It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Mugabe Speech At UN Summit Draws Cheers

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Zimbabewean President Robert Mugabe's speech, at a UN summit, has drawn cheers today. The speech blasted Tony Blair and George Bush, describing them as "two unholy men of our millennium, who in the same way as Hitler and Mussolini formed [an] unholy alliance, form an alliance to attack an innocent country". The summit in Rome was for the UN's Food and Agricultural Organisation and was attended by many UN members including the United States who described Mugabe's presence at the summit as "disheartening". Mugabe has long been denounced by Britain and the United States over his policies.
 



news.bbc.co.uk
Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe has drawn applause for a speech denouncing Britain's Tony Blair and US President George Bush at a UN event in Rome.

Mr Mugabe described the leaders as "unholy men" at talks on food policy.

The US accuses Mr Mugabe of starving his people and has said his presence at the food summit is "disheartening".

Mr Mugabe defended his land reforms that have seen thousands of farmers evicted and said rich nations' farm subsidies were "crippling" the poor.

The Rome conference is being held to mark the 60th anniversary of the UN's Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO).

Though officially banned from travelling to EU countries, Mr Mugabe is allowed to visit them when on UN business.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The cat is among the pigeons, I repeat, the cat is among the pigeons. Wow this speech by Mugabe is explosive. Who'd of thought Mugabe had it in him? He must of been taking lessons from Chavez.

I may despise Mugabe with a passion but his message rung true. The alliance between Blair and Bush is evil and it should be stopped. Are we to accept more invasions from these two? Iran and Syria are next and the political maneuvering for those two targets has begun in earnest.


"The voice of Mr Bush and the voice of Mr Blair can't decide who shall rule in Zimbabwe, who shall rule in Africa, who shall rule in Asia, who shall rule in Venezuela, who shall rule in Iran, who shall rule in Iraq," he said.

That is 100% true, we've been deluded into believing we have more say in the way the World runs than other nations. This is pure delusion, we are all equal partners here. Arrogance should not play a part in international relations. Our forefathers fought wars against this kind of behaviour yet our politicians are reviving the same belligerence, and for what purpose? To secure our access to oil fields? Or to prevent terrorism?

The house of cards these two muppets have set up is based on lies and it will eventually come crashing down around them. And the likes of Mugabe and Chavez will be there to laugh it up, unfortunately.

[edit on 17/10/05 by subz]




posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
You make a good point, i can see how people could see us as crusaders.
I wonder what state zimbabwea would be in if we invaded them too.
Like would the country be better off with mugabe, which i strongly would not like to see, or would we see a similar situation as in Iraq.

Should certain Countries police the world as a whole?

Almost going down the NWO route.

If bush and Blair are going about things wrongly, which i do think they are, whom and what should make the differcult decisions that have to be made.??



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Keep it to between you an RObert 'Give me your land so I may starve my people' Mugabe. Unholy doesnot equal evil. What is this? THe 15th century? Hopefully I will not be burnt at the stake today for reading my book by John Wheeler which makesmention that the earth orbits the sun, is not the center of the universe, and states that cosmic rays are protons, electrons, photons and various other particles and not 'God's light'.



The US accuses Mr Mugabe of starving his people and has said his presence at the food summit is "disheartening".


Yes, I agree.

OH, and what does the so called unholy alliance betwen Bush and Blair have to do with Food? Yeah, this is simply incontrovertible evidence of how messed up and worthless the UN is: people applaude a murderous dictator for calling out unholy men who took another murderous dictator out of power while at a Food Summit. Yes, this was a food summit with a man who has slowly starved to death many of his constituents due to his Nazi-like policies of land reform speaking out on a totaly unrelated issue. Thank god for the UN, whatwould we do without it???!!??



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   

This is pure delusion, we are all equal partners here.

Rubbish!

Countries like the United States give more of their peoples' money and technology to these Third World socialist mendicants than anyone else, and we're excoriated for it!

If it were not for the First World countries like the US and the UK, most of these thugs -- and the citizens of the countries they lead -- would've starved to death.

Indeed, the only reason we continue to involve ourself in these give-aways is that, through our altruism, we feel sorry for the citizens of hell-holes like Rhodesia.

And this same benighted citizenry are the ones who keep supporting ZANU-PF! Perhaps we need to re-adjust our guilt-driven approach and let the very real prod of starvation cause these people to rise up against their oppressors.

