Why the conflicts multiply in Africa?

[cazal1]

Why the conflicts multiply in Africa? The reasons are simple: arbitrary borders to exploit the natural richnesses of the African unhappy poor, because they n`ont ever be independent. Rwanda: the responsibilities fall on French which supported its dictator and génocidaire Habyarimana. Indeed, with three operations AMARILYS, NOIROIT, TURQUOISE, French planned the génocide. Chad: the responsibilities fall on French of Mitterand which supported blindness Hissène Habré, with two operation, MANTA and SPARROWHAWK. Angola: the reponsabilities fall on French and the United States which respectively supports Dos Santos and l`Unita of Jonas Savimbi., in the name of oil/ Congo Brazzaville: French is only the person in charge, because it drove out a democratically elected president. Indeed Elf Aquitaine armed its right arm, Sassou Nguesso, to release President Lissouba/ Somalia: the responsibilities fall on the United States and their foal Syad Barré. Helped by the Americans, it seized the power in 1969 and y instauré a sanguinary mode/ Algeria: the responsibilities fall on French of Mitterand which does not want d`Islamists in an independent country/ Guinea-Bissau: The responsibilities fall on l`armée French stationed on Senegal. Indeed, Abdou Diouf (Senegal) and Told Lansana (Guinea-Conakry), representatives all the facets of the French neocolonialism, came to assistance of their friend dictator Joao Vieira thanks to l`armée French/ The RDC (Democratic Republic of Congo): The responsibilities fall on French of Mobutu and the United States de Mobutu/ The Sierra-Leone: There, they are the British and the United States which has meurtri this country by an attempt at blow d`Etat on January 16, 1996/ Liberia: the responsibilities fall on the United States which helped Charles Taylor to seize the power with 225 Navy American/ Mauritania-Senegal: the responsibilities fall on French. Indeed, the conflict between Mauritania and Senegal are the result d`une bad administration French from Saint-Louis (Senegal): at the time of l`indépendance of Morocco, in 1956, Paris set up Mauritania in territory intended to become a State-plug with an aim of containing the ambitions of the kingdom of the sherifs on the French possessions d`Afric black

And now, Ivory Coast, etc... But, which is astonishing in all that, c`est the behavior of the political leaders. How can they adopt arbitrary decisions and irrational behaviours, when well even those have a human, moral and financial neck insuportable for our countries? That was often the case during l`histoire of l`humanity. However, in these last years of the XXème century, of many African leaders seem to have chosen of s`illustrer more negatively than others in this register. This propensity to grant l`importance to l`absurde and ridiculous is manifest in the many conflicts which oppose to African States or communities with regular intervals on these borders inherited colonization. The civil war which opposes l`armée Sudanese to the rebels Southerners since 1983 in is a perfect illustration, of the same d`ailleurs than the war between l`Ethiopie and l`Erythrée, which made thousands of victims since May 1998. But, into l`espace of a few days, at the end of February, the political leaders for the various armed groups engaged in these two conflicts often changed speech, announcing qu`ils would be perhaps been willing to accept peaceful solutions instead of the war. Now, the African people find themselves taken as an hostage in territories which correspond neither to the large historical surfaces, nor at zones cultural, economic and political homogeneous. Consequently, it is easy for n`importe which sorcerer's apprentice of the policy to be disguised as a head of war to claim an unspecified identity. He thus appears urgent d`engager to to me a reflexion with l`échelle continental on the means of withdrawing at the current borders their "venom", c`est-with-statement simply d`organiser a true political integration of the African continent. Why the Coast d`Ivoire celebrate does its independence? Politically, Militarily and Economically, the Coast d`Ivoire is colonized 100% to bone! Why continue to lie to the people Man from the Ivory Coast, with regard to his independence, its Dignity? Not, one should not any more have one set language with these Men from the Ivory Coast who believe that this world is easy. Somme Men from the Ivory Coast speak like the descendants about DANTON, ROBESPIERRE or THOMAS J, the Father of l`indépendance American. Really sad C`est and at the same time revolting. C`est what l`indignity? Let us follow the answers: POLITICALLY, the Coast d`Ivoire is colonized 100% to bone, because it cannot contract allinaces without asking France; it cannot make the war without asking France; it cannot ensure, with it-only, peace without warning Papa French! Sincerely, we say the truth! Where is Ivory Coast ?where is l`indépendance is the democracy? Where is this the dignity of the people of the Ivory Coast? is not a considerable drift of the Elites and intellectual Men from the Ivory Coast? L`etymology of the word democracy is clear and limpid: capacity of the people, for the people only for him. These people must be independent politically! MILITARILY, C`est what the presence of l`army French in Coast d`Ivoire? A prolongation of French colonization in Africa. L`army of the Ivory Coast can move without
to ask army French? ah ah ah, this is no. Which can better say? J`en spoke so much about this army of Napoleon in Africa that I have enough! The only presence of these French soldiers in Africa maudit any concept of democracy! Where is this dignity? Really, I am sorry to spit certain truths wounding, but good to spit! Where is l`indépendance soldier of the Ivory Coast? Nada ECONOMICALLY, the zone franc(ou CFA franc) n`est it not another prolongation of French colonization in Africa. A currency whose account d`operation domiciled at the Bank of French, c`est-with-statement the Bank of the colonizer; a currency that this colonizer can devaluate when he wants, as he wants and where he wants!
Under these conditions, how can one speak about l`indépendance economic? Is devil of the devils, where the democracy in Ivory Coast ? My question is put: Does the Ivory Coast deserve to really celebrate an unspecified independence? How can a country, which depends politically, economically, socially and militarily d`un another country, celebrate its independence? Therefore, l`indépendance of the Ivory Coast is null and not avenue because of Houphouët Boigny.. The national festival OF THE IVORY COAST is that of French: July 14/ - I show Houphouët Boigny and Lépold Sédar Senghor to have sold l`Afric! - I show Houphouët and Senghor to have soiled the dignity of our People aves l`army French! - I show these two traitors to d`avoir allowed French to prolong its colonization in Africa - I show Elites and Intellectual African to always d`avoir lied with their People, with regard to their independences. - I show ... - I show ... -I show ...
Rwandan Génocide: shown, you raise! Attention my brothers and sisters Men from the Ivory Coast! After the génocide in Biafra, in Rwanda, in Congo Brazzaville, one finds the same actors in`Ivory Coast: French; Common grave and free massacres of the populations, it will be also said to us that France was trapped. The Rwandan génocide is the second of the century spent, after that of the NAZIS. One never should, I well never say, to forget this Rwandan génocide planned by French of Mitterand and Balladur. This duty of memory must challenge us each second, each minute, each hour and each very African day, because a GENOCIDE n`est not a simple conflict. French helped militarily, humanly, materially and morally the Habyarima General! Why, devil, to stop the only Africans on this génocide? The Habyarimana General, whose plane was cut down by French, screwed this company tutsy, while to support on a ethnique speech of purification and by poking tensions which n`avaient ever degenerated in so bloody confrontation. Badly separated of their anti-américan and sovietic breviary, the agents secrets and military French, which are only professionals of crime against l`humanity, their time in the novels of Gerald Villiers kills by encouraging Cruelty there! From 1990 to 1994, French bombarded, in Rwanda four operations: AMARILYS, NOIROIT, TURQUOISE. Yes, French was trapped. 1° OPERATION AMARILYS! - October 1990, l`Ambassador of France, to kigali, sends a telegram to François Mitterand and to Edouard Balladur. This telegram known as: "a génocide prepares here, in Rwanda, against the minority tutsy", word d`Ambassador. The Queyno General is sent to Kiagali by l`Elysée, with weapons por to thwart the terrorists of the FPR. The Queyno General calls upon Colonel Bernard Cussac to involve the troops governmental, FAR(Forces Armées Rwandan). The French soldiers took part in the engagements. It was l`Operation 2° OPERATION NOIROIT In full war of the Gulf, Jean-Pierre Chevenement, former Minister for Defense, is contacted by Mitterand: "the things fester in Rwanda, it is necessary to send men to help the government of Kigali", c`est made thing. It was l`operation "NOIROIT". The French soldiers took part in the combat while killing out of the "enemy" soldiers, the tutsis. Jean-Christophe Mitterand, adviser with the presidency of Dad for the African Businesses, n`en knows anything of all that. And, however in 1993, three years then passed qu`on killed out of the tutsis and hutus moderate, the Habyarimana General is received with l`Elysée by François Mitterand thanks to Jean-Christophe of this same name. French is


