Yet another example of the insidious lack of humanity and lack of respect for human rights in Zimbabwe.
Freedom of Speech is denied in Zimbabwe.
Insulting Mugabe is actually quite difficult in practise, since it’s all true.
One wonders if Mugabe would view any compliment to him as an insult – so ingrained is his inhumanity and odious nature.
I couldn’t agree more. It’s Mugabe who is the insult to people for not allowing them basic human rights and free speech.
Congratulations Aiden, you just exercised your freedom of speech as an anti-gay militant.
Grow up, man up and get a life!
Go away you silly little man.
Was your door knocked down just now by police arresting you? Was your house sprayed with hate slogans just now? Were you just kicked in the legs as you walk past quietly? Were you spat on? Were you told you were going to hell? Were you called militant for asking for the same rights as everyone else? No? Ah, it’s ok then, calm down son, you still have freedom of speech.
Stop trivialising a serious issue with your hysterical trolling, Aiden.
Mugabe is a living insult to humanity.
Mass-murders, mass-expulsions and displacements of large numbers of Zimbabweans, expulsion of white farmers, a ruined economy and a devastated country that engaged in anti-white racism of the worst kind? Don’t ask, don’t tell. Overall lawlessness and a despot who lives in splendour.
Since independence in 1980, Zimbabwe has gone from success story to basket case – becoming the world’s worst-performing economy in 2004.
Zimbabwe, one of southern Africa’s most prosperous countries, held great promise. Its Victoria Falls was one of the seven natural wonders of the world. Its gushing Zambezi River boasted wildlife and pulsing rapids. Its lush soil was the envy of a continent. And, though landlocked, the country had modernized sensibly: it had a network of paved roads, four airports, and, thanks to Mugabe’s leadership, a rigorous and inclusive education system. Mugabe knew that whites drove the economy, and he was pragmatic. “Good old Bob,” as white farmers quickly came to call him, kept
his shoes and socks on, and urged reconciliation: “An evil remains an evil whether practiced by white against black or black against white,” he said on the eve of independence. In a cordial meeting with Smith, Mugabe acknowledged that he had inherited the “jewel of Africa,” and he vowed to keep it that way.
How could the breadbasket of Africa have deteriorated so quickly into the continent’s basket case? The answer is Robert Mugabe who by his actions has compiled something of a “how-to” manual for national destruction. Although many of his methods have been applied elsewhere, taken as a whole his ten-step approach is more radical and more comprehensive than that of other despots. The Zimbabwe case offers some important insights. It illustrates the prime importance of accountability as an antidote to idiocy and excess. It highlights the lasting effects of decolonization—limited Western influence on the continent and a reluctance by African leaders to criticize their own. And it offers
a warning about how much damage one man can do, very quickly.
So what was/is Mugabe’s ten point plan?
1. Destroy the engine of productivity
2. Bury the truth
3. Crush dissent
4. Legislate the impossible
5. Teach hate
6. Scare of foreigners
7. Invade a neighbour
8. Ignore a deadly enemy
9. Commit genocide
10. Blame someone else (the imperialists usually!)
If he hangs on, and if other African leaders don’t force him out, Zimbabwe may go in one of two directions. Its destitute citizens might be so preoccupied with finding food and staying alive that they will increasingly tune politics out. Over time their memory of—and sense of entitlement to—a better life will give way, and they will docilely submit to authorities whose power will only increase as the crisis deepens. Or the country’s appalling conditions might stir a domestic revolution, a fourth chimurenga, which will bring down Mugabe and his ruling party.
The stakes are not small. Mugabe is one of the last surviving members of a
club of African big men—a club that included the likes of Mobutu Sese Seko, of Zaire, and Daniel Arap Moi, of Kenya. These men led necessary and bold opposition to colonial rule, but then grew addicted to power and its opulent trappings. They began to see themselves less as rulers of their lands than as owners. As their support waned, the big men acted in ways that big men so often do, following a manual very much like Mugabe’s—profiteering, stealing elections, torturing opponents, alienating professionals and foreigners, and ignoring the needs of their impoverished citizens.
