Obama's Hypocritical Response Regarding the DRC

Dear Friend: Thank you for writing.  I have heard from many Americans concerned about human rights issues, and I appreciate your perspective. As a free people, we stated our convictions long ago.  We believe that each of us is created equal with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  And for more than two centuries, we have fought to extend that fundamental promise of fairness and opportunity to all our citizens. Many countries have made that same commitment.  Nations around the world have pledged themselves to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, recognizing the inherent dignity and rights of all members of our human family. But even now, we know our journey is not yet finished.  Too many people still labor in the darkness of tyranny and oppression.  In too many parts of the world, fundamental freedoms remain unrealized, and the protections of law extend only to a privileged few.  Our values call upon us to care about those who are denied the chance to build a decent life for themselves and their families, no matter where they live.  They call upon us to embrace the common endeavor of all humanity. I believe that work begins with the example we set here at home.  We know from our own history that intolerance breeds injustice, whether it is based on race or religion, gender or sexual orientation.  We understand that we are stronger when all our people are granted opportunity, and when our wives and our daughters have the same opportunities as our husbands and our sons. But our commitment to expanding opportunity cannot stop at our shores.  Standing up for peace and justice means extending a hand to those who reach for freedom around the world.  It means supporting Afghans as they take responsibility for their future, and people across the Middle East and North Africa as they keep reaching for their rights.  It means working for an Israeli-Palestinian peace, no matter how difficult it may be.  It means engaging in places like Burma, where brave people are stepping forward to play a role in determining their country’s political future. These are moral obligations, just like our moral obligation to help lift impoverished corners of the world.  We promote growth, education, agriculture, and public health.  These efforts are about more than charity.  They are about new models of empowering people by building institutions and abandoning the rot of corruption, and creating ties of trade.  Because when developing nations succeed in offering all their people the opportunity to start a business, educate their children, and improve their standard of living, America will be more successful as well. Yet none of us can be truly prosperous when unspeakable violence continues to rob men, women, and children of the chance to live in dignity with basic rights.  My Administration puts preventing genocide and other mass atrocities at the forefront of America’s foreign policy, and we are bringing every tool to bear in this critical fight.  And while we know too well the challenges that remain in places like Sudan, we also know that our efforts have saved lives in places like Libya and Burma, and areas of Central Africa affected by the Lord’s Resistance Army.  In Syria, we continue to stand with those seeking a free, inclusive, and democratic future.  We are helping lay the groundwork to hold the perpetrators of atrocities accountable while providing support to those who work for the common good of all Syrians. Upholding our commitment to universal human rights also means combatting human trafficking, whether it occurs halfway around the world or here within our borders.  The United States will continue to lead in this fight.  We will keep giving countries incentives to meet their responsibilities, supporting those that pass and enforce anti-trafficking laws and calling out the worst abusers.  We will keep working to put traffickers behind bars and dismantle their networks.  And we will keep making sure investigators, law enforcement, and advocates have the resources they need to take meaningful, effective action.  Together with nations worldwide, we must speak with one voice:  our people and our children are not for sale. No country can claim immunity from human rights abuses, or from the responsibility to confront them.  By embracing that responsibility, we will help prevent mass atrocities, replace tyranny with good governance, and enlist free nations in common cause.  To learn more about my Administration’s human rights agenda, visitwww.HumanRights.gov. Thank you, again, for writing. Sincerely, Barack Obama

Information Sources on The DRC and Rwanda

Mapping Report:

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO, 1993–2003

Report of the Mapping Exercise documenting the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo between March 1993 and June 2003

August 2010

Group of Experts Report to the United Nations (Linking M23 to Rwandan Government)

Interview with Steve Hege (of the Group of Experts - UN)

Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa's Confession that Paul Kagame show down President Habyarimana's Airplane Sparking the 1994 Rwandan Genocide

Friends of the Congo - Advocacy for the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The Case Against Rwanda's Paul Kagame

Why Tony Blair Loves Kagame - It's all about the Money

GUEST BLOG - Never-ending Reichstag fires in Fascist Rwanda

Never-ending Reichstag fires in Fascist Rwanda

BY- The Communist Party of Rwanda

In the run up to the sham parliamentary elections in Rwanda, Paul Kagame has once again used his infamous abominable Reichstag Fire tactic against the Rwandan people. With the aim of creating an atmosphere of fear within the Rwandan populace, grenade attacks here have developed a predictable pattern and show the complete disregard and disdain Kagame and his lumpenbourgeosie cabal have for the common Rwandan.