I have a Universitaire level of the Art-and-Trades, I am Moule 97160 Guadeloupe. . http://membres.lycos.fr/african97160/

[Sponsored Links]

[bbcamp]

I moved this post to the Mud Box because it certainly did not belong in the shallow end. However, I'm not sure it really belongs here either!

[Cami A]

Well...it's not the first long and confusing post we've had in the 'Box. I'd say you put it in the right spot, Bob. ;)

[rj]

is it me or does dis guy got a 'accent ? :wtf:








sounds almost like dem fellas from texas (I think):D

[flatfloor]

Since we try not to censor, I'd leave it here. Eventually it will sink to the bottom. I went into his profile and clicked his home page, best I can tell he's trying to sell CDs. Maybe we can hook him up with the Nigerians.

Somebody hide it from JC. :D

[John Bridge]

Hi Cazal,

Don't know why you picked our board, but you're welcome. :D

[Ron]

They playing bocci ball in that picture or what? :suspect:

[JC]

Too late I found it.

The best I can gather is the guy is a native African from one of the former French colonies..not sure which one but hes looks to me favor a Bantu persuasion which does not really narrow it down much unfortunatly.

I happen to agree 100% with most everything he has said and am also disqusted with the systematic raping of Africa by industrialized nations without even a remote regard to human life....simply despicable beyond believe.


Why does the world turns it's back on Africa? If that crap happened ANY where else in the world there would be some serious hell to pay.

[flatfloor]

Damn JC, do you smell these things or just sense them? :)

Maybe after the holidays I'll get into this and 'splain how the fault lies with the Africans themselves.

[tomtuttle]

Ooooh, flatfloor, I double dog dare ya! :D:D:D The prospect of you and JC mixing it up gives me a reason not to eat myself to death over the holidays.

[JC]

Its a givin that prolly about 90% of government officials in Africa are corrupt and bribery is a daily event for many Africans...but that does not excuse industrialized nations by taking advantage of that when they know the damage and wars that it causes. And to fund and give guns to those same corrupt officials to keep them in power in return for mineral rights and favors etc.....then when the genocides happen we simply leave.

