Muse Report shows how the French Government supported Habyiramana during the 1994 Genocide!

Just two days ago an American Law Firm studied the Rwandan Genocide as they say it themselves: “In light of that inquiry, the Government of Rwanda has retained the Washington, D.C. law firm of Cunningham Levy Muse LLP to review and report on the material available in the public record on the role and knowledge of French officials regarding the Genocide against the Tutsi” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 3, 2017). This here is will be quotes from that report that is on the role of the French Government in the Rwandan Genocide. Clearly, there has been allegations and has been some talk about that, concerning the arms and the knowledge of it. This report are putting light on some of that. I will take the quotes that is substantial for the French intervention in the civil war and genocide in Rwanda.

“The expansion of France’s military support and strategic advice began within days of the war’s commencement. On October 11, 1990, Defense Attaché Colonel René Galinié recommended sending French advisers into the field, northeast of the combat zone, to “educate, organize and motivate troops that had been ossified for thirty years and who had forgotten the basic rules of battle.” (…) “In addition to advice, French officials supplied the FAR with modern mortars, armored vehicles, and other vehicles, along with ammunition and rockets. French officials also provided and helped maintain helicopter-gunships, which fired upon RPF fighters. According to jokes at the time, the only thing Rwandan soldiers did was pull the trigger” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 12-13, 2017).

“Massacres of Tutsi continued throughout 1991, 1992, and up until the Genocide. French officials were aware of massacres at this time, as well as the role of the Habyarimana government and its military in them. Despite this knowledge, French officials maintained their support of the Rwandan military and funneled weapons into Rwanda” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 20, 2017).

“Thus, in February 1993, after the Noroît detachment had just been reinforced . . . , the Army Chief of Staff reminded the defense attaché that he was responsible for “ensuring that the Rwandan army does not find itself in a stock shortage of sensitive ammunition . . . and that deliveries to the FAR of military equipment be made in the utmost discretion.” In fact, in the timeline laid down in his end of mission report, Colonel Philippe Tracqui, commander of the Noroît detachment for the period from February 8, 1993 to March 21, 1993, noted “Friday, February 12, 1993: landing of a DC8 50 with a 12.7mm machine gun plus 100,000 cartridges for the FAR. Wednesday, February 17, 1993: landing of a Boeing 747 with discrete unloading by the FAR of 10 mm shells and 68 mm rockets (Alat).” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 23, 2017).

“The French Parliamentary Commission accordingly found: Faced with procrastination by Rwandan authorities and concerned about the stability of states and regional security, France never made the decision to suspend all cooperation, or even to decrease the level of its civil and military aid. Thus, President Juvénal Habyarimana was able to convince himself that “France . . . would be behind him regardless of the situation, and he could do anything militarily and politically.” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 27, 2017).

“Arms flows to the FAR were not suspended immediately by France after the imposition of the arms embargo on May 17, 1994. Rather, they were diverted to Goma airport in Zaire as an alternative to Rwanda’s capital, Kigali, where fighting between the FAR and the rebel RPF as well as an international presence made continued shipments extremely difficult. Some of the first arms shipments to arrive

in Goma after May 17 were supplied to the FAR by the French government. Human Rights Watch learned from airport personnel and local businessmen that five shipments arrived in May and June containing artillery, machine guns, assault rifles and ammunition provided by the French government. These weapons were taken across the border into Rwanda by members of the Zairian military and delivered to the FAR in Gisenyi. The French consul in Goma at the time, Jean-Claude Urbano, has justified the five shipments as a fulfillment of contracts negotiated with the government of Rwanda prior to the arms embargo” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 39, 2017).

“Information in the public record also shows that in the months that followed the Genocide against the Tutsi French officials continued to support génocidaires. On August 3, 1994, the UN Secretary General suggested that the international community should coordinate with UNAMIR to identify within the camps perpetrators of the Genocide against the Tutsi, with an eye to bringing them to justice. But instead, French soldiers escorted and released suspected génocidaires in Zaire. Between July and September 1994, French military helicopters evacuated Bagosora, along with Interahamwe leader Jean-Baptiste Gatete, and other ex-FAR troops and militia members, out of Goma” (…) “Finally, we urge the Government of Rwanda to seek France’s cooperation in this endeavor. To this end, France should make available its archives, documents, physical evidence and officials (current and former). Any investigation by the Government of Rwanda should evaluate what occurred in the 1990s, as well as what has happened since then, including France’s cooperation with this investigation into French complicity in the Genocide” (Cunningham Levy Muse, P: 48, 52, 2017).

This one collected lots of public information and put into account. This is damning evidence and not just random quotes from a mad-man, but from lawyers collected information as ordered by the Rwandan Government. The could have been done by the French, they might have given other insights and even transcripts we haven’t seen. Even as the Rwandan has and can get documentation on the actions during the genocide and before. Since the Rwandan Government wants closure and might want the French to answer for their crimes.

French President Francois Mitterrand at the time was loyal to President Juvenal Habyarimana, therefore wanted to stop the Rwandan Patriotic Front from overthrowing their man at any cost apperently. The French really showed it with the ammunition, training and also helping them flee with weapons to Zaire/Democratic Republic of Congo. Clearly, the French knew what they did and did it with a reason, as of they wanted someone loyal to them and also a weapons brother at any cost.

So the continued trouble of the Great Lakes Region has been created by the French as well. Since they let the Interahamwe and Ex-FAR leave with weapons in the refugee camps in the DRC. That has been an initial reason for violence since the 1990s. The French should step up and take responsibility for what they did and who they gave power to. Which also created this genocide. The PRF and President Paul Kagame did his part, the RPF is not a holy and non-violent movement who just brought peace. They also killed and took control. However, the French did aid and abide help to the other partner in the crime. Therefore, they are responsible for their part in this genocide. That shouldn’t be left alone and the stones should be turned, the ones sanction this and ordering this on behalf of Habyarimana and his government.

This report was compelling and it shows how disgraceful the French was and how they really wanted the dictator Habyirmana to continue to rule in Rwanda. Peace.

Reference:

Cunningham Levy Muse LLP – ‘REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE GOVERNMENT OF RWANDA ON THE ROLE OF FRENCH OFFICIALS IN THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE TUTSI’ (11.12.2017)

Patrice Lumbaba CIA files: What can we learn from the Cables?

