A Candle For Remembering
May this memorial candle lights up the historical past of our beloved Country: Rwanda, We love U so much. If Tears could build a stairway. And memories were a lane. I would walk right up to heaven. To bring you home again. No farewell words were spoken. No time to say goodbye. You were gone before I knew it And. Only Paul Kagame knows why. My heart still aches with sadness. And secret tears still flow. What It meant to lose you. No one will ever know.
Why did Kagame this to me?
Can't forget. He murdered my mother. What should be my reaction? FYI: the number of orphans in Rwanda has skyrocketed since the 1990's Kagame's invasion. Much higher numbers of orphans had and have no other option but joining FDLR fighters who are identified as children that have Lost their Parents in Kagame's Wars inside and outside of Rwanda.If someone killed your child/spouse/parent(s) would you seek justice or revenge? Deep insight: What would you do to the person who snuffed the life of someone I love beyond reason? Forgiving would bring me no solace. If you take what really matters to me, I will show you what really matters. NITUTIRWANAHO TUZASHIRA. IGIHE KIRAGEZE.If democracy is to sell one's motherland(Africa), for some zionits support, then I prefer the person who is ready to give all his live for his motherland. Viva President Putin!!!
RPF committed the unspeakable
The perverted RPF committed the UNSPEAKABLE.Two orphans, both against the Nazi world. Point is the fact that their parents' murder Kagame & his RPF held no shock in the Western world. Up to now, the Rwandan Hitler Kagame and his death squads still enjoy impunity inside and outside of Rwanda. What goes through someone's mind as they know RPF murdered their parents? A delayed punishment is actually an encouragement to crime, In Praise of the ongoing Bloodshed in Rwanda. “I always think I am a pro-peace person but if someone harmed someone near and dear to me, I don't think I could be so peaceful. I would like to believe that to seek justice could save millions of people living the African Great Lakes Region - I would devote myself to bringing the 'perp' along to a non-happy ending but would that be enough? You'd have to be in the situation I suppose before you could actually know how you would feel or what you would do”. Jean-Christophe Nizeyimana, Libre Penseur
Hutu Children & their Mums
Look at them ! How they are scared to death. Many Rwandan Hutu and Tutsi, Foreign human rights advocates, jounalists and and lawyers are now on Death Row Waiting to be murdered by Kagame and his RPF death squads. Be the last to know.
Almighty God :Justice for US
Hutu children's daily bread: Intimidation, Slavery, Sex abuses led by RPF criminals and Kagame, DMI: Every single day, there are more assassinations, imprisonment, brainwashing & disappearances. Do they have any chance to end this awful life?
Killing Hutus on daily basis
RPF targeted killings, very often in public areas. Killing Hutus on daily basis by Kagame's murderers and the RPF infamous death squads known as the "UNKNOWN WRONGDOERS"
RPF Trade Mark: Akandoya
Rape, torture and assassination and unslaving of hutu women. Genderside: Rape has always been used by kagame's RPF as a Weapon of War, the killings of Hutu women with the help of Local Defense Forces, DMI and the RPF military
The Torture in Rwanda flourishes
How torture flourishes across Rwanda despite extensive global monitoring
Fighting For Our Freedom?
We need Freedom, Liberation of our fatherland, Human rights respect, Mutual respect between the Hutu majority and the Tutsi minority
Friday, January 29, 2010
27-01-10
[If US foreign policy were really driven, as my President Obama has contended on a number of occasions, by Americans’ love of Freedom, Justice and Democracy, the privatized military adventures that brought death en masse to Yugoslavia and Rwanda would never have taken place. But because the US—and, really, the rest of the NATO-occupied world—has become a sort of nuclear-militarized ‘Bates Motel,’ where a morbid, narcissistic fantasy is being defended from encroachments by a persistent and unforgiving Reality with mass murder that is post facto charged to its victims, the swelling tide of judicial evidence that is breaking against the US/UK/EU/NATO-version of events has called forth ever-more hysterical and mawkishly sentimental apologias for this consensus false-consciousness.
Now Boris Tadic, the comprador president of Serbia, is trying to get his parliament to pass a resolution acknowledging his country’s responsibility for what he would have as the defining event of the Bosnian war: the 1995 Srebrenica genocide of 8,000 Muslim men and boys. In 2007 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Serbia was NOT responsible for this alleged mass crime, which is still legally unproven though all too frequently stipulated to.
