Prof Charles Kambanda lambasts claims by Melvern et al. over BBC’s “Rwanda: untold story”

Leave a reply

Charles Kambanda

Professor Charles Kambanda would love to take on Ms. Melvern et al. in an open debate over issues raised on the documentary “RWANDA: UNTOLD STORY”.

October, 15th, 2014

RE: MY ANALYSIS OF Ms. MELVERN, THE THIRTY-EIGHT RESEARCHERS AND JOUNALISTS’ REBUTTAL OF RWANDA’S UNTOLD STORY BBC DOCUMENTARY:

Introduction:

I am writing to you as a Rwandan researcher, human rights defender and an Officer of Court in New York State; I am bound by the Constitutional Oath of Office. I taught at the National University and other institutions of higher learning in Rwanda for over a decade after the 1994 massacres. I am writing from my firsthand and lived experience of the unfortunate Hutu/Tutsi conflict. I am a Rwandan who was born to a Rwandan refugee family in Uganda. I supported RPF before, during and after the 1990 war. Like many other Rwandans, I lost countless family relations to the massacres in Rwanda. I am a Rwandan scholar – based in the United States of America – who is interested in sustainable peace and co-existence between and/or among the diverse people of Rwanda. I belong to no Rwandan political party. It is my submission that no side to the insane Tutsi vs. Hutu conflict is exclusively for victims or perpetrators of the senseless crimes that have characterized these two, generally, hostile groups. Both sides to the armed conflict committed horrible massacres before, during and after the 1994 massacres.

Accept my heartfelt gratitude and respect for the BBC team that prepared the famous Rwanda’s Untold Story documentary. The BBC team that worked on this documentary did a tremendous job documenting the background and the intricate web of the crimes both sides allegedly committed during, before and after the 1994 horrific massacres. What your team did is investigative journalism; Descartes (the great French philosopher) called it the Methodical doubt. In the Holy Scriptures, Jesus Christ says “the Truth will set us free”. The producer of the documentary dug deep into the truth which different parties to the Rwandan conflict do not want the world to know because that truth will set people free. The BBC, as an institution, deserves credit for the great film. It is my submission that Ms. Melvern and her group’s “rebuttal” of the BBC documentary should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

A. Inquiry into the causes, manner, perpetrators and victims of the long and bloody Hutu vs. Tutsi conflict in Burundi and Rwanda before, during and after the 1994 massacres in Rwanda is not a closed chapter as Ms. Melvern’s missive appears to suggest.

The 1994 massacres occurred within the context of a bloody ethnic civil war between the Hutu (a Hutu dominated government) and Tutsi (Tutsi dominated rebels). There are well documented ethnic based massacres between the Hutu and Tutsi before and after the 1994 massacres. The well documented Tutsi/Hutu massacres include:

(i) The 1993 Burundian massacres where the Tutsi butchered the Hutu.

(ii) The Gersony, UNCHR sponsored report which detailed the insane massacred RPF /A perpetrated against the Hutu under the then Tutsi rebels held territory.

(iii) RPF/A (predominantly Tutsi) slaughter of internally displaced Hutu refugees camp.

(iv) Some Tutsi and some Hutu militia on-slaughter of the Tutsi and the Hutu during the 1994 massacres.

(v) RPF/A slaughter of the Hutu in Congo (both native DRC Hutu and Rwandan Hutu refugees as documented by the UN Mapping Report).

Investigating the similarities and differences between these reoccurring insane massacres between the Hutu and Tutsi without favor is, in my opinion, not only necessary but also a noble cause. The documentary does exactly that. Apparently, any objective inquiry into these crimes is what Ms. Melvern and her group of journalists and researchers call “[using] current events to either negate or to diminish the genocide… to promote genocide denial”. All the above well documented crimes, committed by the same people against the same people in different places and time, create an unequivocal need for social research. Social research is a continuum. Unfortunately, Ms. Melvern and her group appear to suggest that their research finding on these complex social political phenomena in the Hutu vs. Tutsi conflict is conclusive.

B. Ms. Melvern and her team resort to name calling instead of addressing the substantive issues the interviewees, individually, and the entire documentary raised. In most instances, Ms. Melvern and her group do not substantiate their generalized attacks on the individual interviewees, the BBC and the documentary producers

Ms. Melvern and her group characterize the BBC documentary as “old claims […] similar material using similar language [that is] part of an on-going Hutu power campaign of genocide denial”. This is an absurd approach especially for social science researchers and journalists for various reasons:

(i) The BBC documentary, as the title of the documentary suggests, was intended to interview different people with rarely mentioned personal experience of what happened in Rwanda during, before and after the 1994 massacres. Such statements must be as old as the events the statements describe if those statements are proper representation of what happened. Therefore, whether those statements are “old claims” is a tautology. How would statements explaining what happened 20 or so years ago be “brand-new” statements for every BBC viewer of the program?

(ii) Ms. Melvern and her group deliberately apply “Hutu power”, term with no known definition to confuse their readers. What’s Hutu power? What is the composition of Hutu power? Where is Hutu power? Research methodology and formal logic prohibit use of unknown and undefined terms for any purpose, especially while addressing critical social problems.

Ms. Melvern and her group of journalists and researchers claim that “the parts of the film which concern the 1994 genocide, far from providing BBC viewers with an ‘Untold Story’ as the title promises, are old claims”. This is a serious allegation against the BBC “on behalf of BBC viewers”. This allegation implies that Ms. Melvern and her group met “BBC viewers” and Ms. Melvern and her group are authorized agents of the “BBC viewers” to complain to the BBC on behalf of what Ms. Melvern calls the BBC viewers. Is Ms. Melvern or any individual signatory to their letter the “BBC viewers” and so the signatory are complaining to the BBC for having viewed “old claims”? Are these researchers who signed the letter presenting their perception of the BBC documentary as “old claims”? Is Ms. Melvern presenting “some” or “all” BBC viewers’ perception of documentary? Did Ms. Melvern and the researchers who signed the letter purposively fail to distribute their term “BBC viewers” properly? Is Ms. Melvern unfamiliar with the rules on distribution of terms? Why didn’t they distribute their term “BBC viewers” so that the readers know, with substantial certainty, the scope of the “BBC viewers” these researchers are referring to?

Ms. Melvern and her group argue that “at the heart of this [Hutu power] campaign are convicted génocidaires, some of their defen[s]e lawyers from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and their supporters and collaborators … like the programme … The BBC programme Rwanda’s Untold Story recycles their arguments and provides them with another platform to create doubt and confusion about what really happened”. This is absurd ad hominem because:

(i) A reasonable person would not confuse the person, ideas and research, of defense counsel with the client’s real or alleged crimes. Ms. Melvern and her fellow researchers appear to impute the ICTR “convicted genocidaire” some ICTR defense counsels.

(ii) Carl Del Ponte, the former ICTR prosecutor, Michael Hourigan who was an investigator and prosecutor at ICTR, among others scholars wrote widely about the ICTR’s cover up of the RPA/F crimes during the 1994 massacres.

(iii) Ms. Melvern and her group know or they should know for sure, that the BBC documentary producer did not interview any ICTR convict. How do the distinguished researchers, who signed the letter, relate the BBC documentary interviewees’ testimony with ICTR “convicted genocidaires”?

(iv) Courtesy and common sense requires Ms. Melvern and her group to explain how the ICTR “convicted genocidaires” exercised undue influence and pressure over the documentary interviewees. Is it rational that the ICTR “convicted genocidaires”, as Ms. Melvern and the group put it, would influence a significant number of society as to form what Ms. Melvern appears to call a global campaign of supporters and collaborators to create doubts and confusion about what happened?

(v) The documentary producer interviewed Rwandans and other nationals. Some of the interviewees are Tutsi and former RPF/A members. How did the ICTR “convicted genocidaires” recruit these Tutsi 1990/1994 war opponents into supporters and collaborators? Aren’t Ms. Melvern and her group oversimplifying very complex issues under cover over of their deliberate ad hominem?

(vi) The documentary features prominent non-Rwandan scholars and legal practitioners. Ms. Melvern and her group conveniently dismiss all these prominent professionals’ views under a terribly sweeping statement “all of those professionals are supporters and collaborators of the ICTR convicted genocidaire”. Ordinarily, social researchers and journalists avoid sweeping statements. How do the “convicted genocidaire” influence a cross section of people – including prominent professionals like lawyers and academics the documentary producers interviewed?

C. What Ms. Melvern and her group calls the three lies of the documentary are real controversies among Rwandans and social science researchers. These contentious issues are proper subject matter for social research and investigative journalism.

Ms. Melvern and her group cite what they call lies in the BBC Documentary as “[…] lie about the true nature of the Hutu Power militia […] an attempt to minimize the number of Tutsi murdered in the genocide, […] an effort to place the blame for shooting down President Habyarimana’s plane on April 6, 1994 on the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF)”. Each of the three accusations, which Ms. Melvern and her group call “BBC Documentary lies”, deserves thorough analysis for validity and truth.

1. On the true nature of the Hutu power militia

Ms. Melvern and her groups argue that “the BBC documentary allows a witness to claim that ‘only ten percent of the Interahamwe (militia) were killers. In fact, the majority of Hutu Power militia forces – estimated to have been 30,000 strong – were trained specifically to kill Tutsi at speed, and indoctrinated in a racist ideology, part of genocide planning. There is eyewitness testimony by several militia leaders who cooperated with the ICTR”.

First, it is absurd to discredit the entire documentary or issue therein because “one of the interviewees made a mistake in [his] quantitative estimation” of the internahamwe who allegedly perpetrated the massacres. Interestingly, Ms Melvern protests the BBC interviewee’s estimation of the number of the Interahamwe by introducing her own estimation about the number of the internahamwe. Why does Ms. Melvern want her readers to believe her estimates, not the BBC interviewee’s estimations of the interahamwe numbers? Second, Ms. Melvern and her group miss on some important facts about the militia, including the internahame, some of who committed the horrible massacres.

(i) It is wrong to think that all interahamwe were Hutu. Some interahamwe were Tutsi. Referring to all interahamwe as Hutu militia is a misstatement of fact. The interahamwe boss in charge of recruitment and politics – Robert Kajuga – was Tutis and so were a significant number of the interahamwe

(ii) When Rwanda embraced multiparty politics in 1991, each political party had its own “Youth Wing to animate party meetings, organize and mobilize for the party. MRND (the then ruling party’s Youth Wing was called Interahamwe. PSD (another political party) had Abakombozi as its Youth Wing. MDR’s Youth Wing was called Inkuba. PL’s Youth Wing was called Jeunes liberaux. As the war and party politics progressed, each Rwandan community -including political parties and their youth wings – developed “radical groups”.

(iii) There is overwhelming evidence that some members of each political youth wing/militia participated in the 1994 massacres and that each political party militia was hostile against others. Reducing these militia groups to “Hutu militia” is distortion of facts.

(iv) There is proof of, and the type of war RPA/F was engaged in against the then government dictate that, RPA/F cadres infiltrated all political parties’ militia as early as 1991. Probably, some of these RPA/F infiltrators engaged in the 1994 massacres.

(v) There is sufficient evidence that by the time of the 1994 massacres, all political parties of that time, including RPF, had some ‘radicalized’ members and militia. Therefore, simplifying the phenomenon of who killed who during such circumstance, like Ms. Melvern appears to suggest, is inconsistent with qualitative research approach.

2. Ms. Melvern and her group’s argument on Rwanda’s population statistics before the 1994 massacres is false and invalid. Ms. Melvern and her group use inadmissible evidence to support their argument

Ms. Melvern and her group argue that “the programme [the BBC documentary] attempts to minimize the number of Tutsi murdered, a typical tactic of genocide deniers. The false figures cited are provided by two US academics who worked for a team of lawyers defending the génocidaires at the ICTR. They even claim that in 1994 more Hutu than Tutsi were murdered – an absurd suggestion and contrary to all the widely available research [reports]”.

Inconsistent statistics argument:

Ms. Melvern and her group know or should know that the entire post-independence Rwandan population census reports indicated the ethnic and religious affiliation of each Rwandan. The last population census before the 1994 massacres took place in 1991. The 1991 Rwanda population census indicate that the total population was 6.2 million people; 14% Tutsi, 84% Hutu and 1% Twa and others. No post-independence Rwandan population census report had bigger figures than the 1991 population census report. However, after the 1994 massacres, the total number of the people butchered is put at 1.3 million people – in any case, well above 1 million people were brutality butchered. The number of Tutsi survivors of the massacres stood at around 350,000 people. The proper equation, for purposes of determining the number of the Tutsi who died during the1994 massacres should be: 14% of the total population – (minus) the total number of Tutsi survivors of the massacres.

