- 19 Jul 2011 11:40
#13759438
Setting the Scene
The on looking crowd, initially having gathered in such significant numbers, had continually dwindled down, and now only a handful remained. Most of those who stayed behind did so because they were overcome by curiosity. Of these, some were interested in seeing how the state would deal its latest corpse, possessing an almost morbid intrigue as to the logistics of the now all too common phenomenon of disposing of bodies. They had seen at first hand what diseases the deceased had, and they had listened with intently to their doctors who told them that the spirit of the dead would pass all of his former ailments onto his executioner.
Others had cravings of a more scientific nature, interested in what would physically happen to the body which they had just witnessed being mutilated before being set alight. Would its last contact with this world be the anguished cries which emanated from the host, wails that were heard across the village and beyond? Would it crumble like freshly crisp ashes? Or would there be one last set of movements from the body? One last tortured attempt to remain in this life?
Some brave family members stayed behind in their endeavour to collect the body of the departed. Their hopes were set on a burial ceremony for it, or rather what remained of it. They lurked in the shadows, acutely aware of the continued presence of state soldiers. With good reason, they were mindful not to be taken away. For if they were taken, it was possible, probable even, that they too would be tortured. And that their death would be sealed with confessions which had been extorted in the most horrific of ways. And brave though they were, no family member wanted to meet with the same fate as their departed relative.
Some of those who remained behind included children, unable to comprehend why the previous events which they had just witnessed had transpired. Their young minds were not yet able to understand the difference between contrasting political and religious opinions or beliefs.
But here, in this country, children grow up. And they grow up quickly.
But no matter how old they grow, or how quickly they reach an age of maturity, there are some things which they will never be able to understand. Why the next door neighbours mysteriously disappeared or why whole families were imprisoned after facing criminal trails at the hand of a government appointed judge.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
During the last British Civil War (the equivalent of the Liberation War in Zimbabwe) more than 200,000 people died.
Entire regions of the country had been ignored by the ruling government. They were determined that regeneration would never reach these parts. After all, almost the entire population here were supportive of the political enemies of the Crown. They disagree with the ruling party, often treating them with open disdain. They do not recognise the ruling party’s achievements, putting these down to natural progression. The government therefore do little to ease the lives of these residents. After all, if theses residents had their way, there would be a different government in place.
To encourage political unity, and in their hopes to teach these residents the true way, the government makes massive land seizures. Residents are evicted and replaced with government sympathisers. The hope being that the other inhabitant’s will be coerced into following government policies. To aid this ambition, the government sympathisers are given huge sums of money to spend. This money comes from the taxation of the country’s people. And it is spent on propaganda, second homes and staff for the regimes supporters.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
Britain has long used plantations as a way of advancing the goals of the government. And these plantations were not restricted to foreign colonies. Often they took place with the United Kingdom, where loyal servants to the Crown would be given land in the north (and in particular Scotland) to further the goals of the ruling elite.
There is a widespread scarcity of food which is crippling the nation. However, even though many of the population suffer from malnutrition, starvation and increased mortality, much of the produced food is exported to other countries.
The general population cannot fathom why and many chose to leave the country. This causes a shortage of necessary skills, therefore only deepening the crisis. Those which do leave open tell of horror stories and villages plagued by death.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
Britain has overseen famines in which more than 25,000,000 (twenty five million) people have died. This includes decimating the population of Ireland by 41%.
But the leading elite of this country are immune to such situations as they qualify for massive government handouts. One leading family actually receive grants totalling more than 2,000 (two thousand) times the countries average salary!
Even junior members of government can expect to receive cash for day to day luxuries, such as second homes (if second homes do not exist they phantom mortgages are created so that they still draw financial support). They then give their family and friends fictitious jobs, ensuring that they too are able to draw grants in exchange for supporting the ruling government.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
And they took place in the years 2009-2011. Even to this very day, the Royal Family are entitled to direct aid of £47,500,000 (forty seven point five million) in state handouts. And this figure ignores the massive indirect aid it receives.
British parliament is currently undergoing extensive scrutiny after ministers were found to be using public taxes to fund extravagant life styles and pay for foreign holidays, moat cleaning and other household upkeep, including gardening services, and state of the art home entertainment systems.
The press, whose owners include some of the largest political donators in the country, declare their allegiance to a political party. They then pay homage to that party’s successes, whilst its failing are usually ignored. Journalists of these papers regularly hack into phone lines of opposition politicians, manipulating situations and events which will ultimately prove the downfall of these politicians.
