Pablo

Support for what? The Matabeleland question and the position of Geoffrey Howe is a matter of public record.

I don't know what question you are referring to when you quote me as saying 'lies, lies and statistics' but if you'd like to point me to it, I'll respond.

And please don't come out with the tired old line that there are no facts, only opinions, and that all opinions are equal.

fa0019

Of course there is nothing wrong with opinions but they are baseless without support.
I wasn't referring to 'The Matabeleland question or the position of Geoffrey Howe'.

rather your comments stating 'race nonsense'. What I asked you was that if he had such an agenda at the beginning why would he let them stay with relative independance for so long, who controlled 2/3's of the farm land in the country for so long after?

Why would the British government have given him a knighthood in 1994... zimbabwe has no political importance in terms of raw materials, geo-politically it had/has very little influence...

Pablo

Mugabe never made any bones of the fact that he wanted a one-party state, with him in charge. You can do some reading up.

I am not a spokesman for the British government. Conferring a knighthood does not make Mugabe right or good. The point is irrelevant. Or are you seeking somehow to find a way to claim that Mugabe is in fact a good person rather than a cynical butcher? Matabeleland happened in the early 80s. Twenty thousand or so, murdered. A mere detail to you, apparently. Not to me, however.

fa0019

You're correct in stating that getting a knighthood does not automatically mean the person is good but I'm sure they wouldn't have given him one without some form of reasoning. As I said before, Zimbabwe has very little political importance or is rich in natural resources so I can't see how they would need to give him the honour.

However please do not put words in other people mouths... if you read the blog you will see that I did not say he IS a good person...rather that many saw him as a good leader for a long time including the British government right up to the mid 90's.

Bijilo123

But it was part of the change - it was hapening at the same time tha W Pakistan was doing it to E Pakistan (and in numbers at least 100 times greater) - just ethnic cleansing - no one ever does anything about it - simple history!! But don't exclude it if you wish.

Pablo

The British government have dished out gongs to a whole variety of goons and idiots for political reasons. So what?

As for what "many saw" that doesn't really concern me. It may be true that a lot of foolish people chose to avert their eyes from what was going on in their desperate wish to believe that Zimbabwe was an African success story. The same sort of people are doing the same thing with South Africa.

Bijilo123

Blair, Clinton, Bush, Thatchet, Putin, Smith (Ian) to name some others.

Pablo

I will read this as ironic, which I assume you intended.

Bijilo123

No- you would be misinterpreting me if you did - and by the way - I don't support ethnic cleansing, it happens in spite of me, in spite of the UN and in spite of former colonial masters!

Chango

You all have covered more ground on this subject in a few days than a UN select comittee would cover in a year; all this without the coke and the prostitutes.

Of course there is the odd mad elucubration of someone lumping a Blair with a Mugabe (may his name be blotted out), but there is also the real promulgation of understanding of the reality on the ground in Africa as well as the reality of life thereafter. I cannot emphasize how much of a learning experience this has been for me; I've been reading online about the anglo-boer conflicts in the region, american public opinion at the time etc....

Tiger, Pablo, Daxk, Teg to name only a few, are weaving for us a historic and contemporary tableau on the canvas of their deeply and generously shared personal experiences.

TigerOC

Stanley your diatribe reminds me of the annoying habit that a 3 years old has when you explain something to them and they answer; "Why?" and carry on doing it until you want to hit them in pure exasperation. Not that I am saying you are that immature. You must have some kind of short circuit between your eyes and your cerebral cortex to not understand. I will put it simply so perhaps you can understand.

Britain unlawfully invaded the Boer Republics, stripped the people of everything they had and then continued to suppress them (sound familiar). In the 1940's the rise of intelligent, aggressive and belligerent leaders led to a rise in Afrikaaner Nationalism and the winning of the election in 1946. They implement affirmative action in favour of previously disadvantaged Afrikaans folk.
1994 ANC come to power via the same process and implement affirmative action in favour of previously disadvantaged Black folk.

Do you see any pattern here. It relates to whose in power and what they can do with that power. If you still do not understand then I suggest seeking more professional help


Absolutely, because the detention and abuse of hostages (particularly women, children and elderly) by Warring powers has been taboo since the Roman days. No one has accepted this kind of behaviour for 2000 years and it was considered a War Crime.

Daxk

Going back to Uncle Bob and why he waited 15 years.
The White Farmers were producing income,creating employment.
He was losing credibility and popularity with his " Voters",if I recall and I have'nt researched this, there was a sudden turnaround where he became belligerent.
everything he has done since then has been to curry favour, the "War" Vets, the farms, the shops and businesses, he's been dishing them out.
I'm sure that Zanu-PF still think he is Father Christmas.
And like Idi Amin Dada, he will be around for a long time till Nature takes its Course at which point the Army and Police who are propping him up will take over.

elfman

Daxk

Yes ,Elfman, well may you blink.
The vengeful Afrikaners did'nt allow any English speaking or English Born to work except in menial training positions with a ceiling on their promotion.

Their Children were limited in terms of access to University education.
All British named towns were immediately renamed with Afrikaans names

No English speaking Company was allowed to tender for Government work unless 51% of their Shareholders or 49% of their workforce and management were Afrikaans speaking.

As regards History, Afrikaans achievements were highlighted,especially those Brave boers who had fought against British invasion, Hitler, who had enjoyed support from aFreedom Fighter Organisation was portrayed as a misunderstood man.

Is that what they did??

What they did do, my friend, was realise that the English controlled the Banks, Mines and commerce.
As the British Empire had ,as it had done in its other Colonies (Ireland and India) had subjugated and limited education for Afrikaners, Black and Indian populations.
They took what they had and took the jobs the English speaking did not want.
they became the Clerks, the porters,the train Drivers, the municipalities and eventually,The English made the money, but what enforced the laws, transported the goods, approved the building plans, all the minutae, was Afrikaans speaking.

The difference between the two, is one built up, the other, current, is merely destroying without any thought for the future.

Bijilo123

..but in some respects it was a success if you consider the only parameter to be avoiding it becoming a Russian State as with Moz and Angola - and that was uppermost in some minds at the time.