When they divided the continent into colonies and placed age old traditional warring tribes into the same international boundries and elected one of those tribes (many times even a minority tribe) to have power over the other...thats when everything got screwed up. It is amazing that these tribes even get along as well as they have been considering those circumstances.

There needs to be a international corporate watchdog agency to gaurd against this stuff..and enforcable laws to prevent smuggling guns for favors.

I think China and Russia have the most respect for Africa of any of the big eight I believe they have certain policies in effect agianst interviening in African affairs and suppling weapons...wish the other greedy nations had this.


http://home.san.rr.com/belgiancongo/images/badhand.gif


Do you know what happened to these kids's hands? hint: Congo and Rubber production.
I don't think this debate will last to long.

[John Bridge]

Well, JC, I'll have to admit to not knowing a hell of a lot about Africa, except for South Africa and what used to be Souther Rhodesia.

But it seems to me that if you are correct, then no warring tribes anywhere and at any time throughout history have been able to bury the hatchet, so to speak, and we all know that's not the case. Former warring peoples have found it convenient to get along, and most of the world does get along (on paper, anyway). So I think you're going to have to come up with a better argument. Seems to me that Cazal, whether he realizes it or not, is appealing to countries like ours to go in and straighten things out. It's pretty apparent the Africans are having a hard time of it themselves.

[JC]

John what you just said is the way much of the world seems to view Africa...ie.. They have been fighting for centuries lets just leave them alone...
Indeed that has been the last few administations viewpoint also.
But that is a very misleading and unaccurate simplification. It is what many folks would like us to believe so the spotlight does not shine of them....We as well as several other countries are systematically RAPING Africa and creating these wars in the process..THAT IS THE TRUTH! Have no doubt that without outsiders meddling for mineral profits MOST of the fighting would not be happening right now.

Sure you may say that if the countries were stable they would not fight over the minerals.

Well stablity in Africa to that extent it damn near impossible if you understand how the nations were formed and the tribal ruling structure that was put in place since the colonization. Basically as long as the continent has borders that confine separate tribes to be controled by differant tribes that can have totally differant cultures in themselves it is friutless.

Remember when the blocked the South African diamond importation...External infuence like that causes much of the violence in other cases also not just with the diamonds. After making importing Diamonds from Africa illegal the fighting pretty much ceased.

John here is a article that illustrates how this the meddling is done and how it cuases the wars. Now keep in mind there are other nations doing the same BS trying to get the same minerals. Alot of weapons come from the eastern bloc also.

http://www.moles.org/ProjectUnderground/drillbits/6_03/3.html


If we removed the exploitation there would be minumal violence.

The African countries governments are a joke....How do you have free elections when you have 3-5 main conflicting tribes in the same country...the indirect effects of the colonization of Africa are still the root to much of the current conflicts.

Foriegn powers buying resources and selling weapons causes war, war causes famine and speeds up the spread of AIDS.


It would be like if the British decided to combine Mexico/USA/Canada into one country....Who gets to be the president...Well if the British like the Mexican tribe better they would have been put in charge...Now what if the Mexican government fixed all the elections, made everyone speak spanish AND claimed all the minerals by force to be Mexican property, And too boot since there is tribe to tribe rascism the Mexicans made the USA and Canada work like slaves and give up there lands.....Can you see how a "internal" war can happen under that scenario.


Just like Cazal says it is.

[shawnee]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JC
[B].
I think China and Russia have the most respect for Africa of any of the big eight I believe they have certain policies in effect agianst interviening in African affairs and suppling weapons...wish the other greedy nations had this.


Gee, JC and to think that these countries are soo human rights oriented!! Look at how they treat their own citizens, do you honestly think that they care about the citizens of the countries of Africa?

[JC]

That may be. but do you see them training African warlords and sending weapons to Africa?

[John Bridge]

JC,

Here's my problem, I guess. We get this multicultural stuff about some of the nations of Africa once having been dynamic and advanced. We learn that all cultures are equal, etc.

Given this, why the hell don' t some of these dynamic and advanced individuals and groups gather together and fix things like other "equal" cultures have had to do in order to prevail?

I am frankly quite sick of hearing what assholes we and other nations are. The Europeans have given up their African colonies. We have quit slavery. What the hell else do you want?

Now I guess I've gone and done it, haven't I? :)

[flatfloor]

OK, I have to comment. Isn't anybody responsible for themselves anymore? Why is it always somebody else's fault your screwed up? This goes for nations as well as individuals.

I suppose someone put a gun to those African Chieftans who sold thier own bretheren into slavery.

[JC]

It's a double standard..

If that is the idea John then why in the hell are we trying to save the poor Iraqi's, We go and save every other two bit country in the world(*cough*) and mean while MILLIONS are dying in Africa.

Yea tribes captured other tribes and sold them into slavery.....understand this, if they considered an enemy tribe as an enemy anyways why would'nt they take advantage of the money that was offered?
Were talking about were a girl will be disowned for seeing a guy from another tribe in many cases.

The same type thing is still happening in the same type of way with differant circumstances.

The bottom line is it was not right for our ansestors to take advantage of that then with slavery and it aint right for them to do it today for minerals..KNOWING FULL WELL THE VIOLENCE THAT HAPPENS as a result.

If the US insist of pretending to care about human rights evry where else in the world, then how can it justify ignoring this issue...AND actually perpetuating the problem as it has been doing(as well as european counterparts are doing) should be illegal.

