© As International - Community for SurViVors

Thursday, August 27, 2009

President Obama should not have any summit with General Kagame or Museveni.

[NDRL - There is a problem in Kigali under Kagame, every thing that comes up, they will immediately go to their defensive. Every body who tries to say something contrary to the “correct line” is immediately referred to as a killer! By the way, do you know how many people we as RPA killed in Byumba and in many other places? Why isn’t this also talked about openly? Do you know how many Hutu that were killed by RPA?! Do you know how many Tutsi have been
killed by Kagame? Dont just blindly defend Kagame, he is a MASS-KILLER!!]

====
27-08-2009
by Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD

The idea of the summit with the dictators who lead Rwanda and Uganda to solve the conflict in the DRC appears flawed and not consistent with Dr. Jendayi Frazer's past advocacy for a tough stance against dictators.

I do not think President Bush's summits and individual meetings with Kagame, Museveni and Kabila that Dr. Jendayi Frazer alluded to helped at all.

From 2000-2008, we had the warlords Mutebusi, Nkunda, Ntaganda, all supported by Rwanda, wrecking havoc, raping women, recruiting children, and committing war crimes, and mass slaughters of the innocent and defenseless Congolese people.

It is only with the UN Experts Report of December 2008, followed by the decision

by Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands to cut aid to the Government of Kigali that the dictator Kagame was forced to stop its military and financial support to the renegade General Nkunda, and eventually dismantle the CNDP as we know it.

President Obama should not have any summit with General Kagame or Museveni.

*** General Kagame is accused of war crimes, genocide and mass killings of more than 5 millions Congolese.

*** He is

under Spanish and French indictments for war crimes and genocide. General Nkunda's CNDP forces, armed, trained, and financed by General Kahame are responsible for war crimes and the rapes. Ms. Clinton heard vivid accounts from the victims of these rapes. It is unfortunate that most of these crimes and rapes happened when Dr.

Jendayi Frazer, as Advisor to President Bush and then Assistant Secretary of State, was playing a major role, advising on and then overseeing the US African policy. General Kagame should be treated as a criminal and tried for these crimes.

President Obama should keep his moral high ground and not shake the bloody hands of African dictators. President Obama has a better grasp of African issues and proposes better solutions, as confirmed during Ms. Hillary Clinton's recent trip across Africa. His African policy has more chance of success than the ways advocated by Dr Jendayi Frazer in the Wall Street Journal.

Felicien Kanyamibwa, PhD.

The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Génocide rwandais : un témoin clé se rétracte. Richard Mugenzi a sûrement été acheté pour rentrer au Rwanda et se rétracter

26-08-2009

Commentaire

Il est important d'associer les deux phrases soulignées en bleu (L'homme qui a vécu de 1998 à 2008 à Arusha,....est rentré récemment dans son pays) pour comprendre le revirement de Mugenzi (voir l'article du Monde repris plus bas).

et plus loin....Jean-François Dupaquier, qui prépare un livre sur les origines du génocide, reconnaît que "les services rwandais ont pu retourner Richard Mugenzi".

Il est rentré au Rwanda après sa manipulation et pour cause!

Cependant il serait intéressant de savoir pourquoi, comment et quand il a commencé à travailler dans le centre d'écoute de l' Armée rwandaise à Gisenyi.

Il faut distinguer le centre des transmissions et le centre d'écoute. Au centre des transmissions on émet et on reçoit des messages de vive voix ou des signaux (en Morse) au sein d'un même réseau de communications.
*

Tandis qu'au centre d'écoute on intercepte des messages d'une station tierce à l'insu de celle-ci. Or Richard Mugenzi n'a pas travaillé au centre des transmissions, mais plutôt au centre d'écoute où il interceptait les messages du FPR seulement.

La différence entre le message reçu et le message intercepté (Lire ce qui suit: "Il précise que les enquêteurs qui l'ont interrogé à Arusha (Tanzanie) pour le compte du magistrat français "ne faisaient pas la distinction entre messages interceptés et messages reçus"). Les enquêteurs qui l'ont interrogé n'avaient pas besoin de lui faire préciser entre les messages reçus et les messages interceptés puisqu'ils savaient bien qu'il ne faisait que l'interception.

Richard Mugenzi travaillait à la préfecture de Gisenyi. Le commandement de place de Gisenyi a fait recours à lui en 1992 quand on est tombé par hasard sur le réseau du FPR émettant en langue Rukiga ou Kigande sur une fréquence de la radio administrative de la préfecture. Or Mugenzi parle ces langues.

C'est ainsi qu'on l'a requis et on a commencé à intercepter les messages du FPR. Le commandement de place et plus tard de secteur opérationnel de Gisenyi retransmettait à l'Etat-major les textes traduits par Mugenzi.

Le Lt Colonel Anatole Nsengiyumva n'était pas encore à Gisenyi. Ce n'est qu'en mi-juin 1993 qu'il a pris le commandement du Secteur opérationnel de Gisenyi alors que Mugenzi travaillait déjà au centre d'écoute depuis plus d'une année.

Dire que "le groupe d'officiers extrémistes hutu qui contrôlait le centre d'écoutes radio lui transmettait des messages rédigés par leurs soins qu'il transcrivait comme s'il les avait interceptés" c'est une aberration. Pourquoi ce double emploi ? Que représentait Mugenzi en tant qu'individu pour le faire transcrire ces messages?

Quelle valeur devait avoir sa propre écriture?

Le commandement de place ou des opérations à Gisenyi n'avait pas besoin de faire transcrire par Mugenzi des messages rédigés par d'autres puisqu'on n'avait à le justifier devant personne par son écriture. Et on l'a requis à cause de sa connaissance des langues utilisées par le FPR dans ses transmissions. Il y avait ses manuscrits parce que c'est lui qui interceptait les messages et les traduisait. Il ne faisait que ça.
*

Puis les messages étaient codés par les spécialistes et retransmis sur le réseau des Forces Armées Rwandaises dans le centre des transmissions. On ne sait même pas si les manuscrits de Mugenzi étaient classés après la retransmission des messages sur le réseau des Forces Armées Rwandaises. En principe on classait les messages après les avoir tapés à la machine et les manuscrits encombrants étaient détruits. Son écriture en soi n'avait aucune valeur!

Dire que "Leur teneur visait à accuser l'ennemi tutsi et à attiser la haine contre lui", c'est une autre aberration. Les messages interceptés étaient seulement utilisés pour les besoins opérationnels et n'ont jamais été portés à la connaissance du public et même pas à celle de toutes les Institutions de l'Etat.

Sinon les gens en auraient parlé avant avril 1994. Ils faisaient l'objet d'une diffusion restreinte, aux destinataires militaires (les Etats-Majors, Minadef, ESM et les Commandements Opérationnels).
*

Est-ce que ce sont ces échelons de commandement qui se laissaient intoxiquer ou manipuler et acceptaient de perdre leur temps à les lire et à planifier en conséquence !!

Il convient de souligner que l'Etat-major de l'Armée Rwandaise avait un autre centre d'écoute. Est-ce que le Chef d'Etat-major se laissait manipuler par ses propres officiers d'Etat-major qui, à en croire Richard Mugenzi, auraient aussi rédigé des faux messages interceptés et les lui auraient remis pour les lire et donner des ordres en conséquence? Le secteur opérationnel du Mutara en avait un autre.

Le revirement de Mugenzi est donc sans valeur.

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Je sais que l'attentat contre l'avion n'a rien à voir avec le FPR.

[NDLR: L'Affirmation ci-dessus est de Jean-François Dupaquier - Survie, connue pour être la prostituée du Pimp Paul Kagame].

25-08-2009
Par k.A.M.I

Et revoilà donc! Les abonnés aux tentatives désespérées des cyniques tueurs d'Afandie de se dédouaner du crime qui a provoqué le Crime se frottent encore les mains.

Ils estiment avoir marqué un point en la rétractation de Richard Mugenzi, un hobereau présenté comme témoin-clé dans l'attentat contre le prédécesseur du Pharaon des mille collines. Une fois de plus, ils sont à plaindre, les pauvres... Savez-vous pourquoi?

Ils sont honteusement pitoyables car ils ignorent qu'un témoin n'a pas besoin d'un tel laps de temps pour vomir son évangile. A l'opposé de Ruzibiza qui, lui, craignait pour sa vie car ayant été de mèche, via afande Karegeya (en Ouganda), avec certains Français, cette nouvelle recrue du Front des Parricides de Rwigema (Fpr) a eu quinze bonne années pour prêcher sa bonne nouvelle sur le coup d'état de Masaka.