Kigali’s security grid is one of the most rigid in the entire world. It is impossible for anyone to be able to carry firearms, grenades, explosives or weapons of any kind and use them without the prior knowledge of the security apparatus. Even smuggling or peddling a few pounds of marijuana in and around Kigali is a near impossible feat and yet somehow RPF wants the world to believe the FDLR, the opposition or dissenters continuously use grenades within open areas like Kigali market places where surveillance is round the clock. The latest grenade attacks were simultaneous adding more to the absurdity of RPF’s claim that the government itself is not responsible.

On the international front, these attacks play into the narrative of the FDLR bogeyman used by Kagame as a pretext for maintaining a police state inside Rwanda while locally they serve as a sadistic reminder to the population that Kagame has the life of every single Rwandan in the palm of his hand. But these recent attacks were also a knee jerk reaction by RPF to what they saw as a rare moment of resistance from a completely fearful and subjugated populace.

Our clandestine party cells had attempted and managed to get as many people as possible to try and avoid participating in the sham elections and the campaigns leading up to them as much as possible. A recent RPF rally in Musanze district did not happen as embarrassingly no one showed up. The people of the area bravely avoided attending and the rally was cancelled two days in a row. On the third day, the police rounded up 30 young men for no reason and held them for four days. Nonetheless, a small step in terms of standing up to State intimidation had been made. The recent grenade attacks were the culmination of the tactics RPF immediately employed to counter what it perceived as any form of resistance from the population as had been demonstrated in Musanze district.

ARRESTS MADE AFTER EVERY BLAST

As for the innocent people usually arrested after the blasts, they always end up at Kami military camp that hosts the most barbaric of torture chambers where they are forced to make false confessions. Many are usually youths already at odds with the law for minor offenses having previously come under scrutiny and surveillance from both local defense militias and Rwandan police. Their movements and connections known beforehand.

The Kami military camp and it’s torture complex are under the direct command of the Ministry of Defense. All surveillance is precided over by this same ministry. The late General Gapfizi who “accidentally” died in a road accident in June this year had been accused of blackmail by officers based in Kami camp. As an opportunist and careerist, it would not have been the first time Gapfizi had used blackmail within officer circles but it was the first time it was against influential Kami based officers. It also happened after grenade blasts earlier this year. His long connections with Kagame might have spared him direct repercussions but if what he was blackmailing them following the grenade attacks earlier this year had in fact something to do with those same attacks, his borrowed time seems to have been put to a halt in the “accident” where the only person who had witnessed it, Ambrose Agaba, has emerged as non-existent.

These non-stop grenade attacks which for Kagame and his cohorts are mere grass-trampling come at a heavy price to the Rwandan psyche. The notion that any day, at any moment, the State which is above you, governs you, watches you, can snuff out your life has slowly taken it’s toll on common Rwandans who are overwhelmed with fear and a sense of complete helplessness. It’s a psychological intimidation tactic that is forcefully forced into the Rwandan subconscious that Kagame and his cabal have complete god-like control and we Rwandans as a completely subjugated people better know what’s best for us.

The stance in Musanze has however not gone unnoticed. The grenade attacks might have Rwandans shaken for the moment but the small act of resistance is still spreading by word of mouth and Rwanda has only so many hills before many know. We might be rattled for now but we made two steps forward. May those who have lost their lives so far rest in peace. A luta continua.

Source: http://communistpartyofrwanda.tumblr.com/

Analysis of "The Global Elite's Favorite Strongman"

September 4, 2013, The New York Times published This Article by Jeffrey Gettleman entitled “The Global Elite’s Strongman.”  The article was based upon Gettleman’s 3 hour personal interview with Rwandan President Paul Kagame.

