By Ebow Duncan
The talk in
town is that president John Mahama has shocked everybody with his appointment
of Ministers and other functionaries of Government.
 |
| President John Mahama |
Who can
disagree with this assertion? It is obvious that the appointments are indeed
shocking. Some of them have never happened before.
How can you
explain the fact that President Mahama now wants his secretary to be known as
an Executive Secretary? What is executive about his secretary? Does he derive his executive power from the
powers conferred on the President by the constitution of Ghana?
If the
Secretary to the President enjoys the residual powers of the president or
delegated authority then how different can that be from the Secretary to the
President without the executive preface?
May be
the president is just throwing titles around but even if that were the case, he would still have to explain
that to his employer, the people of Ghana.
It may
also be possible that the Executive Secretary to the President may be taking
over some of the functions of the Chief of staff and rendering him less
effective in the administration at the castle.
What about
the position of senior policy co-ordinator? What is this guy supposed to do
when part of the responsibility of the chief of staff is policy co-ordination?
Again is the position of chief of staff being devalued?
The
other issue is about the title. Why is he referred to as Senior Policy
co-ordinator? Are there junior co-ordinators?
 |
| Raymond Atuguba |
Then
there is the appointment of as many as six ministers of state at the seat of
Government. The question is, what the hell will they be doing at the
presidency? Could this be a clever way of allowing some NDC heavy weights to
keep their privileges at the expense of the Ghanaian tax payer? And what about
the suggestion that this is just a case of creating jobs for the boys?
It gets even
worse! The President has appointed three other heavyweights to handle special
presidential projects. Official statements tell us that the projects including
the building of one new university and 10 teacher training college.
Dare
we ask why the new Minister of Education cannot handle the building of new
schools?
In any case
what is the status of the three men who are being referred to as the three wise
men?
Could this
also just be a ploy to keep old guards who cannot be made Ministers quite?
Yes, it is
true that a lot more women have become Cabinet Ministers under President
Mahama. It is also true that 16 of the new Ministers come from the North and it
is also true that Tamale alone has two Ministers.
P.V.
Obeng’s name may also have been thrown in for good measure but what his exact
role would be remains undefined.
Between
the Chief of Staff and Mr. P.V. Obeng, who would be the Oga? If Mr. Obeng is
going to be the Capo then what will the Chief of Staff be doing at the
presidency?
Look!
To be honest with all of you who are reading this column, I am really getting
confused and I am hoping that President Mahama is not in my state of mind.
Please
Mr. President, what are you doing? Which kind Ministers be this?
EDITORIAL
DR. BROBBEY HAS SPOKEN!
Dr. Charles
Wereko – Brobbey, a leading Member of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) has joined
several leaders of the party to call for a withdrawal of the party’s petition
at the Supreme Court.
He
says that the party’s interest would be better served if it withdraws the
petition and focuses its attention on re-organising for the December 2016
elections.
The
question however is will the NPP listen to this very wise counsel?
Since
the results of the election were declared by the Electoral Commission, the NPP
has put all of its energies into disputing the Presidential results and the
results of some 40 constituencies.
In
spite of the fact that there is no guarantee that the party will win the case,
some of its leaders are assuring members and sympathizers that very soon the
Supreme Court will declare the NPP Candidate, Nana Akufo Addo as the President
of Ghana.
There
are indications that the case could last for a couple of years and some legal
opinion is convinced that it is a very complex one.
The
problem is that members of the party are most likely to feel very frustrated if
what their leaders are telling them does not come true.
A
second defeat for the NPP would also have a demoralizing effect on its support
base.
For us, the
most important consideration is that for as long as the case is being heard,
the NPP cannot start its rebuilding process.
Perhaps
it is time for the party to listen to the wise words of people like Dr. Charles
Wereko - Brobbey
WONDERS!
Kufuor’s
Presidency was predicted by A Sorcerer.
By Boakye
Yiadom
 |
| Former President John Agyekum Kufuor |
Can you believe this? Former President J.A Kufuor’s
mother consulted a sorcerer at his birth to predict the future of the child. In the official biography of the former
President it is strongly suggested that the sorcerer from Sampa predicted that
he would be President or national leader.
It is interesting that the same biography
emphasizes the fact that Mr J.A Kufuor came from a Christian background.
Another contradiction in is lie is that his
father “benefitted from living with a British family in Kumasi in the 1990s,
….. despite his immediate ancestors’ stance against colonial rule”.
The relevant
portions of the biography are reproduced below;
John Agyekum Kufuor,
alias Kofi Diawuo, was named after Kwapong Diawuo, the second Oyokohene, who
served as an advisor to King Osei Tutu. Typical of children born in the
1930s
and well into the post-colonial era, Kufuor has two names. Kofi Diawuo is
derived from the fact of being born on a Friday (Kofi among the Akan) and in
memory of his gallant ancestor Diawuo.
According to Kufuor's
matrilineal family source, Kwadwo Agyekum was so curious after Kufuor's birth
that, like Saul of old in the famous midnight visit to the medium at Endor, he
travelled all the way to Sampa (near what is today the Ivory Coast) to find out
from an acknowledged sorcerer the fate of his child. Because the Kufuor story
has a happy ending, we may say the sorcerer really knew his job.
As a Christian,
he had to be given a baptismal or Christian name, so he had John and the
father's name, Agyekum. In keeping with his mother's unusual Asante tradition,
Kufuor was added to it. It is interesting how this practice, which was uncommon
in the Asante of 1940s, has now assumed national and international
dimensions.
Now a married
or wedded woman would maintain her father's name and add that of her husband's. This has become part of family
identity, and imposes a sense of independence and re-definition over the female
role in marriage.
Deprived of any
formal education, Kufuor's father benefited from living with a British family
in Kumasi in the 1900s, this despite his immediate ancestors' stance against
colonial rule.
Apart from being a
cherished advisor when he became the Oyokohene to Asantehene Osei Kyeretwie, or
Prempeh II, Kwadwo Agyekum was instrumental in the restoration of
the Asante Confederacy Council in 1935.
After the last
Asante war against the British in 1900, a war popularly called the Yaa
Asantewaa War, in memory of the Queen of Ejisu-Asante who led it, the feeling
was that the 200-year-old empire had ended with the defeat of the Asantes and
the exile of King Prempeh. By the time of his return in 1924, the empire was
short of funds and fragmented into smaller independent states, the only
solution was to unite again as a kingdom.
Again our
guiding proverb: 'A child may resemble his father but he has a family.' But in
the case of Kufuor, both his matrilineal and patrilineal family history lead to
virtually the same direction or roots: King Osei Tutu who died in 1717.The
direction is dictated partly by blood- line and partly politics, that is empire
building.
This investigation
into his pedigree leads us to another Asante proverb: 'The matri-clan is like
the forest. If you stand afar, it looks the same but when you get closer, you
find that each tree has its own branches.' Arna Paa had grown convinced in the
early 1950s that her teenage son (tall for his age) would one day become
Apagyahene.
 |
| Asante Chief, Osei Tutu |
The Apagya Stool was
created by the Asante Chief Osei Tutu Kwame Asibe Bonsu (1804-23) for his son,
Owusu Gyamaduaa, and thus a hereditary stool for sons of Asantehenes from the
house to which the Kufuors belonged.
However, what
deepened ].A. Kufuor's interest and respect for traditional values was the
marriage of his sister, Agnes, to the Asantehene-Prempeh II in the early 1940s.
Through this union, his father was not only an important chief at the palace but
he had become a brother-in-law of the King. He learned the palace language and
its associated proverbs as well as the formation of Asante as an empire and how
it had progressed since the early 1700s. Agnes Kufuor recalls:
'J.A. Kufuor was
very reflective, quiet and always deep in his thoughts. Kwarne Addo Kufuor was
the noisy one-the one who would always entertain us with jokes. We thought he
would be a Lawyer.'
In the 195 Os, Christianity was challenging certain
traditional or cultural values in Asante. Asantes contact with Christianity
dated back to the 1840s, when the Asantehene K waku Duah I, who reigned from
1838-1867, accepted the Wesleyan missionary, Thomas Birch Freeman, to Asante in
1841. Later, in the 1870s, Father Moore, a Catholic Missionary, also came to
Kumasi and later established the Catholic Church.
The
Presbyterians led by the Head Missionary from Switzerland, Ramsyer, also came
and clashed with the Asantehene Kofi Karkari in the early1870s over what they
perceived to be barbaric practices by the chiefs, which they considered needed
to be replaced with Christian values. It was, however, the conversion in the
early 1900s by Asantehene Prempeh II to Christianity that turned many Asante
chiefs to Christianity. Prempeh became an Anglican in the Seychelles and on his
return the Asante Royalty became forever Anglican.