There are lot of information in the covert operation done by the American Government. It is well known for most that the main supporter and donor to Democratic Republic of Congo was the United States after Independence. This was to stop the Soviet interference during the Cold-War. It would seem most likely that the CIA or any other paid assassins from the US to assassinate the first President Patrice Lumumba, to secure their ally and political beneficiary Mobutu. Therefore, the newly declassified CIA cables, can say a lot that hasn’t be reviled about the plans and how it happen. Take a look!

A CIA Cable from August 6^th 1960:

“Appreciate excellent reporting your reference and commend his Alert Rolf. We wish to give every positive support in eliminating Lumumba from any possibility resuming governmental position or if he fails in Leop. Setting himself in Stanleyville or elsewhere. While fully aware of nefarious plotting Ghana, Guinea, UAR. To restore Lumumba, greatly disturbed at reference to and particulary as member of this cliques. Can you suggest any action we can propose to obacid or take otherwise to help detach them from Lumumba” (CIA, August 1960).

A CIA Cable from 19^th October 1960:

“We still have political stalemate in Leopoldville, but Lumumba ‘s long-term political prospects may have been boosted by indications of support from UN quarters, and by Mobutu’s insecure hold on Congo army. A. Hammerskjold told Ambassador Wadsworth 15 October he still regards Lumumba as legal premier. Added that he plans to “break” Tshombe by insisting that Belgians and others route all Congo through the UN. 1. Hammerskjold probably softening his opposition to Lumumba in order to keep support of many African states for UN operations in the Congo” (…) “III. Mobutu appears to have dropped idea of reconvening parliament in order to strip Lumumba of his immunity from arrest. Neither side appears confident of strong parliamentary support” (CIA, 1960).

A CIA Cable from 30^th November 1960:

“Orientale Province controlled by Lumumba forces since mid-October, despite some opposition from army elements loyal to Mobutu. A. Lumumba, describing situation Orientale, recently observed that “liberation movement in Congo could be launched from there”. Probably hopes to consolidate position there, then build up his following in other areas. B. Lumumba agents, the UAR, and the Soviet bloc continue active in support of this goal” (…) “III. On 28 November, Lumumba partisans in Stanleyville launched sweeping arrests of Europeans, including UN personnel. Most released, but many beaten. UN representative in Stanleyville asked for emergency air evacuation of 1,000 Europeans on 29 November, but request dropped on 30 November with UN reporting Stanleyville “quiet” (…) “Mobutu’s Commissioners decided on 29 November to mount military operations against Lumumba forces at Stanleyville. This would be difficult. If UN unable to prevent such action, result would be a civil war” (CIA, November 1960).

A CIA Cable from 28 December 1960:

“1. Rival regimes in Leopoldville and Stanleyville continue to spar. A. Mobutu hampered by logistical problems operating against distant Oriental province. B. Gizenga threatened by critical shortage food and gasoline in Stanleyville. II. Gizenga has broken Mobutu’s “economic blockade”, however, by moving forces in Kivu Province which should relieve pressure on food supply Stanleyville” (CIA, 1960).

A CIA Cable from January 19 1961:

“1. Thanks for Patrice. If we had known he was coming we would have baked a snake. 2. Per GOK had no advance word what so ever. Lumumba severly beaten at airport by gendarmerie, then taken Jadotville prison where guarded by all white guards. GOK does not plan to liquidate Lumumba. Fears changes of Balubakat uprsing in Eville considerable increased” (CIA, 1961).

A CIA Cable from February 10 1961:

“Lumumba fate is best kept secret in Katanga. In addition Embassy demarche to Mukongo to request humane treatment for Lumumba has caused gok make every effort deny firm data to Odyoke, United States. 2. In above context following is review of reports received by Eliz since 17 Jan. A. From dr. De Coster (pediatrician from Stanleyville now living in Eville, we got data from unknown doctor who claims verified death). Lumumba, Mpolo and Ok to executed just off road from Eville to Jadotville on 17 Jan. B. Doctor Lauveau, Belgian Physician with good local contacts, stated on 19 Jan that Lumumba if not already executed was about to be. Mentioned GOK ministers had each been allowed to beat Lumumba first. C. On 1 Feb Commandant Roger Van Der Stock, G-2 Sud Kasai Army, stated categorically that Lumumba dead, but refused reveal source. Said knows man who executed him. D. On 2 Feb Dutch dentist St. Van Baalen, whose wife is secretary Tshombe office, stated definitly Lumumba dead” (CIA, 1961).

A CIA Cable from October 11^th 1975:

“Gottlieb testified poison intended for Lumumba came from Agency’s stockpile “… and (was) sent to a CIA agent in the Congo now known as Zaire for use against Lumumba.” Poison plan was never used as Lumumba was killed by unknown assassins in Katanga Province just few days before inauguration President Kennedy Jan 1961. In 1961 Gottlieb headed Central Division which among other things handled requests for poison by agents in field. He confirmed a number of critical details regarding earlier allegations that the Intelligence Agency was involved in trying to poison Lumumba” (CIA, October 1975).

So there are clear talks of both project of Poisoning Lumumba, that some sent a message to Washington to bake a snake to him already in January 1961, therefore, there are clear indications that the United States and the CIA was involved in the killings. It is sad that Roger Van Der Stock never revealed his sources and neither who he believed did it. You wouldn’t send this sort of messages from the DRC to Washington if you hadn’t something sinister planned. The United States wanted to stop the fraction run by Patrice Lumumba, who we’re supported and had Marxist view, which was countering the ideals of Washington. That was why the death and demise of Lumumba, fit the US very well and the new puppet dictator Mobutu fit the program. Therefore, anyone with a beautiful mind, would understand the value of assassinate Lumumba, to get loyalty to Washington, instead of Moscow. Peace.

Opinion: Austin Powers aka BoJo trying to be jolly in Uganda and Kenya!

There is one of these lost stories that deserves to questioned, as the United Kingdom who are toiled in issues on their own continent, with trade and with borders are suddenly sending their Secretary of State Boris Johnson, the former columnist who hasn’t written much of any good about these nations he is visiting. The visit is coming in the same weeks as the Brexit is a hot potato and the United Kingdom needs secure partners for their economic activity.