Gettleman’s article has caused much controversy among the refugee community as well as the journalist community.  Refugees feel that he did not give an accurate portrayal of Kagame’s barbarism while some other journalists feel that they could have written this article (and some have said they have written similar articles of the same or better quality) using the same sources with or without personally interviewing Kagame.  My goal is to analyze Gettleman’s article to check the validity of these claims.

Gettleman’s article begins by a superficial praise of the outward visual beauty of Kigali, Rwanda. There has never been any doubt about this image. The question that Gettleman fails to ask is, “what is this image hiding?” When he brings up the fact that there are no homeless people, and that the homeless are dealt with by being sent to a detention center in the middle of Lake Kivu (nicknamed “Hawaii” by Rwandan officials – “Alcatraz” by some Kigali citizens), Gettleman fails to ask about this detention center or the human rights issues involved. What happens in this center? When did poverty become illegal? Is Kagame’s image more important than the suffering of his people? We will never know – at least not from Gettleman.

He then praises Rwanda’s safety in contrast to the Genocide of 1994. Obviously, Rwanda is safer than it was in those horrific days. Gettleman overtly posts blame solely upon the Hutus against the Tutsis – a narrative fully supported and made the law by Kagame. To claim otherwise is a crime in Rwanda. To claim that Tutsis were in anyway responsible for any part of the Genocide is “Genocide Denial” or “Genocide Ideology.” Both are punishable by long prison sentences. Gettleman fails to look into the credible claims of Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa that it was Paul Kagame himself who ordered the shooting of the president’s plane that was the tipping point starting the genocide. He fails to look at the claims that Kagame told his Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) armies that all Tutsis were out of the towns they were invading and it would be only Hutus that they would be killing – therefore, unknowing to RPF soldiers, they would also be killing Tutsis. To be clear, no one denies that Hutus killed Tutsis. No one denies there was a Hutu Power movement. But the Genocide conditions were much more complex than a simple narrative can explain. There simply are no clean hands as far as “groups” go when it comes to the 94 Genocide. Gettleman does not consider this.

President Paul Kagame

Gettleman then goes as far as to call Kagame a “godsend” while calling other African leaders disparaging names: “Megalomaniac” (Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe), “Feckless” (Joseph Kabila of the Democratic Republic of the Congo – who Gettleman also accuses of playing video games all day while his nation falls apart). Gettleman then names Kagame’s powerful backers including Bill Clinton and Bill Gates while calling Kagame “stoic,” and “Spartan.”

Gettleman then touts Kagame’s success in raising Rwanda from the ashes of the 94 Genocide, and then brings up his harsh and possible criminal methods (FINALLY!). He says that Kagame has a reputation for being “merciless and brutal,” and describes his documented crimes of supporting the M23 militia in the DRC (though he makes no mention of Kagame’s 19 years of incursions into the DRC costing over 6 million lives). Immediately, however, Gettleman dismisses these claims as “at least what a growing number of critics say…”  He then explains Western support of Kagame. The West, Gettleman says, according to a diplomat working in Rwanda, is rarely concerned with actual humanitarian rights, but with results. Kagame delivered those results of stable leadership and delivering results. What are those results? Gettleman did not say. Why doesn’t the West care about supporting a war criminal? Gettleman did not ask.

Gettleman does not cite other examples of Western Imperialism. He says that the West has supported dictators in other parts of the world, but to the uninformed reader or to the young reader who may not know about the “darker side” of Western history, Gettleman offers no help. Of course, no single article can give every piece of information. That could possibly be Gettleman’s reason for not citing examples. So, rather than criticizing him on this point, I would rather just suggest that readers find examples of Western Imperialism propping up dictators in violation of fair and free elections in other nations. (NOTE: Kagame technically has been elected. Whether these elections are “fair and free” is a matter for debate).

