also cases in point. Liv Ullman, a Norwegian actress, visited a camp for famine victims in Ethiopia in 1984 and congratulated a camp dweller on the beauty of his hand knitted cap and the fellow (we Ethiopians are sometimes rude!) replied to her “ but I cannot eat my cap!”, Present day Livs thrive on our misery. Call them Angelina Jolie, George Clooney, etc they are out there getting publicity, making lightening visits to “war zones”, getting filmed and “arrested” in front of embassies (of course they are released promptly) to, as they say, publicize the plight of people who do not have the luxury of being detained in front of cameras and who will not see the light of day if they ever get captured or jailed. So, the charade is for them and we play along. Naive and kind souls that we are, reading the Bible while they stole our land, being filmed with tears for them to collect money and profit, we are the perennial victims. They want us out of their country but we do not demand the repatriation of thousands of French people from Cote d’Ivoire, thousands of French Foreign Legion mercenaries from Djibouti, CAR or other places. We never ask the deportation of aggressive French or American troops from the Horn of Africa, East Africa, etc. We are so welcoming, no? That is why the ongoing hue and cry against us by Sarkozy and others who think political and economic problems that they are facing are of no importance while they rile against immigrants and wail of national tragedies are indeed fakes but we like them. They are our fakes, our own crocodiles. They have made us modern day Mandingos, needed, the heart of their malaise and crisis. Who can ask for more? It is much better than being outside the gates of civilization, irrelevant, a synonym to misery and uselessness.
We have become an election issue of primary importance and we should thank Sarkozy and all European rightists for the honor. We are now relevant, of some use and role. Immigrants in France and other countries should swagger and be visible. Like it or not we should land on them, we shall come to their shores (as they did come to ours years and years ago to enslave and colonize us). They are still in Africa in their thousands (if only China had not been so far—we would have shown them the replica to their invasion of our continent), enjoying high standard of living and not cleaning African streets and toilets. Yet, we are tolerant. We are happy to be scarecrows and monsters for frightened old ladies and men and for those who keep the nightmare of virile Mandingos possessing their lily white maidens. The march of History is against their dream of keeping us away. They need us for our labor, for our tax money, for our wealth in our countries. They need us to frighten their citizens not vote rationally but to bow to their fears and prejudices. Aren’t we immigrants great?
There are quite a few people, not necessarily white, who have concluded that we Africans, if only we did not have minerals and oil, rich and fertile lands up for grabbing, (we) would be quite useless and irrelevant in the march of History. France’s embattled president even said we are just at the door of civilization and the past century and not yet in though he did not say whether it is because we did not knock, or were too lazy to bother or were kept out.
French president Sarkozy is in waters deeper than the crocodile infested Nile. His win in the next French election is appearing like the dream of riches of an impoverished African. Troubled and faced with the possibility of a resounding defeat, he has desperately come up with what he considers a panacea: attack the Africans, the black and Arab hordes with the Asians thrown in. The Immigrants. Sarkozy hopes he has found the right bogeyman to frighten the French not to vote Socialist. And we all know the French voter is a strange animal who talks left and often votes conservative. Sarkozy has also jumped on the God sent issue of a lone gun man killing French soldiers (North Africans and Caribbean by origin) and innocent Jewish children going to school. He went to Toulouse and almost shed tears as he called the killing of children a national tragedy. The same day Algeria observed the 50th year of its liberation from brutal French colonialism, a day unobserved this way or that by France. Is this the same Sarkozy who ordered the carpet bombing of Libya causing the deaths of thousands? Is this the same man who sent soldiers to meddle in Ivory Coast? The same day Sarkozy was crying about national tragedy (4 people killed of whom three were children) how many died in Gaza without a word of sympathy from him? And Syria? Actually, all this is neither here nor there. Killers of children need to be condemned in all places.
The main point is that we Africans have once again become useful. They need us. Not only for our oil, gold, coltan, fertile land, uranium and diamonds but also to act as scarecrows during elections. There are too many immigrants Sarkozy cries out with indignation stealing the main slogan of the far right National Front thus pushing people ask who really is the leader of the far right—Marine Le Pen or Sarkozy? The rightists and frightened elders who are complaining that France is no longer authentic France (whatever that means), but a sort of Untied Nations of a country, are pleased. Too many “Noirs et Arabs” (blacks and Arabs) everywhere anyway, we are not safe, all meat sold is actually Halal (this is also a campaign issue believe it or not), send the immigrants packing (Norway is trying to that with Ethiopians), immigration, immigrants, they are drowning us. Once again we Africans and Arabs and immigrants have become potent. We frighten. We are not Talibans but we frighten. We are not just miserable souls being rounded up or dying at Lampadusa but living and aggressive immigrants destabilizing Europe. We clean their toilets and streets but somehow we are stealing critical jobs from them. Wow! We are not pathetic warlords being the only ones to be tried and convicted by the racist ICC but Mamadous, Getachews, Dengs and Toures strutting on the streets of Europe and making them afraid. Honor redeemed?
I have always argued that we serve Westerners of all hues by being victims. The NGOs thrive because of us (Juba is host to some 400 of them). We starve and are of use to them. They collect money using photos of our tearful and desperate and starved children and they collect million of which we do not even se a sizeable part. Take the Kony2012 fellows who collected millions and spent only a mere 32% for the Ugandans in whose name they collected the money. War on Want and others of the 1984 Ethiopian famine are also cases in point. Liv Ullman, a Norwegian actress, visited a camp for famine victims in Ethiopia in 1984 and congratulated a camp dweller on the beauty of his hand knitted cap and the fellow (we Ethiopians are sometimes rude!) replied to her “ but I cannot eat my cap!”, Present day Livs thrive on our misery. Call them Angelina Jolie, George Clooney, etc they are out there getting publicity, making lightening visits to “war zones”, getting filmed and “arrested” in front of embassies (of course they are released promptly) to, as they say, publicize the plight of people who do not have the luxury of being detained in front of cameras and who will not see the light of day if they ever get captured or jailed. So, the charade is for them and we play along. Naive and kind souls that we are, reading the Bible while they stole our land, being filmed with tears for them to collect money and profit, we are the perennial victims. They want us out of their country but we do not demand the repatriation of thousands of French people from Cote d’Ivoire, thousands of French Foreign Legion mercenaries from Djibouti, CAR or other places. We never ask the deportation of aggressive French or American troops from the Horn of Africa, East Africa, etc. We are so welcoming, no? That is why the ongoing hue and cry against us by Sarkozy and others who think political and economic problems that they are facing are of no importance while they rile against immigrants and wail of national tragedies are indeed fakes but we like them. They are our fakes, our own crocodiles. They have made us modern day Mandingos, needed, the heart of their malaise and crisis. Who can ask for more? It is much better than being outside the gates of civilization, irrelevant, a synonym to misery and uselessness.
We have become an election issue of primary importance and we should thank Sarkozy and all European rightists for the honor. We are now relevant, of some use and role. Immigrants in France and other countries should swagger and be visible. Like it or not we should land on them, we shall come to their shores (as they did come to ours years and years ago to enslave and colonize us). They are still in Africa in their thousands (if only China had not been so far—we would have shown them the replica to their invasion of our continent), enjoying high standard of living and not cleaning African streets and toilets. Yet, we are tolerant. We are happy to be scarecrows and monsters for frightened old ladies and men and for those who keep the nightmare of virile Mandingos possessing their lily white maidens. The march of History is against their dream of keeping us away. They need us for our labor, for our tax money, for our wealth in our countries. They need us to frighten their citizens not vote rationally but to bow to their fears and prejudices. Aren’t we immigrants great?
Thursday, January 19, 2012
WHAT’S IN A CORPSE?
WHAT’S IN A CORPSE?
