Wee Dougie Alexander was on the BBC this morning talking about the cholera outbreak in Zimbabwe. He was boasting about the £10m of UK tax-payers money that he has given to various NGO’s and the UN to help bring relief in Zimbabwe. My question is why are we giving so much as one penny to Zimbabwe? The issues that afflict it all have a political origin in the shape of the marxist thug Robert Mugabe and it is for African leaders to deal with this – not British tax-payers. Does the BBC ever provide a platform for those who argue that throwing cash into Zimbabwe is an inappropriate use of our money? Dougie then moved on to discuss ….SHOCK HORROR “reform” of the UN. For a moment I paid attention. Was he going to launch a broadside on the serial and despicable anti-Israeli track record of the discredited UN? Nope. Was he going to tackle the UN’s pathetic failure to agree on a definition, never mind a response, to terrorism? Nope. Perhaps he was going to damn the UN for standing by when genocide occurs as in Rwanda and now Sudan? Nope. Instead wee Dougie was worried that the UN approach to climate change and delivering poverty relief could be less than ideal. Big deal. The BBC and the UN – both beyond criticism. Both beyond parody.
UN NO CHANGE
Bookmark the permalink.
Wasn’t it the socialists who supported Mugabe, and not Nkomo, against Smith ? Now they are still giving him our money, none of which will reach the cholera victims, of course. Incredible that they should still be supporting a Genocidal maniac.
Incredible is the right word!
For more comment on Mugabe, see:
http://thethoughtsoffrit.blogspot.com/2008/06/great-zimbabwe.html
Israel is the one issue the UN gets right???
Neo-con Trot go home.
There was a two pronged attack on S.Rhodesia by terrorists; from Mugabe (Chinese communist backed) and Nkomo from the other side, both rivals. Hence Mugabe is still friends with the Chinese.
Rhodesia was the bread basket of Africa. But S.Rhodesia had to suffer from sanctions imposed by Britain as they had ‘insolently’ declared UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) with white people ruling without waiting for independence to be organised by Britain like was done for N.Rhodesia (Zambia).
My parents were working in Zambia at the time when I was a child. I remember singing the new national anthem: Stand and sing for Zambia, proud and free etc.
A white Methodist minister tried to become part of the new government in Zambia, but the blacks were having none of it. So black rule only in N.Rhodesia was ok by Britain, but white rule in S.Rhodesia was definitely a big no no. One of the first things the new government did in Zambia was to get a fleet of new Mercedes.
Eventually Ian Smith had to agree to a one man one vote election in S.Rhodesia, and a moderate black man called Bishop Muzurewu won. But he was not acceptable to Lord Carrington and the Tory government, so they declared the elections null and void and had a second lot of elections. This time the correct candidate won (Robert Mugabe) and so the election was declared free and fair. And instead of sanctions imposed on S.Rhodesia, ever since we have been sending them money.
I remember Claire Short being asked in an interview a few years ago why the UK did not ensure that foreign aid to Africa was not monitored more closely to make sure it was spent on food and wells etc rather than being handed over to the governments as cash. She said that would be patronising.
Ian Smith’s memoirs are called ‘The Great Betrayal’
Wee Dougie- beyond parody
Mr Vance, did you just declare that African problems ought to be solved by African leaders, and then condemn the UN for not getting involved in two recent African problems?
You obviously missed the bit when Evan Davis asked the secretary of state: “Why on earth do we pay the UN $1bn a year, then?”
Oh, because mentioning that would in some way portray BBC News as reasonable, and we couldn’t have that…
Grant – “Wasn’t it the socialists who supported Mugabe?”
Here’s what Benn said at the time of Mugabe’s election:
‘Robert Mugabe has won the Rhodesian elections outright. It is a fantastic victory and I can’t remember anything that has given me so much pleasure for a long time. When I think of the systematic distortion of the British press, it’s an absolute disgrace. The Tories must be furious.’
Says it all, doesn’t it?
Not one peep of anger or snort of derision from the British left or their guardian, the BBC, even as from back as the early 1970s, when Mugabe said: “The only true democracy is a one party state”.
Caveman – the Mercedes in Zambia are nothing compared to Uganda.
There was a Panorama programme recently about aid to Uganda and Sierra Leone. The reporter (a black man) stood in the midde of the Ministry of Health car park in Uganda. There were 1800 4x4s but only four ambulances.
Tommo 11:43
I seem to remember when Smith ( quite rightly) declared UDI, Jeremy Thorpe wanted the RAF to bomb Rhodesia ! You couldn’t make it up !
