I cannot call your response here a fair assessment. I doubt the African nations that oppose the British and American attempts to manipulate the politics in Zimbabwe, after the government (Mugabe's regime) joined the call to seize land from white farmers, can be considered knee-jerk responses.
You are in England (I suspect) and your biases are apparent given some statements you have made on this board. As an example we have your own attempts to use the term "peasant" to demean others. Of course you were not mindful that Rastafari is supposed to be a movement of 'peasants'.
You also stated: "The sort of people who come in to Britain are young men and women mostly of middle-class background. They only become refugees because the immigration lawyers are telling them that that is the only way to not only stay in the country but also get benefits like housing etc. For at least £1000, one get refugee status."
So much of what comes from Zimbabwean refugees in Britain can be lies, as they want to stay in Britian to enhance their own economic opportunities, and as you once said, "to return to Zimbabwe to live like lords".
On 26 December 2004, you stated:
"It would be best to leave African causes to African people.
Zimbabwean causes are also best left to Zimbabwean people."
You are quite aware that the opposition party-MDC has been lobbying US and UK powers to intervene in the affairs of African people and Zimbabwe. You never condemned such actions, and continually post the same type of European biased propaganda being used by the MDC. This same propaganda is also widely circulated by European and American white owned media.
You should also be aware of the attempt by the US embassy to fake a report about starving Zimbabweans a while back. In an attempt to stop them, some Black Zimbabweans took cameras and a computer from a group of US embassy agents who were driving around throwing bags of grain from a truck. When people ran to pick the bags of grain up, they were filming them for their starving Zimbabwean propaganda exercise. The US made one statement about Mugabe supporters beating up US officials, but when the detailed response came out, that story died.
It is a good thing Zimbabwe got wind of the coup plot for Equatorial Guinea, where even black Africans were used to aid another British orchestrated coup. Remember the plane landed in Zimbabwe to buy arms. Since the coup plotters had access to US and British arms, the appearance of buying arms in Zimbabwe for a coup in another African country, leaves the impression in addition or in case the coup plot failed the perpatrators could still call the operation a success. If they had gotten the arms, and the coup failed or succeded, the story would have been different. They would have used the story about arms coming from Zimbabwe in an attempt to tie Mugabe to the coup, claiming that his country was in such financial difficulty that they were part of a plot to take from Equatorial Guinea. They could have played the old Saddam Hussein Iraq and Kuwait plot.
The MDC reached an agreement with the South African government over the observers they were sending for the elections. Soon after claiming to agree, they released a report claiming that the South African observers were just there as a rubber stamp for Mugabe.
These incidents show there is validity in the Mugabe regime's distrust for Western countries and their African agents.
You also know that The US and UK have a bone to pick with Mugabe for actively working to end apartheid in South Africa. Add this to the fact that his regime joined the call to seize land from whites to return to Blacks. This was after Britain refused to fund the land reform exercise, and used unfair delay tactics for over 20 years.
While the British were stalling the land reclamation exercise and felt they had Mugabe tied to a wasteful process designed by them, they were cool with his regime, although there were many reports about abuses before this land exercise.
You did not present the history behind all these issues, which leads me to suspect that you are/were working on behalf of the MDC, the British, or both. You know my position on this is not a blanket endorsement of Mugabe. I have stated many times that I am not supporting the UK and US in their attempts to protect white interest in Zimbabwe. Their onslaught came after the government started seizing land from whites. They are not concerned about black Africans who are abused. The US, UK and the MDC have not demonstrated that they are interested in seeing Blacks get the land that was stolen from them.
On several occasions in the past when no one was taking you on with this issue, I asked you to present the history of what was taking place in Zimbabwe. You never did present the history, so I provided links and asked you to tell us if they were true or false. You did not really address that.
You know quite well that the white controlled foreign press is misleading people about the reason for their concern, and they are also being aided and abetted by Zimbabweans who are operating as agents of Britain (we have you unwittingly confirming this).
Two threads for references:
UK deportations of Zimbabweans, a ploy
AU backs off on Zimbabwe issue
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml