Sanctions: Zimbabwe tells US to 'go to hell'

[Tinoire]

Sanctions: Zimbabwe tells US to 'go to hell'

Zimbabwe's information minister has dismissed new US sanctions which target him and other members of President Robert Mugabe's ruling party, saying "imperialist" Washington could go to hell, a newspaper said on Thursday.

"These Americans who are pontificating about human rights and democracy would not recognise these things even if they hit them on their faces. So go and tell the imperialist to go to hell," Information Minister Jonathan Moyo was quoted as saying in Thursday's edition of the state-run Herald daily.

<snip>

Moyo won't be selling his produce to US

Moyo denied that he owned three farms included among the blacklisted Zimbabwe businesses, insisting he owned just one — but would not be selling his produce to the US.

"I am flattered that these hamburger-eating imperialists are interested in my tomatoes... but I am sending them to Mbare Musika," Moyo said, referring to a popular produce market in the capital Harare.

On Wednesday, US President George W. Bush renewed sanctions he imposed on Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe and other government officials one year ago for allegedly undermining democracy in the southern African country.

<snip>

http://africa.iafrica.com/c2cnews/307458.htm

I'm pretty clueless on Zimbabwe. Can anyone bring me up to speed?
The part about the tomatoes is too funny!

Peace

[JaySherman]

1. ROFLMFAO!!!

:wow: "Hamburger-eating imperialists." Now that's funny.

[Bundbuster]

2. "hamburger-eating imperialists"

Why didn't I think of that one?

"Bush renewed sanctions he imposed... for allegedly undermining democracy."

Squatter sanctions someone for UNDERMINING DEMOCRACY?? This is truly bizzaroWorld.

[Catherine Vincent]

3. Since Bush* took office, you notice all the remarks from

top people in government of other nations?

"Go to Hell"

"Bush is a Moron"

"Bush is an Idiot"

"Bush is an asshole"

...any others?

[Tinoire]

5. From the people of Haiti

"Bush is a terrorist"

It's remarkable isn't it? Never could I have imagined that such an evil man could have been pResident and show such blatant disrespect to the entire world.

[arewethereyet]

4. Zimbabwe is a corrupt mess

Robert Mugabe the president seized the farms of what was once the breadbasket of Africa and gave them out to his cronies, evicting the owners. They have ruined the crops and now his people and more in Africa starve as a result.

The slime needs killing in the worst way.

[Webster Green]

7. Why would the chimp have a problem with that?

Sounds like ChimpCo Inc. Standard Operating Procedure

[arewethereyet]

10. you have no idea

and you you mock the suffering. shameful.

[AP]

16. Zimbabwe was the breadbasket for Europe, and it actually wasn't bread.

It was tobacco.

Zimbabweans went hungry while, essentially, free land was used to grow things that were sold to European markets for huge profits which didn't flow back to the people of Zimbabe. Really, tobacco was the number one crop in Zimbabwe. They didn't even grow for the Zimbabwe markets. There was too much money to be made in Europe.

Now, many of the farms are being used to grow maize for Zimbabweans, and will generate wealth that circulates within Zimbabwe.

That's the point that the minister is making when he says that he's selling his tomatoes in the Harare markets rather than to McDonalds where they'll be slapped on top of a Royale with cheese in Amsterdam.

[dpibel]

60. This is really very tiring

What is the source of your information? If it's the US press, tell me this: Do you think you are getting the truth from the press about the Boosh administration? How about the economy? Did the press give you the truth about invading Iraq?

If you answered yes to these questions, I wonder what you think as you read the insane ravings on this message board.

But if you think you're not getting the truth from the media about those matters, why would you think you're getting the truth about Zimbabwe?

Here's a poser: There's been a huge drought in that part of Africa for the last 3 years or so. Botswana has required major food aid. Zambia has required major food aid. Namibia has required major food aid. Now tell me: Does the mighty Mugabe somehow control the weather for the whole area? I mean, jeez, maybe he is so powerful that he controls the weather in Zimbabwe, but how much power do we want to credit the man with?

Since everybody's Human Rights Watch crazy today, go to HRW and read their 2003 report on Zimbabwe. Even they say that the food shortages in Zimbabwe are the result of the drought, although they also say that the situation has been exacerbated by politicization of aid distribution.

While you're there, check out their report on the great carnage that Mugabe is causing. Didn't find it? Look real hard. Oops! It's not there!

Now about the tragic story of those "farms." Conjures up visions of courageous yeoman family farmers, don't it? Jist like yer ol' Uncle Jesse down ta Ioway.

Well, you could call those farms. You could call Bill Gate's mansion a house. These aren't little family farms. They're fricking plantations. They go on for miles. The blacks work them under conditions slightly better than the slaves had in the old American South.

And get this: Those "family farms" we're all shedding bitter tears about, because now Mugabe has ruint the breadbasket of Africa? They didn't produce food. They produced cash crops for export. Didja know that, until recently, Zimbabwe was the world's third-largest producer of tobacco? Where do you think they grew that? How much difference to the food supply do you suppose it makes if they're not growing tobacco any more?

And, just out of curiosity, how do you stack up the great monster Mugabe against Cecil Rhodes and his British pals? It's not much more than a century ago that the gang went in and dispossesed all the black farmers. And they didn't just kill a few of them. So I'm supposed to get all sad and think Mugabe is "slime" that "needs killing in the worst way"? I can only imagine what you would have said about Cecil Rhodes.

I honestly don't get the level of venom around here toward Mugabe, Castro, Chavez, and whoever is the demon d'jour. Mugabe stacks very low on the totem pole of demons, including quite a number who have been very fine friends of the US. So why are you so excited about him?

Good god, people. Let's clean the beams out of our own eyes before we start frothing about the motes in other people's. We've got serious election problems right here at home. We have an economy that's teetering on the brink. We have serious human rights violations, including violent suppression of civil demonstrations. We have a madman pretending to run the country who is himself run by a cabal of madmen.

Answer me this question if you will. Who was responsible for more needless death in 2003: Robert Mugabe or George W. Bush. If you think it was Mugabe, I'm sorry for you.

If you want another point of view on Zimbabwe (I know, I know -- it's biased, unlike your unbiased sources) try going to www.swans.com. But I kinda think you won't (and I'm not really using that "you" ad hominem as much as a litote for all the rabid Mugabe haters here), because, by god, you know what you know.

BTW: For anyone who's quoting the BBC as the word of god on this matter, stop and think. Those brave embattled white homesteaders down Zimbabwe way came from ____________? Not that that would possibly make any difference.

[AP]

61. Excellent post (where's the venom for Nepal royalty, by the way?)

By the, curiously (IIRC), in the heat of the drought, Britain came through with food aid for Zimbabwe which saved them from misery. Major props for Blair. He could have let them starve and then pretended it was because of land reform. Instead, he behaved ethically.

[AP]

62. Another thing to note: I thin the most liberal estimates of deaths caused

by land reform and in the elections is at about 20 (verified). Meanwhile, HUNDREDS were killed in the last Nigerian elections (IIRC). No outrage regarding Nigeria. Why? Because they're playing ball with American and European neoliberals. They're willing to let Shell run amok all over Ogoniland.

[Gulf Coast J]

105. I would read read what journalists in Zimbabwe had to say...

But that thug Mugabe kicked them all out.

As for Human Rights Watch, this report (http://hrw.org/press/2003/06/zimbabwe060903.htm) talks about the repression of the opposition party. This report (http://hrw.org/backgrounder/africa/zimbabwe060603.htm) states: This background briefing, based on over three weeks of research by Human Rights Watch, finds that Zimbabwe has suffered a serious breakdown in law and order, resulting in major violations of human rights. This environment has been created largely by actions of the ranking government officials and state security forces.

It is sickening that so many people would support Mugabe simply because his corrupt regime stands up to President Bush.

[dpibel]

131. A monster! A monster, I tell ya!

Look. The US has no difficulty supporting dictatorial monsters, as long as they're our dictatorial monsters.

Just exactly what are those "human rights violations"? They are, for the most part, suppression of political dissent. You may not have noticed that we have a pretty good dose of that right here in the last bastion of true freedom and democracy. Ever heard of first amendment zones? Ever been out on the street facing cops in full Darth Vader (I have, and I can tell you that it makes you think twice about participating in dissent).

It's just plain hysteria to make Mugabe out to be the second coming of Saddam Hussein (and it was pure hysteria to believe that Hussein was the second coming of Hitler).

I ask it again: What political leader in the world (and, hence, what country) holds the record for the last two years of killing innocent civilians? For that matter, what country holds the post-WWII record in the same category (clue: It's not Saddam Hussein and it's not even Pol Pot).

Just to help you out: This is not calling anybody a good guy. It's an issue of motes and beams.

[Zinfandel]

128. EXCELLENT FUCKING POST!!!!!

BUBBLE HEADS, TOO LAZY TO FIND THE TRUTH, KNOW NOTHINGS, PONTIFICATING ON DU WHILE STILL WATCHING TELEVISION NEWS AND GETTING THEIR INFORMATION FROM US NEWSPAPERS STUPID FUCKS...MAKE ME SICK!!

[Tinoire]

163. Jeez! If I am ever in a position to say this: You're hired!!!!!! n/t

:wow:


:thumbsup:

[ParanoidPat]

160. Give it a rest, most of us here know how to....

......Google for answers. Try reading the Human Rights Watch report on Zimbabwe. Even they acknowledge that there is plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the land reform issue. Take some time and do a Google search for 'Zimbabwe, land reform' and read a few of the 180,000 hits. You might learn something. :)

As far as "The slime needs killing in the worst way." is concerned, all I can say is that this is the kind of crap sentiment I would expect to find on such fine sites as Freerepublic. It says an awful lot about you.

[Isome]

6. Where should we begin?

It's so long.

A very sketchy outline, from my very biased perspective . . .

Mugabe has been throwing white farmers off the land and turning it over to Black Zimbaweans. The farmers had years to comply with an edict of sorts that mandated the relinquishing of farmland to the indigenous Zimbaweans. They didn't, and Mugabe don't play the radio.

Naturally, it caused (still causes) quite an uproar.

The general tone of the press has been the same as anything you've read about Haiti and Venezuela. Mugabe has been suppressing the press, there is government-sanctioned (or ignored) violence, etc.

His detractors say the Black Zimbaweans don't know how to keep up with the large commercial farms and will only run them into the ground.

If I remember correctly, several years back there was a brouhaha over the use of bio-engineered seeds from Monsanto being rejected by Black Zimbaweans. With those seeds comes the requirement of using Monsanto's pesticides and they wanted no part of either. They were told either they use the seeds or face sanctions.

It's quite a story. Let me go find you some links.