As Grant says above, the socialists supported Mugabe in the main, but it was on Mrs Thatcher’s watch that Ian Smith’s government ended. Lord Carrinton went to S.Rhodesia for the kill and insisted on fresh elections when Mugabe didn’t win first time.
Caveman 12:07
But Carrington is a socialist ! Having said that, Maggie should have reined him in.
IPreferred,
If the UN cannot deal with the massacre of almost 1m people, it has entirely failed in its stated aims and should be iced.
BJ,
I did hear Evan Davies ask that. I also heard no follow through, it was perfunctory, not substantive. Davies is by no means the worst of the BBC trolls but he is still on-message.
Grant – probably not a series of events Mrs Thatcher was proud of.
Once she said how few real supporters she had in her cabinet
I hope TPO will not mind me quoting his comments from a few days ago:
TPO:
‘….he describes how Harold Wilson arranged for Ian Smith to meet him in a British warship and he was hoping to intimidate Ian Smith. But when they walked in where all the British military were, everyone stood up and gave Ian Smith a standing ovation.’
caveman | 02.12.08 – 11:27 am |
I was in the RAF at the time and many of my colleagues went to N.Rhodesia, or Zambia as it came to be known, as part of that communist stooge Wilson’s phoney war against Ian Smith.
What we knew, but was never reported, was that all of the UK service personnel out there threatened to mutiny if they were ordered to fire on Rhodesians.
The RAF warplanes were based near Lusaka. By a strange quirk of Air Traffic Control division, every time they took off and reached 1000ft they were handed over to the ATC based in Salisbury (now Harare).
Brit armed forces engaged in hostilities with Rhodesia was out of the question.
Oh, and don’t forget, all current UK service personnel despise the BBC.
TPO | 02.12.08 – 3:53 pm | #
Thatcher did to Rhodesia what de Gaulle did to Algeria and what Blair/Brown is now doing to us.
Just when are the liberal elite going to apologise for the evil regimes they have foisted on other peoples? As well as Rhodesia one should not forget the fate of Iran. Amnesty International was a great supporter of the Ayatolla Khomeini, who BTW had an 11 year old wife, but seems reluctant to criticise the regime he founded. A regime which is about to institute the death penalty for any man who, born into a Moslem family, wishes to leave that so-tolerant religion.
Question: how depraved does a regime which is a friend of the left have to be before the left starts to feel a bit embarrassed?
Answer: Mugabe’s regime. And it took some doing to get a few tut tuts out of them.
I wonder if their best friend, S Africa, is heading the same way.
in SA a black individual can put a claim on a white business or farm which means the owner can’t get credit from the banks and can potentially go bust. Allegedly there was a move from the ANC to nationalise all the major businesses in Joburg which has led to quite a sense of trepidation there.
Message to any character who used to spend all their time protesting against S.Rhodesia or S.Africa previous regimes, eg sitting outside embassies, student protests etc – why have you stopped? Can you no longer see anything which offends you?
frankos: What a disgrace and what a way to run a country when the consequences are so obvious. I suppose one day even the richest inhabitants like Princess Diana’s brother Earl Spencer will have to leave.
“Bob Bobson:
Message to any character who used to spend all their time protesting against S.Rhodesia or S.Africa previous regimes, eg sitting outside embassies, student protests etc – why have you stopped?”
Well they needed something to do before Daddy’s contacts landed them a high paid non-job at the BBC.
In all parts of the world the liberals decide there are races who have a natural right to land according to their racial characteristics. To find out who has the rights, you have to go back in time. The time you go back varies.
Maori New Zealand – 1000 years.
Quote from Victoria Woods on BBC History Channel to a Maori ‘Why were you unsuccessful in repelling the invaders?’ referring to white people.
Result: it belongs to the Maori
Israel:- 100 years or 1600 years, but not 50 years or 2000 years or 1000 years
Result: it belongs to the muslims
Africa: 200 years.
Also applies to parts of Africa which were uninhabited when whites arrived -the blacks own those parts also. Result: it belongs to the blacks
Britain – not applicable as ‘we have always been a country of immigrants’ as I keep hearing on the BBC. Just look at any old footage of crowds from the 60s or look at old school photographs and you will see all sorts of different nationalities – not.
Result: Belongs to all races. Nobody can complain as we have laws to deal with anyone who says anthing racist – and remember it is official that if it is perceived as racist, it is. That is how the police have been told to act when a complaint is made.
Just to clarify – I’m not saying other races cannot come to the UK, I’m just pointing out that it’s ok to kick white people or Jews out of certain countries but not the other way round
Especially to Allan@Olso but also generally…if Labour try to surrender the loyal citizens of Gibraltar to Spain then I’ll be standing on the front line.