For unknown reasons, Ms. Melvern wants her audience to rely on reports and/or stories, made/told after the 1994 massacres, to ascertain the country’s population’s statistics before 1994. The only proper authority when in issue is the population statistic of a country, is that country’s population census. How does the world end up with over one million Tutsi dead and about 350,000 Tutsi survivors yet the Tutsi were only 14% of a population of 6.2 million people? Even if all the 14% Tutsi had been killed, it was impossible to have the over 1 million human skulls “Tutsi victims” that are paraded in genocide memorial centers. Is it possible that the Hutu set out to exterminate the Tutsi but they ended up killing themselves more than they killed their “target”, the Tutsi? Seeking for answers to such clear statistical inconsistences is called “genocide denial” in Ms. Melvern and his fellow researchers’ world. Ms. Melvern and her group are determined to push all these inconsistences down their readers’ throat because “some reports say so”. This, in my considered view, is undermining human intelligibility.

Ms. Melvern and her group should inquire, from the government of Rwanda, about the 2004/2005 household-to-household nationwide survey of the Tutsi who died during the massacres. Why did the government of Rwanda and donors invest so much money in a survey whose findings were never made public? Who had interest in not publishing that survey? Wouldn’t have made a good argument for Kagame, who has paraded human skulls for tourists throughout the country, to show a breakdown of village by village Tutsi who died during the massacres? Interestingly, every apart of Rwanda has skulls of the 1994 massacres victims. However, by April 1994 when the massacres started, RPF had significant territory under their control. How did the “Hutu” penetrate RPA/F held territory to massacre the “Tutsi”? Why there isn’t any District in Rwanda without the 1994 massacres victim skulls yet a significant chunk of Rwandan territory was under RPF control? Inquiring into these and other critical questions is what Ms. Melvern calls “genocide denial” in Ms. Melvern’s world. Ridiculous

3. Ms. Melvern and her group twist facts about shooting down the plane of the then Hutu president, which is widely believed to have triggered the 1994 massacres

Ms. Melvern and her group claim that the BBC film “argues that the shooting down of the plane on April 6, 1994 was perpetrated by the RPF. This same story was promoted by Hutu Power extremists within a few hours of the president’s assassination and promoted ever since by génocidaires and a few ICTR defense lawyers. The film pays no heed to a detailed expert report published in January 2012 by a French magistrate Judge Marc Trévidic. This contains evidence from French experts, including crash investigators, who proved scientifically that the missiles that shot down the plane came from the confines of the government-run barracks in Kanombe on the airport’s perimeter – one of the most fortified places in the country, and where it would have been impossible for the RPF, armed with a missile, to penetrate”. This argument is a deliberate set of twisted facts and lies that the journalists and researchers cannot have appended their signature to naked lies if their motive had been justice, fairness and good faith rebuttal of the BBC documentary. The following are the nasty twisted facts and lies in Ms. Melvern’s argument “shooting down the president’s plane”:

(i) Ms. Melvern and her group know or should know that shooting down President Habyarimana’s plane is the legal and proximate cause of the 1994 massacres in Rwanda. Shooting down of the plane has been investigated by two distinct and separate courts; the French and Spanish courts. Both courts indicted and issued arrest warrants for Kagame and his top RPF commanders for their alleged criminal responsibility for shooting down the plane. Unfortunately, Ms. Melvern appears to argue that the ICTR “convicted genocidaires” and some of the ICTR defense attorneys “influenced” both the French and Spanish court to indict and issue arrest warrants for Kagame and his former bush war top commanders. Really!

(ii) Ms. Melvern and her group do not inform their readers that the ICTR former prosecutor carried out thorough investigations into Kagame and his then rebel leaders’ role in the massacres. The ICTR prosecutor was ready to prosecute Kagame and his fighters who allegedly committed crimes under the ICTR jurisdiction; war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Shooting down the plane was part of the charges against Kagame and his then rebel fighters. Instead of accepting to face justice at the ICTR, Kagame rushed to President Bush for “rescue”. President Bush ordered the then ICTR prosecutor – Carl Del Ponte – to desist prosecuting Kagame and his former rebel fighters because Kagame is a USA ‘ally’. The prosecutor chose to resign than compromising our professional ethnics because selective justice is not justice. These facts are well documented.

(iii) The French court indicted, and/or issued arrest warrants for, Kagame and his top rebel commanders for the shooting down of the plane. Ms. Melvern and her friends know or should know that a court decision is not overturned by a mere report of experts. A court decision is overturned by another superior court’s decision in form of an appeal or the same court’s review of its decision. Ms. Melvern knows or should know that the French Court indictments and/or arrest warrants for Kagame and his alleged partners-in-crime are on file. It is absurd that Ms. Melvern and her group seek to abuse the purpose and character of expert reports the way they use Judge Marc Trévidic report in their argument. In any case, the French Court has not pronounced itself on the experts’ report Ms. Melvern and her group uses for their argument. This is academic dishonesty of the highest order.

(iv) Ms. Melvern and her group appear to ignore the fact that the BBC documentary features some of Kagame’s former top rebel commanders who testify that Kagame ordered the shooting of the plane. These former top rebel commanders’ testimony is admissible evidence in courts of law; it is an “admission”. Some of the former RPA/F top leaders who testified in the documentary are Tutsi and they incriminate themselves. Linda and her fellow researchers should have analyzed these central facts before dismissing the BBC Documentary as “lies”. It is true these former rebels’ testimony may be subject to impeachment for bias. However, since we are not in court yet – and it is court’s exclusive powers to conclude on whether or not a witness is biased against the accused – Ms. Melvern and her group cannot sweep these former RPA/F top leaders’ testimony under the carpet. In any case, Melvern and a significant number of the signatories to the letter can also be impeached for bias in favor of Kagame because of their constant, sometimes bordering with insanity, defense for Kagame at all costs, including telling lies for that purpose. Whatever the case, the BBC is not reasonably expected to go into the intricate law of evidence on impeachment of witnesses’ rules before selecting their interviewees.

D. Ms. Melvern and her group are determined to present evidence of “planning genocide” to BBC yet; the ICTR prosecutor needed, but failed to get, sufficient evidence to prove “planning” the 1994 massacres with intent to destroy the Tutsi in whole or part.

Ms. Melvern and her group give an impression that they have, and are presenting, evidence of “ genocide planning” yet in the famous Military 1 and Military 11 which prosecuted all the top military and national security officials found that all that evidence did not prove “ planning” genocide. The ICTR indictments of all the accused in Military 1 and Military 11 alleged that the accused had pre-made lists of the Tutsi to be killed, the accused had a well laid strategy to exterminate the Tutsi and that the accused had trained and distributed militia to perpetrate the Tutsi genocide. There was no evidence at the ICTR to prove these allegations and court acquitted all the accused on genocide account. Unfortunately, Ms. Melvern recycles these allegations, which the ICTR examined and found baseless, for her argument to attack the BBC documentary. If Ms. Melvern had the evidence she claims to prove that the Hutu “planned” the genocide, why didn’t Ms. Melvern take her evidence to the ICTR in the Military 1 and Military 11 which examined ‘planning’ the genocide allegation?

Ms. Melvern and her team, fallaciously, argue that “Jane Corbin, who presented the programme, even tries to raise doubts about whether or not the RPF stopped the genocide. The authority on this subject is Lt.-General Roméo Dallaire … Dallaire is categorical. ‘The genocide was stopped because the RPF won and stopped it’”. Ms. Melvern and her group ignore that the then very powerful and one of the top RPA/F commander, General Nyamwasa Kayumba said that “Kagame’s concern was not to stop the genocide. Kagame’s intention was to take power”. Without efforts to reconcile these critical and diverse positions by different actors, Ms. Melvern makes very disturbing conclusion, “RPF stopped genocide because Gen. Romeo Dakkaire said it”. Is that academic honesty as she claims she is?

Ms. Melvern and her group agree that the BBC documentary lasted for less than an hour. The film features some scholars and people with firsthand information about what happened. What Ms. Melvern and the group blames the BBC documentary for is that the BBC documentary producer did not feature the group’s favorite scholars, practitioners including Dallaire, Philippe Gaillard and Dr. James Orbinski. In my considered view, Ms. Melvern and her group are probably mistaken about how investigative journalism and social research operates. The purpose of the film was to bring to light the “Untold story” about the massacres in Rwanda. It follows that the “popular account of events” was not the subject matter of the documentary. What value would the BBC add to its diverse viewers if the BBC was to avoid controversial social issues for “popular” views? It is impossible to interview everybody for one single research project.

E. The 1994 massacres cannot be detached from Rwanda’s social political culture. A researcher that seeks to close investigations and/or research into the culture that gave birth to the 1994 horrible massacres is probably naive

The 1994 Rwandan massacres were a logical sequence of a complex unresolved social and political dynamics. At the core of this insane conflict is each side’s failure to perceive the other side as a legitimate group with equal rights. In this conflict, the “other group” has no legitimate history, story and existence. Each group’s heroes are the other group’s evil men. Vengeance, dehumanizing the ‘other group’ and exterminating “our” enemy is spontaneous characteristic of an ordinary Hutu or Tutsi. “Secrets and lies” in “our” group against the “other” group are the major features of the Hutu vs Tutsi troubled co-existence. Settling for one group or side’s narrative, without critical thinking and reexamination of these two groups’ co-existence history and crimes, is settling on a appallingly slippery cliff.

Unfortunately, the current government of Rwanda and its complex network of lobbyists consider any critical reflection on RPA/F role in the horrific crimes “genocide denial”. This undesirable Government of Rwanda position is clear in its draconic laws, including “genocide revisionism laws”. Kigali government, its lobbyists and, surprisingly, some academics are inclined to refer to the BBC documentary – a very critical inquiry into the different events during, before and after the 1994 massacres – as “genocide denial”.

Conclusion

What happened during, before and after the 1994 massacres is extremely complex that any social researcher who claims to have perfect and conclusive knowledge of the 1994 Rwandan massacres, like Ms. Melvern and fellow researchers claim, must be treated with the contempt they deserve. “Genocide denial” should not become a social-political tool to suppress critical thinking, human intelligibility and human freedoms.

The BBC has a choice to make. Remain critical and investigative or become a morale booster for those who hold power and lose the trust and confidence of the ordinary people who are yarning for justice and fairness. The Hutu/Tutsi conflict has caused way too many horrible massacres in Burundi, Rwanda and DRC. The victor vs. Vanquished narrative, like Ms. Melvern and her group appear to suggest, should be discarded. For BBC’s credibility and very long history of service, a critical approach to the Hutu/Tutsi conflict is the only sustainable and value adding way to go.

I would be happy to take on Ms. Melvern and her group in an open debate over all the issues they raised in their letter.

Dr Charles Kambanda, PhD

Membe thrashes Wenje’s allegations : ‘Prove I was wrong about Rwanda stoking war in DRC, and I’ll resign’

Leave a reply

benn

DRC Diplomacy Chief Bernard Membe(L) thrashes Ezekiah Wenje’s allegations.

Dodoma/Dar es Salaam. Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation minister Bernard Membe said yesterday that he would resign if the Opposition proved his controversial remarks about Rwanda were wrong.

Mr Membe was responding to allegations levelled against him by Shadow Foreign Affairs minister Ezekiah Wenje.

Winding up debate on his ministry’s 2014/15 budget proposals in Parliament, Mr Membe offered to resign if Mr Wenje would provide documentary proof that he was wrong when he said last September that the Banyamulenge in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) were ethnic Tutsis originating from Rwanda.

“This is a fact that cannot be denied,” he said.

He said the Banyamulenge, who formed the M23 rebel group that fought the DRC government for a number of years, were Tutsis originating from Rwanda, while members of the the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) were Rwandans, who fled to eastern DRC after the 1994 genocide.

“When I told the BBC that Rwandans were causing instability in Eastern Congo, I meant what I said…it’s the UN’s group of experts that originally accused Rwanda, not me,” Mr Membe told Parliament.

He admitted that relations between Tanzania and Rwanda were strained, but added that “opportunists” had taken advantage of the situation to fuel diplomatic tensions between the two countries.

Presenting the Opposition’s response to the ministry’s budget proposals earlier, Mr Wenje accused Mr Membe of stoking diplomatic tensions between the two countries.

Although Mr Membe made no mention of the frigid relations in the speech, Mr Wenje said the minister was to blame for the situation.

