The dictator Kagame at UN

The dictator Kagame at UN
Dictators like Kagame who have changed their national constitutions to remain indefinitely on power should not be involved in UN high level and global activities including chairing UN meetings

Why has the UN ignored its own report about the massacres of Hutu refugees in DRC ?

The UN has ignored its own reports, NGOs and media reports about the massacres of hundreds of thousands of Hutu in DRC Congo (estimated to be more than 400,000) by Kagame when he attacked Hutu refugee camps in Eastern DRC in 1996. This barbaric killings and human rights violations were perpetrated by Kagame’s RPF with the approval of UK and USA and with sympathetic understanding and knowledge of UNHCR and international NGOs which were operating in the refugees camps. According to the UN, NGO and media reports between 1993 and 2003 women and girls were raped. Men slaughtered. Refugees killed with machetes and sticks. The attacks of refugees also prevented humanitarian organisations to help many other refugees and were forced to die from cholera and other diseases. Other refugees who tried to return to Rwanda where killed on their way by RFI and did not reach their homes. No media, no UNHCR, no NGO were there to witness these massacres. When Kagame plans to kill, he makes sure no NGO and no media are prevent. Kagame always kills at night.

6 May 2014

[RwandaLibre] The Guardian - Conflict minerals reporting deadline: is your business ready?

 

Conflict minerals reporting deadline: is your business ready?

The looming deadline for disclosing the use of conflict minerals from
the Congo is generating mixed responses from US businesses and
experts. Here are some reactions and advice

Most US public companies must report if they use conflict minerals
from the Congo or from neighboring countries by 2 June. Photograph:
Rob Lavinsky/iRocks.com

Jeff Leinaweaver

Tuesday 6 May 2014 19.44 BST

As US businesses scramble to meet the US Securities and Exchange
Commission's conflict minerals disclosure rule - with the first
reporting deadline rapidly approaching 2 June - some are complaining
of uncertainty and other concerns, while others say they are ready.

A PwC study (pdf) released in April found that many companies - 26% of
respondents - are running behind on preparing their disclosures, even
though 89% have at least one full-time staffer working on their
conflict minerals compliance efforts (and some have more than five).

The rule requires most US companies to report whether they use
conflict minerals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and
neighboring countries.

Last week, the SEC halted part of it's controversial conflict minerals
rule - at least for now - that would have required companies to
declare products that aren't free of DRC conflict minerals as "not
found to be 'DRC conflict-free'" or "DRC conflict-undeterminable". The
decision came after a US appeals court ruled the requirement to be
unconstitutional, saying it would violate First Amendment rights by
compelling commercial speech.

The Commission confirmed that the rest of the rule would remain in
effect, an order that was lauded by some and criticized by others.
"We're disappointed that the SEC's action has only added to the
confusion," a spokesman for the National Association of Manufacturers,
which petitioned for a stay of the entire rule, said via email.

Meanwhile, Julie Schindall, director of communications and stakeholder
engagement at the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition, told us
the rule is giving companies more transparency into their supply
chains than ever before. Companies are now being ethically and legally
compelled to find out what is in their supply chains, "literally from
the phone in your hand to the mine itself", she said. "This is very
powerful."

Let us know your thoughts - and your company's state of readiness - in
the comments below. Here's a roundup of advice and reactions from
experts in the field:

Sarah Altschuller, counsel for Foley Hoag's corporate social
responsibility practice:

Based on the latest SEC guidance (April 29th & May 2nd), companies do
not need to make a concluding statement in their conflict minerals
reports stating that products are either "not found to be DRC conflict
free", "DRC conflict undeterminable", or "DRC conflict free".

That said, you still need to file the conflict minerals report
including a description of your due diligence efforts, the facilities
located to produce the minerals, the country of origin, etc. The SEC
has essentially said that companies still need to do everything
required by the rule, except provide an ultimate concluding statement.

This new guidance raises an interesting question for companies that
were planning to file a reports stating that products were DRC
conflict undeterminable. Despite the SEC's guidance, companies may
wish to use this designation to clarify that products should not be
presumed to be "not DRC conflict free".

If a company is at the point where it's able to say that certain
products are DRC conflict free, and it was already going to have its
conflict minerals report audited, I don't see a reason why it wouldn't
continue to file a report using the "DRC conflict free" designation.
The company will get a benefit from that and it has already done the
work.