Nothing even close to Israel, Rhodesia and a hundred other examples of conflict, famine, death and misery compare, but in my small way I’ll stand firm on my border.
Democracy and the rule of law must always be our watchwords and that’s where the BBC let us down in their disgraceful reporting.
There seems to be some kind of rule that if the ancestors of certain races stepped foot on a continent first, it belongs to that racial group forever more, and they cannot be criticised even if they require 10 square miles each for their nomadic lifestyle, or if they want to cut down all the trees or turn it into desert or kill all the wild game. Even those parts of the continent which have always been uninhabited by the respected racial groups still belong to those groups.
It is like a game of tig, where you tig a continent, but white people’s tigs don’t count.
This certainly seems to apply to the Red Indians (Native Americans) Eskimos (Innuit) Aboriginies and Africans. But in that context, thinking about a person’s race rather than thinking of them as an individual is not being racist, rather it is being positively discriminatory or something worthy like that.
But if you thought about a British person in terms of their race, rather than thinking of them as an individual, you could be arrested by the police for enticement to racial hatred.
A very serious matter coming to light at Guido’s site. Naturally, the BBC and Peston will be highlighting this alarming move by Brown. Surely Dave’s Cons will oppose this?
I can’t stop laughing. The leftist media is doing its nut over Zimbabwe and the Congo. Yet they can’t actually offer any solutions.
Why should we get involved? C**ts like Galloway are always telling the UK & USA to mind their own business, so we are.
Fuck em all, let god sort them out.
Whilst on the subject of Zimbabwe, Brown has decided to use Mugabenomics as his new means of trashing our currency. Courtesy of Guido Fawkes.
While I agree that aid (our taxes)has been wasted and may even have held the African continent back, and patronising blacks in Africa and allowing dictators like Mugabe is disastrous, these are ordinary people suffering a recent calamity not of their making and we must help them.
I also dont agree that only African states can sort out crisises in Africa. Thats like saying only Europeans can help each other in Europe, and for that we get the EU.
America came to our aid after the war,a country from another continent.If we can bypass or topple Mugabe we must help the Zimbabweans to their feet, for humanities sake.
i’d rather we saved the christians in Iraq
>Ian Smith’s memoirs are called ‘The Great Betrayal’
Read this book, it will tell you everything you need to know about Africa, and the Left’s betrayal of Africans.
Original Robin
In my opinion, even some of our government, low as they are, would probably geniunely like to help in Zimbabwe, but China and Russia in the UN keep stopping us by vetoing any UN moves. They object to the notion of looking at other countries’ abuses because they are worried the spotlight might turn on them next. I suppose Mugabe keeps them off the bottom of the list.
It is like watching a mugging and not feeling able to help for fear of repercussions.
It’s just not considered worth the risk of being called colonialist and offending the blacks by walking into one of their countries without taking the precaution of complete agreement by the rest of the world first and going in as a diverse UN group, China and Russia included. You have to try and get the bullies to help in stopping the mugging.
And imagine once we moved in, sorted out elections and then tried to pull out. As we pulled out imagine the accusations – ‘you pulled out too soon you are responsible for not stopping this and that atrocity’. But if we did not pull out immediately -‘You colonial power! Get out of our country’. We could not win whatever we did. And then at the end of it – would there be a ‘thank you’ or would we be treated as an invader like in Iraq? And think of propping them up for the next ten years building bridges and wells and keeping them apart from each other like in Iraq whilst treading on eggshells trying not to be racist.
It’s equivalent to the police marching into a mosque and arresting a mullah and taking his computer (like they did to D Green) – it just cannot be done.
brilliant, only blog on the internet that tells it how it is.
Mike Icecream | 05.12.08 – 6:33 pm | #
A few hundred years back, at Uni, I wrote a piece entitled ‘My great, great, great… great Grandad was a Roman comfort boy’, and how I was determined to claim compo from Italy for ‘hurt’ imposed in a convenient part of my history.
The Student Union didn’t see the joke, or point, and banned me.
I guess it’s tricky to assess a limit for ‘modern’ times, but reach back far enough and you can claim anything.
As a rule of thumb, I’d say if it’s more or less working for the majority population now*, and has done for a fair while, the global community should really not tolerate any minority efforts to upset things* based on selective historical claims, especially when what exists is clearly not going to go back to what ‘was’.
It would be interesting to see what exceptions might be suggested to mess up such a ‘guide’. Despite distance and the frustration of the main country bodies nearby, I think such as Gibraltar and The Falklands bear this out.
The only one I can think of right now that was contrary to the will of the people was Hong Kong in 1997, but that was just honouring a deal. It also seemed/s to have worked better than most.