This forced Mr Membe to hit back when responding to MPs’ views, accusing Mr Wenje of being a stooge of a foreign country. The shadow minister strongly denied the claim.

Mr Wenje, who is also the Nyamagana MP, earlier told Parliament that Mr Membe’s remarks on the BBC’s Focus on Africa programme had worsened the fragile relations between Tanzania and Rwanda.

He said such comments could only heighten confusion and anger among ordinary citizens of the two countries.

The shadow minister claimed that Mr Membe said Rwanda had exported insecurity and instability to eastern DRC after sending rebels into country.

He said the minister made inaccurate comments about Rwanda and the M23 rebellion in eastern DRC.

But Mr Membe stood his ground, saying what he said was the truth, which had even been documented by UN experts.

Mr Wenje also said the government had not bothered to warn former Rwandan Prime Minister Faustine Twagiramungu after he was quoted saying he had held talks with Tanzania to strategise on how the FDLR could take over power in Rwanda.

Tanzania has repeatedly stated that if Mr Twagiramungu visited Dar es Salaam, he came on a private visit and was not invited by the government as claimed by the News of Rwanda website.

Mr Membe said Tanzania was playing a key role in finding lasting peace in the Great Lakes Region.

The United Nations Force Intervention Brigade, also known as the SADC Intervention Brigade and led by Brigadier General James Mwakibolwa from Tanzania, had successfully dismantled M23 restored peace in eastern DRC, he added.

Relations between Tanzania and Rwanda took a plunge in May 2013 following President Jakaya Kikwete’s appeal to Rwanda to engage FDRL rebels in talks.

Mr Kikwete’s suggestion at a meeting of the Great Lakes countries, which met on the sidelines of the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, did not go down well with Rwandan President Paul Kagame.

The government in Kigali links the FDLR with the 1994 genocide, in which over 800,000 people, mainly Tutsis and moderate Hutus, were slaughtered.

M23, which dominated the North Kivu Province since the end of the Second Congo War in 2003 before it was defeated last year by a joint force from Tanzania, South Africa and Malawi, is a reincarnation of the National Congress for Defence of the People.

In April, 2012 up to 700 former CNDP soldiers mutinied against the DRC government that was being supported by the peacekeeping contingent of the Unites Nations Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Monusco).

The mutineers formed M23, also known as the Congolese Revolutionary Army, which was allegedly bankrolled by neighbouring Rwanda.

Source: http://www.thecitizen.co.tz/News/House-divided-as-Membe-hits-back/-/1840392/2328676/-/item/0/-/1214odm/-/index.html

U Rwanda ruvuye muri security council, Angola irarusimbuye!

Leave a reply

téléchargement

Ibendera rya Repubulika ya Angola

Nk’uko tubikesha BBC, Angola niyo yatorewe gusimbura u Rwanda mu kanama gashinzwe umutekano k’umuryango w’abibumbye (UN Security Council). U Rwanda rwari rumaze muri uyu mwanya igihe kingana n’imyaka ibiri rukaba ruzatanga imihoho mu mpera z’uyu mwaka.

U Rwanda rukinjira muri uyu mwanya byagaragaye ko rwari rufite agenda isobanutse:

  • Gukingira ikibaba ingabo za RDF zahoraga muri Congo zisahurira zahabu na diyama ndetse n’igiti gihenze cyane kizwi ku izina rya mahogan( libuyu).
  • Gukoresha imbaraga uwo mwanya kugira ngo umutwe wa FDLR uranduranwe n’imizi.
  • Gukomeza gushimangira igitekerezo cy’uko Kagame atigeze agira uruhare muri genocide yabaye mu Rwanda.
  • Guharanira ko genocide itongera kwitwa genocide y’u Rwanda( Rwandan genocide/Genocide rwandais) ahubwo ikaba genocide yakorewe Abatutsi.

Iyi agenda ya leta ya Mobile President Paul Kagame siko yose yabashije kugerwaho. Ibi biterwa n’uko mu by’ukuri ibikorerwa muri kariya kanama usanga bifatwaho ibyemezo n’ibihugu by’ibihangange kandi bifitemo umwanya uhoraho ibyo akaba ari Leta zunze ubumwe z’Amerika, Ubwongereza, Ubufaransa, Uburusiya n’Ubushinwa. Cyakora Kagame akoresheje uwo mwanya, yarwanyije yivuye inyuma igitekerezo cyo kohereza drones cyangwa se indege zitagira umu pilote ngo zikore reconnaissance ku mupaka w’u Rwanda na Congo mu rwego rwo gutahura urujya n’uruza rwahakorerwaga. Izi drones nizo zatahuye abantu babaga bikoreye amabuye y’agaciro bavaga muri Congo bakinjira mu Rwanda. Zagaragaje kandi mouvements z’ingabo z’U Rwanda zambukaga zinjira muri Congo gutera akavuyo no gufasha M23. Byatumye u Rwanda ruhatakariza icyizere rwari rwarashyize muri bamwe mu bazungu bashyigikiraga buhumyi umutwe w’iterabwoba FPR na perezida Paul Kagame.

Birazwi ko Kagame yagerageje kurwanya icyemezo cyo kohereza intervention brigade muri Congo kuko iyi brigade yari ifite mandate yo kurasa igihe bibaye ngombwa.Nyamara iyi brigade yaroherejwe ndetse iza irimo ingabo za Tanzaniya, igihugu cyari kimaze kugirana amasinde n’u Rwanda kuko Kagame yasezeranyije Tanzaniya ko azaritura perezida wayo Muheshimiwa Jakaya Kikwete. Ibi nabyo byatumye Tanzaniya irwana nk’iyirwanira, maze ingabo za RDF zishushubikanywa muri Congo ndetse umutwe wa M23 ukubitwa iz’akabwana, urashwiragira, benshi birukira mu Rwanda abandi bitandukanya na wo,  batanga n’ubuhamya bw’uko bajyanywe kurwana ku ngufu.

Kagame na none yakoresheje uyu mwanya kugira ngo buri rapport isohoka ibe isaba ko umutwe wa FDLR ukurwa ku isi. Ni muri urwo rwego mu gihe hari kwigwa ikibazo cyo kurandura M23 yashigikirwaga n’ibihugu by’amahanga (Rwanda na Uganda), abahagarariye u Rwanda muri aka kanama basabye ko M23 itasenywa yonyine ahubwo ko hakurikiraho n’indi mitwe yose. Bityo nyuma ya M23, FDLR yagombaga guhita ikubitwa nabi cyane. U Rwanda rugiye kuva muri aka kanama FDLR itararaswa n’ubwo bwose tutazi uko bizayigendekera.

Mu ri iki gihe u Rwanda rumaze muri aka kanama, ama raporo avuga ku bwicanyi bwa FPR yarasisibiranyijwe. Iheruka ikaba ari Mapping Report igaragaza neza uburyo FPR yarimarimye impunzi z’abahutu zari muri Congo ibeshya ko ikurikiranye interahamwe na Ex FAR. Iyi raporo isoza inavuga ko haramutse habonetse urukiko rukurikirana iki kibazo, ubu bwicanyi bushobora kwitwa genocide. Iyi raporo yahumuye abantu ku kibazo cy’u Rwanda: Urukiko ni rwo ruhamya ko ubwicanyi ubu n’ubu ari genocide. Umuntu wese ushyira mu gaciro ntiyabura kwibaza impamvu, umuryango w’abibumbye mu mwaka wa 1994 wemeje ko mu Rwanda habaye genocide kandi byo nta rukiko rubyemeje !?  Indi raporo ikomeye ni iyashinjaga General James Kabarebe kuba commander in chief w’ibikorwa bya M23 akaba ariwe wahaga amategeko General Ntaganda, umunyarwanda wo mu Kinigi (Ruhengeri ) ariko wiyita umunyekongo. Nyuma yaho haje n’and ma raporo ashinja u Rwanda ariko rukayabangamira bikaba iby’ubusa.

Mu gihe kandi u Rwanda rwari muri aka kanama rwaje kuzamura impaka ku nyito ya genocide yahimbwe na FPR maze ikemezwa na ONU bihagarikiwe n’abafatanyabikorwa , abasangiracyaha n’abinjiracyaha ba FPR na Kagame. Iyo nyito ni genocide Rwandais cyangwa se Rwandan genocide. Muri make u Rwanda rusanga imvugo genocide rwandais yemera mu buryo buziguye ko abahutu n’abatutsi bose bapfuye muri genocide. Hiyongeraho kandi ko iyo mvugo ishobora gushyigikira igitekerezo cya double genocide: ni ukuvuga genocide yakorewe Abatutsi b’Abanyarwanda, genocide yakorewe abahutu b’abanyarwanda, byose wabiteranya bikaba genocide y’abanyarwanda aribyo genocide Rwandais/ Rwandan genocide.

Iyo ubirebeye hafi usanga kuba ubwicanyi bwabaye mu Rwanda bwakwitwa genocide biboneka nk’inyungu FPR yonyine isarura. Harashakishwa ko ibyabaye mu Rwanda byitiranwa n’ibyakorewe Abayahudi mu ntambara ya kabiri y’isi yose. Kubera ko nyuma y’iyi ntambara Abayahudi barokotse babashije kugira mbaraga nyinshi n’imyanya ikomeye  ifatirwamo ibyemezo ku isi bakaba bayirimo, FPR isanga Abayahudi bashobora kugirira impuhwe u Rwanda n’abatutsi in particular maze ibyifuzo bya Kagame bikajya bitambuka Abayahudi bavuga bati Abatutsi dusangiye amateka. Ni muri urwo rwego hari abantu bakorera FPR bari baratangiye gukora opinion yerekana ko Abatutsi bakomoka ku Bayahudi!

Ikindi ni uko FPR itekereza ko uyu mwanzuro ushobora kugenderwaho kugira ngo igihugu gihabwe impozamarira nk’uko Abayahudi bazihawe y’ubwicanyi bwabakorewe. Birimo inyungu rero. Umwe mu bahagarariye u Rwanda muri ako kanama Olivier Nduhungirehe yishimiye cyane uwo mwanzuro yemeza ko ari intsinzi ikomeye ku Rwanda muri aya magambo: ” Twarabirwaniye cyane muri iyi minsi ishize…ariko igitangaje ni uko Abafransa babidufashijemo”. Aha yashakaga kuvuga ko bwari ubwa mbere Ubufaransa buvuga rumwe n’u Rwanda ku kibazo cya genocideyo mu Rwanda.

Angola ni yo igiye kwinjira muri aka kanama gashinzwe umutekano ka ONU. Angola kandi yagaragaje ko itumva ibintu kimwe n’u Rwanda ku bibazo birebana n’akarere k’ibiyaga bigari. Mu gihe u Rwanda rwagabaga igitero muri Congo mu ntambara yiswe iya kabiri, mu mwaka wa 1998 Angola yarwanaga ku ruhande rwa Kabila mukuru ndetse ifatanyije na Zimbabwe na Namibia nyuma haza kwiyongeraho Tchad na Soudan, mugihe U Rwanda rwo rwafashwaga na Uganda ya Museveni.  Mu gihe gishize kandi Angola yashakaga kujya muri intervention Brigade iyi igizwe na Tanzaniya, Africa y’epfo ndetse na Malawi  ikaba ari nayo yarashe kandi igatsinsura ingabo za Kagame zari muri M23. Byarangiye General Ntaganda ageze i La Haye aho ashinja Kagame kuba ariwe wamuhaga amategeko.

Ibindi bihugu bijyanye na Angola ni Espagne,New Zealand, Malaysia na Venezuela naho ibindi bitanu bfite umwanua udahoraho ni Chad, Chile, Yorudaniya, Lithuania na Nigeria. Espagne izwiho kutavuga rumwe na Leta y’u Rwanda cyane cyane ku mateka y’ubwicanyi bwakozwe na FPR, gusa ku nyungu za politiki nta wahamya 100% ko iki gihugu cyashyigikira imyanzuro ijomba ibikwasi u Rwanda. Cyakora abakora diplomacy  bo muri opposition baramutse begereye ibi bihugu wasanga ibibazo byarushaho kumvikana neza no kubonerwa umuti ushimishije.

Umwanzuro:

Birashoboka cyane ko imyitwarire y’akanama k’umuryango w’abibumbye ku bibazo by’akarere k’ibiyaga bigari ishobora guhinduka mu gihe Angola izaba igezemo. Ikindi cyiyongeraho ni uko Angola ifite ijambo rikomeye muri SADC bikaba bishoboka ko imyumvire ya SADC ku bibazo by’akarere ari nayo izinjizwa na Angola muri ONU. Twe se nk’Abanyarwanda Angola tuyitezeho iki? Cyakora ndatekereza ko kizaba kivuguruzanya n’icyo twabonye mu gihe U Rwanda arirwo rwari rufite uyu mwanya. Tubitege amaso.