And an equally cynical, if slightly less craven, attempt at puttying up the cracks in a steadily disintegrating false history of genocide has been filed by the current Kigali military dictatorship of Paul Kagame and his Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) with their issuing of the Report of the Mutsinzi Commission of Independent Experts on the 6 April 1994 missile strike that took the lives of all aboard the Rwandan president’s Falcon 50 executive jet, including two duly-elected African heads of state, and triggered the so-called genocide of 800,000 Tutsis and ‘moderate’ Hutus in 100 days.
Both these would-be genocides have been the primary concerns of the two UN ad hoc tribunals in The Hague (for Yugoslavia) and Arusha, Tanzania (for Rwanda), which share a single Appeals Chamber. The legal precedents for proving this crime of genocide are dodgy at best (Srebrenica was stipulated to after plea-bargained confessions from alleged collaborators dropped a guilty verdict on the ill-defended Drina Corps Commander, Radislav Kristic), and completely fatuous at worst (as in the ICTR Military 1 trial, where, after acquitting the so-called brains of the Rwandan Tutsi genocide, Col. Théoneste Bagosora, Major Aloys Ntabakuze and Lt-Col. Anatole Nsengiyumva, of any ‘planning or conspiracy’ in the Rwandan genocide, the three FAR officers were convicted of the ‘genocidal crimes of others’ on the basis of a June 2006 Appeals Chamber order to take ‘judicial notice’ of the crime.
That is to say, the trial chamber should consider the Rwandan genocide a ‘natural fact of Jesus,’ so widely believed in as to be beyond any need for evidentiary verification.
Here is another refutation of the Mutsinzi Report for you (yeah, you’re welcome.). This one’s from the family of the martyred Rwandan President, Juvénal Habyarimana—from his three sons, Léon, Bernard and Jean-Luc. When one considers the absolute UnReason to which the enemies of Historical Truth and Justice have had to resort—the morally bereft Philip Gourevitch’s racist discounting of the Rwandan revolution under President Habyarimana as a thirty-year (communist) genocide springs to mind here—the future of the thinking world seems truly dank. –mc]
The Habyarimana Family categorically rejects the Mutsinzi Report! (27 Jan. 2010)
Communiqué from the family of the late Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana concerning the recently issued Rwandan Report by “the Committee of independent experts” on the terrorist attack of 6 April 1994.
Following the release of the “Mutsinzi Report” on the 6 April 1994 attack which took the lives of 12 fathers from Rwanda, Burundi and France*; we, the family of Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana, feel an obligation to warn the public of the attempted manipulations of and diversions from the reality of this terrorist act that took our father from us. We want first of all to impeach the objectivity of this “Independent Committee of Experts,” whose use of the word ‘independent’ is a mere embellishment for its desperate need to get across.
Everyone knows [or should know—cm/p] that Mr. Jean Mutsinzi, head of the Commission, is a founding member of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF, currently holding state power) and the former Chief Justice of the Rwandan Supreme Court, also under the same RPF regime. His proximity to Paul Kagame is even better known and we do not expect that this Commission he leads is going to cast any suspicion on the party of which he is a founding member or on his colleagues and comrades-in-arms, including Kagame, himself, though they have been found, by international judicial investigations, to be the instigators and commanders of this attack.
We wish to draw the public’s attention to the fact that besides the dubious independence of this Rwandan Commission, it was only conceived in April 2007 and set up by the Rwandan government in November 2007 to begin its work in December of that year, or nearly 14 years after the fact. This is incontrovertible evidence of the indifference of the Rwandan government, since the RPF came to power, on the subject of finding the truth behind this terrorist act. This indifference was even confirmed by Paul Kagame, himself, at the end of 2006 when he stated on the international airwaves (on the BBC’s Hard Talk and on RF1) that he is not at all interested in clearing up the death of President Habyarimana; he said he could not care less about it.
The authorities in Kigali claim to have written to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) demanding the establishment of an international commission of inquiry and that their demand was never followed up on. We can just imagine the insistence with which the RPF administration must have made this demand! We believe that if the Kigali government had really wanted an international inquiry, that inquiry would have taken place and Paul Kagame would not be talking about how such an investigation into the death of President Habyarimana did not interest him at all. Moreover, out of respect for the Burundian people, whose president, Cyprien Ntaryamira, also died in the attack and, therefore, on Rwandan soil, this same government would normally have had to recognize its duty to see that such an international investigation were initiated.
