jk akila pozi na marais wa zanzibar,k rwanda, uganda, kenya na burundi leo kule a-town.
Rwanda, Burundi watawazwa wana ist afrika!
bwanda na burundi leo zimekubaliwa rasmi kujiunga na jumuiya ya ist afrika mashariki inayoundwa na kenya, ganda na Tanzania.
Mwenyekiti wa Jumuiya hiyo rais wa kenya mh. Mwai kibaki ametangaza kwenye mkutano wa siku moja uliohudhuriwa na marais wa nchi zote wanachama, amesema kujiunga kwao kunapanua wigo wa biashara ambao sasa utakuwa na watu milioni 120.
Hata hivyo, Kibaki ametoa hadi Julai mwakani Burundi na Rwanda ziwe zimeshakamilisha taratibu zote za kuwa memba wa EAC.
bwanda na burundi leo zimekubaliwa rasmi kujiunga na jumuiya ya ist afrika mashariki inayoundwa na kenya, ganda na Tanzania.
Mwenyekiti wa Jumuiya hiyo rais wa kenya mh. Mwai kibaki ametangaza kwenye mkutano wa siku moja uliohudhuriwa na marais wa nchi zote wanachama, amesema kujiunga kwao kunapanua wigo wa biashara ambao sasa utakuwa na watu milioni 120.
Hata hivyo, Kibaki ametoa hadi Julai mwakani Burundi na Rwanda ziwe zimeshakamilisha taratibu zote za kuwa memba wa EAC.
Huyo Rais wa Zanzibar anafanya nini hapo? Maana yake Zanzibar ni mwanachama wa Jumuiya ya Afrika Mashariki kama Tanzania? Kikwete sasa kweli anajichanganya. Kwa hiyo Zanzibar wanaweza kuomba kujiunga na OIC, Africa Cup of Nations, FIFA na hata kupeperusha bendera yao UN!. ama kweli kila mtu anaweza kuwa Rais Bongo.
ReplyDeleteHayawi hayawi sasa yamekuwa na hatimaye wahutu na watusi kuwa miongoni mwa wana-jumuiya mpya ya East Afrika.Inabidi iandaliwe mikakati ili uchumi na amani visije dorora!!!
ReplyDeleteWaache kudundana kwanza!!
ReplyDeletekwa mtizamo wangu, hii east african community ni non-starter.
ReplyDeletetunazungumzia kukaribisha nchi nyingi zaidi, lakini ukiangalia kwa makini hizo tatu zilizoasisi [tanzania, kenya na uganda], bado hazijapiga hatua zinazostahili kukaribisha wanachama wapya.
bado kuna maswala kama uhamiaji, forodha na ulinzi wa mipaka, ambayo hakuna maelewano kwa sasa, je wakiingia hao wanachama wapya [burundi na rwanda] hali itakuwaje?vurugu maradufu..
these leaders are too ambitious, sidhani watafanikisha lolote.wanaolaani ushiriki wa burundi na rwanda hawajakosea, member countries zitatumia muda mwingi kusuluhisha migogoro na kubishana badala ya kujadili na kutekeleza maswala ya kimaendeleo.
yetu macho, hapo tanzania endapo ccm haiwezi kuishi kiwanja kimoja na cuf au chadema, itakuwa mkenya aje kusema sijui namna gani? acheni hizo kabisa....!
hawa watu kamwe hawaji kuwa na amani.wao wenyewe wanajua hilo.lakini let's give them the benefit of the doubt.
Aka ka-Karume kanaonekana kan kwamba kanataka Janjiba ijiondoe kutoka Muunganoni!
ReplyDeleteMajina yote yana KKKKKKKKKK: Karume, Kagame, Kaguta, Kibaki, Kikwete...na hata huyo wa Burundi ni K = Kurujinja!
Kagame = Mwuaji
Kaguta = Mwuaji
Kurujinja = Mwuaji!
Hawa wote wameosha madhambi yao ya uuaji kwa kuwa "walokoke" (born again wa-Kristo. Anyway, tunashabihiana. Mimi ni born again m-pagani!
This is Born Agin Pagan, signing off for now!
Na ka-M7 kanataka kunyakua nini? Urais wa Ist-Afrika nini? Kaone ka mkono kake ka kulia! Mbona wenzake wote wamekunja mikono?
ReplyDeleteHuyo naye Karume anafanya nini hapo?Huyo si Mkuu wa Mkoa zanzibar kwa maraisi wanafanya nini na mikoni yake kama vile ametoka kijijini mchamba wima!!!
ReplyDeleteAcheni hizo ati watu 120 million. Hivi nyie biashara mnadhani ni idadi ya watu au ni purchasing power? Hizi ambitions zenu zitawapeleka kubaya mnataka sifa tu hakuna lolote. Born again Pagan nice observation: Kibaki, Kikwete, Kaguta, Karume, Kagame, Kurunjinja ama kweli ndege wenye unyoya mmoja huruka pamoja.
