Rwandan dictator Kagame's sterilisation plan

Post Reply New Topic

Two of Kagame's men said that Kagame did it... As for De Gaulle, he set up the French "Force de Frappe" and took France out of NATO. He believed in an independent France not under any kind of American control. Jacques Chirac was also of that tradition. Sarkozy is a neocon who not only wanted American guidance in foreign policy but also wanted to change the French economy to be more along the lines of the so-called Anglo-Saxon model. Again, his background was alien compared to the typical French politician. I don't see why I can't mention his Jewishness as it is a reason why he became a neocon. France had good relations with the Arab countries but Sarkozy was unconditionally pro-Israeli in a manner never before seen from a French leader, but such a stance is typically neoconservative. Mikhail Kordorkovsky in Russia is by the way another example of a Jewish notable in another country gravitating towards American neoconservatives, in part because of the heavy Jewish membership of that particular club. He stopped seeing himself as Russian and instead saw himself as part of a club pushing for American international hegemony. That Yukos had to be taken from him was a matter of national security in Russia. That he stole Yukos under the catastrophic Yeltsin regime made its recovery a matter of justice.

I am pretty sure that I can find two Hutu individuals who will support the findings that the Habyarimana assassination was carried out by Hutu fractions.

I choose to base my belief on more rigorous sources, though.


1. You are derailing your own thread. I actually consider the political context of modern Rwanda quite interesting, but you seem to be hell-bent on peddling conspiracy theories and nothing else.

2. You are obviously anti-Semitic. Your claim that Jews have no loyalty to the countries they live in - and represent - is part of the anti-Semitic canon. [Mocking Addendum] I am Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and I approve this message.

It is not a conspiracy theory, it's accepted fact. Back to Freedom Fries, shall we? That was caused by the rift between the traditional Gaullists in France and the Americans who at the time were run by extremist neoconservatives. De Gaulle did take France out of NATO. I can't believe I have to explain this... As for Sarkozy, everyone at the time when he was elected said this was George W Bush's victory, that he was not a traditional Gaullist, he was an American-style neocon with the sensibilities of American-style neocons. That the Gaullists were very proud of the French ways of doing things and defended them from Anglo-Saxon model policies but Sarkozy wanted Anglo-Saxon model policies... Sarkozy had an unusual background for a French politician. Both his parents came from outside France, his family was not rooted there. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this influenced his inclinations. Where's the mystery, where's the conspiracy theory?

By the way, I have never heard of a single solitary Hutu claiming responsibility for shooting Habyarimana's plane nor of Hutus saying they know of Hutus claiming responsibility for shooting down Habyarimana's plane... but Kagame's former Chief of Staff says that Kagame did it... and Kagame had the motive. Burundi's first Hutu president had been murdered six months before and now they were going to knock down the second along with Habyarimana? Come on! The "the Hutus did it" theories even suggest that Habyarimana's wife was in on it! Right, she was just itching to kill her husband.

I did not say that no Jew has loyalty to his own country, I simply pointed out examples where seeing a big circle of "winners" when one is part of a country that some see as a "loser country" that a person would identify with the circle of winners - in this case the pro-US hegemony neocons - rather than with "loser Russia"... Joining the ideological cabinet for global hegemons is an attractive proposition for many, one leaves the small time of Russia or France and becomes an international player.

And Obama has an unusual background for an American politician. After all, his middle name is Hussein. Clearly, his obvious Salafism influenced his inclinations. That, and the fact that he is the Antichrist.


Your theory does not survive the brutal confrontation with evidence. However, If you are in possession of evidence superior to the findings of the 2012 report, then please post it.


I completely agree. The Patriots (correction: The La-li-lu-le-lo) rule the world through manipulation, and Sarkozy clearly was auditioning for the Wisemen's Committee.

Obama does have an unusual background for an American politician but by his actions he has shown that this has made him even more a creature of the machine than anyone else. It's total nonsense to say, as many on the Right say, that he's some kind of "anti-colonialist"... The key here is to actually take a look at the person's actions. Sarkozy's actions and Khordorkovsky's actions are what led people to draw the conclusions about them, not simply their family backgrounds.