It is well known that the Rwandan genocide was triggered by the 6 April 1994 attack. For 15 years, Paul Kagame and his forces have been unwilling to shed any light on this terrorist act, without which Rwanda and, doubtlessly, the whole of the Great Lakes region would never have descended into chaos. This paralysis due to the indifference of the Rwandan government has shown that the RPF wants to avoid, at all costs, that its responsibility in the genocide be revealed in any definitive way. Since 1998, a French anti-terrorist court has been investigating this attack.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Jean-Louis Gergorin et Imad Lahoud ont en revanche été reconnus coupables et condamnés à des peines de prison ferme.
• Dominique de Villepin, accusé de «complicité calomnieuse, complicité d'usage de faux, recel de vol et recel d'abus de confiance», a été relaxé. Le tribunal a estimé que l'ancien premier ministre avait été instrumentalisé par Jean-Louis Gergorin et qu'il n'existait pas de preuve que Dominique de Villepin ait agi de mauvaise foi dans le cadre de cette affaire. Un jugement qui va à l'encontre de la réquisition du parquet, qui réclamait 18 mois de prison avec sursis et 45.000 euros d'amende à son encontre.
«J'ai été blessé par l'image que l'on a voulu donner de la politique, de l'engagement qui a été le mien pendant 30 ans, et c'est vers l'avenir que je veux me tourner pour servir les Français et contribuer, dans un esprit de rassemblement, au redressement de la France», a déclaré Dominique de Villepin, à sa sortie du tribunal. «Je suis fier d'être le citoyen d'un pays, la France, où l'esprit d'indépendance reste vivant. Je n'ai aucune rancoeur, aucune rancune. Je veux tourner la page», a-t-il également assuré.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
26-01-10
Analyse du rapport Mutsinzi sur l’attentat du 6 avril 1994 contre l’avion présidentiel rwandais[1]
Filip Reyntjens
Résumé
Le rapport de la commission Mutsinzi a pour objet de démontrer que l’avion du président Habyarimana n’a pas été abattu par le FPR, comme l’a conclu l’instruction du juge français Bruguière, mais par des radicaux hutu proches de la principale victime. Le rapport soulève nombre de questions importantes. Le comité Mutsinzi se targue de son impartialité mais tous les commissaires sont membres du FPR, ce qui le rend juge et partie. Ceci est très clair dès les premières pages et se confirme à travers l’esnemble du rapport, puisque l’enquête ne va que dans une seule direction, celle des extrémistes hutu, alors que les données mettant en cause le FPR sont systématiquement ignorées. Le comité dit avoir interrogé des centaines de témoins, mais la crédibilité de leurs déclarations est sujette à caution. Parmi ceux identifiés, des dizaines sont des membres de l’ancienne armée gouvernementale FAR ; entendus dans un contexte de crainte d’arrestation ou pire et sachant très bien ce que ceux au pouvoir voulaient leur entendre dire, leurs témoignages ne sont guère probants. De nombreux exemples dans le rapport montrent que la méthode employée par le comité n’est pas sans soulever de sérieuses réserves: celui-ci présente d’abord des hypothèses non prouvées voire même des contrevérités comme des faits, et l’accumulation de ces « faits » permet ensuite de dégager la « vérité ». La conclusion à laquelle aboutit le comité ne trouve pas de fondement crédible dans les données qui se dégagent de l’enquête. Nous sommes dès lors aujourd’hui confrontés à deux « vérités » sur l’attentat : celle issue de l’instruction Bruguière et celle du rapport Mutsinzi. Les deux indiquent des suspects, même s’ils sont différents, et constatent qu’un crime a été commis. La façon naturelle pour aborder un problème pareil est de mener un débat contradictoire devant une juridiction pénale. Il semble cependant que tant le Rwanda que la France , souhaitant normaliser leurs relations, soient entrainés à sacrifier l’exigence de justice à l’opportunisme politique. Le peuple rwandais mérite mieux.