Because Zimbabwe had so much going for it, and because the country has come apart at such a frighteningly brisk pace, one can see the continent’s worst tendencies in microcosm.
Zimbabwe shows just how hard it is to destroy a place completely. Mugabe has done virtually everything conceivable to ruin his country, but one finds signs of a redoubtable spirit everywhere. Graffiti has sprung up at city bus stops,
reading, “Zvakwana!,” or “It’s enough!” Despite arrest and torture, opposition activists remain brazen in their dissent. Zimbabwe has been the continent’s latest example of how not to govern. But the mounting severity of Mugabe’s crackdown is a testament to his frustration with the resilience of civil society, which simply refuses to go away. If Mugabe were to give up power, Zimbabweans insist, the country would quickly show how liberated citizens can mend a shattered land. The effect, they say, could be contagious.
The longer that the international community ignore the plight of all minorities in Zimbabwe (white, gay or otherwise), all who seek democracy in Zimbabwe and all who seek to drive the nation to economic success – to see it become a bread basket again instead of a basket case – then the longer that the indoctrination of the hatred, lies and deceit Mugabe has used will become real and true to many. Zimbabwe is a failed state demonised by a hating leader that acts selfishly
Elaine, you reminded me of all the good in Zimbabwe that this man has destroyed, my parents had friends in Bulawayo and we visited them there in 1976, yes sanctions had bittern deeply but the general population seemed happy. always wondered what happened to the egg farm, if it went on or stopped
I used to live in Gaborone and regularly go to Bulawayo and Harare for business.
I used to love my visits to Zimbabwe. Oh, don’t misunderstand me – it was not perfect, and there was good reason for Smith to be overthrown – but the rape of the Zimbabwean economy, the hatred in the teaching from the state education system, the anti-white apartheid that Mugabe enforced and the inhumanity of his policies including genocide, torture and preventing free speech and justice are crimes against humanity and make me very sad when I think of how good the former (although imperfect) Zimbabwe was.
hehehe, he claims to have a “human conscience” this from an animal guilty of murdering anyone who opposes him. really, This idiot need to be removed from office soon, he has already destroyed Zimbabwe
It sounds like a dictatorship
It is a dictatorship. Has been for years.
I never normally wish ill of others but the sooner this man is six feet under then hopefully the better Zimbabwe will be and can then become the beautiful country it once was!
These actions are the actions of a dictator and not a democratically elected president. Mugabe would not know democracy if it sat on his face and wriggled. He is an evil, evil man with blood on his hands.
If ever a human being deserved to be insulted it’s Mugabe. The man is a violent thug, one who acts like a spoiled toddler when he doesn’t get his own way. He has destroyed Zimbabwe. Ridicule is the only sensible reaction any other human can have towards him.
And I can’t understand why Zuma doesn’t just send in the far superior South African military and stop this once and for all. The Zanu PF types cluster around Mugabe because they perceive themselves sheltered by his strength. In the face of real opposition rather than people to physically assault they would run like the cowards they truly are.
Yep and this is the man the UN made ambassador on Tourism?!
Could they have picked a worse human being? Probably but this is the worst of the worst bunch!
Looks like he wants to take over the WORLD now!
Dear Mr. Mugabe,
You are an ugly, half-witted, bellicose, bigoted bell-end. I would wish you a painful, lingering death however your swift demise would bring joy to your people much sooner, so I’ll hope for that.
This is disgraceful.. and a law that makes it illegal to insult or undermine…. what planet do these bigots live on? This is backward politics of the Stalin era!!
How can anyone win with laws like those. Just pathetic. It’s clearly that Mugabe and his party intend to stop any Rights and progression of humanity in their own country.
I thought it was EVERYONES DUTY to insult the tyrant dictator, who is but an Baboons ass.
Sorry that’s insulting the Babboon !