Qu'a-t-il donc attendu lui qui affirme n'avoir "jamais été dérangé par le pouvoir d'ici"? Où se cachait-il donc lorsqu'on a du aller cueillir, du fond de sa Wallonie belge, les bobards de Bikabutura ?Ils sont donc honteusement lamentables lorsqu'ils font suivre aux étapes Ruzibiza et Rose Kabuye, cette étape Mugenzi.

La vérité est que l'os est dur à croquer pour cette meute de chiens qui s'obstinent à confondre peuple rwandais et quelques témoins, crédibles ou non. De ballons d'essai en ballons d'essai, les stratèges du déclin d'Afandie lancent aujourd'hui le pion Mugenzi pour forcer la Sarkozye à enfin s'agenouiller devant un parterre de criminels aujourd'hui identifiés et qui, petit à petit, ont entamé le capital sympathie qu'ils ont tiré de l'usurpation de la souffrance de tout un peuple.

Je plains ces fanatiques de la tyrannie qui croient frapper par là-même où Stephen Smith avait sonné la fin de leur innocence. En contactant le journal Le Monde, ils rêvaient certainement d'influencer une opinion qui sait aujourd'hui que le commanditaire principal de l'attentat contre le Falcon 50 descendu à Kigali en 1994 se trouve justement à... Kigali.

Ils croyaient naïvement qu'ils feraient oublier de la sorte le clash de la BBC avec le très professionnel et téméraire Stephen Sackur. Acculé dans ses propres haines et contradictions l'invité du jour avait, à l'époque, avoué son forfait.Je plains ces laquais du Mensonge car ils ignorent comment a été retourné ce « témoin » qui affirme n'avoir rien vu ni entendu (que prétend-il dès lors?).

Ces aveugles qui ne veulent pas voir (les pires) ne savent pas que le ridicule qui a enveloppé le rapport Mucyo dérange toujours en haut lieu et que ceux qui cirent les bottes de l'Infamie ont promis à leur dieu de lui offrir sur un plateau de sang de quoi ridiculiser tous ceux qui ont mis à nu le caractère criminel de cette camarilla anglo-saxonne sous-traitant le chaos des Grands lacs.

Mais pourquoi diantre ne conseille-t- on pas à l'ancien hôte de l'Hôtel de Police de Paris (1992) d'oublier un peu son ego et de se réconcilier tout simplement avec la France au lieu de s'attaquer à toute une institution (la Justice) et de se ridiculiser à longueur d'année en inventant chaque jour un mensonge qui va maladroitement essayer de couvrir et de faire oublier le précédent?

Je répète à ces actionnaires de l'entreprise établie pour "moudre du Rwandais" ce que je leur ai dit lorsqu'ils applaudissaient ce qu'ils ont cru être la fin des « zorro »: « c'est au peuple rwandais - et à lui seul - qu'il reviendra, le jour venu, de confectionner l'habit que portera leur actuel dieu.

Fin des zorro ou pas donc, l'important était cette comptabilisation des forfaits et le fait de rayer du canon des saints l'assassin dont le professeur Filip Reyntjens dit qu'il est le plus grand criminel aujourd'hui en fonction ».We, the people... Nous savons que l'attentat contre l'avion a tout à voir avec le FPR.

© k.A.M.I.

AFRICOM: Pentagon's First Direct Military Intervention In Africa

Stop NATO
August 24, 2009

By Rick Rozoff

The 2009 World Population Data Sheet published by the Washington, DC-based Population Reference Bureau states that the population of the African continent has surpassed one billion.

Africans now account for over a seventh of the human race.Africa's 53 nations are 28% of the 192 countries in the world.The size and location of the continent along with its human and natural resources - oil, natural gas, gold, diamonds, uranium, cobalt, chromium, platinum, timber, cotton, food products - make it an increasingly important part of a world that is daily becoming more integrated and interdependent.

Africa is also the last continent to free itself from colonial domination. South America broke free of Spanish and Portuguese control in the beginning of the 1800s (leaving only the three Guianas - British, Dutch and French - still colonized) and the post-World War II decolonization of Asia that started with former British East India in 1947 was almost complete by the late 1950s.Sub-Saharan Africa was not to liberate most of its territory from Belgian, British, French, Spanish and Portuguese colonial masters until the 1960s and 1970s.

And the former owners were reluctant to cede newly created African nations any more than nominal independence and the ability to choose their own internal socio-economic orientation and foreign policy alignment.In the two decades of the African independence struggle the continent was marred by Western-backed coups d'etat and assassinations of liberation leaders which included those against Patrice Lumumba in the former Belgian Congo in 1961, Ben Barka in Morocco in 1965, Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana in 1966, Eduardo Mondlane in Mozambique in 1969, Amilcar Cabral in Guinea-Bissau in 1973 and Marien Ngouabi in the Republic of the Congo (Brazzaville) in 1977.

In his latest Anti-Empire Report veteran political analyst William Blum wrote, "the next time you hear that Africa can't produce good leaders, people who are committed to the welfare of the masses of their people, think of Nkrumah and his fate.

And think of Patrice Lumumba, overthrown in the Congo 1960-61 with the help of the United States; Agostinho Neto of Angola, against whom Washington waged war in the 1970s, making it impossible for him to institute progressive changes; Samora Machel of Mozambique against whom the CIA supported a counter-revolution in the 1970s-80s period; and Nelson Mandela of South Africa (now married to Machel's widow), who spent 28 years in prison thanks to the CIA."

Some of Blum's references are to a series of proxy wars supported by the United States and its NATO allies and in some instances apartheid South Africa and the Mobutu Sese Seko regime in Zaire in the mid-1970s and the 1980s, such as arming and training the National Front for the Liberation of Angola (FNLA) and the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), the unspeakably brutal Mozambican National Resistance (RENAMO), and Eritrean and Tigrayan armed separatists in Ethiopia as well as backing the Somali invasion of the Ogaden Desert in that country in 1977.

Over the past five years French troops and bombers have waged deadly attacks inside Cote d'Ivoire, Chad and the Central African Republic either in support of or against rebels, always in furtherance of France's own geopolitical objectives. In the second application of the so-called Blair Doctrine, in 2000 Britain sent troops to its former colony of Sierra Leone and has de facto recolonized the nation, taking control of its military and internal security forces.

But in the post-World War II period there has only been one direct American military action in Africa, the deadly 1986 air strikes against Libya in April of 1986, Operation El Dorado Canyon.While conducting wars, bombings, military interventions and invasions in Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, the Middle East and recently Southeastern Europe over the past half century, the Pentagon has left the African continent comparatively unscathed.

That is going to change after the establishment of the United States Africa Command on October 1 of 2007 and its activation a year later.The U.S. has intensified military involvement in Africa over the past seven years with such projects as the Pan Sahel Initiative (PSI), launched by the State Department but which deployed US Army Special Forces with the Special Operations Command Europe to Mali and Mauritania among other locations.

U.S. military personnel are still engaged in the counterinsurgency wars in Mali and Niger against Tuareg rebels.The Pan Sahel Initiative was succeeded by the Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative (TSCTI) in late 2004 which has American military personnel assigned to eleven African nations: Algeria, Burkina Faso, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria and Senegal.

The Trans-Saharan Counterterrorism Initiative was formally launched in June of 2005 with the deployment of 1,000 American troops, among them Green Berets, in Operation Flintlock 05 in North and West Africa to engage with counterparts from seven nations: Algeria, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Tunisia.Until their transfer to the Africa Command (AFRICOM) all 53 nations on the continent except for those in the Horn of Africa (assigned to Central Command) and the island nations of Madagascar and the Seychelles in the Indian Ocean (handled by Pacific Command) were within the area of responsibilty of the European Command (EUCOM), whose top commander is simultaneously the Supreme Allied Commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

As such the past two EUCOM and NATO commanders, Marine General James Jones (2003-2006) and Army General Bantz John Craddock (2006-June, 2009), were the most instrumental in setting up AFRICOM.Jones is now U.S. National Security Adviser and at this February's Munich Security Conference opened his speech with "As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. [Henry]Kissinger. "

In 2008, while serving as State Department special envoy for Middle East security and chairman of the Atlantic Council of the United States, Jones said, "[A]s commander of NATO, I worried early in the mornings about how to protect energy facilities and supply chain routes as far away as Africa, the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea."

Shortly before stepping down from his military posts with NATO and the Pentagon "NATO's top commander of operations, U.S. General James Jones, has said he sees a potential role for the alliance in protecting key shipping lanes such as those around the Black Sea and oil supply routes from Africa to Europe."