Often senior editors are courted by the ruling government. And recently the editor of the biggest selling newspaper became of the closest confidents of the countries leader.
In exchange for their co-operation and favourable reporting, as well as political donations, hostile corporate takeovers within the industry are. Government ministers will even bypass competition laws in favour of their donors, with some even standing in front of Parliament and lobbying the interests of certain news corporations.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
Newspaper owners, and in particular Rupert Murdoch, are among the biggest political donors in the Western world. His News Corporation was recently allowed to take over BSKYB. Jeremy Hunt, a senior British politician, endorsed the bid and spoke of the benefits that this would bring to the UK.
Andy Coulsdon, former editor of the News of the World, became a close confident of Conservative Leader David Cameron and was appointed his Director of Communications. Andy Coulsdon was the editor of the News of the World during their campaign of hacking and recording voice calls of many opposition politicians.
Distorting processes are used to ensure that they stay in power. These are not only restricted to acts of violence (with entire religious orders being made illegal and those who oppose the ban slaughtered) and even include examples of where surnames are changed to disguise peoples background and make them more appealing to the population at large.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that it is in Zimbabwea. And that it is driven by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
The Royal Family recently changed their name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the Windsors so as not to draw attention to their German heritage. They did this in 1915, ironically waiting for the Great War to have ended before committing to the change.
After reading all of the above it is difficult to ascertain why such hypocrisy is employed by both Western governments and press towards Robert Mugabe and Zimbabwe.
And why have they been allowed to shape world views to the extent that most of the world now views Robert Mugabe as a despot dictator? Why have western media and government been allowed to distort, alter and, in some cases, falsify evidence that will in the most part exonerate Robert Mugabe and his Zimbabwean government?
Three hundred years have now passed since Britain experienced their last civil war. Between then and now, hundreds of thousands have died, been injured or displaced through violent means because of beliefs reflecting politics, religion or other social mobility. But more pressingly, during this time more than 25m have died in British territories through famine. How then can Britain and the western world criticise Zimbabwe for overseeing events which pale into insignificance when compared with their past?
And why then does Britain expect Zimbabwe to do so much better pro rata than it has done? And why is it so keen to lambast the current Zimbabwe regime without any regard for history itself? Whilst British government ministers are allowed to suppress freedom of speech through super injunctions, how can they then criticise state media?
Have they no comprehension of reality?
There are some impressive arguments as to why the process of evolution should speed up compared to three hundred years ago. After all new technologies are openly known about in all parts of the world. However if, through trade sanctions, access to this technology is denied, how can one expect a nation to prosper?
Who is it that is setting the foreign policies of the western world?
The West talks openly of the decline in agricultural output in Zimbabwe. In all footage and interviews, this is put down to the ruling government. It blames Robert Mugabe and his minsters for the lack of agricultural output. And yet the United Kingdom forgets that it has overseen the death of more than 25,000,000 (twenty five million) of its people through famine (predominantly through famines in India and Ireland when it was a colonial power there). Why should we assume that Zimbabwe would have fared any better? Why is it never reported that the food availability decline (FAD) hypothesis exonerates Robert Mugabe and the Zanu PF from this reduction in agricultural output?
Robert Mugabe has taken a country from a colonial power and given it back to its people. And whilst that is a grand statement, it is hard to underplay the role that Robert Mugabe actually played personally in ensuring that Zimbabwe gained independence. He achieved through this at great personal expense, spending time in jail and taking up arms in the struggle for independence, before leading negotiations in London to make Zimbabwe’s independence official.
However, if he thought he could rely on Western powers, he was sadly mistaken. For Labour ensured that he would face an almost impossible task in managing his country.
Why was the West, led by a Labour government in the UK allowed to do this? Who is it that has shaped their foreign policy during this time?
Did the West already have knowledge of Zimbabwe’s rich natural resources? Were they hoping to provoke a regime change, replacing the Great Liberator with a Western pawn? One who would be comfortable in ensuring that the mining contracts associated with Zimbabwe’s gold and diamonds went straight to foreign multinational organisations, who would then export their earnings to their country of source (invariably the UK or America).
Why have Western governments halted aid packages to Zimbabwe when propping up almost all other regimes on the continent?
Surely if the West was serious about helping to turn Zimbabwe into a first world country, they would not intentionally cripple it by imposing such sanctions which render it impossible to live? Why does the West refuse to trade with Zimbabwe but allows Venezuelan and Iranian oil to enter the free market?