Chaste Gahunde

Paul Kagame: umuperezida w’inzererezi, usesagura.

2 Replies

mobile president

P.Kagame(ibumoso) amaze kwegukana akazina ka Mobayilo Purezidenti (Mobile President)

Mu Kinyarwanda inzererezi bivuga umuntu wirirwa cyangwa akarara agenda, cyangwa byombi icyarimwe. Kera bene uyu muntu bamuvugiragaho bati imbwa yamurigase mu karenge, ni kabwera, ni ikirara, ni inzererezi. Muri iki gihe iyo bavuze inzererezi humvikana ba bana baba mu muhanda bazwi no ku izina rya mayibobo. Ikintu abantu bitwa aya mazina bahuriyeho ni ukutagira akazi kazwi, baba bagafite kakaba katemewe n’amategeko. Perezida Paul Kagame we, n’ubwo afite akazi kazwi, ingendo ze za buri munsi ziteye ikibazo cyane cyane ko akoresha amafranga aturuka mu misoro y’abenegihugu kandi ingendo ze zirahenda cyane. Bityo abantu bakagira bati iyaba yagendaga mu gihe koko ari ngombwa ubundi akibuka ko igihugu gikennye.

Iyo witegereje  zimwe mu ngendo Kagame ajyamo ziba zihenze ku buryo bukabije. Urugero, mu kwezi kwa Nzeri 2011 perezida Kagame yaraye muri Hotel Mandarin Oriental Hotel aho yishyuraga amadolari agera ku bihumbi makumyabiri  maganatandatu na mirongo itandatu n’ane(US$20,664 y’abanyamerika ku ijoro rimwe!!! Ni ukuvuga arenga miliyoni cumi n’enye z’amanyarwanda ( 14.000.000Frws). Igitangaje ni uko uyu mugabo iyo agiye atarara ijoro rimwe ahubwo amara nk’ibyumweru bibiri nibura. Ikindi cyiyongeraho ni uko mu ngendo ze akoresha indege ye bwite ariko Leta akaba ariyo iyikodesha.

Kuba Perezida wa repubulika yajya mu ruzinduko ntacyo byari bitwaye niba koko ari ahantu ha ngombwa. Ariko iyo urebye ingendo nyishi akora aba ari izashoboraga gukorwa nabamwe mu ba minisitiri. Cyakora inyinshi ziba ari mu nyungu ze, ngo azajya guhabwa iBihembo cyangwa impamyabumenyi z’ikirenga (atigiye) bita iz’icyubahiro. Ahandi akunda kujya mu nama ni izerekeye iz’ishoramari. Aha naho hashobora kujyayo minisitiri ushinzwe ubukungu, cyangwa se umuyobozi w’ikigo gishinzwe ishoramari,…

Muri uyu mwaka wa 2014, Perezida Kagame umaze gutsindira akazina ka mobile president ( mobayilo purezidenti) yamaze iminsi hafi 90 yose hanze mu ngendo zidasobanutse ariko zifite intego izwi: gusesagura umutungo wa leta. Hai aha hari urutonde rw’izo ngendo.

  1. 12 Mutarama, Luanda, Angola
  2. 21 Mutarama , Naivasha, Kenya
  3. 24 Mutarama, Davos, Switzerland
  4. 30 Mutarama, Addis, Ethiopia
  5. 05 Gashyantare , Cap Vert
  6. 12 Gashyantare , Los Angeles World , Wisdom Conference, visits to Berkeley University, University of California, and Palo Alto University)
  7. 20 Gashyantare, Kampala, Uganda
  8. 23 Gashyantare,  Dublin, Ireland
  9. 25 Gashyantare , Luanda, Angola
  10. 02 MataA, Brussels, Belgium
  11. 22 Mata, Eastern USA ( MIT, Tufts and Brandeis University)
  12. 25 Mata, Western USA (Milken Institute, Saddleback Church, and Stanford University)
  13. 02 Gicurasi, Nairobi, Kenya
  14. 08 Gicurasi, Abuja, Nigeria
  15. 11 Gicurasi ,Nairobi, Kenya
  16. 16 Gicurasi ,Geneva, Switzerland
  17. 23 Gicurasi , Gabon
  18. 27 Gicurasi, New York, USA
  19. 27 Kamena, Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
  20. 08 Nyakanga, Accra, Ghana
  21. 03 Kanama, Aspen, USA
  22. 06 Kanama, Washington, DC, USA
  23. 20 Kanama, Rwanda Day (Mercier University), Atlanta, USA.
  24. 21 Kanama, New York City
  25. 01 Ukwakira, Dubai
  26. 05 Ukwakira, Trieste, Italy
  27. 07 Ukwakira, Kampala, Uganda

Iyo ubaze iminsi uyu mugabo yamaze muri izi ngendo usanga ari 88 ni ukuvuga amezi atatu aburaho iminsi ibiri. Muri izi ngendo nk’uko bigaragara 17 zabereye muri Afurika, Uburayi, n’uburasirazuba bwo hagati kandi wasangaga buri rugendo rumara nibura iminsi itatu(3). Ni ukuvuga iminsi 51 yose hamwe. Mu kwezi kwa Gashyantare, Kagame yamaze icyumweru cyose muri Leta zunze ubumwe z’America (USA) yongera kumarayo ikindi cyumweru mu kwezi kwa Mata. Ukwezi kwa Nzeri 2014 Kagame yazereraga muri Leta zunze ubumwe z’Amerika (USA) atangirira Aspen, Colorado; akomereza Atlanta, Georgia ahava yerekeza New York. Ahavuye Kagame yanyuze i Dubai agera mu Rwanda tariki ya 2 Ukwakira nyuma y’iminsi itatu asubira mu Burayi kuya 5 Ukwakita aho yagiye mu Butaliyani. Yose hamwe iminsi 36 wayiteranya na  51 twabonye haruguru ikaba iminsi 87 yuzuye ni ukuvuga hafi amezi atatu umukuru w’igihugu yamaze azerera.

Ubu Kagame aritegura kujya i Londres mu Bwongereza kuwa 20 Ukwakira 2014 ntawamenya iminsi azamarayo.

Ikibazo gikomeye ni aha kiri: Ni kuki Kagame atareka ngo ba minisitiri be bakore akazi kabo bajye mu ngendo zijyana n’akazi kabo? Uko byagenda kose mission ya minisitiri itwara makeya kurusha aya Kagame ujyana indege ye! Niba ibi abyanze se yakuyeho guverinoma ubwo mbona byose ashaka kubyikorera?

Murabona aho ya mafranga yo mu kigega agaciro ashirira. Kandi ntajya atanga raporo ngo avuge uko yayakoresheje. Ng’ibyo ibya Mister Mobile President! Harahagazwe!

Umwanzuro:

Igihe kirageze ngo Kagame afate ikiruhuko kuko biragaraga ko ananiwe. Ariko abe anitegura kuzasubiza ibibazo imber y’ubucamanza ku byerekeye uko yakoresheje nabi umutungo wa leta. Miliyoni 14 Kagame akoresha mu ijoro rimwe umwarimu wo mu Rwanda yazikorera mu gihe kingana n’amezi 238 ni ukuvuga imyaka 19 n’amezi abiri. Murumva aho bigeze? Aya mafranga yakwishyurira Abana 14 muri Kaminuza mu gihe cy’umwaka. Ufashe ayo Kagame yakoresheje muri iyi minsi 87 Abanyeshuri1200 babona bourses.

Uyu mugabo azi kwihesha agaciro koko.

Chaste Gahunde

La BBC confirme la macabre supercherie

Leave a reply

arution: Thursday 16 October 2014, 17:26
Par: Bernard DESGAGNÉ

Bernard DESGAGNÉ

Le mur du mensonge vient de se lézarder sérieusement. Pour la première fois en 20 ans, un média de masse réécrit l’histoire du génocide rwandais telle qu’elle aurait toujours dû être racontée. Le 1er octobre 2014, dans le cadre de son émission Panorama, la BBC a diffusé « Rwanda’s Untold Story », un documentaire d’une heure réalisé par la journaliste vedette Jane Corbin. Ceux qui connaissent bien le dossier du Rwanda n’ont rien appris, car la plupart des informations que contient le documentaire circulent depuis longtemps. Certaines étaient même dans Ça ne s’est pas passé comme ça à Kigali, le livre de Robin Philpot. Candidat du PQ en 2007, ce courageux auteur a été trainé dans la boue par Radio-Canada et La Presse pour avoir écrit en 2003 ce que la BBC a fini par comprendre en 2014.

Pour ma part, j’ai déjà diffusé l’information contenue dans le documentaire au fil de nombreux articles à propos du Rwanda publiés depuis 2008. On les retrouve sur Vigile, dans le site du Québécois, dans le Huffington Post et dans plusieurs autres médias. J’ai également communiqué cette information à des dizaines de journalistes de Radio-Canada ainsi qu’à des centaines de députés et de sénateurs du Parlement d’Ottawa et de l’Assemblée nationale à Québec, sans qu’aucun d’entre eux n’y donne suite autrement que de manière symbolique. Finiront-ils par écouter maintenant que c’est la BBC qui parle ?

Le dictateur et tueur en série Paul Kagame est un grand ami du gouvernement d’Ottawa, comme le démontre cette photo où la souriante Michaëlle Jean, envoyée par Stephen Harper en 2010, lui transmet les respectueuses salutations du gouvernement conservateur. Cette amitié transcende les partis politiques fédéraux, puisque Kagame peut compter aussi, parmi les néodémocrates et les libéraux, sur de grands défenseurs de la mythologie officielle, par exemple, Paul Dewar et Irwin Cotler.

Stam, Davenport et les autres experts interdits à Radio-Canada

« Ce que le monde croit et ce qui s’est vraiment passé sont deux choses très différentes », nous dit Allan Stam dans le documentaire, qui défait un à un quelques-uns des principaux mythes sur le génocide rwandais. Premier constat : si l’on tient compte uniquement de l’année 1994 et si l’on se fie aux données fournies par l’ONU et le gouvernement de Kigali eux-mêmes, le nombre de Hutus tués est quatre fois plus élevé que le nombre de Tutsis. Et si l’on calcule le nombre de personnes qui, entre 1990 et aujourd’hui, sur une période de 24 ans, ont été massacrées par les exterminateurs aux ordres de Paul Kagame ou qui sont mortes de faim ou de maladie en tentant de fuir, on arrive à un bilan similaire à celui de l’Holocauste, où l’immense majorité des victimes sont des Hutus ou d’autres populations bantoues. Les morts tutsis ne constituent même pas 5 % du total.

Pourtant, les Tutsis exerçant aujourd’hui sans partage le pouvoir à Kigali sont les seuls qui ont le droit de pleurer leurs morts, selon Kagame et ses parrains occidentaux chaque année faussement contrits pour la galerie. Autour du 7 avril dernier encore, Radio-Canada nous a asséné des dizaines de fois que « les Hutus ont tué les Tutsis au Rwanda ». Ses journalistes grassement rémunérés avec notre argent s’en sont donné à coeur joie dans le copier-coller des litanies habituelles et dans les entrevues avec des survivants spécialistes du parjure et de la comédie. Jamais ces sinistres carriéristes n’ont mentionné en ondes les noms d’Allan Stam ou de son collègue Christian Davenport, que je leur ai pourtant indiqués à maintes reprises, depuis des années. Une courageuse journaliste de la BBC vient d’interrompre leur bal costumé.

On pourrait réaliser un documentaire de 100 heures s’il fallait faire entendre tous les témoignages étayés de preuves photographiques et d’autres preuves matérielles queRadio-Canada occulte systématiquement au profit des caisses de résonance de Kagame. C’est pareil dans les autres grands médias québécois, à quelques rares exceptions près, dont celle du critique littéraire du Devoir Louis Cornellier, qui fait bande à part et dont je salue l’intégrité. Mais, tandis que les journalistes de TVA ont l’excuse de ne pas être capables de situer le Rwanda sur une carte de l’Afrique, ceux de Radio–Canada mentent souvent en toute connaissance de cause, surtout les grands « spécialistes » comme les mythomanes François Brousseau et Léo Kalinda, un sympathisant du FPR qui en aurait même été membre, à ce qu’on dit.