Three years ago a Pentagon web site documented that "Officials at U.S. European Command spend between 65 to 70 percent of their time on African issues, [James] Jones said....Establishin g such a group [military task force in West Africa] could also send a message to U.S. companies 'that investing in many parts of Africa is a good idea,' the general said."

During the final months of his dual tenure as NATO's and EUCOM's top military commander, Jones transitioned Africa from EUCOM's to AFRICOM's control while also expanding the role of NATO on the continent.In June of 2006 the Alliance launched its global Rapid Response Force with its first large-scale military exercises off the coast of the former Portuguese possession of Cape Verde, in the Atlantic Ocean west of Senegal.

U.S press reports of the time offered these details:"Hundreds of elite North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) troops backed by fighter planes and warships will storm a tiny volcanic island off Africa's Atlantic coast this week in what the Western alliance hopes will prove a potent demonstration of its ability to project power around the world."

"Seven thousand NATO troops conducted war games on the Atlantic Ocean island of Cape Verde on Thursday in the latest sign of the alliance's growing interest in playing a role in Africa. "The land, air and sea exercises were NATO's first major deployment in Africa and designed to show the former Cold War giant can launch far-flung military operations at short notice.

"You are seeing the new NATO, the one that has the ability to project stability,' said NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told a news conference after NATO troops stormed a beach on one of the islands on the archipelago in a mock assault on a fictitious terrorist camp. "NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe James Jones, the alliance soldier in charge of NATO operations, said he hoped the two-week Cape Verde exercises would help break down negative images about NATO in Africa and elsewhere.

"NATO's first operation in Africa had occurred a year earlier in May of 2005 when the bloc transported African Union troops to the Darfur region of Sudan, at the crossroads of a war-riven region comprised of the Central African Republic, Chad and Sudan.The Alliance has since deployed warships to the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Aden, last year with Operation Allied Protector, and this August 17 NATO announced that it was dispatching British, Greek, Italian, Turkish and U.S. warships to the area for a new mission, Operation Ocean Shield.

These operations don't consist of mere surveillance and escort roles but include regular forced boardings, sniper attacks and other uses of armed and often lethal force.On August 22 a Netherlands contingent of the complementary European Union naval force off Somalia used an attack helicopter against a vessel in the area which subsequently was taken over by troops from a Norwegian warship.

Over three years before, now U.S. National Security Adviser and then NATO chief military commander James Jones addressing what was his major "national security" concern at the time, "raised the prospect of NATO taking a role to counter piracy off the coast of the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, especially when it threatens energy supply routes to Western nations."

A month later both he and NATO's then top civilian leader, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, reiterated the above commitment."NATOs' [commanders] are ready to use warships to ensure the security of offshore oil and gas transportation routes from Western Africa, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, NATO's Secretary General, reportedly said speaking at a session of the foreign committee of PACE [Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe].

"On April 30 General James Jones, commander-in- chief of NATO in Europe, reportedly said NATO was going to draw up a plan for ensuring the security of oil and gas industry facilities. "In this respect the bloc is willing to ensure security in unstable regions where oil and gas are produced and transported. "

Two months earlier a U.S. Defense Department news source reported this from Jones:"U.S. Naval Forces Europe, (the command's) lead component in this initiative, has developed a robust maritime security strategy and regional 10-year campaign plan for the Gulf of Guinea region. "Africa's vast potential makes African stability a near-term global strategic imperative."

Jones "raised the prospect of NATO taking a role to counter piracy off the coast of the Horn of Africa and the Gulf of Guinea, especially when it threatens energy supply routes to Western nations" in April of 2006 and the Pentagon and NATO have followed through on his pledge and exactly in those two opposite ends of Africa.

At article a few days ago by Daniel Volman, director of the African Security Research Project in Washington, DC, called "Africa: U.S. Military Holds War Games on Nigeria, Somalia" provided details on how far plans by James Jones and the Pentagon have progressed over the past three years.

Working with what sketchy information that had been made public about Unified Quest 2008, last year's rendition of what the U.S. Army web site described in an article of this year under the title of and as "Army war games for future conflicts", conducted by the United States Army War College, Volman's article included this information:"In addition to U.S. military officers and intelligence officers, Unified Quest 2008 brought together participants from the State Department and other U.S. government agencies, academics, journalists, and foreign military officers (including military representatives from several NATO countries, Australia, and Israel), along with the private military contractors who helped run the war games: the Rand Corporation and Booz-Allen.

"The list of options for the Nigeria scenario ranged from diplomatic pressure to military action, with or without the aid of European and African nations. One participant, U.S. Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel Mark Stanovich, drew up a plan that called for the deployment of thousands of U.S. troops within 60 days...."Among scenarios examined during the game were the possibility of directAmerican military intervention involving some 20,000 U.S. troops in order to 'secure the oil,' and the question of how to handle possible splits between factions within the Nigerian government. The game ended without military intervention because one of the rival factions executed a successful coup and formed a new government that sought stability.

"When General Ward [AFRICOM commander] appeared before the House Armed Services Committee on March 13, 2008, he cited America's growing dependence on African oil as a priority issue for Africom and went on to proclaim that combating terrorism would be 'Africom's number one theater-wide goal.'

He barely mentioned development, humanitarian aid, peacekeeping or conflict resolution. [12]In addition to nations already shelled, targeted and threatened like Somalia, Sudan, Zimbabwe and Eritrea, even long-time and staunch U.S. military allies like Nigeria are not beyond the reach of hostile Pentagon action.

Nigeria is the main power in the fifteen-nation Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which over the past nine years has deployed troops to Sierra Leone, Liberia and Cote d'Ivoire on the request of the West, but that loyalty will not protect it when its own moment arrives.

The U.S. has employed other countries as regional military proxies - Ethiopia and Djibouti in Northeast Africa, Rwanda in Central Africa, Kenya in both - and has designs on South Africa, Senegal and Liberia for similar purposes.

Since its establishment in October of 2007 AFRICOM has lost little time in marking out the Pentagon's new continent.Even prior to its formal activation the Pentagon conducted the Africa Endeavor 2008 23-nation military exercise with forces from Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mali, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sweden, Uganda, the U.S. and Zambia as well as representatives from ECOWAS and the African Union.

The operation was held under the auspices of the U.S. European Command at the time as AFRICOM wasn't activated until October of that year but it included the participation of the then fledgling AFRICOM and U.S. Marine Forces Europe (MARFOREUR), U.S. Air Forces in Europe and the Marine Headquarters, Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa, but "Next year's exercise will be sponsored by U.S. Africa Command."

This January the U.S. Department of Defense announced that "The U.S. Army Southern European Task Force [SETAF] officially has assumed its new role as the Army component for U.S. Africa Command."The Pentagon web site from which the above quote is taken also provided this background information and portents of the future:"Since the 1990s, SETAF has worked with African nations to conduct military training and provide humanitarian relief in countries such as Liberia, Rwanda, Uganda, Congo and the former Zaire.

[Congo is the former Zaire, as Zaire was the former Belgian Congo]"In the coming years, SETAF, operating as U.S. Army Africa, will continue to grow and build capacity to meet the requirements needed to coordinate all U.S. Army activities in Africa.“[U.S. Army Africa] is not an episodic, flash in the pan, noncombative evacuation operation.”

In the same month, demonstrating another new AFRICOM component and the continent-wide reach of the American military and its recently acquired client states, it was reported that "Air Force C-17s will soon begin airlifting special equipment for Rwandan Peacekeepers in the Darfur region of Sudan, marking the kickoff of the first major operation engineered by U.S. Africa Command's air component, Seventeenth Air Force, also known as U.S. Air Forces Africa."

This May the newspaper of the American Armed Forces, Stars and Stripes, carried a feature on joint U.S.-British training of the Rwandan army, one which bears a large part of the blame for the deaths of over five million Congolese since 1998: The biggest loss of life in a nation related to armed conflict since tens of millions of Chinese and Soviets were killed during World War II.

Rwandan and Ugandan troops invaded Congo in 1998 and triggered ongoing cross-border fighting which persists to this day. Rwanda and Uganda are both U.S. and British military client states.The Stars and Stripes feature detailed that American instructors "are currently working with a team from the British army to train instructors with the Rwandan army.

Those instructors will then train their own troops — many of whom will serve as peacekeepers in places such as Sudan." It quoted a British officer, Maj. Charles Malet, who "leads a contingent of British forces based in Kenya," as saying "We’ve been producing short-term training in this part of the world for a long, long time.

