For anyone who is still confused about my recent post, it was most definitely a joke. Although I blogged about Kagame’s innocence, none of it was true. I’m sure he would probably die from surprise if it were discovered that he was proven innocent, because no such notion exists in our infinite universe, and even if his innocence were discovered, no amount of influence could convince him of its legitimacy. Basically, he’s as guilty as they come, and he knows it. I just wanted to clarify that for anyone who didn’t “get it.”
Aside from that, the Rwanda government is concerned and trying to curb any “genocide ideology” that may surface. Various means of control are applied. In different instances, individuals may be suspended from work/school, fired, jailed, and in some extreme (not so extreme in Rwanda though) killed.
Obviously, any leader concerned about his/her country’s well being would attempt to stop any kind of ideology that would destabilize the society, and especially considering Rwanda’s past, this isn’t far fetched.
On surface level, Rwanda is taking preventive steps to protect its citizens. Unfortunately though, it is at the expense of the truth. Because what is being curbed is not actually genocide ideology, but any truth emerging regarding Kagame’s crimes. If at any time a person speaks out against the murders committed by the Kagame regime, he or she immediately becomes a target, and extreme measures are used to silence him. Many people have been murdered or jailed, simply due to a difference in opinion.
One way that KR (Kagame’s regime from now on), can get away with it, is to call any dissenting opinions “genocide ideology” deflecting from what the speaker is saying, and simultaneously criminalizing the speaker. Obviously, if the speaker truly is spreading genocide ideology then measures need to be taken to prevent future “genocides” from happening.
I would be all for this, except, there are just a few problems with what is actually happening in Rwanda.
Recently, there was an uproar surrounding a local newspaper, “UMUCO” which published, “slanderous material” towards Kagame. There are arrest warrants out for the editor of the paper, and some sources claim that the author of the most inflammatory article does not even exist. Apparently, the said newspaper had been spreading genocide ideology, and therefore needed to be brought under justice for defamation. Talks discussed suspending the paper for a year, and punishing both the editor and the writer.
But just what did the paper say? What Genocide ideology?
According to some sources, the author of the main and most incendiary article compared Kagame to Hitler, and provided him with options that could liberate him from being stuck between life and death. Options included killing himself, clinging to power until death, or to flee the country. Any of these genocide ideologies? No. Sound like typical African dictatorshipdom to me.
Truth is, nothing was said in the paper that was false. If Kagame has nothing to hide, why even entertain this paper if it’s all such none sense? Why bother even suspending it? It isn’t none sense is it?
But the paper also mentioned that Hutu officials in government were monitored by some of their Tutsi counterparts, and this is where the “genocide” ideology comes into play. Using the ethnic group labels. And in order for Kagame to carry out his de facto murder and incarceration of non – government sympathizers, terms such as “genocide survivor” are instead used to denote the difference between the ethnic groups. Everyone knows what is meant when one is referred to as a genocide survivor. Another underhanded means of denying Hutu victims and survivors of KR’s murders and crimes their right to mourn their losses, and their right to protest against their attackers and possibly bring them to justice.
Pride and acknowledgement of your cultural identity is seen as a weapon, seen as vilifying, seen as attempting to incite violence, especially if you are not considered a “genocide survivor” but you are, and it is completely stigmatized. Again unless you’re the appropriate “genocide survivor.”
Here is the thing, and I’ll say this over and over and over and over, until perhaps it clicks for some of you. Kagame did not save Rwanda during 1994 although with his clutch of power the violence within Rwanda stopped, instead he attacked a peaceful country, managed to destabilize the country, ran it into chaos, murdered thousands and thousands of people, assassinated two presidents, and committed genocide against Rwandans and Congolese (of course not all by himself). And what he is doing is covering his tracks. But somehow, pieces of the truth seem to creep up every once in a while, in the most unexpected places. If within his reach, then these people are probably dead or in jail. If not, he’s trying his hardest to make sure they meet the same fate.
If you believe he is a savior, then unfortunately for you, you probably believe he is doing the right thing. But the truth does and will prevail. And anything labeled genocide ideology, is probably someone attempting to call attention to his crimes because one side has been unfairly labeled the criminal, and he walks around free.
But most seem to be mystified and they defend him with a vengeance. They need to stop it like yesterday.