Merchants of Death: Exposing Corporate-financed Holocaust in Africa

White Collar War Crimes, Black African Fall Guys

by Keith Harmon Snow / December 8th, 2008

Keith Harmon Snow is an independent human rights investigator and war correspondent who worked with Survivors Rights International (2005-2006), Genocide Watch (2005-2006) and the United Nations (2006) to document and expose genocide and crimes against humanity in Sudan and Ethiopia. He has worked in 17 countries in Africa, and he recently worked in Afghanistan. Read other articles by Keith, or visit Keith's website.

This article was posted on Monday, December 8th, 2008 at 9:02am and is filed under Africa, Corporate Globalization, Democratic Rep. Congo, Genocide, Mining, Racism, Rwanda, Uganda.

59 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

Ron Horn said on December 8th, 2008 at 10:10am #

This is a report which I have heretofore only gotten bits and pieces of. I figured that it would take another 10 years before I would get a more complete picture. Thank you so much, Keith Snow.
Brad. said on December 8th, 2008 at 6:54pm #

While ago I read this article. It reveals the root causes of to-days world problems, I hope you get a chance to read it:
http://www.left.ru/inter/2003/november/salari.html
john andrews said on December 9th, 2008 at 3:47am #

I managed to get about half way through this article (on a subject about which I know very little), until I came upon the writer’s tacit support for Robert Mugabe, and his apparent doubt about the ’so-called “failed state” of Zimbabwe’ (a subject about which I know quite a lot). I could not go any further.

If Mr Snow’s judgement about Robert Mugabe and the ’so called “failed state” of Zimbabwe’ is any indicator of his judgement on the situation in the Congo, it should be treated with considerable caution.
sk said on December 9th, 2008 at 7:27am #

“Political silence, total silence,” said Chris Hebdon, a Berkeley undergraduate. He went on to describe how various student groups gather at Sproul Plaza, the center of student activity at the University of California, Berkeley.

This plaza used to be the headquarters of student activism in the Sixties.
sk said on December 9th, 2008 at 7:28am #

Oops, forgot to link to the article from which above quote is taken.
sk said on December 9th, 2008 at 7:29am #

Chris Hebdon also talks about how “students table for Darfur, no one tables for Iraq”.
keith harmon snow said on December 9th, 2008 at 8:42am #

Hello John Andrews:

There are three parts to my homework assignment for you:

Please if you would, kindly offer readers

[I] a resume of your experience in Africa, in particular in Zimbabwe, or any of the states around Zimbabwe.

[II] A list of the pivotal sources you use for your assessment of the situation in Zimbabwe, including human rights agencies, think tanks, sources in Africa, and media venues, and U.S. bloggers.

[III] Finally, please inform readers herein as much as you can about the following and their relationships to Zimbabwe or Mugabe:

[1] John Bredenkamp
[2] Operation Chikorokoza
[3] Tiny Rowland
[4] Jacobus Coetzee
[5] Gukurahundi

Thanks. I’m sure readers will be as equally interested as I am in your prompt reply.

blessings
keith
keith harmon snow said on December 9th, 2008 at 8:46am #

Hello John Andrews:

By the way, I forgot to point out, your reading of my article only half way, and your reactionary conclusion about me offering “tacit support” to Robert Mugabe, — well, you might like to examine both of these. If you read only half way you indeed missed the point. Second, I nowhere support Robert Mugabe, either tacitly or otherwise.

Looking forward to your replies to the previous post.

blessings
keith
Annie said on December 9th, 2008 at 10:53am #

Dear Mr. Snow,
Is anyone doing anything right in DRC?
Do any organizations or individuals genuinely care about the Congolese people, either inside or outside of Congo?
Could you please make a chart of the “good” and the “bad?”
(I’m not kidding.)
Could you sum up your own oppinion of the Mai Mai?
Could you include a summation of your piece?
How were you able to take photos in Congo, as it is against the law there?
Thanks.
Annie Kendig
keith harmon snow said on December 9th, 2008 at 11:29am #

Dear Annie:

Sure, theres people who care, even white people. I think many of the people working at the lower levels in NGOs “care” and even believe that they are doing wonderful if not at least “good” things. Indeed, the road to hell… I recommend the books by Paulette Goudge: THE POWER OF WHITNESS and also Micheal Maren: THE ROAD TO HELL.

Take an “NGO” like the IRC — I know folks on the ground who are good people doing what they can, but the organization and its leadership is rotten. Salaries becomes the first and most important consideration for many “AID” workers.

Take another like the OTA BENGA ALLIANCE .. one needs always to questions motivations and interests.

Friends of the Congo (.org) is not alligned with any corporations, hidden interests or political agents and FOTC people are working very hard to help Congo. FOTC refused to join the new ENOUGH project RASIE HOPE FOR CONGO initiative because its not a sincere initiative. Stop Excision (.net) is a great project. Sacred Earth Network is a great project.

There are indeed many, many good projects which are unheard of, true grass roots. Its about economy of scale. As soon as a project becomes too big it becomes about sustaining the machine, not the mission they set out for.

But if people want to throw money into a hole they can support Jane Goodall Institute or CARE. And if they want to just throw money at a “problem” like “Congo” — and relieve them selfs (sic) of the burden of conscience, well, there is the real problem.

As far as your request to have me do work. No, I can’t jump through any of your hoops right now. But you are certainly invited to get involved, lead the way, make a difference. (I know nothing of how you are already making a difference, of course).

I live under the poverty line and perhaps you can guess how many donations I received due to the publication of this story? It’s amazing how many people ask for things and what they ask for. Like this complainant above on Zimbabwe — the guy dismissed my article without understanding anything (new) because his fear is so huge.

On top of my piles of to-do are [1] a major report about multinational corporate slavery in Congo; [2] an investigation about Rwandan intelligence agents of which I cannot reveal the details, [3] a Congo minerals investigation in the US of which I cannot reveal the details.

Picture taking is only “illegal” or problematic under some conditions and in some (usually “strategic” places).

blessings
keith
Annie said on December 9th, 2008 at 4:02pm #

Dear Mr. Snow,

I certainly respect your work. I read the BAR regularly and have had communication with the lovely folks at FOTC.
I have done some research on the Mai Mai, but am unsure of it’s accuracy. You seem like a man in the know, and I asked simply because I value your expericence and knowledge of DRC.
Thank you for continuing shed light on this very important and complicated subject. I send your articles and others like them to everyone I think will read them. Perhaps someday, the Congolese will reap the benefits of their very blessed land. Until then, keep up your good work.
keith harmon snow said on December 9th, 2008 at 4:37pm #

Hello

I think Mai Mai are a very mixed bag. Certainly more defensive and nationalist (Congolese) than other militias but also very much part of the problem. I really don’t understand them well. I have met the MAi Mai General Padiri, like anyone he has interests.
blessings
keith
sk said on December 9th, 2008 at 7:26pm #

I recommend the books by Paulette Goudge: THE POWER OF WHITENESS and also Michael Maren: THE ROAD TO HELL.

Both are excellent choices for opening eyes of folks whose political affiliation is white. Maren’s book has an epigram from Paolo Frere’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed that’s as valid today as it was in the 19′th century:

All domination involves invasion–at times physical and overt, at times camouflaged, with the invader assuming the role of a helping friend.

Here is an interview of Michael Maren.
john andrews said on December 10th, 2008 at 12:38am #

Mr Snow,

In your article you use the words ’so-called “failed state” of Zimbabwe’, as though there is some doubt about it, and write of Robert Mugabe as though he is a victim, presumably of western mining interests. If that doesn’t qualify as tacit support for him and his regime, I don’t really know what does. Whilst you do at least acknowledge his genocide of the Matabele people, your references to him and the country he has destroyed are, in my view, misguided and therefore damage considerbaly the credibility of the rest of your article.

As for my ‘homework assignment’…

I lived in Rhodesia for twenty three years and worked in many parts of it. So I know what the country was like then and I know what the country is like now from personal connections I still have there. I don’t really need any other ’sources’. (Though I was amused to note that you consider US bloggers to be an authoritative source but do not include Zimbabwean bloggers)

Your article may be quite good, I don’t know enough about the Congo to comment; but the fact is that it is tainted by association with your remarks about Zimbabwe, which are extremely questionable to say the least.
Annie said on December 10th, 2008 at 8:30am #

Dear S K,
Thanks for the link to the Michael Maren interview.
It was very enlightening and affirming.
Regards,
Annie
keith harmon snow said on December 10th, 2008 at 10:34am #

Dear John Andrews & interested Readers:

Well, John, you are a very uncooperative complainant. I gave you a simple homework assignment — I hope you didn’t miss the irony in that — and you didn’t at all inform readers about the people or events that I hoped you would, thus actually suporting my case, and not weakening it, which you seem inclined to do.

LOL.

What is one to do? You persist in complaining about my position vis-a-vis Robert Mugabe and Zimbabwe, and therein you cast doubt upon my research both about Zimbabwe and about Congo, and thus about the credibility of my article. Your assumptions definitively degrade your position, as they are wrong, and one is further inclined to be suspicious of your position given your relationship to Zimbabwe / Rhodesia — where whites in their dominant positions of power have perpetuated slavery and injustice against subaltern populations. You managed to get my attention because of your unfairness to my work.

To begin with, please understand my assessment of Robert Mugabe by reading this piece written by me long before the recent hub-bub about Mugabe the dictator:

THE GREAT BETRAYAL:
MUGABE’S GANG AND GENOCIDE IN ZIMBABWE
T he Hidden Story of Mugabe’s Complicity with Global Capital
Behind the persistent news themes about how Zimbabwe’s “President” Robert Mugabe is persecuting white farmers is the untold story of how he did the bidding of the system, for years, and was rewarded for it. A tired old, uncooperative despot getting in the way of profits, it is only then that the newspapers begin to demonize him for the corrupt dictator that he is.
read the html page
http://www.allthingspass.com/journalism.php?catid=15

And you had best re-read my story above, and before you get to the “so-called ‘failed state’” sentence you will find this very crucial idea:

>>>The unembraceable status, applied to Africa, is reserved for black males, for dictators and warlords, rapists and killers, for ‘dirty’ Arabs like Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, and for former ‘Marxist’ guerillas, like Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe. Always they are people of color…<<<

Your outrage and repugnance and anger about people defending Mugabe and his gang is, therefore, misdirected. You best direct it at the people who deserve it, especially the US bloggers (you missed my humor on this point as well, John, and made another erroneous assumption) Stephen Gowans and Gregory Elich.

http://gowans.blogspot.com/

Like the authors Funk and Fake, Gowans and Elich have very little direct understanding or experience in Zimbabwe — if not all Africa — and being capable thinkers, though very confused indeed, they are able to generate flak, gain a following, publish a blog. yet it is only so much noise and, indeed, far more white supremacy. (I prefer the definition of white supremacy as being people who perpetuate inequality and injustice through an active ignorance, arrogance and, esp., obliviousness).

Stephen Gowans has actually figured out the part about how the white system demonizes people of color — the point of my article above — and becuase he is able to see and partially understand the duplicity anbd double standards and hypocrisy he then extrapolates that there must not be anything at all wrong with Robert Mugabe, and every complaint by the Western media system must be an invention, and Mugabe becomes, in the assessment of Gowan’s and his followers, on equal par with Hugo Chavez.
John, I would think this would rankle you.

Beyond the absolute whitewashing and dismissal of Mugabe’s brutality, corruption and networks of organized crime, the most amusing aspects of the Gowans factions are their complete failure to understand or appropriately situate Mugabe’s involvement in Congo. Instead the engage in intellectual masturbation and skirt around the issues with the most ridiculous logic and statements. It is very similar, as I have pointed out only superficially above, to the SAVE DARFUR gangs circumlocutions regarding the African Union forces in Darfur — comprised of mass murderers from teh former RPA, present RDF — Kagame’s clique.