I wonder what parts of their minds the police have to shut off in order to carry out these orders…
They don’t have any minds to shut off, they are sheep following the instructions of Mugabe
There is no insult strong enough for this thuggish douchebag.
I find it repugnant to my human conscience that such an immoral and repulsive individual as Mugabe, who offends all morality espoused by our society, should still remain in power (which he presumably only manages to do because of his enormous stolen wealth).
Life expectancy in Zimbabwe under President Robert Mugabe fell from 62 years in 1990 to 36 in 2006. And, as described in a recent report by Physicians for Human Rights, this man-made catastrophe has only gotten worse in the last two years. To end their agony, Zimbabweans need new leadership.
But even if Mugabe cedes power after 28 years, the international community will still confront a haunting question: How can Mugabe and his henchmen be held accountable for the catastrophe they created?
This question was broached in a preface to a report signed by Desmond Tutu, South Africa’s retired archbishop; Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; and Richard Goldstone, former UN chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. They cite “growing evidence that Robert Mugabe and his regime may well be guilty of crimes against humanity.” And they call for urgent intervention by
Zimbabwe’s neighbours and all UN member states to prevent more deaths.
Physicians for Human Rights sent a delegation to Zimbabwe in 2009. The team found that the Mugabe regime destroyed the country’s healthcare system and pursued policies that ruined what had been a vibrant agriculture, depriving all but a tiny elite of proper nutrition, water, and a sustainable livelihood. One result has been a cholera epidemic and the spread of other diseases.
The rights group is calling for the UN to pass a resolution instructing the International Criminal Court in the Hague to investigate Mugabe and his cronies. The group argues that Mugabe’s depredations meet the requirements for an ICC prosecution for crimes against humanity.
The need for judgment is the same as it has always been: to prevent the next despotic regime from doing to another people what Mugabe has done in Zimbabwe. At present, comparable crimes are being committed by the genocidal regime in Sudan. The best hope to save lifes in
Darfur may be to make an example of Mugabe.
Making an example of Mugabe will not occur whilst the UN, neighbouring states and other international bodies remain impotent to act on human rights breaches and crimes against humanity such as those exposed in this story.
The people of Zimbabwe have suffered too much. Their suffering needs to be stopped. The only way to stop it is for the international community to hold Mugabe to account. But this is not just about preventing the heinous acts of Mugabe and protecting the Zimbabweans – it is also about discouraging other despots.
THE unprecedented economic meltdown coupled with gross violation of human rights in Zimbabwe merit the prosecution and punishment of Robert Mugabe.
After clinging to power for nearly three decades, Mugabe has made sure that he wholly paralyses the economy of a country once regarded as the brightest beacon of hope in southern Africa.
Today, Zimbabwe has been relegated to a begging bowl of southern Africa and according to latest World Bank figures, Zimbabweans now have the shortest life-span the world over. This is not political rhetoric but a product of a reliable scientific measurement.
The country is deep in poverty, and Mugabe is responsible for the severe deprivation of human basic needs, including food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. This is the exact and universally agreed definition of absolute poverty — a condition which is more prevalent in Zimbabwe today.
Mugabe is prosecutable and chargeable with systematic violations of economic, social and cultural rights which rise to the level of serious crime under international law as understood by the Princeton Principles of Universal Jurisdiction, interpreted in light of Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
With half of Zimbabwe’s population facing grinding poverty and millions more having emigrated to other countries where some live miserably as illegal immigrants, just eke out a decent living, the systematic character of the violation of economic, social and cultural rights by Mugabe’s regime have assumed a genocidal dimension.
How Mugabe created poverty in Zimbabwe is perhaps the simplest question that does not need academic research.
Mugabe is responsible for political repression, killing and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction in whole or in part, first for the vulnerable group, the Ndebeles and then
Whites and then everyone.
This is against the background that we now live in a globalised village – what a political leader says or does in Harare makes a chain reaction all the way to Washington DC. It’s the New World Order and it’s unchangeable.