[U.S. Africa Command] has stood [up]. It’s great to link up and provide a sort of introduction. " The training of the Rwandan armed forces by the United States and its NATO allies has less to do with Darfur than it does with devastated Congo.In November of 2008 the United Nations reported that "Rwandan forces fired tank shells and other heavy artillery across the border at Congolese troops during fighting" which began when former Congolese general Laurent Nkunda staged an armed rebellion in the east of the country which led to the displacement of 200,000 civilians.

The BBC revealed at the time that "journalists report that some of Laurent Nkunda's rebel fighters are in the pay of the Rwandan army."This has renewed fears that the fighting will see a re-run of the five-year Congolese war, which involved nine nations, before it ended in 2003." The British Financial Times conducted interviews with "former rebels and observers on the ground" who said that "the uprising – led by Laurent Nkunda, the renegade former Congolese general – relies heavily on recruitment in Rwanda and former or even active Rwandan soldiers.

"Referring to Rwandan President Paul Kagame, the report added, "Mr Nkunda and Rwanda’s government, military and business elite share a history....Mr Nkunda, a Congolese Tutsi, was an intelligence officer in the guerrilla army that Mr Kagame, a Rwandan Tutsi, used to...seize power."Mr Kagame launched invasions of Congo in 1996 and 1998 and supported uprisings... ."

The following month a U.S. congressional delegation "traveled to Rwanda and Ethiopia to meet with U.S. ambassadors, AFRICOM officials and various ministers of each country, including Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi and Rwanda Foreign Minister Charles Murigande." Ethiopia invaded Somalia on America's behest three years ago and Rwanda's repeated incursions into Congo could not have occurred without a green light from Washington.

As an Ugandan commentary at the time of the latest attack on Congo from Rwanda stated, "London, New York and Paris are among the top consumers of minerals from Congo. They lecture humanity on the need to uphold human rights and the sanctity of property rights whilst their thirst for strategic minerals unleashes terror on innocent women and children in Eastern Congo."

Last week an AFRICOM spokesman announced that "The United States military will be sending experts to the war-torn eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo this week." The initial deployment will be small, he added, but "more may follow...." AFRICOM would be better advised to monitor the activities of the Rwandan military it trains and arms.

Also last week the Pentagon stated it was deploying "unmanned reconnaissance aircraft in the skies above the Seychelles archipelago" in the Indian Ocean near Madagascar and AFRICOM commander General William Ward said, "We have the recent arrival of our P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft that will aid in conducting the surveillance of Seychelles territorial waters and as we look into the future, (we will) bring unmanned surveillance vehicles." Two days later Ward said "that the rise of radical Islamist militant group al-Shabab in Somalia makes East Africa a central focus of the U.S. military on the continent."Voice of America added":

General William Ward has pledged continued support to Somalia's transitional federal government.. ..He made his remarks during a visit to Nairobi, Kenya, which is a key U.S. ally in region." Until last October Africa was the only continent other than Australia and Antarctica without a U.S. military command.

The fact that one has now been established indicates that Africa has achieved heightened importance for the Pentagon and its Western military allies. An analysis of why Africa is a major focus of attention and why now rather than earlier was provided by U.S.-based writer Paul I. Adujie in the New Liberian on August 21:"America's Africa Command, in conceptual terms and actual implementation, is not intended to serve Africa's best interests.

It just happens that Africa has grown in geopolitical and geo-economic importance to America and her allies. Africa has been there all along."There were, for instance, reports of how the American military, actingsupposedly in partnership or cooperation with the Nigerian military, literally took over Nigerian Defense Headquarters. ..."

It is probably important to mention that the United States already operates at least three other commands, namely, the European Command (EUCOM), Central Command (CENTCOM) and Pacific Command (PACOM), therefore the Africa Command or (AFRICOM) will be the fourth leg of US military global spread.

"America's Africa Command is...machinery for Western governments to pursue their vaunted economic, political and hegemonic hemispheric influence at the expense of Africans as well as a backdoor through which Westerners can outmaneuver rivals such as China and perhaps Russia in addition."

Monday, August 24, 2009

When Is a Crime ever “BIG ENOUGH” For Punishment? 3,5 million human beings deliberately mass-murdered in violation of cardinal human principles.

24/08/2009

Tennessee - If one searches for the reason of the Rwandan catastrophe of 1994 strategic factors are more often neglected than acknowledged. But without taking them into account, the truth cannot be found.

Is better n

ow or was it better during Habyarimana's rule? 3,5 millions of victims, most of them still in mass graves. This is what happens if you have a hidden agenda and launch a bloody wise war on the Nation and assasinate, in a terrorist act, its elected leader. At what age do you expect a human being to act like a human being?

And justice becomes selective. While local actors are being punished, the often more powerful international culprits [TONY BLAIR] go untouched. The events in Rwanda in 1994 were not an internal armed conflict. IT'S BLOODY OBVIOUS THERE WAS NO CIVIL WAR IN RWANDA.

They were caused by international intervention from the outside. To limit the discussion one-sidedly to the internal dynamics of Rwandan society and history neglects the fact that it were interventions from the outside, which set the conditions for the catastrophe to unfold and helped one side of the conflict to conduct its military operations. And to add insult to injury, Mr. Tony Blair became Officially Advisor (But Prime minister) of the bloody dictator of Rwanda Paul Kagame. A horrifying act that should land him to the International criminal Court.

Western powers, most prominently the Anglo-American powers with the Francophone powers acting as competing junior partners, have caused the crisis in the Great Lakes region of Africa during the 1980s and 1990s in a two fold manner and are therefore responsible for the human catastrophe that followed.

Often times when involved in conversation about Rwanda’s current social and political affair, many people defend the current administration by excusing its past crimes as accidental to necessary social and political development of the country in various forms of “It had to be done.

It just had to! And seeing how well off the people are now and how much off they would have been (especially the minorities), it’s excusable.” [Report by Uwe Friesecke,Prepared for the ICTR Defense Team]

The people whose lives were lost (3,5 millions mainly Hutus) are characterized as simply collateral, rendering the current government’s past actions immune to law and punishment.

In these people’s eyes, the current Rwandan government is filled with heroes who should be celebrated, instead of punished for crimes which unfortunately still continue today in violation of cardinal human principles.

So let’s consider the killings of 4 million civilians as collateral, who does the current government have to kill in order for their crimes to “count” and be punishable by law. Hmm let’s see…since attacking a peaceful country, for no good reason, other than to take over power and kill its citizens on the way are not good enough reasons…

How about the killing of a president? Would that count for something? Maybe not…how about TWO presidents? How about then? Would they still be the anointed saviors that they are today?

Here is an excerpt from a recent article by Andrew G. Marshall entitled, “Western Involvement in the Rwandan Genocide” where we can perhaps draw some conclusions as to why these guys aren’t going to be held to the same standards as anyone else.

But back to Rwanda’s well protected criminals. Allow me to use a very familiar analogy, that can be appropriately be applied to the relationship between the US, and Kagame and his administration. So the US/pimp protects its bitches/hoes until they become insolent. Look at Saddam and Mobutu. Kagame and his administration can be classified as one of America’s favorite African bitches right now.

America will pimp it until it is no longer useful or at least until it becomes too messy to deal with. And whether it’s playing the role of America’s “hoe” right now, it is still not excused or absolved from it’s crimes.

People please, stop defending those criminals! A crime is a crime, and their crimes were crimes against humanity. They don’t get a pass just because they are another country’s hoe!

Note: Throughout the article, Marshall alternates from saying Rwanda was invaded by the RPF from Uganda, to referring to that war as an incursion to finally referring to it as a civil war. It was not a civil war since the country was attacked.

It was an extended invasion/incursion that lasted for over 3 years, culminating in the politicide more commonly knows as the “Rwandan Genocide.”

During the 1990-1994 war, there were many aspects of the negotiations that the Rwanda government had agreed to, including making the army 50% Tutsi, which is a very big deal. They had negotiated cease fire agreements during that war, but the RPF refused to comply. Quite honestly, it doesn’t appear that they had any intention of power sharing. They wanted the power for themselves.

What I do find “improper” though, and reasons why I concentrate on this so much is the way the tale of what happened in 1994 was told. I have issues with lies that have been perpetuated by the media, and the way the rebels and their sympathizers committed/still commit massacres with IMPUNITY.

Along with how the conflict has been characterized (Hutus are genocidaires, Hutu extremists vs moderate Hutus) and simplified into the attacker/hutu-victim/tutsi scenario, when it’s sooo much more complex than that.

Both sides definitely did have their “fair share of bloody actions” however, the media has disproportionately pinned the blame on one side, and whose people have been getting punished, while some are even innocent. Simply because the world believes they are “genocidaires” then they can be convicted of crimes they never committed.