Another point of departure from which to understand the nonsense of the Gowan’s position on Zimbabwe is John Bredencamp. None of these pro-Mugabe “poor Mugabe” U.S. bloggers can tell you much of anything about Bredencamp, Rowland, Jacobus Coetzee, Danaher Corp…

Mugabe was brought to power by some of England and South Africa’s richest — read white — men. He was co-opted from the very beginning. He set out to persecute Nkomo’s faction and did so through the Five Brigade, as you must know, and the Gukurahundi. Gowan’s et all dismiss the Gukurahundi and ALL human rights violations in Zimbabwe as inventions of the imperialist system. Gowan’s is smart enough to recognize this tendency to persecute “dictators” — and so we find the application of such language as “failed State” to such places as Zimbabwe, Congo, Sudan, North Korea?, Venezuela?Cuba?

I do not lightly throw around the term “failed state” — but you apparently do. I am reminded by all these ranking agencies and measuring devices created by and for capitalism: TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL, GLOBAL WITNESS (See my article on Blood Diamonds), the MO IBRAHIM INDEX (SEE, e.g., http://businessrwanda.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/rwanda-is-the-most-improved-african-nation-ibrahim-index/).

I am further suspicious and disinclined toward such labels as “failed state:hen I see all the Western mining and AID institutions operating in the free-for-all of blood and minerals and private profit.

Is Israel a “failed state” ? That depends on the integrity of the respondent who replies to the question: committing genocide against the Palestinians seems to be fine, and participating in and condoning genocide against the Congolese equally fine.

Ditto for the USA. Would you call the USA a failed state? Masive unemployment? Nuclear waste accumulating? A completely corrupt cancer (medical) establishment? Two-party dictatorship? Political prisoners — Leonard Peletier and Mumia Abu Jamal and so many other unnamed people of color? And massive arroance, ignorance and obliviousness — a.k.a. mass hysteria, amnesia and mental illness — in U.S. white populations?

So like Stephen Gowans I find it particularly, scathingly, hypocritical and outrageous that the National Democratic Institute and National Republican Institute and National Endowment for Democracy are funding the “opposition” OPEN HAND movement in Zimbabwe, calling Mugabe a dictator, and accusing Mugabe’s gang of human rights violations — when the people behind NED, NDI and NRI are equally cuplable. Enter Maurice Tempelsman, Madeleine Albright, Tony Lake, the Bush gang…

The penultimate problem, and one my article attempts to get a handle on and elucidate, is the very same problem that Gowans and Ellich have defined, and that is imperialism and, deeper, white supremacy. The difference between me and Gowan’s and me and the Funk and Fake team and is that I stuck my nose into the Zimbabwe story in person, and into the Congo story, and into the Ethiopia story, and into the Sudan story and I am not inclined to try to gain a following by producing what everyone — or some people — want to hear.

The final assessment goes out to Willhelm Reich, whose book THE MASS PSYCHOLOGY OF FASCISM is something everyone needs to read and re read. Because it is those little every day fascisms that sprout and multiply inside each and every one of us — thanks to the nature of the society we live in — that lead people to dismiss someone’s ideas when they are triggered by a word or two that cause them to become deaf, dumb and blind to the greater communication. Its much easier to cling to internalized beliefs — and all the wrong scholarship that may have sustained them — than to admit any error and accept any responsibility — and so people walk around in the world with incredible arrogance and other pathologies of reactionary psyches.

It’s much harder to love. Indeed, even I fail often.

blessings
Odinga said on December 10th, 2008 at 2:50pm #

john andrews,

You are not making sense. One does not have to like Mugabe to admit that Western powers are only now promoting regime change in Zimbabwe after Mugabe’s government started seizing land from Whites and returning it to the descendents of Blacks whose lands were stolen. Yes some of his cronies got land too but so too did over 275,000 families including supporters of the opposition.

The aim is to punish Zimbabwe under Mugabe to ensure that other African states to not emulate Zimbabwe’s land reclaiming example.

Anyone who does not admit this fact and goes on to condemn Mugabe is not credible. Back in the 80’s there were claims of human rights abuses from Mugabe’s regime and western powers were not interested. They do not give a hoot about the suffering of Black Africans. Their only concern now is defending the Whites for fear that if the land redistribution exercise continues and is successful then other states like South Africa will follow suit.
keith harmon snow said on December 10th, 2008 at 7:43pm #

John

?

Are now suggesting that I have denied that Mugabe’s land redistributions are the source of the Western power’s wrath? I have said nothing like that, anywhere, or ever.

The fact is that Mugabe came to power in 1979 on a platform promising land re-distribution. Of course, he had no intentions of re-dstributing the land, back then, and instead consolidated power through the Gukurahundi and other means, as perhaps you understand.

It is only when the system is tired of him, a cranky old cronist crocodile of a dictator who won’t usher in “democracy” of the NED version that he plays the race card and begins to redistribute land.

Of course, correct me if I am wrong, but he has not touched the largest landholders, has he? The multinational mining and tobacco concessions?

So, once again, you seem to be arguing with the wrong person.
keith
john andrews said on December 11th, 2008 at 1:06am #

Mr Snow,

‘Outrage?…repugnance?…anger?…’

I completely fail to see how you could attach these emotions from my comment which merely observed that I could not take seriously any work about Africa from anyone who appears as an apologist for Mugabe. I assure you I have been having these discussions for far too many years to get so excited by yet another poor-Mugabe-victim-of-big-bad-white-man reaction.

Although your subsequent posts now clarify that you do actually know a bit about Zimbabwe and do not belong in the sizeable camp of Mugabe’s misguided supporters who have never set foot in Africa, I’m afraid your original article does suggest otherwise.

I did not say anything at all about Mugabe’s land ‘redistributions’. I’m more than happy to, but I haven’t done so far in this discussion.

Yes I did miss your irony – it isn’t very obvious; and if you don’t know someone it’s impossible to say if they are being ironic or patronising.

‘So-called “failed state”‘ were your words, Mr Snow, not mine.

I understand your suspicion of my opinion because I am a Rhodesian. I am completely used to that. When I first moved to the UK and people found out where I was from they automatically assumed I was a racist, and would launch into their own considerable racist opinions assuming they had a sympathetic ear. They never did. I was, and remain, heartbroken about the condition of a country I loved very much. It is, of course, a standard response to assume all white Africans are racist supporters of slavery, so your judgement conforms to the norm.

Like I said before, your piece on Congo is probably quite good, but it is difficult to read clearly even by someone who knows quite a bit about Africa. I suspect you wanted to write something that might be lovingly caressed in academic circles rather than useful to a wider audience, and if so fair enough; but what Africa really needs from well informed writers is material that can be easily understood by the masses.
Steven Fake said on December 11th, 2008 at 2:50am #

“In Africa Genocide Article, Writer Distorts Our Book” By Kevin Funk and Steven Fake, December 6th, 2008 and “Response To A Reaction To My Article” By Keith Harmon Snow
http://blackstarnews.com/?c=135&a=5185
As the authors of “The Scramble for Africa: Darfur – Intervention and the USA,” we find it necessary to respond to Keith Harmon Snow’s highly confused and misleading references to our work, and the strange litany of positions he attributes to it, and to us.

Harmon Snow writes that “The book makes no mention of covert operations or private military companies operating in South Sudan or Darfur.” Yet this is demonstrably false. We mention the role of Dyncorp in both south Sudan and Darfur (page 88), and, more prominently, Blackwater – in fact, twice in the main text (88, 115), and also for two paragraphs in an endnote (248). Perhaps Harmon Snow’s razor eye for detail somehow missed the book’s index, in which both companies are listed.

He roundly condemns us for citing “ad nauseum all the usual propagandists,” like Eric Reeves. But of course citing does not mean approving. In fact, we label Reeves a “hawkish commentator and invasion advocate” (xxvii), and at different points observe that he pursues his arguments “bizarrely” (xxvii), “very naïvely (to be charitable),” and that he is simply “wrong” (272). In a broader point, even in writing from a leftist perspective, there is of course value in referencing mainstream works (in addition to left-wing ones) where appropriate, as doing so serves to broaden the audience that will be open to the arguments.

As is obvious, relatively few who are not already leftists will be swayed if citations are only given to left-wing works, though if a critique of US policy appears “even” in the New York Times or another mainstream publication, it is much likelier to resonate with the broader public.

Harmon Snow also incorrectly notes that while we call Omar al-Bashir a “major war criminal,” we “never similarly condemn” Western powers such as the U.S. and Israel, and their leaders. Again, the factual record, easily available to anyone who reads the book, indicates otherwise.

We note that, “Given that the U.S. has been named the biggest threat to world security in polls of global opinion, one may wonder when a blue-helmeted UN liberation force will be deployed to the streets of Washington to halt its war against the people of Iraq” (64), and that Washington’s concerns about the ICC are a reflection of the fact that “it might become a serious instrument for justice, and will thus turn to investigating US crimes” (xxxviii). We reference Israel’s “ethnic
cleansing of Palestinians” (63), its “war crimes” (116), and the fact that its “massive crimes are perceived to be in service of Western geopolitical interests” (64). Again, the positions Harmon Snow attributes to us are utterly unrecognizable.

Even where Harmon Snow directly cites our work, he deftly manages to misrepresent our arguments. Referencing our comment in the foreword that, “there would be little to mourn in Bashir’s overthrow, and such a move—depending, of course, on the actors involved, and its prospects for success—could be cautiously supported,” he comments that, “In other words, it’s fine for white people from the United States to organize the overthrow of sovereign governments, as long as we selectively chose the ‘right’ people for the job.”

We make our assertion in the context of discussing the Justice and Equality Movement-led coup attempt against Khartoum in May of this year. There is simply nothing about non-Sudanese trying “to organize” a coup, and in actuality we argue vehemently in the book against any
sort of foreign-led regime change in Khartoum, and spend an entire chapter on the imperialist uses of the doctrine of “humanitarian intervention.” Rather, as is obvious to any individual with any notion of the concept of “solidarity,” our comments mean that we stand with the oppressed segments of the Sudanese population in their struggle for justice, whether their oppression comes from internal or foreign sources.

What we present above suggests one of three conclusions: (1) that Harmon Snow did not read the book, (2) that he read it and did not understand it, or, (3) that he read it, understood it, and
nevertheless chose to deliberately misrepresent the analysis presented therein. We will not speculate on which of the three, or perhaps some combination of them, is behind his mangling of our arguments, though none of the possibilities qualify him to be writing about our analysis
in the first place.

We invite the editors and readers to draw their own conclusions about the merits of our book and arguments (our website features several excerpts from the text,
as well as our other writings on the Darfur conflict), and expect that this letter will be appropriately included on the page containing his article.

Putting aside the serious mischaracterizations of our book in this article, we are very pleased to see analyses that challenge the distorted narratives of the Western corporate press reaching readers. It is impossible for those of us living in the U.S. to act in solidarity with the oppressed in Africa unless the realities and true causes of African conflicts are known. That is particularly true when our government plays a direct role in the violence.

Kevin Funk and Steven Fake, authors of Scramble For Africa: Darfur – Intervention
and the USA
http://www.scrambleforafrica.org

Response To A Reaction To My Article:

By Keith Harmon Snow

Thanks so much for posting the complaints of these authors, however, I’m surprised at their hubris. My article does not set out to review their book, but to situate it. Readers should indeed make their own assessments, keeping a few critical points in mind.

While the names Dyncorp and Blackwater do indeed appear in the book, I invite readers to examine these limited appearances, and while labeling Dr. Eric Reeves as “hawkish” and “wrong” the authors nonetheless engage his wrongness. In comparison, on both of the above, see: OIL IN DARFUR? COVERT OPS IN SOMALIA? http://www.allthingspass.com/journalism.php?catid=24>.

Their complaints avoid my critique of Alex De Waal. The foundation of the book is built on the propaganda produced by a Western intelligence insider (De Waal) whose name (references, footnotes, excerpts of his writings, policy prescriptions) appears over 165 times in 127 pages.