And the criticism that is given to Zimbabwe regarding agriculture ignores the fact that the Western world has made no attempt to teach the native blacks the art of farming. How can they expect them to immediately turn from War Heroes and liberators one day into professional agricultural farmers the next?
Western governments are keen to spread propaganda about the luxury life of the leaders in the regime. And yet they ignore the fact that the Royal family in the UK gets governments grants exceeding £50m per year. And even the Prime Minster David Cameron, a millionaire in his own right, is allowed a government mortgage on his multimillion pound London home. This whilst having the luxury of a country mansion near his constituents. No Zanu PF minster gets anything like this type of allowance. And yet they have to work under pressures that the Western world could never imagine.
The only logical conclusion is that the West wants regime change and is prepared to crush a country and its people to achieve this ambition. People forget that the current list of civilian casualties in Iraq exceeds 100,000. Another country with cherished natural resources. Another country where regime change was desired.
Trade Sanctions
In this section we will take a look at how the West has helped to create almost all of the problems currently being encountered by Zimbabwe.
Trade sanctions are a twenty first century version of a technique first devised in the middle ages. Back then of course they referred to it as a siege.
In the past a foreign invading army would, through restricting a town or countries trade capabilities (by force), create wide spread starvation. They did this in the hope of forcing the ruling party to surrender.
The trade restrictions imposed upon Zimbabwe are bearing similar results, with the people of Zimbabwe the ones who suffer the most. All the time, the West has been allowed to feed the media a constant stream of anti regime propaganda.
Now imagine for a minute what would happen to the UK if they were forced to operate with the same restrictions that they happily impose on Zimbabwe.
The UK import and export market has a combined value of approximately £436bn per annum and is reliant on the foreign imports for a range of items vital to the economy. This includes motor cars, public service vehicles, fuel, telecommunications, medicaments, apparel and furniture. Without access to these goods the UK economy would literally grind to a halt.
Imagine not being able to work more than a mile or so from where you live because there is no transport available. Imagine the devastation that would have on middle England. Imagine not being able to access telephones or the internet because the UK was not allowed to import the materials required to maintain our IT infrastructure. I do not hyperbolise the situation when I say that it would, quite literally, have an Armageddon affect.
And so imports are vital to the running of the UK economy. And to pay for these imports the UK relies on a thriving export market.
So if trade sanctions were imposed upon Britain, it is fair to say that Britain too would suffer a huge decline in life expectancy, salaries and general well being. Without a doubt, it would also suffer huge emigration, as people left to live in a country without sanctions.
Therefore to blame the current plight entirely on Zanu PF is completely unfair.
However, trade is important for more than simply economic reasons. Trade is important for enhancing a countries political standing in the world. Many trade deals are structured to cement strategically important relationships between countries.
The UK, China, Germany, Russia and America carry such strong political standing because of their ability to trade freely. And emerging economies, such as India and Brazil are fast becoming world players.
If the leading players on the world stage use trade to substantiate their policies, both domestic and foreign, how can they then act with such hypocrisy by imposing trade sanctions on others?
Zimbabwe was once known as the bread basket of Africa. Western imposed trade sanctions have no ensured that Zimbabwe remains a respected country only because of their ability to see off colonial power and oppression.
And so, with these trade sanctions imposed, it is no wonder that Zimbabwe has recently found times tough!!!
Natural Resources
Throughout history, countries with sought after products have found themselves coming under the microscope of colonial powers.
In some cases, these colonial powers were happy to simply engage in trade with these countries, however often they felt it would be more cost effective and secure to invade and claim the minerals as their own.
This is as true now as it has been in the past. Some countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain enjoy favourable trading positions with the West. This is due to their abundance of oil. Some, such as Iraq and Libya, are not so fortunate and are the recipients of Western aggression.
However, the attitude is not only restricted to material goods. In Switzerland, lax banking laws are tolerated, even encouraged by many in the West. Whereas other countries, who’s banking model is almost an exact replica of Switzerland, are treated with pariah status.
Now let us look at Zimbabwe in particular. Zimbabwe is without doubt, one of the world’s richest countries in terms of its abundance of natural resources.
Let us first examine its agricultural potential;
Zimbabwe has more than 15,000,000 square miles of potential agricultural land. This could be used to harvest many goods, including tobacco, maize, cotton, coffee, sugar cane, wheat, soy beans and ground nuts.
The potential of this market is immense and could provide a fantastic standard of living for both domestic and foreign markets.
However, even more astounding is the mineral wealth of the country. These deposits range from diamonds, gold and silver to platinum, copper and nickel. And not forgetting the high concentrations of graphite, coal, lithium, asbestos, tin and palladium.