© Kazamarande Phoïbe,PhD
International Relations

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Dirty deals?: Lockerbie victims' families accuse Tony Blair of making a deal involving the Libyan bomber with Colonel Gaddafi two years ago.

By Ian Drury
Last updated at 9:41 AM on 20th August 2009

Tony Blair, 'blood money' and a Lockerbie deal: Talks with Gaddafi hours before BP agreement. To remember please click here

Tony Blair, the former prime British minister and the current advisor of the Rwanda bloody dictator Paul Kagame has been accused of agreeing a 'blood money' deal involving the Lockerbie bomber with Colonel Gaddafi just hours before BP unveiled a £500million oil contract.

The then Prime Minister laid the foundations for the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi during a meeting with the Libyan leader in a desert tent two years ago

. Blair to strenghten the Rwandan Nazism.

The pair thrashed out a controversial prisoner transfer deal just before BP chairman Peter Sutherland announced the firm was investing $900million - about £545million - to search for oil in Libya. If the firm strikes rich, it could be worth £13billion.

The Scottish Government confirmed that its justice secretary Kenny MacAskill would announce Megrahi's fate at 1pm today.

It is widely expected that the terminally-ill 57-year-old, the only person Read more:

Lockerbie bomber set to be released this afternoon despite Obama's desperate appeal for him to die in Scottish prison.

If as expected he is released rather than moved to a Libyan jail, he will almost certainly board a private jet at Prestwick Airport, Ayrshire.
The affair has caused a huge transatlantic rift with families of the victims outraged.

Megrahi's wife

Aisha told The Times her husband still 'didn't know' when he would be freed from Glasgow's Greenock prison, but was 'very happy' at the prospect of returning to his homeland.

It was also reported that the convicted bomber had called his mother in Libya and told her he hoped to be with her by Ramadan, Hajja Fatma, 95, told the Tripoli Post in Libya: 'I do not close the house's door at all. I am expecting him to enter at any moment.

'Eleven years I did not spend the holy month of Ramadan with him, I am waiting for that da

y when he comes back.'
She maintained that her son was innocent of killing 270 people in the Lockerbie bomb, saying 'he would not slaughter a chicken'.
The U.S. government continued to put last-minute pressure on the Scottish Executive yesterday, with a spokesman for Mr Obama insisting Megrahi should 'serve out his term' in Scotland.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also issued a personal plea to keep the bomber behind bars.

Death sentence: Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi is dying from prostate cancer
The former New York Senator said she knew many of the American families who lost relatives in the atrocity and that to release Megrahi would be 'absolutely wrong'.

Mrs Clinton yesterday said Megrahi's release would be 'inappropriate, and very much against the wishes of the family members of the victims who suffered such grievous losses'.
She added: 'I take this very personally because I knew a lot of the family members of those who were lost.
'I just think it is absolutely wrong to release someone who has been imprisoned based on the evidence about his involvement in such a horrendous crime.

'We are still encouraging the Scottish authorities not to do so, and hope they will not.'
Later, Robert Gibbs, a spokesman for Mr Obama, added: 'It's the policy of this administration that this individual should serve out his term where he's serving it right now.'

In a thinly-veiled attack on U.S. attempts to influence the decision, Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has insisted 'international power politics' will be ignored.

But the SNP can expect a huge transatlantic outcry if, as is likely, Megrahi is granted mercy.
Critics are suspicious that Mr Blair's deal was part of an attempt to develop closer relations with the former pariah state to protect Britain's oil interests.

Susan Cohen, whose only child Theodora, 20, was killed in the bombing, said: 'Tony Blair has behaved absolutely appallingly. Some people would describe it as blood money.

second appeal, removing any legal bar on his release.
Despite the likelihood of Megrahi's release, there have been no public moves to bring back the Libyan gunman who murdered WPC Yvonne Fletcher in London in 1984.
The 25-year-old was patrolling a protest outside the Libyan Embassy when she was killed by a bullet fired from inside. All those inside were allowed to return to Tripoli under diplomatic immunity.

WPC Fletcher's mother Queenie, 76, of Dorset, last week said she was 'sickened' at any deal to repatriate Megrahi.

United States must be held responsible for supporting and protecting Kagame, the heavyweight criminal and the worst human rights violator in the world

22-08-2009

[SurViVors Human Rights Advocates for the prevention of genocide and crimes against humanity]

Will Rwandans survive tomorrow? US military support the increase of Rwanda military spending to GDP.

Rwanda tops the 10 African countries with largest ratio of military expenses. Defense analysts estimate that Rwanda mostly uses these arms against its own citizens.

Kigali/Washington - Democracy versus RPF tyranny.

Rwandan survivors have been watching the current situation in Rwanda since the notorious bloody dictator Paul Kagame, the extremist Tutsi from the first minority group (14%) behind The Twa (1%) in Rwanda forcibly took power in Rwanda with help of Bill Clinton his friend after a deadly coup that killed two Hutu presidents from Rwanda and Buru

ndi.

Since 1994, US politics involved in the Rwandan Genocide have given the massive moral, financial and military support to Paul Kagame, the bloody heavyweight criminal and Still president of Rwanda.

The disappointments and frustrations experienced and expressed by most of Rwandan surViVors in articles posted on various pro-democracy websites in connection with the persistent refusal of the US administration to stop supporting, financing and protecting the enemy of both Rwanda and its people are therefore unfortunate and untimely.

The drama started up when the President Habyarimana of Rwanda's jet, a Falcon-50 got shot down in Kigali while landing Kigali Airport on April 6 1994. According to reliable so

urces, some of United States politics, demagogues and the Pentagon are preparing to finish the job in this ongoing genocide in Rwanda using Afro-American generals and battalions in combats mostly composed by afro-American marines.

In 1996 with the refugee camps destruction, US afro-american marines were deployed in the Lake Kivu to provide heavy artillery to the RPF army, killing refugees,women and children in Mugunga and Lake Green refugee camps in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

We actually know that the US military has trained and still trains the RPF military officers accused for war crimes and crimes against humanity and worst of that they are training the death squad leaders who carry out assassinations of exiled Hutus around the world.

Instead of toppling such a ruthless dictator and restore a democratic government where the majority Hutu ethnic group (85%) should have their word on their country’s rule, the Pentagon, is believed to use through those Afro-American US military soldiers “in support of the war on the Hutu insurgency” with sophisticated military weaponry and arms to blow up the typed Hutu community members and destroy them.

The current RPF Tutsi -led government has become more aggressive, mor

e bloody against Rwandans who are believed to be born Hutus and or those who are said to be the regime opponents. Because of the US and British supports, an increasing Tutsi apartheid, with the US support, has been built up in all main Rwandan cities and towns within the last 15 years.

Hutus became marginalized in all public activities and worst of that they are slaves in their home country. Most of Hutu intellectuals are either forcibly sent to exile or sent to Gatchatcha courts for life sentence. Because of mass atrocities (more than 3,5 million of Rwandans), Kagame has seek out protection of British and US politics.

The aftermath of the current US support is that Rwanda is devastated by the RPF Tutsi highly trained by US military and the target is the majority of the Rwandan population that is killing hundreds of t

housands of human Hutus each day.

If the United States was sincere in its effort to assist Rwanda in the upheaval of the Rwandan Genocide, turmoil, misery, diseases, epidemics, and poverty which have overwhelmed Rwanda since Paul Kagame forcibly took power in Rwanda, since the implementation of the forced work in Rwanda, then the United States would donate and contribute more earnest monies into the development of sustaining Rwandans’ life as opposed to sustaining the bloody Rwandan bloody fascism with guns, weaponry and military training in the name of fighting the Hutu insurgency.

If it was sincere, then in its sincerity, the United States would earnestly help Rwandans to dismantle the Rwandan RPF criminal organization with a heavy record of more than 3 millions of killed Rwandans within the last 15 years. Rwandan survivors can't wait.

The heart of the matter, as every rational person can see, however, is that the Paul Kagame and RPF leadership is well aware that the genocide charges against Hutus in its cases have been built on sand and that the intent is, if possible, to snatch and finish the job by mass-murdering Rwandan survivors with the gun bought with the money of Rwandan, US, British and other western taxpayers.

Another point that deserves to be highlighted concerns the current RPF political strategies and false genocidal ideology charges that Hutus are a threat to the Tutsi ethnic group. This is a slap in the face to not only the Rwandan survivors who years have been victimized beyond belief, but to those Americans who have contributed through charitable organizations in an effort to lend some support, as well as to the international allies who too have made efforts to help sustain life in Rwanda.

here is the U.S. support for promoting peace, human and economic development and reconstruction in Rwanda? This is also a slap in the face to the Rwandan Survivors when NDI tells us they are training the RPF criminals for the 2010 presidential elections. NDI should help Rwandan Survivors to express themselves on Kagame as one of the few tyrants with such heavy criminal records. Kagame should step down and face justice.