De Waal was pivotal (1995) in institutionalizing the establishment narrative about “genocide” in Rwanda, which These authors regurgitate throughout: the Hutus did it. Their discussions of past “interventions” and “genocide” re: Haiti, Rwanda and Somalia — is premised on the Rwanda mythology and, like their assessments of “interventions” in Haiti and Somalia, are uninformed.

The authors’ further argue around the works of propagandists like Stephanie McCrummen — a.k.a. Boston Globe, Washington Post, NYT, etc. — who has produced corporate garbage about gorillas in Congo that has been roundly trashed, while covering up for Walter Kansteiner and Richard Leakey, Jane Goodall Institute etc. (See: “S.O.S. in Eastern Congo”
http://www.allthingspass.com/journalism.php?catid=45 .)

There is no criticism, but instead wholesale approval, of the International Crises Group and its’ many satellites and colonies. Ditto their uses of editorials and commentaries etc. by John
Prendergast or Wesley Clark– a former general and champion of the new humanitarian warfare paradigm.

They do not understand the African Union “peacekeeping mission in Darfur, just as they fail to even mildly conceive the deracinating effects of massive foreign “AID” enterprises, the involvement of intelligence services in these. They circumnavigate any substantive discussion of
the current involvement of the SPLA, LRA, UPDF.

The authors are armchair analysts who are smart, caring, ambitious — capable thinkers and writers — but who nonetheless contribute mostly noise to the deafening roar of propaganda re: Africa. They have no experience on the ground, especially in that region, and like Dr. Eric Reeves, and most Western spectator news consumers, they get all their information from others or directly from the propaganda system.

Anyone can create a blog and generate perpetual noise and thus gain a following. But let’s at least be honest about what we do and do not understand and, more important, the power of our whiteness and how we displace, marginalize and silence deeper voices in our foolishness.
Odinga said on December 11th, 2008 at 5:51am #

Keith Harmon Snow

You have been goaded into denouncing President Mugabe in the same dehumanizing manner as the West, just to appease John Andrews. That is one of the reasons I do not trust White historians – quite often they feel Black Africans do not know what they are talking about and doing when it does not align with their interest. I am now more convinced that you are not on top of your history in this area and you are not sensitive and sensible about the events in Zimbabwe either.

You seem to be unaware of all that transpired and was being negotiated to have the land issue in Zimbabwe dealt with peacefully. Fortunately there is “Our-story” outside of what you care to acknowledge.

You said: “Of course, he had no intentions of re-dstributing the land back then…”

You made that comment as if it is a statement of fact that we all agree upon, but I am of the view that you are 100% wrong. What is your evidence to substantiate this?

You seem unaware that the independence agreement did not allow Mugabe to do much about land reform for 10 years.

“When it was clear that the apartheid Rhodesian government could not long remain in power, the Lancaster House Conference was convened in 1979. Land was the core issue for the liberation struggle, and British and American negotiators ensured that independence would not be granted without the imposition of certain conditions. One provision stipulated that for a period of 10 years, land ownership in Zimbabwe could only be transferred on a “willing seller, willing buyer” basis, which effectively limited the extent of land reform. Whites were also allotted a parliamentary quota of 20 seats, far exceeding their actual percentage of the population.”
http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html

You also seem unaware that OAU asked Zimbabwe to put its struggle to redress the land issue on hold to allow for a concentrated focus on ending apartheid.

“The Zimbabwe government delayed its land-reform programme so that negotiations for South Africa’s liberation succeeded, said President Thabo Mbeki on Thursday. He said that when South Africa was negotiating its transition to democracy, around the time which Zimbabwe had started its land reform programme, the Organisation of African Unity had asked Zimbabwe to stop the programme as it would “frighten the apartheid government in South Africa”.”
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/Politics/0,,2-7-12_1745450,00. html

Maybe you are also unaware of Claire Short’s arrogant letter which also points to the Zimbabwe government’s efforts to have the land issue settled through negotiations and dialogue.

Zimbabwe: The Spark … Claire Short’s letter of 1997

Full text of then British Secretary of State for International Development Claire Short’s letter of 5 November 1997 that sparked the political and current economic crisis in Zimbabwe:
http://www.swans.com/library/art9/ankomah5.html

I generally find that those who have already made up their minds about Mugabe and the land issue in Zimbabwe are not interested in facts (of course one can easily say this about me if they disagree with what I have said … but prove me wrong).

I can make a host of arguments about what I find wrong with Mugabe, but most importantly, I am quite convinced that the entire ‘let’s get Mugabe campaign’ is fueled by racism (protecting White land theft, White supremacy and arrogance) and not a genuine concern for Black Africans.

Let Whites get Bush and Blair to the Hague to face charges for crimes against humanity. Let’s see a concentrated campaign similar to the ‘lets get Mugabe campaign’ to punish those responsible for killing hundreds of thousands in their illegal war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and torture. We have a glaring case of human rights violations perpetrated by England and the U.S. but I am not seeing the concentrated campaign to bring these WHITE war criminals to justice. The mainstream media is not demonizing them either.

I am not supporting any RACIST call to denounce or overthrow Mugabe. Until Whites fight for, and succeed in getting, misleaders like Bush and Blair to pay for their crimes against humanity, and pay reparations, they will always be discredited when dealing with African issues.
keith harmon snow said on December 11th, 2008 at 7:53am #

Hello

Heres the bottom line on this Zimbabwe issue. Mugabe is a thug, and his cronies are thugs, and they have destroyed the lives of millions of people both in Zimbabwe and in DRC. I have zero patience for people who apologize for Mugabe, as my articles and web site makes clear. I did not apologize for Mugabe, but instead tried to situate the attacks on Mugabe (and Bashir) in terms of white supremacy and the embraceable/unembracable status (of blacks) issues that my article is really about. John you were the first to bring up the land issue yet you say you didnt say anything about it. Your posts exude outrage or repugnance and the same impatience that mine do. Had you read my article in full perhaps you would have understood. And, in fact, I questioned your status with Rhodesia but I did not assume you are one of the white perpetrators or judge you for that.

If anyone else would like to comment, I would hope they would please feel free to let me know if my original writings and subsequent posts are as confusing as you (John) indicate. Finally, I hope you will get on the backs of these pro-Mugabe white bloggers who have never been to Africa and wield an incredible arrogance and ignorance and (misplaced) righteousness about what they don’t understand. If I have been unclear, I apologize. I will try to do better.

John, I apologize if you felt I was / am condescending. I wish you would try to understand the point of my article, perhaps by reading it through to the end. Do you support the Zimbabwe position of Patrick Bond? Am I correct that Mugabe has little touched the land holdings of multinational corporations? Finally, I appreciate that you, also, admit the truth about Mugabe. But please understand that I don’t a fuck if you or anyone else ‘lovingly carresses’ my work. In fact, almost no one does. If you would read it openmindedly perhaps you would understand why. I don’t write for academics. I think most are hopelessly indoctrinated.

keith harmon snow
john andrews said on December 11th, 2008 at 10:33am #

Keith,

I had no bad feelings at all about your piece, I simply had reservations about it because of the way you initially expressed the Zimbabwe comments. I’m sorry the subject has drifted away from your theme about the Congo.

I would also like to assure you that I’m not easily offended: I can easily agree to disagree with people without taking the disagreement personally. There are too few of us struggling for a basically common cause to afford the luxury of squabbling with each other like over-tired infants.

I haven’t come across Patrick Bond. Rowland I remember, but I’ve never heard of Bond.

As for the land ‘appropriations’. Once again, I don’t know. It sounds entirely plausable that he’s left the big companies alone – for now – but I bet it ain’t through any touching humanitarian concerns.

Back to your central theme, as you say situating… ‘the attacks on Mugabe (and Bashir) in terms of white supremacy and the embraceable/unembracable status (of blacks) issues that my article is really about.’

Do you not think that is a shade simplistic? The black and white thing? It seems to me easier to comprehend, and possibly more accurate, to couch the problem in terms of rich and poor. True, most of the rich are white and most of the poor are black; but describing the conflict in terms of black-good white-bad enables a significant number of rich black villains to fly under the radar and a probably larger number of poor white workers to be wrongly villified.

The truly evil foreign (and largely white) institutions that have raped Africa for centuries could not have done so in recent decades without the active compliance of many black leaders – a bit like the white slavers of yesteryear who wouldn’t have had a chance without the active complicity of plenty of African chiefs.
Hue Longer said on December 12th, 2008 at 12:56am #

Fascinating discussion…I would just like to show my distaste for blaming victims of hegemony for what their bought leaders do when they become proxy leaders for Euro/US empires. The last paragraph by Mr. Andrews depresses me.
john andrews said on December 12th, 2008 at 7:36am #

Hue,

No need to be depressed – none of it’s your fault. Clearly you’re doing more than most to try to put things right just by searching for the real truth. There is hope: Free Democracy is a solution.

http://www.freedemocrats.co.uk.
Hue Longer said on December 12th, 2008 at 8:05am #

John,

Thanks, but I took issue with what you said in your last paragraph…this of course does not detract from whatever else you may say- as I’m not a big fan of circumstantial ad hominem. I hope to see the discussion continue but my place in it is not important.

Cheers
keith harmon snow said on December 12th, 2008 at 11:54am #

Dear Mr. Odinga

You begin your argument suggesting that I cannot think for myself, and like John Andrews you seem to have a propensity to believe that I — like many other people whom it might indeed be true of — merely hope to gain followers and therefore will maneuver or change shapes like a chameleon. So your beginning is offensive, and I will resist the urge to respond in kind.

After paragraph 12 of your post one is led to conclusions that are indeed reasonable and progressive. In fact, you articulate exactly what I have made so very clear is the structural framework operating around the demonization of blacks by whites and white institutions and by arrogant Western policy institutions ad nauseum.

John seems to have missed these points completely.

However, you also cite Gregory Elich, who has written much with Stephen Gowans, and much of what they have written about human rights in Zimbabwe is demonstrably false. They have perpetrated absolute mistruths ( a word I intentionally choose over “lies”) about issues in Zimbabwe they have no knowledge of whatsoever. More armchair analysts — like the Funk and Fake team — who have no grounding in reality in the AFrican areas they write about. Once they get this, if we are lucky, if they do not become compromised by some powerful interest or other, or by fame and ego, then they will indeed be powerful agents of change.

Elich and Gowans and their cheerleading followers completely distort the nature of Mugabe’s own crimes as a comprador class agent of the Western system — which he served dutifully from 1980 to circa 1995. Similarly, their arguments fall apart when we consider the role of Mugabe’s gang in Congo (DRC). Elich at least seems to be atempting to be more honest but Gowans is in fact most guilty of your assessment above that: “those who have already made up their minds about Mugabe and the land issue in Zimbabwe are not interested in facts.”

IF — and its a very specious IF — they discuss teh Gukurahundi at all they cast it as a neoliberal plot against Mugabe. Ditto the recent atrocities by Mugabe’s gang over diamonds and the Kimberley certification, and double ditto over Mugabe’s gang’s involvement in DRC. It simply is something they chose to explain away with absolute obliviousness. This is white supremacy.

You wrote:

>>>>I can make a host of arguments about what I find wrong with Mugabe, but most importantly, I am quite convinced that the entire ‘let’s get Mugabe campaign’ is fueled by racism (protecting White land theft, White supremacy and arrogance) and not a genuine concern for Black Africans.
<<<

I agree for the most part, but Mugabe’s involvement in massive bloodletting and plunder in DRC cannot be separated from the conflight there,, or in RWanda, or in Angola.

So lets indeed talk about who is unaware. Elich (whom you cite) and Gowans — last time i checked — do not talk about Mugabe and his cronies, so please if you would kindly educate us about your understanding of who John Bredencamp is?