WHY, why do we practilcaly start World War Three over a few Isreali deaths but completly turn our back on psuedo-ethnic wars of genocidal proportions?

I tell you why...becuase in this country one race is worth more then another race regardless of all the political lip service..rascism never died it just went dorment...that's why!


Remember what happened in Rwanda...millions died right in front of the UN while we refused to even donate ANY troops to help UN as did any other countries refused to donate troops! Instead we sent planes to get Americans out before the fighting started. If those were Isreali's THAT never would have been allowed to happen...tell me I am wrong. ..please tell me I am wrong...I wish I was.


It is not just the US government and other governments that could care less about Africa...It is average citizens all over this country not limited to whites either. The press avoiding the coverage is largely to blame also.

It's a lethal double standard. And allowing corporations to exploit this is a crime.

[Terry O'Neill]

Let's cover the freakin' continent with Ditra!

At the very least it should stop the AIDs epidemic in it's tracks.

Uncouple

:drool2:

[Rob Z]

Terry

:D


(Terry has actually covered the inside of the back of his van with Ditra-walls, floor, and ceiling. His seats are covered in Kerdi).

[vcr]

Ok. I'll bite, although I do not claim to have fully read and digested the original post...

I think the US undervalues Africa and other areas based on a bias against darker skin color. And it is our loss.

In our own hemisphere, I was so hopeful when the dictatorship in Haiti was overthrown and a new constitution adopted in 1986-87. Conditions were right for some great changes -- toward democracy, human rights, literacy and other good things. We failed to take advantage of the situation and get involved in helping Haiti. Perhaps the fact that the US was involved in getting "Baby Doc" Duvalier (and most of the nation's wealth) out of the country altered our perspective. I know the Catholic Church helped out with health and literacy programs.

Speaking of revolutions, I am glad for the constitution of South Africa, and the mostly peaceful change and development of that country.

Of course, the corruption and incompetence in the governments of many African nations have caused a lot of hardship, including economic, public health, education and political stability. Even the droughts can sometimes be traced to agricultural policy. Prolonging a victim mentality helps no one.

On the other hand, the whole globalization trend means that resources, economics, legislation and even policing are now effectively managed in an international context. The fact that some people in the US are getting richer IS related to the fact that some people in Somalia are getting poorer. Most of us have never been in the situation of being unable to afford safe drinking water for our children. Not yet.

The world would benefit from increased and better trade with African countries. Africa contains plenty of natural resources, including petroleum and precious minerals that could be important to industries in the US. There are also tremendous human resources that are literally being wasted. The difference between the attention paid in US foreign policy to Africa compared to the Middle East is incredible, and a mistake on our part.

Just my opinion, and I realize it is easier to find fault than to do the job of our leaders. I certainly don't have the answers.

Let us remember that we are all related.

[vcr]

Originally posted by JC

It would be like if the British decided to combine Mexico/USA/Canada into one country....Who gets to be the president...Well if the British like the Mexican tribe better they would have been put in charge...Now what if the Mexican government fixed all the elections, made everyone speak spanish AND claimed all the minerals by force to be Mexican property, And too boot since there is tribe to tribe rascism the Mexicans made the USA and Canada work like slaves and give up there lands.....Can you see how a "internal" war can happen under that scenario.

Just like Cazal says it is.


Hey JC,

Can you imagine the uproar if the United Nations or the European Union, for instance, were to declare that the President of the United States is not recognized as a legitimate ruler? What President Bush said about the government of Iraq?

If they said there needs to be free and fair elections, preferably monitored by international observers?

:eek:

Thank goodness I voted on a new computer system last time! You know... that most infallible of machines? :)

[Ron]

I have to agree with Jim and John on this.Why can't they help themselves?They could.The outsiders keep blaming the lack of assistance from other nations.

It's a noble thing to donate money to charitable organizations.I just think that it is more important to contribute money or services to the people who need it in our own country.

Sorry..Sally Struthers.

Yeah,and Bill Gates giving $100 million to India for AIDS research.What about your own country that raised you,Bill?Besides,$100 million to him is like a $100 to me. :complain:

[flatfloor]

Yea tribes captured other tribes and sold them into slavery.....understand this, if they considered an enemy tribe as an enemy anyways why would'nt they take advantage of the money that was offered?

I didn't say they sold only enemies, I said they sold their own people! Their aunts, cousins, nephews, nieces, whatever.

Ginny What more could we have done in Haiti, perhaps we should make it a state?

It seems we Have Cisco to blame for the slave trade. Following JC's logic he is directly responsible. ;)

http://africanhistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa101101a.htm

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/slavetra.html

[JC]

What tribe was it exactly that sold there own into slavery?

Africa is made up of differing tribes and I don't know of any that would condone such a thing...Maybe if certain members were out cast or bieng punished or perhaps the women, daughters(who are considered as property in many areas still) . That report assumes all Africans are the same people it says they sold their own kind but it sounds like by that they simply mean they sold follow Africans..No disignation to individual tribes whos cultures can be worlds apart from each other.

Why do people have such a hard time understaning this concept..Africa is not one big country..It is a continent and there are many differant countries and in each country(thanks to colonization) there are many differant tribes. And EACH tribe has it's own beleifs..
It can be compared if you will to the American indians...Sure there are differant tribes but they are totally differant and cannot even be classed the same if you understand WHY they are so differant from each other.
It was our european anciestors that decided to divide Africa up into "european colonies" without any regard to "social borders" and religions that created much of this constant infighting..Kinda like sticking to rival indian tribes together. what the hell do you expect will happen?

