“About The Financial Gazette

The Financial Gazette, established in 1969, is Southern Africa's leading business and political newspaper well known for its indepth and authoritative reportage that is anchored on providing timely, accurate, fair and balanced news.

Owned by Zimbabwean investors, the weekly newspaper jealously guards its editorial independence and supports democratic and pluralistic politics and free market policies.”

Who are the Zimbabwean investors that own ‘The Financial Gazette’? What was the papers policy on land reform before Mugabe announced that he was going to take back the land from White occupiers? Can you present one of their articles in support of taking back the lands before Mugabe announced that he was going to reclaim the lands?

Unfortunately there is only the government internet source that gives their view on anything, and I am fortunate to have the benefit of emails and other correspondences from others in Zimbabwe who say much of the reports about abuses that were taking place under the ‘not well thought out land reform plan’ are being exaggerated. Not being physically there, I am at liberty to take a generalized view in favour of an African oriented solution to African issues.

Contrary to how that article paints the picture, I will go with the other reports that say the AU is not covering up anything, but is giving the Zimbabwean government time to respond to the report. There is already an effort to discredit the AU by many of these western-controlled interests, so I would not take their views seriously. And as you should know, these White interests have Black African collaborators.

Of course, many would like us to just accept their view on things without the benefit of the other side of the story. As far as I see, the opposition to Mugabe has been appealing to Western Interests, that is definitely not interested in the wellbeing of Africans as a whole, for support, and in that regard I do not see them as a viable alternative.

They have not presented a reasonable plan to take back the land from the white occupiers. They are just reacting to the issue now, and they all seem to have a vested interest in political control (not that anything is wrong with that per se.) I have a strong feeling that US and UK business/political interest are financing much of the opposition forces for their own anti-African agenda, which involves not compensating the real victims for their theft of lands.

I also would expect Mugabe’s regime to first take care of those who support his moves. I see nothing wrong with that. It is foolish for him to take the land and give it to the more colonized Blacks and/or westernized arrogant ones who look down on indigenous African cultures after learning another language and spending time in the US or UK. It is silly to hand lands over to those who feel it was ok to simply remain the employees of the Whites who stole the land.

As I said there would be much valid reasons for Blacks in Zimbabwe to be against Mugabe, but if they are making appeals outside of Black African interest groups, then I do not see them as beneficial to the wider goal of freedom for all Africans.

Playing for the attention of Western Interest would not get my support. It is not like if I am for Mugabe, but I am more against the poor international media coverage of the affairs there since the move to take back the land. They do not present the history for their readers to consider, and they do not recognize the debt the UK and other western interest owes to Zimbabwe.

There were reports of abuses in Zimbabwe before the exercise to reclaim the land, and the international media did not focus on it then, so I see their present moves as tied to maintaining western control over Zimbabwe/Africa.