Thus Apaga,].A.
Kufuor's family house, became Anglican, as did his father's. Other chiefs
joined the Catholic and the Presbyterian churches. ].A. Kufuor went to the St.
Cyprian Anglican Church as regularly as he went to the palace. He even became a
singer and enjoyed the hymns as much as he enjoyed the praise-singing poetry
that accompanied the Asantehene's procession, often in memory of gallant Asante
soldiers.
 |
| Children of Kufuor |
To many people this
could be seen as contradictory: a strong believer in traditional values and a
staunch Anglican. But that has to do with his background and strong principles.
The same conviction led him, in 1972, to join the Catholic Church. After the
overthrow of the Second Republic of Ghana through the military takeover, he was
arrested as Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and imprisoned.
Throughout his stay in prison neither the Anglican Bishop of Accra nor any
of the leading church elders visited him whereas other political prisoners had
their bishops come and prayed for them. Bishop Peter Akwasi Sarpong, the
Catholic Bishop in Kumasi, travelled to visit and prayed for him.
After his release, his sister Agnes advised him to
take God seriously, and so he did by joining the Catholic Church in anger- and
also to be sure that, when he needed God, at least his representative would be
there to inspire him.
Letter to Patrice Emery Lumumba
By
Ama Biney
On the 52nd anniversary of the vicious assassination of Patrice Lumumba, Ama Biney reflects on both the current state of the DRC and Africa, arguing that the Congo is not only a ‘world problem’ but remains critical to the future unity of Africa due to its resources and geo-strategic location
 |
| Patrice Lumumba |
My dear Patrice,
On the 52nd anniversary of your brutal assassination on 17 January 1961, your people of 60 million have continued to see no peace, justice, nor liberation. The people have continued to profusely bleed to death.
On the 52nd anniversary of your brutal assassination on 17 January 1961, your people of 60 million have continued to see no peace, justice, nor liberation. The people have continued to profusely bleed to death.
Rape has become a weapon of war
against thousands of Congolese women. Between
August 1998 and April 2007, up to six
million Congolese have died through unspeakable atrocities, disease, starvation
and malnutrition.
This figure is almost the same number as the Jews who died in the Holocaust, which leads one to ask: is it because they are black skinned Africans that global humanity responds with paralysis and indifference?
If they had been Europeans, would the killings have been averted or lessened? Surely the unfolding catastrophe in the Congo is of similar proportions to that of the Cambodian and Rwanda genocides, the Vietnam War, the wars in Europe known as the First World War, Second World War and the Balkans war?
If you were alive today what would you say to the Congolese women who have been gang raped by fellow Congolese? How would you comfort the children left orphaned by the multitude of vicious male warlords seeking self-aggrandisement and personal riches from the wealth of the Congo?
What would you say to the hundreds of street children, uneducated and unemployed youths who were enticed into the rebel armies to commit horrific crimes against fellow Congolese? How is it possible that after 50 odd years of so-called independence the life expectancy of a Congolese woman is 47 years and that of a Congolese man is 42 years?
CONGO’S RICHES VITAL TO WESTERN LIFESTYLES
Che Guevara was correct when he wrote in his diary in 1965 that ‘the Congo problem was a world problem.’ [1] Furthermore, Che could also see that ‘Victory [in the Congo] would have repercussions throughout the continent, as would defeat’.
This figure is almost the same number as the Jews who died in the Holocaust, which leads one to ask: is it because they are black skinned Africans that global humanity responds with paralysis and indifference?
If they had been Europeans, would the killings have been averted or lessened? Surely the unfolding catastrophe in the Congo is of similar proportions to that of the Cambodian and Rwanda genocides, the Vietnam War, the wars in Europe known as the First World War, Second World War and the Balkans war?
If you were alive today what would you say to the Congolese women who have been gang raped by fellow Congolese? How would you comfort the children left orphaned by the multitude of vicious male warlords seeking self-aggrandisement and personal riches from the wealth of the Congo?
What would you say to the hundreds of street children, uneducated and unemployed youths who were enticed into the rebel armies to commit horrific crimes against fellow Congolese? How is it possible that after 50 odd years of so-called independence the life expectancy of a Congolese woman is 47 years and that of a Congolese man is 42 years?
CONGO’S RICHES VITAL TO WESTERN LIFESTYLES
Che Guevara was correct when he wrote in his diary in 1965 that ‘the Congo problem was a world problem.’ [1] Furthermore, Che could also see that ‘Victory [in the Congo] would have repercussions throughout the continent, as would defeat’.
 |
| Che Guevara |
[2] Indeed the Congo remains a
‘world problem’ when it continues to provide 64 percent of the world’s reserves
of coltan used in cellular phones, laptops, pacemakers, video cameras, jet engines,
prosthetic devices, rockets, hearing aids, amongst other products. [3] Most of
these products are only affordable in the developed world, yet the raw material
is to be located in the Congo.
This reinforces the reality that Africans produce what they do not consume and consume what they do not produce. To put it differently, the consumer lifestyles of most Westerners is dependent on the cheap exploitation of Africans and African wealth whilst most Africans remain impoverished due to the structural linkages of this relationship. Much has not changed since the era of colonialism.
In the 19th century, the Congolese were being forced by the Belgians in savage conditions to produce quotas of rubber from which up to 10 million Congolese died and many lost their limbs for failure to meet production quotas.
Now the pillage, plunder and looting of coltan by Congolese rebel groups with their backers in Rwanda, Uganda, US, Britain and various Western multi-national companies profit enormously from this wealth at the expense of the Congolese people who see little of this wealth invested in their country. As individuals upgrade their cellular phones as a matter of ‘natural’ entitlement, it seems ‘blood diamonds’ now co-exist with ‘blood coltan.’
NKRUMAH’S PRESCIENCE
Your close colleague Kwame Nkrumah wrote of the challenge of the Congo. You and I know that many of those challenges remain today in new and complex permutations; the challenge to create and sustain a democratic centralised or federalised government in which all of Congo’s 200 ethnic groups have a voice in governance; that the phenomenal economic resources of the Congo primarily meet the needs of the Congolese masses instead of being siphoned out of the country to meet the needs of outside interests; that the imperialists are fully aware of the fact that the Congo – the size of Western Europe - borders nine African countries and if one controls the Congo, one controls Africa. The balkanisation, disunity and secession of Africa are tragically epitomised in the Congo, which Nkrumah emphatically cautioned against.
On 8 August 1960 Nkrumah declared to the Ghana National Assembly: ‘If we allow the independence of the Congo to be compromised in any way by the imperialist and capitalist forces, we shall expose the sovereignty and independence of all Africa to grave risk. The struggle of the Congo is therefore our struggle.
It is incumbent on us to take our stand by our brothers in the Congo in the full knowledge that only Africa can fight for its destiny.’ [4] Nkrumah’s words remain as relevant in 1960 as they are today.
Today one asks: why is it that one cannot find one African leader who echoes Nkrumah’s words and deeds in relation to the Congo? The reality is that not only is a revolutionary collective leadership and vision wholly lacking in Africa but continental unification is difficult to realise when Zimbabwe, Angola, Uganda, Burundi and Rwanda have all supported one or other warring rebel group in the Congo or the Congolese government for their own national interests alongside outside interests that have sought to benefit from the continued pillage and plunder of Congo’s enormous mineral wealth. It is also difficult to achieve when the obsequious African petty bourgeois comprador class continue to exist on hand-outs from their former colonial masters and are entrapped in complex bilateral and multilateral arrangements that have further subordinated Africa to the global neo-liberal capitalist economy.
CONVULSING IN YOUR GRAVES?
On 8 August 1960 you entered into a secret agreement with Nkrumah affirming your joint ‘determination to work in the closest possible association with the other Independent African States for the establishment of a Union of African States, with a view to liberating the whole continent of Africa from colonialism and imperialism.’
[5] Tragically the agreement was never implemented due to the breakdown of your government and your murder at the hands of lackeys of neo-colonialism and imperialist forces represented by the Belgians and Americans.
[6] You and Nkrumah both envisioned that the Independent African States would establish a ‘Combined High Command of military forces to bring about a speedy withdrawal of foreign troops from the Congo’. [7] Alas this was not to happen.
Since the Congo debacle, perhaps you and Nkrumah are convulsing in your graves at what is happening not only in the Congo but over much of Africa as neo-colonialism has entrenched itself deeper into the pores and soil of Africa as well as the psyche of some Africans.