It seems like several of the people who have posted above completely fail to grasp the main points of my article, MERCHANTS OF DEATH, which was orginally titled WHITE COLLAR WAR CRIMES, BLACK AFRICAN FALL GUYS — until the editor of the first cite that published it changed it.

Regarding the post above that appears to be by Kevin Fake, it is very interesting to me that the authors Funk and Fake seem to find it within their sphere of responsibility or interest to publish my response to their letter of complaint, with their letter and following it, instead of letting me publish it, or publish anything I like, in reply to their complaints, or nothing at all. They have done this on another web site where MERCHANTS OF DEATH was published.

What’s that about?

I find the entire matter distasteful. Its the same with Gowans ane Elich. Anyone can create a blog, and whip up a following, they don’t have to know what they are talking about. And it sets me up in opposition, rather than in solidarity, and so it becomes a bunch of white people believing they are “progressive” arguing with each other while Africa bleeds.

keith harmon snow
keith harmon snow said on December 12th, 2008 at 12:04pm #

Hello —

For the Funk and Fake duo —

it’s not your place to publish my (old) comments to your letter. You got something to say, say it. Publish your same letter ad nauseum if you like. Although you may not have anything original to say, perhaps I do. But following my story around publishing my my letter appended to your complaints letter is inappropriate and repressive.

And, secondarily, again I ask: What is that about?

keith harmon snow
Odinga said on December 12th, 2008 at 3:39pm #

keith harmon snow,

What you hope to gain is really your own business.

You have not refuted anything that I have written so I would just share some of my observations.

I wonder if you did not see the racist, stupidness that John Andrews wrote as you did not respond to it, but you were quick to demonize Mugabe to appease him. That is the solidarity that Whites share in the face of the evils of White domination.

john andrews wrote:

[quote] “Do you not think that is a shade simplistic? The black and white thing? It seems to me easier to comprehend, and possibly more accurate, to couch the problem in terms of rich and poor. True, most of the rich are white and most of the poor are black; but describing the conflict in terms of black-good white-bad enables a significant number of rich black villains to fly under the radar and a probably larger number of poor white workers to be wrongly villified.

The truly evil foreign (and largely white) institutions that have raped Africa for centuries could not have done so in recent decades without the active compliance of many black leaders – a bit like the white slavers of yesteryear who wouldn’t have had a chance without the active complicity of plenty of African chiefs.” [end quote]

I wonder if you are aware of how stupid those lines of argument are.

I am of the view that any White person who demonizes a Black African is obnoxious, arrogant and racist. When Black Africans do not have to deal with White racism with all the brutal, manipulative, warmongering, and general abuse of power it comes with, then Whites can talk to me like if we are on some level playing field. Of course, you are always free to your ways but I am firm that you are no different than every other obnoxious White person out there — trying to assert your sense of superiority.

You do not demonstrate an understanding of all that transpired that prohibited Mugabe-led Zimbabwe from aggressively addressing the land issue for the first 10 years of Independence, then for several years after (which takes us up to the mid to late 90’s). Whether you accept or reject the information from the links that I presented is up to you. But you have not proven that what I have presented is false. I disagree with many things you write and I have quoted parts of what you wrote elsewhere, but that does not mean that I agree with everything you write. Quoting you or anyone else in no way means that I totally agree with all that you write. You invested much time in a pissing contest with Gregory Elich and Stephen Gowans. I presented a quote and if you found the quote to be inaccurate you could have simply pointed that out and not come over as if you envy two other writers who are not part of this dialogue.

I also noticed in one of your earlier comments you made much about people who have not been to Africa as if one cannot grasp the issues otherwise. Given that you have spent time on the continent, you are using that to promote yourself as THE AUTHORITY on Africa. If the only people who can really grasp the issues are those who have been to the continent, and particularly Zimbabwe, then most of the people in the West should keep quiet. But guess what? There are people presenting a host of information and misinformation to those who have not been to the continent and they have to formulate an opinion. Some can discern better than others. I know of Africans in Zimbabwe who are living the horror of western sanctions and are not quite aware of many of the issues involved. So being there on the spot does not necessarily give one an advantage.

Your version of events in the Congo is not the only story out there and any leader who has troops in a war will obviously get stained with abuses. I am not going into any lengthy debate about Zimbabwe’s involvement in the Congo at this time as that should be the subject of a separate debate. You, however, have invested much time in selling your version of events and all you would do now is to continue defending your position by not responding on point to what I have stated.

My main point in relation to Zimbabwe and Mugabe is that I have no sympathy for Whites who had to be removed from land in order for it to be redistributed to Black Zimbabweans. I have no sympathy for those White descendants of colonial White settlers who died; they should have given up the ill-gotten land they inherited.

The ‘Let’s get Mugabe’ campaign is because of one thing: Mugabe dared to take back land from Whites. And, while the White campaign against Mugabe is mostly based on that fact, I am not assisting them by discrediting Mugabe for any other issues that would simply distract from the real reason they want him ‘dead’ / dead. They must lift sanctions that are hurting ordinary Zimbabweans. They must leave Africans to work out their own issues.

The best thing Whites can do is to get their noses out of Africa’s business. Of course, I know they would not do that as they feel they are entitled to be masters of everything including how African history is written.
Shabnam said on December 12th, 2008 at 9:17pm #

Mugabe has been demonized by the Western mass media telling their readers that Mugabe is responsible for poverty and enforcing terror and repression, and presenting the puppet of the west, Tsvangirai, as an ‘independent’ opposition activist who is committed to establishment of ‘democratic principle’ and able to bring prosperity to Zimbabwe through ‘regime change.’ This picture does not tell you who, in the first place, is responsible for economic turndown of Zimbabwe and ignores the role played by the Western governments and their financial institutions using SANCTIONS, as Mr. Harmon Snow indicated, to strangulate Zimbabwe to bring unemployment and disease thus force people against the government of Mugabe to create chaos and civil disobedience to bring the regime change. This scenario is used in other places including Iran, former Yugoslavia, Sudan and many other countries around the globe leaving the war criminals in western capitals and Israel untouched. In December 2001, the US passed the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act, which allowed Mugabe restore relations with International financial institution (IFS) if he agreed to conditions on Zimbabwe’s rule of law, the presence of its troops in the Congo, and the conduct of its internal elections. In 2002, Jack Straw, the British foreign sectary at the time, declared that Britain would ‘oppose any access by Zimbabwe to IFI.” Furthermore, they threaten other countries with economic sanctions if they dare to help Zimbabwe. This act of war against the population of Zimbabwe by the Western governments tends to bring Zimbabwe under full domination of the west to protect their INVESTEMENT in the heart of Africa, if that causes millions of African deaths let it be, as they have done in Iraq, Afghanistan, Congo, Somalia, Sudan and elsewhere. When American passed Zimbabwe Act, US congresswoman Cynthia McKinney was against it but majority of African-Americans cooperated to pass this bill. Ms. McKinney wanted to know why do American enablers let two puppet African countries, Uganda and Rwanda, off the hook and go after Zimbabwe where the opposition, the MDC, won over 50 seats in parliament, if the Zimbabwean troop in Congo is an issue, then why Uganda and Rwanda’s troops are off the hook. It is obvious that Mugabe is not 100% a puppet leader where is desirable for the war criminals who want to transfer African natural resources with minimum challenge the west to keep their broken economic system active to keep their own population employed avoiding riot and chaos.
The brutal west not only imposes economic sanction and interrupt the flow of cash necessary for a improving the economy and generating employment for the population, but also exerts pressure on other nations tighten the screw on the targeted country. Majority of these countries do not want to cooperate with western policy against Zimbabwe but they don’t have many choices since the world is under brutal dictatorship of the zinofascist financial instructions where it can only survive by robbing other people’s natural resources and availability of cheap labors to keep a viable economy so they can keep their population under tight control by consumption and keeping them ignorant. The west is using STICK AND CARROT policy to bring locals on board to continue its expansionist policy in the region. Therefore, for those white reactionary who are the beneficiaries of the system and they think “this situation cannot be supported without African cooperation,” I must say ask these people what would you do if the TABEL TURNS UPSIDE DOWN AND THE OTHER SIDE HAS THE POWER OVER you and plays the same game with you? Mugabe has been smart and though enough to manipulate his way into power but the west cannot tolerate that Mr. Magube acts as an independent leader. Mugube has to transfer some cookies to the poor Africans to have them on his side to be legitimate. The west, on the other hand, looks at these ‘leaders’ as their ‘facilitators’ for its political and economic gain and influence in the region to expand culture of white supremacist to make the interest of the west as the interest of Africa to eliminate challenges against the western control of their resources.
Despite the fact that majority rule and the existence of a “willing-buyer-willing-seller” land reform program since the 1980s, ZANU claimed that whites made up less than 1% of the population but held 70% of the country’s commercially viable arable land (Mugabe began to redistribute land to blacks in 2000 with a compulsory land redistribution. Charges that the program as a whole is designed to reward loyal Mugabe deputies have persisted in Zimbabwe since the beginning of the process. (This has been a source of tension.)
If any western ‘democratic’ country put under the same pressure it would have gone into chaos and disintegration in NO TIME. Saddam let into power to kill many Iraqis to save Iraq from ‘communism’ during the ‘cold war’ for the interest of MI6 and CIA. Many western ‘intellectuals’ cooperated with CIA, MI6 to bring other groups under domination of the west during the ‘cold war’ and now with phony ‘war on terror.’
But others have exposed the Zionist and imperialist agenda in many regions especially in the Islamic countries of the Middle East, the Central Asia and North Africa where Zionism is the main actor on the ground. FAKE writers explain:
“Divesting from Israel’s human rights abuses, substantial as they are, does not accord with establishment prerogatives, and thus the campaign to divest – though longer running – has failed to resonate in the tender hearts of city legislators, state government officials, or the Lawrence Summers of the world (evidently, no small category). Nor is the mainstream press chomping at the bit to take concrete steps to end the war in Iraq, a humanitarian crisis of immense proportions with a death toll that dwarfs that of Darfur, and one that the U.S. public more directly has the power to halt. It is because the war in Iraq is of our making that antiwar activism has failed to resonate in the media, while officialdom has nurtured the flourishing Save Darfur movement.”
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/14283

FAKE writers in order to protect Zionism they refuse to give us any explanation for actions of the political actors, the population and the media in the United State. They refuse to expose SAVE DARFUR agenda which is a Zionist organization. They don’t tell you that “Save Darfur (Coalition) was created in 2005 by the American Jewish World Service and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.
As MICHAEL BARKER writes:
“It should be noted here that the president of the American Jewish World Service, Ruth Messinger, in addition to serving on the board of the Save Darfur Coalition, had until recently (early 2007) served as a board member of InterAction, a key US-based democracy manipulator.”
Everyone must read Michael Barker’s work to see how Zionism and imperialism, which is ONE, manipulate ‘democracy’ around the world.
http://www.swans.com/library/art14/barker04.html
The bottom line is that Western Sanction and pressure on countries that do not fall behind the vicious plan of the Zionists and its puppets are going to be a target. While Bashir, Sudan president, has been accused of war crimes, which is politically motivated, by ICC an instrument of the west, yet many western war criminals, George Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Feith, Pears, Bill Clinton, Sharon, Peres and other, numerous to be mention here………… left untouched which shows hypocrisy of the west
Mr. Harton Snow thank you for this article.
keith harmon snow said on December 13th, 2008 at 4:20pm #

Dear Mr Odinga –

Thank you for your insults.

People who have not been to africa are certainly free to write about it etc, but lets at least be honest. In fact, I have not, as you assume and wrote, spent a lot of time debating or challenging Elich and Gowans. I read their work and found the absolute nonsense and then I communicate to Gowans and when he responded with absolute arrogance I dropped them from my list of honest people and their work from my list of honest work — its not journalism.