So the United Kingdom suddenly sending their Secretary of State for Foreign Commonwealth Affairs Johnson to Uganda and Kenya, seems to be more an internal needed boost for the United Kingdom, as they need to know that they have trading partners when the article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty get notified. The negotiations and the unknown agreement with European Unions, leaves lot of trade and transactions in the wind. Therefore, the need to diversify and get new connections is more important.

That UK have a long history on the continent and has done despicable things is well-known, that they have gone in only in the interest of the ones in Oxford Street, London or even business in Belfast over the ones in real need in the Protectorates or Colonies. So the United Kingdom Government have most of the time been more reassuring for the ones on the British Isles over the ones in the colonies. Her Majesties civil servants have served London and than offered a token of goodwill if needed be.

Therefore reading this of the visit seems like to good to be true!

“Boris Johnson, the UK Secretary of State for Foreign Commonwealth Affairs, called on me yesterday at State House, Entebbe. Our discussion focused on regional security, especially the situation in Somalia. We also discussed trade and investment between our two countries” (Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, 16.03.2017).

“NAIROBI, 17 March 2017 (PSCU) – President Uhuru Kenyatta this evening held talks with UK Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Secretary Boris Johnson who paid him a courtesy call at State House, Nairobi. President Kenyatta and the British Foreign Secretary discussed promotion of industry and manufacturing. They also exchanged views on the strengthening of trade between Kenya and Britain as well as with the rest of the Commonwealth countries” (Uhuru Kenyatta, 17.03.2017).

First, that Boris Johnson isn’t caring much about the regional troubles, unless it bring work to Birmingham, Swindon or to Yorkshire. If the trade is being done and export from Kenya and Uganda, it is the British Exporters earning the major coins, not the Kenyan producer or the Uganda merchant. The needed tax-base has to be settled in the United Kingdom.

Secondly, the Commonwealth idea is to keep the sphere of the former colonies in a circle where the British and United Kingdom interest get traction and creates development on models where the British manufacturing and technology get traded to them. So that the former colonies get more ideal production from the Leyland and Vauxhall of today. Not buy Fiat or even Tesla. Buy British and serve British values and than if your a good boy, you get British direct aid.

Third, it is connected, but the uncertain future of trade within the European Union, makes the UK so edgy that they have to forge close relationship to make sure they have more open markets to have their bazaar and also sell their repacked tea.

So do I believe he was just visiting in goodwill and care of the Commonwealth nations, no! I do believe he came to be able to have strengthening the markets and get better surplus of funds with the counterparts of Uganda and Kenya. This because he knows that he doesn’t have to dole out much funds or follow heavy institutional policies to get it implemented. Therefore, he traveled here and tried to forge it even more. Peace.

Opinion: Museveni and his axing of civil servants; it is not a quick fix to get the government institutions going!

We all know why all of a sudden all employees of Uganda National Roads Authority (UNRA) we’re fired, after scandal upon scandal where the prices per meter of road went into the imaginary and also the due diligence on the contracts of the roadworks wasn’t really done by the government institution. Still, resolving the matter with clearing the shop totally is more of a public stunt, than actually making it decent. The first culture of thieving, counterfeiting and all the matters lay in most of the government institutions already. That is being made from the top where the monies are spent on farm equipment for the president instead of pay-rise for the civil servants.

President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni has lost it. It is evident with the sacking of the medical personnel of the Nakawuku Health Centre III. This is proof of the wilderness of the Executive these days. As the hide and seek of professional manner from the top, down to the lowest civil servant. If the system we’re correct and the salaries made sense than the works would be done proper and the so-called laziness would not needing sanctions. The other reason for the laziness is the loose structure of the health-care and the systematic under-funded health care in Uganda. That is why there is not functioning Cobalt 60 Teletheraphy Machine for the needed Cancer treatment at Uganda Cancer Institute at Mulago Hospital Complex in Kampala. This is just the major proof of a degraded and worrying condition of health-care in general.

The elephant in the room is obvious, it is clearly not the laziness or the Health Care per say. It’s the structures, the funding and in the end the walking budget. The President, the Executive, the one man with a vision, the force of NRM. That man the elephant in the room is President Museveni. He has run the country for 30 years, by this time his vision and his play for making the country sustainable and steady progress should have made these problems obsolete. Instead he has gotten more land and bigger private planes, but not built proper institutions or procedures to check the government institutions. The laws and regulations of the government is loose. Because if it was transparent he could not get away buying giant and expensive helicopters while the hospitals are understaffed and the vaccine programs are only there because of donor-aid directly to the causes.

The reason for the fall of grace and the sackings is that he wants the respect of President John Pombe Magufuli. He has gone directly fired his minister for drinking while in parliament and also corrupt civil servants at the port of Dar Es Salaam not long after he was sworn-in. That perception is that President Museveni tries to get. What he forget his legacy is long sealed in the behaviour and knowledge of what the NRM really is. The Image of Museveni and NRM Regime is intertwining with corruption and embezzlement.

So the claims of fighting this and going against it are more a play of words than real actions. The times he does it is to save face and make sure the donors we’re happy in the end. That is why he has continued with what he doing and how he operate. The monies always end in ways where he manipulate and make sure the riches are around himself and his loyal cronies. So the service delivery is long gone as the NAADs and SACCO’s money all of a sudden disappear together with the steady pace of the all the other government funds that just vanish in thin air.

If you wait on and continue to wait for payment; if your boss waits for his salaries and the budgeted funds for procurement of needed technical equipment does arrive. And even if it comes, it is never on time and never allocated extra funds for the lost times and lost months as the back-pay are troubling enough. The system of this is in tatters as the government are more important for the close knitted staff around the ministers and the State House. While, the rest have to wait and live in oblivion for their service rendered.

With this in mind, the sackings are unfair as the Executive and his cronies have had 30 years to fix the system and build the government institutions. The Government institutions aren’t only the inherited ones from the colonial times and being a protectorate under the British. It has now been made in the image of Museveni. Therefore the vision and image of this laziness and the lack of supervision; is all in all his fault. It is his demeanour and his wish for weak institutions so he could beg for donor funds that is the reason for the lack of control of the health care facilities. It is the build off of poverty, so he can beg and ask for help from the international community. If the country we’re strong and had transparent institutions that worked on already government funds, than the NRM regime wouldn’t need the donor-funds and NGOs supporting the Ugandan Government. Something, President Museveni clearly knows well as he been skimming and eating of the plate for decades and hope for life at this point.