Gettlemen then describes his meeting of Kagame. He gives a brief but important biography of Mr. Kagame from his days as a refugee to soldier to president. He describes that according to Rwandan Law, the president is limited to 2 terms, and Kagame is in his 2^nd term, but it appears that he will not be giving up power at the end of this term. Rather than exploring this possible power grab, Gettleman moves on. If a 3^rd term only affected Rwanda, this could be understood, but a 3^rd term affects the entire Great Lakes Region of Africa and it also affects International Politics. Kagame’s interventions via the illegal militia M23 as documented by the UN Group of Experts in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) holds the lives of millions at bay. His blatant disregard for international law and the International Community’s ignoring of this affects the peace of the region.

Without a doubt, as Gettleman describes, Kagame has made great strides as President of Rwanda. Women are becoming more and more educated. Technology is developing. The economy is growing. Gettleman fails to count the cost of this growth. What human rights have been violated to accomplish these growths? I cannot say. Why are Rwandans afraid to speak openly (as cited by Gettleman)?

Gettleman praises Kagame for being a “hands on” leader. This does appear to be positive until one reads into the article. Kagame does not tolerate corruption – good thing. This, however, can lead to paranoia (For an account of this, read Healing a Nation: Waging and Winning a Peaceful Revolution to Unite and Heal a Broken Rwanda, by Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa). Kagame is involved in almost all levels of governance of Rwanda. He has his regional leaders set goals and they are held accountable to those goals.

Gettleman then talks about some methods Kagame uses to handle dissent, however he does not ask Kagame any questions about these methods. He uses the example of human rights activist, Rene Claudel Mugenzi who is in the United Kingdom. According to Scotland Yard, they had reliable intelligence that Rwanda had a “hit squad” in the UK to kill Mugenzi. Another example is Kayumba Nyamwasa. He was shot in South Africa and blames this shooting on a Rwandan “hit squad.” Kagame denies all of this. Gettleman does not press him on these issues.

In fact, Gettleman dismissed these claims by calling Kagame “geeky” and it being hard to imagine that he would have anything to do with this. According to Kagame, people like Nyamwasa and Mugenzi are “thieves” who believe that “in Africa, nothing good happens and every leader is a dictator…” 

Gettleman then describes how Kagame handles staff with whom Kagame is not pleased. He will call them into his office, summon some guards, and have these staff members thrashed with sticks. Kagame did not deny this. Instead, he said that he does have a tendency to be “tough.” --- A World Leader “spanking” staff members is tough?

In a very short part of the article, Gettleman does acknowledge Kagame’s human rights abuses including the massacre of Hutu families in the Congo jungles. He acknowledges that there is severe repression inside of Rwanda, but then quickly turns to noting Western Guilt for not helping at the time of the Rwandan Genocide of 1994. He seems to be saying that Westerners should be afraid to even speak of Rwanda because of the West’s horrific mistakes of the past.

Disturbingly, when Gettleman talked to Western Diplomats, he exposed their racist tendencies by their holding low expectations for Africans. The diplomats, by and large, believe there should be more Kagames, because he provides stability. He is a constant in a region of change. His human rights record means little because he is a constant to these diplomats.

The best way that Getleman could conclude this article was by quoting Kagame in saying, “God created me in a very strange way.” If “a very strange way” means murderous, brutal, and invasive into other sovereign nations, then, yes – God did create Kagame in a very strange way.

Getleman’s article is a disappointment for anyone hoping that he would expose something of significance. Reporters such as Ann Garison and Jennifer Fierberg have been doing such work for years and have uncovered much more without access to Kagame. One would expect a publication such as the New York Times to provide a more in depth and truthful article. Instead, they portrayed Kagame as a regular human being. While Kagame is human, he is also a world leader who is held to a higher standard as are all world leaders. Yes, all humans make mistakes, but world leaders can and should be open to public criticism and praise for their actions.  Gettleman ultimately failed in providing the information needed in that regard.

Why I Fight this Battle

Recently, friends, family members, and readers of my blog have asked me why I write about the Great Lakes Region of Africa - more specifically Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The people who know me know that I have no direct connections to that area. I've never visited the area. Writing on such issues has caused me quite a bit of grief. So, hopefully, this will answer some questions. I will attempt to answer it in an FAQ "self-interview" format.