American Marine soldiers were captured on video peeing on the corpses of Taliban fighters. They evidently enjoyed their act, these sons of Christian and civilized America which always strives to teach us Christian democratic values. At the risk of annoying some quarters let me ask the pertinent question: what is in a corpse? Corpses have been sold, mutilated and defiled in the past.
To begin with America has refused to respect many Geneva Convention laws and rejected the ban against torture. Its troops in Afghanistan (and Iraq and other places too) are there to kill people they call their enemies. Afghanistan is not that famous for its R&R spots and considering that the Talibans are also not that gentle with corpse, one can understand the frustration of the peeing Marines. Back in History Belgian colonialists were proudly photographed holding decapitated heads, chopped of hands, etc of the Congolese (15 million died in the hands of the colonials). Colonial wars were not respectful of the bodies of the natives. The German tried to wipe out the Herero people of Namibia (the Nazis got many of their evil concepts from that campaign); the British tried their hand everywhere. Italians killed a million Ethiopians chopped of head and hands of patriots and the Italian colonial Minister Alessandro Lessona even imagined “an Ethiopia without Ethiopians”. Here is one report on the British penchant to destroy entire communities: “On 29 March 1896, Rhodes’ ally Lord Jarvis wrote to his wife that ‘I hope the natives will be pretty well exterminated . . . our plan of campaign will probably be to . . . wipe them out . . .’, while in July he wrote to his mother, suggesting that,‘. . . the best thing to do is to wipe them out . . . everything black’. In January 1897, Lord Grey wrote describing the mood in the colony: even the missionary Father Biehler felt ‘the only chance for the future of the [Mashona] race is to exterminate the whole people, both male and female, over the age of 14! ” In such situations, it is not possible to expect niceties towards the dead.
Still, the American penchant to be disastrously grotesque does shock. The crimes in the Philippines, later made paler by the Indochina experience, were beyond measure and many corpses were mutilated. The Vietnam experience was of course worse. Dead Vietnamese were defiled in one way or another. In Iraq, Abu Ghraib photos of dead Iraqis being defiled by American troops are now followed by American troops peeing on Taliban corpses. Guantanamo is evidence of mistreatment of the living—why expect respect for the dead? Water boarding and other brutal tortures were sued and are still being used on live prisoners—why bother for the Taliban corpses who are dead and would not feel wet or humiliated by the urines of beasts? We should also consider the fact that Americans had been defiling the corpses of Native Americans and habits refuse to die. All this said, I am the first to admit that Africans are not saints in this respect. Anti and pro Gbagbo forces in Ivory Coast torched people to death Kenyans and Ugandans beat and torch alleged thieves in a crude mob justice that also takes place in South Africa where victims are forced to drink petrol for what is called internal combustion. Samuel Doe was cut to pieces. Even Khadafy’s coprse was defiled courtesy of America, Britain and France. Decapitation, mutilation of the dead is not a strange thing to Africans. If violence is as American as apple pie the defilement of corpses is as universal as (not as matoke, sorry) but rice.
Anyway, respect for corpses has not been an American tradition at all. Check the following report:
“On September 19, 1995, two men allegedly broke into the mortuary
at Forest Lawn Memorial Park in Hollywood Hills and engaged in
sexual intercourse with two female corpses. The next day, police announced the two men were being held on suspicion of burglary.
According to police, the two men were not charged with having
intercourse with a corpse because having sex with a corpse is not illegal
in California. This left the men liable only on charges that they
broke into the mortuary and stole computer chips from a personal computer in the building”. There you go. Necrophilia is also a favorite subject of American movies and TV programs. The genre is not, alas, Horror.
Torturing and decapitating people are, in my opinion, not as bad as anything done to a corpse. Intercourse with a dead person is vile but as California law clearly puts it no crime is involved (maybe because the corpse would feel nothing). Killing innocent people by air strikes and drones is evil and not comparable to vile attacks on dead people. Lumumba’s corpse was defiled but not many in the West cared. Today militias supported by the West have raped and attacked more than half a million females in Eastern Congo. Cutting the throat of people is disgusting but the Talibans and Al Shabab type of bizarre forces enjoy it. If people pee on these killers is it poetic justice? If we say yes then we all go into the mad, mad world of criminals playing roulette with decency and hopes of a better world. The Talibans and the Marines are in their own nightmarish world of playing recklessly with our hopes and rights as human beings. The West made fun of Idi Amin and Bokassa and even alleged they were cannibals. The RUF of Sierra Leone also came to the rescue chopping of people’s hands, arms and heads. But the whole operation there was for diamonds and orchestrated by Britain in the first place.
Abu Ghraib. Guantanamo, Afghanistan….. The image of America is not that nice. Peeing on dead people is not going to improve their image. Obama has not been that much of a dramatic change over Bush in the political field. Frustrations abound. American soldiers as harbingers of democracy or decent values are total fiction. The soldiers who peed on corpses publicly and graphically announced that America’s promise of decency and democracy is totally false. This is a proper message to all who want to be duped by Washington. It is also possible that there are many who want for Washington to pee on them but this is not the feeling of the majority. If Americans troops only pee on dead people it is also going to be a problem for those live ones who want the urine treatment. Are Americans that selective with their brutality? If so, is discrimination involved? Must you be dead to be peed on by the agents of civilization, democracy and Christianity? Very difficult questions awaiting clear answers. Again, what’s in a corpse? Dead people have been defiled for centuries. More relevantly, live people have been defiled and peed upon for centuries. This is much more important an issue. Alas, no one seems to care. Be assured, American troops would perform more grotesque and inhuman actions in the future. Defiling corpses is a crime but more than that crime against live people is even worse. Peeing on the dead is not as bad as doing worse things on the living.
American Marine soldiers were captured on video peeing on the corpses of Taliban fighters. They evidently enjoyed their act, these sons of Christian and civilized America which always strives to teach us Christian democratic values. At the risk of annoying some quarters let me ask the pertinent question: what is in a corpse? Corpses have been sold, mutilated and defiled in the past.
To begin with America has refused to respect many Geneva Convention laws and rejected the ban against torture. Its troops in Afghanistan (and Iraq and other places too) are there to kill people they call their enemies. Afghanistan is not that famous for its R&R spots and considering that the Talibans are also not that gentle with corpse, one can understand the frustration of the peeing Marines. Back in History Belgian colonialists were proudly photographed holding decapitated heads, chopped of hands, etc of the Congolese (15 million died in the hands of the colonials). Colonial wars were not respectful of the bodies of the natives. The German tried to wipe out the Herero people of Namibia (the Nazis got many of their evil concepts from that campaign); the British tried their hand everywhere. Italians killed a million Ethiopians chopped of head and hands of patriots and the Italian colonial Minister Alessandro Lessona even imagined “an Ethiopia without Ethiopians”. Here is one report on the British penchant to destroy entire communities: “On 29 March 1896, Rhodes’ ally Lord Jarvis wrote to his wife that ‘I hope the natives will be pretty well exterminated . . . our plan of campaign will probably be to . . . wipe them out . . .’, while in July he wrote to his mother, suggesting that,‘. . . the best thing to do is to wipe them out . . . everything black’. In January 1897, Lord Grey wrote describing the mood in the colony: even the missionary Father Biehler felt ‘the only chance for the future of the [Mashona] race is to exterminate the whole people, both male and female, over the age of 14! ” In such situations, it is not possible to expect niceties towards the dead.