Le rapport de la commission Mutsinzi a pour objet de démontrer que l’avion du président Habyarimana n’a pas été abattu par le FPR, comme l’a conclu l’instruction du juge français Bruguière, mais par des radicaux hutu proches de la principale victime. Le rapport soulève nombre de questions importantes. Le comité Mutsinzi se targue de son impartialité mais tous les commissaires sont membres du FPR, ce qui le rend juge et partie. Ceci est très clair dès les premières pages et se confirme à travers l’esnemble du rapport, puisque l’enquête ne va que dans une seule direction, celle des extrémistes hutu, alors que les données mettant en cause le FPR sont systématiquement ignorées. Le comité dit avoir interrogé des centaines de témoins, mais la crédibilité de leurs déclarations est sujette à caution. Parmi ceux identifiés, des dizaines sont des membres de l’ancienne armée gouvernementale FAR ; entendus dans un contexte de crainte d’arrestation ou pire et sachant très bien ce que ceux au pouvoir voulaient leur entendre dire, leurs témoignages ne sont guère probants. De nombreux exemples dans le rapport montrent que la méthode employée par le comité n’est pas sans soulever de sérieuses réserves: celui-ci présente d’abord des hypothèses non prouvées voire même des contrevérités comme des faits, et l’accumulation de ces « faits » permet ensuite de dégager la « vérité ». La conclusion à laquelle aboutit le comité ne trouve pas de fondement crédible dans les données qui se dégagent de l’enquête. Nous sommes dès lors aujourd’hui confrontés à deux « vérités » sur l’attentat : celle issue de l’instruction Bruguière et celle du rapport Mutsinzi. Les deux indiquent des suspects, même s’ils sont différents, et constatent qu’un crime a été commis. La façon naturelle pour aborder un problème pareil est de mener un débat contradictoire devant une juridiction pénale. Il semble cependant que tant le Rwanda que la France , souhaitant normaliser leurs relations, soient entrainés à sacrifier l’exigence de justice à l’opportunisme politique. Le peuple rwandais mérite mieux.
Introduction
Le comité Mutsinzi est créé par arrêté du Premier Ministre le 16 avril 2007, treize ans après l’événement sur lequel il doit enquêter, mais cinq mois après la sortie, le 17 novembre 2006, de l’ordonnance de soit-communiqué du juge Bruguière auquel il doit fournir une réponse. Le rapport du comité, daté 20 avril 2009, est remis au gouvernement rwandais le 7 mai 2009. Un communiqué du conseil des ministres indique qu’il « sera rendu public dans les prochains jours »[2]. Mais la publication tarde, et l’on ne peut qu’émettre une hypothèse sur les raisons de ce retard. En effet, en novembre 2008, la mise en examen par la justice française de Rose Kabuye, une des neuf personnes visées par l’ordonnance, permet au Rwanda d’avoir accès au dossier d’instruction, et il est probable que le rapport a été adapté, voire augmenté à la lumière d’éléments du dossier parisien, qui y est cité à plusieurs reprises. Après une longue attente, la revue Continental Magazine tire profit d’une fuite et publie des extraits du rapport dans sa livraison du 4 décembre 2009, sept mois après le dépôt du texte[3]. Le rapport est disponible sur internet à partir du 7 janvier 2010, mais il n’est officiellement publié par le gouvernement que le 11 janvier.
AFP
26/01/2010
Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, une opposante rwandaise rentrée de son exil aux Pays-Bas il y a une dizaine de jours et candidate à l'élection présidentielle en août, a assuré être menacée par le pouvoir, dans un communiqué.
Mme Ingabire, qui est revenue au Rwanda pour faire enregistrer auprès des autorités son parti d'opposition, les Forces démocratiques unifiées (FDU), dénonce une "propagande haineuse orchestrée par ces médias politisés", dans ce communiqué rédigé en français."Ces extrémistes sont en train de mobiliser des associations de survivants du génocide (de 1994), de veuves, et d'autres pour des manifestations demandant au gouvernement de suspendre notre action et de me mettre en prison", poursuit-elle, "prenant à témoin la population rwandaise et la communauté internationale".
Dès son retour à Kigali, elle était allée déposer des gerbes de fleurs au mémorial national du génocide à Gisozi, à Kigali, d'où elle avait appelé à des poursuites judiciaires contre les éléments de l'ancienne rébellion tutsi du FPR (au pouvoir) ayant commis des massacres de Hutu en 1994.
24-01-2010
By Ann Garrison
On 01.20.2010, I published "Rwanda's 1994 genocide and 2010 elections," a Digital Journal report on Victoire Ingabiré Imuhoza's return to Rwanda, from 16 years in exile, to run as the FDU-Inkingi's presidential candidate in Rwanda's 2010 presidential elections. And, on the immediate outcry, in state run Rwandan media, including calls to prosecute and arrest Mrs. Ingabire for challenging the received history of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide.
On 01.23.2009, Mrs. Ingabire and the FDU-Inkingi Party issued a release calling the outcry a "cynical media lynching."
On 01.24.2010, I received this letter from Dr. Peter Erlinder, Lead Defense Council at the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda (ICTR):
"Ms. Garrison,
Thanks for the article. As Lead Defense Council at the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda (ICTR), I have had a chance to closely examine the violence associated with the RPF takeover of Rwanda, and have concluded that the "victors" have told the story of the 4-year war, and its aftermath.