If Zimbabwe was not restricted to outside foreign interference they would, without a doubt, have a thriving import and export market. This would in turn create a high standard of living, high life expectancy and reduced illness.
The Struggle to Remain in Power
Much has been published about the tactics used by Zanu PF to remain in power in Zimbabwe. In fact, it has long been used as a tool by the West to portray Robert Mugabe as a blood thirsty dictator.
However, this is far from the reality of the situation.
Let us compare some of the methods used by Zanu PF to remain in power with processes employed by other foreign states, including Britain.
Restriction of your Right to Vote
These were employed by America up until 1965 when the black people were finally allowed to vote freely. Until that point states were allowed to define their own parameters for voting eligibility.
One Voice, One Vote
This year the two main political parties in the United Kingdom joined forces to ensure that the Alternative Vote was not approved.
This effectively ensured that one of the two main parties will continue to run Britain during our lifetimes, and probably the life times of our children.
Ironically, David Cameron campaigned strongly against AV, despite the fact that it was the AV in which he had won the right to lead the Conservative Party (If the Conservative party had employed the technique that he campaigned for last year, David Davies would now be Prime Minster).
Name Changing
The Royal Family recently changed their name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the Windsors so as not to draw attention to their German heritage. However they only did this in 1915, ironically waiting for the Great War to have ended before committing to the change!
Would the Windsors have been so accommodating if Britain had not managed to fight off Germany? Somehow I doubt it.
Violence
Britain has longed supported regimes which have used violence to suppress opposition to their rule. This includes not only regimes looking to remain in power, but also those responsible for military coups.
This continues to this very day, where Bahrain are treated completely differently to Libya, but their military actions remain commensurate.
Conclusion
To accuse Zanu PF of employing tactics which are not sued the world over is gross hypocrisy. Until the West are prepared to treat every sovereignty the same (including themselves), they will never be able to take a moral stance against Zimbabwe.
The Alternative
The question which must be asked is what is the alternative to Zanu PF?
The answer which most people would come up with is to install Morgan Tsvangirai as leader. But are we really saying that Robert Mugabe should be replaced with a Trade Unionist? That Zanu PF should succumb to the MDC?
How many of the MDC helped to liberate Zimbabwe? Most of them are too young to remember what it is like to have a colonial power imposing rule on the country.
The MDC is led Morgan Tsvangirai, a trade unionist with no knowledge of politics or economics. Having turned his back on Zanu PF, Tsvangirai created the MDC. However his lack of political knowledge was cruelly exposed after the last elections. Rather than stay and fight, like the Zanu PF did during the War of Independence, he fled the country. He was too cowardly to remain behind, instead leaving this to the people he is supposed to represent. This says a lot for his moral judgement. However, and more worrying, during his time abroad he lobbied foreign powers to recognise him as the Prime Minster. And yet not one would recognise his as being a legitimate Prime Minster.
One wonders if a more cowardly and inept performance has ever been seen by someone who considers themselves to be a professional politician. Maybe he assumed that being a trade unionist he would be able to draw support from the Labour Government in Britain? Well if he did, he was sadly mistaken, because the labour Government showed its true disdain for all Zimbabwean people by ignoring his pleas. How ironic that a UK government which gets more than 90% of its funding from the trade union movement should so whole heartedly reject a Trade Unionist!
Imagine, even a trade union backed government rejected Morgan Tsvangirai.
Yes, there have been learning curves, but this should be expected, not criticised. And encouragement should be given for cementing Zimbabwe’s position as an independent country.
There has recently been a change of government in England, and already there are encouraging signs that the Conservative Government will relax the draconian sanctions imposed by the trade union backed Labour Party. After all, it was the Conservatives who helped negotiate Zimbabwean independence, something which the opposition Labour Party did not want or agree to.
So, in the previous pages we have exposed the myths surrounding Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe, and also shed light on the valuable work undertaken by him and Zanu PF. We have also explored the ramifications of the trade sanctions imposed by the West on Zimbabwe, and have seen how the West would suffer if similar sanctions were imposed upon it.
And so we are left with no doubt of the good that Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF have done, and continue to do for Zimbabwe. Let all Zimbabweans be aware of the severe restrictions in which he has had to work, and follow him in the polls as he continues to lead an Independent Zimbabwe into the future.
The on looking crowd, initially having gathered in such significant numbers, had continually dwindled down, and now only a handful remained. Most of those who stayed behind did so because they were overcome by curiosity. Of these, some were interested in seeing how the state would deal its latest corpse, possessing an almost morbid intrigue as to the logistics of the now all too common phenomenon of disposing of bodies. They had seen at first hand what diseases the deceased had, and they had listened with intently to their doctors who told them that the spirit of the dead would pass all of his former ailments onto his executioner.
Others had cravings of a more scientific nature, interested in what would physically happen to the body which they had just witnessed being mutilated before being set alight. Would its last contact with this world be the anguished cries which emanated from the host, wails that were heard across the village and beyond? Would it crumble like freshly crisp ashes? Or would there be one last set of movements from the body? One last tortured attempt to remain in this life?
Some brave family members stayed behind in their endeavour to collect the body of the departed. Their hopes were set on a burial ceremony for it, or rather what remained of it. They lurked in the shadows, acutely aware of the continued presence of state soldiers. With good reason, they were mindful not to be taken away. For if they were taken, it was possible, probable even, that they too would be tortured. And that their death would be sealed with confessions which had been extorted in the most horrific of ways. And brave though they were, no family member wanted to meet with the same fate as their departed relative.
Some of those who remained behind included children, unable to comprehend why the previous events which they had just witnessed had transpired. Their young minds were not yet able to understand the difference between contrasting political and religious opinions or beliefs.
But here, in this country, children grow up. And they grow up quickly.
But no matter how old they grow, or how quickly they reach an age of maturity, there are some things which they will never be able to understand. Why the next door neighbours mysteriously disappeared or why whole families were imprisoned after facing criminal trails at the hand of a government appointed judge.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
During the last British Civil War (the equivalent of the Liberation War in Zimbabwe) more than 200,000 people died.
Entire regions of the country had been ignored by the ruling government. They were determined that regeneration would never reach these parts. After all, almost the entire population here were supportive of the political enemies of the Crown. They disagree with the ruling party, often treating them with open disdain. They do not recognise the ruling party’s achievements, putting these down to natural progression. The government therefore do little to ease the lives of these residents. After all, if theses residents had their way, there would be a different government in place.
To encourage political unity, and in their hopes to teach these residents the true way, the government makes massive land seizures. Residents are evicted and replaced with government sympathisers. The hope being that the other inhabitant’s will be coerced into following government policies. To aid this ambition, the government sympathisers are given huge sums of money to spend. This money comes from the taxation of the country’s people. And it is spent on propaganda, second homes and staff for the regimes supporters.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
Britain has long used plantations as a way of advancing the goals of the government. And these plantations were not restricted to foreign colonies. Often they took place with the United Kingdom, where loyal servants to the Crown would be given land in the north (and in particular Scotland) to further the goals of the ruling elite.
There is a widespread scarcity of food which is crippling the nation. However, even though many of the population suffer from malnutrition, starvation and increased mortality, much of the produced food is exported to other countries.
The general population cannot fathom why and many chose to leave the country. This causes a shortage of necessary skills, therefore only deepening the crisis. Those which do leave open tell of horror stories and villages plagued by death.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
Britain has overseen famines in which more than 25,000,000 (twenty five million) people have died. This includes decimating the population of Ireland by 41%.
But the leading elite of this country are immune to such situations as they qualify for massive government handouts. One leading family actually receive grants totalling more than 2,000 (two thousand) times the countries average salary!
Even junior members of government can expect to receive cash for day to day luxuries, such as second homes (if second homes do not exist they phantom mortgages are created so that they still draw financial support). They then give their family and friends fictitious jobs, ensuring that they too are able to draw grants in exchange for supporting the ruling government.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
And they took place in the years 2009-2011. Even to this very day, the Royal Family are entitled to direct aid of £47,500,000 (forty seven point five million) in state handouts. And this figure ignores the massive indirect aid it receives.
British parliament is currently undergoing extensive scrutiny after ministers were found to be using public taxes to fund extravagant life styles and pay for foreign holidays, moat cleaning and other household upkeep, including gardening services, and state of the art home entertainment systems.
The press, whose owners include some of the largest political donators in the country, declare their allegiance to a political party. They then pay homage to that party’s successes, whilst its failing are usually ignored. Journalists of these papers regularly hack into phone lines of opposition politicians, manipulating situations and events which will ultimately prove the downfall of these politicians.
Often senior editors are courted by the ruling government. And recently the editor of the biggest selling newspaper became of the closest confidents of the countries leader.