Bien que ce ne soit pas le coeur du propos, le documentaire de la BBC parle, au début, d’un « rétablissement remarquable » et de la prospérité retrouvée du Rwanda. Là-dessus, Jane Corbin aurait dû pousser son enquête un peu plus loin. Peut-on vraiment parler d’une réussite économique ?

En fait, Kigali n’est qu’une façade. Dans les campagnes, la population crève. La moitié du budget de l’État vient de l’aide étrangère. Et le PIB était de 633 $ par habitant en 2013. Le Rwanda est non seulement l’un des pays les plus pauvres au monde ; c’est aussi l’un des plus pauvres d’Afrique. Kagame est un dictateur impitoyable qui ne peut même pas prétendre avoir fait faire des gains matériels à son peuple. Il se contente d’emprisonner et de tuer ceux qui ne lui obéissent pas, tout en permettant à une petite clique de vivre dans l’opulence.

Les anciens du FPR traqués par Kagame parlent à la caméra

En plus de Stam et Davenport, Jane Corbin nous fait entendre plusieurs acteurs du drame rwandais dont le public de Radio-Canada, les yeux rivés sur les mensonges dont il est abreuvé tous les jours, ne connait même pas l’existence. Qui d’autre parait dans le documentaire de la BBC ? La journaliste Corbin fait appel notamment à deux témoins de taille, Théogène Rudasingwa et Kayumba Nyamwasa, respectivement ancien chef de cabinet de Kagame et ancien chef d’état-major de l’Armée patriotique rwandaise, qui ont tous les deux vu de l’intérieur les crimes de masse orchestrés par leur patron.

Nyamwasa ne mâche pas ses mots : « Kagame n’a jamais eu l’intention d’arrêter le génocide. Jamais. Son intention était de gagner la guerre pour accéder au pouvoir. Que des gens meurent dans le génocide ou se fassent tuer était le cadet de ses soucis. […] Paul Kagame est sans l’ombre d’un doute [celui qui a fait abattre l’avion transportant les présidents du Rwanda et du Burundi, le 6 avril 1994]. Je suis bien placé pour le savoir, et il sait que je le suis. »

Kayumba Nyamwasa, qui est sous haute protection en Afrique du Sud, a fait l’objet de trois tentatives d’assassinat récentes, toutes commises par des hommes de main de Kagame. Son ami Patrick Karegeya, un autre ancien militaire du FPR ayant fait défection, n’a pas été aussi chanceux que lui. Il a été tué dans la nuit du 31 décembre 2013 au 1er janvier 2014.

Nyamwasa a lui-même participé au complot pour commettre l’attentat du 6 avril 1994 et a dirigé les troupes de Kagame pendant qu’elles commettaient d’immenses massacres. Il est parfaitement au courant. Il affirme que Paul Kagame était pleinement conscient des conséquences aussi inéluctables que dramatiques qui devaient résulter de l’attentat : « Si nous sommes en pleine saison sèche et que vous jetez une allumette dans l’herbe, vous viendra-t-il à l’idée de penser que l’herbe ne brûlera pas ? »

Pas de planification du génocide

M. Nyamwasa dit par ailleurs être convaincu que le pouvoir hutu avait un plan d’extermination, mais s’il fait cette affirmation, c’est peut-être pour se dédouaner lui-même de l’horrible traque des Hutus à Goma et ailleurs en République démocratique du Congo, au cours des années 1996 et 1997. Le prétexte de cette traque était d’éliminer les « génocidaires ». N’en déplaise à M. Nyamwasa, le Tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda (TPIR) n’a jamais retrouvé l’ombre d’une preuve de planification du génocide, même après s’être acharné sur l’ancien pouvoir hutu pendant 19 ans, avec un budget annuel qui, par exemple, était de 227 millions de dollars en 2010-2011. Une partie de cet argent a été puisé dans les poches des contribuables canadiens.

L’historien Bernard Lugan a bien démontré l’absence de planification dans son ouvrage Rwanda — Un génocide en question (Éditions du Rocher, 2014), où il s’appuie sur un bilan exhaustif des travaux du TPIR. Les massacres de Tutsis ont été spontanés et se sont terminés bien avant que le FPR ne s’empare du territoire, comme le précise Allan Stam. La fureur a été déclenchée par l’attentat, véritable allumette que Kagame a jetée non pas dans de l’herbe sèche, mais plutôt dans une grosse poudrière créée par trois années et demie de souffrances infligées aux Hutus, qui avaient de très bonnes raisons pour être révoltés contre le FPR et ses partisans, essentiellement des Tutsis.

Comme l’explique le documentaire, la guerre et l’occupation du territoire par les tueurs de Kagame, à partir de septembre 1990, avaient donné lieu à des massacres de masse de la population civile hutue. Un million de réfugiés essentiellement hutus, chassés de leurs terres, s’étaient agglutinés autour de Kigali, dans des camps de la mort d’où l’on sortait une centaine de cadavres par jour, à cause des maladies et de la faim. De plus, un grand nombre de réfugiés en provenance du Burundi avaient afflué au Rwanda en 1993 pour fuir les massacres dont étaient victimes les Hutus dans ce pays, aux mains de l’armée et de civils tutsis. Voir leurs frères burundais ainsi persécutés ne fit rien pour rassurer les Hutus du Rwanda devant l’armée tutsie du FPR et le sadique Paul Kagame.

Lorsque l’avion transportant les deux présidents hutus fut abattu, les Hutus, déjà martyrisés, en vinrent à la conclusion que le FPR et ses partisans ne voudraient jamais de la démocratie, ce que confirment d’ailleurs le documentaire de la BBC ainsi que beaucoup de témoignages et de faits avérés. Pour Kagame, le pouvoir a toujours été au bout du fusil, et non dans les urnes. Certains Hutus, désespérés et fous de rage, prirent des machettes et décidèrent de tuer ceux qu’ils percevaient comme les responsables de leurs souffrances. Qu’on le qualifie de génocide ou non, le massacre des Tutsis, en avril 1994, n’était pas le résultat d’un plan diabolique du pouvoir hutu. Il a sans doute été horrible, mais il a duré quelques jours seulement et était essentiellement terminé à la fin d’avril. Par comparaison, les massacres de Hutus et d’opposants politiques, eux, sont systématiques et bien organisés par le FPR. Ils se sont étirés sur 24 ans, jusqu’à aujourd’hui. Ils se poursuivent encore, sous le regard indifférent ou complice des thuriféraires de Kagame et du public berné par eux.

Par ailleurs, en supposant qu’il y aurait eu malgré tout planification du génocide des Tutsis, il faudrait plutôt regarder du côté du FPR, surtout quand on sait que le chef de la milice Interahamwe était un Tutsi, Robert Kajuga, et qu’il était un agent du FPR selon Aloys Ruyenzi, un ancien membre de la garde rapprochée de Paul Kagame qui apparaît également dans le documentaire de la BBC. Il est possible qu’une minorité de jeunes Hutus révoltés aient été poussés à tuer des Tutsis par des manipulateurs à la solde de Kagame qui voulaient justement lui fabriquer un alibi en vue des massacres de Hutus qui allaient venir. Cette hypothèse reste à vérifier, mais elle est plausible.

Ottawa complice comme Londres

Le documentaire de la BBC traite bien entendu des accointances britanniques de Kagame, notamment Tony Blair, qui, comme son copain de Kigali, a refusé de donner son point de vue à Jane Corbin. Comment pourrait-il justifier l’injustifiable devant la caméra, de toute manière ? En avouant qu’il est un psychopathe ? Or, Ottawa est, comme Londres, un repaire de gens affairés à consolider le pouvoir tutsi absolutiste de Kigali. Le documentaire nomme une Canadienne, Louise Arbour, ancienne juge de la Cour suprême du Canada et ancienne procureure du TPIR. Mme Arbour n’a pas daigné rappeler la journaliste Corbin, elle non plus. Mieux vaut répondre aux questions uniquement quand elles sont posées par des journalistes à gages obéissants.

L’icône canadienne Arbour, présentée par les médias comme une grande philanthrope, a ordonné la fin des enquêtes sur l’attentat du 6 avril 1994 lorsque ses enquêteurs lui ont dit que toutes les pistes menaient au FPR et à Paul Kagame. Jim Lyons, qui était enquêteur à l’époque, en témoigne dans le documentaire de la BBC. Symbole de la relativité de la justice d’Ottawa, Louise Arbour est, de toute l’histoire du Canada, la seule juge de la Cour suprême à avoir démissionné de son poste avant la fin de son mandat. Rien de plus normal après avoir commis une faute d’une extrême gravité : corrompre une procédure judiciaire pour protéger le plus grand meurtrier de masse que la terre ait porté depuis Hitler. Jamais plus Mme Arbour ne réintègrera la magistrature, ni même le Barreau. On lui a trouvé une petite job peinarde à l’International Crisis Group, où elle se spécialise dans la propagande de guerre déguisée en travail humanitaire.

Évidemment, comment parler des relations d’Ottawa avec Kagame sans mentionner saint Dallaire, l’ex-sénateur aux neuf pilules et chouchou des émissions d’infodivertissement de Radio-Canada ? Il n’est pas question de lui dans le documentaire, car Jane Corbin lui a préféré un militaire plus crédible, le colonel Luc Marchal, qui n’est pas programmé pour raconter l’histoire convenue et qui déplait donc souverainement à Radio-Canada et à Hollywood.

De son propre aveu, Roméo Dallaire est encore aujourd’hui un habitué de Kigali. Il fréquente assidument le FPR et n’hésite pas à se livrer à toutes les contorsions imaginables pour justifier en public les horreurs du régime de Kagame. Roméo Dallaire aime les vrais hommes qui savent résoudre les problèmes avec une mitraillette. N’appelle-t-il pas encore constamment le gouvernement du Canada à déployer des troupes pour « éviter les génocides » ?

Au Mali, en Centrafrique et en Irak, l’ex-général voit partout des génocidaires qui méritent une sévère correction. Quand il était au Rwanda, Roméo Dallaire aidait le FPR et son ami Kagame à stocker des armes et à préparer la prise du pouvoir à l’abri des regards indiscrets de la communauté internationale. Les armes rentraient à la tonne, y compris les missiles sol-air qui allaient servir à abattre l’avion de Juvénal Habyarimana. C’est que, voyez-vous, il fallait être équipé pour mâter ceux qui allaient devenir des génocidaires, conformément au scénario écrit d’avance. Pour de plus amples renseignements sur ce grand héros canadien, j’invite les habitués de la propagande médiatique à lire « Saint Dallaire », la série de 6 articles que j’ai publiée en juin dans le Huffington Post.

Le comportement pro-Kagame d’Ottawa n’est pas seulement l’oeuvre de quelques vedettes du génocide et de politiciens trop heureux de se draper dans la vertu en épousant publiquement la cause des détenteurs exclusifs du droit de pleurer ses morts. Ottawa recèle également des juges profondément marqués par les fictions cinématographiques, des procureurs dévorés par leur ambition de devenir les nouveaux justiciers de Nuremberg ainsi que des fonctionnaires bien dressés par leurs collègues infiltrés du FPR, qui sont positionnés stratégiquement dans certains ministères canadiens. Tous ces gens généreusement rétribués déploient constamment des efforts considérables pour traquer les Hutus ciblés par Kigali. Ils leur font des simulacres de procès avec des faux témoignages secrets, comme le procès de Désiré Munyaneza. Ils envoient en pâture à Kagame des innocents comme Léon Mugesera, qui croupit aujourd’hui dans une geôle de Kigali, après avoir dû abandonner au Québec sa femme et ses enfants. Nombreux sont les Hutus qui ont été harcelés par Ottawa ou qui le sont encore, sur la foi des mensonges propagés par le FPR à l’aide de ses syndicats de délateurs affabulateurs.

Mais, au-delà de toutes ces magouilles des serviteurs empressés de Kagame, une forfaiture nous montre que l’hypocrite gouvernement d’Ottawa ne s’intéresse que superficiellement aux droits de la personne, à la justice, aux victimes de crime et à la sécurité des citoyens canadiens : son mutisme absolu concernant les assassinats, par le FPR, des prêtres québécois Claude Simard et Guy Pinard, en 1994 et 1997. Ottawa n’a jamais levé le petit doigt pour que les responsables soient traduits devant la justice. Tout pour plaire à Kagame, conformément, bien sûr, aux ordres qui viennent de Washington.