Patricia Jurewicz, director of the Responsible Sourcing Network:

In regards to the latest partial ruling, our advice is to report as
originally intended by the SEC. We, the sustainable responsible
investors, the human rights community and consumers, want to reward
companies who are doing the right thing, who are no longer hiding out
in the shadows and hiding behind any little word inside a legislation
or a rule, or a court decision about what companies don't have to do.
We're not interested in companies who are looking for the least common
denominator. We need to support companies who understand transparency
is important and who are willing to support the communities in the DRC
and buy their minerals when they are responsibly sourced.

We acknowledge and support those companies who have done the work
already who have done the due diligence and engaging the smelters, and
supporting the closed pipe system that are benefitting the people of
the Congo. And for people who are all wrapped up in the nitpicky
language of how the minerals is designated, [who are] staying in the
shadows, it's business as usual, and that's not the future. The future
is about transparency and accountability. We all understand we live in
a global, interconnected world and we all have some responsibility.
Start investigating what's in your supply chain.

The younger generation wants this data, the transparency. They want to
know their own values will not be compromised when they are buying
something like a smartphone. So by having this SEC disclosure is
important. But with this new partial ruling, not all the dots are
connected yet because if you're going through all of this effort to do
the due diligence anyway, why not report [it], state it?

Julie Schindall, director of communications and stakeholder engagement
at the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition and the Conflict Free
Sourcing Initiative:

There has been so much activity around this rule, and a lot of our
members have been asking if this impacts our work at the Electronic
Industry Citizenship Coalition and Conflict Free Sourcing Initiative.
We've wanted to make clear this effects your reporting obligation, if
you have one, but doesn't change what we're doing - supporting peace
building. We appreciate the companies who are working with us to
support conflict-free sourcing.

This is a complex and evolving landscape in terms of corporate due
diligence on conflict minerals. That landscape includes everything
from doing the right thing as part of [corporate social
responsibility] to expectations for various regulatory regimes to
guidance provided by standard setting and institutions and
expectations from customers. When a company gets out in front, and is
willing to say 'We are conflict free', [that] really sets up some
business competition.

Nancy Mancilla, CEO of ISOS Group:

Companies haven't moved as swiftly as needed to grasp a better
understanding of the exact percentage of elements sourced per product
from these conflict zones. Instead, companies have more quickly
committed to developing policies and the enforcement of them
individually and through industry associations. I don't think this
momentum will be lost, however, as it seems to be a strong indication
of the intention for true stakeholder engagement - companies and
regulators working together to set achievable and realistic targets.

Lisa Malloy, senior media relations manager at Intel:

Intel is deeply committed to eradicating conflict minerals from our
supply chain and we are glad to see momentum continue. Intel started
our work on this important issue before US legislation was enacted,
which has positioned us well to be ready to report to the SEC in June.
We would like to work with other companies and organizations to share
our experience. We think that the challenge of responsible minerals
sourcing requires a comprehensive solution that involves government
agencies in the US and internationally, non-profit groups and
industry.

The supply chain hub is funded by the Fairtrade Association. All
content is editorially independent except for pieces labelled
advertisement feature. Find out more here.

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/may/06/conflict-minerals-reporting-deadline-is-your-business-ready

--
SIBOMANA Jean Bosco
Google+: https://plus.google.com/110493390983174363421/posts
YouTube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9B4024D0AE764F3D
http://www.youtube.com/user/sibomanaxyz999
***Online Time:15H30-20H30, heure de Montréal.***Fuseau horaire
domestique: heure normale de la côte Est des Etats-Unis et Canada
(GMT-05:00)***

__._,_.___
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
.To post a message: RwandaLibre@yahoogroups.com; .To join: RwandaLibre-subscribe@yahoogroups.com; .To unsubscribe from this group,send an email to:
RwandaLibre-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
_____________________________________________________

More news:  http://www.amakurunamateka.com ; http://www.ikangurambaga.com ; http://rwandalibre.blogspot.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-SVP, considérer  environnement   avant toute  impression de  cet e-mail ou les pièces jointes.
======
-Please consider the environment before printing this email or any attachments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sponsors:

http://www.rencontressansfrontieres.com
http://www.intimitesafricaines.com
http://www.foraha.net
-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-

.

__,_._,___
at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

-“The enemies of Freedom do not argue ; they shout and they shoot.”

The principal key root causes that lead to the Rwandan genocide of 1994 that affected all Rwandan ethnic groups were:

1)The majority Hutu community’s fear of the return of the discriminatory monarchy system that was practiced by the minority Tutsi community against the enslaved majority Hutu community for about 500 years

2)The Hutu community’s fear of Kagame’s guerrilla that committed massacres in the North of the country and other parts of the countries including assassinations of Rwandan politicians.

