Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch



Welcome to
Africa Great Lakes Democracy Watch Blog. Our objective is to promote the institutions of democracy,social justice,Human Rights,Peace, Freedom of Expression, and Respect to humanity in Rwanda,Uganda,DR Congo, Burundi,Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya,Ethiopia, and Somalia. We strongly believe that Africa will develop if only our presidents stop being rulers of men and become leaders of citizens. We support Breaking the Silence Campaign for DR Congo since we believe the democracy in Rwanda means peace in DRC. Follow this link to learn more about the origin of the war in both Rwanda and DR Congo:http://www.rwandadocumentsproject.net/gsdl/cgi-bin/library


Showing posts with label Rwanda-Kagame. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rwanda-Kagame. Show all posts

Saturday, May 7, 2011

State Department War Crimes Chief Stephen Rapp’s cover-up of U.S. War Crimes in Rwanda Genocide

Daya Gamage – Foreign News Desk Asian Tribune Washington, DC. 29April
 
The April 28 report in The New York Times captioned ‘American Lawyer is Barred from Rwanda Tribunal Work’ caught the eye of this Online Daily’s Foreign News Desk which informed the readers that Peter Erlinder, a law professor in an American university, has been barred by the UN from working at the international tribunal for Rwanda based in the Tanzanian city of Arusha. He refused to travel to Arusa for fear of his life.
He said that he is a target of the Rwandan government and has even received threats while on lecture tours in the U.S.
Prof. Erlinder charges the current Paul Kahame regime of Rwanda of targeted assassinations of those who were accusing the Rwandan leader of genocide - 1990 through 1994 - in which one million people were killed. He and others who have given a long list of victims in many worldwide cities attributed those assassinations to the current Rwandan leadership of Paul Kagame.
One of the mysterious deaths known to the Asian Tribune network was a UN professional who worked to unearth the evidence of the Rwandan genocide – a Sri Lankan Shyamlal Rajapaksa who happened to be a first cousin of the present president of Sri Lanka Mahinda Rajapaksa. His killing in August 2009 in the Tanzanian city of Arusha where the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was headquartered is still a mystery.
Professor Peter Erlinder has come out with an array of evidence and interpretations of the direct culpability of the current Rwandan president Paul Kagame in the Rwandan genocide, how he and his colleagues were given military training in the U.S., how Kagame as the head of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), a proxy force of the Pentagon according to Erlinder, invaded Rwanda to unleash a genocide with tacit approval of the United States, and in the following years how the United States took covert and overt steps to cover up its involvement in the Rwandan mass massacre.
It is here that Ambassador-at Large Stephen Rapp’s name emerge. Mr. Rapp is currently the head of the Office of War Crimes Issues of the U.S. Department of State, and in his previous position as the chief prosecutor of the Rwandan genocide, according to Peter Elinder, and many other investigators, Mr. Rapp was one of the main who was involved in the cover up of US involvement in the Rwandan Genocide.
The Asian Tribune readers may recall that Stephen Rapp in his capacity as the State Department’s War Crimes Issues chief who prepared and released a document in October 2009 with ambiguous evidence which accused Sri Lanka of violating international humanitarian laws during the final (Jan-May 2009) stage of the battle with separatist/terrorist Tamil Tigers (LTTE).
In October 1990, the Ugandan army and the Rwandan Patriotic Front/Army (RPF) led by Major General Paul Kagame invaded Rwanda. The guerrillas who violated international laws and committed massive war crimes were backed by Britain, Belgium, the United States and Israel, according to many investigators and researchers. By July 1994, the RPF completed its coup d'etat and consolidated its power in Rwanda.
On April 6, 1994, the governments of Rwanda and Burundi were decapitated when the plane carrying the two presidents and top military staff was shot down over Kigali, Rwanda's capital. The well-planned assassinations of Juvenal Habyarimana and Cyprien Ntaryamira sparked a massive escalation of warfare that is falsely portrayed as the result of meaningless tribal savagery. These assassinations were major war crimes, and the RPF and UPDF were responsible, but almost every attempt to honestly investigate the double presidential assassinations has been blocked by the U.S. and its allies.
A frequent contributor to a think tank called Global Research, Prof. Elinder outlined the United States endeavor in the cover up of its own culpability in the Rwandan genocide.
He wrote: “The July 9, 2009 New York Times reported that the Obama administration had selected Stephen Rapp to replace the Bush administration Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes, Pierre Prosper. Rapp began his international career at the UN Security Council Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in 2001, while Carla Del Ponte was Chief Rwanda Prosecutor. Rapp’s nomination just a few months after Del Ponte’s of her memoir of her years as Chief UN Prosecutor, Madam Prosecutor: Confronting Humanity’s Worst Criminals and the Culture of Impunity was published in English.
“Del Ponte’s book describes in detail the systematic U.S.-initiated cover-up of crimes by the current Rwandan government, a U.S. ally, committed during the Rwanda Genocide, and how she was removed from her ICTR (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda) position in 2003 by U.S. Ambassador Prosper, himself, when she refused to cooperate with the U.S.-initiated “cover-up.”
According to Del Ponte, her ICTR Office had the evidence to prosecute Kagame for “touching-off” the Rwanda Genocide by ordering the assassination of Rwanda’s former President Juvenal, Habyarimana, long before 2003. She also details the dozens of massacre sites, involving thousands of victims, for which the current Rwandan President, Paul Kagame and his military, should be prosecuted. The well-publicized canard, that “the identity of the assassins of Habyarimana is unknown” is a bald-faced lie, well -known by ICTR Prosecutors, according to Ms. Del Ponte, writes Prof. Elinder in Global Research.
Two years after Del Ponte was removed from office, Stephen Rapp became “Chief” of ICTR Prosecutions with access to all of the evidence known to Ms. Del Ponte, and more that has been made public in the past few years. During his four years at the ICTR, Rapp like Del Ponte, also was in a position to prosecute Kagame and members of the current government of Rwanda but, not ONE member of Kagame’s military has been prosecuted at the ICTR, to date…and the “cover-up” revealed by Del Ponte, continues today. And, unlike, Ms. Del Ponte, who was fired by the U.S., Mr. Rapp was first rewarded with an appointment as Chief Prosecutor at the U.S.-funded Sierra Leone Tribunal and now, a coveted ambassadorship by the Obama administration as the chief of the Office of War Crimes Issues at the State Department.
Mr. Rapp, for reasons known and unknown to the Asian Tribune, used ambiguous and conflicting information and data to accuse Sri Lanka of violating International Humanitarian Laws (IHL) in a report released to the US Congress in October 2009.
Former Chief ICTR Prosecutor Del Ponte Details War Crimes “Cover-up”
According to Del Ponte, in May 2003 she was called to Washington D.C. by Prosper (ironically, also a former ICTR prosecutor with knowledge of Kagame’s crimes) who informed her that the U.S. would remove her UN post, if she carried through with her publicly announced plans to indict Kagame and members of his government and military. According to Del Ponte, when she refused to knuckle-under because “she worked for the UN, - not for the U.S” Prosper told her ICTR career was over. In October Del Ponte was replaced by a US-approved ICTR prosecutor, Hassan Abubacar Jallow, who elevated Rapp to “Chief of Prosecution” two years later.
ICTR Trials: More Evidence of Rwanda Crimes Cover-Up
Del Ponte’s revelations are not the only evidence that a U.S.-initiated “war crimes cover-up” at the ICTR is creating impunity for crimes committed by the Kagame and his military. On September 10, 1994 memo in evidence in the ICTR Military-1 Trial confirms that U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher was informed that Kagame’s troops were killing “10,000 civilians a month” in military-style, according to an investigation funded by US Agency for International Development (USAID). And, as early as January 1997, a team made up of Chief ICTR Investigative Prosecutor and former Australian Crown Prosecutor Michael Hourigan; former FBI Agent James Lyons; and former UN-Chief of Military Intelligence in Rwanda, Amadou Deme; reported Louise Arbour, Ms. Del Ponte’s predecessor, that Kagame should be prosecuted for assassinating the previous president. Arbour scuttled the investigation, suppressed the report and disbanded the investigative team.
Shortly, thereafter, Arbour was elevated to Canada’s Supreme Court and has sunsequently been chosen to head the International Crisis Group.
Louise Arbour as the head of the International Crisis Group released a report in May 2010 accusing Sri Lanka of war crimes said: “Evidence gathered by the International Crisis Group suggests that these months saw tens of thousands of Tamil civilian men, women, children and the elderly killed, countless more wounded, and hundreds of thousands deprived of adequate food and medical care, resulting in more deaths. This evidence also provides reasonable grounds to believe the Sri Lankan security forces committed war crimes with top government and military leaders potentially responsible.”
Former ICTR Prosecutor Rapp Complicit in Cover-up
But, even though Arbour suppressed the “Hourigan Report,” Del Ponte, Rapp and other ICTR prosecutors certainly knew about it, because ICTR judges had ordered Del Ponte’s Office to release the “Hourigan report” to a defense team as early as the year 2000, a year before Rapp began his ICTR work, and three years before Del Ponte was fired by Prosper.
Prof. Peter Elinder says “But….to date, not one indictment has been issued against Kagame by the ICTR Prosecutor.”
Consequences of the ICTR Cover-up of Kagame’s Crimes
The tragic consequence of the failure to prosecute Kagame at the ICTR, from 1994 to date, is that Kagame has been free to invade the Congo in 1996 and 1998, and to occupy part of the eastern Congo many-times larger than Rwanda, to this day. No less than four UN Security Council-commissioned Panel of Experts Report(s) on the Illegal Exploitation of the DR Congo (2001, 2002, 2003 and December 2008) have detailed the massive rape of the Congo’s resources that has brought vast riches to Kagame and his inner circle.
While Rapp was ICTR Senior Trial Attorney in 2003, Kagame was effectively elected President-for-Life with 95% of the vote, after banning opposition parties and jailing opponents, in “a climate of intimidation” according to EU observers.
“Chief of Prosecutions” Rapp Withheld Exculpatory Evidence
In February 2009, the ICTR issued its Judgment the Military-1 case, that main case at the ICTR, in which Mr. Rapp personally appeared for the Prosecution. Although massive violence did occur in Rwanda, the court certainly recognized that blaming only one side WAS a falsehood, when it acquitted all of the “architects of the killing machine” (as Mr. Rapp called the defendants in court) of conspiracy or planning to kill civilians. The highest ranking military-officer was acquitted of all charges.
And, although it is now clear from Ms. Del Ponte’s memoirs that Mr. Rapp had the evidence to clear the ICTR defendants of the assassination charges and only the losing side has been blamed for all crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994. Simply put, Mr. Rapp and other ICTR prosecutors have withheld evidence that would be beneficial to the defense, contrary to Tribunal Rules; have prosecuted defendants for crimes they knew were committed by Kagame’s forces; and, have created a system of “judicial impunity” that has permitted Kagame to kill millions in the eastern Congo.
It is in this context that Prof. Peter Elinder writing to Global Security questioned President Obama’s wisdom in appointing Stephen Rapp as the head of the Office of War Crimes Issue at the State Department in this manner: “This “inconvenient-African-truth,” raises an uncomfortable question regarding President Obama’s nomination of Mr. Rapp, in the first place: Are Obama and his advisors ignorant of the public record regarding Rapp’s complicity in the ICTR Cover-up….or do they just not give a damn?”
The U.S. Culpability in Rwanda Genocide
Aimable Mugara in a piece to OpEdNews put it this way: “In 1990, General Kagame who was the Chief of Military Intelligence of Uganda and head of the Rwandan Patriotic Forces (RPF) led a violent invasion of Rwanda from Uganda, with the approval and support (financial, military and political) of the United States government. This violent war changed the landscape of that region forever. By landscape, I also mean the number of mass graves that dot every of inch of that region now. The two final years of President Bush the father, during which his American government supported the murderous gang of General Kagame and Yoweri Museveni resulted in the deaths of many innocent Rwandan and Ugandan civilians. During those two years, there are thousands who lost their lives at the hands of General Kagame's soldiers and Yoweri Museveni's soldiers. But this was nothing compared to the more than 6 millions of civilians that would later die under Bill Clinton's 8 year reign, with American money, American weapons and American political support.”
In a September 30, 2010 New York Times article titled ‘Dispute Over U.N. Report Evokes Rwandan Déjà Vu’, it is mentioned how in the fall of 1994, a United Nations investigation discovered that General Kagame's forces had killed tens of thousand of innocent civilians that year. That under pressure from Bill Clinton's government, the United Nations was forced not to publish that report. In that New York Times article, they talk about how the 1994 UN report describes General Kagame's soldiers "rounding up civilians and methodically killing unarmed men, women and children."
“Kagame received his military education under the Pentagon’s Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) at the Command and General Staff College of Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, beginning in 1990,” wrote John E. Peck of the Association of African Scholars (2002). “His sidekick, Lt. Col. Frank Rusagara, got his JCET schooling at the U.S. Naval Academy in Monterey, California. Both were dispatched to Rwanda in time to oversee the RPF’s takeover in 1994. Far from being an innocent bystander, the Washington Post revealed on July 12, 1998 that the United States not only gave Kagame $75 million in military assistance, but also sent Green Berets to train Kagame’s forces (as well as their Ugandan rebel allies) in low intensity conflict (LIC) tactics. Pentagon subcontractor Ronco, masquerading as a de-mining company, also smuggled more weapons to RPF fighters in flagrant violation of UN sanctions. All of this U.S. largesse was put to lethal effect in the ethnic bloodbath that is still going on.”
In 2009 published Edward S. Herman and David Peterson's investigative/research book The Politics of Genocide said: “The United States and its allies worked hard in the early 1990s to weaken the Rwandan government, forcing the abandonment of many of the economic and social gains from the social revolution of 1959, thereby making the Habyarimana government less popular, and helping to reinforce the Tutsi minority’s economic power.9 Eventually, the RPF was able to achieve a legal military presence inside Rwanda, thanks to a series of ceasefires and other agreements. These agreements led to the Arusha Peace Accords of August 1993, pressed upon the Rwandan government by the United States and its allies, called for the “integration” of the armed forces of Rwanda and the RPF, and for a “transitional,” power-sharing government until national elections could be held in 1995.10 These Peace Accords positioned the RPF for its bloody overthrow of a relatively democratic coalition government, and the takeover of the Rwandan state by a minority dictatorship.”
The U.S. State Department’s Office of War Crimes Issues chief Stephen Rapp knew this entire Rwandan episode, the U.S. interests in Paul Kagame, the UN concealment of the 1994 report at the behest of the Clinton administration, the U.S. military assistance to Kagame’s Rwandan Patriotic Front and the entire exercise of the ‘Rwandan cover up’ to conceal the U.S. culpability in the Rwandan genocide when he focused his attention elsewhere; Sri Lanka.
- Asian Tribune -

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Why the Netherlands won’t support Kagame’s government…

Ever since the reelection of Kagame, there has been a lot (more) of open critics coming from the US and the Netherlands on Kagame’s government .
The problem is:
The UN diclosed that there has been some possible acts of genocide in Congo, and Kagame was involved in it. After the genocide the Netherlands were one of the first to help Rwanda. After all this, turns out that the Rwandan government may have supported atrocities that could have led to a genocide too.

What’s the story behind it?

This arcticle might clarify some open questions.
————————————–
The United Nations said acts of genocide may have been committed in the DR Congo as it published a hotly-contested report Friday detailing massacres by foreign armies and rebels in the war-torn nation.
Rwanda, whose troops were at the centre of the most serious accusations, said it categorically rejected the report after it failed to have it suppressed while Burundi said it was designed to destabilise the region.
Joseph Kabila, son of Laurent Kabila and actual president of the DR Congo.

Reaction from Rwanda

Watch an interview with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay on the release of a 550-page report listing 617 of the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law over a 10-year period, by both state and non-state actors in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Source: YouTube
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Brussels, 6th December 2010 – Paul Kagame very last visit to Europe

Rwandan President Paul Kagame on the way into ...Image via Wikipedia

Africans, and particularly people from the Great Lakes and specifically Rwandans and Congolese living in Europe, have a moral duty towards their respective compatriots in ensuring protection of their rights whenever and wherever they can. With the background of continuing tragedies in Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo, the visit of Paul Kagame this early December to Brussels should be such an opportunity.
The call for a general mobilisation of Rwandans and Congolese living in Europe and particularly in Belgium, to come out in big number to show to the Rwandan president how they feel about his crimes, must give him a sign of times to remember for as long he rules over Rwanda. We reproduce here an invitation to participate to that act of solidarity as prepared and published on different online networks by The Association Jambo.
Paul Kagame in Brussels – Congolese and Rwandans: Rise up against tyranny and impunity this Monday, December 6th, 2010.

The association JAMBO calls Rwandans and Congolese of Europe to rise up against tyranny and impunity this Monday, December 6th, 2010 at 12:30 Rue Mont des Arts 1000 Brussels, Belgium. (Http://www.jamboasbl.com/)
Between 6 and 8 million Congolese and Rwandan civilians mostly women and children were massacred during the past 20 years in the Great Lakes. It is more or less the greatest conflict’s death toll the world has experienced since the Second World War.
It is with this particularly gruesome background that the main responsible for this tragedy that continues today, General Paul Kagame, was invited to the European Development Days. Responsibility for its army, RPA, has been clearly demonstrated by various reports and by the numerous testimonies of survivors of these atrocities. The latest being a report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights published on October 1st, 2010, accusing its troops of committing in Congo war crimes, crimes against humanity and acts if produced in front of a court could probably be considered as genocide. Already in 2002 an expert report (GRIP) addressed to the UN highlighted and estimated at millions of dead in Congo explaining that ‘These deaths are a direct consequence of the occupation by Rwanda and Uganda.’
Against this backdrop, several associations of Rwandan and Congolese diaspora in Belgium of which ASBL Jambo is part invite members of both communities and all other citizens of the world guided by fairness, justice and freedom to come and express their outrage and denounce described  situation.
Rwandan associations insist more particularly on the fact that June 24, 2010, hundreds of Rwandans in Kigali had come out against their fear and denounced violations of human rights they are still victims of today. That demonstration was violently repressed and leaders of political parties who called for it, Me Bernard Ntaganda and Victoire Ingabire are currently imprisoned in Rwanda. The latter was subject to torture during her first days of detention.
The Rwandan diaspora has a unique opportunity to relay the warning cries of their compatriots in a country where freedom of expression is permitted, at the risk if it fails to do so, create a definitive break between citizens still present in Rwanda who suffer oppression in their everyday life and the Rwandans in exile who, even though they still suffer intimidations and harassment from Kagame’s regime, were lucky to escape.
Rwandan and Congolese people have suffered enough over the course of their recent history. They deserve better from Rwanda to head a regime that continues to oppose deliberately citizens to each other and who, despite human losses already recorded in the region, continues to detain, torture or kill any critical voice. The prevailing situation continues and above all to be the source of instability in the region and poses to the region risks of a resurgence of extreme violence.
How many rebel movements present in neighboring Congo currently which are not funded by Rwanda and Uganda?
The EU must assume its responsibilities, like Jose Louis Zapatero in July 2010 who refused to accept General Kagame and then said no to holding a double discourse which is to publicly advocate a message of peace and condemn the most serious violations of human rights while at the same time receiving backstage with honors perpetrators of atrocities.
The association Jambo and its partners have requested from Belgian authorities to arrest any immediate members of the delegation of the Rwandan president who would be within the scope of arrest warrants against officials of the Kigali regime, issued in 2008 by the Spanish courts for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.
Come express your feelings against Kagame’s regime loudly, it is time to turn the darkest pages of our past. There is an urgent need to rebuild our promising country, economically, politically and especially socially.
The association Jambo
Coordinator
Placide Kayumba
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Bill Clinton's Rwanda Guilt