During the past 7 years the Prosecutor at the ICTR, with the help of the Kagame government, US and UK have been unable to marshall evidence that the former military or government planned or conspired to kill civilians, much less Tutsi civilians.
In Feb 2009, the Judgment in the Military I (Bagosora) case found that NONE of the top four officers (including Bagosora) were guilty of conspiracy before or after the assassination of President Habyarimana.
In Feb 2009, the former ICTR Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte admitted in her memoirs that she had been ordered to bury evidence of RPF crimes, including Kagame's assassination of Habyarimana which had been known to her office in 1997...by the U.S. State Dept.
'The Great Rwanda Genocide-Coverup' is beginning to unravel....but the US, as you note, is deeply invested in maintaining a Prussian-style military presence in Central Africa. I have posted several articles and the - Rwanda Documents Project - has many of the contemporaneous confirming documents. -Dr. Peter Erlinder"
Dr. Erlinger and I then exchanged contact information, and spoke at some length over the phone, after which I read his essay, "The Great Rwanda Genocide Coverup" on the Global Research website.
Neither Dr. Erlinger nor Mrs. Ingabiré deny that genocidal mass murder occurred in Rwanda in 1994. They dispute only the one-sided history, in which former Hutu government and military are said to have conspired to commit genocide against Tutsis, and in which only Tutsis, not Hutus, were mass murdered.
"On February 9, 2009, the International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda issued its written judgment that the top four Hutu military officers were not guilty of conspiring to commit genocide against the Tutsi in 1994," says Dr. Erlinger.
"If a reporter had been there throughout the trial and seen this unfold, they would have understood that the prosecution had been unable to prove the central, received narrative of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide, which is that the Hutu military conspired, with elements of the government, to commit genocide against the Tutsi. The U.S., the UN, and the Rwandan Government did everything they could to prove the charges, but they could not."
However, by the time the received history of the Rwanda Genocide was finally refuted last year, Rwanda's ruling Rwandan Patriotic Front Party had already made it sacrosanct, and vaguely criminalized divergent histories, in Articles 13 and 33 of the 2003 Rwandan Constitution:
Article 13
The crime of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes do not have a period of limitation.
Revisionism, negationism and trivialisation of genocide are punishable by the law.
Article 33
Freedom of thought, opinion, conscience, religion, worship and the public manifestation thereof is guaranteed by the State in accordance with conditions determined by law.
Propagation of ethnic, regional, racial or discrimination or any other form of division is punishable by law.
Members of the RPF are calling for the prosecution and incarceration of FDU-Inkingi leader Victoire Ingabiré Umuhoza for "revisionism," because she dared say that war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed against Rwandan Hutus
However, unlike the Spanish Judge Fernando Andreu, in his indictment of 40 of Paul Kagame's top officers, Mrs. Ingabiré has not used the word "genocide" with regard to crimes against the Hutu, only "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity."
Rwandans both inside and outside her FDU-Inkingi Party marvel that Mrs. Ingabiré remains alive and free in Rwanda, and still speaking out, one week after returning to say what so many Rwandans think of every day but fear to say out loud.
"Something has changed," says J. Nepo Manirarora, the FDU-Inkingi's Representative in the United States. "Anyone who said what Mrs. Ingabiré said, up until now, would have disappeared, never to be seen again."
Manirarora believes that international attention, possibly pressure, must be keeping her safe, for now.
Pressure from who, where, why, and to what end? Manirarora doesn't know, but says "probably the U.S. and the UK, because they have power and influence in Rwanda."
On the morning of 01.21.2009, Mrs. Ingabiré met with Mr Jolke Oppewal, Head of the Development Cooperation at the Kingdom of the Netherlands Embassy in Kigali, and then went on to meet the British High Commissioner to Rwanda, Nicholas Cannon.
Something seems to have changed in Rwanda. It may be at last possible to speak of crimes against humanity and Hutu.
© Colored opinions
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
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Every government is at times tempted to violate human rights. To encourage governments to resist that temptation, the human rights movement seeks to raise the price of abuse—to shift the cost-benefit calculus behind a government’s actions.
The human rights movement’s ability to raise that price has grown substantially in recent years. Today, activists are capable of exposing abuses most anywhere in the world, shining an intense spotlight of shame on those responsible, rallying concerned governments and institutions to use their influence on behalf of victims, and in severe cases, persuading international prosecutors to bring abusers to justice. These are effective tools, and they have retained their power even as certain traditional allies wavered in their support for human rights. That effectiveness has spawned a reaction, and that reaction grew particularly intense in 2009.
Certain abusive governments, sometimes working together, sometimes pursuing parallel tracks, are engaged in an intense round of attacks on human rights defenders, organizations, and institutions. The aim is to silence the messenger, to deflect the pressure, to lessen the cost of committing human rights violations.
Head of state Paul Kagame
Head of government Bernard Makuza
Death penalty abolitionist for all crimes
Population 10 million
Life expectancy 45.2 years
Under-5 mortality (m/f) 199/173 per 1,000
Adult literacy 64.9 per cent
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Par Kanyarwanda VeritasRapport des Experts britanniques sur leur enquête faite du 17 au 24 février 2009.
Mise au point analytique de ce rapport
Ma mise au point porte sur les éléments suivants:
*La qualité des témoignages choisis par les experts sur lesquels ils étayent leur thèse;
*Les photos prises à partir des collines environnant la colline de Kanombe, relatives à la ligne d'approche et d'atterrissage de l'avion en provenance de l'Est;
*Les photos remises aux experts britanniques par le "Comité des Experts" Mutsinzi
*L'absence de certaines données techniques;
*La carte électronique fournie par le "Comité des Experts" Mutsinzi: Annexe M
22-01-2010
African heads of state declared 2010 the ‘Year of Peace and Security in Africa' for compelling reasons. Now they need to act, by coming up with long-term solutions for armed conflicts and stronger measures to protect civilians and ensure justice for victims of atrocities.
Aloys Habimana, Deputy Africa Director
African Union : Address Justice and Accountability
Incorporate “Civilian Protection” and “Rejection of Impunity” in Strategies to End Conflicts
"African heads of state declared 2010 the ‘Year of Peace and Security in Africa' for compelling reasons," said Aloys Habimana, deputy Africa director at Human Rights Watch. "Now they need to act, by coming up with long-term solutions for armed conflicts and stronger measures to protect civilians and ensure justice for victims of atrocities."
Thursday, January 21, 2010
"During his stay, from 20-22 January 2010, he will hold discussions with President Paul Kagame, and call on Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo. He is also scheduled to address a joint sitting of parliament.
In Kigali, Mr Sharma is expected to meet leaders of the Human Rights Commission, the National Council of Women, the National Youth Association, the Ombudsman’s Office, and the Electoral Commission."
Commonwealth Secretary-General Kamalesh Sharma arrived in Rwanda today for his maiden official visit to the Commonwealth’s newest member.
Soon after touching down in Kigali he laid a wreath at the genocide memorial built in remembrance of nearly a million ethnic Tutsis and allied moderate Hutus killed during the 1994 genocide.
During his stay, from 20-22 January 2010, he will hold discussions with President Paul Kagame, and call on Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo. He is also scheduled to address a joint sitting of parliament.
21-01-10
These primary level students will have to take up sciences if they are to be assured of university education, or they will have to score so highly, according to the latest government student bursuries scheme
Kigali: More than 1,500 freshman students are stranded at several local universities after they were abruptly informed this week that government will not be able to finance their education. The ministry of education however says the blame lies entirely with the students. As RNA reports, a new complicated government financing scheme could leave many fending for themselves.
At the National University of Rwanda in the south, some 500 freshman students reported for school last week and even went through the newly established week-long orientation period. The students had also registered along with hundreds of other freshmen – which essentially means they had been accepted as students at the institution.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
19-01-2010
[I have been following Madam Victoire's speech. I did not find anything that suggests denying Rwandan Genocide. She is categorical: it is painful that so many Tutsis perished in the genocide. But she rightly says that it is painful that the Hutu who lost their relatives during the genocide are not allowed to say anything.Is what Madam Ingabire saying wrong? It is an open and notorious knowledge that the Hutu were also victims of genocide!! It is an open secret that Genocide was used by the two parties (the Hutu extremists ans well as the Tutsi extremi sts) to the War as a military strategy.
Guys, imagine, of all people Mr. Mucyo saying that Madam Ingabire is telling lies!!!Oh God, I feel offended!! I personally saw Mucyo in May, 1994 for the first time. He was foreseeing collection of the Hutu around Save. All these Hutu were being collected for killing!!!!
The Assassination of President Habyarimana on 6 April 1994 - Report of the Mutsinzi "Experts Committee" - The Report is generally a collection of distortions of the truth, speculations, lies, paradoxes and antitheses.
Until President Habyarimana was assassinated, the RPF, especially its Radio Muhabura presented him as a monster whom the population was to be rid of. The RPF said Habyarimana was the only obstacle to the implementation of the Arusha Peace Agreement.
However, when he organized the ceremonies for swearing in the members of the Transitional Institutions, the RPF boycotted them. But now the report made by the same RPF is defending him, saying he was favorable to the Arusha agreement, and was killed by the extremists of his own party or the Army who were opposed to the agreement.
All the information known about the threat of the RPF against Habyarimana, and the security measures that were taken because of it, are turned around to say that the threat was from the Rwandan Armed Forces. Even the information given Habyarimana by Mobutu on 4 April 1994 in Gbadolite is said to concern the threat from the Rwandan Armed Forces.
On 4 April 1994, the retired Colonel Théoneste Bagosora, then Director of Cabinet in the Ministry of Defense, said that he was against President Habyarimana’s traveling to Dar-es-Salaam on 6 April 1994, opining that his airplane could be downed. That means he was
Monday, January 18, 2010
18-01-2009
People want to know who to trust and how to help Haiti. If people are dead set on supporting so-called relief in Haiti at this time, which I do not advise, then my advice is to support Paul Farmer's PARTNERS IN HEALTH (PIH) -- but only to do so with this caveat or condition:
When people donate to PIH they also send along an unequivocal demand to PIH that they (donors) will NOT EVER support PIH again unless PIH immediately makes a public statement calling for the arrest of the top 40 Rwandan Patriotic Front/Army (RPF/A) military government officials that PIH has been collaborating with in RWANDA, along with the CLINTONS in both Rwanda and HAITI. These top 40 officials have been indicted for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Rwanda by the courts in SPain and France and the international arrest warrants have been issued for all but President Paul Kagame, who as a sitting head of state is immune.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Le Comité National de l’APARECO s’est réuni ce samedi 21 novembre 2009 en vue d’analyser les documents officiels de l’État-major Général des Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (FARDC) relatifs à la «Réarticulation et COMDT des unités OPS KIMIA II Sud Kivu», et l’«organigramme OPS KIMIA II Sud Kivu», en vue d’en tirer toutes les conséquences qui s’imposent. Ces documents officiels, et donc secrets, détaillant la mise en place des officiers des forces armées congolaises déployées dans la zone de combat au Sud Kivu nous ont été communiqués par les officiers congolais patriotes et résistants au sein même de l’État-major Général des FARDC.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Posted by ColoredOpinions
[De Antwerpse burgemeester Patrick Janssens is voorstander van het invoeren van een huwelijksleeftijd. Dat zou volgens hem de kans verhogen dat jongeren van allochtone origine in het huwelijksbootje treden met iemand die onze taal en normen kent en dus geïntegreerd is.
Janssens deed die opmerkelijke uitspraak in het vakblad 'Samenleving en politiek'. Janssens noemt geen vaste leeftijd maar vindt het wel een item waarover om twee redenen moet nagedacht worden.
Ten eerste verhogen zo de kansen dat allochtonen trouwen met iemand "die de taal, de gebruiken, waarden en normen kent", meent de burgervader. "Bovendien wordt de familiale druk bij jongeren weggenomen om snel te trouwen."]
Partnerchoice Sign Of Integration?
It has become the consensus among the Dutch political elite to openly say that choosing a partner from abroad equals unwillingness to integrate. The small Dutch coaltion party ChristenUnie's former scientific institute director Roel Kuiper recently stated:
Sommige allochtone groepen zoeken nog altijd huwelijkspartners in het land van herkomst. "Is dat kiezen voor Nederland?"
Translated:
Some (allochtoon= someone with one parent born abroad) groups still look for a partner in their country of origin. "Is that choosing the Netherlands?"
First of all I remind the readers that Article 8 of the European Treaty of Human Rights asks all the European memberstates to respect the family life of all it's citizens. Governmen interference based on the above doubts concerning the willingness to integrate are not mentioned as grounds to refuse these fundamental rights.
Secondly, "choosing for the Netherlands" is exactedly what the partner from the country of origin is doing. She or he is intending to move to the Netherlands and live with his or her spouse here in the Netherlands.
Apparently "choosing for the Netherlands" means something else in Roel Kuiper's mind. Apparently a good citizen should choose a Dutch partner. And he praises the efforts of the Dutch integration minister Albayrak to limit to a maximum the number of foreign brides from Turkey and Maroc. On a sidenote, in practice this sounds very similar to the interference in family life during communism. The protection of family life by the European Treay of human rights and fundamental liberties (article 8) is clear: there are only very limited reasons government interference into family can be acceptable. The reason of not "choosing for the Netherlands" is certainly not one of them. Nobody moving from the UK that moves to the Netherlands can be forced to "choose for the Netherlands".