3) The Rwandan people felt abandoned by the international community ( who was believed to support Kagame’s guerrilla) and then decided to defend themselves with whatever means they had against the advance of Kagame’ guerrilla supported by Ugandan, Tanzanian and Ethiopian armies and other Western powers.

-“The enemies of Freedom do not argue ; they shout and they shoot.”

-“The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.”

-“The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.”

-“I have loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore I die in exile.”

The Rwanda war of 1990-1994 had multiple dimensions.

The Rwanda war of 1990-1994 had multiple dimensions. Among Kagame’s rebels who were fighting against the Rwandan government, there were foreigners, mainly Ugandan fighters who were hired to kill and rape innocent Rwandan people in Rwanda and refugees in DRC.

READ MORE RECENT NEWS AND OPINIONS

SUMMARY : THE TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE BRITISH BUDGET SUPPORT AND GEO-STRATEGIC AMBITIONS

United Kingdom's Proxy Wars in Africa: The Case of Rwanda and DR Congo:

The Rwandan genocide and 6,000,000 Congolese and Hutu refugees killed are the culminating point of a long UK’s battle to expand their influence to the African Great Lakes Region. UK supported Kagame’s guerrilla war by providing military support and money. The UK refused to intervene in Rwanda during the genocide to allow Kagame to take power by military means that triggered the genocide. Kagame’s fighters and their families were on the Ugandan payroll paid by UK budget support.


· 4 Heads of State assassinated in the francophone African Great Lakes Region.
· 2,000,000 people died in Hutu and Tutsi genocides in Rwanda, Burundi and RD.Congo.
· 600,000 Hutu refugees killed in R.D.Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic and Rep of Congo.
· 6,000,000 Congolese dead.
· 8,000,000 internal displaced people in Rwanda, Burundi and DR. Congo.
· 500,000 permanent Rwandan and Burundian Hutu refugees, and Congolese refugees around the world.
· English language expansion to Rwanda to replace the French language.
· 20,000 Kagame’s fighters paid salaries from the British Budget Support from 1986 to present.
· £500,000 of British taxpayer’s money paid, so far, to Kagame and his cronies through the budget support, SWAPs, Tutsi-dominated parliament, consultancy, British and Tutsi-owned NGOs.
· Kagame has paid back the British aid received to invade Rwanda and to strengthen his political power by joining the East African Community together with Burundi, joining the Commonwealth, imposing the English Language to Rwandans to replace the French language; helping the British to establish businesses and to access to jobs in Rwanda, and to exploit minerals in D.R.Congo.


Thousands of Hutu murdered by Kagame inside Rwanda, e.g. Kibeho massacres

Thousands of Hutu murdered by Kagame inside Rwanda, e.g. Kibeho massacres
Kagame killed 200,000 Hutus from all regions of the country, the elderly and children who were left by their relatives, the disabled were burned alive. Other thousands of people were killed in several camps of displaced persons including Kibeho camp. All these war crimes remain unpunished.The British news reporters were accompanying Kagame’s fighters on day-by-day basis and witnessed these massacres, but they never reported on this.

Jobs

Loading...

Download Documents from Amnesty International

Loading...

25,000 Hutu bodies floated down River Akagera into Lake Victoria in Uganda.

25,000 Hutu bodies floated down River Akagera into Lake Victoria in Uganda.
The British irrational, extremist, partisan,biased, one-sided media and politicians have disregarded Kagame war crimes e.g. the Kibeho camp massacres, massacres of innocents Hutu refugees in DR. Congo. The British media have been supporting Kagame since he invaded Rwanda by organising the propaganda against the French over the Rwandan genocide, suppressing the truth about the genocide and promoting the impunity of Kagame and his cronies in the African Great Lakes Region. For the British, Rwanda does not need democracy, Rwanda is the African Israel; and Kagame and his guerilla fighters are heroes.The extremist British news reporters including Fergal Keane, Chris Simpson, Chris McGreal, Mark Doyle, etc. continue to hate the Hutus communities and to polarise the Rwandan society.

Kagame political ambitions triggered the genocide.