American citizens through the US representives at the White House should remain dubious and ask accountability of the US individuals in the Rwandan conflict. They must remember that in their struggle for power and glory around the world that Human Rights must be adhered to and protected. Remember: 3,5 millions of Rwandans have been mass-slaughtered while thousands of Rwandan survivors are at this time being killed, forcibly sent to prison or exile. We say nothing but to remember our visitors that more than 5 millions of Congolese people were killed since the 1996 Kagame wars launch up to now.

This problem should be addressed.

© SurViVors Editions

Thursday, August 20, 2009

THE TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE BRITISH BUDGET SUPPORT AND GEO-STRATEGIC AMBITIONS

19.08-2009

****

[ NDLR: Tell the Truth and make a difference. Rwandan Survivors highly appreciate Herman's testimony and analysis on the Rwandan Tragic events. Paul Kagame's associates should stop whitewashing the bloody monster]. Let's focus on Rwanda

****
By Professor Edward S. Herman

4 Heads of State assassinated in the francophone African Great Lakes Region.· 2,000,000 people died in Hutu and Tutsi genocides in Rwanda, Burundi and RD.Congo.

600,000 Hutu refugees killed in R.D.Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic and Rep of Congo.·

6,000,000 Congolese dead.·

8,000,000 internal displaced people in Rwanda, Burundi and DR. Congo.·

500,000 permanent Rwandan and Burundian Hutu refugees, and Congolese refugees around the world.· English language expansion to Rwanda to replace the French language.·

20,000 Kagame’s fighters paid salaries from the British Budget Support from 1986 to present.·

£500,000 of British taxpayer’s money paid, so far, to Kagame and his cronies through the budget support, SWAPs, Tutsi-dominated parliament, consultancy, British and Tutsi-owned NGOs.·

Kagame has paid back the British aid received to invade Rwanda and to strengthen his political power by joining the East African Community together with Burundi, joining the Commonwealth, imposing the English Language to Rwandans to replace the French language; helping the British to establish businesses and to access to jobs in Rwanda, and to exploit minerals in D.R.Congo.

Genocide Inflation is the Real Human Rights Threat: Rwanda
by Edward S. Herman

"The plane was shot down by Paul Kagame and his Tutsi associates, [15] with active or tacit help from the Belgians, UN representative Romeo Dallaire, [16] and possibly the CIA. This act was part of the Kagame-Tutsi final assault to seize power after a four-year war, with the assistance of the U.S.-sponsored Ugandan military.

When the chief investigator for the Rwanda Tribunal, Australian Michael Hourigan, reported solid evidence on this locus of responsibility for the April 6th assassination to Chief Prosecutor Louise Arbour in 1997, she immediately closed down the investigation and ordered him to destroy his files. This finding, which does not comport with the idea of a pre-planned Hutu murder program, has been suppressed in the Free Press. [17]

Genocide denial

Rwanda.

A less well-known and less well-understood case of genocide inflation--and possibly even more important, misapprehension of the true source and major direction of the killings-- is that of Rwanda. In the establishment narrative, genocide irrupted suddenly following the April 6, 1994 shooting down of a plane at the Kigali airport that killed the Hutu presidents of both Rwanda (Juvenal Habyarimana) and Burundi (Cyprien Ntaryamira).

According to the narrative, the Hutu genocidaires and the Interahamwe militias unleashed a huge pre-planned killing spree against the minority Tutsi population that wiped out some 800,000 to 1.2 million people, mainly Tutsis. In the myth structure, Bill Clinton made a regrettable error in pressing for the withdrawal of UN forces that might have protected civilians, for which he apologized.

In a major article of September 2001 in the Atlantic Monthly, Samantha Power and others dubbed the United States “bystanders to genocide,” which is also a myth.Contrary to the establishment narrative:

(1) The plane was shot down by Paul Kagame and his Tutsi associates, [15] with active or tacit help from the Belgians, UN representative Romeo Dallaire, [16] and possibly the CIA. This act was part of the Kagame-Tutsi final assault to seize power after a four-year war, with the assistance of the U.S.-sponsored Ugandan military.

When the chief investigator for the Rwanda Tribunal, Australian Michael Hourigan, reported solid evidence on this locus of responsibility for the April 6th assassination to Chief Prosecutor Louise Arbour in 1997, she immediately closed down the investigation and ordered him to destroy his files. This finding, which does not comport with the idea of a pre-planned Hutu murder program, has been suppressed in the Free Press.

(2) The two leaders whose plane was shot down on April 6, 1994, were Hutus. A third Hutu leader, Melchior Ndadaye, an earlier president of Burundi, was assassinated by his Tutsi military in October 1993, which was followed by an anti-Hutu pogrom that killed tens of thousands and drove hundreds of thousands of Burundian-Hutu refugees into Rwanda.

(3) Clinton and his Western allies (UK, Belgium) sponsored the U.S.-trained Kagame, supported his invasions of Rwanda from Uganda and massive ethnic cleansing prior to April 1994, and via their control of the Security Council refused to allow additional UN troops into Rwanda in April 1994, in fact forcing a reduction of the UNIMIR contingent in Rwanda from 2,500 to 270, not because of caution but because Kagame didn’t want them there to interfere with his conquest of Rwanda, which Clinton and his allies supported.

(4) The Hutu authorities urged more UN troops—and in light of the Kagame/U.S. (etc.) opposition to such civilian-protective assistance, this once again calls into question who it was that did the main killing in Rwanda.

(5) A suppressed 1994 UNCHR (Gersony) Report documented massacres of civilians in Kagame-controlled areas of Rwanda, which was confirmed by contemporaneous Amnesty and HRW reports.

(6) A University of Maryland research team led by Christian Davenport and Allan Stam, sponsored by the Western-organized Rwanda Tribunal, initially found that only about 250,000 civilians had been killed in Rwanda and that two out of three victims were Hutus. This caused a great deal of dismay and the authors have been under attack and in retreat ever since.

The 800,000 (and higher) figures have no basis in any other scientific studies but are essentially the Kagame regime’s numbers.To an amazing degree, the Western media and NGOs swallowed the propaganda line and lies on Rwanda that turned things upside down.

They made the prime aggressors and genocidists, who were responsible for the dual assassination of April 6, 1994 that precipitated the mass killing, into heroic defenders against the de facto victims. The dictator Paul Kagame, one of the great mass murderers of our time, was made into an honored savior deserving and receiving strong Western support.

Philip Gourevitch and the New Yorker whipped up sympathy in the West by labeling the Tutsis the “Jews of Africa;” the label stuck, and it garnered even greater support for Western anti-“genocide” intervention. [18] These big lies are now institutionalized and are part of the common (mis)understanding in the West.

Because the Western propaganda machine succeeded so well in making the Hutus the villains and killers, and Paul Kagame the defender/savior of Rwanda, this cleared the ground for Kagame and Yoweri Musevemi--Kagame’s ally and fellow U.S. client and dictator (of Uganda)—to periodically invade and occupy the Eastern Congo (then Zaire) and beyond without “international community” opposition as they were allegedly cleaning out the genocidaires.

The Pentagon very actively supported this on the ground, even more than it supported the Kagame machine’s drive in Kigali. This led to the killing of hundreds of thousands of civilian Hutu refugees in a series of mass slaughters, and also provided cover for a wider Kagame-Musevemi assault in the Congo that has led to the deaths of literally millions.

[19] This was again compatible with Western interests and policy, as it all contributed to the replacement of Mobutu with the more amenable Kabila and the opening up of the Congo to a new surge of ruthless exploitation of its mineral resources by Western companies—a fine illustration of “shock therapy” with murderous human consequences but large gains to a small business and military elite. [20]In sum, Rwanda offers an outstanding illustration of how genocide inflation and lies can have immense, even catastrophic, human consequences.

Thus, not only did the West fail to intervene to prevent “genocide,” it intervened both before April 6th and after to ensure that the right killers took over and in support of genocide. This also ensured preferential treatment in both Rwanda and the Congo for the killers’ sponsors in the West.