I did not make this map - But it shows the distance from the USA to Rwanda

What got you started in DRC/Rwanda issues?: Initially, I only knew about the 94 Genocide on a very superficial basis. I had just turned 16 and was working to get my driver's license. I know about the genocide, but I could not carry on any sort of conversation other than saying that it happened.

A few years ago, my wife and I made friends with a couple from a different African country who had come to America. They came early in their marriage as an adventure out of wanderlust. While here, they found good jobs and stayed. We were new to the town where they lived, and they were the first couple to reach out to us. They had children who were our son's age, and we immediately became close friends. 

I didn't want to be THAT friend who was always asking about their culture - I do have a fascination with other cultures and learning about how other people live their everyday lives. I'm also a language nerd - So, I knew I had a strong chance of becoming annoying and doing so very fast. Rather than constantly bothering them about the history of their home country and culture, I went to the local library and read as much as I could. American small-town libraries have very limited sections on Africa. What they do have, usually centers around the Rwandan Genocide. So, I began reading about that. 

Of course, victors write the history books. So, I felt I knew the true narrative. I watched "Hotel Rwanda," and was deeply disturbed by the horrors. I honestly didn't know what to make of it.  A few years later, I felt the call to ministry, and in a seminary orientation meeting, I met a person from Rwanda who would later become like a brother to me. We didn't talk about any issues that day, but eventually we would. 

Several months passed, and he shared that he was a survivor of the Genocide and he shared his story. His story did not quite match what I read in the books. In his story, Paul Kagame was not a hero - he was also guilty - maybe even more guilty. I didn't believe my friend at first. Then I researched on my own - I found the UN Mapping report as well as documents from Amnesty International and Human Rights watch. I also found testimonies from journalists and other survivors that matched his story. All of these unconnected people could not by lying. I knew they had to be telling the truth.

Describe your first issue of activism: William Penn University was hosting Paul Kagame as their commencement speaker in May 2012. Knowing only the bare minimum, I wrote a letter to the university suggesting that a Quaker (a Christian Peace Denomination) should reconsider having someone with such a record as their speaker and reconsider awarding him an honorary doctorate.

My letter somehow was leaked to a "Rwandan Intimidation Team." My e mail was flooded within a matter of hours. I received veiled threats. I had my address and other personal details e mailed to me. I was accused of Genocide Ideology. I found this to be a harsh response to a suggestion.

My letter was printed in International News Sources on the internet. Horrible things were said about me and my character. 

Months later, I found out that the Vice President of William Penn University is in the process of building a University in Rwanda, and he also owns a mineral trading company that deals in the Great Lakes Region. About a year later I would find out that Kagame's incursions are to get access to the mineral rich DRC. You can make whatever conclusions you want here. I am just stating the facts. Just for the record, I am not making any accusations.

Why did you continue this activism: As a Christian Pastor, I believe it is every Christian's duty to stand up for the truth. Doing so is not always comfortable. We are also called to be peacemakers. My advocacy is for peace in the region. Despite what my critics say, I have NEVER called for any violent overthrows of any government. Despite the 6 million + people that Kagame has killed, I have never called for his death. Yes, that would be an "easy" solution, but that would not be the Christian solution. The Christian solution is to stand in solidarity with his victims and say that enough is enough. It's time to call attention to his crimes and make the world aware. Hopefully, through God's power he will repent. If not, he will be judged. Judgement is not my job. 

I also continue because of the millions of innocent people who just want to live their lives, go to work, go to school, rest, grow gardens, have dinner, raise families, go to church, and do the things that I take for granted. They cannot because they constantly live in fear of militia troops under the orders of Kagame's government constantly invading their towns and cities. Hundreds of thousands of Congolese are currently displaced from their homes. They live in refugee camps, in the wild, they wander.  They have no stable food sources. They have no stable water sources. Why? Because politicians refuse to leave their greedy desires alone. Instead they victimize innocent people to achieve their fruitless ends. Yes, they "win" a city. But then a stronger group comes along and they lose that city. The cycle continues. It is for these innocent people who do not want this war that I continue.