In exchange for their co-operation and favourable reporting, as well as political donations, hostile corporate takeovers within the industry are. Government ministers will even bypass competition laws in favour of their donors, with some even standing in front of Parliament and lobbying the interests of certain news corporations.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that these events occurred in Zimbabwe. And that they were orchestrated by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
Newspaper owners, and in particular Rupert Murdoch, are among the biggest political donors in the Western world. His News Corporation was recently allowed to take over BSKYB. Jeremy Hunt, a senior British politician, endorsed the bid and spoke of the benefits that this would bring to the UK.
Andy Coulsdon, former editor of the News of the World, became a close confident of Conservative Leader David Cameron and was appointed his Director of Communications. Andy Coulsdon was the editor of the News of the World during their campaign of hacking and recording voice calls of many opposition politicians.
Distorting processes are used to ensure that they stay in power. These are not only restricted to acts of violence (with entire religious orders being made illegal and those who oppose the ban slaughtered) and even include examples of where surnames are changed to disguise peoples background and make them more appealing to the population at large.
So where did this occur? One who listens to Western government led media outlets would immediately assume that it is in Zimbabwea. And that it is driven by the ‘despot dictator’.
Well those of you who thought this would be hugely mistaken. No, these are not extracts or tales from a far away land on the continent of Africa. These are actual events which occurred right here in the United Kingdom. The same United Kingdom which sees fit to preach to other nations from its self proclaimed title as a land of democracy.
The Royal Family recently changed their name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the Windsors so as not to draw attention to their German heritage. They did this in 1915, ironically waiting for the Great War to have ended before committing to the change.
After reading all of the above it is difficult to ascertain why such hypocrisy is employed by both Western governments and press towards Robert Mugabe and Zimbabwe.
And why have they been allowed to shape world views to the extent that most of the world now views Robert Mugabe as a despot dictator? Why have western media and government been allowed to distort, alter and, in some cases, falsify evidence that will in the most part exonerate Robert Mugabe and his Zimbabwean government?
Three hundred years have now passed since Britain experienced their last civil war. Between then and now, hundreds of thousands have died, been injured or displaced through violent means because of beliefs reflecting politics, religion or other social mobility. But more pressingly, during this time more than 25m have died in British territories through famine. How then can Britain and the western world criticise Zimbabwe for overseeing events which pale into insignificance when compared with their past?
And why then does Britain expect Zimbabwe to do so much better pro rata than it has done? And why is it so keen to lambast the current Zimbabwe regime without any regard for history itself? Whilst British government ministers are allowed to suppress freedom of speech through super injunctions, how can they then criticise state media?
Have they no comprehension of reality?
There are some impressive arguments as to why the process of evolution should speed up compared to three hundred years ago. After all new technologies are openly known about in all parts of the world. However if, through trade sanctions, access to this technology is denied, how can one expect a nation to prosper?
Who is it that is setting the foreign policies of the western world?
The West talks openly of the decline in agricultural output in Zimbabwe. In all footage and interviews, this is put down to the ruling government. It blames Robert Mugabe and his minsters for the lack of agricultural output. And yet the United Kingdom forgets that it has overseen the death of more than 25,000,000 (twenty five million) of its people through famine (predominantly through famines in India and Ireland when it was a colonial power there). Why should we assume that Zimbabwe would have fared any better? Why is it never reported that the food availability decline (FAD) hypothesis exonerates Robert Mugabe and the Zanu PF from this reduction in agricultural output?
Robert Mugabe has taken a country from a colonial power and given it back to its people. And whilst that is a grand statement, it is hard to underplay the role that Robert Mugabe actually played personally in ensuring that Zimbabwe gained independence. He achieved through this at great personal expense, spending time in jail and taking up arms in the struggle for independence, before leading negotiations in London to make Zimbabwe’s independence official.
However, if he thought he could rely on Western powers, he was sadly mistaken. For Labour ensured that he would face an almost impossible task in managing his country.
Why was the West, led by a Labour government in the UK allowed to do this? Who is it that has shaped their foreign policy during this time?
Did the West already have knowledge of Zimbabwe’s rich natural resources? Were they hoping to provoke a regime change, replacing the Great Liberator with a Western pawn? One who would be comfortable in ensuring that the mining contracts associated with Zimbabwe’s gold and diamonds went straight to foreign multinational organisations, who would then export their earnings to their country of source (invariably the UK or America).
Why have Western governments halted aid packages to Zimbabwe when propping up almost all other regimes on the continent?
Surely if the West was serious about helping to turn Zimbabwe into a first world country, they would not intentionally cripple it by imposing such sanctions which render it impossible to live? Why does the West refuse to trade with Zimbabwe but allows Venezuelan and Iranian oil to enter the free market?