One might want to know, as human memory is very short, who are the actual victims of Mugabe’s murderous regime, the answer is first they were the Ndebeles.then Whites..later everyone. Mugabe has always assumed that Ndebeles were by definition enemies and opponents of his regime. Remember, there was a time in the late 1980s when Mugabe tried to establish a one party state in Zimbabwe. He saw Ndebeles as a hindrance to his plans of a one-party state, hence he attempted to exterminate them.
This “genocide” was both ideological and national in character, for in effect, it sought to annihilate an entire political spectrum from Zimbabwe’s public life by persecuting elite members of the Ndebele society.
There is no doubt that Mugabe’s regime
should be held accountable for the unprecedented levels of poverty, or what we would call social genocide. In my view, his crime stems from a deliberate reduction of the living standards of the country’s poorest and working people, because of intentionally redistributing wealth upwards and reconcentrating wealth among his cronies. Using this theory of social genocides, one can authoritatively conclude that Mugabe’s enemies (and victims) are the majority of Zimbabweans.
In addition, Mugabe’s regime can be pursued under the 1986 Limburg Principles on the Implementation of the International Covenant on Economics, Social, and cultural Rights, echoed in part in the language quoted above from 1993 Vienna Declaration, the 1997 Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the evolving General Comments of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the findings of Special Rapporteurs on related topics. Such principles, guidelines and comments
are all essential elements of the emerging normative framework of international poverty law.
In the Maastricht Guidelines (1997), this emphasis is further elaborated: “It is now undisputed that all human rights are indivisible, interdependent and interrelated. Therefore, states are as responsible for violations of economic, social, and cultural rights as they are for violations of civil and political rights.
Violations of the Covenant occur when a state fails to satisfy what the committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has referred to as a minimum core obligation to ensure the satisfaction of, at the very least, minimum essential levels of each of the rights, thus a state Party in which any significant number of individuals is deprived of essential foodstuffs, of essential primary health care, of basic shelter and housing, or of the most basic forms of education, is pram facie, violating the Covenant.
What is more depressing is that even if Mugabe goes today, his legacy
will continue to haunt Zimbabwe for many years to come. It manifests itself plainly in the form of hostility between Zimbabwe’s two major tribes, Shona and Ndebele.
Because of Mugabe’s earlier preachings of tribalism, Zimbabwe is today a more divided country than it was before independence in April 1980. This is evidenced by the fact that when one visits football grounds, internet chart rooms and so forth, there is a lot of tribal slurs going on.
These are some of the behavioural attitudes which our society has unwittingly inherited from Mugabe’s quarrelsome brand of politics. Remember if Mugabe had not resorted to planting seeds of tribalism he would have lost the 1980 elections to Joshua Nkomo.
From independence, Mugabe’s vampiric government lacked particularly a basic attribute of all laws, and that is the simple ability to provide rational guidance for exemplary conduct. For Zimbabwe to flourish and move on as an egalitarian society we need our version of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission whose major task would be to investigate the Mugabe regime crimes in order to reconcile and unite a deeply divided society.
What is more glaring is the deliberate inequality Mugabe tried to create between Ndebele and Shona – today Harare and Mashonaland are regarded by an average person from Matabeleland as upper class and privileged against the background of numerous skyscrapers and glassy buildings in Harare and well-constructed roads while Bulawayo is still reeling from medieval buildings put up by the Smith regime in the 1970s.
Perhaps leading British social scientist Prof Peter Townsend’s definition of absolute poverty gives us a better insight of what is happening in Zimbabwe today. Prof Townsend argues in his celebrated work on poverty that individuals, families and groups in the population can be said to be in poverty when they lack the resources to obtain the types of diet, participate in the activities and have the living conditions and amenities
which are customary, or at least widely encouraged or approved, in the society to which they belong to.
According to the Bulawayo City Council, in the first six months of 2003, up 67 people died in the city as a result of malnutrition. The figure included both children and adults.