By Dana Godstein in The Daily Beast
Paul Kagame helped rebuild after genocide, but he has also brutally repressed political opposition in his country. Dana Goldstein on why Clinton is still protecting the Rwandan president.
Article - Goldstein RwandaWhile the Rwandan president is celebrated for rebuilding his country after its horrific genocide, over the past year he has brutally suppressed his political opposition, arresting presidential rivals and censoring journalists. This month, a leaked U.N. report accused Kagame’s militias of murdering and raping thousands of members of the Hutu ethnic group who fled over the border to Congo in the late 1990s.
Yet here at the Clinton Global Initiative, Kagame has one very powerful defender: Bill Clinton himself. At last year’s CGI conference, Clinton presented Kagame with a Global Citizen Award. At this year's event, he is promoting Rwanda's success in expanding rural health care and aid to family farmers.
Paul Kagame & Bill Clinton (AP Photo 2) Kagame has denied the accusations against him. When I asked Clinton Monday evening whether the world community should hold Kagame accountable for the violence and political suppression, he equivocated.
“The U.N. said what it did about what happened after the [Rwandan] genocide, in Congo. … Kagame strongly disputes it,” Clinton said. “Right now I’m not going to pre-judge him because there’s this huge debate about what happened in the Congo and why, and I don’t know.”
Yet the U.N. evidence against Kagame is nothing new. Activists have long accused Rwanda of ethnic and sexual violence in Congo—both in the Rwandan government’s pursuit of its own rebel groups and in Rwandan militias’ competition to access and control Congo’s lucrative mineral deposits.
“We lost our moral authority in 1994 when the genocide happened, and we allowed Paul Kagame to become the authority in the region and go into Congo.”
“It is not a matter of pre-judging,” Human Rights Watch senior Rwanda researcher Carina Tertsakian told The Daily Beast in response to Clinton’s statement. “The facts are well-established. … There is no doubt that Rwandan troops, together with their Congolese allies, committed large-scale massacres and other grave human-rights violations against Rwandan and Congolese civilians. The evidence is there for all to see. What more does Clinton need?”
In part, Clinton’s defense of Kagame is unsurprising. The former president says he deeply regrets that his administration was slow to act during the Rwandan genocide of 1994, in which 10 percent of Kagame’s ethnic group, the Tutsi, were murdered—mostly by machete.
Since then, Kagame has achieved impressive results modernizing Rwandan society. He has contributed troops to U.N. peacekeeping missions, notably in Sudan, and has worked effectively with international aid groups, including the Clinton Foundation, to build a more efficient bureaucracy, particularly around public health and agriculture.
That record leaves some diplomats and humanitarians hesitant to criticize Kagame. At CGI, Rwanda is being portrayed as a model for international aid, not as a nation struggling with basic democracy and human rights. "It's the best-run nation in Africa," Clinton told me.
But overwhelming evidence emerged this year that Rwanda’s presidential election was rigged, with the Kagame regime using a law against genocide-denial to sully the reputations of government critics and prevent opposition leaders from getting on the ballot. Several dissidents even turned up dead.
In our interview Monday, Clinton downplayed the political suppression and violence, citing Kagame’s popularity among the Rwandan public. “I’ve been to Rwanda a lot. … And I’ve been out where most people don’t go. And my opinion is there is nothing that could have kept him from getting a breathtaking majority because the lives of the Rwandans have changed,” Clinton said. “It doesn’t mean it’s justifiable to muscle your opponents or anything else. It just means the next step of their democracy is going to be making more space for dissent and having the confidence that everything you’ve done is not going to be derailed if you do it.”
Clinton is undoubtedly influenced by the long-running policies of the U.S. State and Defense Departments toward Rwanda. While nations such as Sweden and the Netherlands have withheld foreign aid from the Kagame regime because of its support for armed rebel groups active inside Congo, Rwanda receives tens of millions of dollars annually from the U.S., including money for military training and weapons.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, November 21, 2010

UK aid to benefit Rwanda which is accused of acts of genocide in Democratic Republic of Congo