And the criticism that is given to Zimbabwe regarding agriculture ignores the fact that the Western world has made no attempt to teach the native blacks the art of farming. How can they expect them to immediately turn from War Heroes and liberators one day into professional agricultural farmers the next?
Western governments are keen to spread propaganda about the luxury life of the leaders in the regime. And yet they ignore the fact that the Royal family in the UK gets governments grants exceeding £50m per year. And even the Prime Minster David Cameron, a millionaire in his own right, is allowed a government mortgage on his multimillion pound London home. This whilst having the luxury of a country mansion near his constituents. No Zanu PF minster gets anything like this type of allowance. And yet they have to work under pressures that the Western world could never imagine.
The only logical conclusion is that the West wants regime change and is prepared to crush a country and its people to achieve this ambition. People forget that the current list of civilian casualties in Iraq exceeds 100,000. Another country with cherished natural resources. Another country where regime change was desired.
Trade Sanctions
In this section we will take a look at how the West has helped to create almost all of the problems currently being encountered by Zimbabwe.
Trade sanctions are a twenty first century version of a technique first devised in the middle ages. Back then of course they referred to it as a siege.
In the past a foreign invading army would, through restricting a town or countries trade capabilities (by force), create wide spread starvation. They did this in the hope of forcing the ruling party to surrender.
The trade restrictions imposed upon Zimbabwe are bearing similar results, with the people of Zimbabwe the ones who suffer the most. All the time, the West has been allowed to feed the media a constant stream of anti regime propaganda.
Now imagine for a minute what would happen to the UK if they were forced to operate with the same restrictions that they happily impose on Zimbabwe.
The UK import and export market has a combined value of approximately £436bn per annum and is reliant on the foreign imports for a range of items vital to the economy. This includes motor cars, public service vehicles, fuel, telecommunications, medicaments, apparel and furniture. Without access to these goods the UK economy would literally grind to a halt.
Imagine not being able to work more than a mile or so from where you live because there is no transport available. Imagine the devastation that would have on middle England. Imagine not being able to access telephones or the internet because the UK was not allowed to import the materials required to maintain our IT infrastructure. I do not hyperbolise the situation when I say that it would, quite literally, have an Armageddon affect.
And so imports are vital to the running of the UK economy. And to pay for these imports the UK relies on a thriving export market.
So if trade sanctions were imposed upon Britain, it is fair to say that Britain too would suffer a huge decline in life expectancy, salaries and general well being. Without a doubt, it would also suffer huge emigration, as people left to live in a country without sanctions.
Therefore to blame the current plight entirely on Zanu PF is completely unfair.
However, trade is important for more than simply economic reasons. Trade is important for enhancing a countries political standing in the world. Many trade deals are structured to cement strategically important relationships between countries.
The UK, China, Germany, Russia and America carry such strong political standing because of their ability to trade freely. And emerging economies, such as India and Brazil are fast becoming world players.
If the leading players on the world stage use trade to substantiate their policies, both domestic and foreign, how can they then act with such hypocrisy by imposing trade sanctions on others?
Zimbabwe was once known as the bread basket of Africa. Western imposed trade sanctions have no ensured that Zimbabwe remains a respected country only because of their ability to see off colonial power and oppression.
And so, with these trade sanctions imposed, it is no wonder that Zimbabwe has recently found times tough!!!
Natural Resources
Throughout history, countries with sought after products have found themselves coming under the microscope of colonial powers.
In some cases, these colonial powers were happy to simply engage in trade with these countries, however often they felt it would be more cost effective and secure to invade and claim the minerals as their own.
This is as true now as it has been in the past. Some countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Bahrain enjoy favourable trading positions with the West. This is due to their abundance of oil. Some, such as Iraq and Libya, are not so fortunate and are the recipients of Western aggression.
However, the attitude is not only restricted to material goods. In Switzerland, lax banking laws are tolerated, even encouraged by many in the West. Whereas other countries, who’s banking model is almost an exact replica of Switzerland, are treated with pariah status.
Now let us look at Zimbabwe in particular. Zimbabwe is without doubt, one of the world’s richest countries in terms of its abundance of natural resources.
Let us first examine its agricultural potential;
Zimbabwe has more than 15,000,000 square miles of potential agricultural land. This could be used to harvest many goods, including tobacco, maize, cotton, coffee, sugar cane, wheat, soy beans and ground nuts.
The potential of this market is immense and could provide a fantastic standard of living for both domestic and foreign markets.