Zimbabweans lack many more necessities that are needed for a human being to properly function and participate in his society. Individuals or families whose resources are so small as to exclude them from the minimum acceptable way of life are said to be living in poverty. In the study of poverty and inequality we find that both financial exclusion and debt are associated with low income. Moreover, debt is strongly associated with a range of psychiatric problems.
Mugabe’s laws are a deliberate ploy to bring down Matabeleland – salaries are higher in Harare even if people are doing the same job with same qualifications and working for the same company. What seems to be a problem is to be based in Matabeleland
And more daring was the fact that in the 1990′s, the Chronicle newspaper earned more revenue for Zimpapers, but still Herald employees in Harare were paid far much higher than Chronicle workers.
Firebrand politician Welshman Mabhena is reported to have once told a journalist from The Chronicle that Mugabe has a secret agenda to destroy the Ndebele as a society. Mabhena said Mugabe blames Ndebeles for his miserable, fatherless childhood.
Mabhena said Mugabe’s father walked out on the family and left his wife to fend for the off-springs to live with a beautiful woman in Bulawayo’s Makokoba suburb, identified as MaTshuma, and has never forgiven the Ndebele for his miserable upbringing. According to Mabhena, Mugabe achieved revenge for his troubled childhood by sending the 5 Brigade to kill the Ndebeles.
Remember, when Mugabe appeared on television in the mid-1980s, he deliberately twisted his tongue, coming up with a horrible accent in an attempt to say a Ndebele word. He was in a
deliberate contempt of the Ndebele language. However, Mabhena argues that Mugabe can speak in Ndebele fluently as the two were teachers at Hope Fountain on the outskirts of Bulawayo – implying what Mugabe intended to demonise the Ndebele language and its values, hence no Shona child would envy to speak a demonised language.
Reporters who listened to Mugabe’s speech on the funeral of Joshua Nkomo in Bulawayo’s Ascot stadium, revealed that, on this day he spoke fluent Ndebele without even fumbling. One such reporter commented at the time “Mr President you have finally invoked your Hope Fountain Primary School days”.
The same reporter went on to say “What I found more interesting is when I visited South Africa recently, I found out that in every street there is a Zimbabwean who happens to be Shona and they all speak in Zulu which is close to Ndebele. The excuse we were given by our fellow employees at Chronicle was that Ndebele was such a difficult language to learn as it involved
learning to pronounce cliques omankankane or uxakuxaku. As a head of state Mugabe’s hatred of the Ndebele people was never a secret which penetrated deep into the social fabric of society. Even children in Matabeleland know that Mugabe hates Ndebeles so is vice versa in Mashonaland.”
Unfortunately, such a behavioural attitude is contagious even among the unborn generation. There is alarming hostility among the two tribes, this hostility turns out to be Mugabe’s strength. For example, consider what happened in the run up to the division of the opposition MDC. Under normal circumstances, and in a proper democratic institution, Tsvangirai should have been ostracised for what he did. He called in for a vote and when he lost that vote he decided to use brute force, so what is the difference between Tsvangirai and Mugabe?
When some dissenting voices queried and tried to bring in sanity in the name of democracy, they were simply labelled “dissident Ndebeles”, because of that label very
few Shona people would support the rebelling Ndebeles.
Mugabe who has presided over the world’s fastest shrinking economy, thereby, condemning the entire population to poverty is guilty of social genocidal crimes and crimes against humanity which should be prosecutable at the international court of tribunal.
To start with, designing and legislating brainless policies which result in mass poverty is a crime on its own. Apart from the 20 000 Ndebele speaking people of Matabeleland who were massacred by Mugabe’s Fifth Brigade, estimates say up to 10 000 people from Matabeleland disappeared and had not been accounted for to date.
Murderous state-sponsored hit squads have been in existence at least since the independence of Zimbabwe in April 1980 and are widely acknowledged to have stirred up much dissident activity in Matabeleland in order to justify the killing of civilians in the region.