[AP]

14. Another part of this story:

In the 80s, I believe, Zimbabwe (rightfully) believed that Western press coverage's major aim in Africa was to undermine independent Africa by portraying Black governments as backwards and incomptentent. Mugabe had a policy that required that western reporters had to be based in Zimbabwe if the government were going to cooperate with them.

I think it was specifically aimed at the NY Times whose Africa reporter was based in Johannesburg and had a reputation for having a soft-spot for Apartheid. The Times wrote a letter begging Zimbabwe to reverse the policy (rather than simply hire a local stringer or send a staff member to Harare). Zimbabwe replied that they had good reasons for having that policy and they'd prefer not to make exceptions for the New York Times.

[Virginian]

8. Mugabe has been in power too long and has become corrupt.

He did everything in his power to get re-elected. He arranged for there to be plenty of polling places where he was still popular and an inadequate number of polling places where he was unpopular. People stood in line for three days to vote against him, and some still didn't get through the line. There was lots of intimidation toward voters who were against him.
He arrests the members of the opposition party for anything. A week in jail is the same as a death sentence with the epidemic of AIDS in Africa. He just had his opponent arrested for attempted assassination.

I don't know much, but it isn't a nice place for anyone to live these days.

[AP]

17. The colonizers have been controling Africa for too long and they're evil.

Although the white hats aren't wearing the whitest hats, it isn't a tough call here if you're deciding which of two sides is the side with the better claim to doing the right thing.

[Isome]

9. Here's one...

...While white farmers continue to shed crocodile tears, it is a matter of record that in a land of more than 11 million people, the whites who make up less than 2% of the population, control more than 60% of the arable land. It is also a matter of record that although 95% of the white farmers have received notice to quit the land, those whose land has been taken over have all received compensation, and of the 500 who have agreed to leave peacefully some have also already been paid.

It seems the height of hypocrisy that the world should be focused on the plight and non-payment of compensation to white farmers, without as much as a mention of the savagery with which the Black African owners were massacred and their lands seized without compensation. The word Bulawayo, the second largest city in Zimbabwe, is an Ndebele word for "slaughter," and it refers to the savagery of the British settlers, including the infamous Cecil Rhodes who had crushed the attempt by the indigenes to fight back, leading King Lobengula to swallow poison rather than be captured. Or should we forget the savagery of the bestial Sir Frederick Carrington, who had publicly advocated that the entire Ndebele race should be forcefully removed or be exterminated.

—from blackcommentator (of course)

http://www.blackcommentator.com/10_zimbabwe.html

[Isome]

11. Here's a short part...

It's an interview:

Mr. Mugabe also directed sharp criticism at the recently formed Movement for Democratic Change, the opposition party viewed by most analysts as the first serious threat to ZANU P-F's uninterrupted monopoly on
power for the past 20 years since Zimbabwe's independence from Britain. He called M-D-C leaders amateurs and suggested they are no match for the ruling party.

/// MUGABE ACT TWO ///

We are masters at the game and the M-D-C, they are amateurish. Well, amateurs and professionals play different games, don't they?

/// END ACTUALITY ///

Mr. Mugabe decried the violence that has claimed the lives of M-D-C supporters as well as white farm owners in recent weeks. But he suggested the opposition and white commercial interests are conspiring against his government and have brought trouble on themselves.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/2000/05/000503-zim2.htm

[KharmaTrain]

12. Hate To Say...* Is On The Right Side For Once

Mugabe has been a thug and murderer for over 30 years. He promised to establish a democracy in Zimbabwe after 25 years of brutal civil war and then set up his own corrupt autocracy on the level of Saddam. His political opponents are ruthlessly oppressed. Lately, he's been repossessing white farms, including the murder of the farmers to intimidate others, and giving it to his political cronies.

If this regime is serious about helping oppressed people, those in Zimbabwe have long suffered...from Cecil Rhodes to Ian Smith to Mugabe.

Like Iraq, Zimbabwe is loaded in natural resources...including Gold and Diamonds...but unlike Saddam, Mugabe's played ball with enough Western countries that no one except for the British pay attention to what he does.

A lot of this rhetoric comes right out of the 60's/70's Communist liberation stuff...backed by the Soviets and Cubans...that led to some of the funniest double-speak and analogies ever put to words.

[mikehiggins]

54. Hey, great! Why don't we invade them then?

That's all it takes nowadays to bring down the military power of the United States on your head, right?

[Zynx]

78. Mugabe is a one-bullet regime change.

Knock him down, and the rest will fall. Other African countries that are stable, if there are any in that part, can deal with rebuilding.

[AP]

94. Sounds like Eisenhower's Africa policy. Usually the bullets were aimed

at people who wanted the wealth of their nations to circulate within their country's borders FIRST before some of it flowed to bank accounts abroad.

[muriel_volestrangler]

13. Zimbabwe defends 'secret camps'

Zimbabwe has denied setting up secret camps to train youths how to torture and kill opposition supporters.
Youth Minister Ambrose Mutinhiri dismissed a BBC documentary on the youth camps as "unfounded rubbish".

He said the camps trained youths in technical skills, health, disaster management and entrepreneurship.

The Panorama documentary showed youths claiming they were trained to torture or kill members of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3537583.stm

The transcript of the BBC program:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/panorama/transcripts/secretsofthecamps.txt

[AP]

15. The BBC's Africa coverage is absurd.

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. Which international news organisations are left

that Mugabe hasn't banned from the country yet?

[AP]

19. Milton G. Allimadi

The Hearts of Darkness: How White Writers Created the Racist Image of Africa
by Milton G. Allimadi

[muriel_volestrangler]

20. So what does Allimadi say about the BBC's coverage of Zimbabwe?

And can you find a news organisation that hasn't been banend by Mugabe?

[AP]

21. He explains why Zimbabwe wouldn't deal w/ reporters not based in Zimbabwe

who report on Zimbabwe, and it made sense, and he describes BBC's Africa coverage as being incredibly biased, which I didn't need to be told by Allimadi. It's perfectly obvious.

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. Of course the real reason

Is Mugabe is a dictator (heavy on the dic) and he is concerned the worldwide media will be honest about this.

[AP]

23. Read the book.

[Muddleoftheroad]

25. Darn, I was waiting for the The Passion of Mugabe

It portrays him as a Christ figure making millions of his own people starve so he can feed them with loaves and fishes.

Nothing the book can say will change my opinion of Mugabe in all his evil.

[AP]

27. It might help you understand why Bush only cares about Mugabe

now.

[Muddleoftheroad]

33. It is marketing

Nevertheless, I am happy somebody cares about him at all.

[dpibel]

67. And that pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

"Nothing the book can say will change my opinion of Mugabe in all his evil."

In that book or anywhere else, right?

What is the source of your unshakeable knowledge, please? I'd like to have that kind of certainty.

[Muddleoftheroad]

71. Lots of ongoing reading

Call it a summary of knowledge.

We all reach conclusions in life. I reached this one some time ago. If I had my way, the U.S. would treat Mugabe just like Castro.

[Solomon]

87. The Passion of Mugabe. About as stupid as the

Passion of Christ.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. You mean like these 2 correspondents

who were so based in Zimbabwe that their families were there?

http://www.rsf.org/rsf/uk/html/afrique/cplp01/lp01/190201.html

Enlighten us to the bleedin' obvious, then.

[AP]

28. It's way too obvious.

The British don't want the Jamaicans and everyone else getting any ideas about land reform.

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. So your proof that the BBC is biased

is your assertion about 'the British' policy on land reform. Wow, you have the logical ability of Dubya. Get back to us when you have some evidence.

[AP]

30. As a criticism, that makes no sense.

The proof of BBC's bias is in BBC's reporting. I was simply explaining their motivation.

[AP]

31. In all the coverage of Zimbabwe on BBC, I've heard a Zimbabwean defend

Zimbabwe ONCE -- his name is George Shire. Apparently, he's been interviewed three times on the BBC.

Here's a transcrip of one of the interviews:

http://www.ndi.org/front_page/fomunyoh_bbc.asp

[AP]

32. Here's part of the interview:

George Shire: Well, uh, first of all, that, uh, I think we need to, as a matter of record, say that for the, between the 23 years of Mugabe's presidency, two-thirds of that time, Robert Mugabe was everybody's best customer indeed. Went and received all sorts of international accolades for the way in which he led Zimbabwe. The crisis in Zimbabwe begins at that moment in which the land distribution program begins to emerge in earnest because it touches on the interest of modern national commercial farmers and the international community, and so on. Now, everybody can see that. The other thing to say is that, you know, what is happening in Zimbabwe now is uh, comes out of a facilitator's framework which is, produced a five-point plan: One, much of the acknowledgement is spent on two political parties in Zimbabwe and to do so requires Morgan Tsvangirai on the one hand, and Robert Mugabe on the other. To recognize themselves, each other, as leaders of political institutions. So this is not about Robert Mugabe personally, it's to do with the respect of political institutions in the country.

Jones: Let me just put your first point to Dr. Formunyoh, though: That, when President Mugabe addressed the colonial legacy, if you like, the land question, then the problems began, which suggests that it is not just leadership, there are broader issues at stake.

Fomunyoh: Obviously there are broader issues at stake. But, you know, part of leadership is the ability to be able to address the issues that you are confronted once you are elected into public office. Leaders do not choose their problems in advance, they, however, are tested; the mettle of leadership is tested in the way in which they address these problems. Obviously, land reform is the number one issue in Zimbabwe. And my sense is that every Zimbabwean, black or white, ruling party or opposition party, agrees on the need to undertake serious land reform. The problem is, the question then is, how do you get there? Is land reform synonymous with one individual sticking to power at all costs? And here we have President Mugabe, who served his country well in the past, and I agree with that, who led a liberation movement, and who is going to be remembered, most likely, not for what he did to liberate Zimbabwe, but for the way in which he has brought the country down because of the electoral dispute.

Shire: But, Robert Mugabe will be remembered for having delivered, at last, the land question, which has dominated Zimbabwean politics for the last hundred years. Which is still pivotal to understand ideologically how the region works. So, he'll become a symbol of that. Robert Mugabe has not been working in isolation as an individual, he's been working with others. And if you look at successes, they far outweigh the minuses. He's not an angel, but he certainly is not the devil.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. So, do you think that the dearth of defenders of Mugabe

is because he is in fact almost universally unpopular; because the BBC and most other news organisations are banned from the country, so they can't even interview normal Zimbabweans; or because they are ignoring Zimbabweans who do think he's an honest man and a responsible democrat?

If the latter, I'd ask you to point me to reporters who aren't part of the state-owned Zimbabwean media who are reporting facts different to those of the 'absurd' and 'obviously biased' BBC.