However, even more astounding is the mineral wealth of the country. These deposits range from diamonds, gold and silver to platinum, copper and nickel. And not forgetting the high concentrations of graphite, coal, lithium, asbestos, tin and palladium.
If Zimbabwe was not restricted to outside foreign interference they would, without a doubt, have a thriving import and export market. This would in turn create a high standard of living, high life expectancy and reduced illness.
The Struggle to Remain in Power
Much has been published about the tactics used by Zanu PF to remain in power in Zimbabwe. In fact, it has long been used as a tool by the West to portray Robert Mugabe as a blood thirsty dictator.
However, this is far from the reality of the situation.
Let us compare some of the methods used by Zanu PF to remain in power with processes employed by other foreign states, including Britain.
Restriction of your Right to Vote
These were employed by America up until 1965 when the black people were finally allowed to vote freely. Until that point states were allowed to define their own parameters for voting eligibility.
One Voice, One Vote
This year the two main political parties in the United Kingdom joined forces to ensure that the Alternative Vote was not approved.
This effectively ensured that one of the two main parties will continue to run Britain during our lifetimes, and probably the life times of our children.
Ironically, David Cameron campaigned strongly against AV, despite the fact that it was the AV in which he had won the right to lead the Conservative Party (If the Conservative party had employed the technique that he campaigned for last year, David Davies would now be Prime Minster).
Name Changing
The Royal Family recently changed their name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the Windsors so as not to draw attention to their German heritage. However they only did this in 1915, ironically waiting for the Great War to have ended before committing to the change!
Would the Windsors have been so accommodating if Britain had not managed to fight off Germany? Somehow I doubt it.
Violence
Britain has longed supported regimes which have used violence to suppress opposition to their rule. This includes not only regimes looking to remain in power, but also those responsible for military coups.
This continues to this very day, where Bahrain are treated completely differently to Libya, but their military actions remain commensurate.
Conclusion
To accuse Zanu PF of employing tactics which are not sued the world over is gross hypocrisy. Until the West are prepared to treat every sovereignty the same (including themselves), they will never be able to take a moral stance against Zimbabwe.
The Alternative
The question which must be asked is what is the alternative to Zanu PF?
The answer which most people would come up with is to install Morgan Tsvangirai as leader. But are we really saying that Robert Mugabe should be replaced with a Trade Unionist? That Zanu PF should succumb to the MDC?
How many of the MDC helped to liberate Zimbabwe? Most of them are too young to remember what it is like to have a colonial power imposing rule on the country.
The MDC is led Morgan Tsvangirai, a trade unionist with no knowledge of politics or economics. Having turned his back on Zanu PF, Tsvangirai created the MDC. However his lack of political knowledge was cruelly exposed after the last elections. Rather than stay and fight, like the Zanu PF did during the War of Independence, he fled the country. He was too cowardly to remain behind, instead leaving this to the people he is supposed to represent. This says a lot for his moral judgement. However, and more worrying, during his time abroad he lobbied foreign powers to recognise him as the Prime Minster. And yet not one would recognise his as being a legitimate Prime Minster.
One wonders if a more cowardly and inept performance has ever been seen by someone who considers themselves to be a professional politician. Maybe he assumed that being a trade unionist he would be able to draw support from the Labour Government in Britain? Well if he did, he was sadly mistaken, because the labour Government showed its true disdain for all Zimbabwean people by ignoring his pleas. How ironic that a UK government which gets more than 90% of its funding from the trade union movement should so whole heartedly reject a Trade Unionist!
Imagine, even a trade union backed government rejected Morgan Tsvangirai.
Yes, there have been learning curves, but this should be expected, not criticised. And encouragement should be given for cementing Zimbabwe’s position as an independent country.
There has recently been a change of government in England, and already there are encouraging signs that the Conservative Government will relax the draconian sanctions imposed by the trade union backed Labour Party. After all, it was the Conservatives who helped negotiate Zimbabwean independence, something which the opposition Labour Party did not want or agree to.
So, in the previous pages we have exposed the myths surrounding Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe, and also shed light on the valuable work undertaken by him and Zanu PF. We have also explored the ramifications of the trade sanctions imposed by the West on Zimbabwe, and have seen how the West would suffer if similar sanctions were imposed upon it.
And so we are left with no doubt of the good that Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF have done, and continue to do for Zimbabwe. Let all Zimbabweans be aware of the severe restrictions in which he has had to work, and follow him in the polls as he continues to lead an Independent Zimbabwe into the future.
- By Puffer Fish
- By FiveofSwords
- By Potemkin
- By KurtFF8