Kagame political ambitions triggered the genocide.
Kagame’s guerrilla war was aimed at accessing to power at any cost. He rejected all attempts and advice that could stop his military adventures including the cease-fire, political negotiations and cohabitation, and UN peacekeeping interventions. He ignored all warnings that could have helped him to manage the war without tragic consequences. Either you supported Kagame’ s wars and you are now his friend, or you were against his wars and you are his enemy. Therefore, Kagame as the Rwandan strong man now, you have to apologise to him for having been against his war and condemned his war crimes, or accept to be labelled as having been involved in the genocide. All key Kagame’s fighters who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity are the ones who hold key positions in Rwandan army and government for the last 15 years. They continue to be supported and advised by the British including Tony Blair, Andrew Mitchell MP, and the British army senior officials.

Aid that kills: The British Budget Support financed Museveni and Kagame’s wars in Rwanda and DRC.

Aid that kills: The British Budget Support financed Museveni and Kagame’s wars in Rwanda and DRC.
Genocide propaganda and fabrications are used by the so-called British scholars, news reporters and investigative journalists to promote their CVs and to get income out of the genocide through the selling of their books, providing testimonies against the French, access to consultancy contracts from the UN and Kagame, and participation in conferences and lectures in Rwanda, UK and internationally about genocide. Genocide propaganda has become a lucrative business for Kagame and the British. Anyone who condemned or did not support Kagame’s war is now in jail in Rwanda under the gacaca courts system suuported by British tax payer's money, or his/she is on arrest warrant if he/she managed to flee the Kagame’s regime. Others have fled the country and are still fleeing now. Many others Rwandans are being persecuted in their own country. Kagame is waiting indefinitely for the apologies from other players who warn him or who wanted to help to ensure that political negotiations take place between Kagame and the former government he was fighting against. Britain continues to supply foreign aid to Kagame and his cronies with media reports highlighting economic successes of Rwanda. Such reports are flawed and are aimed at misleading the British public to justify the use of British taxpayers’ money. Kagame and his cronies continue to milk British taxpayers’ money under the British budget support. This started from 1986 through the British budget support to Uganda until now.

Dictator Kagame: No remorse for his unwise actions and ambitions that led to the Rwandan genocide.

Dictator Kagame: No remorse for his unwise actions and ambitions that led to the Rwandan genocide.
No apologies yet to the Rwandan people. The assassination of President Juvenal Habyarimana by Kagame was the only gateway for Kagame to access power in Rwanda. The British media, politicians, and the so-called British scholars took the role of obstructing the search for the truth and justice; and of denying this assassination on behalf of General Kagame. General Paul Kagame has been obliging the whole world to apologise for his mistakes and war crimes. The UK’s way to apologise has been pumping massive aid into Rwanda's crony government and parliement; and supporting Kagame though media campaigns.

Fanatical, partisan, suspicious, childish and fawning relations between UK and Kagame

Fanatical, partisan, suspicious, childish and fawning relations between UK and Kagame
Kagame receives the British massive aid through the budget support, British excessive consultancy, sector wide programmes, the Tutsi-dominated parliament, British and Tutsi-owned NGOs; for political, economic and English language expansion to Rwanda. The British aid to Rwanda is not for all Rwandans. It is for Kagame himself and his Tutsi cronies.

Paul Kagame' actvities as former rebel

Africa

Loading...

UN News Centre - Africa

Loading...

The Africa Report - Latest

Loading...

IRIN - Great Lakes

Loading...

This blog reports the crimes that remain unpunished and the impunity that has generated a continuous cycle of massacres in many parts of Africa. In many cases, the perpetrators of the crimes seem to have acted in the knowledge that they would not be held to account for their actions.

The need to fight this impunity has become even clearer with the massacres and genocide in many parts of Africa and beyond.

The blog also addresses issues such as Rwanda War Crimes, Rwandan Refugee massacres in Dr Congo, genocide, African leaders’ war crimes and crimes against humanity, Africa war criminals, Africa crimes against humanity, Africa Justice.

-The British relentless and long running battle to become the sole player and gain new grounds of influence in the francophone African Great Lakes Region has led to the expulsion of other traditional players from the region, or strained diplomatic relations between the countries of the region and their traditional friends. These new tensions are even encouraged by the British using a variety of political and economic manoeuvres.

-General Kagame has been echoing the British advice that Rwanda does not need any loan or aid from Rwandan traditional development partners, meaning that British aid is enough to solve all Rwandan problems.

-The British obsession for the English Language expansion has become a tyranny that has led to genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, dictatorial regimes, human rights violations, mass killings, destruction of families, communities and cultures, permanent refugees and displaced persons in the African Great Lakes region.

- Rwanda, a country that is run by a corrupt clique of minority-tutsi is governed with institutional discrmination, human rights violations, dictatorship, authoritarianism and autocracy, as everybody would expect.