This history also shows how magnificently the Western media and NGOs can adapt even in the grossest cases to serve Western political-economic interests. With media and NGO help genocide claims now function as a tool of U.S. expansionism, appropriately labeled “genocidalism,” [21] regularly applied to virtually any target and helping clear the ground for bombing attacks, invasions, occupations and regime change by the United States itself or one of it proxies or clients.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

3 chefs coutumiers abattus par les rwandais sous le couvert des FARDC au Sud-Lubero

19-08-2009

En date du 12/08/2009, 3 chefs coutumiers ont été abattu par balles et leurs corps calcinés par des rwandais portant l’uniforme FARDC dans la localité de KAKUNE à 40 km de la cité de Kirumba en passant par Miriki, au sud du territoire de Lubero. Il s’agit de Bami suivants :

1. Mwami Laurent MASITOLA,
2. Mwami MATATA
3. Mwami KALISYA

En effet, avec la vague des incendies des villages au sud de Lubero dont l’objectif est désormais connu, à savoir exterminer les populations congolaises du Nord-Kivu, les trois chefs coutumiers ci-dessus avaient entamé une campagne de sensibilisation de leurs populations pour la résistance à l’occupation rwandaise.

Les chefs ci-dessus étaient entrain de faire écrire à leurs fils et petits fils l’histoire de la localité de Kanune où depuis Adam et Eve, il n’y a jamais eu des rwandais, hutu, tutsi, etc. Aucun rwandais ne peut prendre qu’il est originaire de Kanune.

La consigne des chefs à leurs populations pourchassées par les militaires rwandais anciens du CNDP, était de ne jamais fuir très loin du village incendié et d’utiliser les bâches des ONG pour se réinstaller au village. Cette consigne était suivie à la lettre par les populations de Kanune qui ne sait plus à quel saint se vouer.

Pendant cette campagne qui était devenue la plus grande occupation du village car personne n’ose s’aventurer dans les champs qui sont pour la plupart devenus des repères des tueurs rwandais, ceux qu’on appelle force de l’ordre faisaient la patrouille au village et visitaient même les chefs coutumiers chez eux.

Le jour de l’attaque, les patrouilleurs étaient absents de leur poste de garde de Kanune. Certains villageois disent que certains patrouilleurs étaient parmi les assaillants à cause de la reconnaissance parfaite des maisons de trois cibles du jour, à savoir, les chefs coutumiers.

Les trois assassinats simultanés ont eu lieu au milieu de la nuit vers 2 h00 du matin heure locale. Les assaillants faisaient sortir un à un chacun les trois chefs de la localité de Kanune. Le premier chef, notamment Masitola en voulu se défendre mais les assaillants étaient trop nombreux. Ils l’ont descendu en tirant pêle-mêle sur lui.

Il est tombé directement devant sa porte. Les deux autres chefs, à savoir Matata et Kalisya, ont eu une morte atroce telle que seuls les rwandais peuvent infliger à un être humain. Les bourreaux les ont d’abord torturés, les découpant à la machette membre par membre avant de les cribler des balles dans la tête et dans la poitrine.

Comme si cela ne suffisait pas, les bourreaux ont trainé rassemblé les restes de ces 3 corps dans une paillote sur laquelle ils ont mis du feu pour calciner leurs victimes. La méthode utilisée dans ce nième forfait au Sud de Lubero est celle de toutes les dictatures sanguinaires du monde, à savoir, faire des exécutions publiques pour semer la peur et la panique dans les esprits des survivants qui savent ce qui les attend s’ils ne collaborent pas.

Après leur forfait, les assaillants sont partis du village sans précipitation comme s’ils étaient en mission de service. Et pourtant ce ne sont pas les services de sécurité qui manquent au pays! Ils ne sont jamais au moment des attaques!
.
On peut dire sans peur de se tromper qu’un génocide est en cours au Nord-Kivu. Le gouvernement congolais ne veut pas le reconnaitre et ne fait rien pour l’arrêter. La Monuc qui représente l’ONU est au courant mais ne veut rien faire.

Qui parlera pour les victimes ? Plusieurs ONG avaient été chasses de la région pour couvrir le génocide. La population ne sait plus à quel saint se vouer. Les élus de la région se taisent. Pourtant ils avaient promis de parler pour leurs électeurs ?

Peut-être savent-ils qu’il n’y aura pas d’élection bientôt, le temps pour eux d’arrondir leurs émoluments! Mais le sang a beaucoup coulé au Nord-Kivu ! Il est temps que des nouveaux leaders se lavent pour dénoncer le génocide de son peuple et sauver ce qui peut être sauvé!

Correspondance particulière de Kirumba

© Beni-Lubero Online

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Burundi : Le gouvernement doit rendre justice aux victimes de crimes de guerre

Human Rights Watch
Le cinquième anniversaire du massacre de Gatumba commémoré sous le signe de l’impunité.

Août 13, 2009

„ Le conflit armé au Burundi a été marqué par des crimes de guerre atroces commis contre la population civile par toutes les parties au conflit. Les victimes et leurs familles ont le droit de voir les auteurs de ces crimes traduits en justice. «Corinne Dufka, chercheuse senior sur l’Afrique à Human Rights Watch (Bujumbura)

- Le gouvernement burundais devrait exiger des comptes à toutes les parties responsables de crimes de guerre et de crimes contre l'humanité perpétrés avant et durant les seize années de conflit armé dans ce pays, a déclaré Human Rights Watch aujourd'hui. Cette déclaration intervient à l'occasion du cinquième anniversaire du massacre de Gatumba qui a coûté la vie à quelque 150 réfugiés congolais lors d'une attaque revendiquée par les Forces Nationales de Libération (FNL).

Le conflit qui a pris fin en 2009 était caractérisé par de nombreuses violations systématiques des lois internationales relatives au droit humanitaire et aux droits humains par toutes les factions belligérantes, notamment par des cas de meurtres, de viol et de torture.

Le gouvernement burundais n'a pris aucune mesure significative pour enquêter sur ces crimes graves ou intenter les poursuites judiciaires qui s'imposaient, et tarde toujours à respecter sa promesse de mettre en place une commission de vérité et de réconciliation ainsi qu'un tribunal spécial chargé de juger les auteurs des crimes commis lors du conflit.

„ Le conflit armé au Burundi a été marqué par des crimes de guerre atroces commis contre la population civile par toutes les parties au conflit «, a déclaré Corinne Dufka, chercheuse senior sur l'Afrique à Human Rights Watch. „ Les victimes et leurs familles ont le droit de voir les auteurs de ces crimes traduits en justice.

«Des milliers de personnes ont été massacrées par les diverses factions belligérantes, notamment au cours de l'attaque du camp de Gatumba revendiquée par les FNL, le massacre d'environ 200 civils hutus à Itaba en 2002 par l'armée burundaise dominée par l'ethnie tutsie, ainsi que celui de Bugendana en 1997 où plus de 300 Tutsis ont été tués par les rebelles du Conseil national pour la défense de la démocratie - Forces pour la défense de la démocratie (CNDD-FDD).

Les groupes incriminés ont reconnu leur responsabilité dans ces crimes. Bien avant l'éclatement de la guerre civile, des massacres étaient aussi perpétrés par l'armée burundaise. En 1972, elle avait tué quelque 200 000 civils hutus et 20 000 autres en 1988.

Bien que la négociation d'accords de paix internationaux ait ouvert la voie à la tenue d'élections et au désarmement de toutes factions belligérantes, les mécanismes de justice de transition prévus dans ces ententes ne sont toujours pas encore en place. Les FNL, le dernier groupe parmi plusieurs factions rebelles à avoir déposé les armes, est devenu un parti politique depuis avril dernier, à l'issue de négociations menées par un facilitateur sud-africain.

En juin dernier, les dirigeants des FNL ont officiellement fait leur entrée au gouvernement, rejoignant ainsi leurs adversaires de toujours, le CNDD-FDD, un autre ancien groupe rebelle hutu, devenu le parti politique au pouvoir depuis sa victoire au scrutin de 2005. Des membres de l'ancienne armée burundaise, les Forces armées burundaises (FAB), composée essentiellement de Tutsis jusqu'en 2004, continuent eux aussi d'occuper des postes de pouvoir.

De nombreuses personnes qui ont peut-être commis des crimes contre l'humanité et des crimes de guerre occupent maintenant des postes clés au sein du gouvernement, notamment dans l'armée et les organes exécutifs.

Le gouvernement semble peu disposé à exiger des comptes aux personnes soupçonnées d'être les auteurs de ces crimes. La grande majorité des rebelles et des soldats arrêtés pendant le conflit, y compris des personnes soupçonnées d'avoir commis des meurtres, ont été relâchés sans procès suite à des décrets présidentiels en 2006 et en 2009 qui accordaient une „ immunité provisoire « aux auteurs de „ crimes politiques.