ReplyDeleteMimi mpaka sasa sijaelewa bado , kwa hiyo hawa marais wamekaa na kuamua kuongeza hizo nchi mbili bila ya Ridhaa ya bunge , kwa hiyo bunge litakaa na ku-rubber stamp maamuzi yaliyokwisha pitishwa ...mmmh tuna kazi kubwa sana.
ReplyDeleteSwali ninalojiuliza ,jee sisi wadanganyika tumejiandaa vipi katika huu muungano manake tusije tukawa wasindikizaji ...
Mtoa Maoni, Anonymous, Friday, December 01, 2006 12:18:29 AM, Nakubaliana nawe, pia. Purchasing power and willingness to buy ni nyezo muhimu katika kulinda soko. Wakubwa wa nje wanajua kuwa mwenye hiyo purchasing power ni serikali zetu. Hiyo idadi ya 120 milioni ni kwa ajili ya Coca Cola, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Shell, na makampuni ya nje mengine ya kujenga barabara. Kama kampuni ya nje ikiingia East Africa inapata guarantee ya soko la watu 120.
ReplyDeleteKusema kweli, hii idea ya kuungana inawasaidia sana wakubwa, kinyume cha dola ya Kisovieti. Kwa nini Umoja wa Kisovieti uliangushwa, kama it is the question of idadi ya watu. Kwa sababu Moscow ndio ilokuwa na kauli ya kusema kwa makampuni ya nje, nyet! Wakubwa wakaona njia moja ya kupenyeza katika hiyo empire ni kuiangusha dola hiyo. Lakini hata wana-Ist Afrika wakiwa na uwezo wa purchasing power and willingness to buy, yafaa sana tusiwe masoko ya vitu vya nje.
Mpaka sasa ni vigumu sana kwa bidhaa zetu tuzalishazo sisi Wamatumbi kuingia masoko ya wakubwa. Mkubwa akitaka bidhaa zetu, yeye huja kuanzisha shamba la mibuni ama pamba, Hata utalii ni lazima anunue, kwa mfano, sehemu ya Grumeti-Ikorongo-Ikoma, hivi, huko Serengeti. Hata AGOA!!!!!!!!!!! Pamba ni lazima itoke Amerika au sehemu Amerika inapenda. Majora ya nguo au nyuzi za kushonea yawe/ziwe ya/za Amerika au sehemu Amerika inapenda. Sisi tunabakia ni fundi cherehani tu ! Wamiliki na wanyapara ni wa kutoka Asia Mashariki, eti, kwa kuwa wana ujuzi wa kushona shona manguo hayo. Tunawakaribisha bure na kuwapa kila la nyezo za kufanikisha biashara hizo. Baada ya kuchuma na kupata faida kubwa saaaaaaaaaana, hukunja virago na kutuacha mataani, kama walivyofanya huko Uganda. Kampuni yao hiyo hiyo ipo kwetu. Haya tuone watafanya nini baada ya miaka mitatu ya kuchuma bure!
Nilisoma Mwamerika mmoja anataka kuwekeza katika ulimaji wa pamba nchini kwetu. Mwamerika huyu ana viwanda vyake vya kutengeneza nguo. Kwa nini asiambiwe kuwa akitaka pamba ni lazima anunue ya Wamatumbi? Japani inataka kuwekeza katika mistu. Inasema inakuja kupanda mistu huko kwa Wamakonde kwa Mkapa na shemejie JK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kwa nini wana-Afrika ya Mashariki tusiulizwe kwanza endapo tunataka huu muungano ? Tumalize matatizo yetu kwanza. Kila nchi bado ina matatizo yake. Uganda hakuna umoja. Burundi na Rwanda bado weanahanagika kuleta umoja huo. Kenya haina “moyo wa State”. Tanzania bado “the Zanzibar factor” inatu-haunt!
This is Born Again Pagan, saying bye for now!
Inasikitisha sana, kwani hao warwanda na waburundi bado wana damu mikononi mwao toka katika mauaji yaliyofanyika huko kwao, leo hii ni miongoni mwa watu wenye amani kuliko wote yaani watanzania??? hii inatisha sana, sijui itakuwaje, mimi naona huu muungano umeng'ng'anizwa na viongozi wetu bila kujali hasa feelings na maoni ya watanzania kwa ujumla, Mungu ibariki Tanzania!!!
ReplyDeleteKarume hapo anawakilisha serikali ya Mapinduzi Zanzibar(SMZ) msisahau hilo...! Na Mchango wake kwenye mkutano huo ulikuwa unahitajika sana, na hasa ukiangalia mtazamo wa jumuiya hiyo katika miaka minne ijayo!