The sackings is the deepest approach of trying to action and act upon the words he sometimes utter to the public. No matter how right or wrong. He knows deep in his heart and in his soul that he is the one behind the massive need for restructuring and rebuilding the Ministry of Health and the Health Care in general. As the counterfeit pills from India and Pakistan isn’t what they say they are and not as effective as the grade A pills. That is something he knows as he takes what he can get and accept it because this make him wealthy and powerful. The legality and novelty of firing own men and woman for laziness proves the little common sense for the destruction of the institutions that knows very well about. But it is better for a few health care personnel to jump on their swords than the Executive. That is the key to this arrangement. President Museveni knew so very well and lives like it doesn’t exist because he is never the issue. The issues are always and will be somebody else than him. He is the one with the vision, the guiding star for all gracious men to follow. Therefore we are supposed to cherish and celebrate his actions. Instead of saying that this actions are really just a spark and proof of his neglect or inactions for decades, that isn’t welcomed; still it is the ice-cold proof. Peace.

Lot’s on 1950s Bilderberg Conferences that we’re on European Integration, EEC and other issues discussed within the conferences!

As there been a leak of documents that are addressing the Bilderberg conferences that have been silenced and been a not well-known public affair between the European Government and also the World Affairs, as they have been set invited to discuss the affairs and deal with the present takes of issues.

Like on the Bliderberg Conference of 1954 that we’re on the 29^th – 31^st May. When the Chairman for the Conference we’re Prince of the Netherlands Prince Bernhard and his Vice-Chairmen we’re John S. Coleman and Paul Van Zeeland. While the same Conference had rapporteurs on the subjects that we’re discussed, these men we’re from USA, Belgium, Netherlands, France and Italy, but half we’re from the United States. Of attenders there we’re from all across Europe, like from Norway came Leif Høegh; UK had a dozen attendees, but the one standout we’re Sir Harry Pilkington; From Germany Rudolf Mueller, Penagiottis Pipenelis from Greece for instance. This proves the importance of the conference as the nations didn’t send some random citizens.

They held the conference in hope for the American that the European Countries could through the NATO partnership have the military arm inside the European Defense Community, while German and French didn’t have faith in or could be part of the EDC. While the unity within unions like Steel and Coal we’re possible, as the sacrifices we’re not feasible, even if the American wished for something more than a European answer, but a Atlantic Pact, that we’re combining the European and American, not only trade, but also Defense. There we’re a general agreement between Europeans at the conference to work against the Soviet propaganda and advantages from the Communists.

One key pieces from the 1954: “The difference between America and Europe with respect to the problem of overseas territories emerged from the discussion as minor by comparison with the areas of agreement. The obvious objective to be sought is an agreed policy of the West to work towards colonial self~government as rapidly and safely as is possible. Such a solution serves the interests of the West and of the dependent peoples. It thwarts the imperialistic interests of Communism”. Second piece: “It was recognised that this conflict sprang largely from the differences in the emotional reactions to the Korean war in America and Europe – differences which it was thought had recently diminished. It was hoped that the negotiations at present taking place on the list of controlled exports would do much to eliminate them”. Third piece: “European unity in some form has long been a Utopian dream, but the conference was agreed that it is now a necessity of our times. Only thus can the free nations of Europe achieve a moral and material strength capable of meeting any threat to their freedom”.

The next conference we’re on the 18^th– 20^th February 1955 at Barbizon Conference. The Chairman of the Conference we’re H.R.H the Prince of Netherlands. Honorary Secretary we’re J.H. Reitinger and American Secretary Joseph E. Johnson. Interesting people’s attending we’re Sir. Colin Gubbins of United Kingdom, H.J. Heinz of United States and Alberto Pirelli of Italy.

Sir John Kotelawala

This was the second conference and here is the key issues and quotes from the report: “We had created the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to oppose Stalinism all Its aspects, but today that Organisation had a very difficult task. Set on foot to meet the possibility of an attaque brusquee it now found itself facing the long struggle of the cold war, perhaps to be prolonged through many decades to come” (…) “Anti-Colonialism: “A European speaker discussed the important psychological aspect of the uncommitted peoples of Asia and Africa, and a number of Latin Americans. He had been very much struck during the last General Assembly of the United Nations by the fact that so much jealousy and resentment was pent up beneath the mostly polished exteriors of representatives of these countries. This was particularly so with the Asians and to a lesser degree there was something of the kind at work in the minds of quite a few South Americans” (…) “There were Asians who, being ardent nationalists and in many cases instrumental in forging the independence of their countries, nevertheless understood the West and all it had to offer to Asia and Africa well enough to interpret it. Names of men like General Romulo sprang to mind, or Sir John Kotelawala” (…) “There was a dangerous tendency on the part of United Nations commissions, after short visits to territories under European tutelage, to recommend periods after which independence should be given. There had been continuous attacks on the Belgian position in Ruanda-Urundi, in East Africa. In this case the Commission had recommended a course which might transform the territory directly from feudalism to “peoples’ democracy”. It must be remembered that the more the Western powers were weakened in Africa the more would their political, economic and even moral powers of resistance to communism be weakened” (…) “The United Nations had entered into the discussion by way of the problem of colonialism. But in terms of the broad relationships between the West and the East the United Nations was an instrument of the greatest importance. It had been said that international law was a generalisation of British foreign policy of the nineteenth century. Whether that was true or not, there was written into the preamble and articles 1 and 2 of the Charter a set of propositions about international order which were entirely congenial to the foreign policies of all who sat there in the room and these had been agreed by sixty governments, including the uncommitted peoples whom we were discussing” (…) “One of Europe’s greatest responsibilities today was to find new formulae for getting over nationalism and in that the speaker agreed with the views of a participant who had suggested that some sort of federation might be the solution. We must find some form, whether it was of federation or of any other juridical term which one might give it, which would be a European-invented by-pass for European-created nationalism”.