«.Les représentants du gouvernement burundais et de l'ONU tentent depuis mars 2006 de mettre au point les plans initialement définis dans l'Accord de paix d'Arusha signé en 2000, portant sur la mise en place d'une Commission de vérité et de réconciliation et d'un tribunal spécial relevant de la justice burundaise.

Malgré les promesses faites à des hauts fonctionnaires de l'ONU, dont l'ancien Haut-commissaire aux droits de l'homme des Nations Unies Louise Arbour en mai 2007, les autorités burundaises continuent de rejeter l'appel de l'ONU concernant la nomination d'un procureur indépendant pour le tribunal.

Par ailleurs, certaines autorités gouvernementales ont publiquement exprimé leur soutien à une amnistie pour les auteurs de crimes graves dont le génocide, les crimes de guerre et les crimes contre l'humanité. Conformément au droit international, une amnistie ne doit pas être accordée aux auteurs des crimes internationaux les plus graves. Au contraire, ces personnes doivent être obligatoirement traduites devant les tribunaux.

Financé par des bailleurs de fonds et dirigé par une équipe „ tripartite « composée de représentants de l'ONU, du gouvernement burundais et de la société civile, le processus de „ consultations nationales « dont l'objectif était de recueillir l'opinion des Burundais sur les mécanismes de justice de transition, omet expressément ces questions essentielles.

„ Le processus de consultations nationales ne devrait pas faire oublier que le gouvernement, neuf ans après la signature de l'accord d'Arusha, n'a toujours pas réalisé de progrès significatifs dans la mise en place de mécanismes de justice transitoire conformément au droit international «, a déclaré Mme Dufka.

L'impunité relative aux crimes de guerre passés contribue probablement à l'actuel climat dans lequel les forces de sécurité continuent de commettre des crimes de droit commun ainsi que des crimes basés sur des motifs politiques. Seul un petit nombre de ces crimes perpétrés depuis la fin des graves combats qui se sont déroulés en 2006 ont fait l'objet d'enquêtes minutieuses.

Aucune poursuite n'a été intentée pour les assassinats de plus d'une dizaine de membres des FNL et de militants de l'opposition dont Human Rights Watch a fait état en 2008 et en 2009, dont le récent meurtre d'Emmanuel Minyurano, dont l'assassin serait selon certains témoins un agent du service de renseignements.

Dans un autre cas, des officiers de l'armée ont tué 31 civils dans la province de Muyinga en 2006. Même si le procès qui s'est tenu en 2008 et qui a reçu beaucoup d'éloges, a abouti à la condamnation de 15 soldats, plusieurs civils impliqués dans des assassinats, notamment des agents du renseignement et de l'administration qui ont des relations avec le parti au pouvoir, n'ont jamais été traduits en justice.

Les lois visant la mise en place d'une nouvelle force de police et de la réforme de l'armée en 2004 prévoyaient l'exclusion des anciens soldats et rebelles tenus responsables de crimes de guerre, de crimes contre l'humanité et de torture. Cependant, un mécanisme de contrôle n'ayant toujours pas été mis en place, la police et l'armée tout comme les autres institutions de l'État continuent d'engager des personnes ayant peut-être commis des crimes odieux sur des civils.

„ Cinq ans après le massacre de Gatumba, les auteurs continuent d'échapper à la justice «, a déploré Mme Dufka. „ Il est temps que le gouvernement burundais respecte ses engagements à rendre justice aux milliers de personnes qui ont subi des crimes atroces à Gatumba, à Bugendana, à Itaba et dans d'autres régions du Burundi pendant les longues années de conflit.

Contexte:

Avant et pendant le conflit armé au Burundi qui, à l'origine, opposait les groupes rebelles essentiellement hutus dont le CNDD-FDD et les FNL à l'armée burundaise à prédominance tutsie avant qu'ils ne commencent à se battre entre eux, toutes les parties au conflit ont commis de graves violations des lois internationales relatives au droit humanitaire et aux droits humains. Human Rights Watch tout comme les autres organisations de défense des droits humains avaient présenté des rapports détaillés à ce propos.

Les crimes de guerre attribués à l'armée burundaise remontent au massacre de 1972 où environ 200 000 Hutus avaient perdu la vie. Les soldats ont également massacré environ 20 000 Hutus dans la commune de Marangara (province de Ngozi) en 1988 après un soulèvement hutu où plusieurs milliers de Tutsis ont été tués.

D'après les conclusions présentées en 1994 par une Commission d'enquête internationale composée d'organisations non gouvernementales dont Human Rights Watch, les auteurs de l'assassinat du président Melchior Ndadaye et d'une dizaine d'autres responsables politiques hutus en 1993 étaient des hauts gradés de l'armée.

Des exécutions sommaires de dirigeants politiques hutus se sont poursuivies tout au long des années 90. En réponse à la formation de mouvements rebelles hutus au milieu des années 90, l'armée a régulièrement réagi par des actes de brutalité envers la population civile.

L'armée a par exemple soutenu les milices civiles tutsies qui ont tué des centaines de Hutus dont des douzaines d'étudiants d'université, dans le cadre d'opérations de „ nettoyage ethnique « à Bujumbura de 1994 à 1996. Deux autres exemples sont les meurtres en 1997 de centaines voire de milliers de civils hutus qui ont refusé de rejoindre les camps de „ regroupement « forcés, décrits par Human Rights Watch dans son rapport en date de 1998 intitulé „ Proxy Targets : Civilians in the war in Burundi.

« („ Les civils pris pour cible : Une guerre civile par personnes interposées au Burundi «), de même que le massacre d'environ 200 civils Hutus non armés à Itaba à 2002. Ces massacres ont laissé derrière eux un pays jonché de fosses communes dont la plupart des corps n'ont jamais été exhumés.

Les membres du CNDD-FDD, le parti actuellement au pouvoir, ont massacré des centaines de civils tutsis déplacés à Bugendana (province de Gitega) et à Teza (province de Muramvya) en juillet 1996. En 1997, les rebelles du CNDD-FDD ont tué environ 100 personnes lors d'un service religieux à Kayogoro (province de Makamba).

Lors d'une attaque perpétrée en 1997 au petit séminaire de Buta (province de Bururi), après que les élèves hutu eurent refusé de céder aux ordres leur intimant de se séparer de leurs camarades de classe tutsis, les rebelles ont tué 34 étudiants des deux ethnies dont la plupart des enfants et six enseignants.

À Gatumba , Human Rights Watch avait fait état en 2004 d'alliances entre les FNL et les miliciens congolais dont le but était de massacrer les réfugiés congolais du groupe ethnique Banyamulenge considéré comme ayant des liens étroits avec l'ethnie tutsie.

En réponse au massacre, le gouvernement a délivré cette année-là des mandats d'arrêt contre Agathon Rwasa, le chef des FNL et son porte-parole de l'époque, Pasteur Habimana, mais ces mandats n'ont jamais été exécutés. Les résultats de l'enquête menée par le gouvernement sur ce massacre n'ont jamais été publiés.

The Truth can be buried and stomped into the ground where none can see, yet eventually it will, like a seed, break through the surface once again far more potent than ever, and Nothing can stop it. Truth can be suppressed for a "time", yet It cannot be destroyed. ==> Wolverine

A Candle For Remembering

Rwanda: Cartographie des crimes

Let us remember Our People

You can't stop thinking

Welcome to Home Truths

Everybody Hurts

KAGAME - GENOCIDAIRE

Paul Kagame admits ordering...

Why did Kagame this to me?

RPF committed the unspeakable

Inzira ndende

Search

Hutu Children & their Mums

Rwanda-rebranding

Ways To Get Rid of Kagame

Almighty God :Justice for US

Killing Hutus on daily basis

RPF Trade Mark: Akandoya

The Torture in Rwanda flourishes

Fighting For Our Freedom?

KAGAME VS JUSTICE

AS International

Profile

Genocide masterminded by RPF

Human and Civil Rights

Rwanda: A mapping of crimes

KIBEHO: Rwandan Auschwitz

Mass murderers C. Sankara

Stephen Sackur’s Hard Talk.

Prof. Allan C. Stam

Prof. Christian Davenport

The killing Fields - Part 1

The killing Fields - Part II

Daily bread for Rwandans

The killing Fields - Part III

Time has come: Regime change

Drame rwandais- justice impartiale

Sheltering 2,5 million refugees

Latest videos

Rwanda's Untold Story

Rwanda, un génocide en questions

Nombre de Visiteurs

Pages

Popular Posts - Last 7 days

Archives

Everything happens for a reason

Hutus didn't plan Tutsi Genocide

Your comment if you LIKE IT. All for Human rights