This reinforces the reality that Africans produce what they do not consume and consume what they do not produce. To put it differently, the consumer lifestyles of most Westerners is dependent on the cheap exploitation of Africans and African wealth whilst most Africans remain impoverished due to the structural linkages of this relationship. Much has not changed since the era of colonialism.
In the 19th century, the Congolese were being forced by the Belgians in savage conditions to produce quotas of rubber from which up to 10 million Congolese died and many lost their limbs for failure to meet production quotas.
Now the pillage, plunder and looting of coltan by Congolese rebel groups with their backers in Rwanda, Uganda, US, Britain and various Western multi-national companies profit enormously from this wealth at the expense of the Congolese people who see little of this wealth invested in their country. As individuals upgrade their cellular phones as a matter of ‘natural’ entitlement, it seems ‘blood diamonds’ now co-exist with ‘blood coltan.’
NKRUMAH’S PRESCIENCE
Your close colleague Kwame Nkrumah wrote of the challenge of the Congo. You and I know that many of those challenges remain today in new and complex permutations; the challenge to create and sustain a democratic centralised or federalised government in which all of Congo’s 200 ethnic groups have a voice in governance; that the phenomenal economic resources of the Congo primarily meet the needs of the Congolese masses instead of being siphoned out of the country to meet the needs of outside interests; that the imperialists are fully aware of the fact that the Congo – the size of Western Europe - borders nine African countries and if one controls the Congo, one controls Africa. The balkanisation, disunity and secession of Africa are tragically epitomised in the Congo, which Nkrumah emphatically cautioned against.
On 8 August 1960 Nkrumah declared to the Ghana National Assembly: ‘If we allow the independence of the Congo to be compromised in any way by the imperialist and capitalist forces, we shall expose the sovereignty and independence of all Africa to grave risk. The struggle of the Congo is therefore our struggle.
It is incumbent on us to take our stand by our brothers in the Congo in the full knowledge that only Africa can fight for its destiny.’ [4] Nkrumah’s words remain as relevant in 1960 as they are today.
Today one asks: why is it that one cannot find one African leader who echoes Nkrumah’s words and deeds in relation to the Congo? The reality is that not only is a revolutionary collective leadership and vision wholly lacking in Africa but continental unification is difficult to realise when Zimbabwe, Angola, Uganda, Burundi and Rwanda have all supported one or other warring rebel group in the Congo or the Congolese government for their own national interests alongside outside interests that have sought to benefit from the continued pillage and plunder of Congo’s enormous mineral wealth. It is also difficult to achieve when the obsequious African petty bourgeois comprador class continue to exist on hand-outs from their former colonial masters and are entrapped in complex bilateral and multilateral arrangements that have further subordinated Africa to the global neo-liberal capitalist economy.
CONVULSING IN YOUR GRAVES?
On 8 August 1960 you entered into a secret agreement with Nkrumah affirming your joint ‘determination to work in the closest possible association with the other Independent African States for the establishment of a Union of African States, with a view to liberating the whole continent of Africa from colonialism and imperialism.’
[5] Tragically the agreement was never implemented due to the breakdown of your government and your murder at the hands of lackeys of neo-colonialism and imperialist forces represented by the Belgians and Americans.
[6] You and Nkrumah both envisioned that the Independent African States would establish a ‘Combined High Command of military forces to bring about a speedy withdrawal of foreign troops from the Congo’. [7] Alas this was not to happen.
Since the Congo debacle, perhaps you and Nkrumah are convulsing in your graves at what is happening not only in the Congo but over much of Africa as neo-colonialism has entrenched itself deeper into the pores and soil of Africa as well as the psyche of some Africans.
 |
| Osagyefo Dr Kwame Nkrumah |
Nkrumah’s African High Command has become parodied in the Africa Command or
AFRICOM led by the United States of Aggression – America, established by former
President George Bush, Jr. It is now led by Barack Obama who hails from a
Kenyan father and American mother and now unreservedly services US imperialist
interests under the figleaf of AFRICOM.
Under the euphemistic buzzwords such as ‘mutual security’, ‘cooperation’, ‘piracy’ in Somalia, ‘joint military training exercises’, the fight against the ‘Global War on Terrorism’, the armies of myriad neo-colonial African governments have engaged in such training exercises across the continent under the auspices of AFRICOM and those of their former colonial masters. AFRICOM has a military outpost - Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, in the Horn of Africa with more than 2000 American troops stationed there.
Since your savage assassination new gas and oil reserves have been found in several African countries and will only lead to further imperialist and neo-colonial intrigues in Africa, if Africa does not unite to use these resources for her people. In addition, the rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al-Shabaab in Somalia and the alliance of Islamists in Mali with Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb portend the further militarisation and disunity of our continent as pretexts for intervention by outsiders bearing Trojan gifts.
The savage murder of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi on 20 October 2011 is not only a profoundly retrogressive step for the oil-rich nation of Libya but the entire continent as the African Union was carelessly and arrogantly sidestepped by NATO, France and Britain in their pretext of ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) doctrine in which the plight of dark-skinned Libyans and African migrants became targets for torture and detention in the unfolding mayhem. These Africans were not protected by the NATO forces.
Such an ostensible humanitarian doctrine in R2P is simply the 21st century version of the 19th century’s ‘white man’s burden’ which conceals the motives of empire builders. The mistreatment of dark-skinned Libyans and African migrants in Libya undermines Pan-African unity; it is an issue belying national unity in places such as Mauritania and Sudan when Arabs oppress Africans.
Since your assassination, the Congolese people have not suffered alone in this world. Conflicts elsewhere on the African continent in Darfur, the Horn of Africa, Liberia, Burundi, Sierra Leone, and elsewhere; the war in the Balkans; the first Iraq war; the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 followed by the grotesque invasion of Iraq in March 2003, despite international opposition to the warmongering governments of Britain and America; the abuses in Abu Ghraib; rendition by British and American governments all in the name of the Global War against Terror that has now replaced the Cold War of your era; alongside hundreds of detainees languishing at the US military camp at Guantanamo in Cuba.
In short, many have died, been wrongly imprisoned and tortured. In addition, there has been the slow genocide inflicted on the people of Gaza in the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, whereby the declining infrastructure is negatively impacting on the lives of the Palestinian people and the food crisis is adversely affecting the old, children and pregnant women.
Meanwhile, the anniversary of your assassination coincides with 53 years of the US vicious blockade against the small island of Cuba, imposed in October 1960. Yet, on 13 November 2012, of the 193 member states of the UN General Assembly, 188 voted unanimously to support the ending of the blockade. Three countries voted against the uplifting of the embargo: the US, Israel and Palau and therefore the embargo remains place. If democracy means rule of the majority where is the democratic fairness and justice in this instance? Put differently, why is it that America can have normal trade relations with ‘communist’ China and not with communist Cuba?
THE THREAT OF A GOOD EXAMPLE CONTINUES
You and Nkrumah were profoundly aware that on account of its size, geo-strategic position, and vast economic resources, the Congo was critical to the quest for Pan-African unity. However, the imperialists could not tolerate a single leader in the developing world utilizing the resources of their country in the interests of their people.
In your era one was dubbed a communist for doing this or even thinking of doing such a thing. The consequence of devoting one’s national resources for a people orientated development was that leaders like yourself, Nkrumah, Cabral, Pierre Mulele, Sankara, Machel and many others in our rich history had to be eliminated and often with the collaboration of what Malcolm X aptly called ‘house Negroes’ or ‘Uncle Toms’ of the day.
The threat of a good example continues to imperil imperialism, capitalism and current day neoliberalism, for theirs is a unipolar world order in which alternative political and economic systems cannot be tolerated for fear that such an example will inspire others.
That is why Fanmi Lavalas , the popular political party of the Haitian majority remains banned in Haiti; why former, twice democratically elected Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide was atrociously vilified and presented as ‘a cross between Ayatollah and Fidel’ [8] and was exiled from his native land for seven years until March 2012.
The ‘assault on democracy in Haiti’ [9] has been orchestrated by the Haitian ruling elite and their murderous accomplices in the US, Canada and France. Similar to the Palestinians who elected Hamas in January 2006, Fanmi Lavalas should not - in the eyes of the West - have won landslide victories at all levels of government in 1990 and 2000.
Hence, the attempts to crush the genuine democratic will of the Haitian people and their organisations continues in the vicious operations of paramilitary forces as a cruel punishment of the Haitian people by neo-colonial and imperialist backed forces. It is not the Haitian people who are not ready for genuine democracy but the Haitian neo-colonial elite and their Western collaborators.
ARE MESSIAHS PART OF THE PROBLEM?
