Thread: Zimbabwe

Somewhere hardly ever talked about here on PH, since reports seem to vanish very quickly on the internet thought I'd post the few I see here. This is more an indication of what is going wrong than worthy of much discussion in itself, what I'm interested in is how it reflects what the situation is like in Zimbabwe today.

Reported in Today's Independent on Sunday

Victoria Falls 'at risk', UN warns

World Heritage status may be revoked as Zimbabwe and Zambia compete for tourist income

By Christopher Thompson

Published: 07 January 2007


Victoria Falls, one of the world's greatest natural wonders, may cease to be a World Heritage Site as a result of the chaos in Zimbabwe.
Known locally as Mosi oa Tunya, or "the smoke that thunders", the falls are more than a mile wide and 420ft high. They have been a tourist hotspot since 1905, but Unesco is now considering listing the site as "endangered" because of mismanagement that has allowed the once prosperous resort to deteriorate.
Furthermore, over-zealous Zambian developers are proposing to build 500 chalets in a national park overlooking the falls, prompting warnings that the plan could lead Unesco to remove the site'sWorld Heritage status immediately.
Control of the Victoria Falls, named by the explorer David Livingstone in 1855, is at the centre of a turf war between two government bodies - the National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management - both fighting over rights to manage one of the country's last remaining sources of valuable tourist revenue as hyperinflation touches 1,100 per cent.
The Zambezi river, which plunges over the falls, forms the border between Zimbabwe and Zambia. Most Western tourists used to stay on the Zimbabwean side, attracted by top-class facilities such as the Victoria Falls and Elephant Hills hotels, but the surrounding decay, and safety fears after the often violent land seizures initiated by President Robert Mugabe, have seen tourist revenues plunge by more than 70 per cent to $98m (£51m) last year from $340m in 1999, before land reforms started.
Unesco is also alarmed by Zambia's efforts to benefit from Zimbabwe's disarray. In a reversal of the traditional position, most foreign visitors now approach the falls from the Zambian side, even though the view is less spectacular. The tourism industry in Zambia is booming, with the number of overseas arrivals doubling between 2003 and 2005, bringing the country much-needed income, and new hotels are springing up near the Zambian town of Livingstone.

Originally Posted by Magpie

Somewhere hardly ever talked about here on PH ...

Thank you Magpie. I have long wondered why Zimbabwe is not on the radar for the spreaders of 'democracy', such as Bush, Blair, and Howard.

If ever there was need for a government to be brought to account ...

Originally Posted by Leo

Thank you Magpie. I have long wondered why Zimbabwe is not on the radar for the spreaders of 'democracy', such as Bush, Blair, and Howard.

If ever there was need for a government to be brought to account ...

Because they're black. If the US attempts to intervene in an internal racist clash between black marxists bent on land and property seizures from whites, the world media will do nothing except heap scorn on the US, no matter how well deserved that aid really is, no matter how badly the poor people, mostly black, need it.

So the US rightly says "fuck'em, they ain't worth it. We got more important things to do."

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Because they're black. If the US attempts to intervene in an internal racist clash between black marxists bent on land and property seizures from whites, the world media will do nothing except heap scorn on the US, no matter how well deserved that aid really is, no matter how badly the poor people, mostly black, need it.

So the US rightly says "fuck'em, they ain't worth it. We got more important things to do."

Sorry FFA, but none of that makes any sense. Possibly the majority of the world's population are dark-skinned, does that mean everyone should just ignore their suffering?

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Because they're black. If the US attempts to intervene in an internal racist clash between black marxists bent on land and property seizures from whites, the world media will do nothing except heap scorn on the US, no matter how well deserved that aid really is, no matter how badly the poor people, mostly black, need it.

So the US rightly says "fuck'em, they ain't worth it. We got more important things to do."

But that's not true. The Bush Administration has done good things (not enough, but it's a start) with regard to the atrocities in Darfur and have been instrumental in resolving conflicts in Angola (although the reasons were a bit self serving) and Sierra Leone.

As you can see from the attached report regarding Conflict Diamonds and the Kimberely Process , the United States has been very involved in aiding African countries in need.

Originally Posted by TennesseeRain

But that's not true. The Bush Administration has done good things (not enough, but it's a start) with regard to the atrocities in Darfur and have been instrumental in resolving conflicts in Angola (although the reasons were a bit self serving) and Sierra Leone.

As you can see from the attached report regarding Conflict Diamonds and the Kimberely Process , the United States has been very involved in aiding African countries in need.

Very true, Sierra Leone's civil war ended four years ago but they did receive over 400 milion dollars in aid. Conflict diamonds tore that country apart.