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
His Excellency Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero
President of the European Union
~~~
His Excellency, Dr. Herman Van Rompuy
President of the European Council
Rue de la Loi 175,
B-1048 Brussels
~~~
His Excellency, Dr. Jose Manuel Durao Barroso
President, European Commission
Rue de la loi 200
B- 1049 Brussels
~~~
His Excellency, Dr. Karel de Gutch
European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid
Berlaymont 10/165
B- 1049 Brussels
~~~
Your Excellencies:
RE: 2010 Presidential Elections and Human Rights in Rwanda
African SurViVors International (ASI) is an international nonprofit charitable organization based in The Netherlands. ASI deeply values Democracy and the principles of international Human Rights.
• The Declaration of the European Union on the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights stipulates:
Monday, January 11, 2010
11-01-2010
Marianne2.fr
[Dans son acte de traitrise, M. Bernard Kouchner est le premier dirigeant français qui s'en fiche et se moque de l'assassinat de ses compatriotes pour ses intérêts personnels et ceux de son président Nicolas Sarkozy.
Les Français regreteront toute leur vie pour avoir élu des étrangers à la direction de leur pays. Quelle honte! Le Général Charles de Gaulle est dans les oubliettes]. Kouchner s'en fiche. il n'est pas un élu des Français
**
Question
Qui croira en son humanisme lorsque il promène les Afghans au coeur de la France pendant que des veuves françaises crient Justice.
**
Le Ministre des Affaires étrangères a entamé sa tournée africaine par Kigali, où il a assisté, impassible à l'humiliation diplomatique de la France par le régime de Kagamé, qui poursuit son offensive afin d'obtenir l'annulation du jugement qui accuse ses collaborateurs de terrorisme.
[Dans son acte de traitrise, M. Bernard Kouchner est le premier dirigeant français qui s'en fiche et se moque de l'assassinat de ses compatriotes pour ses intérêts personnels et ceux de son président Nicolas Sarkozy.
Les Français regreteront toute leur vie pour avoir élu des étrangers à la direction de leur pays. Quelle honte! Le Général Charles de Gaulle est dans les oubliettes]. Kouchner s'en fiche. il n'est pas un élu des Français
**
Qui croira en son humanisme lorsque il promène les Afghans au coeur de la France pendant que des veuves françaises crient Justice.
**
Le Ministre des Affaires étrangères a entamé sa tournée africaine par Kigali, où il a assisté, impassible à l'humiliation diplomatique de la France par le régime de Kagamé, qui poursuit son offensive afin d'obtenir l'annulation du jugement qui accuse ses collaborateurs de terrorisme.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
09-01-2010
In Philip Gourevitch’s post to The New Yorker of 8 January 2010, he describes the just-released Mutsinzi Commission Report on the 6 April 1994 missile strike against the Rwandan presidential jet that killed two duly-elected Hutu heads of state, the presidents of Rwanda and Burundi, the Chief of Staff of the Rwandan Army, and their entourages, as well as the French flight crew, as ‘remarkable’ and ‘an extraordinary historical and political document.’ There’s a certain ‘last days of Bernie Madoff’ tone to Gourvitch’s writing—like he can hear history's Five-O coming up his back stairs and he’s got to put out this one last ‘the check is in the mail’ pitch rationalizing his long since debunked historical pyramid scheme on the Rwanda genocide of April-July 1994 before they book ‘im, Dano.
Even the ‘Dallaire fax,’ which is the source of the title to Gourevitch’s On the Town in Kigali gossip-novel, ‘We Wish to Inform You . . .’ has been shown by our own Chris Black to be a fabrication, long after the fact, of British MI6. His The New Yorker (sl)easy style, which glosses over historical irrationalities with bathos and lurid sentimentality, is not enough to hide just how bereft of any decent concern for the real victims his ‘victims justice’ agit-prop really is. His evidence-free insinuation that Mme Habyarimana aided and abetted in the murder of her husband, the President, and the others on board the Falcon 50, if not actionable, is certainly unspeakable.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(Atom)
AS International
SurViVors SPEAK OUT - Rights of Victims Seeking Justice and Compensation for the RPF Genocide. This is an Exciting Collaborative Project launched by The AS International Founder Jean-Christophe Nizeyimana, Economist and Human Rights Activist. Join US and Be the First to know about the Mastermind of the Rwandan Genocide Still At large and enjoing Impunity.