Still, the American penchant to be disastrously grotesque does shock. The crimes in the Philippines, later made paler by the Indochina experience, were beyond measure and many corpses were mutilated. The Vietnam experience was of course worse. Dead Vietnamese were defiled in one way or another. In Iraq, Abu Ghraib photos of dead Iraqis being defiled by American troops are now followed by American troops peeing on Taliban corpses. Guantanamo is evidence of mistreatment of the living—why expect respect for the dead? Water boarding and other brutal tortures were sued and are still being used on live prisoners—why bother for the Taliban corpses who are dead and would not feel wet or humiliated by the urines of beasts? We should also consider the fact that Americans had been defiling the corpses of Native Americans and habits refuse to die. All this said, I am the first to admit that Africans are not saints in this respect. Anti and pro Gbagbo forces in Ivory Coast torched people to death Kenyans and Ugandans beat and torch alleged thieves in a crude mob justice that also takes place in South Africa where victims are forced to drink petrol for what is called internal combustion. Samuel Doe was cut to pieces. Even Khadafy’s coprse was defiled courtesy of America, Britain and France. Decapitation, mutilation of the dead is not a strange thing to Africans. If violence is as American as apple pie the defilement of corpses is as universal as (not as matoke, sorry) but rice.
Anyway, respect for corpses has not been an American tradition at all. Check the following report:
“On September 19, 1995, two men allegedly broke into the mortuary
at Forest Lawn Memorial Park in Hollywood Hills and engaged in
sexual intercourse with two female corpses. The next day, police announced the two men were being held on suspicion of burglary.
According to police, the two men were not charged with having
intercourse with a corpse because having sex with a corpse is not illegal
in California. This left the men liable only on charges that they
broke into the mortuary and stole computer chips from a personal computer in the building”. There you go. Necrophilia is also a favorite subject of American movies and TV programs. The genre is not, alas, Horror.
Torturing and decapitating people are, in my opinion, not as bad as anything done to a corpse. Intercourse with a dead person is vile but as California law clearly puts it no crime is involved (maybe because the corpse would feel nothing). Killing innocent people by air strikes and drones is evil and not comparable to vile attacks on dead people. Lumumba’s corpse was defiled but not many in the West cared. Today militias supported by the West have raped and attacked more than half a million females in Eastern Congo. Cutting the throat of people is disgusting but the Talibans and Al Shabab type of bizarre forces enjoy it. If people pee on these killers is it poetic justice? If we say yes then we all go into the mad, mad world of criminals playing roulette with decency and hopes of a better world. The Talibans and the Marines are in their own nightmarish world of playing recklessly with our hopes and rights as human beings. The West made fun of Idi Amin and Bokassa and even alleged they were cannibals. The RUF of Sierra Leone also came to the rescue chopping of people’s hands, arms and heads. But the whole operation there was for diamonds and orchestrated by Britain in the first place.
Abu Ghraib. Guantanamo, Afghanistan….. The image of America is not that nice. Peeing on dead people is not going to improve their image. Obama has not been that much of a dramatic change over Bush in the political field. Frustrations abound. American soldiers as harbingers of democracy or decent values are total fiction. The soldiers who peed on corpses publicly and graphically announced that America’s promise of decency and democracy is totally false. This is a proper message to all who want to be duped by Washington. It is also possible that there are many who want for Washington to pee on them but this is not the feeling of the majority. If Americans troops only pee on dead people it is also going to be a problem for those live ones who want the urine treatment. Are Americans that selective with their brutality? If so, is discrimination involved? Must you be dead to be peed on by the agents of civilization, democracy and Christianity? Very difficult questions awaiting clear answers. Again, what’s in a corpse? Dead people have been defiled for centuries. More relevantly, live people have been defiled and peed upon for centuries. This is much more important an issue. Alas, no one seems to care. Be assured, American troops would perform more grotesque and inhuman actions in the future. Defiling corpses is a crime but more than that crime against live people is even worse. Peeing on the dead is not as bad as doing worse things on the living.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
HAPPY GENOCIDE
HAPPY GENOCIDE !
This time around Amnesty International has got the spirit right by calling for the arrest of George Bush during his tour of Africa. Alas, Ethiopia, Zambia and Tanzania do not have independent and truly African regimes and the man accused of violating the international convention against torture (and possibly against mutilating English grammar) will be feted and honored and not arrested. Bush will surely say “they misunderstimated me”. And Meles Zenawi, whose police and security forces torture and brutalize all prisoners, would give him a hug.
The so called International Criminal Court and the head prosecutor Ocampo are part of Western instruments against the so called Third World. If genocide be the issue, then the first people to be arrested and tried would be the American and Western criminals who have supervised genocides all over the world. Talk of Indochina and Chili and you get Kissinger. Mention Kenya and the horrible crimes of British colonialism come to the fore and France is guilty of the barbaric murders in Algeria. In recent times, the crimes of America in Iraq and Afghanistan are worthy of mention and Amnesty is right in calling for the arrest of George Bush. Tony Blair should also be detained without delay and charged. But, let us be real and realize that the powers in place are beyond the law and the ICC farce of Ocampo. The pathetic puppet is only focused on arresting Yugoslavs and Africans who have displeased the Western capitals. If genocide is really the issue, the recently celebrated Thanksgiving Day is but an example of the celebration of the wanton murder of Native Americans by savage settlers from Europe who were neither pilgrims nor invited guests. Manipulated and revised History has to be reconsidered—the day is a day of mourning for the real Americans who were there before even Columbus “discovered “the place. Happy genocide is in order for those celebrating the day and it is sad to note that Africans including Ethiopians celebrating the day. But this is not the issue here.
The miscarriage of justice is best exemplified by Ocampo and his ICC. A so called embargo killed half a million Iraqi children in an event that was dismissed by Madeline Albright as just collateral damage. Bush has been identified with water boarding and a country that often boasts of being civilized has shown its naked face—wanton murder and brutal torture. From Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo it is all injustice riding high. Gbagbo is whisked, actually bundled by the French to The Hague but the perpetrators of genocide like Mels Zenawi are feted and cuddled by the West—they are theirs. A Congolese alleged war lord is taken to The Hague while the master criminal Kabila is still in power. If Beshir of the Sudan is sought by the ICC why are not Bush, Nguema, Blair and the NATO bombers not accused? The same old nauseating double standard rears its head. There are genocides and there are genocides—no news here, just the dog biting the man. If you stick with the West you can murder and torture to your heart’s content and maybe face one or two lame “stop it” s through the years. One can live with that especially if one is a sadistic butcher and dictator.
There is no doubt that Gbagbo will be railroaded though his rival and the French army can both be accused of the crimes against civilians. Yes, the ICC seems to have an appetite for black faces only. To mention racism would be just belaboring the obvious. It is still this the kind of world we live in. No one has yet paid a cent let alone serve a prison term for the genocide of Africans and the infamous slave trade. Five million Congolese have died victims of the greedy pursuit of the mining conglomerates—no arrest warrant has been issued for them. The outcry for Darfur is not at all matched by a serious concern for the Congolese victims of the mineral robbers. The perpetrators and supporters of Apartheid are still around with no credible mea culpa coming out of them. The list is long. The rape of India, of South America, of Africa and Indochina involved genocides of all sorts and few of the criminals have been made to pay. That one genocide is till being celebrated as Thanksgiving Day is enough commentary. Here is one report on that Day: “1621, year of the supposed ‘first Thanksgiving.’ There is not much documentation of that event, but surviving Indians do not trust the myth. Natives were already dying like flies thanks to European-borne diseases. The Pequot tribe reportedly numbered 8,000 when the Pilgrims arrived, but disease had reduced their population to 1,500 by 1637, when the first, officially proclaimed, all-Pilgrim "Thanksgiving" took place. At that feast, the whites of New England celebrated their massacre of the Pequot. "This day forth shall be a day of celebration and thanksgiving for subduing the Pequot," read Massachusetts Bay Governor John Winthrop's proclamation. Few Pequot survived.” Many other massacres did follow. In 1623 at the Pamunkey Peace Talks the English poisoned the wine at a "peace conference" with Powhatan leaders, killing about 200; they physically attacked and killed another 50. British perfidy is very old. The accusation that blankets contaminated by small pox were given to the native Indians is not to be brushed aside lightly. Syphilis was spread also and this is without even mentioning the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.