The next conference we’re in Garmish-Partenkichen conference at the date 23^rd – 25^th September 1955. When the same leaders as earlier in the year at the Barbizon Conference as this was a continues effort on the common work. The key things to take from this one we’re this: “The discussion on this subject revealed general support for the idea of European Integration and unification among the participation from the six countries of the European Coal and Steel Community, and a recognition of the urgency of the problem” (…) “The six countries of the Coal and Steel Community had definitely decided to establish a common market and that the experts were now working this out was felt to be a most encouraging step forward and it was hoped that other countries would subsequently join in”.

In 2 Years the next conference happened on St. Simon Island on the 15^th – 17^th February 1957. Where most of the usual suspects showed up again, when even a Turkish representative Muharrem Nuri Birgi; Jean De La Garde, French and David Rockefeller, United States. The discussion of this conference led to this: “Several speakers urged that patience was essential in the present Suez crisis. Situations like that which developed in Iran in 1951 and was now being repeated in Egypt could not be dealt with in a hurry. A dictator who is impervious to external influences must be allowed to run through his cycle. For a period his personal pride and the demands of his position will render him insusceptible to advice or pressure. The point at which this cycle begins to turn is very delicate and needs careful watching, since a dictator like Nasser might well take desperate measures” (…) “According to the best available estimates, the expansion of oil sales in the years ahead would bring greatly increasing revenues, in fact within the next ten years the oil-producing countries of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrein should receive 5 billion dollars in oil royalties; yet it was calculated that. over this period they would not be able to spend more than a third of this amount inside their own frontiers. This would leave a surplus of about billion dollars to dispose of” (…) “It might be possible and desirable to change NATO’s present strategic!’ posture and to develop a military organization and doctrine which would free Europe from total . dependence on the threat of massive atomic retaliation. But until or unless this was done the contradictions of our present policy were damaging and dangerous. Because the peoples of NATO did not believe in the possibility of an effective shield against attack, they were reluctant to make the sacrifices required to provide for the forward advance strategy was official doctrine at present”.

The Second conference that year was in Fiuggi, we’re still the usual suspects we’re in control of it and the men behind it. Special names registered at this one we’re Henry A. Kissinger we’re a U.S. Representative and Major-General James Jr. McCormack a U.S. Representative. Key issues and quotes from the Fiuggi we’re this: “Participants from the countries directly involved, however, felt that these fears would prove to be unfounded. The Common Market would be implemented by easy stages and, if the experience of Benelux was any guide, trade With the outside world would increase together with internal trade. They were confident that the Common Market would be a step towards greater freedom in world trade as a whole. This was the purpose of the plan, although in some cases adjustments had had to be made so that particular interests would not be too drastically affected. Now that the internal pattern had been settled in the Common Market Treaty attention would concentrate increasingly on relations with third countries; the Free Trade Area would be the next step in the process of European economic integration” (…) “the main obstacle to British and Scandinavian participation in the Common Market was its function a step towards political union among the countries concerned” (…) “there was also the problem of including agriculture, which for countries like Denmark was of fundamental importance”.

At the 1958 Buxton Conference on the 13^th September to 15^th September 1958; which was run by the usual suspects yet again. Other representatives worth noticing from this ones we’re E.N. Van Kleefens from the European Coal and Steel Community, Jaques Rueff, European Economic Community (EEC), C.V.R. Schuyler, S.H.A.P.E., Sakari Tuomioja, UN Economic Commission for Europe and Sir. Gordon Archibald of the United Kingdom; other key quotes from this conference are these: “Nationalism could well yield positive results, as was the case in Turkey under Ataturk. It was objectionable, however, when it reached beyond its own borders hurting the interests of others. In such cases we had the right to protect ourselves, and should be firm about it” (…) “The Common Market was due to come into operation on a January 1959, and it was feared that, if no solution were in sight by then, the first appearance of discrimination would produce a schism between the Six and the rest of Europe” (…) “Further the speaker suggested that the Free Trade Area proposals were not the only alternative to the European Economic Community. The notion of association had a technical meaning, and various degrees of rights and obligations were conceivable and could be worked out between the European Economic Community and individual countries on a bilateral basis” (…) “Another major problem facing the European Economic Community was the co-ordination of monetary policies. As one of the participants pointed out, the economic integration of the Six required the co-ordination of all fields of economic policy”.

So there you have it and this is just outtakes, the Soviet problem is a key picture on every single conference, but that isn’t that important now. As the proof of the cold-war and the escalated influence U.S. policy had in Europe. That with their will of a more unified Europe; this being more valid for me, as the proof of the works behind the scenes from the Bliderberg group and their supporters from both United States and Canada; as they even wanted a federal solution to issues between the nation and their integration of monetary and trade-agreements on the continent.

Also the worrying views of Europeans wish to hold-on to their colonies and the liberation of the nations under British and French rule. While the Americans actually wanted a quicker liberation, while they had the worry of Soviet and Communist influence in the new “territories”; the leaked documents really reflect the dominance and arrogance of the Europeans at the time as their paternalistic threshold came under question. Another key we’re  the usefulness of NATO and the place of military operations as a countering for peace in Europe, as the fear of Soviet was a reason for the alliance after the Second World War.

Next time I drop on the subject, I will go through the 1960s documents of Bilderberg conferences. To see what else that came up in the next decade. Peace.

First Q: What is in Theresa May’s drink? Second Q: What reason does she have to appoint Boris Johnson for Foreign Secretary? Why do I ask? Because of what he has written and said about Foreigners in the past…

I don’t know what kind of Sherry or Wine the new British Prime Minister Theresa May is drinking, but something fishy in it; and it is not the fish and chips from the port of Southampton that is the issue, the issue is the decision to pick Boris Johnson, the former London Mayor. To become the Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom!

I don’t know what kind of trade-off that we’re behind the scenes as his supporters of backbenchers and the ones not leaving him behind Michael Gove skimmed glasses. Certainly there is something that is bugging me. There is an issue of uncertainty that this man should be the man for the Foreign Policy and Foreign Affairs from the United Kingdom. The brash and unsettled man, who loves the spotlight and brute language, which’s now supposed to sweet-talk diplomates and generates negotiations with the European Union and other foreign dignitaries as the new trade-policy and other agreements need to the fit the Post-Brexit agenda. Oh, dear Lord would you give UK a better political climate, for Europe’s sake.

