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.

3 Aug 2020

[africaforum] Fw: [uRwanda_rwacu] America’s Wars on Democracy in Rwanda and the DR Congo - CounterPunch.org

 


America's Wars on Democracy in Rwanda and the DR Congo

Joe Emersberger interviewed Justin Podur regarding his new book about a conflict few understand thanks to, among other things, "Africanist" scholars.

Joe Emersberger: Your book is aimed at understanding the war in the DR Congo that killed an estimated 5 million people since 1998.

Justin Podur: I see it as about a fifteen year event that began in 1990 when the RPF [led by Paul Kagame] invaded Rwanda. That ended, arguably, sometime from 2003 to 2006. It was the same people fighting for the same general reasons. There were breaks, never very long breaks, in the fighting.

JE: Your book spends a lot of time refuting "Africanists" – the supposed experts who are like the Middle East specialists whom Edward Said called "Orientalists".

Podur: Said didn't coin that term. That's what those people called themselves – the tradition started with a group of scholars whom Napoleon brought to Egypt when he invaded. That tradition continued of Western scholars being the ones to explain and interpret the East. In recent decades, scholars from Aime Cesaire and Chinua Achebe to Gayatri Spivak (and of course Edward Said) have argued "No, people from the region can speak for themselves".

I started studying the Congo Wars as a leftist who was trying to get a handle on what was going on, knowing there is this huge US imperial footprint – and Canada's (everyone knows about Romeo Dallaire whose role is discussed at length in my book). I did what probably many people do when they try to understand a war: I picked up a series of books by these Africanist scholars.

The first time through I was reading for facts: who did what to who. But the whole time there were other things I was noticing: the way they would talk about one ethnic group relative to another, the way they would physically describe leaders who were pro-US versus those who were not. I realized that to tell this story properly I had to expose the racial and other biases of many people who had written about it so far...

JE: You describe the use of sloppy history combined with racism by many of the Africanists. You also focus heavily on the murder of Patrice Lumumba in 1960 and the crushing of his push for democratic reform in the Congo.

Podur: I wanted to talk about that because the Africanists portray Lumumba as a badly or fatally flawed leader. In my first reading of these texts, I assumed these portrayals were accurate. Who isn't flawed? But when I looked at each of the claims- the alleged flaws, none of them really held up.. There is one that he committed genocide against the Baluba [one of the ethnic groups in the province of Katanga] but it was actually his enemy, Moise Tshombe, who did that and the West pinned it on Lumumba. There are a large number of things like that. There is also the speculation that "well if he had lived, he'd have become a dictator". That's another Africanist classic. We had to kill somebody because they might do something bad in the future.

But when you understand the context at the time it's obvious why they killed him. It wasn't because he was flawed, it was because he was so far ahead of the imperialist time in which he lived. He was trying to bring the Congo's enormous resources under democratic control. He didn't slip up and get killed by local enemies. He had a large and very deep following, especially in the Province Orientale, and those people, the Lumumbists, continued to fight for 4 more years. In fact one leader, Pierre Mulele, fought for 8 more years.

The US continually poured more and more resources into making sure the Lumumbists were crushed. They did that for almost a whole decade. It was no accident. It was systematic – one of the major initiatives of US foreign policy at the highest levels. It is all in the cables, the Foreign Relations of the United States, some of which were released in 2014. They had knowledge of Congolese politics to a granular level of detail. They knew the local politicians, their positions on different issues and on one another. US officials whose names you'll recognize are in these cables: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Harriman…. It really refutes the notion of Africa, or the Congo generally, as some kind of irrelevant backwater. Imperialists don't do this kind of planning and detailed work for a backwater – I don't even think there is such a thing as a backwater any more, for imperialists who have the objective of controlling the whole world or more, since Cecil Rhodes (the original Africanist) apparently looked up at the sky and wept that he couldn't conquer the stars.