Who are the politicians that are causing the issues? First and foremost, we need to remember that in the conflicts in the DRC area, there is not "good" vs. "bad." For the most part, there is "bad" vs. "worse."  The "good" are the innocent victims who suffer and are injured and killed everyday.

The first and most obvious cause of the problems is Paul Kagame President of Rwanda. Kagame is a narcissist who only is concerned with his own power. He claims he saved Rwanda from the Genocide, but all evidence points otherwise. Kagame sparked the Genocide and then continued it by slaughtering entire refugee camps in pursuit of those who killed Tutsis when he invaded the DRC after the 94 Genocide. He not only slaughtered the killers, but he slaughtered innocent men, women, and children. Of course he will deny this - what politician wouldn't? But the UN Mapping Report says otherwise. His defected members of his government say otherwise. 

Joseph Kabila is the President of the DRC. He is at best, an ineffective leader. At worst, he is a puppet of Paul Kagame. It is an open secret that Kagame through his Military leader James Kabarebe had Kabila's father, then President Laurent Kabila murdered.  Joseph Kabila was brought out of school to become then the youngest president in the world. He holds virtually no leadership skills. Is this because he has no skills? Or is this because he answers to Kagame? This is where the jury is out.

James Kabarebe is Rwanda's Minister of Defense. Essentially, he is Kagame's military might. Kabarebe is also a politician and quite a good one at that. Rwandan politicians are quite active on Twitter. When Kabarebe discovered my blog, he personally ordered me to "cease any discussion of Rwanda," as if I were one of his military subordinates. Yes, it was actually Kabarebe communicating with me. I had that confirmed from sources I have within Rwanda. He knows how to dodge questions, avoid questions, and he knows how to attempt to intimidate opposition.

Oliver Nduhungirehe is a Rwandan Diplomat a the United Nations. He is not the main Ambassador, but he is the public face of the Diplomatic team. In "internet terms," Oliver is a "troll." He spends hours policing Twitter and starting arguments and harassing dissenters. He makes veiled threats to the safety of others, though he is smart enough to keep it as an undercover threat that could be taken as something else. ****(See Bottom For a Correction of this statement)****For example, when he was "tweeting" back and forth to a Rwandan exile in England, Oliver told the man in exile to go back into hiding before someone got him. Of course, this was after the man explained why he couldn't return to Rwanda for those fears. Oliver also is good a diverting the conversation from the issues at hand to a minor detail someone may have gotten wrong. A journalist could have written an entire article but got a date wrong, and he will argue the date rather than the content of the article. Oliver is one of the few Hutus in Kagame's Tutsi Government. Whether he realizes it or not, Oliver is in the Government for show. He is there to be a puppet of the regime. He is there to show that Kagame is "inclusive" - something everyone knows he is not.

M23 is the militia that has invaded the DRC from Rwanda. Essentially, there is no difference between the Rwandan army and M23.  The Group of Experts of the UN have issued 2 reports on this militia. Kagame and his government continually deny sponsoring M23. The United States and United Kingdom refuse to acknowledge Rwanda by name when mentioning M23. They mention "regional support for illegal militias." M23 is not, as they say, a liberation movement. M23 is not doing the will of the people. M23 is a bringer of war and destruction. M23 is terrorizing the people of the DRC. If they were truly liberators, why would they bring war to the very people they are trying to save?

FARDC is the Congolese army. They are notoriously undisciplined and highly underpaid. They receive very little support from Kabila's Government. While one would think they are defending the people of the DRC, at times, they too go on looting and violent sprees where they massacre and rape their own people. Currently, they are allied with MONUSCO.

MONUSCO - is the UN Brigade in the DRC. At first it was a peacekeeping force. In November 2012, this peacekeeping brigade failed miserably as M23 took over the DRC city of Goma while MONUSCO sat back and watched. Now, MONUSCO is actively engaged with FARDC in a military battle against M23. 