[AP]

35. I think Shire has some interesting things to say, that don't get

said enough in the press, and I don't think he's all that hard to find, and I have to wonder why his opinions get ghettoized.

He had a really interesting debate with Frederick (?) Forsythe which Shire won handily. It'd be nice to get a little more of that, or at least hear the ideas that were expressed in that debate reach the news reporting.

Instead, it's like 4 stories out of thousands on Zimbabwe in which a little truth seeps out.

[noiretextatique]

57. thanks, AP

it's really quite astounding...how much this issue is colored by that.

[AP]

58. In that book, the author refers to a study of racist representations of...

...Africa in European literature. For 500 years of friendly trade with Africa, racism was not prevelant in European representations of Africa.

However, when they started dealing in slaves and trying to rip off the wealth of Africa, racism became the overwhelming feature of European perception of Africa.

Economic oppression and racism -- they go hand in glove. How can you justify what the west does to African economies without using racism to justify it?

[ParanoidPat]

162. WOW! I wasn't aware that the School of the Americas.....

.....had an African annex! :evilgrin:

[OneTwentyoNine]

24. HEY!! They can't say those nasty things about Bush and his administration

Only WE can say those nasty things about Bush and his administration!!

Damn people speaking their minds these days......


David

[historian]

36. overseeing elections

Zimbabwe was the first to offer overseers to make sure the florida elections were conducted under fair conditions. He said that if something like that had happened in another country, they would have been declared an unstable third world country and in go the marines!!!
I am so sick of our hypocrisy.

[Darranar]

37. Human Rights Watch doesn't like him very much...

I think the US position may actually be somewhat justified for once.

On edit: Here's a few links.

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/01/zim0129.htm

http://www.hrw.org/press/1999/feb/zimltr.htm

http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/Z/ZIMBABWE/ZIMBABWE904.PDF

http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/Z/ZIMBABWE/ZIMBABWE90N.PDF

http://www.hrw.org/press/1999/feb/zim0209.htm

[AP]

39. What does HRW think about land redistribution?

That's what this is all about.

Nobody cared until he started redistributing land because that's actually going to work to bring Zimbabwe out of poverty and will challenge the hegemony of the former colonizers.

[Darranar]

40. Okay, nice to know...

However, land redistribution does not excuse human rights violations.

[AP]

41. Opposing land reform and nothing else doesn't justify a coup.

[Darranar]

42. I don't know much about this...

those human rights reports are pretty much the extent of my knowledge.

I agree with you that it doesn't justify a coup. Has a coup occured? Is one being planned? Is there evidence of US involvement?

[AP]

43. The opposition party is funded by Europeans and the CIA has admitted

that they're trying to work with anti-Mugabe forces.

It's not very different from Haiti and Venezuela.

[Darranar]

44. Except...

Mugabe seems quite a bit more brutal than either Aristide or Chavez.

[Darranar]

45. Well, it appears that he isn't really a dictator...

The CIA World Factbook calls the government of Zimbabwe a parliamentary democracy and states that Mugabe got 56.2% of the vote.

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. but their elections are condemned

as neither free nor fair.
http://www.zmag.org/content/Africa/moyo_zimbabwe.cfm

[AP]

50. The BBC predicted that Zimbabwe would close the polls in the city

and understaff the polls out in the country.

On the day of the election BBC could find no long lines in the country and Mugabe opened the polls in the city -- where the opposition party was reportedly stronger -- and extra day.

They found no credible evidence of election fraud and none of their predictions came true.

[muriel_volestrangler]

72. Election fraud

On election days, the capacity of polling stations in Harare was wholly inadequate. Despite advance warnings, the Registrar General decided to carry out elections with as many as 5,300 voters per polling station on average in Harare and Chitungwiza. In all other provinces, excepting Bulawayo, the number was around 1,000 per polling station.
On the first election day voters in Harare and Chitungwiza turned out in extremely high numbers. In the morning of the first day of polls up to 4,000 voters had queued up to vote. After three days of voting only 2,000 to 3,500 voters per polling station had been able to cast their votes. Despite a clear requirement in the Electoral Act to allow all voters in line at the close of the polls to vote, the Registrar General decided to close all polling stations at around 10 pm on day two and at 7 pm on the extended third day of voting. The thousands of voters still in line both days were sent away by the police. Many of the voters who were turned away had been waiting for ten to twenty hours in vain. Inexplicably, the polling did not start until 11 am on the third day, despite polling material and staff being present from the morning onwards at all polling stations visited by our teams. The irregular closure of the polling stations on the second and third days together with the late opening on the third day removed the last chance to offer all voters a fair chance to cast their vote within a reasonable time.
In the areas outside of Harare the voting was carried out in an efficient manner. However, a number of incidents of intimidation were reported, including harassment of polling agents and domestic observers, resulting in an atmosphere of fear surrounding the electoral process. Inside the polling stations visited by our observers, the technical part of the process was handled in an orderly manner, and staff at the polling stations showed a high degree of commitment to achieving a correct voting process.
After the count, one can clearly conclude that the violations were on such a scale that it could have affected the outcome of the elections. That the turnout in some provinces rose drastically compared to previous elections, must at least in part be attributed to the high level of intimidation of voters reported in these areas prior to and during the poll. In Harare where the opposition draws its strongest support, voters were not given a fair chance to cast their ballot.

http://www.humanrights.uio.no/forskning/publ/nr/2002/05/nordem_report-Executiv.html

[AP]

74. Save it for Nigeria. Nigeria has REAL election fraud, but nobody complains

about Nigeria becaue the Nigerian government whores it up for big oil.

The West ONLY complains about election fraud in Africa when it produces the wrong results (ie, the results which threaten corporate profits).

[noiretextatique]

53. what about our elections?

how is the hell can americans whine about 'free elections' some place else considering what happened in 2000? how can bush talk about democracy ANYWHERE given his own illegitimacy?

[AP]

56. And notice that we complain about elections abroad when they result

in spreading wealth down from large American corporations to the people (in Zimbabwe they're threatening the profits of supermarkets, investment banks, and ADM) but we don't say a damn thing when democracy is destroyed in order to flow wealth up to those entities (as in the US or in Nepal).

[noiretextatique]

68. i do notice that also

perhaps if we showed as much concern about disenfranchisement in our own country...oh wait, most of those people in florida were probably felons anyway :eyes:

[Gulf Coast J]

106. There is a difference between spreading wealth and destroying it

The only people who have benefited from Mugabe's thugocracy are his cronies. The average citizen is much worse off.

[AP]

107. Not true. A RACIST news story from a year ago described how

thousands of poor people have moved onto the land, taken possession, and are using it to feed themselves. Of course, the article meant to describe it like it was chaos. But anyone who understood anything about economics or even took Property II in law school would interpret that discription as an important first step in creating a functioning, wealth-producing society. (The people the artcile described were, a year earlier, starving and poor because thier land was stolen from them without compensation and being used to transfer wealth created from it to European bank accounts).

Also, Stiglitz says the only way to create middle class wealth is through land reform.

In fact, I heard on the CBC a very convincing criticism of the failures of micro-loan programs which supported Stiglitz's argument.

[Gulf Coast J]

110. Look, what is going on in Zimbabwe is beyond the realm of land reform...

According to The Economist, The GDP of Zimbabwe is expected to shrink by 9% this year. It has fallen each of the four previous years. There are over three million Zimbabweans who have fled to South Africa. There are over half a million in other neighboring countries. Botswana is building a fence to keep Zimbabweans from coming in. Inflation is over 300%!!! Please don't tell me that Zimbabwe is on the right path to prosperity for all.

The farms aren't producing at capacity and there will be no outside investment precisely because the rule of law has been so subverted by the regime. Would you give anyone in that country a loan?

There can be land reform without the thuggery and brutality brought on by Mugabe. Stalin's and Mao's principles might have been grounded in ideals that would improve the life of their people, but their methods amounted to genocide. The same will be written of Zimbabwe.

[AP]

111. Yeah. According to Stiglitz, equitable distribution of land is the only

way to create functioning societies, and create real wealth for the middle class.

Zimbabwe's economy was falling apart due to the irrationalities of post-colonialism. It's outrageous to steal land and then have all the wealth produced from it shipped off to Europe. That only works for so long, and then it comes crumbling down.

What works is the New Deal and, more or less, Keynes.

[Gulf Coast J]

That doesn't mean that Mugabe isn't a brutal thug...

The underlying policy of land redistribution could be great, that isn't what I'm debating. But the way it's being done by Mugabe is destroying his country, causing wave after wave of emigrants and is making everyone worse off but a handful of cronies. One can be opposed to colonialism and still think Mugabe is a modern day Stalin. People here are creating a false choice between Mugabe and white dominated society. It's extremely frustrating.

To compare the Zimbabwe of today to FDR's New Deal is a stretch to say the least.

[AP]

121. Everybody loved Mugabe until he started reforming land ownership in...

...earnest.

Why is he suddenly so bad?

Because of land reform.

[muriel_volestrangler]

116. CBC report on Zimbabwean land reform

"Let us beat our swords into ploughshares," he said, but the whites retreated in large part to their clubs and sports fields, ignoring the political process while retaining control of the economy. "The hand of friendship was ignored," Mugabe now says in his private and political discussions.
...
Both British and American governments of the day offered to buy land from willing white settlers who could not accept reconciliation and a fund was established. Many sold out and left for Australia and apartheid South Africa, some say because of the similarity in racial policies and the pleasant climate.

Those who stayed did so because they believed in the economic future of the country. But the land issue was never solved.

Some land was purchased by the land fund, originally estimated at $2 billion US, but few peasants were resettled while hundreds of abandoned and expropriated white farms ended up in the hands of cabinet ministers, senior government officials and wealthy indigenous businessmen. The British and Americans cut their losses and money, alleging widespread corruption. To date, the elites have the land and fewer than 70,000 peasants have been resettled, most without the necessary infrastructure to work the huge commercial farms from the 12-hectare plots they have been allocated.
...
Some 80 farms were acquired after the 1992 Act, however, most of these too ended up in the hands of the new black elites. Election after election has been fought on the land issue with ZANU-PF promising more and more to peasants. With a huge following in the communal lands, Mugabe was never in doubt about his victories, but after the violence and promises of these campaigns, the land issue always faded again into the background.