JE: And your book discusses the post-Independence dictators who emerged to become important tools of US policy: Kagame, Mobutu, Amin, Obote. You focus on the Congo but to do that you also had to discuss Rwanda and Uganda in depth. Could you go over the kind of death toll these guys inflicted? I am also curious why Idi Amin (who took power with UK support) has come to be the most infamous.

Podur: It's tough to count deaths but you definitely can for wars. Mobutu for example, there were two wars to overthrow him in the 1970s that were put down. Those were by right wing forces. Those were pretty big and probably tens of thousands were killed. He was in power for 30 years – from 1961 really until 1996. He had a long run. He was known also for the concept of kleptocracy. That comes from Mobutu.

Amin was really bad, responsible for deaths in the hundreds of thousands in counterinsurgencies in north Uganda. I think people might know him the best because he let hijackers land in Uganda in 1976. Israeli commandoes did this rescue and it became a big story because the Israeli commandoes were successful. Maybe crossing the Israelis was one reason why he became so notorious. He also deported the Indian population in Uganda, which generated a lot of suffering and a lot of hatred towards him. Amin was overthrown by Tanzania in 1979.

But then a big civil war started in Uganda between Obote and Museveni. That was called the Ugandan Bush War (1980-86). Museveni won that war. Nobody knows the exact numbers killed as far as I could find, but it could have been half a million that died in that war. Nobody talks about it, but probably comparable numbers to the Rwandan genocide.

JE: That kind of leads us to Kagame. Dictators generally struggle to justify themselves to the world, but this guy actually succeeded in demonizing the majority that he ruled over, basically declaring them all guilty of genocide..

Podur: To me it's the most successful propaganda operation ever because, like you said, the majority of a country is now seen essentially by the whole world as guilty and worthy of perpetual slavery.

The events of 1994 which I discuss in the book, include the genocidal massacres of Tutsi by Hutu militia but also the [Kagame-led] RPF massacres of Tutsi and Hutu civilians all over Rwanda. The RPF then followed these fleeing Rwandans into the Congo killing hundreds of thousands – mostly Hutus but also other groups of Rwandan and Congolese people. All of these events are generally talked about in the context of the allegedly unique evil of the Hutus. It ends up being used to justify the forever dictatorship of Kagame. It's an amazing feat.

JE: Ed Herman and David Peterson touched on this in their book the "The Politics of Genocide" Perhaps you can go through some of the estimates regarding the 1994 genocide.

Podur: I try to avoid, and I think actually Herman and Peterson also avoided, the idea that there is some kind of ledger. That's a big Africanist trope – a big part of what they do with Rwanda, is to tally up the numbers of Hutus killed by Tutsis and Tutsis killed by Hutus and balance out the deaths by ethnicity. They say 800,000 Tutsis were killed, and seem to suggest that if Kagame kills any less than 800,000 Hutus, he's being magnanimous, merciful. I keep repeating this phrase in the book: the Africanists seem to think "the first 800,000 are free".

The death estimates are not based on counting bodies or cluster sampling surveys like the Lancet has often published for the DRC, Iraq, etc. It's based on missing people. This is how many Tutsi were present according to the (adjusted) census. This is the number that showed up in refugee camps. The difference between the two must be the number killed. Herman and Peterson (and others like Davenport and Stam) say that based on that method we don't know who killed them. They also note that many more Hutus died than Africanists talk about, but that's expected because they were in the majority. Also because machete wielding militias didn't know who they were killing. They'd kill anybody who showed up to a roadblock, they would cordon an area and kill everyone inside it. Between 500,000 – 800,000 were killed by these militias, while the RPF was conducting huge massacres in the expanding areas they controlled. There are estimates as high as a million, with about half being Hutu.

JE: You also noted that massacres were incited by Kagame's looming invasion which then actually took place. In the US, there were hate crimes against Arab and Muslim US citizens in response to the 9/11 bombing. We can imagine the race hatred that would have been incited if Bin Laden had actually been poised to overthrow the US government. But Kagame gets a pass even though his quest for power incited the massacres to begin with. You also talk about the wild claims regarding the number of perpetrators of the massacres. Kagame claimed 3 million perpetrators and outright declared every Hutu adult male a suspect.