In the vortex of the conflict in the Congo that has enmeshed the region and several African leaders with rapacious self-interest, there are various bogus messiahs claiming to lead the Congolese to the promised land.
Perhaps this has been a problem not only of the Congo but the post-colonial African condition: the people are falsely led to believe they need a magic man (rarely a ‘magic woman’), a messiah to deliver them from oppression. We look for messiahs only to end up in a new form of dictatorship, cult of personality which engenders a wretched patriarchal phallocratic dispensation.
A democracy that is not genuinely inclusive of women, youth, all ethnic groups and political opinions has been a pitfall of which our failure to heed Fanon’s prescience has cost us dearly. Similarly a failure to address the neo-colonial and patriarchal edifices in place since physical decolonization occurred, has only given rise to new systems of domination and repression, including that of gender oppression.
Consequently, the diverse voices of Congolese women must be heard and also their silences. They must be at the forefront of peace-building and reconstructing a new Congo in every sphere of the society.
It is time for the people to work and organise for themselves; define their interests, needs and programmes on a collectivist principle and approach as opposed to the fixation with leaders and individuals. In addition to this, the reality is that many of our people have yet to emancipate themselves from mental slavery and a psychosis of dependency in which there is a desire for outsiders to come and ‘save’ us. To reiterate Nkrumah: ‘only Africa can fight for its destiny.’ It is only the Congolese people who can save themselves.
A FREE CONGO AND FREE AFRICA
As the first Prime Minister of the Congo, a committed Congolese patriot and Pan-Africanist, in your short life you represented a new Congolese consciousness, with the audacity to envision a new Congo as part of a united and genuinely free Africa.
Under the euphemistic buzzwords such as ‘mutual security’, ‘cooperation’, ‘piracy’ in Somalia, ‘joint military training exercises’, the fight against the ‘Global War on Terrorism’, the armies of myriad neo-colonial African governments have engaged in such training exercises across the continent under the auspices of AFRICOM and those of their former colonial masters. AFRICOM has a military outpost - Camp Lemonier in Djibouti, in the Horn of Africa with more than 2000 American troops stationed there.
Since your savage assassination new gas and oil reserves have been found in several African countries and will only lead to further imperialist and neo-colonial intrigues in Africa, if Africa does not unite to use these resources for her people. In addition, the rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al-Shabaab in Somalia and the alliance of Islamists in Mali with Al-Qaeda in the Maghreb portend the further militarisation and disunity of our continent as pretexts for intervention by outsiders bearing Trojan gifts.
The savage murder of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi on 20 October 2011 is not only a profoundly retrogressive step for the oil-rich nation of Libya but the entire continent as the African Union was carelessly and arrogantly sidestepped by NATO, France and Britain in their pretext of ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) doctrine in which the plight of dark-skinned Libyans and African migrants became targets for torture and detention in the unfolding mayhem. These Africans were not protected by the NATO forces.
Such an ostensible humanitarian doctrine in R2P is simply the 21st century version of the 19th century’s ‘white man’s burden’ which conceals the motives of empire builders. The mistreatment of dark-skinned Libyans and African migrants in Libya undermines Pan-African unity; it is an issue belying national unity in places such as Mauritania and Sudan when Arabs oppress Africans.
Since your assassination, the Congolese people have not suffered alone in this world. Conflicts elsewhere on the African continent in Darfur, the Horn of Africa, Liberia, Burundi, Sierra Leone, and elsewhere; the war in the Balkans; the first Iraq war; the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 followed by the grotesque invasion of Iraq in March 2003, despite international opposition to the warmongering governments of Britain and America; the abuses in Abu Ghraib; rendition by British and American governments all in the name of the Global War against Terror that has now replaced the Cold War of your era; alongside hundreds of detainees languishing at the US military camp at Guantanamo in Cuba.
In short, many have died, been wrongly imprisoned and tortured. In addition, there has been the slow genocide inflicted on the people of Gaza in the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, whereby the declining infrastructure is negatively impacting on the lives of the Palestinian people and the food crisis is adversely affecting the old, children and pregnant women.
Meanwhile, the anniversary of your assassination coincides with 53 years of the US vicious blockade against the small island of Cuba, imposed in October 1960. Yet, on 13 November 2012, of the 193 member states of the UN General Assembly, 188 voted unanimously to support the ending of the blockade. Three countries voted against the uplifting of the embargo: the US, Israel and Palau and therefore the embargo remains place. If democracy means rule of the majority where is the democratic fairness and justice in this instance? Put differently, why is it that America can have normal trade relations with ‘communist’ China and not with communist Cuba?
THE THREAT OF A GOOD EXAMPLE CONTINUES
You and Nkrumah were profoundly aware that on account of its size, geo-strategic position, and vast economic resources, the Congo was critical to the quest for Pan-African unity. However, the imperialists could not tolerate a single leader in the developing world utilizing the resources of their country in the interests of their people.
In your era one was dubbed a communist for doing this or even thinking of doing such a thing. The consequence of devoting one’s national resources for a people orientated development was that leaders like yourself, Nkrumah, Cabral, Pierre Mulele, Sankara, Machel and many others in our rich history had to be eliminated and often with the collaboration of what Malcolm X aptly called ‘house Negroes’ or ‘Uncle Toms’ of the day.
The threat of a good example continues to imperil imperialism, capitalism and current day neoliberalism, for theirs is a unipolar world order in which alternative political and economic systems cannot be tolerated for fear that such an example will inspire others.
That is why Fanmi Lavalas , the popular political party of the Haitian majority remains banned in Haiti; why former, twice democratically elected Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide was atrociously vilified and presented as ‘a cross between Ayatollah and Fidel’ [8] and was exiled from his native land for seven years until March 2012.
The ‘assault on democracy in Haiti’ [9] has been orchestrated by the Haitian ruling elite and their murderous accomplices in the US, Canada and France. Similar to the Palestinians who elected Hamas in January 2006, Fanmi Lavalas should not - in the eyes of the West - have won landslide victories at all levels of government in 1990 and 2000.
Hence, the attempts to crush the genuine democratic will of the Haitian people and their organisations continues in the vicious operations of paramilitary forces as a cruel punishment of the Haitian people by neo-colonial and imperialist backed forces. It is not the Haitian people who are not ready for genuine democracy but the Haitian neo-colonial elite and their Western collaborators.
ARE MESSIAHS PART OF THE PROBLEM?
In the vortex of the conflict in the Congo that has enmeshed the region and several African leaders with rapacious self-interest, there are various bogus messiahs claiming to lead the Congolese to the promised land.
Perhaps this has been a problem not only of the Congo but the post-colonial African condition: the people are falsely led to believe they need a magic man (rarely a ‘magic woman’), a messiah to deliver them from oppression. We look for messiahs only to end up in a new form of dictatorship, cult of personality which engenders a wretched patriarchal phallocratic dispensation.
A democracy that is not genuinely inclusive of women, youth, all ethnic groups and political opinions has been a pitfall of which our failure to heed Fanon’s prescience has cost us dearly. Similarly a failure to address the neo-colonial and patriarchal edifices in place since physical decolonization occurred, has only given rise to new systems of domination and repression, including that of gender oppression.
Consequently, the diverse voices of Congolese women must be heard and also their silences. They must be at the forefront of peace-building and reconstructing a new Congo in every sphere of the society.
It is time for the people to work and organise for themselves; define their interests, needs and programmes on a collectivist principle and approach as opposed to the fixation with leaders and individuals. In addition to this, the reality is that many of our people have yet to emancipate themselves from mental slavery and a psychosis of dependency in which there is a desire for outsiders to come and ‘save’ us. To reiterate Nkrumah: ‘only Africa can fight for its destiny.’ It is only the Congolese people who can save themselves.
A FREE CONGO AND FREE AFRICA
As the first Prime Minister of the Congo, a committed Congolese patriot and Pan-Africanist, in your short life you represented a new Congolese consciousness, with the audacity to envision a new Congo as part of a united and genuinely free Africa.
 |
| Map of Congo |
I take you back to your independence speech of 30 June 1960 in which you said
‘The Congo’s independence marks a decisive step towards the liberation of the
entire African continent’ – to which you received a mighty applause.
You were prepared to organise for that unity but were not given the chance due to larger neo-colonial and imperialist forces. You also spoke truth to the powerful and powerless in that audacious address before the King of Belgium.