After the 1995 election, a group of young, well-educated lawyers, academics, economists and businesspeople began to agitate for a new constitution and a new politics. Land was to be the key issue and plans were drawn up by the bushel to begin a serious resettlement of peasants. Even the white CFU participated, promising their expertise and the turnover of under-utilized land. They also pointed out that the government itself was the greatest under-utilizer with "millions of acres lying idle while the elites who own the land live in urban mansions.
...
Another land conference was cobbled together by ZANU-PF in 1998, this time with a massive appeal to the international donor community for funds to develop the unused land and that which would be purchased from whites willing to sell. Land, once again, was Mugabe's first response to serious political opposition. The conference generated a lot of talk but very little money to buy white farmland. Donors insisted on a fair process for purchase and sale, Mugabe was hesitant. As the effort fizzled, donors backed further away and land was still beyond the grasp of the poor peasants.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/zimbabwe/land.html

[AP]

122. Yes. Mugabe placated West with half-measures and false starts for years.

That's why he was never a problem until 2000.

Last I remember reading, 30,000 new landowners have taken title to transferred land in the last two years.

One of the problems before 2000 was the white farmers would only give up the worst land. If Mugabe's cronies got that land, they got shafted.

[Karenina]

69. Indeed. No American need discuss it

until that stinking mountain of Pachyderm fecal matter is removed from the sitting room. Will those in Florida, whose voting rights were unceremoniously stripped from them in 2000, be able to vote in November? IIRC, they weren't in 02 when Jebby took over his fiefdom...

[noiretextatique]

138. my point exactly....WE are hardly in a f'ng position

to be whining about "free elections" and "democracy" some place else (ALWAYS where BROWN and BLACK people live, btw)...until the lily-white theives of 2000 have their lily-white asses in jail.
i don't think i can say it more plainly.

[muriel_volestrangler]

142. Since I'm not an American

am I allowed to criticise?

[Karenina]

150. I also find it interesting

how the word "thug" seems to stick in pale-skinned Americans' minds in reference to melanin-rich leaders, while their own necks are getting stomped by some *pasty white jackboots. :shrug:

[hellhathnofury]

167. I didn't know Ukranians were "BROWN and BLACK"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x38916

For reference, I made that before I saw your post.

Also...Colin Powell and Condi are "lily-white"? Know your BushCo.

:hi:

[muriel_volestrangler]

48. Compare the Amnesty reports for the 3 countries

and decide which shows the greater amount of systematic government abuse of human rights.

http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Zwe-summary-eng

http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Hti-summary-eng

http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/ven-summary-eng

What section of the liberal press supports Mugabe? You can find plenty that support Aristide and Chavez.

[noiretextatique]

137. you forgot the USA...that is the comparsion

americans should be making.

[muriel_volestrangler]

145. AP was saying Zimbabwe is the same

as Haiti and Venezuela. That's why I linked the 3 reports - to show that Mugabe is running his country as a police state, unlike Aristide or Chavez. Support for those 2 should not translate into support for Mugabe.

[AP]

147. I'm saying it's the same battle: wealth redistribution vs wealth ....

...concentration.

It's about doing what's best for the people or doing what's best for Wall St.

It's about New Dealism vs neoliberalism.

That's what's the same about these three countries.

[lapislzi]

46. British stirring up things in Mugabe's cabinet

last year, I think. There have been attempts.

There are two separate issues here, which we as analysts can't allow to muddy each other.

The issue of land reform in Zimbabwe is basically a sound idea, and a reasonable counter to the neocolonialist culture which grew up in Zim in the 1980s and 1990s, with nods from Britain and South Africa. Redistibution of land and resources was a primary tenet of the Bush War (no, not THAT bush!) of the late '70s.

Is Mugabe the man to do it? That's a different issue, and I think the jury is still out on it. There is no question that the man's human rights record is abysmal, and the secrecy of the current regime makes one deeply suspicious.

The British play on this; Mugabe's been crucified by the British press; not a week goes by that I don't receive some twaddle from ex-colonials somewhere in the world lamenting the poor whites of Zimbabwe. Is it in the U.S.'s interest to play along with Britain on this one? Probably.

[AP]

51. Thank you for saying this. It's pretty much how I feel. Mugabe is a bad

man who's doing one thing right. Nobody cared when he was a bad man destabilizing the regioun, but the colonizers are pissed off that he's going reform land ownership which is going to bring forward the date when Zimbabwe can stand up to the ex-colonizers by about 50 years.

[Tinoire]

164. Thanks Lapislzi

Your hammer seems on a straight path to the nail. Thanks

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. "How to Kill a Country"

Mugabe decided on what he called "fast-track land reform" only in February of 2000, after he got shocking results in a constitutional referendum: though he controlled the media, the schools, the police, and the army, voters rejected a constitution he put forth to increase his power even further. A new movement was afoot in Zimbabwe: the Movement for Democratic Change—a coalition of civic groups, labor unions, constitutional reformers, and heretofore marginal opposition parties. Mugabe blamed the whites and their farm workers (who, although they together made up only 15 percent of the electorate, were enough to tip the scales) for the growth of the MDC—and for his humiliating rebuff.

So he played the race card and the land card. "If white settlers just took the land from us without paying for it," the President declared, "we can, in a similar way, just take it from them without paying for it." In 1896 Africans had suffered huge casualties in an eighteen-month rebellion against British pioneers known as the chimurenga, or "liberation war." The war that brought Zimbabwean blacks self-rule was known as the second chimurenga. In the immediate aftermath of his referendum defeat Mugabe announced a third chimurenga, invoking a valiant history to animate a violent, country-wide land grab.

Initially, the farmers held their ground, but it became clear after several white farmers were murdered that they were too few and Mugabe's regime was too determined. Of the 4,000 large-scale commercial farmers in business three years ago, all but 500 have been forced off their land. Most Zimbabweans (including white farmers) say that land reform was both necessary and inevitable. The tragedy of Mugabe's approach is that it has harmed those whom a well-ordered, selective redistribution program could and should have helped. Generally the farms have not been given to black farm managers or farm workers. Indeed, because of their association with the opposition, more than a million farm workers and their dependents have been displaced, and they are now at grave risk of starvation. In fact, the beneficiaries of the land seizures are, with few exceptions, ruling-party officials and friends of the President's. Although Mugabe's people seem to view the possession of farms as a sign of status (the Minister of Home Affairs has five; the Minister of Information has three; Mugabe's wife, Grace, and scores of influential party members and their relatives have two each), these elites don't have the experience, the equipment, or, apparently, the desire to run them. About 130,000 formerly landless peasants helped the ruling elites to take over the farms, but now that the dirty work is done, many of them are themselves being expelled.

The drop-off in agricultural production is staggering. Maize farming, which yielded more than 1.5 million tons annually before 2000, is this year expected to generate just 500,000 tons. Wheat production, which stood at 309,000 tons in 2000, will hover at 27,000 tons this year. Tobacco production, too, which at 265,000 tons accounted for nearly a third of the total foreign-currency earnings in 2000, has tumbled, to about 66,000 tons in 2003.

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2003/12/power.htm

[AP]

52. The is all pro-imperialist crap.

Most of the land transferred in Zimbabwe was tobacco and exotic vegetable (artichoke?) farmland which was used to sell low-cost produce to European supermarkets and high prices.

The land is only now being used to sustain Zimbabweans. And OF COURSE the transition out of colonialism is going to be traumatic. Do you know how traumatic it was getting into it? Just because there will be trauma doesn't mean it's wrong. (See, e.g., the Civil War -- when there's a lot of wealth at stake, greedy people will do fucked-up shit to protect it.)

[dpibel]

64. Are you motherbiting kidding me?

I am supposed to believe anything that contains this line:

In 1896 Africans had suffered huge casualties in an eighteen-month rebellion against British pioneers known as the chimurenga, or "liberation war."

British pioneers? PIONEERS? Oh, shades of conestogas. Did they travel on the African Oregon trail.

A REBELLION???? Why those uppity blacks! Daring to take on the brave British pioneers.

How about: In 1896 the British used overwhelming superiority in armaments to slaughter thousands of Africans who had the cheek to object to having their land stolen. Would that work for anybody?

Y'know, Ms. Volestrangler, I read your posts with interest, and I agree with you a lot of the time (not that I expect that to make any difference to you). But we sure are on different pages for this one.

[muriel_volestrangler]

70. The point is that Mugabe is pretending that

his current land grab has the same honour as the struggle against the British in the 1890s, or the white minority in the 1970s. Since he started losing popularity, he's trying to make himself out as a fighter for his people.
But the problem is that he transfers the land to his supporters, not to the common people (and especially not to the black farm workers, who have the experience to run the farms productively). This is resulting in consistent food shortages; he abuses the food aid sent in, by witholding it from areas that voted against him.
He bans external reporters, and harrasses independent Zimbabwean newspapers who dare to write critically of him.
He tortures and kills.
http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/zwe-summary-eng

[AP]

73. It's not a land grab. Both sides agreed the land would be returned 20 ...

... years ago. People are just being asked to keep their word.

Thousands of people have taken title to the land.

There was one extremely racists article about land reform last year which said that if you drive around Zimbabwe today, you see poor people on these farms feeding themeselves from what they can grow and hunt.

EXACTLY!!! That's what it SHOULD be used for. The article meant to argue that it's good when there's a huge high-tech farm on the land, and bad when poor, starving people have control.

However, that big farm was, more likely than not, growing tobacco which was sold to Europeans and the profits of which were deposited in a Swiss Bank Account.

It's absolutely right that the people of Zimbabwe who were made poor becuase their land was stolen from them are now using the land to make Zimbabweans happier and wealthier.

Furthermore, this article itself contradicted iteself. It also tried to pretend that only Mugabe cronies were getting land. Yet they described poor people using the land. So, it looks like either Mugabe has a lot of poor friends, or they're not telling the whole truth.

[lapislzi]

75. Ask yourself: has there been ANY international support

...for land reform in Zim? Answer? A resounding NO. Why? Mugabe is the guy the British love to hate. He wrested their beloved Cecil Rhodes imperial dream from them in the 1980s. He could promote dangerous ideas of self-rule throughout the commonwealth. We can't have that.

Having said that, and before you flambe me, I have no interest in defending Mugabe's domestic policies. He took a sound idea (land reform) and implemented it in the most corrupt, destructive way possible.

However (and this is a big however), if there had been international support for land reform back in the early days of the Mugabe government, there's a good chance it could have been steered in the right direction. But what did they get? Monsanto, and incessant sniping from the British press. The British (and the rest of the world by extension) refused to support what they couldn't control. All you need to do is look to the west, at Botswana, to see what a well-run ex-colonial republic can look like.

[AP]

76. Actually, his land reform has gone way smoother than one should

reasonably expect. They gave the farmers 20 years to prepare. They paid for the land, except for the final round of people who resisted (which is logical -- you don't want to reward that behavior).

And the legal procedure they used wasn't so far removed from an eviction proceeding we'd use in the US or UK.