Podur: Exactly. There were tens of thousands of perpetrators, probably 30 to 40 thousand. That's a lot. I think the highest scholarly estimate is of 200,000 perpetrators. Strikes me as high but possible. However the population at the time of the 1990 RPF invasion was close to 7 million (13 million today). The idea is that they were all guilty. And if you think about demographics and age, these are young countries, the majority was not even alive in 1994. But there is an immense effort to keep the idea of collective Hutu guilt alive.

JE: It's a way to justify dictatorial rule over the majority.

Podur: And to justify RPF murders. While the militias were killing Tutsis, the RPF was also rounding up and massacring tens of thousands of Hutus, calling them to meetings and clubbing them to death. This is well documented by Judi Rever in her book "In Praise of Blood", also by another journalist Stephen Smith who estimated maybe 40,000 were killed by the RPF in this period and another 150,000 killed within Rwanda by the RPF in the following year. So the Africanists say "yeah whatever, you can't compare that to 800,000 killed by the Hutus" So 190,000 people are free. Then there was a cholera epidemic in Hutu refugee camps in the Congo that killed tens of thousands. Then Kagame invades the Congo in 1996 to hunt down the remaining Hutus who fled Rwanda and kills 500, 000 to 600,000, maybe more. The demonization of the Hutu population as guilty is there to rationalize this level of mass murder and absolute dictatorship. The Germans widely supported Nazism. In the US, white Americans would hold picnics to watch a lynching. But in both Germany and the US, there are people reading Africanist literature believing there is something uniquely evil about a group of people called Hutus in a country called Rwanda that they would never believe about themselves.

JE: And going back to Lumumba, it serves the purpose of smashing any chance of democratic development, and it facilitates resource plunder.

Podur: A big point I wanted to make is that in 1960 South Africa is an apartheid state. The US is also a kind of apartheid state. They were not going to allow a democratic republic in the Congo – a huge, resource rich, centrally located black democratic republic that could serve a tremendous geopolitical role in liberating the whole continent.

I have a chapter about Che Guevara's activities in the Congo. Guevara was a bit depressed in the Congo. I actually think he was too pessimistic about what they were able to do there. People forget that he made the calculation to go there. He could have gone anywhere. But in 1964 he decided that that was the strategic place to go, that the most strategic fight in the world against imperialism was being waged by the Lumumbists in eastern Congo. That is where he needed to be. That tells us something.



###
"Hate Cannot Drive Out Hate.. Only Love Can Do That", Dr. Martin Luther King.
###

Posted by: Nzi Nink <nzinink@yahoo.com>

__._,_.___

Posted by: Alfred Nganzo <alfrednganzo@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"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.
"I have loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore I die in exile.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
"When the white man came we had the land and they had the bibles; now they have the land and we have the bibles.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Post message:  africaforum@yahoogroups.com
"Subscribe: africaforum-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
"Unsubscribe: africaforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
"List owner: africaforum-owner@yahoogroups.com

.

__,_._,___

Fw: [uRwanda_rwacu] America’s Wars on Democracy in Rwanda and the DR Congo - CounterPunch.org


America's Wars on Democracy in Rwanda and the DR Congo

Joe Emersberger interviewed Justin Podur regarding his new book about a conflict few understand thanks to, among other things, "Africanist" scholars.

Joe Emersberger: Your book is aimed at understanding the war in the DR Congo that killed an estimated 5 million people since 1998.

Justin Podur: I see it as about a fifteen year event that began in 1990 when the RPF [led by Paul Kagame] invaded Rwanda. That ended, arguably, sometime from 2003 to 2006. It was the same people fighting for the same general reasons. There were breaks, never very long breaks, in the fighting.

JE: Your book spends a lot of time refuting "Africanists" – the supposed experts who are like the Middle East specialists whom Edward Said called "Orientalists".