Evidently, Bush will not be arrested by the African puppets. In fact, he was given a prize by Meles Zenawi—as we say in Ethiopia stinking fellows walk close and hand in hand. ‘Gim legim abreh azgim’. One is out of power and the other wobbles still. The American backed regime in Ethiopia has committed genocide and massacres, and tortures dissidents brutally and as a matter of routine. That Bush took this long to come and say bravo to his puppet is actually what is surprising for he does belong in Addis Abeba alongside Meles. Time for Bush and Meles to say Happy Genocide, to one another up close, together, with their stink.
This time around Amnesty International has got the spirit right by calling for the arrest of George Bush during his tour of Africa. Alas, Ethiopia, Zambia and Tanzania do not have independent and truly African regimes and the man accused of violating the international convention against torture (and possibly against mutilating English grammar) will be feted and honored and not arrested. Bush will surely say “they misunderstimated me”. And Meles Zenawi, whose police and security forces torture and brutalize all prisoners, would give him a hug.
The so called International Criminal Court and the head prosecutor Ocampo are part of Western instruments against the so called Third World. If genocide be the issue, then the first people to be arrested and tried would be the American and Western criminals who have supervised genocides all over the world. Talk of Indochina and Chili and you get Kissinger. Mention Kenya and the horrible crimes of British colonialism come to the fore and France is guilty of the barbaric murders in Algeria. In recent times, the crimes of America in Iraq and Afghanistan are worthy of mention and Amnesty is right in calling for the arrest of George Bush. Tony Blair should also be detained without delay and charged. But, let us be real and realize that the powers in place are beyond the law and the ICC farce of Ocampo. The pathetic puppet is only focused on arresting Yugoslavs and Africans who have displeased the Western capitals. If genocide is really the issue, the recently celebrated Thanksgiving Day is but an example of the celebration of the wanton murder of Native Americans by savage settlers from Europe who were neither pilgrims nor invited guests. Manipulated and revised History has to be reconsidered—the day is a day of mourning for the real Americans who were there before even Columbus “discovered “the place. Happy genocide is in order for those celebrating the day and it is sad to note that Africans including Ethiopians celebrating the day. But this is not the issue here.
The miscarriage of justice is best exemplified by Ocampo and his ICC. A so called embargo killed half a million Iraqi children in an event that was dismissed by Madeline Albright as just collateral damage. Bush has been identified with water boarding and a country that often boasts of being civilized has shown its naked face—wanton murder and brutal torture. From Abu Ghraib to Guantanamo it is all injustice riding high. Gbagbo is whisked, actually bundled by the French to The Hague but the perpetrators of genocide like Mels Zenawi are feted and cuddled by the West—they are theirs. A Congolese alleged war lord is taken to The Hague while the master criminal Kabila is still in power. If Beshir of the Sudan is sought by the ICC why are not Bush, Nguema, Blair and the NATO bombers not accused? The same old nauseating double standard rears its head. There are genocides and there are genocides—no news here, just the dog biting the man. If you stick with the West you can murder and torture to your heart’s content and maybe face one or two lame “stop it” s through the years. One can live with that especially if one is a sadistic butcher and dictator.
There is no doubt that Gbagbo will be railroaded though his rival and the French army can both be accused of the crimes against civilians. Yes, the ICC seems to have an appetite for black faces only. To mention racism would be just belaboring the obvious. It is still this the kind of world we live in. No one has yet paid a cent let alone serve a prison term for the genocide of Africans and the infamous slave trade. Five million Congolese have died victims of the greedy pursuit of the mining conglomerates—no arrest warrant has been issued for them. The outcry for Darfur is not at all matched by a serious concern for the Congolese victims of the mineral robbers. The perpetrators and supporters of Apartheid are still around with no credible mea culpa coming out of them. The list is long. The rape of India, of South America, of Africa and Indochina involved genocides of all sorts and few of the criminals have been made to pay. That one genocide is till being celebrated as Thanksgiving Day is enough commentary. Here is one report on that Day: “1621, year of the supposed ‘first Thanksgiving.’ There is not much documentation of that event, but surviving Indians do not trust the myth. Natives were already dying like flies thanks to European-borne diseases. The Pequot tribe reportedly numbered 8,000 when the Pilgrims arrived, but disease had reduced their population to 1,500 by 1637, when the first, officially proclaimed, all-Pilgrim "Thanksgiving" took place. At that feast, the whites of New England celebrated their massacre of the Pequot. "This day forth shall be a day of celebration and thanksgiving for subduing the Pequot," read Massachusetts Bay Governor John Winthrop's proclamation. Few Pequot survived.” Many other massacres did follow. In 1623 at the Pamunkey Peace Talks the English poisoned the wine at a "peace conference" with Powhatan leaders, killing about 200; they physically attacked and killed another 50. British perfidy is very old. The accusation that blankets contaminated by small pox were given to the native Indians is not to be brushed aside lightly. Syphilis was spread also and this is without even mentioning the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment.
Evidently, Bush will not be arrested by the African puppets. In fact, he was given a prize by Meles Zenawi—as we say in Ethiopia stinking fellows walk close and hand in hand. ‘Gim legim abreh azgim’. One is out of power and the other wobbles still. The American backed regime in Ethiopia has committed genocide and massacres, and tortures dissidents brutally and as a matter of routine. That Bush took this long to come and say bravo to his puppet is actually what is surprising for he does belong in Addis Abeba alongside Meles. Time for Bush and Meles to say Happy Genocide, to one another up close, together, with their stink.
OF LIES AND DESPOTS
OF LIES AND DESPOTS
““They made us many promises, more than I can remember. They only kept but one. They promised they would take our land, and they took it.” ----Red Cloud
Who was it who wailed “If only I had the luxury of lying?” I do understand the burden of French president Sarkozy who had to complain in private to Obama about Netanyahu “the liar”. Here is how the press report put it:
“French President Nicolas Sarkozy branded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "a liar" in a private conversation with US President Barack Obama that was accidentally broadcast to journalists during last week's G20 summit in Cannes.
"I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.
"You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to the French interpreter. Obama is lying too as he has cuddled up to and tolerated many shamelessly lying despots. They are “his” liars. As we Ethiopians say, you love your baby snot and all. Politics and lies seem to cohabit comfortably, alas. Impostors who can delude the crowds make effective despots. They fear not the lie in other words. Every year at the general meeting of the African Union or the UN a carnival of liars is held. Coup makers and murderers pay lip service to democracy and the will of the people. Those who easily and readily promise the sky to gullible millions will steal the land from all of them. Easy, invade Bahrain and then weep for the people of Syria. Invade for your own limited political objectives and then swear concern for the welfare of the people (France in Ivory Coast and Libya, America in many other places). The lie is important. If Netanyahu lies as Sarkozy alleges then most French people know that Sarkozy himself plays loose with facts actual or historical.