In the eyes of the king you were simply one uppity nigger. In the eyes of the Belgians that speech sealed your assassination and hence their complicity in your murder. Yet, your name lives on in the revolutionary pantheon of freedom fighters from all over the world, alongside Toussaint L’Ouverture, Nanny, Sojourner Truth, Haydée Santamaria, Nzinga, Nehanda, Víctor Lidio Jara Martínez, Ganga Zumba, Luisa Mahin, Che Guevara, Simón Bolivar, Frank Pais, Gasper Yanga, Paul Bogle, Hatuey, Mary Muthoni Wanjiru, and many others that would fill the pages of this letter to you.
Some argue that gone is the era of ideology that steeped your generation. Indeed what noble ideology drives the rebel groups in the Congo? There is none other than naked greed, egotism, violence, ruthless power and vengeance. No nation nor continent can be built on such despicable and destructive ‘values’.
CONGO IS VITAL TO SAVING THE PLANET
Some may also believe that the Pan-African sentiment based on what affected one African affected all Africans and people of African descent has also vanished. Yet, I do not believe this. Surely the struggle in the Congo for peace, social and economic justice must be mobilised as a global movement among all Africans, people of African descent and peace loving people, in a similar way the moral repugnance of apartheid and the crimes it wreaked on the lives of black South Africans in South Africa spawned the global anti-apartheid movement?
We cannot separate the conflict in the Congo from world peace when the resources of that land provides the pillar of Western lifestyles; when few people realise that the Congo possesses the second largest rainforest in the world, after the Amazon rainforest and it is therefore vital to global collective efforts to save the planet from its continuing destructive path of wanton capitalist exploitation. As Jeannette Winterson succinctly expressed in The New York Times, on 17 September 2009: ‘Nuclear, ecological, chemical, economic – our arsenal of Death by Stupidity is impressive for a species as smart as Homo sapiens.’
You continue to inspire a new generation, for there are genuine peace loving Congolese, Pan-Africanists and internationalists who are quietly working around the globe for peace and social justice for the people of the Congo. Similarly, in the land of your birth there are a plethora of political parties that claim your spiritual and political legacy. It is for the people to decide which of them genuinely represent your true legacy.
THE WORK TO BE DONE
The work to be done in terms of building peace, reconciliation, socio-economic development that benefits women, the poor, young people, child soldiers, the physically mutilated, the disabled, those infected with HIV/AIDS as a consequence of rape, healing the physical and mental wounds of trauma and war, is colossal. Integral to that work must be reparative justice and reconnecting people to an understanding of a wider continental history which has not always been soaked in blood, for as Marcus Garvey tells us, ‘We have a beautiful history, and we shall create another in the future that will astonish the world.’ You yourself once wrote, ‘history will one day have its say, but it will not be the history that is taught in Brussels … it will be a glorious and dignified history.’ We must look to the past, but as that other great Pan-Africanist, the late Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem, implored us: ‘Life must be understood backwards but lived forwards.’
And so, Patrice, on the 52nd year of your murder that deeply pains and causes one to reflect on the past and present in the Congo and Africa, I remember you as a human being and a political leader with a principled vision. Your values, dedication to the Congo and commitment to improvement in the lives of your people are part of your legacy that we must realise not only for the Congo but all Africans and human beings on this planet of ours. All that remains for me to say is: ‘aluta continua!
You were prepared to organise for that unity but were not given the chance due to larger neo-colonial and imperialist forces. You also spoke truth to the powerful and powerless in that audacious address before the King of Belgium.
In the eyes of the king you were simply one uppity nigger. In the eyes of the Belgians that speech sealed your assassination and hence their complicity in your murder. Yet, your name lives on in the revolutionary pantheon of freedom fighters from all over the world, alongside Toussaint L’Ouverture, Nanny, Sojourner Truth, Haydée Santamaria, Nzinga, Nehanda, Víctor Lidio Jara Martínez, Ganga Zumba, Luisa Mahin, Che Guevara, Simón Bolivar, Frank Pais, Gasper Yanga, Paul Bogle, Hatuey, Mary Muthoni Wanjiru, and many others that would fill the pages of this letter to you.
Some argue that gone is the era of ideology that steeped your generation. Indeed what noble ideology drives the rebel groups in the Congo? There is none other than naked greed, egotism, violence, ruthless power and vengeance. No nation nor continent can be built on such despicable and destructive ‘values’.
CONGO IS VITAL TO SAVING THE PLANET
Some may also believe that the Pan-African sentiment based on what affected one African affected all Africans and people of African descent has also vanished. Yet, I do not believe this. Surely the struggle in the Congo for peace, social and economic justice must be mobilised as a global movement among all Africans, people of African descent and peace loving people, in a similar way the moral repugnance of apartheid and the crimes it wreaked on the lives of black South Africans in South Africa spawned the global anti-apartheid movement?
We cannot separate the conflict in the Congo from world peace when the resources of that land provides the pillar of Western lifestyles; when few people realise that the Congo possesses the second largest rainforest in the world, after the Amazon rainforest and it is therefore vital to global collective efforts to save the planet from its continuing destructive path of wanton capitalist exploitation. As Jeannette Winterson succinctly expressed in The New York Times, on 17 September 2009: ‘Nuclear, ecological, chemical, economic – our arsenal of Death by Stupidity is impressive for a species as smart as Homo sapiens.’
You continue to inspire a new generation, for there are genuine peace loving Congolese, Pan-Africanists and internationalists who are quietly working around the globe for peace and social justice for the people of the Congo. Similarly, in the land of your birth there are a plethora of political parties that claim your spiritual and political legacy. It is for the people to decide which of them genuinely represent your true legacy.
THE WORK TO BE DONE
The work to be done in terms of building peace, reconciliation, socio-economic development that benefits women, the poor, young people, child soldiers, the physically mutilated, the disabled, those infected with HIV/AIDS as a consequence of rape, healing the physical and mental wounds of trauma and war, is colossal. Integral to that work must be reparative justice and reconnecting people to an understanding of a wider continental history which has not always been soaked in blood, for as Marcus Garvey tells us, ‘We have a beautiful history, and we shall create another in the future that will astonish the world.’ You yourself once wrote, ‘history will one day have its say, but it will not be the history that is taught in Brussels … it will be a glorious and dignified history.’ We must look to the past, but as that other great Pan-Africanist, the late Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem, implored us: ‘Life must be understood backwards but lived forwards.’
And so, Patrice, on the 52nd year of your murder that deeply pains and causes one to reflect on the past and present in the Congo and Africa, I remember you as a human being and a political leader with a principled vision. Your values, dedication to the Congo and commitment to improvement in the lives of your people are part of your legacy that we must realise not only for the Congo but all Africans and human beings on this planet of ours. All that remains for me to say is: ‘aluta continua!
Ethics and
Agriculture
By Peter Singer
 |
| A market place in Afica |
Should rich countries’- or
investors based there - be buying agricultural land in developing countries?
That question is raised in Transnational Land Deals for Agriculture in the
Global South, a report issued last year by the Land Matrix Partnership, a
consortium of European research institutes and nongovernmental organizations.
The report shows that since 2000, investors or state bodies in rich or emerging countries have
bought more than 83 million hectares
(more than 200 million acres) of
agricultural land in poorer developing countries.
This amounts to 1.7% of the world's agricultural land.
This amounts to 1.7% of the world's agricultural land.
Most of these purchases have been made in Africa, with
two-thirds taking place in countries where hunger is widespread and
institutions for establishing formal land ownership are often weak. The
purchases in Africa alone amount to an area of agricultural land the size of
Kenya.
It has been claimed that foreign investors are purchasing land that has been left idle; thus, by bringing it into production, the purchases are increasing the availability of food overall. But the Land Matrix Partnership report found that this is not the case: roughly 45% of the purchases involved existing croplands, and almost a third of the purchased land was forested, indicating that its development may pose risks for biodiversity.
The investments are both private and public (for example,
by state-owned entities) and come from three different groups of countries:
emerging economies like China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Malaysia, and South
Korea; oil-rich Gulf states; and wealthy developed economies like the United
States and several European countries. On average, per capita income in
the countries that are the source of these investments is four times higher
than in the target countries.
Most of the investments are aimed at producing food or other crops for export from the countries in which the land is acquired, for the obvious reason that richer countries can pay more for the output. More than 40% of such projects aim to export food to the source country - suggesting that food security is a major reason for buying the land.
Oxfam International calls some of these deals "land grabs." Its own report, Our Land, Our Lives, indicates that, since 2008, communities affected by World Bank projects have brought 21 formal complaints alleging violations of their land rights. Oxfam, drawing attention to large-scale land acquisitions that have entailed direct rights violations, has called on the Bank to freeze investments in land purchases until it can set standards ensuring that local communities are informed of them in advance, with the option of refusing them. Oxfam also wants the Bank to ensure that these land deals do not undermine either local or national food security.