Podur: Said didn't coin that term. That's what those people called themselves – the tradition started with a group of scholars whom Napoleon brought to Egypt when he invaded. That tradition continued of Western scholars being the ones to explain and interpret the East. In recent decades, scholars from Aime Cesaire and Chinua Achebe to Gayatri Spivak (and of course Edward Said) have argued "No, people from the region can speak for themselves".

I started studying the Congo Wars as a leftist who was trying to get a handle on what was going on, knowing there is this huge US imperial footprint – and Canada's (everyone knows about Romeo Dallaire whose role is discussed at length in my book). I did what probably many people do when they try to understand a war: I picked up a series of books by these Africanist scholars.

The first time through I was reading for facts: who did what to who. But the whole time there were other things I was noticing: the way they would talk about one ethnic group relative to another, the way they would physically describe leaders who were pro-US versus those who were not. I realized that to tell this story properly I had to expose the racial and other biases of many people who had written about it so far..

JE: You describe the use of sloppy history combined with racism by many of the Africanists. You also focus heavily on the murder of Patrice Lumumba in 1960 and the crushing of his push for democratic reform in the Congo.

Podur: I wanted to talk about that because the Africanists portray Lumumba as a badly or fatally flawed leader. In my first reading of these texts, I assumed these portrayals were accurate. Who isn't flawed? But when I looked at each of the claims- the alleged flaws, none of them really held up. There is one that he committed genocide against the Baluba [one of the ethnic groups in the province of Katanga] but it was actually his enemy, Moise Tshombe, who did that and the West pinned it on Lumumba. There are a large number of things like that. There is also the speculation that "well if he had lived, he'd have become a dictator". That's another Africanist classic. We had to kill somebody because they might do something bad in the future.

But when you understand the context at the time it's obvious why they killed him. It wasn't because he was flawed, it was because he was so far ahead of the imperialist time in which he lived. He was trying to bring the Congo's enormous resources under democratic control. He didn't slip up and get killed by local enemies. He had a large and very deep following, especially in the Province Orientale, and those people, the Lumumbists, continued to fight for 4 more years. In fact one leader, Pierre Mulele, fought for 8 more years.

The US continually poured more and more resources into making sure the Lumumbists were crushed. They did that for almost a whole decade. It was no accident. It was systematic – one of the major initiatives of US foreign policy at the highest levels. It is all in the cables, the Foreign Relations of the United States, some of which were released in 2014. They had knowledge of Congolese politics to a granular level of detail. They knew the local politicians, their positions on different issues and on one another. US officials whose names you'll recognize are in these cables: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Harriman…. It really refutes the notion of Africa, or the Congo generally, as some kind of irrelevant backwater. Imperialists don't do this kind of planning and detailed work for a backwater – I don't even think there is such a thing as a backwater any more, for imperialists who have the objective of controlling the whole world or more, since Cecil Rhodes (the original Africanist) apparently looked up at the sky and wept that he couldn't conquer the stars.

JE: And your book discusses the post-Independence dictators who emerged to become important tools of US policy: Kagame, Mobutu, Amin, Obote. You focus on the Congo but to do that you also had to discuss Rwanda and Uganda in depth. Could you go over the kind of death toll these guys inflicted? I am also curious why Idi Amin (who took power with UK support) has come to be the most infamous.

Podur: It's tough to count deaths but you definitely can for wars. Mobutu for example, there were two wars to overthrow him in the 1970s that were put down. Those were by right wing forces. Those were pretty big and probably tens of thousands were killed. He was in power for 30 years – from 1961 really until 1996. He had a long run. He was known also for the concept of kleptocracy. That comes from Mobutu.

Amin was really bad, responsible for deaths in the hundreds of thousands in counterinsurgencies in north Uganda. I think people might know him the best because he let hijackers land in Uganda in 1976. Israeli commandoes did this rescue and it became a big story because the Israeli commandoes were successful. Maybe crossing the Israelis was one reason why he became so notorious. He also deported the Indian population in Uganda, which generated a lot of suffering and a lot of hatred towards him. Amin was overthrown by Tanzania in 1979.