The man running the foreign affairs wrote back in the day this in the Telegraph:

“They say he is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird. Like Zeus, back there in the Iliad, he has turned his shining eyes away, far over the lands of the Hippemolgoi, the drinkers of mares’ milk. He has forgotten domestic affairs, and here, as it happens, in this modest little country that elected him, hell has broken loose” (Johnson, 2002).

He also had some ideas about Uganda:

“Consider Uganda, pearl of Africa, as an example of the British record. Are we guilty of slavery? Pshaw. It was one of the first duties of Frederick Lugard, who colonised Buganda in the 1890s, to take on and defeat the Arab slavers. And don’t swallow any of that nonsense about how we planted the ‘wrong crops’. Uganda teems, sprouts, bursts with vegetation. You will find fruits rare and strange, like the jackfruit, hanging bigger than your head and covered with green tetrahedral nodules. Though delicately perfumed, it is, alas, more or less disgusting, and not even Waitrose is pretentious enough to stock it” (…) “So the British planted coffee and cotton and tobacco, and they were broadly right. It is true that coffee prices are currently low; but that is the fault of the Vietnamese, who are shamelessly undercutting the market, and not of the planters of 100 years ago. If left to their own devices, the natives would rely on nothing but the instant carbohydrate gratification of the plantain. You never saw a place so abounding in bananas: great green barrel-sized bunches, off to be turned into matooke. Though this dish (basically fried banana) was greatly relished by Idi Amin, the colonists correctly saw that the export market was limited” (Johnson, 2002).

If you thought this was his worst and most arrogant belief of other fellow human being and states, just wait there is more in land. This man has displayed a real level of character as the stereotyping of people is enormous. Over a decade later he writes this:

“The Labour government enlisted this country in all sorts of wars around the world, some more disastrous than others. British soldiers went to fight and die in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in the Balkans. Here we had people with close relatives in our own country – yes, our own kith and kin – and we did absolutely nothing. We turned our backs on the very people who were actually indispensable to the economic well-being of Zimbabwe, and Labour essentially allowed Mugabe to launch a racist tyranny. It was Labour’s betrayal of the Lancaster House Agreement – driven by political correctness and cowardice – that gave Mugabe the pretext for the despotic confiscations by which he has rewarded his supporters. And that is why Blair should be there: to mark Labour’s special contribution to the tyrant’s longevity in office” (Johnson, 2015).

What he was saying here, is that if they; the labour had left the White in power and control the country might not been in the situation and that the Zimbabwean Government couldn’t done it without them. Which is a bit disrespectful as they we’re colonial and took the land without question; not that I am defending Mugabe and his dictatorial rule, but there have to make some sense to power-grabbing man who have use all kind of tactics to keep control and run the nation. That he has used the White-men when need and abandon them when they we’re not needed. So that Johnson, the future words of his will be that the British and Neo-Colonial ideas is the salvation as the Commonwealth riches comes from his homestead and nowhere else. He will not say it so briefly, but through the bullshit-veins it comes out.

When you thought he could be more fierce, as he has addressed Africans in blatant light of colonial view, twice over two decades, with disrespectful words, as if he is supposed to greet and African President. He should study a bit more and be a bit humble, even ask for forgiveness as he wouldn’t like to be called something disgusting himself. Even if he brash and little rational accusations are sometimes eaten out of his hands by his fellow supporters. That does not make it a reality, even if the Congolese, Ugandan and Zimbabwean state are failed in some perspectives, the ways he describe it and gives only credit to the ‘white’ and ‘British’, and he had his colourful perspective on the EU:

“Napoleon, Hitler, various people tried this out, and it ends tragically. The EU is an attempt to do this by different methods” (…) “But fundamentally what is lacking is the eternal problem, which is that there is no underlying loyalty to the idea of Europe. There is no single authority that anybody respects or understands. That is causing this massive democratic void” (…) “The Italians, who used to be a great motor-manufacturing power, have been absolutely destroyed by the euro – as was intended by the Germans” (…) “The euro has become a means by which superior German productivity is able to gain an absolutely unbeatable advantage over the whole Eurozone” (…) “This is a chance for the British people to be the heroes of Europe and to act as a voice of moderation and common sense, and to stop something getting in my view out of control” (Roth, 2015).

Here he claims the EU has the Napoleon and Hitler complex for the power-sharing regime that comes from Brussels. This is the man, that already have called African for shambolic things and now his fellow brothers are using the Eurozone as Hitler, did is what he is saying the German are doing with the Euro. That is scary that a mans that believes that the German and Germany are doing what they can to destroy the Italian Auto Industry and take away the British their control of their state, proves the fear the new Foreign Secretary believes in.

Theresa May, this appointment shows little character you have or how little judgement you did with this. I hope you got your will on most of the appointment in your new cabinet post David Cameron. The Post-Brexit Cabinet that have to work and negotiate with European Union and have as a Foreign Secretary would be the London MP Boris Johnson; there is so much disgrace in his attitude and this man supposed to represent the British abroad.

I hope he changes his way, but his tone over the long time proves his distinguished belief that the British are better than other people and for some reasons have the faith for believing so. That is dangerous, not for the protectionist or fear, but the belief that the automatic British ways are better for the world than any other. That is the man they are appointing to be representing them. Any other block from Swindon or Manchester without any track-record could be more representative at this point, as he has burned bridges and is not a brother a man respect, as he has address fellow human beings very badly! Peace.

Discussion: Should the French get jurisdiction for trials of Rwandan Genocide? Since they now are breaching international boundaries and judging acts not happening on French soil, but in Rwanda.

It is not that I am for the Rwandan genocide or partial in any sense of the actions done in Paris today. I will just spill the beans and ask for questionable trial and courtship in Paris as that is France, not Kigali that is Rwanda. If it still we’re tribunal in Arusha, Tanzania then this would be understandable for court outside as it was an agreement between United Nation and the Rwandan Government for this Tribunal as Peaceful change after the civil war and the genocide in 1993-1994 in the country. There I will question the action of the French Authorities today.

In Paris today:

“On Tuesday, Octavien Ngenzi, 58, and Tito Barahira, 64, will go on trial for allegedly playing a direct role in the massacre of hundreds of Tutsi refugees in a church in the eastern town of Kabarondo on April 13, 1994” (News Wires, 2016).