Originally Posted by Leo

Sorry FFA, but none of that makes any sense. Possibly the majority of the world's population are dark-skinned, does that mean everyone should just ignore their suffering?

Hello? McFly? The world calls the US, the most tolerantly open society in the world, one of the most racist.

If we go into Zimbabwe, who problems are caused strictly by racist Marxist blacks busy stealing the property of white land owners, on the side of the white land owners, which is, after all, what is needed to fix the problems the black racist Marxists caused, everyone will view the event as either racially motivated.

By "everyone", I mean not only the irrelevant gnats that is the world outside the US borders, but the poverty pimps and race baiters in the United States who make millions of dollars keeping that racism is alive and well in this country, at least in the eyes of the fools that need some excuse to explain the failures they've made of their lives. Also, the PPs and RB's in this country are an exclusiver and essential property of the Democrat party, which is also the main Marxist political party in the United States. Thus, if a Republican president should act to stop the disaster black racist Marxists in Zimbabwe have caused, the black racist Marxists in the United States would rise up against him. And since most of the major media outlets are nothing but tools of the Democrats in the United States, that's all we'd hear about until the return of Noah...or is it Jesus that's supposed to come back? whatever...

It's all complicated, and you have to be a member of the most tolerant least racist society on earth to realize how insane living here can be.

Originally Posted by TennesseeRain

But that's not true. The Bush Administration has done good things (not enough, but it's a start) with regard to the atrocities in Darfur and have been instrumental in resolving conflicts in Angola (although the reasons were a bit self serving) and Sierra Leone.

As you can see from the attached report regarding Conflict Diamonds and the Kimberely Process , the United States has been very involved in aiding African countries in need.

Zimbabwe was a former apartheid country like South Africa, and it would have repurcussions.

I can see it now, all the idiots out there saying the only reason we interfered is to gain control of half the world's chromium.

Besides, they fairly elected their racist black Marxists, I'm all for letting them enjoy their ideology. Sure looks tasty, doesn't it?

The US got shit on for helping in Somalia.

We got shit on for not helping in Rwanda.

We get shit on for not spending enough on AIDS in Africa.

We get shit on when we spend more to help deal with the problem of AIDS in Africa.

Fuck Africa. I, for one, and tired of the hypocrisy of the world. If they don't like us, and they don't, let 'em starve, let 'em drown, let 'em enjoy self-imploded econonmies, and let 'em enjoy being slaves to themselves.

Also, ivory doesn't have any structural uses, fuck the elephants. Gorillas are equally useless, use their land for farms...ones cleared by slash and burn because the US shouldn't loan those people any more money until they pay back what they already owe.

Africa is the birthplace of the human race. Isn't it about time they've learned to fend for themselves? If anything, it was EUROPE that destroyed the burgeoning Bronze-Age civilazation in Africa. Let Africa carry the White Man's burden for a change.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Zimbabwe was a former apartheid country like South Africa, and it would have repurcussions.

I can see it now, all the idiots out there saying the only reason we interfered is to gain control of half the world's chromium.

Besides, they fairly elected their racist black Marxists, I'm all for letting them enjoy their ideology. Sure looks tasty, doesn't it?

The US got shit on for helping in Somalia.

We got shit on for not helping in Rwanda.

We get shit on for not spending enough on AIDS in Africa.

We get shit on when we spend more to help deal with the problem of AIDS in Africa.

Fuck Africa. I, for one, and tired of the hypocrisy of the world. If they don't like us, and they don't, let 'em starve, let 'em drown, let 'em enjoy self-imploded econonmies, and let 'em enjoy being slaves to themselves.

Also, ivory doesn't have any structural uses, fuck the elephants. Gorillas are equally useless, use their land for farms...ones cleared by slash and burn because the US shouldn't loan those people any more money until they pay back what they already owe.

Africa is the birthplace of the human race. Isn't it about time they've learned to fend for themselves? If anything, it was EUROPE that destroyed the burgeoning Bronze-Age civilazation in Africa. Let Africa carry the White Man's burden for a change.

Your avatar is fitting....you are on the moon.

Originally Posted by Freedom for All

Hello? McFly? The world calls the US, the most tolerantly open society in the world, one of the most racist.

I call bullshit on that FFA

A black man who used to work at my office was more concious of his colour in America than he ever was in Britian. Not only did he get told not to pump gas because it wasnt good for people of his colour to be out but even when he did not recieve such direct racism he found himself uncomfortable even in places where they tried to be overly nice to him because of his colour. Americans often seem fixiated on colour in the media etc.