The existence of the WMD was one of the worst lies America and Britain played on the world with Colin Powell in the role of the pathetic messenger. We all saw the carnage that was justified by that huge lie. Africans were promised paradise and deprived of their land and freedom. Ethiopians have been promised three meals per day and millions are still starving and eating once a day has become a luxury. The lies are so effective that there are still many naïve souls who believe that Western troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan to bring democracy to the peoples there. Lying has become the pillar of the State in many countries and most despots rely on lies as much as arms to perpetuate their rule. A link has conveniently been made between Al Qaida in the Horn, in North Africa and the Boko Harem in Nigeria. The Africom operations are destined to carve out a New Africa, dominated by the West and serving the interests of the West. More drone bases would appear on African soil (the latest one is in Arba Minch/Gamo Gofa/, Ethiopia) and American troops would fight along African ones (Ethiopia, Uganda, etc) to crush any resistance to western domination. A good example of the big lie is the fraud that the war against Libya exposed. Kaddafi was said to have thousands of African mercenaries (many black refugees and workers were killed as a result by the so called rebels), that he was going to bomb Benghazi and killed some six thousand Libyans (the NATO war killed many more actually) and that jets bombed civilians. The whole accusation was presented by the Libyan For Human Rights many of whose members were to become members of the Transitional Council to win power.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, a Sociologist and Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) has put it as follows:
“The claims of the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) were coordinated with the formation of the Transitional Council. This becomes clear when the close and cagey relationship of the LLHR and the Transitional Council becomes apparent. Logically, the Obama Administration and NATO had to also be a part of this.
Whatever the Transitional Council is and whatever the intent of some of its supporters, it is clear that it is being used as a tool by the U.S. and others. Moreover, five members of the LLHR were or would become members of the Transitional Council almost immediately after the claims against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya were disseminated. According to Bouchuguir individuals with ties to the LLHR or who hold membership include Mahmoud Jibril and Ali Tarhouni.
Dr. Mahmoud Jibril is a Libyan regime figure brought into Libyan government circles by Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi. He would undemocratically be given the position of Transitional Council prime minister. His involvement with the LLHR raises some real questions about the organization.
The economist Ali Tarhouni on the other hand would become the minister for oil and finance for the Transitional Council. Tarhouni is Washington’s man in Libya. He was groomed in the United States and was present at all the major meetings about plans for regime change in Libya. As Minister of Oil and Finance the first acts he did were privatize and virtually handover Libya’s energy resources and economy to the foreign corporations and governments of the NATO-led coalition against Libya.
The General-Secretary of the LLHR, Sliman Bouchuiguir, has even privately admitted that many influential members of the Transitional Council are his friends. A real question of interests arises. Yet, the secret relationship between the LLHR and the Transitional Council is far more than a question of conflict of interest. It is a question of justice and manipulation.
Sliman Bouchuguir is an unheard of figure for most, but he has authored a doctoral thesis that has been widely quoted and used in strategic circles in the United States. This thesis was published in 1979 as a book, The Use of Oil as a Political Weapon: A Case Study of the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. The thesis is about the use of oil as an economic weapon by Arabs, but can easily be applied to the Russians, the Iranians, the Venezuelans, and others. It examines economic development and economic warfare and can also be applied to vast regions, including all of Africa.
Bouchuguir’s analytical thesis reflects an important line of thinking in Washington as well as London and Tel Aviv. It is both the embodiment of a pre-existing mentality, which includes U.S. National Security Advisor George F. Kennan’s arguments for maintaining a position of disparity through a constant multi-faced war between the U.S. and its allies on one hand and the rest of the world on the other hand. The thesis can be drawn on for preventing the Arabs, or others, from becoming economic powers or threats. In strategic terms, rival economies are pinned as threats and as “weapons.” This has serious connotations.
Moreover, Bouchuiguir did his thesis at George Washington University under Bernard Reich. Reich is a political scientist and professor of international relations. He has worked and held positions at places like the U.S. Defense Intelligence College, the United States Air Force Special Operations School, the Marine Corps War College, and the Shiloah Center at Tel Aviv University. He has consulted on the Middle East for the Foreign Service Institute of the U.S. State Department and received grants such as the Defense Academic Research Support Program Research Grant and the German Marshal Fund Grant. Reich also was or is presently on the editorial boards of journals such as Israel Affairs (1994-present), Terrorism: An International Journal (1987-1994), and The New Middle East (1971-1973).
It is also clear that Reich is tied to Israeli interests. He has even written a book about the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel. He has also been an advocate for a “New Middle East” which would be favorable to Israel. This includes careful consideration over North Africa. His work has also focused on the important strategic interface between the Soviet Union and the Middle East and also on Israeli policy in the continent of Africa.
It is clear why Bouchuiguir had his thesis supervised under Reich. On October 23, 1973, Reich gave a testimony at the U.S. Congress. The testimony has been named “The Impact of the October Middle East War” and is clearly tied to the 1973 oil embargo and Washington’s aim of pre-empting or managing any similar events in the future. It has to be asked, how much did Reich influence Bouchuiguir and if Bouchuiguir espouses the same strategic views as Reich?”
The reality is complicated and like the proverbial Truth needs a contingent of lies to protect it. The West lies to pursue its objectives which are anathema to the interest of Africans primarily. AFRICOM is the new instrument of neo colonial domination and plunder and war against terror is the new name for the scramble of the new Century. The lying despots are the cogs for the wheel of the West and its predatory campaign against Africa. Human rights organizations are being used as a cover for the wars the West is waging against African and other continents. At the end of the day, it is war for valuable resources. The US imports more oil from Africa than from Saudi Arabia. The resistance to the plunder of Africa’s oil and resources comes from the people of Africa and it is this resistance that is conveniently being presented as “terrorism”. The African despots are thus part of the big lie and working against the continent and its peoples. The lie is huge. The stakes are high as Africa’s future is on balance. Meles Zenawi sells bonds to gullible people promising that they will get their money back once the huge dam get finished on the Nile. Ivory Coast is said to be fine with Ouattara and Kabila is said to be a panacea for the Congo while Tsvangirai is expected to be an improvement on Mugabe, and so on and on. All lies. In politics “relative improvement” often hides a lie, the continuation of the same under a new name, a new despot. Lies are the weapons of despots. Gullible citizens trust the lies and become victims of tyrants. The wake up call is still unheard. Many Africans still imagine their salvation will come from the West. Waiting for Godot is the reality we observe with sadness.
How long are we to be fooled?
““They made us many promises, more than I can remember. They only kept but one. They promised they would take our land, and they took it.” ----Red Cloud
Who was it who wailed “If only I had the luxury of lying?” I do understand the burden of French president Sarkozy who had to complain in private to Obama about Netanyahu “the liar”. Here is how the press report put it:
“French President Nicolas Sarkozy branded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "a liar" in a private conversation with US President Barack Obama that was accidentally broadcast to journalists during last week's G20 summit in Cannes.
"I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.
"You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to the French interpreter. Obama is lying too as he has cuddled up to and tolerated many shamelessly lying despots. They are “his” liars. As we Ethiopians say, you love your baby snot and all. Politics and lies seem to cohabit comfortably, alas. Impostors who can delude the crowds make effective despots. They fear not the lie in other words. Every year at the general meeting of the African Union or the UN a carnival of liars is held. Coup makers and murderers pay lip service to democracy and the will of the people. Those who easily and readily promise the sky to gullible millions will steal the land from all of them. Easy, invade Bahrain and then weep for the people of Syria. Invade for your own limited political objectives and then swear concern for the welfare of the people (France in Ivory Coast and Libya, America in many other places). The lie is important. If Netanyahu lies as Sarkozy alleges then most French people know that Sarkozy himself plays loose with facts actual or historical.