I once tried to track down every verifiable death from the land transfer, and could only find 16. Half of them came in a single event when when very well armed farmers went out and got into a shoot-out with some black Zimbabweans.

Considering how many people died when the land was last 'transferred', that's pretty remarkable.

One thing about colonialism is that it was so disruptive to get into it, it's crazy to think you can get out of it without ruffling feathers.

[lapislzi]

79. Again, you can look to the British press

to understand why the "horror" for whites has been so exaggerated. In traditionally expat outposts like South Africa and Australia, there is a subculture of loathing for all things Mugabe, and ex-Rhodesians have fueled this for decades in the British press. And the rest of the world, in deference to the British, has kept its distance from Zimbabwe.

Note how utterly absent was the South African defense force throughout the entire period. Granted, it certainly had its share of woes, but it managed to find the wherewithal to launch several incursions into Angola, and to foment instability in Mozambique.

[AP]

80. The British loved Mugabe for a long time. Ian Smith lives on a huge

farm which Mugabe gave him, and his life is undisturbed.

Mugabe was extremely conciliatory with the British and carried on the conduct of his goverment in a way that made Britain very happy...until Zimbabwe embarked in earnest upon reforming land ownership.

[boobooday]

38. Every man got a right to decide his own destiny

And in this judgement there is no partiality
So arm in arms with arms
We fight this little struggle
Cause that's the only way we can
Overcome a little trouble . . .

Zimbabwe, by Bob Marley

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[noiretextatique]

55. get the fuck outta here...how is the hell can the dimwit

mention "undermining democracy" without his head exploding?
2% of the population owning 60% of the land...is that what he means by "democracy?"

[DebJ]

59. maybe, but he sure has Dubya's number!

[noiretextatique]

63. dumbya is the dimwit

"On Wednesday, US President George W. Bush renewed sanctions he imposed on Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe and other government officials one year ago for allegedly undermining democracy in the southern African country."

in a just world, his head would explode.

[hellhathnofury]

65. Here's some reading on Mugabe:

####
June 3, 2003

OPEN LETTER TO ZIMBABWEAN PRESIDENT ROBERT MUGABE

Dear President Mugabe,


We are writing today to implore you to seek a peaceful and just solution to your country's escalating national crisis. Those signed below are Americans of Africa descent - many of them representing major organizations of civil society in the United States - who have worked for decades to support the liberation movements of Africa and the governments that followed independence which promoted and protected the interests of all of their nation's people. We form part of an honorable tradition of progressive solidarity with the struggles for decolonization, and against apartheid and imperialism in Africa.

We have strong historical ties to the liberation movements in Zimbabwe, which included material and political support, as well as opposition to U.S. government policies that supported white minority rule. In independent Zimbabwe we have sought to maintain progressive ties with the political party and government that arose from the freedom struggle. At the same time our progressive ties have grown with institutions of civil society, especially the labor movement, women's organizations, faith communities, human rights organizations, students, the independent media and progressive intellectuals. In Zimbabwe today, all of our relations and our deep empathy and understanding of events there require that we stand in solidarity with those feeling the pain and suffering caused by the abuse of their rights, violence and intolerance, economic deprivation and hunger, and landlessness and discrimination.

We do not need to recount here the details of the increasing intolerant, repressive and violent policies of your government over the past 3 years, nor the devastating consequences of those policies. The use of repressive legislation does not, in our respectful view, render such actions justifiable or moral, because of their presumed "legality". We represent a long tradition of opposition to unjust laws. We have previously expressed to your representative in Washington, DC, our humanitarian concerns about the impact of the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Zimbabwe as well as that of the famine triggered by the recent southern African drought and exacerbated by the economic policies and food distribution practices of your government. We have shared our concerns that land redistribution in Zimbabwe be used to fight the poverty of the majority and not to promote the narrow interests of another minority. But most of all, we have communicated clearly that we view the political repression underway in Zimbabwe as intolerable and in complete contradiction of the values and principles that were both the foundation of your liberation struggle and of our solidarity with that struggle.

Today, Mr. President we call upon yourself and those among the ruling party who truly value democracy, and wish to protect the future of all of Zimbabwe's citizens to take extraordinary steps to end your country's political crisis and place it upon a path toward peace. We ask that you initiate an unconditional dialogue with the political opposition in Zimbabwe and representatives of civil society aimed at ending this impasse. We call upon you to seek the diplomatic intervention of appropriately concerned African states and institutions, particularly South Africa and Nigeria, and SADC and the African Union, to assist in the mediation of Zimbabwe's civil conflict.

Mr. President, the non-violent civil disobedience that is growing in your country - such as that which took place on Mother's day in Bulawayo - is increasingly met with police brutality and excessive force. Such trends in the abuse of human rights are not only unacceptable, they are threats to your country's stability and they are undermining the economic and political development your people desire and deserve. We believe that a peaceful solution is possible for Zimbabwe if you find a way to work with others in and outside of your government to create an effective process for a transition to a more broadly supported government upholding the democratic rights of all.

Sincerely yours in struggle,

William Lucy, President, Coalition of Black Trade Unionists

Willie Baker, Executive Vice President, Coalition of Black Trade Unionists

Salih Booker, Executive Director, Africa Action

Bill Fletcher, Jr., President, TransAfrica Forum

Horace G. Dawson Jr., Director Ralph J. Bunche International Affairs Center, Howard University

Patricia Ann Ford, Executive Vice President, Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

Julianne Malveaux, TransAfrica Forum Board Member

Rev Justus Y. Reeves, Executive Director Missions Ministry, Progressive National Baptist Convention

Coordinating Committee, Black Radical Congress

http://www.africaaction.org/desk/pr0306a.htm

[hellhathnofury]

112. Any reason this is being ignored?

[dpibel]

134. To answer your question

I have no idea why it's being ignored.

I thank you for posting it: It essentially supports my point of view that, while far less than a saintly ideal, Mugabe is not even close to the monster requiring instant termination that you and other folk on this thread are making him out to be.

Mugabe needs to pay more attention to AIDS. OK. That's cool. Does his failure to do so make him a monster? How about our Fierce Warrior Chieftain who has cut off funding for family planning clinics in Africa because they might perform abortions? Who's da monstah?

You all Mugabe haters keep accusing him of causing mass starvation. But these folks say that the principal reason for hunger in Zimbabwe is the regional drought. Mugabe (if you believe the reports) hasn't helped the situation. But there's been all this talk about how the cause of the famine in Zimbabwe is throwing all those brave white farmers off their little family farms. This letter, which you apparently find credible, says otherwise.

The big question I have for you, which is the same I have for all the rabid Mugabe haters here (and I may well have posed it to you) is this: what, exactly is the cause of your ire? You're really that angry because, as in the US, political dissent is increasingly met with police violence? Perhaps you haven't heard about mass arrests, free use of pepper spray, and escalating police violence associated with political demonstrations in the US.

If you all think Mugabe needs immediate killing based on the information in this letter and at Amnesty must be wishing for the deaths of a whole slew of heads of state. Are you? If you're not, what's so special about Mugabe?

[muriel_volestrangler]

135. I'd just like him locked up

and here's why:
More than 1,000 cases of torture and ill-treatment were reported during 2002. Victims were primarily targeted for their perceived or real affiliation with the political opposition. Among those responsible were members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police, the CIO and the Zimbabwe National Army.

ZANU-PF youth militia, trained in national youth service camps established throughout the country, were deployed to suburbs and rural areas in the run-up to elections and were implicated in the widespread harassment and torture of the political opposition. The number of reported cases of rape and other forms of sexual torture perpetrated against women suspected of supporting the political opposition increased. This intimidation and political violence created a climate of fear, and of impunity for perpetrators of human rights abuses.
...
Following the elections, widespread reports emerged of the government's politicization of the distribution of international food aid and the deliberate denial of food aid by ZANU-PF officials to MDC members and supporters. Youth militia stationed outside long queues to buy grain reportedly targeted MDC supporters for assaults and intimidation to prevent them from getting food.

From the Amnesty report for 2002. Rape, torture, violence and denial of food. Yes, there's lots of other bastards out there; I'd like them locked up too. I don't see them excused on DU, because of a dubious program of land confiscation.

[AP]

136. But the land reform is the reason there is resistance to Mugabe in the ...

...first place.

If there were no land reform, there'd be no mercenaires, there'd be no MDC financed by overseas donations, running on a platform of ending the land reform, and there'd be no BS propagandizing by the media.

And what is it about land reform that's encouraged so much resistance? It's the fact that's probably not that dubious and it sets the rong example for the rest of the world.

You know why the US crushed Allende? Because they wanted to send a message to the rest of the developing world. And why did they need to do that? Because Allende was going to make Chile work properly, to the cost of Wall St banks.

[muriel_volestrangler]

139. It's the other way round

if there had been no MDC looking like taking over from Mugabe, there'd have been no fast track land reform, or shutting down newspapers, torture etc. The land reform is dubious because far too much ends up in the hands of Mugabe's cronies; but he paints it as 'giving land to the people' to attempt to shore up his support. It's the torture and killings that are the big problem. And in a country where the government tries to control all the media, and ban foreign news organisations, you know that the propaganda comes overwhelmingly from Mugabe.

[AP]

146. IIRC, MDC was formed after the land reform program looked like

it was starting in earnest.

And I guarantee you the Europeans financing it are financing it BECAUSE they promise to end land reform.

Do you have links as to how much is ending up in Mugabe's cronies hands. Seriously, last I saw, 30,000 people were getting titles to land. The ONLY crony I've seen identified by name in any story was Mugabe's wife, but that article was so full of BS, it's not clear that it was an accurate account of what was going on.

As for torture and killings, there are several posts in this thread addressing that, and I've yet to see someone come up with good retort to the questions repeatedly asked of people about their outrage.

As for propganda, most of the propaganda I see is coming from NPR, BBC, and the west, and much of it is very inconsistent. There was one story about how awful it was that a rhinoceraus habitat was being turned into a farm. It was so bizarre to read an argument that it's more important for rhinocerauses to have retreats than for Africans to have farmland to feed themselves.

