First Mugabe, now Charles Taylor: Who's next?
Ytzhak | 23.06.2003 02:33 | Anti-militarism | Repression | Social Struggles
U.S. intelligence (CIA), British intelligence (MI6), Israeli intelligence (Mossad) and even Russian intelligence (FSB, formerly KGB) operatives are busy in regions throughout the world fomenting dissatisfaction among the people, in order to create confusion that will lead to the overthrow of government to be replaced by leaders who do the bidding of their paymasters.
First Mugabe, now Charles Taylor: Who's next?
(FinalCall.com)--Africa is the world's future. Whoever controls her resources controls the world.
Today, Africa is in a state of chaos, with numerous civil wars being fought—brother against brother—all in the name of determining who will control Africa.
On the surface, it may appear that the young men in these militias and rebel movements are fighting against established governments in their country because
the rebels want to overthrow the leaders of the government—whether that government is good or corrupt.
But when we look deeper, we are likely to find that many conflicts in Africa—as well as other developing countries that have something of value to the world
powers—are fueled by outside interests.
U.S. intelligence (CIA), British intelligence (MI6), Israeli intelligence (Mossad) and even Russian intelligence (FSB, formerly KGB) operatives are busy in
regions throughout the world fomenting dissatisfaction among the people, in order to create confusion that will lead to the overthrow of government to be
replaced by leaders who do the bidding of their paymasters.
President Bush has openly discussed fomenting revolution in such places as Cuba, Iraq and Iran, in order to destabilize those governments to make these
countries accessible by U.S. corporations and interests—regardless to what the people want.
It goes without saying that Africa is viewed the same way.
It is a fact that if the American government stopped financing, arming and supporting some rebel movements, stability would come to those regions and
government could go about its business of providing for the people.
But quite frankly, the United States—despite its rhetoric about giving aid to developing countries, donating billions of dollars to fight AIDS, etc.,—is not
interested in seeing a viable, strong and United Africa. Just as they are not interested in seeing a united, strong Black America. If they were interested, it would
be so. The question is, are we (Black people) interested in seeing this?
We know that historically the U.S. government has always had a "denial objective" of Black leadership as part of its policy. That's why Elijah, Martin,
Malcolm, Garvey, Farrakhan and even W.E.B. have been maligned and slandered by the media. They became too powerful. But too powerful for what? To
liberate the minds of Black people and get them to think beyond the training received from their oppressors!
The U.S. government has even formulated official policy to deny Black Africa and liberation movements in this country from uniting. [See web link below.]
Why?
That brings us to Liberian President Charles Taylor and President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.
Why would the UN issue an arrest warrant for Pres. Taylor while he was sitting in Ghana at the table discussing peace with rebels in his country? Western
governments say Taylor is wanted for war crimes and keeping the region unstable. Who's to say it is not international meddlers, like the United States and
Britain, that are behind the destabilization? Most governments would respond to threats from within or without. Then the international—western
dominated—press defines the good guys and the bad guys. And their definitions always serve their own interests.
In Zimbabwe, the people responded to more than 20 years of injustice and broken promises by the U.S. and Britain by taking back farm land gained at
independence that had been owned by Whites since the days they stole it from Blacks. If these promises had been kept, then stability would rule in Zimbabwe
today. But when you read about the problems in Zimbabwe, there is little or no mention of the decades of servitude of Blacks to White conquerors, or how
the land was not cultivated to serve the domestic needs, but for export and to serve international capitals.
What we are witnessing, and will continue to witness, is the U.S./British formula for attacking leaders that they want to get rid of: First, vilify them in the
media; foment an opposition in the country; demonize them for responding to the opposition; separate them from their base of support; and last, overthrow or
assassinate them.
It has happened in Iraq, they're doing it in Palestine, while still working on Cuba, and looking toward Iran. Heavy emphasis on Africa is shortly to come.
Oil, diamonds, mineral riches. These are the things wars are fought over. In the eyes of the ruling powers today, these are the things that Black people must
not benefit from, that are right under their feet.
We fight one another and displace our own leadership to the delight of the enemies of our own rise.