Because it is an important question and with the implication of history between Rwanda and the France; France have been the colonial master on the African Continent and still have control over the Central African Franc (CAF) and with that has an economic stake in many African nations. Still, this should not be implicated into why they can take Citizens of another Nation and also order their trial, even if it is breaching with Human Rights and Roman Statute. Most Countries have ratified the Roman Statute and also parts of UN Charter for Human Rights and even the Geneva Convention on justice in War. Still, this does opens the door from who has the right to sanction and the right to create justice.

Some people might say the Rwandan Government is a totalitarian and a Police State under strict control from a central government under the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) under President Paul Kagame who does not have the will to take certain Génocidaires to court as they might implicate certain close allies of the government. Still, that does not open the question that I will talk about. Because even if the courts and judges are premature and built for the Government in Rwanda, does not take away their jurisdiction and their own rights of rule of law in their own country. Even when it is the violations are a crime against humanity as Genocide.

Not that I want the men and woman behind an action of this size to get away is not my intention to discuss it. It is more the example of colonial law and the post-colonial acts that are not just or justified. We as people have to set standards and use our minds. I will not let the French or British control the Central Arguments, as much as I don’t want the Americans or Chinese doing it. What is important is this. We have Nations, which is a set territory, a territory where they keep citizens safe and have the monopoly for violence is for the state; in that sense that the nation have an Army to keep foreign forces away and the town a secure to raise families and work. Second part of that security is the internal security to make peace inside the country with a Police that takes criminals and courts of laws that with justification condemns and detain fellow citizens that have breached the national laws. All of this should be universal and understood, as ordinary understanding of what a state should do. And it with this matter I will take a step further.

Because this is important even when the States and Governments who controls their nations and does the wrong acts against fellow peers. Their citizens should then as long as the nation and state have ratified international laws and statutes get their crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court of Hauge. Even if the ICC and it’s attack on African Leaders, it still have the authority as given by the United Nation and the other bodies together with the ratified laws that the States and Government have signed at one point in time.

The problem I have and the reason for it is simple and it’s basic for any Republic/Kingdom/State/Nation their sovereign rights and their sovereign rule as a Sovereign Power in their own Territory as it is with the Army and the Police inside that nation. That is the main issue I have. Even when it comes to Crime Against Humanity.

Let’s say that the unlawful and unjust war from the United States of America under President George W. Bush who even address the world on 20^th March 2003, which started a war on false premise and lies to American public and the United Nations, without the international states accept for United Kingdom accepting the attack on the Sovereign Nation of Iraq under President Saddam Hussain. I am not saying President Hussain we’re a saint, as his acts with certain gas and weapons against Iran was not justified, still the matter at hand can question the jurisdiction of the ones implicated and breaches of justice from the American Government at the time and the United Kingdom Government who went in Iraq. They all certainly we’re behind acts against Humanity on some levels as they went to war and even did torture in certain chambers in Iraq. Can the Rwandan Government and their courts if they collect evidence and collect for instance affidavit of victims and of low-level civil servants of the time, could they take President Bush for trial at the High Court of Kigali?

I am just asking the question, because the case today is an act upon the same sovereign question as the former Mayors of two towns or villages are taken to court in Paris. They are in foreign land as they are not in the Jurisdiction and the Territory of where the crimes happen and in the State where the claimed Génocidaires are citizens.

If citizenship and if sovereign nations still means something, then we have to ask the question and ask the matter. Even when it grimes crimes and crimes against humanity as the laws should be the same for Western Nations as for the African Nations. This should open up the questions for French interaction with the Génocidaires of the official government at the time under President Habyarimana with the military training and equipment before Operation Turquoise turned into the UNAMIR mandate under Dallaire. In that sense, the black-box sage that never really been answered as the training and interference of the French, should give the Government under Rwandan Patriotic Front to be allowed to Court the French Men who served the Génocidaires, right? Since the French now is doing the same in Paris, just because they are French and European should not make them able to clean their hands of the blood, just as much as the RPA, now RPF should not be white-washed over time. The law should apply alike to either side. Something that should not be needed to explain or take on; as any crime on humanity and support of the attacks with weapons and structures should be taken to court as violation of these men and woman.

The case is not that the Génocidaires should be dealt with from authorities and the men behind killings should not be punished by the Government or any other piece international legal-body that has the jurisdiction on it. If so then the men and woman should go to international court or a national one that could offer a fair judgement on the causes behind the violations and assess the criminal activity.

But what bugs me is the easy way the French and Government of France overturn the Rwandan Government as a sovereign nation to turn their citizens and their eye-witnesses to Paris for the trial to concede the judgement of these two mayors. Not that I am defending the Mayors for their activity, it’s the actions of French I am still questioning.

That is why, why couldn’t the Rwandese if they could collect information on the French involvement and support of the late-President Habyarimana in the turns up-to the genocide. Since the French can now take Rwandese to court in Paris and collect the witnesses from Rwanda to serve these men and woman in the capital of France. There questions about it and if it is justified as the precedence this kind of cases set. As if the French Authorities still can grant them authority to get these people to be eye-witnesses in a court case of actions against humanity in Rwanda and not on the French shores or near Caen. Therefore since this court is not directly based on the Roman Statute or the other ratified laws where the crimes against humanity are involved and control the verdicts of the judgements. So the matter is that if it was so, since this a case that is about crimes done abroad in alien jurisdiction, it might should have been posted in the ICC and not the High Court or whatever name the Court have in Paris.

It is not that I want the two Mayors to free-men without a court judgement or get the Génocidaires of the Rwandan tragedy to not be tested in Court and get fair trials, so that the men and woman who has actually done their crimes get their punishment. But the way it is done and how it is conducted as long as it talks about Sovereign States and Territory; when coming to court and to be able to conduct justice to its citizens and the condemn the crimes, condone it and make sure that criminals get fair trials before serving time as felons. That shouldn’t be too much to ask. The question is if we twisted the Courts to Kigali instead of Paris, if the French we’re sent to be on trial in Kigali instead of Paris. That should be allowed to ask, as the Rwandan Government and the French Government are both Sovereign States. As Sovereign they have rights, over territory and their citizens and nations are bound to respect these in any sense and be responsible for justice, also over boundaries and borders. And also respecting the international conventions, laws and other ratified accords that set the standards for justice in the State as the Citizens need safety and security; something the state should provide and make sure they have, by the peaceful means and rule of law. Peace.