There are a lot of people in Ethiopia, Congo and Uganda — at least — who are very thankful that i exist and thankful for what I have written about people like Paul Kagame and Yoweri Museveni and James Kabarebe and Meles Zenawi and so many more. The fact that I am white and they are black Africans does not excuse them, or inhibit me, from challenging their terrorism against millions and millions of innocent (read : black) people. Its the same with Mugabe. You like ebveryone else — when it comes to Mugabe’s involvement in Congo or perpetration of the Gukurahundi — you answer: “thats a seperate discussion” (from the land question in Zimbabwe).

see how easily the truth is subverted — and skirted?

If you don’t like what I write about Congo then write something your self. I don’t need to be an authority on Congo, I need to see honesty from others who claim to be authorities. Sadly, there’s very little of that.

keith harmon snow
Max Shields said on December 13th, 2008 at 5:59pm #

“Dear Mr Odinga –

Thank you for your insults.”

Priceless!!!
Odinga said on December 13th, 2008 at 11:50pm #

To: keith harmon snow

You seem incapable of having a reasonable debate without trying to shift the nature of it. I posted information to you earlier on in response to your claim that Mugabe “had no intentions of re-distributing the land back then” but you did not respond to what I presented disputing your assertion. Instead you demonstrated “circumstantial ad hominem”. You did not show how the quote I presented was wrong. “…see how easily the truth is subverted – and skirted?”

Perhaps your vendetta with Elich and Gowans has grown into an obsession. Whining about them in response to the quote I posted is puerile. You accuse them of arrogance but I find you quite arrogant indeed.

You said: “Thank you for your insults.”

When I speak to you straight, you call that insults but when you use derogatory terms to refer to others how is that not insulting? You feel you are entitled to call anyone what you like and speak to anyone, anyhow you feel.

YOU have responded on this blog in a condescending manner, with arrogance, and the same general racist conduct that I detect quite easily.

Even if all the people in Africa tell you they appreciate what you do, that does not mean that you are above the White Superiority Complex that I see so clearly in how you relate to, and speak about others.

There are lots of desperate Africans who accept ‘gifts’ and heap praises onto racist Whites who claim to be doing charity. What makes you different? Fake White saviours are quite common and have made businesses out of spreading White Supremacy in Africa under the disguise of doing charity. They use this disguise to inflate their egos, advance White business interests and spread White, racist religion. Further, they use the disguise of charity to fund wars and coups and frustrate the efforts of other Africans on the continent who are encouraging Africans to develop a level of self-sufficiency. So telling me about Africans who are grateful to you means nothing. Of course, you could only be hearing those who are telling you what you want to hear so you could be deluded.

You said:

[quote] You like ebveryone else – when it comes to Mugabe’s involvement in Congo or perpetration of the Gukurahundi – you answer: “thats a seperate discussion” (from the land question in Zimbabwe).
see how easily the truth is subverted – and skirted? [end quote]

In an earlier post I said, “I can make a host of arguments about what I find wrong with Mugabe…” But, YOU cannot get me to join your ‘let’s lynch a n*****’ campaign.

I previously stated:

[quote] The ‘Let’s get Mugabe’ campaign is because of one thing: Mugabe dared to take back land from Whites. And, while the White campaign against Mugabe is mostly based on that fact, I am not assisting them by discrediting Mugabe for any other issues that would simply distract from the real reason they want him ‘dead’ / dead. [end quote]

What about that do you not get? Must I join racist Whites in covering up the REAL reasons for their hatred of Mugabe? Absolutely not! No self-conscious African, or informed and sensible White would do that. I know Whites who understand that point very well so they appreciate why we are not joining the ‘let’s bash Mugabe’ campaign. You, unfortunately, may not understand that as you are careless, reckless and out to make a name for your ego.

You can challenge anything you want, but other than your whiteness what makes you feel you are entitled to call an African demeaning, derogatory names? You accuse others of not having been to Africa and therefore lacking knowledge of what they write but a more fundamental point is that you are not a Black African, you are White, and therefore, no matter how much time you spend in Africa, you are incapable of knowing how all these issues impact on Black Africans. You lack essential knowledge of African issues as well as basic sensitivity with which to make several judgements.

You wrote your article and the other character did not care to read it in its entirety until you ’slaughtered’ an African to appease him. Instead of letting him read what you wrote carefully to and work out his issues, you changed the nature of the discussion to engage in the most dehumanizing name calling of Mugabe — slaughtering a Black African on the altar of Whiteness — to appease him. After being assured of your White solidarity, he can now read your article top to bottom. That is how White Supremacy works.

He wrote more crap after but you left that alone as that was not your concern. All you cared about was how he felt about you and what you wrote, so you satisfied him in a most disgraceful manner. Look, it’s either you dare not point out, or are incapable of seeing what is wrong with his lines of argument. You could be too dense to understand how inappropriate it is for a White person to be demeaning a Black African.

It is not about whether I like what you write or not. It is that you accuse other Whites of White Supremacy but you are unwilling to look in the mirror and see that you are not above that obnoxious White conduct.

You gather a lot of data but that has not fundamentally changed you.
john andrews said on December 14th, 2008 at 1:46am #

I don’t think it’s appropriate to let the ranting of some hysterical racist have the last word in this otherwise interesting discussion.

Odinga, and others like him, do more harm to Africa with their blind subservience to mass murderers like Mugabe, just because he happens to have a black skin, than they seem to comprehend. This is not too surprising as rational thought is clearly a difficult process for them.

If the people of a country are being deliberately exterminated by starvation, disease and its own ruthless state police, the government is rotten. Such government must be vigoously resisted wherever it occurs whether it’s coloured balck, white or purple with yellow stripes.
Lydia, CATALYST in MN said on December 14th, 2008 at 8:11am #

The complexity of this article takes soem digesting. No doubt, white imperialist neo-liberals/neo-conservatives 9redundant I know!) LOVE these “civil wars”. And it’s critical to understand this hidden ‘background” of conflicts in Africa (and elsewhere). However, I am not willing to let dictators, mass murderers, torturers, and gang rapists totally off the hook simply because they are African and the West is messing with their country. THE AFRICAN MILITIA/SOLDERS ARE HELPING TO DESTORY THEIR OWN COUNTRIESAre these thugs simply willing to slaiughter for the highest bidder? Without their participation the imperialists could NOT plunder their coutntries. See the article below–and explain how the African men who are ACTUALLY DOING this mass rape, sexual mutiliation & deliberate spreading of AIDS by these various militia,soldiers, death/gang rape squads have no responsiblity for their hideous actions. Interesting, too, how none of this sexual violence ever gets address in any of the so-called “peace talks”. Lydia Howell, Minneapolis

> http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/13-8

Published on Saturday, December 13, 2008 by Huffington Post
The Never Ending War

by Eve Ensler and Stephen Lewis

There is a modest rush to bring humanitarian aid to the Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). After weeks of escalating conflict, during which hundreds of thousands have been displaced, hundreds more women raped, and many civilians slaughtered, there is now the possibility that three thousand additional peacekeepers will be sent to DRC. There have been high-level meetings with militia leader Nkunda and Presidents Kabila of the Congo and Kagame of neighboring Rwanda. There is a new element of care and concern.

But why does the world behave as if there is suddenly a new war in the DRC? For thousands upon thousands of women, the war that began 12 years ago has never ended. Each day, women have been threatened with rape, torture, abuse and violation. Many of us have been calling for intervention on their behalf for years, especially the last two years. We have spoken at the Security Council, we have met with European governments, we have pushed the U.S. administration, we have made countless speeches. We have launched a worldwide campaign: “Stop Raping our Greatest Resource; Power to the Women and Girls of the DRC”. We have begged, cajoled and pleaded for triple the number of peacekeepers to protect the women, for an end to impunity, for shining a light on the connection between the sexual violence and the plundering of Congo’s vast resources my militias and multi-national companies. We have worked with brave and resilient women and men in the DRC who are building movements from the ground up to break the silence, demanding an end to war.

It is acknowledged across the board that the sexual atrocities perpetrated on women in the DRC are without a doubt the worst atrocities in the world today. It may seem extreme to call what is happening a Femicide — the violence may not fit the exact legal definition of the Genocide Convention — but for the women facing such systematic destruction, targeted precisely and only because they are women, Femicide is a word whose time has come. The numbers are appalling. More than a quarter of a million women have been raped in the last decade. The crimes are shocking: gang rapes; the raping of three-month-old infants and eighty-year-old women; the dispatching of militias who have AIDS and other STDs to rape entire villages; women being held as sex slaves for weeks, months and years; and women being forced to eat murdered babies.

At Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, over ten women who have been raped and tortured arrive daily. Their vaginas are ripped apart; for some that means that their reproductive organs are permanently destroyed. Many have fistula — a hole in the wall of tissue between the vagina and the rectum or the vagina and the bladder. These wounds are most often inflicted by militias who attack using sticks, knives or guns, or through the merciless vaginal penetration of mass rape.

What makes it all so appalling is that everyone in power knows what is happening. On December 10, the founder of Panzi — Dr. Denis Mukwege — was awarded the United Nations Prize in the field of Human Rights, an award which Nelson Mandela and other esteemed leaders have received. There are Security Council resolutions, dramatic visits by western Foreign Ministers, increasing news coverage, coalitions of UN agencies, statements by humanitarian NGO’s, 17,000 peacekeepers on the ground, and yet the sexual violence never ceases.

The missing piece of the analysis is that peace and war have always been measured in gun blasts. When men take up arms, and other men fight back, war is declared; when men agree to a ceasefire, the war is said to have stopped. Now we’ve come to the point when the world has recognized that in conflict after conflict, a gruesome, sadistic dimension has been added to modern-day-war, a widespread strategy employed by men to achieve their military and political ends: the rape of civilian women and girls.

All the parties to the war in the DRC may agree in theory that rape is being used as a ‘weapon of war’, but when they sit around the negotiating table and work out the terms that will end the fighting, they consistently forget to include for discussion just one weapon in the arsenal: rape. And so sexual violence has continued unabated, never letting up during the periods of so-called ‘peace’.

And it will continue, because although we claim that rape is a weapon, committing a rape has never constituted a breach of any peace accord.

Enough of the lip service. If rape is a weapon of the Congo’s war — and we know that the threat of rape is a terrorist tactic, causing communities to flee their homes and farms, causing millions of deaths by starvation, making rape the single most deadly of all the militias’ weapons — then treat it with the gravity afforded every other weapon. Insist that the militias lay down their weapons AND stop their raping. Until the sexual violence ends, the world has no right to speak of peace.
© 2008 Huffington Post
Eve Ensler is a writer and activist, and the founder of V-Day, the global movement to end violence against women and girls. Stephen Lewis is the Co-Founder of AIDS-Free World and the former UN Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa.

ing a Femicide — the violence may not fit the exact legal definition of the Genocide Convention — but for the women facing such systematic destruction, targeted precisely and only because they are women, Femicide is a word whose time has come. The numbers are appalling. More than a quarter of a million women have been raped in the last decade. The crimes are shocking: gang rapes; the raping of three-month-old infants and eighty-year-old women; the dispatching of militias who have AIDS and other STDs to rape entire villages; women being held as sex slaves for weeks, months and years; and women being forced to eat murdered babies.

At Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, over ten women who have been raped and tortured arrive daily. Their vaginas are ripped apart; for some that means that their reproductive organs are permanently destroyed. Many have fistula — a hole in the wall of tissue between the vagina and the rectum or the vagina and the bladder. These wounds are most often inflicted by militias who attack using sticks, knives or guns, or through the merciless vaginal penetration of mass rape.

What makes it all so appalling is that everyone in power knows what is happening. On December 10, the founder of Panzi — Dr. Denis Mukwege — was awarded the United Nations Prize in the field of Human Rights, an award which Nelson Mandela and other esteemed leaders have received. There are Security Council resolutions, dramatic visits by western Foreign Ministers, increasing news coverage, coalitions of UN agencies, statements by humanitarian NGO’s, 17,000 peacekeepers on the ground, and yet the sexual violence never ceases.