Moreover, it is worthless and malevolent debating societies like the UN which try to foist off the lie of equality on the producing nations to force them to give their money to the parasite nations which have done nothing whatsoever to earn it.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 11:08 AM
link   


"Must we allow these men, the two unholy men of our millennium, who in the same way as Hitler and Mussolini formed [an] unholy alliance, form an alliance to attack an innocent country?" asked Mr Mugabe, apparently referring to Iraq.


You've got to agree, he as a point,
We know the capability of our governments, and how they lie and diceive there own people, and with the propaganda machine who's to know how bad mugabe really is? i'm sure he aint no angel, but can it be as bad as invading another country based on lies?

Frosty


people applaude a murderous dictator for calling out unholy men who took another murderous dictator out of power


one murderous dictator takes out another murderous dictator.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Denied
Should certain Countries police the world as a whole?


I think that certain countries should police the world, yes. Of course, this is simply my opinion and runs counter to many others, which is fine. I think that the US and the UK probably should police Africa, just as I feel that my home country, Australia, should police parts of South East Asia. Our countries are rich and powerful, especially when compared to third-world nations. Although we may dislike or even hate our governments, you would be hard-pressed to declare them worse than some those of some African nations. In countries such as Sierra Leone or Liberia, the people are suffering terribly under governments which do not have their best interests at heart. In situations such as these, I think our nations have a responsibility to ensure that the peoples of these nations are not being mistreated or harmed. If this means overthrowing those governments by force, then so be it.

This is counter to what I used to believe. I used to be in favour of letting each country handle its own internal affairs and of not involving ourselves in matters which do not concern us. But then I thought "Well, we're all human. If one group of humans is killing or starving another group, we have a duty to intervene, to stop this from happening". Now, I realise that this issue is more complex. You cannot simply impose yourself on a situation in which you are ignorant of the groups and history involved. However, I strongly believe that countries such as the USA, UK and Australia represent the best we have to offer at the moment in terms of both government and quality of life and have a subsequent responsibility to police those nations less fortunate then our own. I would prefer this role to be undertaken by the United Nations, but I feel that they are too limited in what they are able to do.

A little lacking in details and perhaps a tad naive, but these are my personal feelings on this issue.

[edit on 17/10/05 by Jeremiah25]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Rubbish!

Save your outrage, im not intimidated by it. Read your Declaration of Independence, all men created equal and all that jazz. It might be a fluffy anachronism to you but there are some of us who actually believe that.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Countries like the United States give more of their peoples' money and technology to these Third World socialist mendicants than anyone else, and we're excoriated for it!

Oh is that right is it? You do realize that the United States donates a paltry 0.15% of its GDP compared to Denmarks 0.93% of GDP, Norways 0.77% of GDP, Netherlands 0.69% of GDP. Even the French donate twice as much of their GDP to aid as the United States.
Source A
Source B


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
If it were not for the First World countries like the US and the UK, most of these thugs -- and the citizens of the countries they lead -- would've starved to death.

If it weren't for colonialism and slavery (from the US and UK) these countries wouldn't be Third World countries still.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Indeed, the only reason we continue to involve ourself in these give-always is that, through our altruism, we feel sorry for the citizens of hell-holes like Rhodesia.

Or we feel guilty for the hell we've put the African continent through for oh...I don't know...the past 300 years? We should be begging their collective forgiveness for what our nations put them through. Not gloating at the perceived generosity you think we lavish on the continent.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
And this same benighted citizenry are the ones who keep supporting ZANU-PF! Perhaps we need to re-adjust our guilt-driven approach and let the very real prod of starvation cause these people to rise up against their oppressors.

Yes, lets...because we all know these worthless people are nothing without the almighty United States and Great Britain...



Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Moreover, it is worthless and malevolent debating societies like the UN which try to foist off the lie of equality on the producing nations to force them to give their money to the parasite nations which have done nothing whatsoever to earn it.

You really are a racist bigot arent you? Parasite nations? Lie of equality? You just dont get it do you. You and those with your beliefs are what drag the human race down. Your kind of superior attitude caused slavery and the colonization of the African continent. When we were booted out of Zimbabwe in 1963 we left the country in turmoil. The injustices wrought upon the Zimbabweans is still being felt to this day and even though Mugabe is an evil moron that doesn't absolve what we did to that nation.