[muriel_volestrangler]

148. Human Rights Watch history

While these debates were ongoing, many of those demanding economic and political reform came together in 1997 to form the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), an alliance of civil society groups which initiated a process of debate on the need for a new constitution. In 1999, representatives of a wide range of interest groups formed a new political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). The creation of the MDC was the first time in Zimbabwe's post-independence history that an opposition party had succeeded in creating a genuinely national movement, and thus represented a real threat to the ruling party. In particular, the MDC was the first party to attract support from white Zimbabweans, and received significant financial support from the white business and commercial farming communities. In addition to calling for national renewal on a range of issues, the MDC promised "people-driven land reform." The party committed itself to purchasing "6-7 million of land for resettlement through the acquisition of underutilised, derelict and multiple owned land, land already identified and designated for the purpose and corruptly acquired land."19 At the time, the government's policy was eventually to acquire five million hectares of land from the commercial farming sector for redistribution.20

In an attempt to coopt the demand for constitutional reform, in May 1999 President Mugabe created an official government commission, consisting of almost 400 members, to rewrite the constitution. A large number of public meetings was held to solicit public views, though these were ultimately largely ignored. A draft constitution, including provisions that would greatly strengthen the executive at the expense of parliament, and extend the powers of the government to acquire land compulsorily without compensation, was adopted against the protests of a substantial number of members of the constitutional commission and submitted to a national referendum in February 2000.21 The MDC campaigned for a "no" vote. The government was defeated in the referendum, by 53 percent of the 1.3 million votes cast.

In the face of the challenge represented by the MDC and other increasingly outspoken critics of his government, President Mugabe and Zanu-PF responded on two fronts. On the one hand, the government revived the call for radical land redistribution to fulfill the promises made at independence, giving official blessing to a new wave of land occupations led by members of the War Veterans Association that had rapidly accelerated following the referendum result. Members of the army were also involved in coordinating and facilitating these occupations. Capitalizing on the fact that land reform remains a powerful issue for any political party to invoke, Zanu-PF campaigned for the June 2000 parliamentary elections on the slogan "Land is the Economy; the Economy is Land."22 The government implemented the provisions of the rejected draft constitution relating to land acquisition through parliament, adding a new section 16A to the existing constitution. The amendment, which became law in April 2000, significantly extended the grounds on which land could be compulsorily acquired and absolved the government from providing compensation, except for improvements; instead, the "former colonial power" should provide any compensation.23 The Land Acquisition Act was further amended in May 2000, using the power given to the president to enact six month temporary legislation under the Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act of 1986; and again November, through parliament in a two-day process. The stated aim was to "clarify and streamline various procedural aspects of the acquisition process and to prescribe new compensation rules in accordance with the Constitution."24 On the other hand, the ruling party mobilized violence against the political opposition.
...
The Zimbabwean government formally announced the "fast track" resettlement program in July 2000

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/zimbabwe/ZimLand0302-02.htm

[AP]

149. The key part:

In particular, the MDC was the first party to attract support from white Zimbabweans, and received significant financial support from the white business and commercial farming communities. In addition to calling for national renewal on a range of issues, the MDC promised "people-driven land reform."

During the election, I read the MDC web site, and they were firmly against land reform. They wanted to halt Mugabe's program, and they didnd't offer an alternative other than to say that it would be evaluated.

Another thing I remember about the MDC, which HRW doesn't note: a lot of the funding came from Europe (and I think Mugabe passed a law to prevent overseas poltical donations).

So you have to ask yourself why the MDC exists if Europeands, white businesses and commericial famers (and, apparently, the CIA) are underwriting their activities.

[hellhathnofury]

66. dupe, this is happening a lot with my connection.

[Zynx]

77. I am simply stunned at what I am hearing here.

People here are actually defending Robert Mugabe?! Why don't you defend Kim Jong-Il or Joseph Stalin or Pol Pot or some right-wing thugs like Efrain Rios Montt or Jorge Videla?

Any objective evidence shows that Mugabe does not hold legitimate elections, is a brutal tyrant, and is ruining the country economically with massive inflation and shortages of food. Opposition leaders in elections have been assasinated for the love of God! Those here who support liberal values are making extreme contradictions when supporting a brutal tyrant.

[WoodrowFan]

81. but but but

but he's a left wing tyrant! That always attracts a small corp of the dedicated lefties who will ignore or explain away any possible sin.

[Zynx]

92. Indeed. Some probably don't think Mao was that bad.

[dpibel]

159. This actually works for you? See colors much?

As a first matter, if you find dedicated lefties so shallow and repugnant, I would very respectfully ask you: WTF are you doing here? Did you mistake this for the chat room at the DLC website? It is surpassing odd, I think, to ramble around here using left-wing as an epithet.

But I'm more interested in this: Do you really live in a world where the only choices are saint or demon?

There is a bizarre and, so far as the deafening silence which has met my requests for clarification demonstrates, inexplicabe hatred of Robert Mugabe here. People say he should be killed right away. People comfortably lump him with Joe Stalin and Pol Pot. What's that all about? As I've said in other posts, assuming that every single accusation made about Mugabe here is true, he's just plain farm league amongst tyrants and oppressors. As AP has pointed out, he doesn't hold a candle to the Nigerians.

But here's my big question for you: How do you distinguish what you are doing -- claiming that any attempt to moderate the venom is merely crazed leftists supporting a crazed leftist -- from what you claim that the crazed leftists are doing? You seem terribly comfortable dismissing out of hand any words coming from the "dedicated lefties." Is that any different from your claim that dedicated lefties will support any leftist tyrant?

Isn't there just the slightest possibility that there's a middle ground? I see no claim by anyone that Mugabe is perfect, a saint, the greatest thing since sliced bread, or any such thing. All I'm saying, all AP is saying, all the other "dedicated lefties" are saying is this: Mugabe falls short of the glory of god, but he's not the monster y'all are making him out to be.

Do I think that the former general manager of the Texas Rangers is a demon? No I don't. Do I think he heads the current leaderboard for killing innocent civilians? Well, as a matter of fact I do. So will you please explain to me why I'm supposed to be so much angrier with Robert Mugabe than I am with the Fierce Warrior Chieftain? Or does even saying such a thing make me a dedicated leftie tyrant defender?

See, there's this area called the middle ground. Try to find it some time.

[AP]

161. Your posts kick ass.

[Tinoire]

165. Damn. You're not only hired but.. uh.. name your salary & benefits! n/t

[dpibel]

169. Thanks to both of you

Edited to: delete a stray "d" and a useless "just," and to add a sentence to the land paragraph

I really do find all of this perplexing. All these people who, by god, know what they know. But they won't tell me how they know it.

If you're interested, here's an excellent, albeit long, article on the recent history of Zimbabwe: http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html#31
I suppose it's terribly biased, although it's footnoted like all hell to those mainstream media sources that are giving us such reliable information about Chavez.

Couple of points I'd forgotten: Zimbabwe's economy was doing very well until, in 1991, the World Bank imposed one of those very helpful economic restructuring plans, after which, as is customary, the economy went directly in the crapper. In 2001, Mugabe declared the ESAP a dead letter. That's when the shit really started to hit the fan -- the IMF cut off all aid to the country, and the big West started putting the screws to the country.

The article points out that the 2002 elections, about which our fellow DUers are so sad, were certified by observers from South Africa, Namibia, and Nigeria, all of whom declared the elections free and transparent. Of course, that is no doubt a demonstration of those, umm, well, you know people sticking together to try to embarass the enlightened folks in the umm, y'know, different countries. Because they only live to embarrass the USofA, doncha know?

I think the land issue is the one that's easiest to get your average news reader all excited about. Evil Africans Brutally Oust White Family Farmers! And the two -- ESAP and land -- are two parts of the same issue: making sure the wealth of a backward and benighted country ends up where it belongs, in the hands of the frontward and bedayed.

But since I don't know what these people are so exercised about, I'm just speculating. There's one poster whom, IIRC, is really, really worried that Chavez is going to turn Venezuela all commie, and probably invade forthwith, so he's probably especially worried that Zimbabwe might go commie, and then we'd be getting it from both directions. As for the rest, who knows? The lame "lookit the Amnesty reports!" just doesn't get it done. Has any of them yet explained why those Amnesty reports are so horrifying. I think I've read the whole thread, and I haven't seen it.

Anyway, that article is a good one, and Swans has a nice collection of articles, if you've got the time and inclination.

[AP]

82. I don't see anyone defending Mugabe. But I'm calling this like it is:

it's about land reform.

[Zynx]

89. He's killed rival opposition leaders.

That is unacceptable for a country mascarading as a democracy. Besides, the land reform has been a disaster and corrupt as hell.

[Tinoire]

98. Wellstone? Kennedy? Malcolm X? Martin Luther King?

It seems that's just the nature of the beast in politics. Manly men doing manly things (sarcasm of course).

I do not see how we can demand perfection from the countries which have natural resources & labor in which we're interested without demanding it from ourselves first.

[AP]

101. That's part of Stiglitz's argument in The Roaring 90s.

Part of the hypocrisy of neoliberalism is that we asked (and ask) other countries to engage in policies that we would never inflict on Americans because we know they don't work.

What they work to do is transfer huge amounts of wealth to American corporations.

And that's what this Zimbabwe issue is all about. It's about huge profit margins for corproate farms and supermarket chains in Europe, and huge profits for American investment banks. But it's not so much about Zimbabwe, since the hourse is out of the barn (it may not be easy to go backwards now, although I don't underestimate the power of capital). It's about making sure Zimbabwe doesn't set an example for the rest of the third world.

[Tinoire]

104. Just like Haiti, Venezuela or Cuba

The Red Scare all over again. And again the fear is caused by those who would dare try to put their own people over corporate profit.

Ah the things we don't think of when we empty those cute little packets of sugar into our coffee.

There is a heart-wrenching book called "Bitter Sugar" by Maurice Lemoine about the 10 year old kidnapped Haitian children slaving (and I mean slaving) away on the Dominican sugar plantations. Their bitter tears sweeten our coffee.

The US, despite pictures and film, has been unable to hear their cries because the corporate profits are too big.

http://nwo.media.xs2.net/articles/86_04haitisugar.html It illustrates a very good case in point.

I swear, I become more and more ashamed of the First World with each passing day.

[noiretextatique]

140. absolutely...and amazingly, people who should know better

keep falling for it. please tell me WHY only people like aristide, mugabe, chavez, and hussein are referred to a "thugs," while too many refer the the unelected SOCIOPATH in the white house as "president." not ashamed: i am FURIOUS.

[noiretextatique]

141. absolutely...and amazingly, people who should know better

keep falling for it. please tell me WHY only people like aristide, mugabe, chavez, and hussein are referred to a "thugs," while too many refer the the unelected SOCIOPATH in the white house as "president." not ashamed: i am FURIOUS.

[AP]

99. Land reform is probably working.

If it weren't, big business wouldn't be working overtime to discredit what's going on over there.

Under JFK, the CIA assassinated Patrice Llumumb, members of the South Vietnemese government, and many others. Would you have tolerated a well-funded KGB effort and a global labor movement to overthrow JFK and ensure that president of the USA was someone who didn't pull shit like that.

I guess that analogy doesn't really work, because there really is no equivalent opposite of the way corporations try to dominate governments around the world and prevent them from shifting wealth to the people rather than to the corporations.