But then a big civil war started in Uganda between Obote and Museveni. That was called the Ugandan Bush War (1980-86). Museveni won that war. Nobody knows the exact numbers killed as far as I could find, but it could have been half a million that died in that war. Nobody talks about it, but probably comparable numbers to the Rwandan genocide.

JE: That kind of leads us to Kagame. Dictators generally struggle to justify themselves to the world, but this guy actually succeeded in demonizing the majority that he ruled over, basically declaring them all guilty of genocide.

Podur: To me it's the most successful propaganda operation ever because, like you said, the majority of a country is now seen essentially by the whole world as guilty and worthy of perpetual slavery.

The events of 1994 which I discuss in the book, include the genocidal massacres of Tutsi by Hutu militia but also the [Kagame-led] RPF massacres of Tutsi and Hutu civilians all over Rwanda. The RPF then followed these fleeing Rwandans into the Congo killing hundreds of thousands – mostly Hutus but also other groups of Rwandan and Congolese people. All of these events are generally talked about in the context of the allegedly unique evil of the Hutus. It ends up being used to justify the forever dictatorship of Kagame. It's an amazing feat.

JE: Ed Herman and David Peterson touched on this in their book the "The Politics of Genocide" Perhaps you can go through some of the estimates regarding the 1994 genocide.

Podur: I try to avoid, and I think actually Herman and Peterson also avoided, the idea that there is some kind of ledger. That's a big Africanist trope – a big part of what they do with Rwanda, is to tally up the numbers of Hutus killed by Tutsis and Tutsis killed by Hutus and balance out the deaths by ethnicity. They say 800,000 Tutsis were killed, and seem to suggest that if Kagame kills any less than 800,000 Hutus, he's being magnanimous, merciful. I keep repeating this phrase in the book: the Africanists seem to think "the first 800,000 are free".

The death estimates are not based on counting bodies or cluster sampling surveys like the Lancet has often published for the DRC, Iraq, etc. It's based on missing people. This is how many Tutsi were present according to the (adjusted) census. This is the number that showed up in refugee camps. The difference between the two must be the number killed. Herman and Peterson (and others like Davenport and Stam) say that based on that method we don't know who killed them. They also note that many more Hutus died than Africanists talk about, but that's expected because they were in the majority. Also because machete wielding militias didn't know who they were killing. They'd kill anybody who showed up to a roadblock, they would cordon an area and kill everyone inside it. Between 500,000 – 800,000 were killed by these militias, while the RPF was conducting huge massacres in the expanding areas they controlled. There are estimates as high as a million, with about half being Hutu.

JE: You also noted that massacres were incited by Kagame's looming invasion which then actually took place. In the US, there were hate crimes against Arab and Muslim US citizens in response to the 9/11 bombing. We can imagine the race hatred that would have been incited if Bin Laden had actually been poised to overthrow the US government. But Kagame gets a pass even though his quest for power incited the massacres to begin with. You also talk about the wild claims regarding the number of perpetrators of the massacres. Kagame claimed 3 million perpetrators and outright declared every Hutu adult male a suspect.

Podur: Exactly. There were tens of thousands of perpetrators, probably 30 to 40 thousand. That's a lot. I think the highest scholarly estimate is of 200,000 perpetrators. Strikes me as high but possible. However the population at the time of the 1990 RPF invasion was close to 7 million (13 million today). The idea is that they were all guilty. And if you think about demographics and age, these are young countries, the majority was not even alive in 1994. But there is an immense effort to keep the idea of collective Hutu guilt alive.

JE: It's a way to justify dictatorial rule over the majority.