À l’instar des Hutus traqués et accusés collectivement d’être des génocidaires par une bande de menteurs et d’assassins, les familles des pères Simard et Pinard n’ont pas le droit de faire entièrement leur deuil. Elles n’ont pas le droit à la justice. Elles doivent comprendre que les assassins de Claude Simard et Guy Pinard sont les protégés d’Ottawa, donc qu’ils ont la permission de continuer de tuer en toute liberté.

Si je vivais au Rwanda, le présent article me vaudrait soit d’être exécuté sommairement, soit d’être emprisonné pendant 8 ou 15 ans, comme l’opposante Victoire Ingabire, peut-être même pendant plus longtemps. Pourquoi ? Parce que je serais coupable d’avoir contesté les vérités officielles. Je serais coupable du délit de refus de se prosterner devant le chantage des supposés survivants qui s’arrogent l’exclusivité des larmes de la communauté internationale, sous prétexte qu’ils ont subi le crime suprême de génocide. Ce crime devrait effacer tous les autres, qui ne méritent même pas qu’on s’y arrête. Sa seule évocation devrait suffire pour nous rendre sourds, muets et aveugles et même pour nous faire perdre tout esprit critique et tout sens moral.

« Rwanda’s Untold Story », le documentaire de la BBC qui dit la vérité pour la première fois dans les médias de masse, après plus de 20 ans de mensonges. Une réalisation de Jane Corbin diffusée seulement au Royaume-Uni le 1er octobre 2014, à l’émission Panorama, puis rediffusée le 2 octobre à l’émission This World. À voir absolument.

Source: http://www.vigile.net/La-BBC-confirme-la-macabre

“Mu gatendo ngiye gukora, muzambere ba mudahunga” Kagame Paul

Leave a reply

Mu ijambo yavuze amaze kwakira indahiro z’abayobozi bashya ba sena y’u Rwanda, Perezida Kagame yatunguye benshi bari basanzwe bamuziho amakare n’ubukaka. Mu ijwi ryuzuye ikiniga, umukuru w’igihugu yahamagariye abari bamaze kurahira kwirinda guharanira inyungu zabo bwite, ahubwo bagaharanira inyungu rusange z’u Rwanda n’abenegihugu. Avuye kuri ibi, yahise atandukira maze arihambura ( se défouler), agaragaza umujinya afitiye abanyamakuru ndetse n’ubuyobozi bw’ikigo cy’itangazamakuru cy’Ubwongereza BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) kubera sinema kimaze iminsi gihitishije igaragaza ubwicanyi Kagame yagizemo uruhare rukomeye, ndetse akaba ariwe watanze itegeko ryo kurasa indege ya Habyarimana.

Ubusanzwe ibyavuzwe muri iyo sinema nta gishya kirimo, kuko si ubwa mbere byari  bishyizwe ahagaragara, kandi harimo n’amagambo Kagame we ubwe yivugiye abyemera. Ubusesenguzi buragaragaza ko igiteye ubwoba Kagame  ari uko noneho Ubwongereza na bwo bwemeye ko Kagame ari umwicanyi. Ibi simbitindaho ahubwo mu ngingo enye(3) reka turebere hamwe uko Kagame yiteguye guhangana n’ikizakurikiraho nk’uko yabibwiye abamwumvaga. Izo ngingo ni izi:

  1. Muzabe ba Mudahunga
  2. Isi yose irimo akavuyo
  3. Ndangije amagambo, ngiye gukora “agatendo”(real things).

Umuntu yitegereje izi ngingo yasanga zidakurikiranye neza, sinzi niba umukuru w’igihugu cyacu yarabigize nkana, ariko icy’ingenzi ni uko ubutumwa bwe yabuhitishije bwose uko bungana. Iyo aza kuba umuhanga mu kuvuga yashoboraga gutangira ati : “Ubwo basigaye bemera ko turi abicanyi….  kandi (1) isi yose ikaba irimo akavuyo (2)njye ndangije iby’amagambo ngiye gukora agatendo (3)kandi ndabasaba ngo muzambe hafi muzabe ba Mudahunga”. Uko bimeze kose reka tuzikurikiranye uko Kagame yabikoze, ni ukubaha uburenganzira bwe.

  1. Muzabe ba Mudahunga

Ibi yabihereye aho yinubiraga ko ngo abahawe ijambo muri iriya sinema ari abantu bahunze igihugu. Avuga ko nta yindi nyungu yo guhunga uretse guhabwa ijambo kuri BBC. Aha Kagame arashaka kubeshya ko uhunze wese ahabwa ijambo kuri BBC cyangwa andi ma radiyo atandukanye, nyamara yamaze imyaka 30 mu buhungiro nta jambo yahawe. Yarinze gutegereza ko intambara y’Inkotanyi itangizwa kugira ngo ahabwe ijambo.

Kagame azi uko BBC yamukoreye publicité mu gihe na nyuma y’intambara, akaba rero ubu azi neza ko ubwo abandi nabo bahawe ijambo, we bishobora kumugwa nabi. Gusaba rero abamwumvaga kudahunga ni ukugira ngo na bo BBC itazabaha urubuga maze bakamushyira hanze. Ikindi arabashuka kugira ngo mu gihe atangije agatendo (yari atarakavuga) bazamugwe inyuma ngo barimo kurwanira inyungu z’u Rwanda.

Ariko na none Kagame si umuswa. Asaba aba bantu kudahunga ni uko yari azi icyo avuga. Aha reka twibukiranye ibintu bitera ubuhunzi twese tuzi. Umuntu uhunga ni uko aba abona ariho hasigaye amakiriro ye. Wahunga intambara cyangwa se umutekano mukeya, wahunga ubukene, ni uko aba ariyo chance usigaranye yo gukiza amagara yawe. Ibyo aribyo byose aba basenateri, abaministiri n’abadepite yabwiraga bose ama konti yabo aruzuye, nta bukene bafite. Ni ukuvuga ko ikindi bashobora guhunga ari intambara cyangwa se umutekano mukeya. Mu yandi magambo Kagame aratwereka ko igiye kuba intambara irimo gutegurwa akaba asaba aba bantu kuzamugwa inyuma.

  1. Isi yose irimo akavuyo

Kagame avuga ko isi yose yuzuyemo ibibazo by’intambara z’iterabwoba n’ibindi bibazo. Byashoboka ko yaba ashaka kunyura mu rihumye amahanga arangariye ahandi maze agakora agatendo ke. Byakunze kugaragara ko iyo abantu barangaye Kagame ahita akora ikintu gikomeye. Muzakurikirane neza muzasanga buri gihe yagiye yohereza ingabo muri Congo amahanga yabaga ahugiye muri Burasirazuba bwo hagati mu bibazo bihahora. Kugira ngo asasire icyifuzo cye, aravuga ati iyo chaos iri ahantu hose ntibazavuga ko ari twe twayiteje. Ni nk’aho yavuze ati hano naho haramutse habaye chaos nta gitangaza cyaba kirimo. Aravuga rwose yeruye ko u Rwanda na rwo rugomba kubamo chaos. Uyu mugabo Imana imuturinde!

  1. Ndangije amagambo, ngiye gukora “agatendo”

Ibi abivuze yabitekerejeho kuko amaze iminsi arunda ingabo ku mupaka w’u Burundi n’u Rwanda. Abinyujije mu binyamakuru bivugira leta kandi, yatangiye gushinja u Burundi ko mu gihe ingabo zabwo zavaga muri Congo zazamukanye na FDLR. Ibi bikaba aribyo aheraho ashaka kwishora mu ntambara kandi biragaragara ko ariyo izamuhitana cyane cyane ko nk’uko abyivugira imbaraga asigaranye ari nkeya.

Aha hanyibukije ya mvugo y’abakurambere igira iti “amagambo ashize ivuga”.  Koko rero Kagame amagambo yamushiranye, ariko si n’amagambo gusa ahubwo n’ibitekerezo byashize. Arabigaragaza aho avuga ko ngo atumva ukuntu abantu bamufashije kubaka ikintu (jenoside) ari na bo baza kugisenya. Koko rero Abongereza ndetse na benshi mu bahoze muri FPR batanga ubuhamya, bubatse FPR ndetse bayitera inkunga nyuma ya genocide. Raporo za mbere zashinjaga FPR na Kagame ni Abongereza (bafatanyije n’Abanyamerika ) bahitaga bazisisibiranya bakoresheje iturufu ya genocide y’abatutsi nyamara bari bazi neza ko Kagame abifitemo uruhare.

Mu buhamya bwa Carla Del Ponte, yemeza ko yashatse gufata abantu bo muri FPR , Koffi Annan akamubwira ko ari politiki kandi ko bashakaga ko u Rwanda rubanza rukisana. Kuba Kagame atumva uyu mukino rero bishobora gutuma afata n’ibyemezo byo kumuhitana. Iyo ntambara se yo ashaka gushora, inganda zo mu Rwanda zikora amasasu angahe? Uwamufatira embargo ntiyongere kubona amasasu rahira ko igihuru kitabyara igihunyira!?

Umwanzuro:

Iyo witegereje uburyo u Rwanda ruyobowe, ukareba uko abaturage babayeho n’umujinya bamaze kugira, ukongera ukareba akazi gakomeye amashyaka atavuga rumwe na Kagame akomeje gukora, nta shiti uhita ubona ko ibintu bigiye guhinduka mu Rwanda. The wind of change is blowing. Perezida Kagame nk’umuntu ubikurikiranira hafi, nawe azi uko ikibazo kimeze. Abanyarwanda ndabasaba gukurikira kandi bakamenya gusoma ibimenyetso by’ibihe. Akenshi iyo ingoma itangiye kurindimuka biragaragara ariko kumenya igihe ihombokera (ku ngoma ntibavuga guhomboka bavuga kubyara) bikunze gutungurana.

Gusa ntidukwiye kugira ubwoba, kuko na Karinga bavugaga ko nisezererwa nta mubyeyi uzongera kubyara, inka zitazongera konsa, imvura itazongera kugwa, isake ntizizabika,…. Nyamara yasimbuwe n’ibendera U Rwanda rurushahp gutera imbere. Kagame ashoze intamabara, imuhitane wenyine, dukomeze twubake Igihugu. Ikiniga afite kiramucira amarenga. Ariko na none muzirikane ko n’ubwo karinga yagiye abantu bagahumeka, imvugo ngo Habyarimana navaho impundu zizavuga yo ntiyigeze isohora. Ni ukubyitondamo.

Chaste Gahunde

Rwanda: Kagame yaba agiye kwiyahura?!

2 Replies

1781914_676140859114667_617787618_n

Iyi photo yahinduwe n’umuntu wemeza ko yabonekewe abona Kagame afatwa kubera ibyaha bya genocide aregwa.

Birakwiye gusesengura neza ijambo ridasanzwe Perezida Paul Kagame yavuze ejo taliki ya 14 Ukwakira 2014 ubwo yarahizaga mubyara we Bernard Makuza  usimbuye  Yohani Damaseni Ntawukuriryayo ku mwanya w’umuyobozi wa Sena.

Muri rusange, ryari ijambo rirerire cyane kuko ryamaze iminota 56 yose ! Ikintu cy’ingenzi cyariranze ni uko rya jwi ry’amakari Kagame  asanganywe ryari ryaguyemo imbeho, ejo rwose ryari ribuzemo imbaraga ku buryo yavugaga nk’umuntu wongorera, nk’unaniwe cyane cyangwa se umurwayi usohotse ibitaro ! Izo ntege nke na we ubwe yaziyumvagamo kuko hari aho yivugiye ngo” N’ubwo umubiri wananirwa umutima wo ntunanirwa”. Gusa aha yaribeshye  cyane kuko twese tuzi neza ko umutima utananirwa gusa ahubwo ugeze n’aho uhagarara burundu, iyo uruhijwe birenze imbaraga zawo . Aritondere uwe rero !

Maze gutega amatwi iri jambo nasanze mu by’ukuri ritari rijyanye neza n’ibirori byahimbazwaga ahubwo ryari rigenewe gufasha Kagame gusohora hanze (speaking out ) uruvangitarane rw’ ibyiyumviro by’ubwoba, uburakari n’agahinda, biremereye umutima we muri iyi minsi . Kandi impamvu y’uko kuremererwa Kagame yarayivuze ndetse ayitindaho cyane : ni Sinema yo mu bwoko bwa Documentaire yitwa “Rwanda: Untold story” yakozwe n’Abongeleza, yerekanwa incuro nyinshi kuri Televisiyo yabo yitwa BBC 2, irebwa n’amahanga menshi.  None rero ikibazo ni iki : Icyababaje kandi kikarakaza Kagame bigeze aho ni iki mu by’ukuri ?