The missing piece of the analysis is that peace and war have always been measured in gun blasts. When men take up arms, and other men fight back, war is declared; when men agree to a ceasefire, the war is said to have stopped. Now we’ve come to the point when the world has recognized that in conflict after conflict, a gruesome, sadistic dimension has been added to modern-day-war, a widespread strategy employed by men to achieve their military and political ends: the rape of civilian women and girls.

All the parties to the war in the DRC may agree in theory that rape is being used as a ‘weapon of war’, but when they sit around the negotiating table and work out the terms that will end the fighting, they consistently forget to include for discussion just one weapon in the arsenal: rape. And so sexual violence has continued unabated, never letting up during the periods of so-called ‘peace’.

And it will continue, because although we claim that rape is a weapon, committing a rape has never constituted a breach of any peace accord.

Enough of the lip service. If rape is a weapon of the Congo’s war — and we know that the threat of rape is a terrorist tactic, causing communities to flee their homes and farms, causing millions of deaths by starvation, making rape the single most deadly of all the militias’ weapons — then treat it with the gravity afforded every other weapon. Insist that the militias lay down their weapons AND stop their raping. Until the sexual violence ends, the world has no right to speak of peace.
© 2008 Huffington Post
Eve Ensler is a writer and activist, and the founder of V-Day, the global movement to end violence against women and girls. Stephen Lewis is the Co-Founder of AIDS-Free World and the former UN Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa.
Odinga said on December 14th, 2008 at 8:43am #

john andrews, you are being characteristically putrid. You cannot even be informative in your attempt to be offensive.

In your White Supremacist worldview, it is people like me who do more harm in Africa for people like you. You want us compliant and submissive for you to steal our resources. When met with resistance, it is well documented how Whites have no qualms about using brutality and torture to meet their goals (no wonder, as victims of these abuses, some Blacks give in and aid White abuses).

Every Black African who does not bow to White Supremacy has always been your problem. Whites continually work to undermine Black Africans. They want compliant African leaders and people. You are of the view that Whites know what is best for Africa and Black Africans.

john andrews said: [quote] “I don’t think it’s appropriate to let the ranting of some hysterical racist have the last word in this otherwise interesting discussion.” [end quote]

Maybe it is not appropriate to let the rantings of JOHN ANDREWS — the hysterical racist — have the last word in this otherwise interesting and quite REVEALING discussion.

Any African who is not subservient to Whites, or does not accept their White-washed propaganda as fact, calls out their White conduct, or has the self-confidence to be a true DISSIDENT VOICE would be hysterical to you. The only good Black Africans to you and your kind are your servants, those who accept being on reservations and those who unquestioningly do your bidding.

I doubt you could even be partially honest and state clearly who does the most harm in Africa. Every conflict, every war, every famine, every bit of corruption has WHITE-controlling complicity. Every effort to move away from White manipulations towards developing some sort of self-sufficiency is met with assassinations, demonizing campaigns and, of course, the general sentiment that Black Africans do not know what is best for Black Africans. Whites do. Africa has a history of White, Western governments manipulating the politics with their mania for regime change when they don’t get what they want. People in Africa are being deliberately exterminated by starvation, disease and murder because of White- Western governments’ and business elites’ overt and covert actions to steal resources. When all else fails there are always sanctions.

Every self-conscious African is against imperialism which is the White agenda in Africa. Through theft they control the best land, the media and the miseducation system. Too bad most Black Africans have not found the formula to wrestle themselves away from this corrupt and controlling White influence. But WE do not get to pick many of our political leaders. It is usually Whites who promote and install leaders then blame Black Africans when they fail to live up to White expectations. We conscious Black Africans are about addressing White Imperialism and its trappings OUR way, and certainly not by appeasing or joining with racist Whites who look for every opportunity to act on their racism.

To you an African could just HAPPEN to be Black. That is how much you know. Let’s see if your peers, who are as White as snow, could show you all the ways you are misguided.

If there were purple people with yellow stripes, Whites would steal their resources while trying to exterminate them too. Whites would enslave and then colonize those who survived. That is the reality of White history worldwide, but especially in Africa.

Whites try to make us believe that Hitler was the worst of them, but I never bought that. I see worse than Hitler in many Whites, past and present, who are passed off as respectable.

It would be better if all Whites recognized and focused on their own brutal history instead of falsely trying to be saviours to Black Africans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lydia, CATALYST in MN said:

[quote] However, I am not willing to let dictators, mass murderers, torturers, and gang rapists totally off the hook simply because they are African and the West is messing with their country. [end quote]

My point is not about letting anyone off the hook. The point is: not to work with racist Whites who get on board under the guise of ‘charity’ to mask their real intentions of trying to control Black African lives and resources through constant White-influenced political regime change. As Africans, we need to address our issues without the constant paternalistic interferences from others, particularly Whites who think they are better informed and therefore qualified to set Black African agendas.
Max Shields said on December 14th, 2008 at 10:29am #

Isn’t this “complexity” really about US interventionism?

Let’s say, Southeast Asia has a “brutal” dictator. Does the story change? The humanitarian interventionism of Rice and others is no less an imperially motived intervention than the current occupation of Iraq. Afterall, was not the reason for the embargo under Clinton and the regular bombing. Or how about Somalia?

This tale is not about humanitarism it is about imperial interventionism which results blantantly in war crimes against humanity on the part of the veiled Orewellian label of “humanitarian interventionism”.

Genocide, a legal term, is invoked regardless of whether the situtation passes muster. It is a twisted notion. Letting someone off the “hook” requires we roll the whole thing back to US interventionism the world over, the mayhem and brutal killing undertaken by US toops and the horrid air-raids which leave thousand dead, homeless, and brutalized.

The stone cannot be cast by the US. The causes of internal conflict, of civil war, striff, of brutal dictators must first be understood. In all cases, these are fundamenally the result of privatization of the commons, tying off the populations from the essentials of life. How does this happen? Start there before we talk about the madness of “intervening”.
keith harmon snow said on December 14th, 2008 at 10:44am #

Hello

I am in agreement with Max Shields (12/14 post), Odinga, John Andrews, … we all have a commonality . Again I suggest that people don’t understand the point of my writing:
WHite Collar War Crimes, Black African Fall Guys.

Its easy to accuse me of racism, of being racist, and unlike most racist whites I accept my whiteness as a moderating factor on my capacity to see and interpret reality equitably.

However, Mr. Odinga is way off mark, as John Andrews notes. Most of my writings and every one of my presentations in public address the white people behind the blacks. I show how blacks are used, and the role they play. But I do not let dictators of f the hook whether they are on the White House or Black House.

Similarly, I do not call for intervention unless it is against whites operating behind the scenes — so WHITE COLLAR WAR CRIMES calls for the arrests of whites. Mr. Odinga — go back and read it.

and read this one:
http://www.allthingspass.com/journalism.php?catid=14

Putting it all neatly together, you will find that Stephen Gowans and Gregory Ellich do not mention the whites behind Mugabe — being, with Mugabe’s gangs support — just another faction, though one competing against Western international capital.

Who has the deeper analysis? Who takes responsibility?

The only obsession I see at work, Mr. Odinga, is yours.

blessings
Shabnam said on December 14th, 2008 at 11:33am #

Lydia writes:
“I am not willing to let dictators, mass murderers, torturers, and gang rapists totally off the hook simply because they are African and the West is messing with their country. THE AFRICAN MILITIA/SOLDERS ARE HELPING TO DESTORY THEIR OWN COUNTRIES are these thugs simply willing to slaughter for the highest bidder? Without their participation the imperialists could NOT plunder their countries.”
This ignorant and arrogant statement is typical of many westerners who want to DO GOOD, but instead it shows their lack of sophistication and understanding of the issues. They don’t know that they are being used by the axis of evil US – Israel – Britain to divert attention from the fact that policies of the Western powers had looted Africa, where sitting on sea of natural resources, Gold, Oil, Uranium, Copper, Diamond and many others, and subjugated the African population through use of violence and WMD forcing locals to cooperate in order to FEED THEMSELVES, although the wealth belongs to African but controls by American, Canadian, Israeli, British, French and other western looters. The western beneficiaries pretend that they do not know who is responsible for the Death and destruction of African communities and other communities like Palestinian, like Iraqi Iranian, Sudanese, Pakistani, Somaliland, Afghani, Moroccan community, Algerian and other communities. Yet dare to write:
“I am not willing to let dictators, mass murderers, torturers, and gang rapists totally off the hook simply because they are African and the West is messing with their country.”
You MUST know that the policy of western governments is responsible for the genocide on the ground. This policy is used all over the world especially in Africa as well as in Islamic countries. If you want to fight thugs who slaughter for the highest price, you HAVE TO START FROM YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT, because without the western policy which is designed to loot our natural resources and human capital in from of DOCTORs, ENGINEERs, EDUCATORs, and skilled workers in order to limit our development toward self sufficiency so it can make it easier for them to have full control over our economy and MARKET to reduce us to petty CONSUMERS and maintains themselves as PRODUCERS so they can have domination over us for the ‘New World Order” which is dictated through ‘WORLD GOVERNMENT’ where is going to be centered in Occupied Palestine, a zionofascist rule through the financial institutions, where we are determined to DESTROY. It is not necessary for you to come after our soldiers. As a result of western policies of looting many people in Africa and elsewhere left hungry and illiterate. To change the situation on the ground in Congo and elsewhere, it is better to start with your own government. We have not forgotten your RAPE AND TORTURE in Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia and elsewhere. Iranian people still remember the atrocity of the US government in Iran through the Shah, a dictator, by SAVAK, and coup of 1953 against the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq. Why don’t you start with Michael Barkers’ work to educate yourself they how your government in name ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’ which is phony they train THUG as ‘opposition leader’ and fund informants in name NGO to destabilize the targeted countries through terror and chaos? If you knew more than the lies which are spread around through campaign of misinformation then you will realize how racist and ignorant your statement is when you and people like you write:
“If the people of a country are being deliberately exterminated by starvation, disease and its own ruthless state police, the government is rotten.”
Do you know that during the WWI, due to racist British imperial policy which diverted Iranian crop from feeding the Iranian population to feed British Soldiers who illegally occupied Iran caused between 8 to 10 million to die. Are you aware of it? Dr. Mohammad Gholi Majd called this genocide the worse of the 20th century in a book:
The Great Famine and Genocide in Persia, 1917 – 1919 published in 2003. Are you aware of it? What have done? Why not bringing these WAR CRIMINALS TO JUSTICE? Is Saddam who let to power by CIA and MI6 killed more or your governments, millions in Iraq alone? Who is responsible for all these terrorist activities? Is it Al Qaeda where does not exist or axis of evil US – Israel – Britain? What have you done about it? or
“THE AFRICAN MILITIA/SOLDERS ARE HELPING TO DESTORY THEIR OWN COUNTRIES are these thugs simply willing to slaughter for the highest bidder? Without their participation the imperialists could NOT plunder their countries.”
This ignorant statement would not has been made if your imperialist and Zionist history. If you have any concern about the sake of others who are killed every day in the street by your terrorism, economic sanction, occupation, collective punishment, torture, rape, looting of their natural resources and looting of their museum and………….. you and people like you should have burnt down the center plot, axis of evil US – ISRAEL – BRITAIN by now. Why haven’t you done a damn thing? Your new president, a Zionist puppet with a chain of Star of David around his neck is pettier than others to do a damn thing , thus, the phony ‘war on terror’ is going to continue and more Zionist wars are going to be waged to establish ‘the greater Israel’ with the stolen natural resources from Africa and Asia. What is your plan to save Africans? How can you stop the Zionist and imperialist war which is ONE?
Mr. Odinga: You are right when you say:

“Too bad most Black Africans have not found the formula to wrestle themselves away from this corrupt and controlling White influence.”
The problem is lack of UNITY. The west always has taken advantage of “divide and rule” to transfer the wealth of our nations to the west with minimum resistance and kill those who dare to act against it. Campaign of misinformation and deception is a strong tool of the west against us. Now, the policy of ‘divide and rule’ is used by the Zionists in all targeted countries, India, Iran, Sudan, Morocco, Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, and other places to make us divided and weak. Therefore, we have to educate our ignorant population and the opportunists
‘opposition’ groups who are receiving FUNDING by the west to mobilize the grievances of workers, women, students due TO SANCTION, which is WMD against population, against governments that are targeted for regime change. I agree with most of your grievances inflicted by the west, however, I do not like the term White and Black dichotomy and I prefer, the west, instead. The reason is that in the United States, African descents are full partner in American policy of Black suffering, rape and killing. They are party to ‘Save Darfur’ which is a Zionist coalition to partition Sudan through phony ‘minorities’, the black African, against white Arabs where is nothing but a LIE created by the Zionists and is implemented by the whores of Zionism, Susan Rice, and others. Everyone knows that Sudanese are all black African. Thus, people of Asia, Africa, the Middle East and freedom fighters of the west must be united.
keith harmon snow said on December 14th, 2008 at 11:42am #

Hello

Mr Odinga — obviously you feel strongly. Do you do anything other than write about (your interpretation of) the problem?

bYou talk about a lack of UNITY but I dont see anyone else on these posts who has done more to divide and offend than you. Take the YOU out of UNITY and you end up with … ity (-bity nothing).
Shabnam said on December 14th, 2008 at 11:58am #

This needs to be more clear. What do you mean?