Reference:

New Wires – ‘Rwandan ex-mayors face trial in France over 1994 genocide’ (10.05.2016) link: http://www.france24.com/en/20160509-rwandan-ex-mayors-face-trial-france-1994-genocide-Ngenzi-Barahira

(Youtube – Speech) President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe speech at the state visit in South Africa – 8th April 2015

Worth looking and listening to. From the industrialization of diamond industry to the spirit if Cecil John Rhodes and so on!

Robert Mugabe actually said: “We grow for those who want to smoke it!”.

Robert Mugabe said: “We want peaceful elections”. He disscussed the intervention in DRC from the Southern Africa standpoint. This with the fear from the  power struggle of Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda in the DRC.

He even said: “As a real dicatator! Yes A dictator who had cut the troath of Ian Smith”. Which he didn’t do. He (Ian Smith) died a natural death.

And so much of more, that you should listen to and get enlighten, and get the vision of President Mugabe today.

Enjoy!

OBBI: Buganda Kingdom Grassrots letter to all Ugandans of 22th April 2013 (a must read!)

22th April 2013

To the Peoples of the Original 15
(Kingdoms, Territories and Districts
That formed Uganda at Lancaster)

Dear Sir/Madam!

Olukiiko Lwa Bazzukulu Ba Buganda International is Buganda Kingdom’s worldwide grassroots organization. We are writing in great distress over the signs of the times that proclaim a regime change around the corner. This in Uganda is always a violent process with many lives lost and properties destroyed. Even though this usually happens mostly in Buganda, severe atrocities have been committed in other regions too. For this reason, we are calling to all of you, individually and collectively, to join us in working towards a change management strategy. To start with, we have to go back and look at Uganda’s past and present and decide on the most logical and effective course of action.

In the year 1962, groups of people from the Kingdoms of Buganda, Ankole, Toro and Bunyoro, the Territory of Busoga, Districts of Acholi, Lango, Teso, Bukedi, Bugisu, Kigezi, Karamoja, West Nile, Sebei and Madi went to Lancaster in the United Kingdom to take part in a conference for the formation of the country Uganda. These were the original 15, designated as kingdom, territory, etc., according to their preferences. They represented every individual man and woman from their respective areas. Coerced as the Union was, choosing it over conflicts with our conquerors burdened us with a responsibility towards its member groups. Nevertheless, many who occupied the leadership positions ever since chose to become colonial agents. They did not hesitate to speak and act in ways detrimental to some groups. Their subservient mentality drove them to conduct an aggressive brainwashing program on their people, pushing them to commit crimes with far-reaching consequences. The people’s fault was failure to search for the truth, in some instances ignoring it even when obvious, thus condoning injustice and refusing to think their own thoughts. This is a problem, which we must solve in order to reverse this trend of total destruction threatening us all.

The colonialists and their agents had a plan, to assimilate the different peoples into a common culture at breakneck speed. The intent of this was the extinction of any remnant of indigenous characteristics that would inspire rebellion against the British Empire, over the long term. They called this, breaking eggs to make an omelette. The trouble was that each agent in charge wanted the final product to be a hybrid of his own and the English cultures. The other groups resisted. Buganda being at the center of all this, did so relentlessly. The differences persisted, albeit wrapped in hypocrisy. What would have been natural borderlines in a true and voluntary multicultural union ended up being splits in a dysfunctional unit. Through these cracks, enemies from within and without would take hold and pull to complete the damage. Today, it is a common secret that people feel loyalty only to their Kingdoms, Territory and Districts. At times like this, each of them sits in council discussing their group struggle. They scheme to fight, conquer and oppress others to secure for themselves the lion’s share of what Uganda has to offer, though some just struggle for their survival in the only way that appears possible. However, the past has taught quite a few sharp lessons to those who unreservedly thought and acted as Ugandans. The betrayals, arrogance, lies, theft, insults and gruesome crimes have been a tough drill to forget. As a result, this time around, hoodwinking the public is extremely difficult. Moreover, without trust the prospects of working together look dim. Anyone feigning ignorance of this is either self-seeking or incompetent. Meanwhile we hang between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Here in Buganda, children are murdered in sacrificial rituals, people of all sexes and ages are raped in broad daylight, bludgeoned with iron rods, burnt with acid, whole families butchered and many innocent people locked up in prisons, while frequent poisonings threaten to undo our social fibre. All this has made ours a fertile ground for diseases. There is land grabbing, disinterment of our dead, burning of schools and work places, destruction of shrines, desecration of our norms and traditions, as well as violation of the ecosystem and distortion of our history. Public funds are stolen, health and education are in the gutter, properties robbed, people displaced and our ancestral land auctioned off to foreigners. All these together qualify as high-key systematic genocide of the Baganda. Uganda is on a free-fall descent down into the pit. It is indisputable now that only the truth shall set us free.

All over the world, the Baganda are demonstrating a great will to come to terms with our past and present, as well as take responsibility of our future through brainstorming. We have put together the ideas we have gathered from these meetings, to help boost individual and group endeavours in finding lasting solutions to our common Ugandan problems. From these we have chosen ten redemption points attached to this letter. It has been said that wars begin in the mind, and that is where they must end first. It is imperative that we understand the impossibility of building order on disorder. Uganda was built on a bad foundation for all the wrong reasons. Nevertheless, we are all leaders at different level of society. Fullfilling this responsibility should be high on our list of priorities. We need to start thinking and working seriously about saving lives above everything else. For the lives we save might be our own or those of our loved ones.

Please pass on this letter and the Ten Redemption Points to as many people as you can.

God and Buganda, One Spirit, One Living Heart
Long live the Kabaka of Buganda Ssaabasajja Muwenda Mutebi II

Yours faithfully
Major General Elly Kigozi
……………………….
OBBI – Secretary Diaspora (London)

CC: Ssaabasajja Kabaka Muwenda Mutebi II
CC: Traditional Leaders of the other 14 of the Original 15