About the Zimbabwe thing.

I have close fiends who have lived there for a while and they have told me this.

The people of Zimbabwe were better off with white farmers as they were what held many communities together. The food and $$$ returned to the community and gov in taxes was what kept the system together. When a white farmer dies his/her farm isnt divided among his/her 17 sons. When an African dies his farm is. This is what the colonial empires found when they showed up all those years ago. Tonz of 1 acre farms with little fiefdoms all over the place. The empires never bothered to educate the people so when they left guess what happened. Slowly and surely the uneducated people took over and slowly messed things up over and over until they ended up with what they had before. Zimbabwe is now seeing a nice famine grip the country and basically it joins the rest of the chaos.

MUCH OF WEST AFRICA IS IN THIS TROUBLE. THE WHOLE PLACE IS RUN BY WARLORDS AND CRIME.
http://dieoff.org/page67.htm

After we "liberate" the middle east it would be in the worlds best interest to "liberate" Africa and educate the people(birth control) so some day we can give it back knowing that it will last. Africa doesn’t have a hope in hell otherwise.

___________________
Todays youth have desacrated music with the popification of all generes. FOR SHAME.

MUSIC GURU - 2002.

Last edited by Mental Exodus on Mar-29-2003 at 01:08

below is an article that was written in our daily university newpaper. i took interest in this case and it only served to infurate me about the corruption of man and the unwillingness to do anything about it.

quote:

The international community stands by as ethnic cleansing under the guise of reparations takes place per the orders of Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe. You won't read this in an American newspaper or hear it from the United Nations. The world has turned a deaf ear to the cries of suffering from Southern Africa, both white and black. Mugabe came to power in 1981 as the first and only black Zimbabwean president after the end of white apartheid. Since that time, he has molded the once prosperous democracy into a communist dictatorship. His most recent abuses of power include using the military to intimidate opponents at and away from the polls, expatriating the media for his own use, and forcing members of the independent judicial branch to quit. Zimbabwe, once the breadbasket and tourist mecca of Southern Africa, now faces the starvation of more than 6 million of its people, according to Refugees International. As Zimbabwe's problems emanating from nepotism and mismanagement have grown, so has the Zimbawean people's disapproval of Mugabe. In 2000, as his popularity reached an all-time low, according to iafrica.com, Mugabe turned on the same scapegoats he had used his previous two decades in power: whites. In an attempt to deflect personal responsibility for the country's woes, Mugabe claimed white ownership of commercial farms in Zimbabwe were to blame. He called for reparations in the form of farm seizures from whites to be given to the country's poor, black citizens. Despite the defeat of a constitutional amendment to allow such action, Mugabe instituted the confiscations through brute force. Reuters reports that armed young militants, under the direction of Mugabe, have repeatedly stormed farm property. The latest figures from the South African newspaper, the Sunday Independent, show only 400 white farmers remain in Zimbabwe versus 4,500 just two years ago. The effects of the attacks are not limited to Zimbabwe. The violence against farmers has been spreading to nearby South Africa and Namibia. The Zimbabwe Human Rights Forum says that Mugabe thugs have left hundreds dead, thousands beaten and raped, hundreds of thousands jobless and millions on the brink of starvation. The ugly proof can be viewed at www.africancrisis.org/Photos.asp. Ironically, the named beneficiaries of the land program are hurt the most. As commercial farms are destroyed, thousands of local black laborers who live and work there lose their homes and livelihoods. In a continent already stricken by AIDS, Zimbabwe's lack of agricultural production has placed the price of food beyond the reach of most. Food aid given by international organizations and other countries to help the starving has been intercepted by the Zimbabwe government, according to the Associated Press. Similar to Somalia in 1993, food is being withheld as a weapon against political opponents of Mugabe. Those who believe "the end justifies the means" should know even those causing the violence are unhappy. ZWNews.com says the majority of confiscated lands have gone to wealthy political allies of Mugabe. This has angered many of Mugabe's followers, who believed they had terrorized for their own benefit, according to allafrica.com. Neck-deep in civil rights violations, Mugabe has received international acclaim rather than criticism. Participants in the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development gave a deafening applause after President Mugabe defended his "land reform" program. The African Descendants World Conference Against Racism this month in Barbados issued this statement: "'Be it resolved that we applaud and support the courage and foresight of President Mugabe for embarking upon the land reform program." That is not surprising coming from a group that on the same day expelled all non-blacks from its conference hall. U.S. Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, forbidden to enter Britain for inciting racial hatred, counts himself as a Mugabe enthusiast. The Zimbabwe Independent also lists the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America as supporters. While it is not the job of the U.S. military to "nation-build," if there ever was a use for the United Nations, the situation in Zimbabwe is it. Mugabe is a despot in the tradition of Stalin, Pol Pot and Pinochet. The world and the media must wake up and recognize tyrants of all stripes.