Save your righteous indignation for some one who cares.

[edit on 17/10/05 by subz]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   
My, my! Getting a bit shrill, aren't we?


Save your outrage, im not intimidated by it. Read your Declaration of Independence, all men created equal and all that jazz.


I suggest you re-read my post; I was not discussing the innate equality of people (which obviously does not mean equality in ability; if it were, I'd be an NFL or NBA superstar), but was responding to your comment about "we're all equal partners here [in the UN]. I don't think any sane person would say that we're all equal, except for an equal vote in the General Assembly.


You do realize that the United States donates a paltry 0.15% of its GDP compared to Denmarks 0.93% of GDP, Norways 0.77% of GDP, Netherlands 0.69% of GDP. Even the French donate twice as much of their GDP to aid as the United States.


What is your point? I said we give more, not "more as a percentage of GDP". Are you implying I have a quota to meet to assuage your guilt? You do know the difference between absolute and proportional values, don't you?


If it weren't for colonialism and slavery (from the US and UK) these countries wouldn't be Third World countries still.


How much longer are you going to use that excuse for a country or a region which has simply not advanced? Certainly India was a colonial entity until 1947 and they're doing quite well, thank you very much. And what does chattel slavery of a hundred fifty years ago have to do with the fact that countries like Zimbabwe have actually gone backwards since they kicked the White Devil Slavemasters out?

And slavery from the US or UK? Where's the chattel slavery today? The Sudan!

It's not "colonialism" or "slavery", kid; it's a demand economy and stupid politics which has sentenced so many people in Africa (and elsewhere) to misery.


Or we feel guilty for the hell we've put the African continent through for oh...I don't know...the past 300 years? We should be begging their collective forgiveness for what our nations put them through. Not gloating at the perceived generosity you think we lavish on the continent.


Right. As someone who personally owned slaves a hundred fifty years ago, it is all my fault! You want to eat yourself up with guilt, go right ahead, but I shouldn't have to be forced to part with my tax dollars to support someone else's pathology.


You really are a racist bigot arent you? Parasite nations? Lie of equality?


What on Earth does understanding that one country's politics, economy, and educational level are not equal with another's have to do with 'racism' or 'bigotry'? We're talking failed economics and political thuggery here, which, like stupidity and shrillness, is an equal-opportunity employer.


When we were booted out of Zimbabwe in 1963 we left the country in turmoil. The injustices wrought upon the Zimbabweans is still being felt to this day and even though Mugabe is an evil moron that doesn't absolve what we did to that nation.


"We"? Are you pregnant?


Save your righteous indignation for some one who cares.


Actually, I was saving it for people who understand the reality of geopolitics and economics in the 21st Century.

Either way, kid, you're off the hook.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Wow! subz
i really admire how you got your pionts across, i wonder if there's any chance, he'll be strong enough to except them,

Off_The_Street


producing nations to force them to give their money to the parasite nations.

some of these parasite nations, produce oil worth trillions & trillions,
and yet they live in squaller, without medicine, human rights, education or even water, who gains the most?
while you sit at your desk looking at the computor screen, in your secure surroundings, think about the big picture, and take a look around you,
and find out whats going on,

do you really believe in what you say?



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
I suggest you re-read my post; I was not discussing the innate equality of people (which obviously does not mean equality in ability; if it were, I'd be an NFL or NBA superstar), but was responding to your comment about "we're all equal partners here [in the UN]. I don't think any sane person would say that we're all equal, except for an equal vote in the General Assembly.

Forget re-reading your post, im going to re-read my own because im sure I never mentioned equality in the UN. But hey, if putting words in my mouth floats your boat, who am I to stop you?


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
What is your point? I said we give more, not "more as a percentage of GDP". Are you implying I have a quota to meet to assuage your guilt? You do know the difference between absolute and proportional values, don't you?

Oh please, like we haven't heard that one before. You brought the issue up to make the United States look like this super-altruistic Mother Teresa figure. Well let me ask you this of absolute and proportional values, who is more generous: the kid who donates half his pocket money ($5) to charity or Bill Gates who donates $100? Using your logic of how to gauge generosity, Bill Gates is 20x more generous than the kid. You really understand the concept of generosity don't you...


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
How much longer are you going to use that excuse for a country or a region which has simply not advanced?