In response, the World Bank agreed that there are
instances of abuse in land
acquisition, particularly in developing countries in which
governance is weak, and said
that it supported more transparent and inclusive participation.
At the same time, it pointed to the need to increase food production to feed the extra two billion people expected to be alive in 2050, and suggested that more investment in agriculture in developing countries is required to improve productivity. The Bank rejected the idea of a moratorium on its oW91 work with investors in agriculture, arguing that this would target precisely those who are most likely to do the right thing.
that it supported more transparent and inclusive participation.
At the same time, it pointed to the need to increase food production to feed the extra two billion people expected to be alive in 2050, and suggested that more investment in agriculture in developing countries is required to improve productivity. The Bank rejected the idea of a moratorium on its oW91 work with investors in agriculture, arguing that this would target precisely those who are most likely to do the right thing.
One may ask whether transparency and the requirement that
local landholders consent to a sale is enough to protect people living in
poverty. Supporters of free markets will argue that if local landowners wish to
sell their land that is their choice to make.
But, given the pressures of poverty and the lure of cash, what does it take for people to be able to make a genuinely free and informed choice about selling something as significant as a right to land? After all, we do not allow poor people to sell their kidneys to the highest bidder.
Of course, hardline supporters of free markets will say
that we should. But, at the very least, it needs to be explained why people
should be prohibited from selling kidneys, but not from selling the land that
grows their food. Most people can live without one kidney. No one can live
without food.
Why does the purchase of body parts give rise to international condemnation, while the
purchase of agricultural land does not - even when it involves evicting local landholders
and producing food for export to rich countries instead of for local consumption?
The World Bank may indeed be more concerned about local landholders' rights than other foreign investors are. If so, the 21 complaints made against Bank projects are most likely the visible tip of a vast iceberg of violations of land rights by foreign investors in agricultural projects in developing countries - with the others remaining invisible because victims have no access to any complaint procedure.
One such case belatedly came to the attention of the United Nations Human Rights Committee. In November, the Committee concluded that Germany had failed to police the Neumann Kaffee Gruppe regarding its complicity in the forced eviction of several villages in Uganda to make way for a large coffee plantation.
But the evictions took place in 2001, and the villagers are still living in extreme poverty.
They found no remedy, in either Uganda or Germany, for the violation of rights that, according to the Committee, they possess under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Germany is a signatory. Are we to believe that landholders fare better with Chinese or Saudi investors?
Martin Luther: I Have A Dream, Obama: I Have A Drone
By Norman Solomon
A simple twist of fate
has set President Obama’s second Inaugural Address for January 21, the same day
as the Martin Luther King Jr. national holiday.
By Norman Solomon
 |
| Martin Luther King Jr. |
Obama made no mention
of King during the Inauguration four years ago -- but since then, in word and
deed, the president has done much to distinguish himself from the man who said
“I have a dream.”
After his speech at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in August 1963, King went on to take great risks as a passionate advocate for peace.
After his Inaugural speech in January 2009, Obama has pursued policies that epitomize King’s grim warning in 1967: “When scientific power outruns moral power, we end up with guided missiles and misguided men.”
But Obama has not ignored King’s anti-war legacy. On the contrary, the president has gone out of his way to distort and belittle it.In his eleventh month as president -- while escalating the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan, a process that tripled the American troop levels there -- Obama traveled to Oslo to accept the Nobel Peace Prize. In his speech, he cast aspersions on the peace advocacy of another Nobel
Peace laureate: Martin Luther King Jr.
The president struck a
respectful tone as he whetted the rhetorical knife before twisting. “I know
there's nothing weak -- nothing passive -- nothing naive -- in the creed and
lives of Gandhi and King,” he said, just before swiftly implying that those two
advocates of nonviolent direct action were, in fact, passive and naive. “I face
the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the
American people,” Obama added.Moments later, he was
straining to justify American warfare: past, present, future. “To say that
force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a
recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason,”
Obma said. “I raise this point, I begin with this point because in many
countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter
what the cause. And at times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of
America, the world’s sole military superpower.
Then came the jingo
pitch: “Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United
States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six
decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms.”
Crowing about the
moral virtues of making war while accepting a peace prize might seem a bit odd,
but Obama’s rhetoric was in sync with a key dictum from Orwell: “Who controls
the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”
 |
| Obama and his loving drone |
Laboring to denigrate
King’s anti-war past while boasting about Uncle Sam’s past (albeit
acknowledging “mistakes,” a classic retrospective euphemism for carnage from
the vantage point of perpetrators), Obama marshaled his oratory to foreshadow
and justify the killing yet to come under his authority.Two weeks before the
start of Obama’s second term, the British daily The Guardian noted that “U.S.
use of drones has soared during Obama’s time in office, with the White House
authorizing attacks in at least four countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen
and Somalia. It is estimated that the CIA and the U.S. military have undertaken
more than 300 drone strikes and killed about 2,500 people.”
The newspaper reported
that a former member of Obama’s “counter-terrorism group” during the 2008
campaign, Michael Boyle, says the White House is now understating the number of
civilian deaths due to the drone strikes, with loosened standards for when and
where to attack: “The consequences can be seen in the targeting of mosques or
funeral processions that kill non-combatants and tear at the social fabric of
the regions where they occur. No one really knows the number of deaths caused
by drones in these distant, sometimes ungoverned, lands.”Although Obama
criticized the Bush-era “war on terror” several years ago, Boyle points out,
President Obama “has been just as ruthless and indifferent to the rule of law
as his predecessor.”
Boyle’s assessment -- consistent with the conclusions of many other policy analysts -- found the Obama administration’s use of drones is “encouraging a new arms race that will empower current and future rivals and lay the foundations for an international system that is increasingly violent.”In recent weeks, more than 50,000 Americans have signed a petition to Ban Weaponized Drones from the World. The petition says that “weaponized drones are no more acceptable than land mines, cluster bombs or chemical weapons.” It calls for President Obama “to abandon the use of weaponized drones, and to abandon his ‘kill list’ program regardless of the technology employed.”
Count on lofty
rhetoric from the Inaugural podium. The spirit of Dr. King will be elsewhere.
A Christmas Story
By Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey
 |
| David Cameron |
Once
upon a time there were three wise men called Barack, David and François who
claimed for themselves the duty of freeing the world from its ills by sending
their forces to topple governments they perceived as "evil" and who
in breaking each and every clause of international law made themselves
criminals.
And so
as we enter another Christian (Roman) festive season, let us remember this
Christmas Tale and its moral. Once upon a time there were three men who called
themselves wise - named Barack Obama, François Hollande and David Cameron who
together with their chiefs of diplomacy Hillary Clinton, Laurent Fabius and
William Hague, claimed to represent the international community and took it
upon themselves to impose their justice on sovereign nations.
Instead
of making a difference through development, they chose deployment of their own
special forces against every fibre of international law making the United
States of America, France and the United Kingdom pariah states, outlaws in the
international community that their leaders claimed to represent. Welcome to the
FUKUS Axis (France-UK-US). They also took a sinister decision which will haunt
them and their countries for decades to come: they chose to use terrorists to do
their dirty work, training and arming them and sending them to run amok among
civilian populations. Thus they lost the moral high ground.
The
massacres perpetrated by the Libyan terrorists which the FUKUS Axis trained are
singularly shocking. Women had their breasts hacked off in the street, girls
were raped, little boys were impaled on metal rods, men were tortured and burnt
and sodomised as the FUKUS Axis' demons went berserk, goaded on by the three
wise men and their evil minions.
"Lift
your leg, you son of a dog, we will cut off your penis" yelled a gang of
FUKUS Axis terrorists as they sodomised a man with a rifle, treatment meted out
to all Libyans who refuse to support the FUKUS Axis puppet government run by
terrorists. Thousands of Libyans have been tortured, mutilated, raped, abused
and humiliated. Ethnic cleansing against black Libyans has taken place under
the noses of Cameron, Obama and Hollande and their Foreign Affairs Ministers.
 |
| Francois Hollande |
What
did they do? Like the three monkeys who could hear, see or speak no evil, they
covered their eyes, ears and mouths and said nothing. Members of the Libyan
National Resistance, loyal to the Green Libya which Muammar al-Qadhafi built,
risk their lives daily getting this information to us. How free are they in the
new FUKUS Libya?
How
free are people to step out of their homes, to buy a loaf of bread without
being attacked and tortured by these demons? And are the three wise men not
ultimately guilty by association for the crimes their minions have committed?
Why, the group LIFG was even on the British Foreign and Commonwealth office's
own list of proscribed groups while it was being supported.