Podur: And to justify RPF murders. While the militias were killing Tutsis, the RPF was also rounding up and massacring tens of thousands of Hutus, calling them to meetings and clubbing them to death. This is well documented by Judi Rever in her book "In Praise of Blood", also by another journalist Stephen Smith who estimated maybe 40,000 were killed by the RPF in this period and another 150,000 killed within Rwanda by the RPF in the following year. So the Africanists say "yeah whatever, you can't compare that to 800,000 killed by the Hutus" So 190,000 people are free. Then there was a cholera epidemic in Hutu refugee camps in the Congo that killed tens of thousands. Then Kagame invades the Congo in 1996 to hunt down the remaining Hutus who fled Rwanda and kills 500, 000 to 600,000, maybe more. The demonization of the Hutu population as guilty is there to rationalize this level of mass murder and absolute dictatorship. The Germans widely supported Nazism. In the US, white Americans would hold picnics to watch a lynching. But in both Germany and the US, there are people reading Africanist literature believing there is something uniquely evil about a group of people called Hutus in a country called Rwanda that they would never believe about themselves.

JE: And going back to Lumumba, it serves the purpose of smashing any chance of democratic development, and it facilitates resource plunder.

Podur: A big point I wanted to make is that in 1960 South Africa is an apartheid state. The US is also a kind of apartheid state. They were not going to allow a democratic republic in the Congo – a huge, resource rich, centrally located black democratic republic that could serve a tremendous geopolitical role in liberating the whole continent.

I have a chapter about Che Guevara's activities in the Congo. Guevara was a bit depressed in the Congo. I actually think he was too pessimistic about what they were able to do there. People forget that he made the calculation to go there. He could have gone anywhere. But in 1964 he decided that that was the strategic place to go, that the most strategic fight in the world against imperialism was being waged by the Lumumbists in eastern Congo. That is where he needed to be. That tells us something.



###
"Hate Cannot Drive Out Hate. Only Love Can Do That", Dr. Martin Luther King.
###
__._,_.___

Posted by: Nzi Nink <nzinink@yahoo.com>

1 Aug 2020

[africaforum] Comment La France a fait la France l’épicentre de la propagande des groupes Tutsi

 

Le Président Macron a fait la France l'épicentre de la propagande   des groupes Tutsi et Français  ayant l'objectif de dissimiler la vérité sur le génocide Rwandais.  Nous avons Ibuka, L'Association de la Diaspora Rwandaise en France, L'Association de la Communauté Rwandaise en France, Le Collectif des parties civiles pour le Rwanda, etc, etc. Tous ces groups sont dirigés et organisés par les  Tutsi  et   font croire qu'ils regroupent tous les Rwandais. Malgré le petit nombre des membres de ces groupes, ils sont dénommées sous l'appellation « rwandais » pour faire croire grouper tous les Rwandais vivant en France. En effet, tout le monde sait bien que " diaspora rwandaise" signifie " tutsi vivant a l'etranger". Ces groupes ont la liberte en France au moment ou la liberte au Rwanda n'existe pas.

 

Ces groupes  travaillent pour influencer la justice  française, pour l'empêcher de raisonner, de juger en toute independence, pour pleurer  indéfiniment le génocide des Tutsi.  Le slogan génocide des  Tutsi est un nouveau véhicule de la monarchie Tutsi qui a conduit au génocide Rwandais.. Le génocide des Tutsi signifie la supériorité des Tutsi par rapport aux Hutus ( les tueurs). Cette supériorité était à la base des institutions monarchiques rwandaises  qui sont maintenant en train d'être revalorisées sous le slogan génocide des Tutsi.

La France  est accusée d' avoir participé dans le génocide rwandais. Un jour, elle sera accusée de promouvoir le génocide des Tutsi qui est destinée à faire peur aux Hutus, promouvoir la discrimination et l'apartheid au sein de la société rwandaise, maintenir le  régime de Kagame et faire oublier la guerre meurtrière initiée par les Tutsi et qui a conduit au génocide rwandais.  Tous ces groupes  rwandais opérant en France et ailleurs,  les media et les ONG français travaillent  sans relâche pour faire comprendre à tout le monde que tout a commencé en 1994.

Ils ne dorment pas. Le seul objectif :  Ignorer la guerre rwandaise  en la dissimilant dans le génocide rwandais.  



COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE DE LA COMMUNAUTE RWANDAISE DE FRANCE

Rwanda podium
alt

L'Association Communauté Rwandaise de France saisit le Parquet de Nanterre pour demander l'identification, la poursuite et le jugement de celles et ceux qui ont permis à Félicien KABUGA d'échapper à la justice

 

 




L'Association Communauté Rwandaise de France saisit le Parquet de Nanterre pour demander l'identification, la poursuite et le jugement de celles et ceux qui ont permis à Félicien KABUGA d'échapper à la justice

L'Association Communauté Rwandaise de France (CRF) se réjouit de l'arrestation de Félicien KABUGA, inculpé de génocide et de six autres chefs d'accusation, tous commis pendant le génocide contre les Tutsis au Rwanda.

L'Association a pris connaissance du communiqué conjoint de la Gendarmerie Nationale, du Parquet Général auprès de la Cour d'appel de Paris et de l'Office Centrale de Lutte contre les Crimes contre l'Humanité qui indique que Félicien KABUGA a pu se soustraire à la justice pendant de longues années grâce à l'aide dont il a pu bénéficier. Elle considère qu'il n'est pas à exclure que Félicien KABUGA ait pu bénéficier également de l'aide, d'individus, d'institutions ou organismes pour se procurer des documents d'identité et de voyage, se faire soigner, voyager, etc, puisqu'il est établi d'ores et déjà qu'il a pu voyager dans plusieurs pays, bénéficier de soins médicaux, etc…

Ce faisant, ces individus, institutions ou organismes ont privé, pendant plusieurs années, de justice des citoyens français ou résidant en France, victimes du Génocide contre les Tutsis ou à leurs ayant-droits. Ils ont, par ailleurs, mobilisé, pendant des années, les forces de l'ordre et les services de la justice en charge de l'exécution du mandat d'arrêt international dont Félicien KABUGA faisait l'objet, causant ainsi un préjudice au contribuable français.

Le recel de malfaiteur étant une infraction prévue et punie par la loi française, l'association Communauté Rwandaise de France a déposé ce jour, auprès de Madame Catherine Denis, Procureure de la République de Nanterre, une plainte afin que soient identifiés, poursuivis et jugés celles et ceux qui, en France et ailleurs, ont fourni à Félicien KABUGA un logement, des subsides, des moyens d'existence ou tout autre moyen qui lui a permis de le soustraire aux recherches ou à l'arrestation.

 


Paris, le 22 mai 2020

 


Angélique INGABIRE
Présidente de la CRF  
diasporwanda@gmail.com

 


__._,_.___

Posted by: Alfred Nganzo <alfrednganzo@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"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.
"I have loved justice and hated iniquity: therefore I die in exile.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.
"When the white man came we had the land and they had the bibles; now they have the land and we have the bibles.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Post message:  africaforum@yahoogroups.com
"Subscribe: africaforum-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
"Unsubscribe: africaforum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
"List owner: africaforum-owner@yahoogroups.com

.

__,_._,___

Comment La France a fait la France l’épicentre de la propagande des groupes Tutsi

Le Président Macron a fait la France l'épicentre de la propagande   des groupes Tutsi et Français  ayant l'objectif de dissimiler la vérité sur le génocide Rwandais.  Nous avons Ibuka, L'Association de la Diaspora Rwandaise en France, L'Association de la Communauté Rwandaise en France, Le Collectif des parties civiles pour le Rwanda, etc, etc. Tous ces groups sont dirigés et organisés par les  Tutsi  et   font croire qu'ils regroupent tous les Rwandais. Malgré le petit nombre des membres de ces groupes, ils sont dénommées sous l'appellation « rwandais » pour faire croire grouper tous les Rwandais vivant en France. En effet, tout le monde sait bien que " diaspora rwandaise" signifie " tutsi vivant a l'etranger". Ces groupes ont la liberte en France au moment ou la liberte au Rwanda n'existe pas.