“bYou talk about a lack of UNITY but I dont see anyone else on these posts who has done more to divide and offend than you. Take the YOU out of UNITY and you end up with … ity (-bity nothing).”
Chris said on December 14th, 2008 at 1:56pm #

The author of this article, Snow, does make a good case for why we Whites need to examine our own history.

When he is called out, he gets too defensive. That, among other things, leaves him unable to respond to what is raised or to defend his own positions since what he is being called on is his own White racist conduct by a Black who seems very aware of the subtleties of racism.

Whites who try to deny their complicity in racism (all Whites are complicit) are the subtler form to overt racists. What makes Whites that subscribe to this behavior more dangerous is that other Whites buy into their fantasies that they are above White racism, that racism is a thing of the past.

Racism is not a thing of the past. Whites that subscribe to this denial allow the Bushes and Cheneys of the world to get away with their crimes against non-White humanity. Why, with all the evidence that shows a long and sordid history of White violent aggressions for what they are, would a rationale and informed White person not understand why Blacks would not accept them speaking about another Black in a dehumanizing way? Case in point: why most Whites did not understand the Black reaction when O J Simpson was cleared of murder. Blacks totally rejected that selective white outrage.

It would be good if all of us Whites would take the advice and start examining our own White history and leave Black Africans to decide their own.
Annie said on December 14th, 2008 at 9:33pm #

I’d like to repeat my request, to any and all interested participants, for a “roster of players” both in and related to Congo. From political leaders (past, present and waiting in the wings,) mining companies, NGO’s, and religious organizations to writers, historians and other authorities on the subject, who do I need to read about? For those of us who would like to know more, this would be most helpful.
The topic is complex, but the conversation about this article seems to have become personal. Lots of westerners don’t have a clue about any of what goes on in Congo and Africa in general. (Sarah Palin is certainly not alone in her lack of knowledge.) However, I believe that there are many more who would like to know and address the truth.
keith harmon snow said on December 14th, 2008 at 9:59pm #

Annie

I have named the “players” over and over in article after article beginning with my first articles circa 1999. However:

On the Kabila govt side some of the key players are outlined in detail here (and NOWHERE else). especially including the Israeli networks:
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/02/gertlers-bling-bang-torah-gang/

On the “rebels” side 00 its important to understand the people behind Bemba, many of whom are connected to groups named in the recent article:
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1123/1/

and generally, here:
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/4309

Wayne Madsen’s book “Genocide and Covert Operations in Congo, 1993-1999″ is also very important.

And David Barouski wrote the book on Laurent Nkunda:
http://www.ias.uni-bayreuth.de/resources/africa_discussion_forum/07-08_ws/LKandexANC.pdf

blessings
keith
keith harmon snow said on December 14th, 2008 at 10:05pm #

Sorry

Madsen’s book: “Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa, 1993-1999″

and the big conservation scams involving the Jane Goodall Institute and Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund and all these peripheral players are outlined in this series called KING KONG:
http://www.allthingspass.com/journalism.php?catid=45

peace
Deadbeat said on December 14th, 2008 at 10:19pm #

Shabnam could not have stated it any better and is absolutely correct to admonish the racist rants of “Lydia”. Shabnam’s commentary confirms why Zionism must be unambiguously confronted in the United States.
keith harmon snow said on December 14th, 2008 at 10:25pm #

i personally don’t pay any attention to people who don’t use their real names.
Odinga said on December 15th, 2008 at 6:28am #

I saw what you attempted with the article but you moved away from its focus to solidify with whiteness (no problem with that per se), but it is how you did it. I saw the authoritarian way you responded, dismissing evidence, and then giving homework assignments. I am addressing a conduct that I am familiar with and totally reject. I call it as I see it. You could be well-intended but that does not mean you are above the same issues you write about.

I saw how you responded when I presented evidence that did not line up with your opinions. You simply ignored the evidence and went on to attack one of the sources I quoted while never proving what I quoted was false. You totally left out my repudiation of your assertion that Mugabe had no intentions of redistributing the land back then. Then you jumped to: “After paragraph 12 of your post one is led to conclusions that are indeed reasonable and progressive.” That is a condescending attempt to dismiss the evidence I presented with platitudes. Thus, I saw it useless to present anymore evidence to show how some of your evaluations are faulty. The White TIN GOD has spoken and his version of the African Story is all there is to it and should not be challenged.

You wrote: [quote] Its easy to accuse me of racism, of being racist, and unlike most racist whites I accept my whiteness as a moderating factor on my capacity to see and interpret reality equitably. [end quote]

This is meaningless intellectual masturbation. If you are saying that your whiteness limits your ability to see reality equitably then you should have been exercising some humility when discussing African issues. You should be considering that you do not see all the angles. I do not see that coming from you or other Whites with their limited insights into Black African affairs.

You all come over as if all Black Africans who are not dismissing Mugabe have to be ignorant fools. You totally fail to grasp why so many Black Africans support Mugabe. And, no, it is not simply because he is a Black African as so many ignorant White commentators would have the world believe. You all always try to reduce the African sensibilities to one of childish immaturity, lacking the sophistication to analyze and interpret complex matters.

I do not trust White people’s involvement in African affairs. You are NOT the authority of the African Story so anyone who does not answer your questions or do your homework assignments cannot be legitimately considered ignorant and arrogant either. They, like me, could be simply dismissing your authoritarian, superiority complex.

Your constant reference to Gowans and Elich, who are only part of this debate by virtue of one quote I presented from Elich, shows your particular obsession. Here I am responding to you directly about what I witnessed about your demeanor and there you are constantly whining to me about them. How are they my concern? I do not even know them. If and when I ever have the opportunity to discuss issues with them I will assess them based on what they put on the table, the reason/s for the positions they take and how they come over. I do not need you to tell me who is the better researcher or writer as that is not my interest. That is the White obsession.

You said: [quote] Putting it all neatly together, you will find that Stephen Gowans and Gregory Ellich do not mention the whites behind Mugabe — being, with Mugabe’s gangs support — just another faction, though one competing against Western international capital.

Who has the deeper analysis? Who takes responsibility? [end quote]

Here you have demonstrated your obsession and one of your many weaknesses that impairs your evaluations; you want to be seen as smarter and therefore superior to other writers. All you have succeeded in doing is coming over boastful, envious and bitter because maybe people pay more attention to others than you. Trying to assert your superiority over others, even if they are White, inevitably translates into feelings of superiority over Black Africans. It is all part of the same White Superiority complex.

It is no wonder you cannot reason logically with I — a Black African who is not intimidated by your Whiteness and will not kowtow to you.
keith harmon snow said on December 15th, 2008 at 7:21am #

Hello

Indeed, I am white and therefore inherently racist. It’s clear that I have failed herein to communicate without getting defensive. I will withdraw now and focus on my own homework.

blessings
keith
Ilunga Bwana said on December 15th, 2008 at 8:35am #

I do not think it is correct to associate the one’s race to a particular vice or virtue. I have known many white people who died for the freedom and emancipation of the blacks. Keith will be among them. He defends virtue and not skin. You will never imagine what he does for the poor Africans in order to set them free from black and white ‘imperialism’. It is easy to say I am not racist but X is. Do not confuse culture to which somebody belongs and racism, which, in my opinion is far from the goals and daily behaviour of Keith. Many who have not shared time, ideas and belongings may have just presumptions but not the correct image of this man. Let him do what he is doing and we blacks find him correct in many respects.
Shabnam said on December 15th, 2008 at 10:58am #

Today, the enemy is not the WHITE vs. BLACK because the racist and corrupt white power has sent their racist BLACK envoys to Black African countries to warn their leaders either they accept the racist Zionist policy or face regime change through war and chaos directed by the Zionist coalition such as SAVE DARFUR, American Jewish World Service and US Holocaust Memorial Museum. Unfortunately many Black Africans in the United States and in Africa have accepted this racist call to benefit from Zionist power which is based on a racist ideology of the white supremacists.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7594
Acceptance of Black African leaders gain currency after the occupation of Palestine but it started to lose some of its legitimacy after Anti Zionism stand of Gamal Abdul Nassar, the Egyptian president in 1960s.
Several scholars have documented and analyzed the friendly ties between Israel and Africa in the early years of decolonization. Israel first became interested in cultivating ties with African countries in 1956, after it was excluded from the first Afro-Asian conference in Bandung, Indonesia. As sub-Saharan African countries achieved independence, beginning with Ghana in 1957, Israel perceived an opportunity to counter its diplomatic isolation in what was rapidly becoming known as the “Third World.” In an effort to court allies, Israel quickly recognized these new governments, established diplomatic relations, and offered aid packages.
For several reasons, African leaders welcomed a close relationship with Israel. They were inspired by the Israeli model of state building and economic development and desperately needed economic aid. These opportunist BLACK AFRICAN LEADERS did not have the knowledge to realize that Israel is supported and financed by the richest family in the world, Rothschild family, who financed the transfer of Palestinian land to European setters by his wealth and influence in the British Empire, a white supremacist empire, and benefited from it. This ignorance also infected and fooled the Iranian intellectuals in the beginning of the tragedy, but in late 1950s, Al Ahmad, an anti colonialist Iranian writer was invited to Israel to gain support of the Iranian intellectuals for racist Zionist ideology against Arabs. Fortunately, this was not fruitful and Al Ahmad did not become a fool to accept a system based on racism and colonialism. He wrote against Zionism and called it “extension of the imperialism in the region.”
However, today we are witnessing a dangerous and racist phenomenon which is fueled and funded by Zionist propaganda using white and black dichotomy, Persian vs. non Persian, Hindu vs. Muslim, Arab vs. African, and Amazigh ( a phony term for Berber in North Africa) where covers countries such as Sudan, Morocco, Tunis, Western Sahara, Libya even Egypt to fuel ethnic tension against “Arab African”, a hoax, to put one against the other to divert attention from the racist and terrorist Zionists where have chose terror through proxy to wage war against ALL OF US regardless of SKIN COLOR. Many opportunists BLACK and White are in full partnership with these racist thugs using “divide and rule” game to bring the world under domination by establishment of “world government” according to the “protocol”.
The Zionists have spent a lot of effort to channel the African-American grievances against Arabs and Muslims in the United States.