[dpibel]

83. Here's a deal

You supply me with five good articles to read that will tell me what a monster Mugabe is. I'll read them. You, meanwhile, go to www.swans.com and read their articles on Zimbabwe. You tell me why you don't believe Swans, and I'll tell you whether or not I accept the information in your articles.

BTW, I just scanned the Amnesty Int'l reports for 2000-2003. The 2000 report says, "In January politically motivated torture was reported for the first time since the late 1980s." Which does not exactly speak of an endless reign of terror. The 2001 report says, "Violations included more than 30 political killings and widespread torture and ill-treatment throughout the country." Now I don't defend 30 political killings or any torture and ill-treatment. OTOH, 30 political killings in a year (1) is trivial compared to our Fierce Warrior Chieftain's record (if you want to argue the point, please explain: Why are deaths which are the direct result of a politically and economically motivated war of aggression not political killings) and (2) hardly in the Pol Pot/Stalin category. I mean, aren't you hyperbolizing just a tiny bit?

So don't send me to Amnesty, because, while not an enviable record, it shows me nothing that justifies your bogeyman labels. It is dead even with quite a number of our best buds, including our pals in Pakistan and Uzbekistan.

But mainly I want you to educate me. Tell me where you've gotten your information so that I can learn the truth. I already asked one poster on this thread, who told me that his conclusions are based on long years of reading. That does not help me come to the light. I have to know what to read.

Deal?

[AP]

86. Notice who Amnesty cites for most of its information.

It cites a SINGLE Harare newspaper whose reporter is a British man I've heard on NPR countless times tell us how bad land reform and Mugabe is, and he employs all the catch phrases you'd expect from the pro-imperialists.

I'm not saying that he's definitely lying. It's just that if NPR gives him so much time to imprint his vision on the minds of Americans, I want to see some corroboration.

I read those reports a long time ago, so that's from memory. Another thing I remember is that, when Amnesty cites bad acts in Zimbabwe, if they weren't from that single, suspect newspaper, they were from court reports -- ie, for some of the events there were actual trials and convictions.

And another thing that is illuminating is a comparison of Zimbabwe to, for example, Nigeria (or Nepal). Nigeria is 300 times worse than Nigeria because of the oppression required to prevent the kinds of reform that Zimbabwe wants to undertake. Yet nobody calls for the ouster of the pro-western Nigerian government. We talk about election fraud and violence in Nigeria as if it's justification for keeping in power the government perpretating those attrocities. In Zimbabwe, it's an argument for getting rid of the government.

The real north star for the west isn't the election fraud. It's whether the governments are aligned with the west.

[Zynx]

91. There were more than five posted from Human Rights Watch.

Besides, you will just say that they aren't believable sources just because you want to defend a left-wing tyrant.

[dpibel]

132. Well, that's pretty convincing

Edited for a typo

I've read the Amnesty Reports. They do not convince me that Mugabe is a monster. OK? They detail election fraud and political suppression, both of which we have a good dose of in this country. What is it about those reports that makes you so very angry? I understand that if I point out that various US allies have records far worse than Mugabe's according to Amnesty, you will probably say that you don't like those bad guys either. That does not explain how it is that you are so very, very angry with Mugabe. On the scale of tyrants, he's really penny ante.

Now see if you can respond to this: I did not say that Amnesty is biased. I said that the information in their reports does not remotely support the degree of venom that is displayed around here. Please tell me specifically what it is you find in those reports that justifies calling him a monster and saying he should be killed. (I don't know that you've called for his head, but others in this thread have very comfortably and confidently done just that.)

In other words, my response to the Amnesty material is substantive: I've read it. Assuming it all to be true, I fail to see what there is in it that inspires the hatred expressed here.

Do I think that it would be a good idea for the world to be a beautiful place, filled with all good people. Why, indeed I do. Do I think it is? Now that you mention it, I don't.

What's your response to the material on Swans?

[AP]

133. The US tried to use Amnesty reports to justify invasion of Iraq and...

...Amnesty had to issue a press release saying that they did not believe that they're own reports justified the actions the US seemed intent on undertaking, and Iraq's Amnesty reports have to be more incriminating by a factor of 100, if I had to guess.

[WoodrowFan]

84. 2003 Amnesty International Report on Zimbabwe

President Robert Mugabe was re-elected in March amid serious concerns about the fairness and transparency of the elections. The run-up to the election was marred by intimidation, arbitrary arrests, torture and attacks on the political opposition, as was the period following the election. This pattern was repeated during local council and parliamentary by-elections also held during the year. Violations reported during 2002 included at least 58 political killings and widespread torture and ill-treatment throughout the country. Legislation passed during the year further curtailed freedoms of expression, association and assembly. An estimated six million Zimbabweans were at risk of starvation by the end of 2002. Food shortages resulting from sub-regional drought were exacerbated by the government's acquisition of commercial farms and the political manipulation of the delivery of food aid by officials and supporters of the ruling Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF).

http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Zwe-summary-eng

[AP]

90. Compare that to repression and electoral fraud in Nigeria and tell me

why the west cares more about Zimbabwe.

Psst. It's because Nigeria cooperates with western corporate profitability, and Zimbabwe is threatening the profitablity of European supermarket chains and corporate farms by threatening to recirculate wealth created in Zimbabwe within Zimbabwe, rather than transfer it to European bank accounts.

[WoodrowFan]

93. sheesh

And that's better than excusing government oppression because the governemnt opposes the West? Anyone who excuses any oppression as "necessary" or saying "hey, he's WORSE!" is a moral idiot.

[AP]

96. The ONLY reason the US opposes Mugabe is because of corporate profits

in the west.

I'm not about to start rewarding that.

Look, the opposition party the west is funding -- the MDC -- is running to end land reform.

That's why they exist. That's why the west funds them.

This is really the ONLY issue in Zimbabwean politics today thanks to the west shitting bricks over it.

It defines everythign that's going on. If you had an opposition party that was down with land reform, wanted to run the country so that MORE wealth would flow to the people, and thought Mugabe needed to go because he was the wrong face for the government, I'd be sending them money (and Zimbabwe, unlike most countries, didn't have a law preventing foreign donations to political parties, until recently, IIRC).

But that isn't what the opposition is about. Not by a mile.

[WoodrowFan]

85. Human Rights Report on "Land Reform"

Fast Track Land Reform In Zimbabwe
The "fast track" land resettlement program implemented by the government of Zimbabwe over the last two years has led to serious human rights violations. The program's implementation also raises serious doubts as to the extent to which it has benefited the landless poor. The stated aim of the fast track program is to take land from rich white commercial farmers for redistribution to poor and middle-income landless black Zimbabweans. Under the program, however, ruling party militias, often led by veterans of Zimbabwe's liberation war, have carried out serious acts of violence against farm owners, farm workers, and, using occupied farms as bases for attacks, against residents of surrounding areas. The police have done little to halt such violence, and in some cases are directly implicated in the abuses. The process of allocating plots to those who want land has frequently discriminated against those who are believed to support opposition parties, and in some cases those supervising the process have required applicants to demonstrate support for the ruling party, the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (Zanu-PF). Zimbabwe's several hundred thousand farm workers have been largely excluded from the program, and many have lost their jobs, driven from the farms where they work by violence or laid off because of a collapse in commercial agricultural production.
HRW Index No.: A1401
March 8, 2002

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=africa_pub&c=zimbab

[AP]

88. It has been a 20 year process. I don't know how they can call it fast...

...track.

Furthermore, HRW should compare the disrutpiveness of getting INTO colonialism to getting out of it.

What's happened in Zimbabwe in the last two years is a walk in the park compared to what Zimbabweans went through in the first 200 years of colonialism (and even compared to the last two years).

Furthermore, Zimbabwe is the FIRST post-colonial country that has taken this step. I have no idea what HRW is comparing their progress to. There is absolutely no comparison.

I say, let's give it a shot their way because clearly nothing else has worked that the world has tried since the 1960s.

In fact, I think the resitance the west is displaying is a pretty good sign that they suspect it will work.

[Tinoire]

95. Thanks. Ok- I have a pretty clear picture now. Black people can't govern

themselves according to the more industrialized countries whose wealth depends on controlling 3rd world labor and resources & when 3rd world countries force their independence they are to remain subservient to 1st world interests and tolerant of those from the non-indigenous business-elite in their midst who would continue to exploit them.

Who on earth died and put the old colonial powers in charge? Seems the entire world is yelling "Yankee go home".

How on earth can warring countries, who are the biggest terrorists in the world, with their obscene weapons that pulverized millions, dare demand that 3rd world countries have spotless human rights records? Obviously Mugabe isn't perfect but the make-up of the countries demanding he be so is hiliarious.

Minister Moyo, good luck with your tomatoes.

Thank you all for all the informative responses.

[WoodrowFan]

97. no, it's

No, the lesson is that black leaders who are corrupt get a free pass from some on the left if they scream "racism" loud enough...

[AP]

100. We're talking about politics and economics more than race.

This is about profits more than it's about skin color.

[Tinoire]

102. Ah cause there's no racism on file?

US, French & UK papers weren't calling these people niggers and coons and idiots who have no business governing themselves and all those valuable resources 40 years ago?

The leadership of those countries changed that much in the last 40 years that now they think those semi-humans are capable people who can survive & take care of their people, like they did for tens of thousands of years before the White Man appeared on their shores?

Be careful. The papers still exist and no tiger changes its stripes that rapidly. Jesse Helms is no anomaly in the government.

I am astounded because the only thing missing, to make this picture complete, are the RW type responses of "this is what happens anytime Blacks are in charge".

How good of the imperialistic countries to be so concerned about the welfare of their 3rd world brothers. More concerned about the diamonds, the sugar, the free labor seems more like it.

[AP]

103. In 1993 or so, I distinctly remember a NYTimes reporter (a woman with

an Italian sounding name) actually claim in the pages of the NYTimes that the Rwandan massacres started after a fight over a chicken in a marketplace.

That goes so far beyond simple racism. That was sick.

[noiretextatique]

144. what about you president? perhaps y'all need to

focus your outrage on him. he makes white men everywhere look bad.

[Tinoire]

108. Well, well, well... Seems Bush is VERY busy now: Zimbabwe seizes US plane

Well, well, well... How timely. The boys aren't skipping a beat.

Zimbabwe seizes US plane
08/03/2004

Harare - Zimbabwean security authorities have impounded a US-registered aircraft that landed at the country's main international airport carrying military equipment and 64 men aboard suspected to be mercenaries, Home Affairs Minister Kembo Mohadi announced on Monday.

"A United States of America-registered Boeing 727-100 cargo plane was detained last night (Sunday) at 19:30 at Harare International Airport after its owners had made a false declaration of its cargo and crew," the minister told a news conference.