 

Ces groupes  travaillent pour influencer la justice  française, pour l'empêcher de raisonner, de juger en toute independence, pour pleurer  indéfiniment le génocide des Tutsi.  Le slogan génocide des  Tutsi est un nouveau véhicule de la monarchie Tutsi qui a conduit au génocide Rwandais. Le génocide des Tutsi signifie la supériorité des Tutsi par rapport aux Hutus ( les tueurs). Cette supériorité était à la base des institutions monarchiques rwandaises  qui sont maintenant en train d'être revalorisées sous le slogan génocide des Tutsi.

La France  est accusée d' avoir participé dans le génocide rwandais. Un jour, elle sera accusée de promouvoir le génocide des Tutsi qui est destinée à faire peur aux Hutus, promouvoir la discrimination et l'apartheid au sein de la société rwandaise, maintenir le  régime de Kagame et faire oublier la guerre meurtrière initiée par les Tutsi et qui a conduit au génocide rwandais.  Tous ces groupes  rwandais opérant en France et ailleurs,  les media et les ONG français travaillent  sans relâche pour faire comprendre à tout le monde que tout a commencé en 1994.

Ils ne dorment pas. Le seul objectif :  Ignorer la guerre rwandaise  en la dissimilant dans le génocide rwandais.  



COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE DE LA COMMUNAUTE RWANDAISE DE FRANCE

Rwanda podium
alt

L'Association Communauté Rwandaise de France saisit le Parquet de Nanterre pour demander l'identification, la poursuite et le jugement de celles et ceux qui ont permis à Félicien KABUGA d'échapper à la justice

 

 




L'Association Communauté Rwandaise de France saisit le Parquet de Nanterre pour demander l'identification, la poursuite et le jugement de celles et ceux qui ont permis à Félicien KABUGA d'échapper à la justice

L'Association Communauté Rwandaise de France (CRF) se réjouit de l'arrestation de Félicien KABUGA, inculpé de génocide et de six autres chefs d'accusation, tous commis pendant le génocide contre les Tutsis au Rwanda.

L'Association a pris connaissance du communiqué conjoint de la Gendarmerie Nationale, du Parquet Général auprès de la Cour d'appel de Paris et de l'Office Centrale de Lutte contre les Crimes contre l'Humanité qui indique que Félicien KABUGA a pu se soustraire à la justice pendant de longues années grâce à l'aide dont il a pu bénéficier. Elle considère qu'il n'est pas à exclure que Félicien KABUGA ait pu bénéficier également de l'aide, d'individus, d'institutions ou organismes pour se procurer des documents d'identité et de voyage, se faire soigner, voyager, etc, puisqu'il est établi d'ores et déjà qu'il a pu voyager dans plusieurs pays, bénéficier de soins médicaux, etc…

Ce faisant, ces individus, institutions ou organismes ont privé, pendant plusieurs années, de justice des citoyens français ou résidant en France, victimes du Génocide contre les Tutsis ou à leurs ayant-droits. Ils ont, par ailleurs, mobilisé, pendant des années, les forces de l'ordre et les services de la justice en charge de l'exécution du mandat d'arrêt international dont Félicien KABUGA faisait l'objet, causant ainsi un préjudice au contribuable français.

Le recel de malfaiteur étant une infraction prévue et punie par la loi française, l'association Communauté Rwandaise de France a déposé ce jour, auprès de Madame Catherine Denis, Procureure de la République de Nanterre, une plainte afin que soient identifiés, poursuivis et jugés celles et ceux qui, en France et ailleurs, ont fourni à Félicien KABUGA un logement, des subsides, des moyens d'existence ou tout autre moyen qui lui a permis de le soustraire aux recherches ou à l'arrestation.

 


Paris, le 22 mai 2020

 


Angélique INGABIRE
Présidente de la CRF  
diasporwanda@gmail.com

 


-“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.

Download Documents from Amnesty International

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

UN News Centre - Africa

The Africa Report - Latest

IRIN - Great Lakes

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.