Some here see that the best thing is to let them"fight it out amounst themselves"...Ok fine (it aint hapenning) but anyways.

The whole thing is we and other nations are not just not doing anything to stop it we and others are acually instigating and contributing to it. THATS THE DIFFERANCE.

We contribute to it every time we trade guns for minerals to warlords and factions we want to put into power for selfish reasons.

The Blood diamonds were helped drastically when the Global intervention came into play...That is a good thing...regardless of who's fualt it was the fact remains that it saved lives.

Regardless of who's fualt it is the bottom line is trading guns for minerals knowing full well those weapons are going to be used against rival tribes to kill many innocent women and children is BS!!

It was agianst the law to sell guns to indians back in the day.

It is against the law to sell guns to anyone whom you know will use it to kill with..You are an accessory to murder if you do that in this country.

Sure we can sit back and pretend the problem does not exist or we can say "well it's their own fualt" but when our democratically elected officials are propogating these wars and we give them power we are indirectly responcible for the killings. Thats a democracy right?

Perhaps if you understand the extent of the violence you will understand more the need for intervention...surely after looking at a few of these links if you have any compassion for our fellow men at all, it has to be agreed that SOMETHING ..whatever that may be NEEDS to be done to stop these atrocities.

We can go back and forth all day long pointing fingers at differant people but in the end it is irrelevent who fault it is...in the end all that matters is stopping the killings. And if that means I have to go without a cell phone to possibly save someone from dying due to Cal-tan mining then damnit I am doing it. A human life is alot more valuable then a damn cell phone.


http://www.marekinc.com/PhotosAngolaTragedy.html

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/natres/generaldebate/2002/0114coltan.htm


http://www.oneworld.net/ips2/jan00/20_53_079.html

http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/africa/01/12/africa.diamonds/

http://www.namibian.com.na/Netstories/Econ10-99/financing.html

http://www.time.com/time/2002/salgado/contact.html

http://www.marekinc.com/PhotosHeadllines2002.html

http://frist.senate.gov/press-item.cfm/hurl/id=184997

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sierra/article/0,2763,328977,00.html

And now the results. Don't read if you have a weak stomach.

http://garnet.acns.fsu.edu/~sss4407/Rwanda/RWStats.htm

http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=7260

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1806249.stm

http://www.speaktruth.org/sm/issues/2002/05/23/an/0000-3808-KEYWORD.Missing.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1717043.stm

http://allafrica.com/stories/200205230747.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2405563.stm

These are the fighting fractions that the US has trained and armed and so have the europeans and any other asshole that wants to exploit Africa...Nice guys huh? An AK-47 cost about 6 bucks on the street...Actually that expensive when you consider the average daily wage is 1.00.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1252049.stm

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/africa/9903/31/rwanda.01/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2405563.stm

The shame of it all was that the damn guerrilas got more media exposure in the US media then the war did.

[vcr]

Jim,

Haiti. Well at first the people had an idealistic hope for democracy and the improvement of their society. We could have assisted with setting up democratic elections, literacy programs and medical clinics.

I guess politically I mean some public recognition and encouragement. Perhaps a government sponsored teacher's program where US teachers would help set up schools. The President calling on US colleges to sponsor training for Haitian teachers.

So many unemployed people, and US businesses couldn't think of anything to do that might have been mutually beneficial?

I visited Port au Prince in the late '70s and I can tell you that ordinary people were afraid to talk about the government or the police standing on the street corners with machine guns. (Not to mention the macoutes who came to your house in the middle of the night if you did talk.)

Right after the overthrow, I felt there was a window of opportunity where people want to participate and feel they can make a difference in improving their country and their lot in life. When the possibility of change is believed in by ordinary citizens. Then after a while of same ole same ole, it's natural to become cynical again. Then it's harder to want to work for anything; just let big brother...

[flatfloor]

Haiti. Well at first the people had an idealistic hope for democracy and the improvement of their society. We could have assisted with setting up democratic elections, literacy programs and medical clinics

I could have sworn we did all that. How long are we supposed to stay there, who pays for this? Please don't say the Federal government.

JC Buy the CD from Harvard University.

Thousands of records of transactions are available on a CDROM prepared by Harvard University and several books have been published recently on the origins of modern slavery (namely, Hugh Thomas' The Slave Trade and Robin Blackburn's The Making Of New World Slavery).

Pointing fingers? I'm not pointing, you are.

I can't believe you read all of the sites you offer, who the hell is the World Policy Institute? It's an off shoot of the New School obviously an excellent source since they teach acting, the arts, furniture design and fashion.

As for the African and the Nambian publications who are they? Do you know?

You offer a two or three paragraph statement from the opening of an introduction to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, what's that all about?

The Guardian? One of the worst British tabloids, might as well cite the Enquirer.

Did you even open and READ the sites I listed?

[JC]

Slavery has been around since the dawn of time..Just becuase one race may condone it does not mean it is acceptable for our race to buy the slaves.

There STILL is slavery in Africa..In Mauritania and Sudan...did you know that? It is still here officially outlawed just a couple years ago but still exist to this day.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9902/26/slavery.01/

http://home.earthlink.net/~ynot/slave1.html

Does that mean we can go there and buy some and brieng them home and turn them into Tile helpers.....No It still does not justify slavery. So I guess most of us will just have to stick to paying useless helpers 12 bucks an hour to lose our tools for us.