The existence of the WMD was one of the worst lies America and Britain played on the world with Colin Powell in the role of the pathetic messenger. We all saw the carnage that was justified by that huge lie. Africans were promised paradise and deprived of their land and freedom. Ethiopians have been promised three meals per day and millions are still starving and eating once a day has become a luxury. The lies are so effective that there are still many naïve souls who believe that Western troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan to bring democracy to the peoples there. Lying has become the pillar of the State in many countries and most despots rely on lies as much as arms to perpetuate their rule. A link has conveniently been made between Al Qaida in the Horn, in North Africa and the Boko Harem in Nigeria. The Africom operations are destined to carve out a New Africa, dominated by the West and serving the interests of the West. More drone bases would appear on African soil (the latest one is in Arba Minch/Gamo Gofa/, Ethiopia) and American troops would fight along African ones (Ethiopia, Uganda, etc) to crush any resistance to western domination. A good example of the big lie is the fraud that the war against Libya exposed. Kaddafi was said to have thousands of African mercenaries (many black refugees and workers were killed as a result by the so called rebels), that he was going to bomb Benghazi and killed some six thousand Libyans (the NATO war killed many more actually) and that jets bombed civilians. The whole accusation was presented by the Libyan For Human Rights many of whose members were to become members of the Transitional Council to win power.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, a Sociologist and Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) has put it as follows:
“The claims of the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) were coordinated with the formation of the Transitional Council. This becomes clear when the close and cagey relationship of the LLHR and the Transitional Council becomes apparent. Logically, the Obama Administration and NATO had to also be a part of this.
Whatever the Transitional Council is and whatever the intent of some of its supporters, it is clear that it is being used as a tool by the U.S. and others. Moreover, five members of the LLHR were or would become members of the Transitional Council almost immediately after the claims against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya were disseminated. According to Bouchuguir individuals with ties to the LLHR or who hold membership include Mahmoud Jibril and Ali Tarhouni.
Dr. Mahmoud Jibril is a Libyan regime figure brought into Libyan government circles by Saif Al-Islam Qaddafi. He would undemocratically be given the position of Transitional Council prime minister. His involvement with the LLHR raises some real questions about the organization.
The economist Ali Tarhouni on the other hand would become the minister for oil and finance for the Transitional Council. Tarhouni is Washington’s man in Libya. He was groomed in the United States and was present at all the major meetings about plans for regime change in Libya. As Minister of Oil and Finance the first acts he did were privatize and virtually handover Libya’s energy resources and economy to the foreign corporations and governments of the NATO-led coalition against Libya.
The General-Secretary of the LLHR, Sliman Bouchuiguir, has even privately admitted that many influential members of the Transitional Council are his friends. A real question of interests arises. Yet, the secret relationship between the LLHR and the Transitional Council is far more than a question of conflict of interest. It is a question of justice and manipulation.
Sliman Bouchuguir is an unheard of figure for most, but he has authored a doctoral thesis that has been widely quoted and used in strategic circles in the United States. This thesis was published in 1979 as a book, The Use of Oil as a Political Weapon: A Case Study of the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. The thesis is about the use of oil as an economic weapon by Arabs, but can easily be applied to the Russians, the Iranians, the Venezuelans, and others. It examines economic development and economic warfare and can also be applied to vast regions, including all of Africa.
Bouchuguir’s analytical thesis reflects an important line of thinking in Washington as well as London and Tel Aviv. It is both the embodiment of a pre-existing mentality, which includes U.S. National Security Advisor George F. Kennan’s arguments for maintaining a position of disparity through a constant multi-faced war between the U.S. and its allies on one hand and the rest of the world on the other hand. The thesis can be drawn on for preventing the Arabs, or others, from becoming economic powers or threats. In strategic terms, rival economies are pinned as threats and as “weapons.” This has serious connotations.
Moreover, Bouchuiguir did his thesis at George Washington University under Bernard Reich. Reich is a political scientist and professor of international relations. He has worked and held positions at places like the U.S. Defense Intelligence College, the United States Air Force Special Operations School, the Marine Corps War College, and the Shiloah Center at Tel Aviv University. He has consulted on the Middle East for the Foreign Service Institute of the U.S. State Department and received grants such as the Defense Academic Research Support Program Research Grant and the German Marshal Fund Grant. Reich also was or is presently on the editorial boards of journals such as Israel Affairs (1994-present), Terrorism: An International Journal (1987-1994), and The New Middle East (1971-1973).
It is also clear that Reich is tied to Israeli interests. He has even written a book about the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel. He has also been an advocate for a “New Middle East” which would be favorable to Israel. This includes careful consideration over North Africa. His work has also focused on the important strategic interface between the Soviet Union and the Middle East and also on Israeli policy in the continent of Africa.
It is clear why Bouchuiguir had his thesis supervised under Reich. On October 23, 1973, Reich gave a testimony at the U.S. Congress. The testimony has been named “The Impact of the October Middle East War” and is clearly tied to the 1973 oil embargo and Washington’s aim of pre-empting or managing any similar events in the future. It has to be asked, how much did Reich influence Bouchuiguir and if Bouchuiguir espouses the same strategic views as Reich?”
The reality is complicated and like the proverbial Truth needs a contingent of lies to protect it. The West lies to pursue its objectives which are anathema to the interest of Africans primarily. AFRICOM is the new instrument of neo colonial domination and plunder and war against terror is the new name for the scramble of the new Century. The lying despots are the cogs for the wheel of the West and its predatory campaign against Africa. Human rights organizations are being used as a cover for the wars the West is waging against African and other continents. At the end of the day, it is war for valuable resources. The US imports more oil from Africa than from Saudi Arabia. The resistance to the plunder of Africa’s oil and resources comes from the people of Africa and it is this resistance that is conveniently being presented as “terrorism”. The African despots are thus part of the big lie and working against the continent and its peoples. The lie is huge. The stakes are high as Africa’s future is on balance. Meles Zenawi sells bonds to gullible people promising that they will get their money back once the huge dam get finished on the Nile. Ivory Coast is said to be fine with Ouattara and Kabila is said to be a panacea for the Congo while Tsvangirai is expected to be an improvement on Mugabe, and so on and on. All lies. In politics “relative improvement” often hides a lie, the continuation of the same under a new name, a new despot. Lies are the weapons of despots. Gullible citizens trust the lies and become victims of tyrants. The wake up call is still unheard. Many Africans still imagine their salvation will come from the West. Waiting for Godot is the reality we observe with sadness.
How long are we to be fooled?
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
NATO AKHBAR! WOW!
NATO AKBAR ! WOW !!
There was a time when Allah Akbar only meant God is great. Alas, times have changed and in the tragedy that is called Libya Allah Akbar now means NATO Akbar, an exultation of the murderous machine called NATO that reduced Libya to rubbles and killed thousands of innocent people (all photos edited/censored-- circulate, nothing to see, thank you!). As Hilary Clinton so stupidly said: wow!
The illegal and grotesque execution of Khadafy is within the realms of a war crime. There was from the outset the decision to execute him if he were ever to be captured alive. The dictator knew too many secrets, just like Ben Laden, and an open public trial was not to be envisaged. One confidential newspaper in London has asserted that the decision to kill Khadafy was endorsed and called for by none other than Obama and Sarkozy. Imagine Khadafy enlightening us on his deals with Condoleezza Rice and the CIA, with that Tony Blair fellow (who has now become a political consultant to the tyrant of Kazakhstan at a yearly price of 8 million British pounds), with Berlusconi and France’s Sarkozy who had hosted him at the the Elysee palace and begged for more oil concessions for TOTAL. Obama has become the father of all disappointments. The man has been given an undeserved Nobel Peace Prize (but then again this prize has been given to criminals like Kissinger and De Klerk too!). He has failed to keep his promises (Guantanamo is still open for example), waged wars, interfered in other people’s affairs using force, approved and enjoyed murders and selective assassinations (Ben Laden/Khadafy) and went on to say with insensitivity that the war has been won in Libya with no casualty and “only” two billion dollars spent. This is Bush talk par excellence—it is apparent that for Obama too the lives of thousands of Libyans are of no consequence whatsoever. Obama hobnobs with dictators and arms and supports tyrants. Meles Zenawi is one example. I am sure Ugandans can point to their own despot, Equatorial Guineans and Djiboutians to theirs and Chadians to American backed Deby. Sarkozy is also obsessed with winning the coming 2012 presidency and has even had a programmed birth to project the “ papa poule” image (it has not stuck) and has resorted to force against other countries (Cote d’Ivoire and Libya) to present himself defender of the imperial and shredded macho image of France.