The Writer:Nzeimana Ambroise
A persistent unanswered question has been on the lips of everyone who has been observing conflicts and politics in different parts of the world. What are the criteria the Department for International Development (DfID) follows to distribute British taxpayers’ money as aid to different countries? Unless you assume there are hidden pointers that ordinary Westerners aren’t allow to know, no one would understand for example how Rwanda led by Paul Kagame could be one of the favourite beneficiaries, knowing that its record of human rights abuse is unprecedented.
Let’s forget the UN/ Gersony report of October 1994 or the Garreton report of 1997 which, though covered up and therefore not followed up, documented killing of thousands of Hutu population the first in Rwanda and the second in Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). But the UN report published on October 1st, thanks to its leaking by the newspaper Le Monde a month earlier, accuses openly the Rwandan Patriotic Army and its AFDL partner in war of having committed acts of genocide in DRC. Since October 14th, 2010, the President of Rwanda has imprisoned Ms Victoire Ingabire, leader of FDU-Inkingi, an important opposition personality on Rwandan ring-fenced political space, and this occurring without any clear condemnation from the international community.
On the Mo Ibrahim Index Rwanda scores 47.2% and stands at no. 31 out 53 African countries. For a reminder, this index measures annually four parameters across the continent. These are safety and rule of law, participation and human rights, sustainable economic opportunity, human development. Overall the country has moved backwards by 2.2% from previous period of 2007/8. There has as well been a significant decrease in safety and rule of law by 8.4%, while in terms of sustainable economic opportunity, a 2.2% increase had been registered.
In its press freedom index, Reporters without Borders indicates that Rwanda was ranked 157th out of 175 countries in the 2009 listing. The country was featured among the four lowest African scorers of the record. Eritrea, Somalia and Equatorial Guinea were the only countries below Rwanda in the ranking. Transparency International has on the other hand referred to Rwanda as the least corrupt country in East Africa. But it is arguable because, according to the country’s critic, there may not be official corruption following the fact that Rwanda is a police state. As Transparency itself points it out, ‘it was unable to produce a comparison of how Rwanda’s institutions fared because reports of bribery were so low – and no Rwandan organization was included in the regional comparison.’ For example, the South African newspaper Sunday Times uncovered in February 2010 the case of two luxury jets worth around one hundred millions of US $ belonging to the Rwandan president, and this may only be the tip of the iceberg.
At a time of drastic measures that the British government is currently taking to deal with its massive deficit, very few departments have seen their budgets increased. International development is among the handful winners. Apparently the department budget is ring-fenced, but even there fundamental changes may be planned in its spending.  Anne McElvoy, writing in The Evening Standard, seems to be sceptical about supposed changes. ‘Ring-fencing of spending of international development, (which) means that less rigour will be applied there than in other areas – and in a department whose inefficiencies are legendary in Whitehall,’ she argues.
It has been announced that aid budget will mainly focus on ‘fragile states’ such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen and other countries deemed important for Britain’s national security, with less for prosperous nations such as India and China. The aim is seemingly to tackle underlying problems, such as poor education, governance and healthcare, which are exploited by militants seeking recruits for terrorism acts. However, such prioritisation supposes that hopefully, there won’t be any recruit from Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi or Democratic Republic of Congo who will come to London to blow himself with other members of the public, since some of these countries could be as well called fragile states, when considered the total absence of political space for dissent voices.
Tim Whewell’s film, ‘What is the true price of Rwanda’s recovery’, which was shown on Newsnight in March 2010 on BBC Two, explained that whoever between Labour and Tories British political parties would’ve won the general elections, support to Paul Kagame’s regime would’ve remained. As for Britain’s role in supporting Rwanda, Mr. Cannon, British ambassador in Kigali, says that: ‘Although there are aspects of the country’s human rights that are not perfect – certainly we wouldn’t be here or doing what we’re doing if we didn’t think there was a commitment on the part of the government to the values we share.’ He points in particular to a shared commitment to pro-poor policies – thanks in part to British aid, the proportion of poor Rwandans fell from 70% of the population to 57% between 1994 and 2006. He however forgets to mention that in 1990, before the guerrilla war led by Paul Kagame, that proportion of poor Rwandans was according PNUD only 47%.
The particular treatment of Rwanda responds to a number of specific interests the country represents or defends for Britain in the Great Lakes region. French was replaced by English as national language, without any public consultation, despite the consequences of such decision on thousands of Rwandan public servants who had been educated in French for several generations. The Rwandan president was rewarded admission of his country to the Commonwealth though Rwanda and countries of the ex-British empire didn’t share any common heritage. Such admission maybe could’ve been tolerable at least if Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative and other human rights organisations hadn’t vigorously denounced the level of human rights abuse by the Rwandan president.
But this was without considering current cuts that the coalition government Lib. Dem/ Conservatives would impose to the British nation or the exposure to compelling evidence of Paul Kagame’s crimes to the public which had turned a blind eye on his excesses because of his country’s recent history. Despite an increasing and unprecedented record of abuses of human rights particularly against Rwandan politicians from the opposition, Kigali doesn’t look worried to loose the support of Britain, this even after the publication of the UN report on crimes committed in DRC. The fact of pointing an accusatory finger to Paul Kagame seems to have rather radicalised his attitude towards his opponent politicians: Victoire Ingabire from the FDU-Inkingi and Me Bernard Ntaganda from Socialist Party Imberakuri are paying with tortures and imprisonment for the frustration of the Rwandan president. But this may not apply for Andre Rwisereka, vice-president of the Green Democratic Party of Rwanda who was apparently assassinated by the regime’s handlers in July 2010 for political reasons. On this particular case, Kigali has refused an independent inquiry into the death of this politician, but instead imprisoned probably innocent people to calm pressing calls for justice.
At the Conservative conference held a few months ago, the issue of human rights in Rwanda was apparently raised but couldn’t find any ear ready to listen to the point of concern. Those who tried to highlight the question found it played down because Rwanda is seen as a flagship for Britain in the matters of aid to development. But what the whole picture of support to Paul Kagame doesn’t tell is how that provided financial support enables Rwandan authorities to get a hand on Eastern Congo mineral resources with the complicity of private companies based in Western countries, or to oppress and legally discriminate among its citizens, and spread internationally its propaganda of being a success story in the midst of an African continent marred with conflicts and all sorts of negative clichés. Another hidden reality was uncovered by UN experts on the consequence of aid in the Great Lakes region. They found that, for example in the case of Uganda, ‘(it) gave the Government room to spend more on security matters while other sectors, such as education, health and governance, are being taken care of by the bilateral and multilateral aid,’ asserts the UN report of 2001 on ‘Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.’
In the light of current cuts, would British taxpayers continue to see their money which would have helped them or else to deal with ongoing tough times be spent as aid to development of dictatorial and oppressive governments such Rwanda, without asking pertinent questions to their leaders? I don’t think they would knowingly. As international aid budget is scheduled to increase during the current parliament, British public should be more attuned to asking from their ministers a minimum of criteria of human rights and press freedom, and democratic credentials, beneficiaries of British aid should comply with rigorously.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Rwanda: “Victoire Ingabire is our source of courage and strength”

