BLACKS IN ZIMBABWE ARE BRINGING FAMINE UPON THEMSELVES

http://www.aegis.com/news/afp/2002/AF020947.html
from JoeUser Forums
Over the last four years, virtually 100 percent of white landowners have been violently driven from their farms by President Robert Mugabe’s irrational hatred of whites. Mugabe's ruling party aims to complete the job even though they claim otherwise.

This does not bode well for the people of Zimbabwe already living under a destroyed economy. Food production fell by over 80 percent because of disruptions caused in the agricultural sector by the farm invasions. If it were not for white people donating food, most blacks would be starving right now.

This may sound unbelievable, but a mere eighth of the targeted agricultural land was ploughed and planted in 2004. The average food cost of a family of six has risen 30 percent in the last three months alone. The cost of food and non-food items has increased 120 percent from March to December in 2004.

Unemployment in Zimbabwe has soared to 85 percent. The whole cause of the high unemployment rate is the destruction of the white man's farms. The farms are not employing anybody because there is nothing happening on the farms. The farms have become totally derelict under black rule. With food production virtually wiped out, who will Mugabe blame when he is unable to feed Zimbabwe’s 14 people?

Larry Kuperman supplied this very informative link....
1,754 views 11 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Politics, not reality, have fuelled most of the famines of the last 50 years. Instead of addressing the problem, "activists" usually make it worse by trying to place the blame on their pet peave, instead of the actual problem.

Worse yet, people make excuses for tryants, basically saying that they have every right to starve and abuse their people and no other country has a right to stop them.

The truth is, poverty in this world is not the problem. The problem is, those who are in a position to end it are usually the ones who perpetuate it, and those who claim to be working to end it, are usually only using it to further their own agenda.
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think this is a pretty good article, it is sad a leader can't get past his hate, even if it means throwing his country into famine.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think this is a pretty good article, it is sad a leader can't get past his hate, even if it means throwing his country into famine.


if that was what marvin was saying, you'd be right. even though his title could mean a black dictator and members of his ruling party who are also black are bringing famine upon themselves, it's highly unlikely mugabe et al are bringing anything but wealth upon themselves...at the expense of everyone else there. blaming zimbabwe's problems on all black zims because a criminal such as mugabe has so far managed to crush those who oppose him--both black and white--is the equivalent of blaming the people of the philippines for buying emelda so many shoes.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
"With food production virtually wiped out, who will Mugabe blame when he is unable to feed Zimbabwe’s 14 people?" should read 14.4 MILLION people.

Marvin is right, factually. (Something that I never thought that I would say, but give credit where credit is due.) See http://www.aegis.com/news/afp/2002/AF020947.html

Food production is down by 70 percent. Recently, the government of President Mugabe blocked the import of 30 tons of maize that was to have been given to chuches for redistribution. Why? Since all the food supply is controlled by the government, one can assume that as supplies decrease and demand increases or remains the same, the price will rise. This not only effects the former Rhodesia, but neighboring countries that once bought food from Africa's former breadbasket.

The govenrment has also fought efforts to control HIV and Aids.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Kingbee...........You make a good counter point. I was a bit overly zealous in blaming all Zimbabwe blacks.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
yeah, I'd have something hateful to say about it if A) the swedish government was a corrupt relic of colonialism B) the article was written by a blogger with a history of White Christian-centric articles, and C) I felt that the blogger was distorting statistics to prove a racist point.

If you want to blame Robert Mugabe, that's one thing. If you want to blame ALL black people, that's another.

As for little whip, any time the BDIU calls me asinine, I must be doing something right.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Myrrander...........former rhodesia was much better off under the rule of Iean Smith. even the blacks were slowly progressing and would have eventually had a viable democracy. But Mugabe has set it back centuries. Mugabe, though a black man, has turned his own black people into a nation of slaves just as stalin turned the russians into slaves. Mugabe would rather starve millions of blacks than lose all the power and billions he has stolen during his reign of tyranny and madness.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
"
If you want to blame Robert Mugabe, that's one thing. If you want to blame ALL black people, that's another. "


Mugabe isn't going out to these farms with machine guns and evicting/arresting/killing the owners. Granted there are some in Zimbabwe that are in opposition to him, and are crushed like the whites, but the population is duplicitous, to the point of hopping in trucks and "re-distributing" this land by force.

I don't think marvin means that "blacks", i.e. the entire race, are responsible for famine in Zimbabwe. To make out that it is just a few rabble-rousers starving an entire people isn't true either.

The issue in Zimbabwe is racial because it was made so by those who are wrecking the economy through their own anti-white bigotry.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is largely the colonialist who originally created the problems in Zumbabwe. Although, the current people could be doing a much better job.