its sad to see nothing done about this. its another example of showing how the UN is completely ineffective when dealing with government led attrocities or even with aiding countries in developing forward. of course Zimbabwe is only one example in africa but sadly many more exsist and altough i belive much should be done by foriegners to set up a stable africa. i also belive that the big part of it should come from within. Until the africans living under these condition become responsible for their actions and are willing to bring about a change there is only so much the outside world can do.

___________________
If God is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.

Zimbabwe has an idiotic racist regime which has to be taken down. Too bad they don't have any oil so they're not interesting.

___________________
1+1=10

and who recently shook Mugabe's hand? why Jaques Chirac off course, TOSSER!!!! I bet hes selling Mugabe some weapons, just like Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by eLe_vatE and who recently shook Mugabe's hand? why Jaques Chirac off course, TOSSER!!!! I bet hes selling Mugabe some weapons, just like Iraq

That's Frogs for ya I can't believe Chirac did that, Mugabe is a backwards thinking racist, of potentially hitler proportions

Btw a black & white guy, 2 of the countries best cricketers used the world cup to wear black armbands to protest at the regime, and now they're hiding in England, having been ordered dead should they return home, how fucked up are they there

No one has been doing anything about it and it seems to have taken a backseat to the war in Iraq and problems over the world. Mugabe is killing white farmers for no reason then again, killing people and forcing people off their own land is plain wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by torontotrance No one has been doing anything about it and it seems to have taken a backseat to the war in Iraq and problems over the world. Mugabe is killing white farmers for no reason then again, killing people and forcing people off their own land is plain wrong.

how quiant. The Europeans completely mess up the world, and all you guys expect is "someone" (which we all know means the USA) to fix their colonial troubles for them. As long as it is not genocidial or atrocious, the UN has no mandate to go into their, and I don't belief they should. For once, a conflict that one should stay out of and let it solve itself.

simply put, it's not going to solve itself and how can people sit there with the killings of people for no reason go on. Something needs to be done about this because by the time the world sits up and takes notice, it will be too late.

Just an idea that came to me talking with my flatmate tonight, who coincidentally was born in Zimbabwe: one reason why the West won't intervene in horrible situations like this and others in Africa is because not only does the US not immediately stand to gain (by this I mean economically) from resolving political conflicts in Africa but rather it would probably stand to lose a lot of vested interests by getting involved in helping to improve the political climate on the continent. This is because the West, in improving polical conditions and "empowering the people," could stand to lose Africa as a cheap source of raw materials, natural resources, and cheap labour. A lot of countries in Africa are controlled by military regimes and power-driven despots, and these ppl in charge control the wealth that is funneled in by Western companies who invest in the regions. With these corrupt dictators in charge, who in turn suppress the general public's say in public matters and keep civic peace, these Western companies have a relatively easy time in being able to 'exploit' the natural resources of the country without giving up too much in return. Of course, one condition for this would be governments who are relatively Western-friendly, or least inclined to be for the right price, in their dispostion, which most of them are anyways; at least in most of the countries which the West has great interest in, such as Nigeria.

Also, a pan-African union is trying to be set up, envisioned to be something along the lines of the EU. But on a continent that is at present largely replete with corrupt leaders driven by self-interest as well with countries in throes of civil warfare and conflict, this is almost something of a pipe dream. A strong union of African countries could spell trouble for trans-national companies, for in all likelihood they would not be able to continue to extract such a high profit in their dealings in a more unified Africa. Therefore, by keeping the status quo, the West continually stands to profit the most; that's why there is no great rush liberate the continent, and why Africa continues to be one of the saddest examples of Western apathy today.

What do you guys think? I know I'm definately generalizing to some extent, but I think there are some valid points to this argument.

quote:

Originally posted by torontotrance simply put, it will be too late.

YO do u know why torontotrance.com is closed?

___________________
Todays youth have desacrated music with the popification of all generes. FOR SHAME.

MUSIC GURU - 2002.

yes its a very horrible situation in africa rite now, high rates of mortal diseases, genocide, widespread famine, poverty, etc...but africa has almost never been anywhere significant in terms of world politics, and i fear that the situation has crossed the point of no return