CLARIFICATION - M23, FARDC, and MONUSCO alternate between active battles and returning to the negotiation table quite often. It is a daily task just to keep up with what is happening.

Why don't you focus on issues in your own country? - This is a question I get asked the most. The only answer I can give is this: What you read on my blog is just a snapshot of my life. This blog is NOT the entire story of my life. For this particular issue, I've found that this is the best outlet. For other issues, I have different platforms. Often the people asking this question have a hidden agenda to tell me to stay out of this issue. I can't, and I won't.  My answer is that it is no one's business what other issues I tackle and how I tackle them. As Jesus said, we are not to boast of our spiritual practices. I believe that activism is a spiritual practice. Whether or not I directly mention God, God is always the subject.  God is the reason I do what I do. I'm not going to brag about the things I do. Yes, this issue is public, but it is the only way I've found that works and reaches the people that it needs to reach. Do I work on other issues? Yes! What are they? If you know me, you'll find out. If you don't know me, you don't have to worry about it. 

There are conflicts and wars in many places - Why this one? I ask myself the same question. I can't explain the exact reasoning. I guess it's a "God thing." I also know that other wars are in the public's attention so much that they don't need more activists. When is the last time you read about the Congo on the front page of ANY (non-African) newspaper?  More people have been killed here than in Syria - where the US Government is currently considering bombing. Why does the US consider humanitarian bombing (Yes, that is one of the most stupid terms I've ever heard) in Syria, but completely ignore Congo? The people of Congo deserve advocates! They need to be empowered to speak for themselves! They need to be heard. No one has listened for the past 19 years. When will someone listen? That is why I write on this issue.

But your narrative doesn't match up with the narrative I heard - Most people heard this - The genocide started in 1994. Kagame came in and saved the nation. He went into Congo to get the perpetrators of the genocide, and by chance, as in all wars, some innocent people were killed. He has modernized Rwanda and he is a stable and benevolent leader.  

That narrative is from Kagame. Remember - Victors write the history books! Ask Victore Ingabire if Kagame is telling the truth...Oh, wait...you can't...she's in jail in horrible conditions because she said Hutus were also killed in the genocide and should be acknowledged.  Ask Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa. He was Kagame's Chief-of-Staff. He is now in exile for fear of his life. He admitted that Kagame shot down the former president's plane that sparked the genocide. He admitted Kagame's crimes in the Congo. Ask Kagame's former body guard who fled for his life. He was put in a witness protection program. This program was breached by Rwandan intelligence. He was captured and kidnapped. Thanks to Ugandan police, he was saved.  Ask those who work for Kagame. If they don't meet his standards, he calls them into his office and beats them with a stick. You don't need to re-read that - he's admitted to it in an interview to the New York Times. Ask the people of Rwanda who are afraid to speak. They feel they are constantly monitored wherever they go. They never know if they are being spied upon. 

Is that a benevolent president? Does a benevolent president kill 6 million Congolese? 

So what should happen? I've been very clear - I do NOT call for violence. We have too much of that right now! First of all, any foreign aid to Kagame's government should be stopped. That will paralyze him. That will cause his people to demand a leader who can lead without causing so much fear. Then there should be free elections. Despite what Kagame says, Rwanda does not have to fear another Genocide. The only reason there is fear is because Kagame promotes it and suppresses it. Hutus and Tutsis are not enemies. They can get along. They have for hundreds of years. Kagame has artificially caused division and fear. The people need to realize there is no reason to fear. A real leader can show them that.

Correction: The above statement in blue as it turns out is not

 completely accurate. I apologize to all parties involved! Oliver

 DID NOT tell the person to go back into hiding (who is NOT in

 exile) before someone got him. After being told that time is

running out for the murderous RPF Regime, Oliver's Direct Quote

 in a Veiled threat stated in a Twitter Exchange on June 29, 2013: 

"Time is running out for who? For our leaders,

implementing policies for our people, or for a guy locked up

in a London flat?" 