From Theproxylake
Victoire Ingabire in Prison Uniform at Court Hearing
Mr Sylvain Sibomana, the Secretary General of the yet-to-be registered political party FDU Inkingi whose chairperson is in prison issued a press release this Friday 19th November 2010. In his word, Sylvain stated that more than ever before Ms. Victoire INGABIRE, who has now spent her 37th Day in maximum Prison, is now the “source of courage and strength” to her party members and to many Rwandans.
Today FDU INKINGI party members visited party Chair Ms. Victoire INGABIRE in Kigali maximum prison. She remains a symbol of a national struggle, a freedom icon and a democracy martyr. She encouraged the visiting colleagues and members in the following terms: “this place is like hell, and there is no relief in hell. But only our determination, courage and faith help the martyrs to endure extreme moments. My incarceration should strengthen the fire of hope for a lasting solution in Rwanda. This is part of the non-violent struggle for democracy and the Prison is one of dictators’ favourite weapons”.
Her security detail inside the prison seems more impressing and two female inmates have been relaying each other in her cell.
The Prosecution is not yet ready for the trial. The intimidation is still going on towards party members inside Rwanda and house staff. Almost every staff has been blackmailed either to support the prosecution evidence, either to face the security machinery as enemies of the state. No one was spared: private secretaries, kitchen staff, gardeners and watchmen. Some party members have been arrested in different parts of the country.
The key witness, the so called “Major” Vital UWUMUREMYI, paraded by the prosecution has never been a member of the former Rwandan army before the genocide. It is only in exile in the DRC, when he enrolled for officer’s training course and according to our records until his repatriation in February 2009, he has never been given the rank of “Major”, either in the rebellion, either in the ruling Rwandan Defence Forces. He was promoted to this rank by some propaganda for the purpose of this politically motivated trial. We officially challenge the government to substantiate with official army records his military training in Rwanda before or after the genocide.
The reactions of the international community to the detention of our party leader are strong and powerful signals to the Rwandan people and Africans in terms of knowing whether there are genuine friends of Rwanda and in which circumstances they can rely on them. We are very grateful for the efforts carried on and by the work being done by some countries for the unconditional release of Ms. Victoire INGABIRE.
Sylvain SIBOMANA
FDU INKINGI
Secretary Genera
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, November 12, 2010

Africa's Female Mandela? Victoire Ingabiré Umuhoza on Trial

Opposition presidential candidate Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza stood before a judge in Kigali, Rwanda, on April 22, after the Kagame government arrested and charged her with "associating with terrorists" and "genocide ideology," a crime unique to Rwanda which includes "divisionism" and "revisionism," meaning politics, and/or attempting to revise the received history of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide.    

Two weeks earlier, on April 7th, speaking at a commemorative ceremony, on the 16th anniversary of the civilian massacres known as the Rwanda Genocide, Rwandan President Paul Kagame referred to Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza as "some lady," an example of "some people" who "just come from nowhere, useless people."  He refused to speak her proper name, though she is widely acknowledged as the leading opposition candidate in Rwanda's 2010 presidential election, and many of her supporters now call her Africa's female Mandela:

"Some people want to encourage political hooliganism.  Some people just come from nowhere, useless people.  I see everytime in the pictures, some lady who had her deputy, a genocide criminal, her deputy, talking about "y'know, there's Rwanda Genocide, but there is another. . . so that is politics.  And the world says, 'The opposition leader!'  But I know those who say it and who support that.  They know it is wrong, but it is an expression of contempt these people have for Rwandans and for Africans, that they think Africans deserve to be led by these hooligans, and to that we say NO, a big NO.  And if anybody wants a fight there, we'll give them a fight." 
--Paul Kagame, http://www.youtube.com/watchv=vO9Zad51kJc&feature=related


Two weeks later, on April 21st, Kagame's security police arrested Ingabire, then brought her before a Rwandan court for a bail hearing within six hours, creating a flurry of international news.   Not only the African press, but also the BBCRadio NetherlandsCNNYahoo News via Agence France Presse, and other outlets around the world, including the San Francisco Bay View, National Black NewspaperBlack Star News, and Global Research reported the story, and it appeared on blogs across Africa, Europe, and North America, often with notes urging readers to contact Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. 

Two days later, on April 23rd, Rwandan authorities gave Human Rights Watch researcher Carina Tertsakian, 24 hours to get out of the country

Even the New York Times, which had until then ignored this year's Rwandan presidential election, finally published three accounts of Ingabire's arrest on April 21st, and the next day the Washington Post, which had also been ignoring the story, finally published a Reuters wire reporting that Ingabire had been released on bail that morning.
Shortly after the news of her release, the International Humanitarian Law Institute of St. Paul Minnesota announced that its director, William and Mitchell Law School Professor Peter Erlinder, and Wichita Lawyer Kurt P. Kerns, will join Ingabire's Rwandan lawyer Protais Mutembe in her legal defense.   Ingabire is charged with "genocide related crime," meaning crime related to the 1994 Rwanda Genocide, the central narrative justifying Rwanda's political life and relationship to the outside world, and, most of all, to its most ardent defenders and donors, the US and the UK.

Erlinder is Professor of Constitutional Criminal Law and International Humanitarian Law at William Mitchell College of Law, President of  ICTR-ADAD (Association des Avocats de la Defense), and past President of the National Lawyers Guild, NY, NY.  Most significantly, in Ingabire's case, he is the Lead Defense Counsel in the Military-1 trial at the UN's International Criminal Tribunal on Rwanda (ICTR), where he won a victory of enormous significance to Rwandan history---the acquittal of four former top military leaders accused of conspiring and planning to commit genocide or any other crimes in 1994.

The ICTR acquitted its highest ranking defendant, Colonel Bagosora, on December 18, 2008, after which Erlinder wrote:

". . . ALL of the top Rwandan military officers, including the supposedly infamous Colonel Bagosora, were found not guilty of conspiracy or planning to commit genocide. And Gen. Gratien Kabiligi, a senior member of the general staff was acquitted of all charges! The others were found guilty of specific acts committed by subordinates, in specific places, at specific times - not an overall conspiracy to kill civilians, much less Rwandan-Tutsi civilians."