Until we've put them back on track to a decent way of life. We not only stole their people but we've taken vast amounts of their natural resources. Do you not think the are entitled to get that wealth back? Or shall we conveniently call it quits, since we're ahead?


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Certainly India was a colonial entity until 1947 and they're doing quite well, thank you very much. And what does chattel slavery of a hundred fifty years ago have to do with the fact that countries like Zimbabwe have actually gone backwards since they kicked the White Devil Slavemasters out?

India doing quite well is rather debatable. But India was not enslaved, it was occupied and for no where near the length of time Africa was. The British Raj lasted what? 89 years? Western slavery and colonialization of Africa started in earnest in the 16th century and continued till the mid-18th century. Great example their champo.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
And slavery from the US or UK? Where's the chattel slavery today? The Sudan!

Whoah, that changes EVERYTHING.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
It's not "colonialism" or "slavery", kid; it's a demand economy and stupid politics which has sentenced so many people in Africa (and elsewhere) to misery.

Kid? You better be Han Solo...


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Right. As someone who personally owned slaves a hundred fifty years ago, it is all my fault! You want to eat yourself up with guilt, go right ahead, but I shouldn't have to be forced to part with my tax dollars to support someone else's pathology.

The only guilt I personally feel is when revisionists such as yourself try to make out the problems Africa faces are entirely of their own making. I never owned slaves either but I acknowledge that Britain (my country of birth) was a major player in the holding back of Africa for a very long time. We made money off the backs of Africans and who knows, Britain could owe its Empire to the cheap (read "free") labour of Africans. But hey, I never personally did anything so Britain gets off scot-free right? Too bad the wealth acquired by Britain from Africa did not die off with the slave traders.


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
What on Earth does understanding that one country's politics, economy, and educational level are not equal with another's have to do with 'racism' or 'bigotry'? We're talking failed economics and political thuggery here, which, like stupidity and shrillness, is an equal-opportunity employer.

Well at least you're back peddling I suppose. Where was your qualifications that you're talking about economic equality and political equality in your previous post? Maybe if you spent a little more time explaining your thoughts rather than coming up with witty insults you might not cause such 'misunderstandings'?


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
"We"? Are you pregnant?

Are you mentally retarded? We, as in we British, we, as in we Westerners. But sorry, I suppose generalizations are only allowed when referring to Africans, eh?


Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Actually, I was saving it for people who understand the reality of geopolitics and economics in the 21st Century.

Either way, kid, you're off the hook.

Oh that's right, I don't know what im talking about is that it? I must not understand the nature of geopolitics and economics in the 21st Century because I have a grasp of history? Listen Han, I know plenty about geopolitics and how Africa is still being exploited to this day by Western economic policy. I also don't find your venomous invective interesting or entertaining.

[edit on 17/10/05 by subz]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by iamian
Wow! subz
i really admire how you got your pionts across, i wonder if there's any chance, he'll be strong enough to except them,

Thanks Ian, I really dont care if he excepts them really. Its the principle of allowing his revisionist bigotry to grace these boards unchallenged that I posted my reply. I actually didnt want to reply to his second post either but, alas, I cant let tripe like that sit there.

He can rest assured though that I wont reply any more to him. Something about "fools" and "going down to their level", and "beaten by experience"....



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 12:59 PM
link   
LOL! Argueing about who gives more! Where is Bill Gates from? USA. What has Bill Gates done for third world countries and the rest of the world? Supplied jobs that never existed before.

Stop with your pathetic 'my country is a better charity case than yours'. The way to solve poverty is with people like Gates, who are mostly American. Mother Terresa's of the world are nothing but a nusance yet they are praised in places such as India as saints, while Bill Gates can donate $200 million to AIDs research in India and still receive a sour look from them.


A government donating money won't sovle squat for more than a few days, if the aide ever reaches the people it is meant for. That is to say people like Mugabe don't claim the aide for their own or UN diplomats take money meant for a country's infrastructure as their own. I know, I should give them a break, they are the UN after all and have done so so much to....well, they've done a lot.

But am I the only one who realizes how worthless the UN is? Here they come together for the FAO and turn it into a Bush/Blair bashing seminar.
Am I not the only one who finds this the least bit strange, funny or worthless?