Muri iri sesengura turibanda ku ngingo ebyiri gusa: Ikibabaje Kagame(I) n’Icyo ateganya gukora (II).

I. “UBU NITWE BICANYI….”

Uwansaba kuvuga mu magambo atatu gusa ubutumwa bwose Kagame yatambukije mu ijambo rye ryamaze iminota 56, sinazuyaza, nasubira muri aya magambo ya Kagame: “UBU NITWE BICANYI….”. Mbega ukuntu yishimiraga kubyita abandi  Banyarwanda harimo n’abarengana! None we bamuvuze uko ari, ngo Rusizi nticyambutswe!

Kagame arababaye

1.Icyababaje Kagame kurusha ibindi ni uko iriya sinema yerekana neza ko Abongereza batahwemye kumushyigikira kuva yatangira intambara zarimbuye Abanyarwanda  batagira ingano bamaze kubona ko badashobora gukomeza kwibeshya no kubeshya isi mu gushyigikira umutegetsi bazi neza ko ari umwicanyi kabuhariwe !

2.Kagame ababajwe n’uko Abongereza bateye intambwe yo gutangira  kumushinja ku mugaragaro ko ari we Nyirabayazana w’ibyago byagwiriye u Rwanda, ubwo yahanuraga  indege y’uwahoze ari umukuru w’u Rwanda Yuvenali Habyarimana, mu ijoro ry’iya 6 rishyira iya 7 mata 1994, icyo gikorwa cy’iterabwoba kikaba ari cyo cyabaye imbarutso ya jenoside yarimbuye Abanyarwanda basaga miliyoni, Abatutsi n’Abahutu. Ndetse iyo Sinema yo ijya kure ikerekana ko mu by’ukuri  gukomeza gushyira imbere Abatutsi bishwe bonyine birimo ikinyoma n’ubushinyaguzi kuko imibare itangwa n’u Rwanda ubwarwo igaragaza ko Abahutu bo mu Rwanda ari bo bagize umubare munini w’abarimbuwe bityo amateka y’u Rwanda akaba yirengagiza nkana kubavuga no kubibuka !

3. Kagame ababajwe n’uko  amahanga aha ijambo (Freedom of speech) abantu we ngo abona nta gaciro na busa bafite (Completely discredited). Mu mutwe we yumvaga ari we (Le Maître de l’univers) ugena abantu bafite agaciro n’abatagafite, intungane n’abanyabyaha ! Ubwo bubasha kandi akaba yishukaga ko abufite ku Rwanda no ku bindi bihugu. Kandi ni mu gihe, mu myaka isaga 20 amahanga yakomeje kumufata bajeyi, none atangiye kwibonera ko ibihugu by’ibihangange  birambiwe kandi byiyemeje kurambika hasi  “politiki ya ciraha nikubite”yateteshaga umwicanyi ruharwa Paul Kagame.

4. Kagame ababajwe no gutahura bitinze ko nta rundi rukundo ba Mpatsibihugu bari bamufitiye, ko yagizwe igikoresho cy’inyugu zabo gusa , ko mu by’ukuri we nta kandi GACIRO bamuhaga katari ako kubabera igikoresho, bityo babona amaze guhindana( Infrequantable) bakaba biyemeje kumuta bakifatira undi wakwita ku nyungu zabo kumurusha .

Kagame afite ubwoba

5.  Kagame  atewe ubwoba no gutahura ko atigeze yita na rimwe ku nyungu nyakuri z’Abanyarwanda none atangiye kuraga mubyara we Makuza ibyamunaniye: Ngo ntimuzahugire muguharanira inyungu zanyu musuzugura iza rubanda !

6. Kagame afite ubwoba bw’uko politiki ye yo guhindura umutwe wa FDLR ba Nyirurutwerunini (Bouc-emissaire) itazongera gushyigikirwa nk’uko abyifuza, bo yahoraga agerekaho ibyaha byose byakozwe mu Rwanda n’akaga kose Abanyarwanda barimo ubungubu, bikamufasha kurangaza amahanga no kwigaragaza nk’intungane n’umucunguzi w’Abatutsi bo ku isi yose!

7. Kagame afite ubwoba ko amateka y’u Rwanda agiye kuvugwa uko ari bityo uruhare rwe mu marorerwa yarimbuye abanyarwanda n’Abanyekongo batagira ingano  rurekere aho guhishwa ahubwo ruvugirwe ku kabonabose.

8. Kagame afite ubwoba bwo kwitwa umwicanyi bityo abari bamukingiye ikibaba bakaba bagiye kumukuraho amaboko burundu, ahasigaye imbwa zikamurya !

9.Kagame afite ubwoba bw’uko agiye gukurwa ku butegetsi maze Inkiko mpuzamahanga zikamufata, zikamuryoza ibyaha byose yakoze zitababarira .

Kagame afite umujinya

10. Kagame afite umujinya  ko ishema yaterwaga no kwita Umuyobozi “UDASANZWE”(Visionary Leader) rirangiriye aho, ahubwo akaba atangiye gucuncumuka agana ikuzimu (Descente aux enfers), kuko agiye kuba iciro ry’imigani, yerekanwe nk’umutegetsi w’UMUBISHA warushije abandi gukomeretsa no kwivugana abanyagihugu benshi, kuva isi yaremwa !

11. Kagame afite umujinya ndetse n’ ipfunwe ryo kuzasubira kuvugira kuri BBC, hahandi yahoraga ajya kwigamba ubumanzi bw’ubutekinikano: Aho yambariye inkindi azagira ubutwari bwo kwemera kuhambarira incocero?

12. Kagame afite umujinya mwinshi w’uko abo bafatanyije gusahura ibyiza by’igihugu n’iby’abaturanyi bamwigaritse akaba agiye kubibazwa wenyine, aka ya nteruro yo  muri Bibiriyango “abo nagaburiye umugati wanjye nibo banteye ishoti”!

13. Kagame afite umujinya ko mu batangabuhamya bamushinja harimo abavandimwe bahoze mu Gatsiko ke nyuma bakaza kwitandukanya n’ubugizi bwa nabi bwe.  Koko rero yagerageje kubatesha agaciro mu maso y’abanyarwanda n’abanyamahanga, abacira imanza zo kubacisha umutwe, agerageza kubatsinda ishyanga ngo ntihasigare n’iyonka……none ababajwe n’uko bakiriho kandi bakaba batamworoheye . Aricuza impamvu basubiranyemo, none bikaba biri mu bimukozeho….

II. KAGAME ARATEGANYA KWIYAHURA NO KOREKA U RWANDA

Kubera ko Kagame atiteguye “kwemera ibyaha bye ngo tuzarebe uko yagabanyirizwa ibihano”,mu ijambo rye ry’ejo yagerageje gushushanyiriza Abanyarwanda igikorwa cya nyuma cy’ubutwari yiteguye gukora : KWIYAHURA ariko ntagende wenyine.

Ongera utege amatwi uko Kagame yashoje ijambo rye : “From here ,I think, It is a time to go and do  a real thing  “, “Guhera  ubu , ndabamenyesha ko ngiye gukora “Agatendo” katazibagirana”. Ako gatendo ni akahe ? Aho si  “Apocalypse”  nk’iyo twiboneye n’amaso yacu muri 1994 ?

Mu by’ukuri, mu kwishuka ko agifite ibanga ryo kwikura mu kimwaro , Paul Kagame agiye gushoza indi intambara y’amasasu, gusa icyo atazi ni uko izaba ariyo ya nyuma kuko ari nayo izamuhitana. Ibimenyetso byose birerekana ko Kagame agiye gutera Kongo n’Uburundi icyarimwe. Gusa hari ibintu bitatu asa n’uwirengagiza nkana. Icya mbere ni uko  yibeshya ku ngufu z’Uburundi muri iki gihe kandi n’iyo turebye amateka tukaba dusanga  basekuru na basekuruza be b’indwanyi cyane batarigeze bigarurira Uburundi na rimwe. Icyakabiri ni uko asa n’utangiye kwibagirwa ukuntu umutwe we w’iterabwoba yari yarahaye izina rya M 23 wayobewe ikiwukubise, ugashwanyaguzwa nk’amakoma y’insina, izuba riva ! Icya gatatu ni uko inzangano  zikarishye yikururiye mu karere no mu mahanga ya kure zishobora kumubyarira amazi nk’ibisusa, nko mu kanya ko guhumbya ijisho!  Intamenya ntibwira umugenzi koko. Nagende rwiza, abagira iyo bajya baragenda. Mbabajwe n’abana b’inzirakarengane bagiye kongera gutikizwa bashorwa mu ntambara zitagize icyo zimariye u Rwanda n’Abanyarwanda. Njyewe Padiri Thomas Nahimana, ndamutse ndi mu ngabo za Kagame, iyi yo sinayirwana kandi sinakwibuza gushishikariza n’abandi kugenza nkanjye: twareka Kagame akayishoramo na Cyomoro we, bonyine!

UMWANZURO

Nyamara hari ukundi byagenda…! Haracyari akadirishya k’uko Kagame yakiza ubugingo bwe n’ubw’umuryango we, akarokora n’ubw’Abanyarwanda benshi . Nacishe make, aduhamagare, twicare TUGANIRE nta buhendanyi.

Mu gihe amahanga yizeraga atagishoboye kumucira akari urutega, Abanyarwanda nitwe twenyine ahari twamupfa agasoni, ngo n’ibyaye ikiboze irakirigata ! Umuti w’ikibazo Abanyarwanda ubwabo barawifitiye, bifitemo ubushobozi bwo gutera umugongo ibyahise, bakitangira kurema  igihugu cy’AMAHORO  arambye kandi asangiwe basonzeye .

Padiri Thomas Nahimana,

Umuyobozi w’Ishema Party

Akaba n’Umukandida w’iryo shyaka mu matora ya 2017.

Paul Kagame: a mobile president who spent three out of nine months abroad !

Leave a reply

One other interesting thing you did not know about Kagame…He is always on trips using his personal jet but hired by the government. David Himbara has followed this amusing (not amazing) man’s movements. Kagame is the real “Mobile president”.

mobile president

The man (left) knows how to spend taxpayers’ money!

If we include Kagame’s forthcoming trip to London to attend the Global African Investment Summit (20-21 Oct) and give a lecture on “Rwanda’s Role in an Emerging Africa and Uncertain World” at Chatham House, 21 Oct 2014, he will have made 28 trips overseas in ten months. Of the 28 trips, 17 were in Africa, Europe and Middle East averaging 2 days each – meaning 34 days in total. In February, the President spent a week in western USA, and another week in eastern and western part of America in April – a total of 14 days. The President then spent the entire month of September in the United States, beginning in Aspen, Colorado in the west, swinging to the south in Atlanta, Georgia, before jetting to New York City for the UN events. From there, Kagame continued on to Dubai on 1 October, returning to Rwanda on 2 October and flying back to Europe for the event in Italy on 5 October 2014 – a total of 36 days. This means that in total Kagame was absent from Rwanda for a grand total of 84 days, or nearly 3 months.

Putting aside the costs which runs into millions of dollars, who runs Rwanda when Kagame is away, and how?

HERE IS A MORE COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF PRESIDENTIAL TRIPS JAN-OCT 2014

  1. 12 Jan: ICGLR Summit, Luanda, Angola
  2. 21 Jan: Nation Media Group Governor’s Summit, Naivasha, Kenya
  3. 24 Jan: World Economic Summit, Davos, Switzerland
  4. 30 Jan: AU Summit, Addis, Ethiopia
  5. 05 Feb: Africa Innovation Summit, Cape Verde
  6. 12 Feb: Western USA visit (including Los Angeles World Affairs Council, Wisdom Conference, visits to Berkeley University, University of California, and Palo Alto University)
  7. 20 Feb: Northern Corridor Integration, Kampala, Uganda
  8. 23 Feb: UN Broadband meeting, Dublin, Ireland
  9. 25 Feb: ICGLR Summit, Luanda, Angola
  10. 02 April: EU-Africa Summit, Brussels, Belgium
  11. 22 April: Eastern USA (including MIT, Tufts and Brandeis University)
  12. 25 April: Western USA (including Milken Institute, Saddleback Church, and Stanford University)
  13. 02 May: Northern Corridor Integration, Nairobi, Kenya
  14. 08 May: World Economic Forum for Africa, Abuja, Nigeria
  15. 11 May: Signing of standard railway gauge, Nairobi, Kenya
  16. 16 May: World Telecommunications and Information Society Award, Geneva, Switzerland
  17. 23 May: New York Forum Africa, Gabon
  18. 27 May: UN meeting on sustainable urbanization, New York, USA
  19. 27 June: AU Summit, Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
  20. 08 July: Honor of Wole Soyinka, Accra, Ghana
  21. 03 Aug: Aspen Institute, Aspen, USA
  22. 06 Aug: USA-Africa Summit, Washington, DC, USA
  23. 20 Aug: Rwanda Day (plus Mercier University), Atlanta, USA.
  24. 21 Aug: UN General Assembly (plus other events, including Global Citizen Festival), New York City
  25. 01 Oct: Global Business Forum, Dubai
  26. 05 Oct: 50th anniversary of International Center for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy
  27. 07 Oct: Uganda-Rwanda Business Forum, (plus Uganda Independence celebrations), Kampala, Uganda
  28. 20 Oct: Global African Investment Summit (plus Chattam House Lecture), London, UK

We wait to see where the gentleman jets for November and December.