"This raises the more profound question: If there was no conspiracy and no planning to kill ethnic (i.e., Tutsi) civilians, can the tragedy that engulfed Rwanda properly be called “a genocide” at all? Or, was it closer to a case of civilians being caught up in war-time violence, like the Eastern Front in WWII, rather than the planned behind-the-lines killings in Nazi death camps? The ICTR judgment found the former."

"The Court specifically found that the actions of Rwandan military leaders, both before and after the April 6, 1994, assassination of former Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana, Rwanda's head of state at the time of his murder, were consistent with war-time conditions and the massive chaos brought about by the four-year war of invasion from Uganda by General Paul Kagame's RPF Army, which seized power in July 1994.  ----Professor Peter Erlinder, "Rwanda: No Conspiracy, No Genocide Planning. . . No Genocide?," Jurist, 12.23.2008, Global Research, 01.24.2009

Erlinder says that the Court's ruling in December 2008 should have radically revised the world's understanding of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide, but because there were no international press covering the ICTR by December 2008, 14 years after the slaughter that left 1 million or more Rwandans dead, and because of international political investment in the received history, it continues to be told in the Wikipedia and repeated by most news outlets whenever they revisit Rwanda or the Rwandan violence of 1994. 

At the ICTR, Erlinder was able to assemble the evidence and argue the case that led to the court's conclusion that there was no conspiracy, and no planning to commit genocide, and therefore no genocide crime like that covered by the international law created by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide after the Nazi death camps of World War II.

Though the international press had indeed turned away from Rwanda and the ICTR by December 2008, its attention is now on Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza and her trial, less than four months before Rwanda's August 9th polls.  Though her party, the United Democratic Forces, (UDF)-Inkingi, remains unable to register, and she herself has now been indicted, she continues to attempt to contest the election.

"Ingabire was arrested on trumped-up, political thought crimes, including association with a terrorist group, propagating the genocide ideology, genocide denial, revisionism, and divisionism, all arising from the "crime" of publicly objecting to the Kagame military dictatorship, and Kagame's version of the Rwandan Civil War," Erlinder said.

If he and Rwandan lawyer Protais Mutembe can make the same case that he was able to make at the ICTR, then the international press may have to decide whether or not to report that, in Rwanda, in 1994, there was "no conspiracy, no planning . . . no genocide?"  This, of course, depends on how the world defines "genocide," but, the genocide ideology statutes that Victoire is charged with violating---for having said that Hutus, as well as Tutsis, were victims of crimes against humanity---would become impossible to defend.  

And, it might finally emerge that there has been a massive cover-up of the real story of what we know as the Rwanda Genocide, as Global Research writers have pointed out for years in, e.g., Rwanda: Installing a U.S. Protectorate in Central Africa and The Geopolitics behind the Rwanda Genocide; Paul Kagame Accused of War Crimes, by Michel Chossudovsky, The US Sponsored "Rwanda Genocide'" and its Aftermath
Psychological Warfare, Embedded Reporters and the Hunting of Refugees, by Keith Harmon Snow, andU.S./U.K./Allies Grab Congo Riches and Millions Die, by Peter Erlinder.

If international reporters finally do begin to cover the real story of the Rwanda Genocide and the Congo War, then Paul Kagame's regime, which Hillary Clinton has called "the beacon of hope" for Africa, will cease to seem so to the outside world.  
  
No one, least of all Professor Erlinder, denies that the bloodshed in Rwanda, in 1994 was horrific, but he says, as he did when I spoke to him for KPFA Radio, that the received history of Rwanda in 1994, and the ensuing war in neighboring D.R. Congo are history written by the victors, and by their backers, the U.S. and the UK:


Indeed, on April 30, in an Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Court, Professor Erlinder, Kurt B. Kerns, and Oklahoma lawyer John P. Zelbst filed a lawsuit, alleging that Kagame and nine of his current and former military officers and government officials are guilty of the assassination of Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana andBurundian President Cyprien Ntaryamira, and subsequent acts which caused the civilian massacres that came to be known as the Rwanda Genocide, costing a million lives. 

And, that they are guilty of racketeering to acquire and maintain an interest in the resources of the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, at a cost of 6 million more lives. 

D.R. Congo is one of the most resource rich nations on earth and its mineral wealth, most of all its cobalt reserves, are essential to modern military industries' ability to manufacture for war.   The U.S. is the world's largest consumer of cobalt.

The eight counts alleged in Habyarimana vs. Kagame are:
Wrongful Death - Murder,
Crimes against Humanity, 
Violation of the Rights of Life, Liberty, and Security of Person, 
Assault and Battery, 
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Stress, 
Violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act,
Torture, and, 
Conspiracy to Torture

Media outlets around the world reported that Kagame had escaped process service in the U.S. on April 30th, but Peter Erlinder told KPFA Radio News, that Kagame had violated the law by doing so, and, that, assuming the law is upheld, he will be served and required to answer.

Click to listen to KPFA Radio News, May 2, 2010:

As Erlinder, and lawyers Kurt P. Kerns and John P. Zelbst, prepare to advance the case against Rwandan President Paul Kagame, Erlinder and Kerns also prepare to defend Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, against Kagame's Rwandan government. 

"I consider it my job to say things that my clients are not free to say," says Erlinder, "and I'm sure that Mrs. Ingabire realized that when she asked me to defend her."

Ann Garrison is a frequent contributor to Global Research.  Global Research Articles by Ann Garrison

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Kayumba, Karegeya vs Kigali’s brainless propagandists

From Thenewsline
Prof. Nshuti Manasseh, the so-called advisor to the President, and one of the dormant partners (read shareholder) in Kagame’s companies around the world recently treated the world to a new revelation in one of the many propagandist articles he writes in the state sponsored, The New Times. The former Finance minister insinuated that the exiled former director of external security in Rwanda, Col. Patrick Karegeya aided wanted genocide suspect, Felicien  Kabuga to escape.


Gen Kayumba Nyamwasa
 The professor was a few days later, supplemented by two other military officers, Brig. Richard Rutatina, Kagame’s security advisor and Jill Rutaremara, the defence spokesman who in a joint statement said thus; “At one time when the security agencies were closing in on Kabuga in Kenya, it was Karegeya who tipped him off to escape in return for large sums of money,"

The two who have been instrumental in the campaign to smear the two exiled generals, Kayumba Nyamwasa, the former army Chief of Staff and Patrick Karegeya, added that Karegeya was connected to Kabuga through his daughter. Kabuga is Kigali’s most wanted man for his connection to the 1994 tutsi genocide and is believed to be in Kenya.

Now, while, it’s logical for the honourable generals and the professor to defend the regime that feeds them, the behaviour and utterances of some of Kagame’s aides and many of Kigali’s propagandists these days, begs serious questions;

For the record, I’m not any way a spokesperson of the accused Karegeya, much as I’m not one of Kigali’s blind supporters and propagandists; I only want to see people giving us factual information or else, they give us a break;

For those who have already forgotten, and those who do not know, Karegeya was the Director of External Security between 1994 and 2004. After that, he was briefly appointed the Director of corporate affairs, shortly before he was arrested, released and arrested again-serving an 18-month sentence, for the charges of desertion and insubordination. That, we know.
He fled on November, 22, 2007, after serving his sentence. The professor and the two RDF officers loyal to Kagame say, Karegeya accepted Kabuga’s money and sabotaged his arrest in 2003.
Now, six years after he left the office which he is alleged to have used to tip off Kabuga in return of money and three after he fled Rwanda after being charged with insubordination and desertion, we are told that he committed such a high profile crime of treason by aiding a wanted man to escape.
The primary questions here are; why wasn’t Karegeya charged with this crime? How could Karegeya have been charged with insubordination (disrespecting the orders of the Chief of General Staff) and desertion, when he had committed such a high profile crime that could have kept him in jail for good in Kigali?
But before that, how did Karegeya manage to stay in the position of chief spy (until 2005), when in 2003, he helped a man he should have captured to escape? Was the Kagame in charge or he wasn’t? How do the generals and the respected Professor expect any sober human being to believe that Karegeya was kept in there after committing the crime that we are being told now? And then, six years later, who is Kabuga’s informer? Kagame? He surely should have been arrested now, he has no informer!
Those are questions that the Kigali propagandists should expect people to ask; but at worst, people won’t ask, but will just see how some of Kagame’s aides have gone so low and/or brainless in trying to defend the Kigali regime that is on the ropes after the UN report and the revelations of the exiled former RDF officers. Indeed, the deficiency of logic about the connection between Karegeya and Kabuga also leave room for serious doubt about the allegations that the two officers are in touch with FDLR.
As usual, the allegations seem to be aimed at diverting the international community notably the US and UK from the accusations levelled at the Kigali government. At first, the two generals were linked to grenade attacks in Kigali, with Kigali issuing arrest warrants for them. But a day before Kayumba left Rwanda, the grenades had been linked to FDLR, with the police announcing that, some culprits have been arrested and confessed. But, we were later told that, the two dissident officers were behind the attacks.
Besides the Kabuga  issue that raises all those questions, a few more revelations from Nshuti made me take a step of even questioning his ‘professorship’; in his serialised article in the New Times, he questions Karegeya’s nationality; yes, that he is not Rwandese. Now, what does nationality have to do with the bigger picture here?
Karegeya fought for Rwanda’s liberation and thats the most important thing, isn’t it? Look, Prof, Che Guevara was not Cuban, Bolivian or Congolese but Argentine; has it stopped him from being a hero to the people of these countries? It certainly hadn’t. With all respect, such reasoning casts doubt on your ‘professorship’, Mr. Nshuti. And indeed, it’s been questioned by some genuine professors, in some reactions I have read; which Universty awarded it? And a couple of other questions have been raised; we can live that for another day.
It only reminds me that Mannasseh came to Rwanda to be a minister, and now he has the audacity to question the credibility of those who made it work for him.
In the absence of logic and facts in the accusations against the generals, one cannot help but conclude that the allegations are just another of the fabrications by the Kigali regime on potential critics. The revelations from Kigali only come after the two officers together with other key former RPF officers stated that, there was a dire need for governance reforms in Rwanda, challenging the autocracy of President Kagame, in a higly publicised document, titled ‘Rwanda briefing’. 
The document proved to be a real ‘kick in the teeth’ to the Kagame regime from the RPF founders, and the regime has been out and out to smear the generals, as it looks. But, the fabrications and the apparent lack of substance and reality in the defence of Kigali is a reason for Rwandans to worry about the strength and credibility of the Kagame regime.
It’s clear that it’s all about diverting people from the reality that the exiled officers wanted the world to see-and the usual motive of wanting to destroy critics of the escalating authoritarianism in Kigali.
It is especially true when you consider the many times the Kigali government has tried to smear its critics accusing them of denying genocide, working with FDLR and other sorts of rubbish. Lady Victoire Ingabire is in jail on the charges of facilitating FDLR; that she funded them with USD 1000; imagine such an allusion? If it was the reverse, that Ingabire received that much from FDLR, I would be tempted to accept, but as it is, it’s a joke.
 I mean, Ingabire funding FDLR or vice-versa? Next is Paul Rusesabagina, of the Hotel Rwanda fame, who the Kigali government says is also on the list of FDLR supporters-and then all of Kagame’s critics are genocide deniers and FDLR activists-sheer stupidity as Karegeya put it when asked by the writer about it.
 He (Karegeya) actually said, he considers challenging those making such utterances in a court-yes, may be, it’s time such they were challenged to substantiate their claims, but the very notion of fabricating accusations against critics of the despotic regime in Kigali is getting old-fashioned, isn’t it? I only hope the exiled officers won’t be deterred by the fabrications from continuing to expose Kagame’s autocracy. 
They have realise that they (Karegeya, Kayumba, Gahima and Rudasingwa) raised national issues of importance to Rwandans, and the Kigali ‘backing dogs’ are only responding with native and fabricated issues that shouldn’t stop a worthy cause. Rwandans, however silenced they are, are able to make a distinction between a cockroach and a grasshopper, don’t they?
Enhanced by Zemanta