Alot of folks are very quick to point out that "we" did not start the slave trade...why this makes any differance I have no idea...we still brought them,shipped them, used them, and then later lynched them.
Europe had slaves before the Slave trade and so did Africa...I think I forgot why we are even discussing this issue for anyways....


I read parts of the links.. I have already studied most of that stuff so I was basically just grabbing stuff and putting it up there for you. They should show cases of guns for minerals ,US policy toward Africa,The effects of forieng intervention,The IMF African policys. I decided not to post any horrific photos links as it would serve no real purpose.

Those are just quik links Jim, beleive me even if some of the sites may be in question as you say the atrocities are real regardless. Since I don't think anyone really doubts the hardships in Africa these days I saw no need to confirm each and every source. If you need me to find "official" sources you would consider "realiable" I am sure it would not be hard at all...Do you doubt the info?

I read both of your sites Jim...I did'nt follow any links from them though.


World policy Institute? Do you mean Global Policy Org?


What are your plans for Christmas?
Me I still have to go shopping..thats bad huh?

[flatfloor]

:)

[shawnee]

''Alot of folks are very quick to point out that "we" did not start the slave trade...why this makes any differance I have no idea...we still brought them,shipped them, used them, and then later lynched them.''

In response to the above quoteby JC: Just my humble feelings again, but I refuse to take any responsibility for the "we" of the past, I HAD NOTHING to do with buying, shipping, using, or (heaven forbid) lynching slaves. I will not be made to feel guilty for something that I, personally, had nothing to do with. I believe that it was totally wrong, but just because I am caucasian does not mean that I am to blame for what occurred. So, JC, that is why it makes a difference. Understand that I hate the whole idea of one human enslaving another human, and I will speak out against it and do my best to work prevent it, but again, I will not apologize for the past actions of others.

Merry Christmas to everyone!

[JC]

Like I said alot of folks get defensive and use that arguement. I never said anyone here is guilty of slavery.
I did say many civilized nations and corporations are guilty of exploiting Africa and used slavery as one example. And I did say many folks would rather avoid and ignore the problems facing Africa today.

Also I don't particularly beleive that we should compensate blacks for something our ancestors did that we did not do...nor should they expect money for work they never did..too me that makes no sense at all..even if the economy could afford to do it. Were all in this boat together now.

Now the Indians we repaid(oops...are supposed to repay) that money to was differant..that was a contractual agreement that our government entered into with the indians and subsequenty welshed out on..that money IS owed..a deal is a deal. The government flat out ripped the Indians of for billions of dollars and destroyed the evidence....thats shamefully low.....

[flatfloor]

And to all, a good night!:santa:


Ho-ho-ho-hos echoing into the night:p

[vcr]

Originally posted by flatfloor
Haiti. Well at first the people had an idealistic hope for democracy and the improvement of their society. We could have assisted with setting up democratic elections, literacy programs and medical clinics

I could have sworn we did all that. How long are we supposed to stay there, who pays for this? Please don't say the Federal government.


Jim,

My point was that I thought we dropped the ball in 1987. The window of opportunity was well over by 1992.

Consensus seems to be that the government is corrupt now, so the opportunity to help foster an ally and trading partner is lost. In favor of a source of destitute refugees.

I was not suggesting that the US give aid to Haiti NOW.

I was really basing my comments on my personal perception of the news coverage at the time. It was a social attitude comment, not an economic aid one. I thought about adding a IMHO disclaimer, but didn't.

I did a little checking in response to your last comment, and it seems the US is still giving aid to Haiti.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/1982.htm

We have given and are still giving US economic aid. The above source lists teacher training and medical clinics, among other things.

I have not found any independent corroboration of my impressions of 1987. I just remember being disappointed that things didn't turn out better.

So, you may be right.

[vcr]

following Shawnee's comment:

I'm one of the indians, and I had nothing to do with welcoming the europeans to this continent.

We are all, however, living with the consequences.

[John Bridge]

Now hold it. I guess I'm sort of a European and nobody welcomed me here but my momma. :D

Ginny,

Europeans were bound to be here whether there was a welcoming committee or not.

The big question is, where's Cazal? He got all this going. :D

[flatfloor]

Cazal is on his merry way plastering forums with his message and has no idea what he started.

By now he's probably scamming someone with Nigerian secret bank account letters. :D

[vcr]

The europeans would not have survived without the help of the natives.

[John Bridge]

Possibly. I'm not so sure. Europeans decimated native populations in other parts of the hemisphere and survived.

I will agree that the early colonists were apparently ill-prepared for survival, but eventually, groups of Europeans would have survived with or without the help of the natives. I think is was inevitable. Over the long haul, I don't think the natives had a choice in the matter.

[JC]

I would have to agree with John over that...Sure the Indians helped alot but sooner or latter the Europeans would have settled anyways.


You guy believe that Indians origenally came from China? Via the Bering Straight.

The theory is that at the end of the last Ice age the glaciers were still inland but the coast were clear..so they followed the beach all the way down the coast into South America and then back up as the Glaciers recided... Kinda explains the similar facial characteristic huh?

[flatfloor]

I buy into that, up to a point. Personally I think there was a land bridge across the Bering straits and the Indians came out of Manchuria.