For
the first time in my life, I have had to stop viewing the footage sent to me by
members of the Libyan National Resistance (fighting against the FUKUS
terrorists) who risked their lives getting this video out. I cannot post the
footage with this article but those with medium research skills will find it on
You Tube. The viewing is utterly disgusting and totally disturbing but it is
important for people to know what the foreign policies of the FUKUS Axis truly
represent.
In
Libya, the country where al-Qadhafi was the first international leader to issue
an arrest warrant against Al-Qaeda, we see an Al-Qaeda Salafi Sheikh beating a
defenceless man with a stick as he is strung up by his wrists, hanging upside
down. How religious is that? And then the wise men turned to Syria and employed
the same tactics, recruiting youngsters into the so-called Free Syrian Army,
arming them, training them and then unleashing them on what was under Bashar
al-Assad a peaceful society.
"Allahu
Akhbar! Allaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahu Akhbar!" they scream as a
Syrian soldier has his head hacked off by some crazed demented lunatic with a
machete. Teenagers are drafted into the gangs, controlled by Al-Qaeda, trained
by FUKUS Axis special forces and financed by their bedboy in the Middle East,
Qatar.
And
speaking of which, this Christmas Tale ends with a parting thought for David
Cameron, Barack Obama, François Hollande, Laurent Fabius, William Hague and
Hillary Clinton as they tuck into their turkeys this Christmas in their comfy
little homes, stuffing themselves stupid and chortling in self-congratulatory
delight as they sip their brandies and over-indulge on port wine as they tell
their families how great they are and how family issues really matter most.
 |
| Barack Hussein Obama |
How
many families have their forces destroyed in Libya and Syria over the last two
years? How many children do not have a father sitting at the head of the table
because he has been tortured to death by the forces that they themselves
unleashed? Hopefully with every mouthful of stuffing they will remember the
burnt and seared guts of a policeman who was turned into a human torch because
he dared to try to stop these gangs from smuggling weapons and drugs in Libya.
How
many children have lost their mothers in Libya and Syria because she had her
breasts sliced off and then her dying body was gang-raped by these monsters? As
these self-satisfied pigs tuck into their Christmas dinners, and look at their
families, they know very well what they have done but they are blind and deaf
to the horrific images and screams they have caused by their actions.
I
sincerely hope that this Christmas night, the above-mentioned will hear the
screams of a Syrian soldier screaming in agony as his anus was stretched to the
size of a football by Free Syrian Army (terrorist) personnel, which the FUKUS
Axis have recognized as the legitimate spokespersons for the Syrian people, and
as he was sodomised with an array of tools before being seared with a red-hot
poker.
And as
I wish them a Happy Christmas, breaking news has just come in: The Syrian
"opposition", their little darlings, have just used chemical weapons.
Merry
Christmas. Have a good dinner.
Israeli ‘witch hunt’ cripples freedom of speech and ICC
Since the nearly unanimous United Nations vote to recognize Palestine as
a free state, Israel has marshaled its political resources in Europe and
elsewhere to “criminalize” moves against Israel, particularly in the
International Criminal Court.
 |
| Benjamin Nyetanyahu |
Recent frightening revelations that occupants of a Mossad “safe house” in the exclusive Greenwich Village neighborhood of New York were involved, not just in the Sandy Hook terrorist attack, but in trying to avert blame to “neo-Nazi” groups, has become a disaster for Israel. This is only the most recent bombshell.
With Palestine now able to seek redress for war crimes by Israel in the
International Criminal Court at The Hague, Israel is seeking to silence all
dissent, Palestinian and otherwise, that would aid in their prosecution.
Israel had already moved to have their “hasbara assets” silence Press TV in Europe and elsewhere, all attempts at “damage control” after their defeat in Gaza and, of course, their ties to Sandy Hook.
Direct moves within most EU nations, particularly Germany, Austria, France, the Netherlands along with pressure in Switzerland and Canada, aided by attempts to pass new “silencing” laws in the United States, are intended to end future moves against Israel.
For instance, Germany is now ready to prosecute anyone, lawyers, diplomats,
journalists or professors, anyone who speaks or publishes any information
critical of Israel. It is now a crime in Germany to edit documents, even those
presented to the United Nations or the International Criminal Court, if those
documents contain evidence of Israeli crimes.
Lawyers, representing the Palestinian Authority, who have been tasked with preparing criminal charges against Israel for recent violations of Palestinian sovereignty tied to Netanyahu’s new “settlements” in now recognized Palestine, face imprisonment.
We have evidence that editors, translators and even computer technicians face prosecution, including but not limited to employees of both the United Nations and the International Criminal Court.
There is a long history of persecution of those who have challenged the historical narrative of the Holocaust. Hundreds of scholars, their attorneys and even journalists have been jailed for as long as fifteen years for failing to follow “the letter” of what has become “victimization dogma.”
Thousands more have been removed from teaching positions, fired from newspapers and other media outlets, or have been subjected to travel restrictions and “police state” surveillance. More still have been harassed, subjected to detention, even torture, for supporting “historical revisionism.”
It is not unreasonable to assume that many “unexpected” or “suspicious deaths” among critics of Israeli policy may well be a part of this process of suppressed free speech? After all, what is more effective than murder?
Lawyers, representing the Palestinian Authority, who have been tasked with preparing criminal charges against Israel for recent violations of Palestinian sovereignty tied to Netanyahu’s new “settlements” in now recognized Palestine, face imprisonment.
We have evidence that editors, translators and even computer technicians face prosecution, including but not limited to employees of both the United Nations and the International Criminal Court.
There is a long history of persecution of those who have challenged the historical narrative of the Holocaust. Hundreds of scholars, their attorneys and even journalists have been jailed for as long as fifteen years for failing to follow “the letter” of what has become “victimization dogma.”
Thousands more have been removed from teaching positions, fired from newspapers and other media outlets, or have been subjected to travel restrictions and “police state” surveillance. More still have been harassed, subjected to detention, even torture, for supporting “historical revisionism.”
It is not unreasonable to assume that many “unexpected” or “suspicious deaths” among critics of Israeli policy may well be a part of this process of suppressed free speech? After all, what is more effective than murder?
Now, with Israel humiliated in the United Nations, abandoned by the
United States and facing annihilation if they carry out their threats against
Iran, bribery, blackmail and threats are being used in a “wholesale manner” in
order to block the Palestinian Authority from, not just access to media but
from further moves at the United Nations and from free and guaranteed access to
the ICC.
Prohibitions now in effect in most European nations, along with Canada and Australia, block any effort to prepare materials for submission to the United Nations, block preparation of case materials for submission to the ICC, but this is only part of it.
Electronic transmissions of materials outlining war crimes by Israel or other violations of international law, part of the now guaranteed legal rights of the Palestinian government as outline by the United Nations, are considered criminal acts punishable by imprisonment for “not less than five years and not more than twenty years.”
This simply means that anyone from any nation that has been involved in legal processes that include information “damaging to Israel” will be deemed guilty of “hate crimes” and be subject to imprisonment.
These edicts have made it a criminal act to, not only teach “historical or Holocaust revisionism” but to report Israeli bombing of Palestinians, their shooting of demonstrators or even to make reference to the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty or Israeli involvement in 9/11 and the Sandy Hook terrorist attack.
Sandy Hook is, perhaps, the most damning incident for Israel in recent years. The arrest, on January 2, 2013, of two Israeli nationals at a “terrorist safe house” in New York, the seizure of weapons and explosives, done as a direct result of the Sandy Hook investigation, has led to a virtual explosion of attacks on free speech, most by the “pop culture press,” Google and Wikipedia.
The two suspects are identified as being “hippies” but a recent New York Times article opens more doors:
Mr. Greene had relatives who perished in the Holocaust, according to a statement released by his lawyers, Charles E. Clayman and Isabelle Kirshner. “We are surprised and dismayed that rather than conducting a complete investigation and then turning over the results to the district attorney, the police have chosen to leak innuendos, half-truths and slurs,” the lawyers wrote.
The statement came after police investigators discovered an undated letter, which they believe was written by Mr. Greene and included “kill them all” and, repeatedly, “kill.” Police officials said Mr. Greene had signed the letter with a lightning-bolt symbol associated with the SS, the Nazi special police.
It doesn’t take much imagination to surmise that the Israeli group planned to blame Sandy Hook on “neo-Nazi” gun owners and support New York Mayor Bloomberg’s demand for national gun confiscation.
 |
| Yasser Arafat |
The documents found, those taking credit for the murders, along with terrorist
manuals, obviously unneeded by highly trained Mossad operatives, are all part
of a “deception and cover” operation, done in cooperation with the press, to
derail investigations into the botched terror attack at Newtown.