The destruction of Libya and the commandeered execution of Khadafy is a disgrace to Washington and Europe. Despite the trumpeted claim that the removal of Khadafy has heralded a new era, the reality is bleak. Libya has been taken one step back and there is no sign of a two steps leap foreword other than the adoption of Sharia law, the reintroduction of polygamy and the denial of divorce rights for women. Some forever naïve souls in Africa have hailed the execution of the Libyan dictator and some live tyrants may be shaking in their expensive loafers imagining such a fate being theirs. Outside of this, the murder of Khadafy does not augur well for Libya and Libyans. Reactionary Arab regimes aided the rebels, Qatar sent troops and Sudan sent arms and ammunition. It was a free for all that showed the features of the new scramble for Africa. The old devils are there, hungrier and better armed than ever before. New predators have come from the East with China leading the way. Forget the hollow talk of solidarity and concern for the welfare of Africans. In all this, the African Union has been demonstrated to be in a state of comatose that was the lot of the previous OAU, the puppets of the West dominate the so called Union and it was not long before all these who were beholden to Khadafy ( and enjoyed his gifts and aid) abandoned him in frenzy.
The NATO military fury against Libya has nothing to do with democracy or with helping a people “hungry for democracy”. The composition of the rebel leaders and their religious zeal do not promise any democratic commitments. Compared to Khadafy, they have emerged as more backward, their proclamation of Sharia law affirming the fact. Their tribal or ethnic division has hampered them up to now from forming a sort of government however wobbly. The dictator, like most tyrants, had mauled institutions worthy of the name and so allegiances and loyalties are basic—“tribal”, family, region and religious. Much as Khadafy and his folks antagonized others, the brutal and violent action against Khadafy loyalists (and the Khadafa group) is bound to undermine a trouble free future. Wow! Khadafy is gone and hail the new Libya is thus a hollow and overly optimistic cry unsupported by the facts on the ground and by our experience of “mission accomplished” and continued havoc in Iraq and Afghanistan. If truth be told, Khadafy was attacked for Libya’s oil, for his anti imperialist rhetoric and call for African unity, for his stand against the daylight robbery of the resources of Africa by foreign monsters. Otherwise, the double standard has been laid bare, only fools believe that the war against Libya was a war for democracy and the human rights of the people? What human rights? The rebels killed as many African workers and migrants as the Khadafy who was hailed by Europe for promising “I will serve as a wall to stop the famished hordes coming to your shores and lands”.
Moatassem Gaddafi, meeting Hillary Clinton, 21 April 2009. A murderous criminal who personally executed soldiers who refused to shoot at the protesters, Gaddafi's fifth son and the National Security Advisor, was also killed in Sirte.
The extrajudicial murder or rather the lynching of Khadafy was ordered by those with extensive past experience in the matter. Obama may have forgotten it but black Africans were lynched by white racists in America, the British hanged too many Kenyan and Yemeni patriots and French colonialists murdered thousands in Algeria and many other places. Yet, the “lynchers” hailed and feted Khadafy when it suited them.
Khadafy was kosher, halal, their friend and ally, before they turned against him and planned his ouster and assured his execution. The double standard is so plain to see it needs no detailed comment. The Tunisian uprising was seen in bad light by France and the West. The French interior minister even offered to provide French repressive means and experience to quash the people’s revolt. Hilary Clinton assured us that, Tunisia notwithstanding, the regime of Mubarak was stable. Assad of Syria and Salah of Yemen have murdered thousands with no NATO plane hovering over their skies or no drone bombing their strategic arms depots. Take also the African dictators allied with America (like Meles Zenawi for one) who are enjoying full Western support and no sanctions though they are labeled horrible human rights violators and guilty of genocide (Gambella, Ogaden). Tony Blair is consultant to one of the worst dictators in the world. France backs most tyrants in the so called Francophone Africa. The Libyan tragedy highlights the Western drive to re colonize Africa and plunder its resources. More than 5 million Congolese have died in a war sponsored by Western companies greedily vying to control the gold, diamond, coltan and other precious minerals of this hapless country. Not much hue and cry has been raised, at least not as much as the cry over Darfur. While comparing one tyranny from another and declaring this one is relatively benign is not a good exercise, there is for example no doubt that any comparison between say Khadafy and Meles Zenawi shows the latter crueler and more monstrous. Beshir and Mugabe are softies compared to the West’s darling called Meles Zenawi. American military bases and presence in the Horn of Africa and in Uganda augur disaster for the peoples of the region who may rise up against their western backed tormentors. This is why those Africans who wax lyrical in condemning Khadafy and praising the NATO operation are dupes of the worst kind, alas.
History teaches for those willing to learn. Not all revolutions or popular uprisings lead to democratic change. Not all transitions are for good. In Tunisia the Islamist Ennahda has won the election. This party was financed and bankrolled by Middle Eastern and Gulf countries. The west is clamoring about “moderate Islamists” though such a creature has been extinct for many many years. Ennahda is playing along trying to project a reformist image and declaring itself a Tunisian version of the Turkish regime though situations of Turkey and Tunisia are not all the same and the so called reformist wing within Ennhada is a tiny minority. The Tunisian revolution is more or less hijacked and short circuited as is the Egyptian one. The West can live with hard line Islamists and anti democrats (Saudi Arabia is an example) so long as they are pro west and hand over their oil resources. The financial supporter of Ennahda, the fiery Sheikh Youssef Al Quadrawi who lives in Qatar, did declare that any Moslem who does not vote for Ennahda commits a grave sin. The Libyan sharia will sneak into Tunisia too. France which cuddles the Burmese junta hated Khadafy because of economic interests and not because it was affected by the plight of Libyans. One of the military leaders of the Libyan rebels is none other than an Al Qaeda operative who was captured by the Americans and then handed over to Libya for torture and interrogation by Khadafy’s security. One remembers the time when diverse forces (left, right and center) saw in Khomeini a liberator!
A wanted man has been killed in Mogadishu—wow! Bin Laden has been murdered-wow! Khadafy has been summarily executed—wow! The Obama administration has no shame at all and maybe as the late Steve Jobs had said Obama may be a one term president like Sarkozy. Good riddance is in order. Ivory Coast, Libya, drones flying out of their Ethiopian and Seychelles bases to kill and destroy, American troops in Djibouti, Ethiopia and Uganda, Africa’s land being handed out to foreigners, dictators being supported by the West, NATO being used to bomb African aspirations to smithereens—the reality is frightening. The execution of Khadafy and the destruction of Libya is a clear warning for all Africans who are entering a very dangerous time that makes their struggle for emancipation and freedom even more difficult.
Wow indeed! Just look at Hilary Clinton reveling in the cruel death of Khadafy.
There was a time when Allah Akbar only meant God is great. Alas, times have changed and in the tragedy that is called Libya Allah Akbar now means NATO Akbar, an exultation of the murderous machine called NATO that reduced Libya to rubbles and killed thousands of innocent people (all photos edited/censored-- circulate, nothing to see, thank you!). As Hilary Clinton so stupidly said: wow!