You would think tho that somebody's family would have some snapshots or old home movies from the trip. :)

[JC]

Manchuria=Northeast China....right?

Sure they took pictures, not the best cameras back then since Taiwon was'nt created yet but I did find these ones.

http://www.thegalleryofchina.com/F4020.JPG

Thats a pic of the son telling his father about the land bridge.

http://www.thegalleryofchina.com/F4076.JPG

This one is where the daughter climbs a tree to see if they can see the other side.

Heres them packing there cloths

http://www.thegalleryofchina.com/F4101.JPG


on this one you can see a good shot of the famous land bridge

http://www.thegalleryofchina.com/L0505.JPG

Heres a nasty sea monster they had to jump over to get to alaska.

/www.thegalleryofchina.com/D4063thumb.jpg

Heres some of the glaciers reciding

http://www.thegalleryofchina.com/L4040.JPG

Heres a better one done of the glaciers..differant exposure setting I guess.

http://www.glacier.rice.edu/Images/land/s-49.lores.gif

Ah finally they arrive at the hotel.

http://www.cave-pictures.com/P8120046.JPG

Oops almost forgot about the family pet....meet "spot"...don't worry he don't bite.

http://prehistoricsillustrated.com/images_pw/mammoth/mammoth_000162a.jpg

Some pictures the kids drew

http://www.culture.fr/culture/arcnat/lascaux/img/homeparoi.jpg

Spot playing in the tar pit

http://www.uark.edu/~dksander/california/tar.gif

Spot and kitty playing together.

http://members.tripod.com/JaguarLady35/5cde8b30.jpg

Looks like they visited the grand canyon too. must have been smaller back then.

http://www.eas.ualberta.ca/elj/icepics/river2.jpg

No trip would be complete without going to disneyland. Still pretty cold out.

http://www.jazzpiano.com/tdl/special_features/snow/snow_1.jpg

It must suck to be Mickey during the ice age. Disneyland just aint been the same since.

http://www.jazzpiano.com/tdl/special_features/snow/snow_3.jpg

Never thought I could find 18,000 year old vacation pictures did ya.







Wanna read something really funny?

http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/top.htm

[flatfloor]

Nice pics, wonder how they financed the trip, Wampum Visa cards? :)

The other guy needs help.

[JC]

Scary that non-sense is bieng taught in our schools too, Jim. And what's worse is there are probably millions of folks who truelly don't beleive in evolution and consider it a "theory" in total bliss of all the facts.

It just goes to show how people are easily manipulated on mass levels.


The more I think about it the more I see less of a differance between modern time and crazy beliefs and the middle ages beliefs...


Hey did ya here that new scientific data they have...they came up with this crazy new "theory" about the earth bieng round instead of flat...imagine that....They don't have any proof though since so far noone has found the edge and fell off yet.

[flatfloor]

John and I are card carrying members of The Flat Earth Society.

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

Who says nobody ever found the edge? Where do you think Jimmy Hoffa, Judge Crater and Amelia Earhart went? What do you think Vinny does with his vict...er, contractual residual remnants?

The Stankhammer Triplets are living proof the earth is flat. :rolleyes:

[cx]

Nice photo spread there, JC. I was afixin' to post me a picher that shows where I stayed in that same hotel just last spring, but I still can't figger out how to git this new program to take one of my photos. And thems that you posted are a lot bigger than the one I tried to post. :confused:


But to be moderately serious, I recall reading not so long ago (within the last couple years) that some remains had been found on this continent that indicated the presence of different people in too many places at the same time for all of them to have come across that bridge up there. Don't recall the details, unfortunately, but seemed like some serious scientists were nearly all in agreement on that aspect of it. Maybe somebody else gonna recall that happening for us.


Oh, and flatfloor, them Stankhammers ain't living proof of nothin' 'cept that maybe there ain't necessarily no living proof. :)

[drew]

Ya konw some of them there pics look a little like my ex-outlaws, ya sure yoou ain't robbin my database? :D Hell I know there were out stalkin the earth back then. :santa: BTW who is cazal1? Does he/she really exist or are they just like spot, as in extinct!?!:D:D:D

[JC]

Dang Jim, where do you find these links...that was hilarious.


CX, Theres a interesting theory out there backed up by DNA and Mitochrondia testing that points to a "bottleneck" happening.

With Mitochondria there is someway they can tell how long a population existed by the way it replicates certian ...ah...stuff I can't discribe the actual process unfortunatly...but anyways

The theory is that long ago there was alot of people on the earth at one time then at roughly 70,000 years ago according to DNA testing (give or take 10,000 years or so) the population died out to just a few thousand people...then it slowly built back up to present levels. But then again..thats not saying who all they tested or what accuracy it really is. But they can't seem to match up any of the very old DNA to present man very well.