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz

Oh is that right is it? You do realize that the United States donates a paltry 0.15% of its GDP compared to Denmarks 0.93% of GDP, Norways 0.77% of GDP, Netherlands 0.69% of GDP. Even the French donate twice as much of their GDP to aid as the United States.


Which, by your numbers, would equal the following in aid*:

Denmark = 1,621,920,000
Norway = 1,409,100,000
Nether = 3,329,312,790
France = 5,211,000,000
U.S. = 17,625,000,000
*using the GDP estimates from the CIA world fact book and applying the percentages you cited

Bit of a difference there, eh? And, before you yell at me about Bill Gates and a little kid, I grant you your point. I get what you are saying. And you are right that the intentions of these nations are admirable.

But, let’s also be fair and recognize that when a Jerry Lewis has his telethon, if ten people donate their hard-earned $5 bills, and one guy donates his daddy's $10 million, nobody cares about the $50. The point is that in the end, its absolute value, not proportion that really matters.

In short, you can't feed a starving nation on good intentions, but you can on $17.6 billion in aid per year.

I've granted you yours, it might be time you grant this.

As for slavery...that's a narrow view. Even Public Enemy concedes that:

"King and chief prolly had a big beef,
Because of that now I grit my teeth"

This comes in reference to the fact that vast numbers of Africans were complicitous in the slave trade and profiting nicely from it. And, to suggest somehow that North American slavery devastated Africa is to ignore that Egypt was built by slaves, Rome was built by slaves, and there is hardly a culture on the planet that didn't practice some form of slavery.

Not saying it's right, just saying that when you call someone else a revisionist, you better check yourself out first.

I hope you don't take this as a flame, but as a fair point of discussion that you seem to have omitted.

Thanks,

Hambone



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Dear Comrades please come and see my newest video

Thank you

Robert Mugabe



Oh and please have a look at my favorite idol

Again thanks

Robert Mugabe



When you are done viewing my pics please visit my website


mugabe.netfirms.com...


Looks like he is just your kind of man Subz


[edit on 10/17/2005 by shots]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Bush and cronies been compared to a Nazi several thousand times these past several days, no wonder his poll numbers are at historic low levels. All hands abandone ship the USS Neonutso is sinking fast.

Keywords on Google search:
bush nazi = 6,390,000 hits
bush hitler = 5,710,000 hits
bush fascist = 2,300,000 hits

Keywords on Google news:
bush nazi = 859 stories
bush hitler = 885 stories
bush fascist = 382 stories

Those Nazi terms are getting worn out, maybe we need some new ones.



[edit on 17-10-2005 by Regenmacher]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 02:04 PM
link   
No wonder the UN Cheered him. The UN raped nations so he aligned him self right along with the UN and did likewise.


Indeed, right now in Zimbabwe, the Robert Mugabe tyranny is perpetrating a genocide by starvation aimed at liquidating about six million people. Mugabe is great admirer of Adolf Hitler. Mugabe's number-two man (who died last year) was Chenjerai Hunzvi, the head of Mugabe's terrorist gangs, who nicknamed himself "Hitler." One of the things that Robert Mugabe, "Hitler" Hunzvi, and Adolf Hitler all have in common is their strong and effective programs of gun control.

www.nationalreview.com...


[edit on 10/17/2005 by shots]



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Bush and Mugabe are both god forsaken freaks of nature bent on destruction. Perhaps the lesson here is, it takes a genocidal maniac to know one.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 03:49 PM
link   
In the Temple of Baal, Judas receives acclaim for chastising the devil.

What a weird and wacky world we live in.



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
Bush and cronies been compared to a Nazi several thousand times these past several days....

And as such, when said comparison is made, the IQ of the topic drops 50+ points. Here's a thought: ATS is above such crap?
Might want to read something of worth that is enlightening within itself concerning such like type comparisons: Godwin's Law





....no wonder his poll numbers are at historic low levels. All hands abandone ship the USS Neonutso is sinking fast.

Apparently, those informed sites you visit have forgotten to mention that Bush's current ratings are still higher than the lowest ratings of the last seven presidents?




Those Nazi terms are getting worn out, maybe we need some new ones.

How about abstain from such like comparisons for Godwin's sake, eh?








seekerof



posted on Oct, 17 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Maybe Mugabe is just trying to take focus off himself. Afterall, he did implode the country's agriculture and economy, then divert food from the people to his militia. I'd be talking about someone else being Hitler, too.




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join