THE BBC MUST BE CONGRATULATED FOR LAUNCHING SCRUTINY WITH “RWANDA’S UNTOLD STORY”

Leave a reply

  

Paul Kagame– wants only the victor’s side of the story to be heard

[Commentary: Open Letter to the BBC]

The letter objecting to the BBC documentary “Rwanda’s Untold Story” signed by a list of formerly credible academics and public figures reveals​ their inability to accept the fact that, after any major conflict the “victor’s tale” is not completely accurate, and that is particularly the case for the four-year war for power in Rwanda the last 100 days ​of which ​is called “the Rwanda genocide.”

This is a lesson taught to those of us in the U.S. ​who remember Vietnam by Robert S. McNamara in another documentary “The Fog of War” about another war built on half-truths​.

He also noted that​, had the Japanese won WWII, he and others who planned the gasoline bombing of Tokyo would be the war criminals.  It is quite amazing that “the myths of the victors” continue to be so easy to swallow — initially.  It is as if the signers of the letter seeking to suppress journalism have suspended disbelief despite what ​even the British must remember about the Weapons of Mass Destruction.

​But, the signatories are sticking to the Kagame/RPF victors’ saga long after the lack of evidence to support the “myth” has been exposed and contemporaneous data reported by third parties present in Rwanda has begun to create a new narrative.  The notables signing the letter have to ignore written judgments entered by the UN Tribunal for Rwanda, after Trial Chambers heard the best evidence the Rwandan government could muster for more than a decade, on exactly the same three issues raised in the letter, the UN Tribunal rejected all three.

Here are the facts:

First, IF there was any evidence to support the assertion that “30,000 interahamwe were trained as killers,” it was not introduced by the Prosecution as evidence in the trials of the government or military leaders of the Habyarimana government. The proponents of the letter cite no source.  In fact, the leaders of the government and military were acquitted of planning, conspiring, training, organizing, preparing, or any other sort of “planification” of any criminal acts against Tutsi civilians at all, prior to the assassination of President Habyarimana in the April 6, 1994 shootdown of the President’s plane.

This means that there was no evidence of planning to shoot down the President’s plane by his own forces, either.  This is what Trial Chamber-​found in the Bagosora Trial, Military-1:

When viewed against the backdrop of targeted killings and massive slaughter perpetrated by civilian and assailants between April and July 1994 as well as earlier cycles of violence, it is understandable why for many this evidence…shows a prior conspiracy to commit genocide….However, they are also consistent with preparations for a political or military power struggle…when confronted with circumstantial evidence [the Chamber] can only convict where it is the only reasonable inference…the Prosecution has not shown that the only reasonable inference based on credible evidence…was that [genocidal] intention was shared by the Accused.

…the Chamber is not satisfied that the Prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the four Accused conspired among themselves, or with others to commit genocide before it unfolded on 7 April 1994. (emphasis added)

Second, according to ​the letter’s signatory ​Gen. Dallaire, in his ​own​ Sept 1993 Reconnaissance Report to the Security Council,  the RPF reported the total number of Tutsi in Rwanda was about 667,000, a number which the RPF did not consider an undercount in a UN estimate pre-Genocide. (see p. 30).

After July 1994,  IBUKA, the RPF survivors organization estimated 300,000 Tutsi survived in Rwanda.  This means that according to contemporaneous numbers from the RPF ​via Gen. Dallaire​, total Tutsi deaths must have been a blood-chilling 337,000 and even less than Davenport and Stam estimate and means even more Hutu deaths would be required to reach 800,000 to 1,000,000 total or some 460,000 to 660,000 Hutus. Please take note:  these numbers come from General Dallaire and the RPF. (Moreover, Gen. Dallaire has been a Kagame admirer for a long time, as far back as 1994 telling The New York Times, “He is absolutely brilliant,” and “He has an exceptionally disciplined mind.”)

Third, the shooting down of the plane was the conclusion reached in 1997 the elite International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) Prosecutor’s Investigative Team by: Michael Hourigan, Australian Queen’s Prosecutor; frmr. FBI Special Agent, James Lyons; Gen. Dallaires Chief Mil. Int. Ofcr. Col. Amadou Deme; Chief ICTR Prosecutor Carla del Ponte; French Investigating Judge Bruggiere; Spanish Investigating Judge Merelles; the subject of confessions by frmr Kagame Chiefs of Staff Theogene Rudesingwa, M.D.; Gen. Rudesingwa; Lt. Joshua Abdul Rusebiza(ICTR testimony); Lt. Ruyenzi; and supported by ICTR testimony from eyewitnesses including Fr. Col. DeSanQuentin in Kanombe Base and first at the crash site with Maj. Ntabakuze on April 6, 1004.All of the above is documented in the film, in documents cited in my book “The Accidental Genocide,” or in the evidence and transcripts at the ICTR.

Davenport, Stam and Reyntjens were all Prosecution witnesses, not defense witnesses, who stopped being called by the Prosecution as their conclusions began to contradict the RPF myths.  Interahamwe leaders…witnesses A and BY in the Military-1 Trial both testified as Prosecution witnesses after guilty pleas in Belgium and both claimed to be trained ONLY as self-defense forces.  This evidence is IN the ICTR record.  Please confirm the assertion.

Please read the Trevidic Report, it does not say what is alleged by the letter.  It’s conclusions are far more ambiguous than the letter suggests and are based on an analysis of re-produced sound recordings, not on the testimonies of any individuals involved in the shootdown team, itself. Without studying and understanding:

the four-year war that began as an invasion from Uganda in October 1990;

that resumed with a full assault in Feb. 1993 that displaced nearly 1.5 million Rwandans from the Byumba breadbasket that nearly took power;

the Burundi genocide that drove 300,000 refugees into Rwanda; and the U.S. ambassador telling Kagame in Nov. 1993 that if he resumed the war, he would be responsible for a second Burundi genocide in Rwanda  (ICTR Testimony of Amb. Robert Flaten, July 2005):

As Dr. Stam stated, discussing the 100 days of the “Rwanda genocide” without discussing the 4-year war following the RPF invasion is like discussing the Holocaust without discussing WW-II.

Please note, none of the allegations in the letter signed by so many cite to any hard evidence in support.  At the ICTR, this same lack of support required the Trial and Appeal Chambers to reject the allegations of the ICTR Prosecutor, the Rwandan Government, and the several Prosecutors on loan from the U.S. Dept of Justice which pursued the issue for more than a decade without success.

The letter fails to note the incontrovertible evidence of RPF crimes in Congo from 1993-2003 documented in the October 2010 UNHCR “Mapping Report;” the UNS/C Expert Reports on Illegal Resource Extraction from Congo, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 20012; Rwandan support for M23 and other occupying groups illegally extracting resources from Congo; the excess deaths in Congo and Central Africa between 5 and 10 million ​deaths attributed to invasions of 1996, 1998 and continual warfare over two decades.

In 2010, the Obama administration declared the Kagame election ​unfree and unfair, while Victoire Ingabire and other potential candidates were imprisoned and prevented from meaningful campaigning. In March 2014, HRW Reported the history of assassination of political opponents of Kagame dating back to 1993, and attempts on current opponents in exile.

In 2012, the U.S. War Crimes Ambassador, Stephen Rapp THREATENED with prosecution ala Charles Taylor for his support of M23 crimes in Congo.​ All of the foregoing are in the public record.​

The existence of this massive bloodshed, and its authorship in Kigali ​with assistance from Kampala cannot be denied by any honest signatories of the letter submitted to BBC.

The BBC documentary is true to the documentary record, and to the investigations and judgments of the United Nations ICTR despite the impunity enjoyed by Kagame and the RPF for crimes committed during the Rwanda genocide, described by former Chief ICTR Prosecutor Carla del Ponte.

The BBC is to be congratulated for following the story where the evidence leads.

Sincerely,

Prof. Peter Erlinder

Director, Int. Humanitarian Law Institute

Former Lead Counsel, Military-1, Ntabakuze Defense

Past-pres. ICTR-ADAD, Association des Avocat de la Defense

Source: http://www.blackstarnews.com/global-politics/africa/the-bbc-must-be-congratulated-for-launching-scrutiny-with-rwandas-untold

UK: MPs vote to recognise Palestinian state, adding to pressure on Israel

Leave a reply

Palestine debate
Young Jewish men argue with pro-Palestinian supporters in Parliament Square as MPs debate the recognition of Palestine. Photograph: Leon Neal/AFP/Getty Images

MPs including the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, have voted to recognise Palestine as a state in a symbolic move that will unnerve Israel by suggesting that it is losing a wider battle for public opinion in Britain.

The vote of 274 to 12, a majority of 262, on a backbench motion has no practical impact on British government policy and ministers were instructed not to vote. Labour decided to impose a one-line whip, and the Liberal Democrats, like the Conservatives, gave their backbenchers a free vote.

In possibly the single most important contribution in an emotional debate, Richard Ottaway, the Conservative chairman of the foreign affairs select committee, said the recent annexation of West Bank land by the Israeli government had angered him like nothing else in politics.

The Conservative MP said he had been a supporter of the state of Israel before he became a Tory and had close family connections with the generation that formed the Israeli state. He explained: “The Holocaust had a deep impact on me growing up in the wake of the second world war,” adding that he had been a strong supporter of Israel in the six day war and subsequent conflicts.

He told MPs: “Looking back over the past 20 years, I realise now Israel has slowly been drifting away from world public opinion. The annexation of the 950 acres of the West Bank just a few months ago has outraged me more than anything else in my political life. It has made me look a fool and that is something I deeply resent.”

He said he was not yet convinced that Palestine was fit to be a state due to its refusal to recognise Israel, adding that “in normal circumstances” he would have opposed the motion. But, he said, “such is my anger with the behaviour of Israel in recent months that I will not be opposing this motion. I have to say to the government of Israel: if it is losing people like me, it is going to be losing a lot of people.”

The former foreign secretary, Jack Straw, said the vote was not simply a gesture, because if it were, the Israeli government would not be as worried by the vote.

The Israeli government, he said, wants the recognition of the Palestinian state only at the successful conclusion of any negotiations. But Straw said “such an approach would give the Israelis a veto over whether a Palestinian state should exist”. A vote for recognition would add to the pressure on the Israeli government, he said. “The only thing that the Israeli government, in my view, in its present demeanour under Bibi Netanyahu understands is pressure.”

Straw moved an amendment to the motion setting out that the UK government should recognise Palestine “as a contribution to securing a negotiated two-state solution”.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a former Conservative foreign secretary, said it had been British policy for generations that a state is recognised when the territory in question has a government, an army and a military capability.

Conservative James Clappison spoke out against the motion, arguing it would do more harm than good. He said: “I believe that international recognition of a Palestinian state in the terms of the motion would make a two-state solution less likely rather than more likely.

“I don’t see Israel, having faced the challenges it has over the years, caving in to this backbench motion. It might be a gesture on behalf of this house, but it would take the process no further.”

He said Hamas had “set its face against any peace deal with Israel” and undertaken a “campaign of terror”.

The motion had been tabled by Labour’s Grahame Morris, who said it was right to take the “small but symbolically important” step of recognising the Palestinian right to statehood.

Tobias Ellwood, the Middle East minister, said the UK government was a “staunch supporter” of Israel’s right to defend itself, but settlement-building made “it hard for Israel’s friends to make the case that Israel is committed to peace”.

Ellwood said Palestinian statehood could only become a reality when occupation ends

and stressed that the UK believes “this will only come through negotiations”. He added: “The UK will bilaterally recognise a Palestinian state when we judge that it can best help bring about peace.”

SOURCE: The Guardian