Bombing for Peace is Like Screaming for Silence

As I write this on September 4, 2013, the US is considering strikes against the Syrian regime for their use of chemical weapons against civilians.

OK, There's another title of this article I wanted to use - One that was used in the Hippie era. It started "Bombing for peace is like..." However, it would be quite inappropriate for me to finish that quote. There are, however many search engines on the internet if you do not know the quote. Let me warn you, the original quote contains foul language...VERY foul language.  Don't say I didn't warn you!

Let me begin by saying that I absolutely condemn the use of chemical weapons. I don't care who uses them. There is no excuse to poison anyone! There is no excuse to deliver a weapon that kills people by poisoning the very air they breathe. There is no excuse to cause people to die from causing their own body to destroy itself.

However, the use of chemical weapons does not validate the use of conventional weapons either. Both are equally damaging. Many of us have at least seen news footage of scenes from inside hospitals where those wounded by conventional weapons suffer and eventually die. Many of the wounded who do not die are afflicted with life altering disabilities for the rest of their lives.  These weapons do not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. The same can be said about chemical weapons.

Why members of the US Government think that an attack against Syria will solve this problem, I can't answer. But, this I can answer. It won't solve the problem! It will only create more problems.

Maybe an attack will stop the further use of chemical weapons, but it will not stop the killing of civilians in conventional weapon attacks. In fact, I would be willing to bet that any attack from the US Military will include civilian casualties - the very "noble" thing our government says we are fighting. Of course, the government will call those injuries and deaths "collateral damage." Why? Because it sounds better! 20 dead civilians sounds barbaric.  Some collateral damage doesn't sound bad at all.

We need to tune our ears into the vocabulary of war. Collateral Damage = People.

Senator John McCain and President Barack Obama are hellbent on heavy strikes against Syria and then giving assistance to the rebels.  In essence, they are FOR the continuation of this war. They are FOR more civilian deaths. Also, given the fact that we are dealing with an Authoritarian regime, and that no one knows the scope of the rebel regimes (yes, I said regimes - there are MANY - some estimate dozens while others estimate thousands), we don't know if the combatants are there by their will or by force.  Maybe the combatants are as innocent as the civilians. In fact, I would go as far to say that all soldiers - even those who enter any conflict willingly are innocent - at least to a point when taking another life becomes "just another day's work."

So, who are we helping? Who are we hurting? What are we perpetuating?  This war will not end soon. Even with our limited strikes, this war will not end soon. There is a very good chance that if the rebel groups win, they will then fight amongst themselves for power, thus creating more chaos and destruction.

America needs to pay attention.  Just a few weeks ago, we had no money. Our economy was in the tank. We were going bankrupt and on the verge of a zombie apocalypse. Now, we have millions to spend on "targeted strikes" and providing aid to rebels we do not know?  Of course, I hate to take an isolationist view or a "me first" view of the world.  I am merely pointing out the inconsistency of our government actions. We will leave millions homeless so that others can kill across the world? Our own veterans have to fight for their basic rights to get a job and healthcare? Our educational system is destroyed because some legislators believe that only a few elite should be completely educated while we placate the rest by a minimal education? But we can afford someone else's war?

If America really cares, why not take this course of action? We have military ships in the area.  Why not send in Red Cross and other willing humanitarian sources. Why not get the wounded civilians and bring them to a port and put them on these military ships? Then we can give them the medical care they need.  Why not go to the refugee camps and instead of letting these people live in squalor, let's feed them a balanced diet. Let's give them real shelter instead of just make-shift tents. Let's provide actual security at the refugee camps.  While all this is going on, let's send our diplomats and Secretary of State and President to actually talk to the warring factions of Syria. Let's see if we can get them to talk. Of course this will be a long and arduous process, but so will watching them kill each other.

People will say my plan is not viable and it is too expensive. I'm not an economist, and I'm not a military expert, but I would be willing to "bet the farm" that my plan is much cheaper than sending missiles into Syria. It will cost less lives, and it will boost America's global image. Most importantly, it will affirm the sanctity of human life!