We even see evidence that Israel is trying to rehabilitate the “Mossad mouthpiece” Julian Assange, long a defender of Israel and a known “9/11 truth denialist.”
Assange, long tied to Netanyahu and the Murdoch organization, has long inserted attacks on Iran and Pakistan into Wikileaks while carefully editing out all material prejudicial to Israel.
Several recent issues have put more pressure on Israel. A prime example is the breakdown in the relationship with the United States. General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, long a skeptic of America’s “alliance” with Israel, will now be working directly under Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, the only prominent US politician to have distanced himself from the Israel lobby.
Though Hagel’s nomination hearings await, Israel’s smear campaign against Hagel is failing miserably and will only lead to an increasingly acrimonious relationship with Israel, at least until the Likudists are forced from their dictatorial rule.
What had happened over decades, in Europe, Canada, and Australia, prosecutions for speech considered protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights issued in 1948, had long ago created a feeling of suppression and censorship.
That has now been superseded by draconian measures that eliminate all access to international institutions and all possible redress of grievances. Moreover, as the purpose is that of active conspiracy in support of terrorism and war crimes, of aggressive war, of widespread criminal conspiracies in banking and finance, in narcotics and human trafficking, those governments that cooperate are, in fact, fully complicit
We even see evidence that Israel is trying to rehabilitate the “Mossad mouthpiece” Julian Assange, long a defender of Israel and a known “9/11 truth denialist.”
Assange, long tied to Netanyahu and the Murdoch organization, has long inserted attacks on Iran and Pakistan into Wikileaks while carefully editing out all material prejudicial to Israel.
Several recent issues have put more pressure on Israel. A prime example is the breakdown in the relationship with the United States. General Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, long a skeptic of America’s “alliance” with Israel, will now be working directly under Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, the only prominent US politician to have distanced himself from the Israel lobby.
Though Hagel’s nomination hearings await, Israel’s smear campaign against Hagel is failing miserably and will only lead to an increasingly acrimonious relationship with Israel, at least until the Likudists are forced from their dictatorial rule.
What had happened over decades, in Europe, Canada, and Australia, prosecutions for speech considered protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights issued in 1948, had long ago created a feeling of suppression and censorship.
That has now been superseded by draconian measures that eliminate all access to international institutions and all possible redress of grievances. Moreover, as the purpose is that of active conspiracy in support of terrorism and war crimes, of aggressive war, of widespread criminal conspiracies in banking and finance, in narcotics and human trafficking, those governments that cooperate are, in fact, fully complicit
Nigeria Won’t Break Up
How many times have we heard the expression “Nigeria
won’t break up”? This clichéd expression has become the chorus of Nigeria’s
ruling elite; an elite that will not raise a finger to defend the territorial
integrity of Nigeria if it becomes necessary to do so.
 |
| Goodluck Jonathan |
Like every bankrupt ruling class, ours never ceases to
find an opportunity to proclaim its commitment to the country and her unity.
One such opportunity offered itself a few days ago during the Inter-Denominational
Church Service to mark the 2013 Armed Forces Remembrance Day Celebrations at
the National Christian Centre in Abuja.
The Armed Forces Remembrance Day, also known as
Remembrance Day, was celebrated on November 11 to coincide with the Remembrance
Day for veterans of the World War II in the British Commonwealth of Nations.
The date was changed to January 15, in commemoration of the surrender of
Biafran troops to the Federal troops on 15 January, 1970, an action that
brought the Nigerian Civil War to an end. January 15 is also remembered for
another important event in Nigeria’s tortuous road to democratic governance and
nationhood. It was on that day, 47 years ago, that the first of many military
coups took place, ending Nigeria’s First Republic.
It is understandable, therefore, if presidential
emotions run high on Remembrance Day. While lauding the Armed Forces and other
security services for their efforts to “keep the nation one and in peace” the
President assured Nigerians that the country would not break up. “Some people
talk about disintegration of Nigeria, now even at political levels, some people
take it as a weapon… when they want to discuss politics. But my conviction, and
I believe that of most people here and those listening to us, is that Nigeria
will continue to remain a united nation,” the President averred.
Two months ago, at the height of the debate about
another petrol price increase, the President had likened the pains Nigerians
were experiencing to a boil on the face of a five-year-old girl. Then, he had
suggested surgery for the little girl with an assurance that “if she bears the
pain and does the incision and treats it, after some days or weeks, the child
will grow up to be a beautiful lady”. The President was saying in essence that Nigerians
should be ready to bear the pain of his government’s agonising policies.
 |
| Nigerian Children |
This time around, President Jonathan likened Nigeria
to a 100-year-old marriage which, in his wisdom, is indissoluble. “Nigeria will
not disintegrate… I know Nigeria will remain one”, the President assured his
audience. “In 2014, we will celebrate our centenary, 100 years in existence. It
will only take two mad people to stay in marriage for 100 years and say that is
the time you will divorce and we are not mad. If there are issues that have
been brewing over the period and we have been managing, we will continue to
manage.”
I wonder why the President keeps coming up with these
pedestrian comparisons. First, there are not many people in the world who live
up to 100 years and there are even fewer who are married for that long. Even if
we assume that the President was speaking metaphorically, there is no law that
says people who have been married for so long can’t go their separate ways.
You
don’t have to be mad to divorce after being married for a long time. Sacrifice,
yes, but marriages survive based on trust, love and respect, not because of how
long. No marriage can survive for too long if it is based on abuse, neglect and
deprivation.
Mr. President, we can’t continue to manage after over
five decades of independence and almost a century of amalgamation and billions
of dollars in earnings. Every Nigerian, including those whose actions have
brought the country to its knees, has become a professional manager.
No country
can survive that continues to patch rather than fix once and for all the
long-term structural problems that continue to hold down its progress.
Waxing patriotic, President Jonathan had this to say
about the motherland: “I always say that Nigeria is great not because of our
oil, because we have people that produce more oil than us but we are
appreciated and still reckoned with because of our size and diversity both for
human beings and environment. These are areas we should exploit for unity and
development”.
 |
| Mo of The Congo |
Mr. President, I hate to be the bearer of bad news,
but the reality is that Nigeria is only great in our imaginations. Nigeria is
big for nothing! We are not respected in the comity of nations; our citizens
are mistreated around the world, sometimes because of their actions, and other
times simply because they have a green passport. What is there to respect? Even
with the abundance of human and natural resources, we have one of the highest
maternal mortality rates in the world. We are ranked amongst the most corrupt
nations in the world and we are in competition with Afghanistan, Chad, Angola,
DR Congo and Pakistan, for countries with persistent polio transmission. To our
eternal shame, while Afghanistan’s polio programme has been described as
“consistently performing at a reasonable level”, Nigeria’s “has slipped back in
a quite alarming way”.
That President Jonathan – like those before him – has
to use every opportunity to proclaim that “Nigeria won’t break up” is
reflective of the state of our union. Forty three years after the civil war
ended, we have a virtual war on our hands. The same issues that existed before
the civil war began are still with us, except that today they have grown worse.
The President is unable to visit certain parts of the country; fiends are
murdering at will in the name of religion; militancy has become profitable;
armed robbers and “freelance assassins” prowl the country while kidnapping has
become a lucrative profession; poverty, anger and disillusionment are rife; and
our corrupt public officials have graduated from 10 per cent to 150 per cent
kickback. What this means is that our rulers, and their collaborators in the
private sector, have become so brazen that contractors are guaranteed to
receive full payment for a contract that was never started, let alone
completed. And they are entitled to an additional half of the total contract
sum after a review of the contract in line with the rate of inflation.
Indeed, we are witnessing a scenario worse than the
country breaking up. The real fear shouldn’t be the country breaking up because
that is a harder and much longer route to travel. The real fear is the
possibility that anarchy will envelop the country and we will go the route of
Somalia, the poster child of failed states.
The President admonishes “us all (to) stand up and
condemn those who say otherwise about our unity. Those who call for our
disintegration or who make similar statements should be condemned by all
Nigerians”. I agree with the President. Now also is the time for all Nigerians,
including the President himself, to rise up in one voice and condemn those ills
that breed terrorism, anger, disillusionment, poverty and threaten the unity of
the country. Ills such as corruption, abuse of power and suppression of the
rule of law.
Ultimately, Nigerians would have to take control of
their destiny and decide the shape of things to come. If in the end the country
survives the doomsday prophesy, it won’t be because the present administration
has done anything to stem the slide.
By Chido Onumah
By Chido Onumah
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou can watch more News about Ghana on Joy news
ReplyDelete