One theory why this happened is a great volcanic eruption in Sumatra around that time..A volcano is capable of erupting to that magnitude. Also volcano's are implecated in touching off Ice ages...The wisconsinian Ice age started at that time also following the Eem interglacial period. This is the beginning of the Stone age and the Palaeolithic period(early stone age).


http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/w/x/wxk116/habitat/iceage2.gif


Many other theory's too of course, but perhaps at one time there were plenty of people on the continant then everyone died and when it stated up again it started as we mentioned?? who knows. I wonder if that would match the archealogical records. Kinda hard to figure that out since we have bones and tools/huts millions of years old all the way up the present times.
But judging fromt the way populations increase in recent history I would guess that if we started out with just a few thousand people it could take as little as 5000 years or as little as 3000 years to become a relatively substancial population again.
So as you can imagine the odds of finding a 3-5000 year break in archealogical records over that amount of time leaves alot of room for just about anything to happen considering that if a super eruption took place and wiped out a growing season or two...such a population could reach near extinction theoretically in a matter of as little as few years or less.
I would guess that it can also be probable that more then one great catastrophy has happened over those time periods to wipe out entire populations and cultures and subsequently have multiple parallel "rebirths" of civilizations. Maybe even dieing off and evolving again separatly for certain periods could explain the many adjacent groups such as the neandethal and the human sapien sapiens that existed at the same time periods, as well of course explain differant races.
I highly doubt that any "one" simple exclaimation could ever really be found considering the multiple possibilties over the expansive time periods..alot can happen in a matter of 10,000 years let alone multiplying that number by 600. Assuming that the earliest human resemblace bones found to date are at 6 millions years old and still counting. And considering our recorded history is a mere trifiling few thousand years old.

[flatfloor]

I found this yesterday after I had posted.

http://www.si.edu/resource/faq/nmnh/origin.htm

[cx]

Yep, a discussion much like that is what I recall, flatfloor. Mostly says everything we knew, and everything we keep learning, seems to point to the fact that we don't really know very much about the subject.

Whole lot like countin' owls. :D

[John Bridge]

JC,

You and I ain't gonna be buddies anymore you keep carvin' up my disc space with all that garbage. ;)

[Sonnie Layne]

Way I see it, John and CX aren't available,,, what happened to the tent society??? Carried over into the Fox & Jacobs time span???

[John Bridge]

Thor Heyerdahl of Kon Tiki fame believed that South America was populated by peoples from the South Pacific Region, or at least they passed through the South Pacific on their way from some other place. Those people would have then migrated in all directions including north. Conversely, the people might have arrived across the Atlantic. He attempted to prove his point with the Ra Expeditions.


He didn't disbelieve the Clovis idea. Nor did he doubt that people walked across the land bridge.

[flatfloor]

What ARE you talking about?

[John Bridge]

It's what happens when you switch over entirely to wine. :D

[Sonnie Layne]

was only referring to the graph depicted above, as a point of humour (note the 'u').

as goes the travels of humanity and trade, I'm of the opine that trade was established between Egypt and the americas long before the extinction of the flat world society. Atlantis was a stop-over, and possibly the cause of it all. At any rate, the expansionism of that trade included what we now call Easter IS., Fiji, etc. as the trade proceeded westward.

On the other hand, maybe the venture started in Australia, that's what they'd have us think (in which case their BBQ is constructed correctly, gods!). If that were true, and the conquest proceeded westward, then the Incan civilization would have been first, then the Indian (maybe) and finally the Egyptian.

Darned, I'm so sorry the schools I attended had such crappy world history programs. I've been left to sceptical wandering. I have no doubt, however that the minds involved in the keepings of this forum will divulge more theories upon me now than I'd ever wished for.

New topic???

Oh, and I don't entirely buy into the thought that Egyptians were the first wine-makers, either. Someone was around before then and I think wine was around before beer. Jeez, now Tom's gonna jump in here I suppose. :rolleyes:

S

[tomtuttle]

Hell, yes, I'm going to jump in here :yeah:

You're almost certainly right about wine preceding beer historically. Wine is, procedurally, a much simpler product. It requires no cooking, fewer ingredients, and happens "accidentally" all the time.

It is a point of some contention between winemakers and beermakers that modern beer simply requires more of the craftsman/artisan who is doing the making. Whereas some winemakers *can* have vertical integration with the product, whereby factors like soil, weather, agricultural practices, etc. are within their responsibility, they can't always *control* those factors. And it is common for there to be some legal separation between the guys in charge of growing the grapes and the guys in charge of rotting, er, fermenting them - even in commercial operations.

In beer, the processes are much more rarely vertically integrated - only companies like Budweiser grow their own barley. However, it would be a mistake to assume that "barley is barley" or that hop varieties (or their growing regions) do not have a profound impact on the end product.

In modern beer, the barley has to be malted, kilned, mashed, sparged, and boiled with hops BEFORE the fermentable stuff gets to the place where winemakers start (the crush). After that, the fermentation process also varies dramatically due to medium (stainless vs. oak, etc.), duration and temperature. In some ways, yeast (and the resulting alcohol) is the only thing wine and beer have in common.

On the "which came first" question, you have to include the notion of defining your terms. Modern beer (with hops) is probably only 700-800 years old. However, yeast has been rotting all kinds of food for centuries, so it makes sense that people have been drinking the resultant boozy liquid for just as long. It's what you call that liquid that is at issue.

[John Bridge]

And so could beer be at the root of the continuing chaos in Africa?

:shades:

[bbcamp]

No, John, he said it was the wine! It couldn't possibly be the beer. You weren't paying attention.

[tomtuttle]

"Beer: the cause of and solution to all our problems." -- Homer Simpson

Seems like they should be able to grow decent grapes in Africa.

:topicoff: :yeah: :yeah:

[JC]

Hey check-out this link I found for the history of beer...can't attest to the factuality but none the less very interesting reading.


http://www.alabev.com/history.htm

[flatfloor]

They are making wine in So Africa.