There is a school of thought which says the six European tourists killed at Esigodini area
allegedly by the dissidents were in fact murdered by Mugabe’s murderous hit squads in order to justify the deployment of the Fifth Brigade.
There is no doubt that Mugabe and his government are guilty of crimes against humanity. To some extent, crimes against humanity overlap with genocide and war crimes.
But crimes against humanity are distinguishable from genocide in that they do not require an intent to “destroy in whole or in part” as cited in the Genocide Convention of 1948, but only target a given group and carry out a policy of widespread or systematic violations. Crimes against humanity apply in the context of war and in times of peace as well.
The good thing about it is that no one is immune to prosecution for crimes against humanity – this applies to those who acted on behalf of the state and even the head of the state himself is not immune.
The Geneva Convention, states that if the head of state sends an army to a troubled area or province, and that army happen to
target civilians, the head of state is guilty of war crimes. The Convention goes on to state that, under such circumstances it is the duty of any nation or anyone else to prosecute or the International Criminal Court has a right to indict the head of state with his accomplices.
What makes the Zimbabwe situation more needy is the gruesome killings of people of Matabeleland especially in Tsholotsho, Lupane and Gwanda.
The sorry state of the Zimbabwe’s economy here does not need us to consult a rocket scientist or a Professor of economics. Even a young school boy would tell you that Mugabe and his gangsters have messed up, and the destruction of our economy was long expected.
Much of Mugabe’s legislations are so capricious in their drafting as well as in their application. Above all, the whole battery of laws makes political dissent a crime. The normal functions of a responsible citizenry becomes the business of the country’s jailers. Mugabe’s government has increasingly conferred
forms of lawless discretion on his functionaries in the civil service, the police and the military. The deployment of the state’s resources to inflict random terror and assassination on the state’s own citizens.
Poverty levels are unprecedented and Mugabe, like a woman in a polygamous relationship, keeps on churning abuse at the US and UK leaders – guess what, they don’t reply back they just shut up.
When a BBC reporter confronted Tony Blair in 2002 at the height of bloody farm invasions, and asked him why he was not engaging Mr Mugabe in talks Mr Blair simply said: “I will not sit in a round table conference with a leader guilty of mass murder. In fact, I will do everything for him to go.”
Blair and the whole international community could have and his followers can go a step further than just pushing for Mugabe’s exit. He should be brought to account for his murderous reign and sermons of hatred that have divided the once beautiful nation of Zimbabwe.
I find it…… repugnant to my human conscience that such an immoral and repulsive person is still in power. If he is ever kicked out of power, we should drag him to the world court to have him answer to those freaking crimes that he commit whilst he is in power.
How is it possible so many STUPID people can be all in the same country Zimbabwe…Is it the drinking water??
The major stupidity is the dictatorship and inhumanity of Mugabe and his manipulation of power and corruption to maintain power and suppress those who either oppose him or who he hates.
As expected, this thread has denigrated into a anti Mugabe slanging match. How about a thought to the brave gay activists who are fighting for justice in the face of oppression that none of you can imagine?
I don’t know anything about them.
I wish I did because they are very brave.
I do know about Mugabe.
I can only realistically comment on things I am aware of.
If you can educate me (and maybe others) about the heroic nature of the LGBT activists in Zimbabwe – I would love to hear.
Unsurprising your level is Mugabe.
If your fictitious party were ever to sniff at power (more likely to lose any election deposits!) then you would cause the same economic collpase, genocide and crimes against humanity that Mugabe has in Africa.
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to share your thoughts with us, Aiden.
What do you think Mugabe would think of you?
The bloody idiot…
I wonder if his own bodyguards or military will man up and remove him so they will be heroes to Africa and the world for removing a tyrant. Egypt’s military removed a tyrant – which provides a great example for Zim’s military.
Poor Robert is a tender flower easily hurt and fragile. He must ne protected from any slight comment that might upset him. He is known for his great tenderness and humility. The problems within Zimbabwe are all the fault of other people. This man can do no wrong.