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer234/aidi.html

In the early 1970s, a school of Black Nationalism emerged that is strongly distrustful of the Arab world. Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, that school has become stridently political, make common cause with movements, such as those of Christian evangelicals, Zionists and neo-conservatives, with which it has historically been at odds. The resurgence of this strand of Black Nationalism, which sees Arabs as not our people and guilty of inflicting the same devastation on Africa as the white West, is the result of centuries-old tensions between African-American Muslims and Christians, strained relations nationalism in the Afro-Arab borderlands, particularly in the Sudan. Since September 11, this view has gained popularity outside Black Nationalist circles, leading to a rapprochement between Black Nationalist groups and Zionist groups over Sudan. Such developments are best explained by an enduring feature of US politics racial scapegoating which is implemented by BLACK enablers such as Susan Rice and supported by famous BLACK families such as King and Young. Is this NOT RACISM?

http://www.wzo.org.il/en/resources/view.asp?id=1823

The Save Darfur campaign in many ways captures the new racial climate, as different ethnic and political divisions have been set aside and grievances are externalized onto the Middle East. As in the Cold War, race has emerged as an ideological tool in the war against Arabs and Muslim alike.
Lydia, CATALYST in MN said:
[quote] However, I am not willing to let dictators, mass murderers, torturers, and gang rapists totally off the hook simply because they are African and the West is messing with their country. [end quote]

My point is not about letting anyone off the hook. The point is: not to work with racist Whites who get on board under the guise of ‘charity’ to mask their real intentions of trying to control Black African lives and resources through constant White-influenced political regime change. As Africans, we need to address our issues without the constant paternalistic interferences from others, particularly Whites who think they are better informed and therefore qualified to set Black African agendas.
Racism does not recognize border. There are many racist Blacks who are carrying White supremacist policy on population of BLACK Africa. How about these racists? Therefore, a black dichotomy does not bring any solution except divisiveness which should be avoided at all cost to fight the main enemy, Zionism and imperialism, which is both sides of the same coin. Racist and ignorant people can be found in every society. While the European Union are typing to bring Europeans close together, the enemy tries to divide us through “divide and rule” game to force domination upon us. Our aim is to expose this trap and build a just world for all regardless of skin color. No group can work alone. No civilization is superior to the other. All the people on earth are contributors to human civilization.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jimeav4qlLs
Shabnam said on December 15th, 2008 at 11:02am #

Today, the enemy is not the WHITE vs. BLACK because the racist and corrupt white power has sent their racist BLACK envoys to Black African countries to warn their leaders either they accept the racist Zionist policy or face regime change through war and chaos directed by the Zionist coalition such as SAVE DARFUR, American Jewish World Service and US Holocaust Memorial Museum. Unfortunately many Black Africans in the United States and in Africa have accepted this racist call to benefit from Zionist power which is based on a racist ideology of the white supremacists.
Acceptance of Black African leaders gain currency after the occupation of Palestine but it started to lose some of its legitimacy after Anti Zionism stand of Gamal Abdul Nassar, the Egyptian president in 1960s.
Several scholars have documented and analyzed the friendly ties between Israel and Africa in the early years of decolonization. Israel first became interested in cultivating ties with African countries in 1956, after it was excluded from the first Afro-Asian conference in Bandung, Indonesia. As sub-Saharan African countries achieved independence, beginning with Ghana in 1957, Israel perceived an opportunity to counter its diplomatic isolation in what was rapidly becoming known as the “Third World.” In an effort to court allies, Israel quickly recognized these new governments, established diplomatic relations, and offered aid packages. For several reasons, African leaders welcomed a close relationship with Israel. They were inspired by the Israeli model of state building and economic development and desperately needed economic aid. These opportunist BLACK AFRICAN LEADERS did not have the knowledge to realize that Israel is supported and financed by the richest family in the world, Rothschild family, who financed the transfer of Palestinian land to European setters by his wealth and influence in the British Empire, a white supremacist empire, and benefited from it. This ignorance also infected and fooled the Iranian intellectuals in the beginning of the tragedy, but in late 1950s, Al Ahmad, an anti colonialist Iranian writer was invited to Israel to gain support of the Iranian intellectuals for racist Zionist ideology against Arabs. Fortunately, this was not fruitful and Al Ahmad did not become a fool to accept a system based on racism and colonialism. He wrote against Zionism and called it “extension of the imperialism in the region.” However, today we are witnessing a dangerous and racist phenomenon which is fueled and funded by Zionist propaganda using white and black dichotomy, Persian vs. non Persian, Hindu vs. Muslim, Arab vs. African, and Amazigh ( a phony term for Berber in North Africa) where covers countries such as Sudan, Morocco, Tunis, Western Sahara, Libya even Egypt to fuel ethnic tension against “Arab African”, a hoax, to put one against the other to divert attention from the racist and terrorist Zionists where have chose terror through proxy to wage war against ALL OF US regardless of SKIN COLOR. Many opportunists BLACK and White are in full partnership with these racist thugs using “divide and rule” game to bring the world under domination by establishment of “world government” according to the “protocol”. The Zionists have spent a lot of effort to channel the African-American grievances against Arabs and Muslims in the United States. In the early 1970s, a school of Black Nationalism emerged that is strongly distrustful of the Arab world. Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, that school has become stridently political, make common cause with movements, such as those of Christian evangelicals, Zionists and neo-conservatives, with which it has historically been at odds. The resurgence of this strand of Black Nationalism, which sees Arabs as not our people and guilty of inflicting the same devastation on Africa as the white West, is the result of centuries-old tensions between African-American Muslims and Christians, strained relations nationalism in the Afro-Arab borderlands, particularly in the Sudan. Since September 11, this view has gained popularity outside Black Nationalist circles, leading to a rapprochement between Black Nationalist groups and Zionist groups over Sudan. Such developments are best explained by an enduring feature of US politics racial scapegoating which is implemented by BLACK enablers such as Susan Rice and supported by famous BLACK families such as King and Young. Is this NOT RACISM?
The Save Darfur campaign in many ways captures the new racial climate, as different ethnic and political divisions have been set aside and grievances are externalized onto the Middle East. As in the Cold War, race has emerged as an ideological tool in the war against Arabs and Muslim alike.
Lydia, CATALYST in MN said:
[quote] However, I am not willing to let dictators, mass murderers, torturers, and gang rapists totally off the hook simply because they are African and the West is messing with their country. [end quote]

My point is not about letting anyone off the hook. The point is: not to work with racist Whites who get on board under the guise of ‘charity’ to mask their real intentions of trying to control Black African lives and resources through constant White-influenced political regime change. ”

Racism does not recognize border. There are many racist Blacks who are carrying White supremacist policy on population of BLACK Africa. How about these racists? Therefore, a black dichotomy does not bring any solution except divisiveness which should be avoided at all cost to fight the main enemy, Zionism and imperialism, which is both sides of the same coin. Racist and ignorant people can be found in every society. While the European Union are typing to bring Europeans close together, the enemy tries to divide us through “divide and rule” game to force domination upon us. Our aim is to expose this trap and build a just world for all regardless of skin color. No group can work alone. No civilization is superior to the other. All the people on earth are contributors to human civilization.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jimeav4qlLs
Shabnam said on December 15th, 2008 at 3:53pm #

The following QUOTE that I included in my comment earlier was made by ODINGA on December 14th, 2008 at 8:43am #. Sorry, I should have made it more clear.

[My point is not about letting anyone off the hook. The point is: not to work with racist Whites who get on board under the guise of ‘charity’ to mask their real intentions of trying to control Black African lives and resources through constant White-influenced political regime change. As Africans, we need to address our issues without the constant paternalistic interferences from others, particularly Whites who think they are better informed and therefore qualified to set Black African agendas.]
kahar said on December 15th, 2008 at 7:29pm #

odinga:”Let Whites get Bush and Blair to the Hague to face charges for crimes against humanity…”

Is it not transparent that the focus of keith’s works is to do with exposing the criminals in his own country? Try reading some of his articles.

odinga:”you have been goaded into denouncing Mugabe…”

Perhaps instead of spewing all your blind nonsense you could go and read keith’s previous writings (one on Mugabe which he referenced above).
kahar said on December 16th, 2008 at 4:15am #

odinga:”…you want to be seen as smarter and therefore superior to other writers. All you have succeeded in doing is coming over boastful, envious and bitter because maybe people pay more attention to others than you. Trying to assert your superiority over others, even if they are White, inevitably translates into feelings of superiority over Black Africans.

It is no wonder you cannot reason logically with I — a Black African who is not intimidated by your Whiteness and will not kowtow to you.”

LOL!!

Mr Odinga the Expert in Logic! Well done in demonstrating utter illogic and mastery in BS. Your comments are concoction of a confused and ignorant mind. What an arrogant boastful racist you are. You should be ashamed of of yourself and damned GRATEFUL to people like keith who devote their lives to trying to right injustice in return for no reward. Your comments are sickening and even more alarming as you claim to be a black African, hey so is Obama and he’s a FASCIST servant of Israel intent on continuing the genocides in the Middle East. Or perhaps only you are qualified to criticise anyone with black skin? Is that your logic? You say you are sensitive to racism, I say you are a FRAUD.
kahar said on December 16th, 2008 at 4:41am #

Odinga, it is intriguing that you devote so much time and energy to making personal attacks on khs and at the same time fail completely to comprehend what he has written. It can only be concluded that you are not interested in justice for otherwise you would have stated your name and told us exactly what it is YOU are doing to right injustice.

You are stuck in the Bush mentality of “either you are with us or against us” and therefore someone like khs who does not fit into you narrow childish world must be an enemy. You need to wake up!
kahar said on December 16th, 2008 at 5:11am #

odinga: “khs wrote: [quote] Its easy to accuse me of racism, of being racist, and unlike most racist whites I accept my whiteness as a moderating factor on my capacity to see and interpret reality equitably. [end quote]
This is meaningless intellectual masturbation. If you are saying that your whiteness limits your ability to see reality equitably then you should have been exercising some humility when discussing African issues. You should be considering that you do not see all the angles. I do not see that coming from you or other Whites with their limited insights into Black African affairs.You all come over as if all Black Africans who are not dismissing Mugabe have to be ignorant fools. ”

Odinga, what khs wrote is very clear and is certainly not meaningless. If you were sensitive to racism as you claim then you would have completely understood what he wrote as I did but here again you demonstrate that you are indeed a fraud. It seems at the bottom of your personal attacks on khs is your obsession with anyone critical of Mugabe, a CIA sponsored mass murderer. You criticise the mass media and yet you fall exactly into the place they have designed for you: ” you are either with us or against us”, you need to step out of this psychological control game.
kahar said on December 16th, 2008 at 5:24am #

Chris:”When he is called out, he gets too defensive. That, among other things, leaves him unable to respond to what is raised or to defend his own positions since what he is being called on is his own White racist conduct by a Black who seems very aware of the subtleties of racism.”

What is the point of this idiotic comment? It has nothing to do with the article. And this in particular: “White racist conduct by a Black who seems very aware of the subtleties of racism”, where is the white racist conduct??? why do you write meaningless rubbish like this? And where has Odinga demonstrated any awareness of subtleties of racism? He has made baseless insensitive, shameful and thoughtless remarks. You say he shows awareness of subtleties because clearly you have no awareness of what has been expressed.
kahar said on December 16th, 2008 at 10:02am #

odinga, your mindless comments, for example this paragraph:
“I also noticed in one of your earlier comments you made much about people who have not been to Africa as if one cannot grasp the issues otherwise. Given that you have spent time on the continent, you are using that to promote yourself as THE AUTHORITY on Africa… blah blah blah..You, however, have invested much time in selling your version of events and all you would do … ”

Shows clearly that you have not AT ALL read the article of this thread. You are such a fraud.

Latest Articles

Recent Discussion

Browse by Topic

The Military Death Toll While Enforcing the Occupation of Iraq

Merchants of Death: Exposing Corporate-financed Holocaust in Africa

59 comments on this article so far ...

Add to the discussion