Except you. You clearly arrived at your conclusions on the basis of their religious beliefs.

Oh, and Sarkozy is Catholic, BTW.

Their family backgrounds provide an explanation. It permits them to identify with, to use Bin Laden's infamous phrase, a "stronger horse" with which they feel affinity. Perhaps the example of the boxer Lennox Lewis might help. He lived the very early part of his life in Britain but grew up overwhelmingly in Canada. He represented Canada at the summer Olympics. But when it was time to go pro, did he fight as a Canadian? No. He fought with the Union Jack as British. The British are bigger players in the world, a bigger market than is Canada, so he decided to play in the bigger sandbox. Khordorkovsky felt affinity with Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, the latter who wrote that infamous blueprint for global domination. These were heady days, and people like Sarkozy and Khrodorkovsky wanted to align themselves with this "strong horse"... To this day, it's far easier to take Kagame's side than to oppose him. The most powerful forces on Earth are on Kagame's side and those who oppose him are accused immediately of being the worst people in the world. The old Gaullists get grief over having opposed George W Bush and they're accused of all sorts of depravities in general but Sarkozy is celebrated by these same people... I'm sure he's going to collect a lot more cash in his retirement than De Villepain ever will.

xenon13, you're coming across as freaking nuts.

Only just worked that out, have we?

Only just saw the thread a few minutes ago.

Look, I'm talking of stuff that's common knowledge and I'm supposed to explain it again and again... And Wikileaks also revealed such.

Wikileaks reveals Sarkozy's love of George W Bush

Sarkozy liking bush doesn't make him some sort of traitor against his own country, regardless of his ancestry.

I did not say that Sarkozy was a traitor to France, I said that he was a supporter of Anglo-American hegemony, a hegemony effectively run by the Americans with Britain as "lieutenant". Madeleine Albright said "We are the world's organising principle and the Indispensible Nation". Tony Blair explained that the US must rule the world in order to prevent weapons of mass destruction attacks; this is why he was so gung ho about invading Iraq. Sarkozy was very open about his sympathies, his admiration for Bush and for neoconservatism, as well as for Anglo-American economic policies and organisation.

Everyone knew his victory was Bush's victory, that he was qualitatively different from Chirac and de Villepain who got into fights with Bush over the Iraq war. Go back to Mitterand and he was one who spoke critically of the American "hyperpower". Sarkozy was a big change and that his parents were not French has been offered as an explanation for his sympathies. One parent from a pro-US post-Soviet "New Europe" country, another whose being Jewish helped give him an affinity with the American neoconservative club. Now, I am not saying that his Jewish background made him into a neoconservative, I'm simply saying that he chose to be a neoconservative but this common point with leading black holes of neoconservatism likely helped draw him in.

So under Sarkozy, the Rwanda policy changed substantially. It was changed to follow the policy set in Washington which is to support Kagame without question.

Your quote:

The funny thing is that this is not considered to be traitorous in most countries. Accepting American hegemony is considered to be normal. It's a bit like that rhyme, the one that says "Treason doth never prosper. What's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it 'treason.'" At any rate, Sarkozy ran on this platform and was elected. So it's not like people didn't know what kind of snake oil they were being sold.

At least there were funny chants that came out of his terrible presidency, "Sarko si tu savais, ta reforme, ta reforme, Sarko si tu savais, ta reform ou on le met, au cul, au cul, aucune hesitation!"

I have here a list of former Kagame associates and people who were in his army who said that he assassinated Habyarimana...

In 1998 an editor for an RPF propaganda outfit named Jean Pierre Mugabo said that Kagame did it.

In 2004 there was Aloys Ruyenzi who said he was personally involved. Then in 2005 there was Abdul Joshua Ruzibiza, also involved. Each of the two were RPF soldiers.

On 1 October 2011, Theogene Rudasingwa, former Chief of Staff and Secretary General of the RPF, former Rwandan Ambassador to the U.S., said that Kagame “told me that he was responsible for shooting down the plane”.

In June 2012 In 2012, Gen. Faustin Kayumba Nyamwasa, Rwanda's former chief of military staff, said that Kagame did it.