The illegal and grotesque execution of Khadafy is within the realms of a war crime. There was from the outset the decision to execute him if he were ever to be captured alive. The dictator knew too many secrets, just like Ben Laden, and an open public trial was not to be envisaged. One confidential newspaper in London has asserted that the decision to kill Khadafy was endorsed and called for by none other than Obama and Sarkozy. Imagine Khadafy enlightening us on his deals with Condoleezza Rice and the CIA, with that Tony Blair fellow (who has now become a political consultant to the tyrant of Kazakhstan at a yearly price of 8 million British pounds), with Berlusconi and France’s Sarkozy who had hosted him at the the Elysee palace and begged for more oil concessions for TOTAL. Obama has become the father of all disappointments. The man has been given an undeserved Nobel Peace Prize (but then again this prize has been given to criminals like Kissinger and De Klerk too!). He has failed to keep his promises (Guantanamo is still open for example), waged wars, interfered in other people’s affairs using force, approved and enjoyed murders and selective assassinations (Ben Laden/Khadafy) and went on to say with insensitivity that the war has been won in Libya with no casualty and “only” two billion dollars spent. This is Bush talk par excellence—it is apparent that for Obama too the lives of thousands of Libyans are of no consequence whatsoever. Obama hobnobs with dictators and arms and supports tyrants. Meles Zenawi is one example. I am sure Ugandans can point to their own despot, Equatorial Guineans and Djiboutians to theirs and Chadians to American backed Deby. Sarkozy is also obsessed with winning the coming 2012 presidency and has even had a programmed birth to project the “ papa poule” image (it has not stuck) and has resorted to force against other countries (Cote d’Ivoire and Libya) to present himself defender of the imperial and shredded macho image of France.
The destruction of Libya and the commandeered execution of Khadafy is a disgrace to Washington and Europe. Despite the trumpeted claim that the removal of Khadafy has heralded a new era, the reality is bleak. Libya has been taken one step back and there is no sign of a two steps leap foreword other than the adoption of Sharia law, the reintroduction of polygamy and the denial of divorce rights for women. Some forever naïve souls in Africa have hailed the execution of the Libyan dictator and some live tyrants may be shaking in their expensive loafers imagining such a fate being theirs. Outside of this, the murder of Khadafy does not augur well for Libya and Libyans. Reactionary Arab regimes aided the rebels, Qatar sent troops and Sudan sent arms and ammunition. It was a free for all that showed the features of the new scramble for Africa. The old devils are there, hungrier and better armed than ever before. New predators have come from the East with China leading the way. Forget the hollow talk of solidarity and concern for the welfare of Africans. In all this, the African Union has been demonstrated to be in a state of comatose that was the lot of the previous OAU, the puppets of the West dominate the so called Union and it was not long before all these who were beholden to Khadafy ( and enjoyed his gifts and aid) abandoned him in frenzy.
The NATO military fury against Libya has nothing to do with democracy or with helping a people “hungry for democracy”. The composition of the rebel leaders and their religious zeal do not promise any democratic commitments. Compared to Khadafy, they have emerged as more backward, their proclamation of Sharia law affirming the fact. Their tribal or ethnic division has hampered them up to now from forming a sort of government however wobbly. The dictator, like most tyrants, had mauled institutions worthy of the name and so allegiances and loyalties are basic—“tribal”, family, region and religious. Much as Khadafy and his folks antagonized others, the brutal and violent action against Khadafy loyalists (and the Khadafa group) is bound to undermine a trouble free future. Wow! Khadafy is gone and hail the new Libya is thus a hollow and overly optimistic cry unsupported by the facts on the ground and by our experience of “mission accomplished” and continued havoc in Iraq and Afghanistan. If truth be told, Khadafy was attacked for Libya’s oil, for his anti imperialist rhetoric and call for African unity, for his stand against the daylight robbery of the resources of Africa by foreign monsters. Otherwise, the double standard has been laid bare, only fools believe that the war against Libya was a war for democracy and the human rights of the people? What human rights? The rebels killed as many African workers and migrants as the Khadafy who was hailed by Europe for promising “I will serve as a wall to stop the famished hordes coming to your shores and lands”.
Moatassem Gaddafi, meeting Hillary Clinton, 21 April 2009. A murderous criminal who personally executed soldiers who refused to shoot at the protesters, Gaddafi's fifth son and the National Security Advisor, was also killed in Sirte.
The extrajudicial murder or rather the lynching of Khadafy was ordered by those with extensive past experience in the matter. Obama may have forgotten it but black Africans were lynched by white racists in America, the British hanged too many Kenyan and Yemeni patriots and French colonialists murdered thousands in Algeria and many other places. Yet, the “lynchers” hailed and feted Khadafy when it suited them.
Khadafy was kosher, halal, their friend and ally, before they turned against him and planned his ouster and assured his execution. The double standard is so plain to see it needs no detailed comment. The Tunisian uprising was seen in bad light by France and the West. The French interior minister even offered to provide French repressive means and experience to quash the people’s revolt. Hilary Clinton assured us that, Tunisia notwithstanding, the regime of Mubarak was stable. Assad of Syria and Salah of Yemen have murdered thousands with no NATO plane hovering over their skies or no drone bombing their strategic arms depots. Take also the African dictators allied with America (like Meles Zenawi for one) who are enjoying full Western support and no sanctions though they are labeled horrible human rights violators and guilty of genocide (Gambella, Ogaden). Tony Blair is consultant to one of the worst dictators in the world. France backs most tyrants in the so called Francophone Africa. The Libyan tragedy highlights the Western drive to re colonize Africa and plunder its resources. More than 5 million Congolese have died in a war sponsored by Western companies greedily vying to control the gold, diamond, coltan and other precious minerals of this hapless country. Not much hue and cry has been raised, at least not as much as the cry over Darfur. While comparing one tyranny from another and declaring this one is relatively benign is not a good exercise, there is for example no doubt that any comparison between say Khadafy and Meles Zenawi shows the latter crueler and more monstrous. Beshir and Mugabe are softies compared to the West’s darling called Meles Zenawi. American military bases and presence in the Horn of Africa and in Uganda augur disaster for the peoples of the region who may rise up against their western backed tormentors. This is why those Africans who wax lyrical in condemning Khadafy and praising the NATO operation are dupes of the worst kind, alas.
History teaches for those willing to learn. Not all revolutions or popular uprisings lead to democratic change. Not all transitions are for good. In Tunisia the Islamist Ennahda has won the election. This party was financed and bankrolled by Middle Eastern and Gulf countries. The west is clamoring about “moderate Islamists” though such a creature has been extinct for many many years. Ennahda is playing along trying to project a reformist image and declaring itself a Tunisian version of the Turkish regime though situations of Turkey and Tunisia are not all the same and the so called reformist wing within Ennhada is a tiny minority. The Tunisian revolution is more or less hijacked and short circuited as is the Egyptian one. The West can live with hard line Islamists and anti democrats (Saudi Arabia is an example) so long as they are pro west and hand over their oil resources. The financial supporter of Ennahda, the fiery Sheikh Youssef Al Quadrawi who lives in Qatar, did declare that any Moslem who does not vote for Ennahda commits a grave sin. The Libyan sharia will sneak into Tunisia too. France which cuddles the Burmese junta hated Khadafy because of economic interests and not because it was affected by the plight of Libyans. One of the military leaders of the Libyan rebels is none other than an Al Qaeda operative who was captured by the Americans and then handed over to Libya for torture and interrogation by Khadafy’s security. One remembers the time when diverse forces (left, right and center) saw in Khomeini a liberator!
A wanted man has been killed in Mogadishu—wow! Bin Laden has been murdered-wow! Khadafy has been summarily executed—wow! The Obama administration has no shame at all and maybe as the late Steve Jobs had said Obama may be a one term president like Sarkozy. Good riddance is in order. Ivory Coast, Libya, drones flying out of their Ethiopian and Seychelles bases to kill and destroy, American troops in Djibouti, Ethiopia and Uganda, Africa’s land being handed out to foreigners, dictators being supported by the West, NATO being used to bomb African aspirations to smithereens—the reality is frightening. The execution of Khadafy and the destruction of Libya is a clear warning for all Africans who are entering a very dangerous time that makes their struggle for emancipation and freedom even more difficult.
Wow indeed! Just look at Hilary Clinton reveling in the cruel death of Khadafy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)