"The plane was actually carrying 64 suspected mercenaries of various nationalities," he said.

<snip>

http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/Zimbabwe/0,,2-11-259_1495138,00.html


Stop me if I'm going out on a limb here but maybe some of the people supporting Bush's actions should consider voting for him? He is after all, on a roll to save the world from crazed Black dictatorships and make sure their resources continue subsidizing our way of life.

Hmmm.... Maybe this is why they hate us?

[AP]

109. Holy fucking shit. I'm laughing right now, but this really isn't funny.

It does give Bush a sort of "gang that couldn't shoot straight" image...

Man, I'd love to know the full story here.

Is this like the watergate break in -- just dumb luck in finding the tape on the door jamb. Or is this like Venezuela, with the head of OPEC giving Chavez a heads up so that he could make his plans.

[LoneStarLiberal]

113. Aristide and Mugabe Are Very Different

Haiti and Zimbabwe are very, very different, however.

Aristide cannot be blamed in the least for Haiti's horrible economic and social legacy since independence.

Mugabe can be blamed for most of Zimbabwe's horrible economic and social legacy since independence (from apartheid-run Rhodesia). As he has grown increasingly more senile and syphlitic he has run a country with the natural resources of one of the top two in southern Africa (behind only South Africa) into the ground.

Now why the Bush administration would choose now to get involved in Zimbabwe is beyond me.

[AP]

114. That's interesting. Name a post-colonial economy that's working.

It's interesting that it's Mugabe's fault that colonialism and post-colonialism destroys economies.

[muriel_volestrangler]

117. Malaysia? Singapore? Botswana? (n/t)

[AP]

123. Malaysia, because they reject neoliberalism. Botswana because it was

ingored by the colonizers. Botswana was a source of cheap labor for SA mines, and the land was never taken from them. There was no need for land reform because it was never stolen.

Botswana is an example of how equitable land ownership is good for economic development.

Singapore is an island.

[Tinoire]

115. They may very well be different

but the principle is the same to me. I wish we'd just withdraw and leave people alone for at least 100 years to let them sort out their own problems the same way we, France, Germany, well all "civilized" countries were allowed to do so despite our internal wars. Then in about 100 years, which we can dedicate to bettering democracy in our own country, we'll be able to see clearer. Right now, it seems we seize any old pretext to change regimes around the world. It's so frankly discouraging that I'm not sure I even want to know what's going on anymore.


Pat Robertson, sterling man of God that he is, has been eyeing Zimbabwe's diamonds (well African diamond mines in general) for a while now. He's got some rather hefty investments in them. I'm sure there's more to it though.

[muriel_volestrangler]

119. Would leaving Zimbabwe alone be a good idea?

After all, there's massive food aid going into it now. And the sanctions are aimed at the people in the Zimbabwean government, not the people. If we had nothing to do with the country, I think a lot of people would die before it sorted out its problems.

[AP]

124. Tony Blair gave them food aid to help them through the drought.

Critics of land reform -- when it started over a year ago -- said that 6 million would be dead within months. That didn't happen. Partly thanks to Blair, I guess.

What do you think of that?

[Tinoire]

126. I think before we start meddling in other countries, we need to reform

the means we use to meddle and that includes reforming the United Nations which is pretty much held captive to the vetoing whims of the 5 permanent members of the Security Council.

The only interventions I can get behind would have to be sanctioned by the UN. And the entire UN, not the security council which is nothing more than the 5 biggest powers protecting their own interests and carving up the world's resources as they see fit.

That some countries are poorer than others is a fact of life. That all countries can be self-sufficient without the meddling of the 5 members of the Security Council is another.

They have tomatoes & chickens; they won't starve ;) Nope, they won't starve without our intervention. Hundreds of years ago, before we came along, they were so healthy from this self-sufficience, that we kidnapped them to work the fields in lands where we'd exterminated the indigenous peoples. I think they can manage just fine.

[AP]

127. As Blair did with food aid to Zimb., I don't mind "meddling" in order to

help the people.

But that RARELY happens. We usually meddle to help the short-term profitability of large, connected private corporations and industries. (IIRC, the US offered food aid to Zimbabwe only if it was GMO crops. Wisely, IIRC, Zimbabwe refused, although this was cast, misleadingly, as acting against the best interests of Zimbabweans. I think any sentient individual would want to keep GMO suicide gene and tied-product gene produce out of a country the US wants to control.)

[Vladimir]

118. Aaaaaaaah

:wow:

My jaw is still wide open. I mean... Muggers ain't my favourite third world leader to defend (if for no other reason then because he spent a large part of the 80s executing Marxists), but I am not going to pretend I don't enjoy it when he makes *'s life difficult.

V

[hellhathnofury]

120. Repost from LBN: 2 quick points.

1."Journalists were not shown the plane, which Mohadi said had been moved to a nearby military base, and the government's claims could not be independently verified.

U.S. Embassy officials said they had not been informed of the incident and were trying to obtain details from Zimbabwe authorities.

President Robert Mugabe repeatedly has accused the United States and Britain of plotting to overthrow his autocratic regime."

-Mugabe was threatened with sanctions. He's got to respond somehow. This has been alleged by a relatively uncredible source.

2. The CIA wouldn't be stupid enough to use an American registered plane to do this and I doubt they'd get them into the country by flying into the main airport.

----
I'm going to need independent verification to believe this. But that's not going to happen because there is no independent press in Zimbabwe. If Mugabe actually had this it'd be all over CNN by now.

[AP]

125. If you'd seen The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, you wouldn't hold your

breath waiting for CNN to tell the truth about neoliberalism and the Bush administration's covert actions perpetrated in order to further it.

[hellhathnofury]

151. You can't base your entire argument on one documentary.

That movie is about Chavez, we're talking about Zimbabwe. They are pretty different situations. The fact that you put so much credibility in an acknowledged brutal dictator's ability to tell the truth is stunning.

[AP]

152. I certainly can base an opinion on CNN based on what I saw CNN do in that

documentary.

[hellhathnofury]

153. Still, your not going to require independent verification of this.

Just take Mugabe's word?

[AP]

154. I don't know about CNN, but the BBC is reporting on it. So, looks like it

happened. The state dep't even had a non-denial denial.

Do you think it didn't happen?

[hellhathnofury]

155. I'm not sure yet.

Mugabe has a hell of an interest to make something to make the US look bad. No names have been released, no weapons have actually been found. Who's to say that this just isn't a wayward rafting expedition?

[AP]

156. Reuters reported the ID number, and traced it back to a plane once owned

by US gov't which was almost sold to an Ecuador military person.

Although I appreciate a healthy dose of skepticism, HELLO!!!

[hellhathnofury]

157. Well...you need to read a little closer...

"State-run TV broadcast footage of a white plane with the tail number N4610. Inside the aircraft, the station showed two satellite telephones, radios, blue backpacks, sleeping bags, hiking boots, an inflatable raft, paddles, bolt cutters and what appeared to be a can of Mace.

No weapons were shown, but the station said officials were still going through the cargo section.

Western journalists were not shown the plane, which Mohadi said had been moved to the nearby Manyame military airfield, and the government's claims could not be independently verified."

No weapons have been shown to any media.

"The plane is registered to Dodson Aviation Inc. of Ottawa, Kan. However, company director Robert Dodson said it had sold the aircraft about a week ago to a "reputable" South African company, Logo Ltd.

"I think they were going to use it for charter flights," he said by telephone.

There was no reply at the Pretoria-based company."

It's not a US gov't plane either.

"In 1999, three American missionaries were arrested at Harare International Airport trying to board a homeward Swissair flight with a stockpile of more than 20 rifles and handguns in their baggage.

Accused of plotting to assassinate Mugabe, the three were jailed for eight months. They said the arms were for self-defense during three years of work among converts in war-torn Congo. "

Mugabe has a history of this too.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=515&ncid=721&e=9&u=/ap/20040308/ap_on_re_af/zimbabwe_plane_seized

[AP]

158. Yeah, we'll see where this goes.

I note your skepticism.

[sandnsea]

130. 64 mercenaries?

That's very interesting. Have these dimwits ever been caught in the act before?

[windowlicker]

129. About Zimbabwe

No one really cares much about Zimbabwe anymore.All threats made against it are idle.The Commonwealth nations tried to turn things around but Mugabe wouldnt budge on some of his policies,so Zimbabwe left(or was kicked out depending on your take of it)the Commonwealth.The UK,Australia and New Zealand no longer have any real interest in the place,and i have never heard of the US even commenting on Zimbabwe until i read this post.

The concerns raised in countries like England,Australia and New Zealand were,i suspect,really based on the massacres of white farmers by mobs of Mugabe's supporters.However,most of the remaining white farmers(along with large numbers of Sth African whites) have emigrated en masse to Australia/New Zealand so the issue is mostly a dead one from the Commonwealth perspective.They've essentially washed their hands of the place(aswell as Sth Africa).Again,if someone was really going to intervene,they would have done it at the height of tensions 5 years ago.Any threat against Zimbabwe is for the sake of keeping up appearances.

Now that the racial issue is mostly redundant in both South Africa/Zimbabwe,i hope that both nations will focus on their aids epidemics.A 28% infection rate is more worrying than any racial issue ever was.

Anyways,i just signed up to post on this thread as i have a direct connection to this very unfortunate situation.

[Tinoire]

166. Welcome to DU Windowlicker

I follow you up until the point of "Any threat against Zimbabwe is for the sake of keeping up appearances."

Are there no resources in Zimbabwe that would interest Bush. His family has a lot invested in gold and diamonds as do, surprisingly many of our late night TV evangelists.

There's a very sad note in your post and for that I am sorry. Please tell us more.

[AP]

168. Bush is most worried about the example Zimbabwe will set if they start

feeding people and if wages, employment, and wealth rise as a result of land reform (which, I believe, is what Stiglitz predicts will happen).

If other former colonies see land reform as a solution to institutionalized poverty, that'll be the end of guaranteed profits for hundreds of industries. In Zimbabwe, it's the tobacco industry and, probably Ahold supermarket which will take the hit to their profits. In Jamaica it will be the tourism industry. In Negeria and Nepal it will be oil. In the Congo it will be diamonds, or whatever.

It's isn't a single industry that's threatened by land reform. It's the entire neoliberal project that's threatened.

[noiretextatique]

143. good for him: americans, expecially bush, have no moral authority

to lecture any country about "democracy." until out own house is in order...consider bush's posturing business as usual...kissing the asses of his corporate masters.

[Undemcided]

170. Mugabe is running that country into the ground.

How the hell you can expect a Marxist to take care of a Parliamentary democracy is beyond me.