Suggested link:
National Security Memorandum-46 (Black Africa and the U.S. Black Movement)
http://www.finalcall.com/MEMORANDUM-46.htm
www.finalcall.com/MEMORANDUM-46.htm
(FinalCall.com)--Africa is the world's future. Whoever controls her resources controls the world.
Today, Africa is in a state of chaos, with numerous civil wars being fought—brother against brother—all in the name of determining who will control Africa.
On the surface, it may appear that the young men in these militias and rebel movements are fighting against established governments in their country because
the rebels want to overthrow the leaders of the government—whether that government is good or corrupt.
But when we look deeper, we are likely to find that many conflicts in Africa—as well as other developing countries that have something of value to the world
powers—are fueled by outside interests.
U.S. intelligence (CIA), British intelligence (MI6), Israeli intelligence (Mossad) and even Russian intelligence (FSB, formerly KGB) operatives are busy in
regions throughout the world fomenting dissatisfaction among the people, in order to create confusion that will lead to the overthrow of government to be
replaced by leaders who do the bidding of their paymasters.
President Bush has openly discussed fomenting revolution in such places as Cuba, Iraq and Iran, in order to destabilize those governments to make these
countries accessible by U.S. corporations and interests—regardless to what the people want.
It goes without saying that Africa is viewed the same way.
It is a fact that if the American government stopped financing, arming and supporting some rebel movements, stability would come to those regions and
government could go about its business of providing for the people.
But quite frankly, the United States—despite its rhetoric about giving aid to developing countries, donating billions of dollars to fight AIDS, etc.,—is not
interested in seeing a viable, strong and United Africa. Just as they are not interested in seeing a united, strong Black America. If they were interested, it would
be so. The question is, are we (Black people) interested in seeing this?
We know that historically the U.S. government has always had a "denial objective" of Black leadership as part of its policy. That's why Elijah, Martin,
Malcolm, Garvey, Farrakhan and even W.E.B. have been maligned and slandered by the media. They became too powerful. But too powerful for what? To
liberate the minds of Black people and get them to think beyond the training received from their oppressors!
The U.S. government has even formulated official policy to deny Black Africa and liberation movements in this country from uniting. [See web link below.]
Why?
That brings us to Liberian President Charles Taylor and President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe.
Why would the UN issue an arrest warrant for Pres. Taylor while he was sitting in Ghana at the table discussing peace with rebels in his country? Western
governments say Taylor is wanted for war crimes and keeping the region unstable. Who's to say it is not international meddlers, like the United States and
Britain, that are behind the destabilization? Most governments would respond to threats from within or without. Then the international—western
dominated—press defines the good guys and the bad guys. And their definitions always serve their own interests.
In Zimbabwe, the people responded to more than 20 years of injustice and broken promises by the U.S. and Britain by taking back farm land gained at
independence that had been owned by Whites since the days they stole it from Blacks. If these promises had been kept, then stability would rule in Zimbabwe
today. But when you read about the problems in Zimbabwe, there is little or no mention of the decades of servitude of Blacks to White conquerors, or how
the land was not cultivated to serve the domestic needs, but for export and to serve international capitals.
What we are witnessing, and will continue to witness, is the U.S./British formula for attacking leaders that they want to get rid of: First, vilify them in the
media; foment an opposition in the country; demonize them for responding to the opposition; separate them from their base of support; and last, overthrow or
assassinate them.
It has happened in Iraq, they're doing it in Palestine, while still working on Cuba, and looking toward Iran. Heavy emphasis on Africa is shortly to come.
Oil, diamonds, mineral riches. These are the things wars are fought over. In the eyes of the ruling powers today, these are the things that Black people must
not benefit from, that are right under their feet.
We fight one another and displace our own leadership to the delight of the enemies of our own rise.
Suggested link:
National Security Memorandum-46 (Black Africa and the U.S. Black Movement)
http://www.finalcall.com/MEMORANDUM-46.htm www.finalcall.com/MEMORANDUM-46.htm
Ytzhak
e-mail:
ytzhak@telus.net
Homepage:
http://www.finalcall.com/MEMORANDUM-46.htm