The tricky one is when a big country has ‘stepped in’ recently for less than obvious positive reasons to the locals, such as in Tibet.
*I’d exclude genocide as in large chunks of Africa, as anyway by definition the minority are not usually the ones stirring things up. Hence a vast complication to the naive simplicity of my notion (and an explanation for why the world suffers the turmoils it does) as hands get wrung over intervening or not, and letting nature take its course vs. intervening, with all that entails.
I, for one, am quite pleased the US decided to pop over to assist with the last bit of bother we had with some EU members.
So you’re saying you’re not a fan of Dougie Alexander or the UN? Interesting. But what’s this got to do with the BBC again?
Peter – how ridiculous student unions make themselves look when they ‘ban things’ as if they are important people, and although it was a long time ago I am sure they are the same today.
Interesting point about compensation from Italy.
Boba Fett: Because the BBC has its penis so far up Mugabe’s backside it would make Mandelson jealous.
When a vile left wing twat slaughters his people the BBC are silent.
Billy Hippo,
I agree with your analysis.
I would still like to get aid to the people, I just hope later it can be done if the Zimbabwaens ask for it voluntarily.
The worst thing that ever happened to Africa is “help”. Since the fatuous father of waster Peaches Geldof started “Band-aid” and “Feed the World” generations have grown up trying to stop nature find the balance between people and resources. First starvation, then AIDS. The 922 million people of Africa need to “sort themselves out” and our aid puts off them day thay start to do that.
Nigeria has the worlds largest known reserves of oil. It could be the Saudi Arabia of Africa, and instead its main export is laughable emails asking for your bank details.The only thing Africa seems good at is making more Africans.
Gordon’s pissing away taxpayers money to grandstand on “saving” Zimbabwe. Help Zimbabwe? No. Its long overdue time for them to help themselves.
Nigeria is the twelfth largest producer of oil, and yet the average income is $1 dollar a day.
The corruption is so immense that up to them the Arab leaders seem quite fair-mided people.
I used to work in the UK for an oil company operating in Africa, and other employees told me that you had to pay bribes all over the place to get anything done.
The British, however, and this is going back some time, could write a cheque and it would be accepted as payment, because the Africans could trust them. We sent all our best people out, not reps from the underclass.
Ian Smith did not steal millions from S.Rhodesia like so many black rulers do. The economy in Switzerland is boosted by African leaders depositing millions and then dying.
Sir Francis Younghusband worked for the Britich Army in India and Tibet 100 years ago and when he needed horses and supplies he was able to get them using an I.O.U. written on a piece of paper.
Being honourable and fair is what Britain made the largest and most successfull empire ever, whereas being corrupt is why Africans live in poverty.
How a country that produced the Empire can be the same country that produced the BBC I do not know. It shows how quickly standards can fall over a hundred years.
By the way, I got an email from Nigeria ordering 100 computers to be delivered to some airport in Nigeria whereupon I would be paid cash on delivery. Who on earth would respond to an email like that? Can anyone seriously imagine getting off the plane with their palette load of valuables and being paid? But they must get people who fall for it or they would not keep sending them.
Nice segue SimonP. Here is where the wealth of Zaire disappeared to.
http://tinyurl.com/6ov7g3
Funny how you never hear a mention of Swiss bank accounts on the subject of Africa’s problems. You’d think the Swiss would be a little more embarrassed, money-laundering for Africa’s crooked leaders. But it seems not.
AndrewSouthLondon: Interesting to see Mobuto’s residence.
Another strange thing – Why do the Arabs and Africans not make a big issue of their countries’ corruption, including the oil wealth being stolen by their rulers? It does not seem to offend them like lots of other issues do.
For example, here is the Arabs’ list of priorities, and protesting at the corruption does not even appear on the list:
1) Top is the possibility of the ‘honour’ of taking over the Jew’s lands.
2) Monitoring other people’s countries to make sure the ‘honour’ of your religion is not insulted eg in Danish cartoons
3) Monitoring the ‘honour’ of your close family and kidnapping your own daughters if required, even if they are 33 years old and a GP
4) Not eating pork and telling your children that pigs are dirty
5) Making sure an animal faces the city where their religious leader was born when it is killed
6) Making sure you end the daily fast during Eid at precisely the right moment eg 7.17pm. (Otherwise you will have to add another day on at the end)
7) Don’t point your front bits, or is it your bum, to Mecca when in the shower -I forget which way round is correct.
8) It is a good thing to fast during Eid, even though you might put on weight overall, by eating a big curry at 4am before the daily fast starts and eating another big meal each evening when it ends for the day (this does not count as cheating).
8) Cut bits off your willies