ReplyDeleteANNOYN DEC,01 11:40:45PM THIS MAY HELP YOU IN FUTURE.
ReplyDeleteFlawed plane crash evidence
By Jean-Paul KIMONYO
Monday, 04 December 2006
FEATURE:Bruguière displaying intellectual dishonesty: Juge Bruguière order to the Paris public prosecutor’s office to issue international arrest warrants for nine Rwandan army leaders for their alleged involvement in the attack against President Habyarimana’s plane...
... is based on three types of evidences: contextual elements, testimonial evidence and the recalling of tangible evidence; two missile launcher tubes. The following analysis only deals with the tangible evidence tabled by Judge Bruguière. In view of the seriousness of the charges and the highly political nature of the whole issue, the tangible evidence should be unquestionable and likely to gather the judge’s conviction beyond any reasonable doubt as the expression goes. Finally, a review of the tangible pieces of evidence provided by Bruguière enables to shed a light on his methodology.
The following elements highlight the tangible evidence provided by Judge Bruguière. He bases his defence speech on the fact that he was able to authenticate the origin and trail of the missiles used to shoot down President Habyarimana’s plane on April 6, 1994. In his view, RPF leader Paul Kagame, while preparing the shooting of the plane, could not ignore that this action would trigger masse reprisals killings.
Because the real tangible evidence - the missile launcher tubes - that would had helped the judge in tracking the origin and trail of the missiles have disappeared in Zaire, Bruguière bases his tracking on an identification report of the missile launcher tubes and on pictures of the missile launchers taken by the Rwandese Armed Forces in April, 1994.
Bruguière explains that the identification numbers of the missiles were obtained from the two missile launcher tubes allegedly found unattended on the scene of the shooting. Some peasants allegedly found the two unattended tubes in the bush in the area of Masaka, near the Kanombe camp, and brought them to the Rwandese Armed Forces who recorded their identification numbers.
The Judge goes on to state that on April 24 and 25, 1994, Lt-Engineer Augustin Munyaneza had examined the two tubes and drafted a handwritten report stating the identification numbers of the missile launchers as 04-87-04814 and 04-87-04835. A photocopy of this one-page report was attached as an annex to the French Parliamentarian Fact-finding Mission Report on the role of France between 1990 and 1994.
Pictures of the missile launchers were taken and on the pictures, the reference number of one of the missile launcher was clearly legible and indeed corresponds to one of the two numbers stated above. Copies of the pictures were also attached to the Fact-finding Mission Report.
Juge Bruguière succeeded in establishing that in May 1994, in Paris, the photos were handed over to General Huchon (who was at that time transferred to the French Cooperation Ministry) by Lt-Col. Ephrem Rwabalinda, accompanied by Col. Sébastien Ntahonbary, the Defence Attaché to the Rwanda Embassy in Paris. The pictures were then handed over by the Cooperation Ministry to the Military Intelligence Department (Direction du Renseignement Militaire - DRM).
Mr Bruguière explains that as part of the implementation of a legal assistance request, the Moscow Military Prosecutor’s Office established that the two missiles bearing reference 04-87-04814 and 04-87-04835 were made in the USSR and were part of an order of 40 SA 16IGLA missiles delivered to Uganda in execution of an inter-state contract.
According to Bruguière, in view of the Ugandan origin of the missiles and of the fact that for him, the armament of the Rwanda Patriotic Front (FPR), including its anti-aircraft weapons, originated from the Uganda military arsenal, therefore President Habyarimana’s plane was shot down by FPR.
In his demonstration, Bruguière abundantly quotes the Fact-finding Mission Report which is his main source of information on the missiles, and merely had such information confirmed by witnesses the majority of whom are FPR opponents or French servicemen. The only new information as compared to the extracts from the Fact-finding Mission Report is the tracking of the origin of the missiles, including their soviet origin and previous inclusion in the Uganda military arsenal.
However, the trail of missile launcher N° 04-87-04814 and N° 04-87-04835 was rejected by the French Parliamentarian Fact-finding Mission, which clearly showed that this was an attempt manipulation. The best way to proceed here is to replicate the findings of the review of the missile issue by the French Parliamentarian Fact-finding Mission.
To better understand these findings which mention Prof. Reyntjens, it is useful to know that the reference numbers of the two missile launchers mentioned by Filip Reyntjens in his book Rwanda, Trois jours qui ont fait basculer l’histoire are fully consistent with the numbers mentioned in the handwritten report by Lt-Engineer Augustin MUNYANEZA, a copy of which is attached as an annex to the Fact-finding Mission Report.
First Launcher Second Launcher
9 M 322-1-01 9 M 322-1-01
9 M 313-1 9 M 313-1
04-87 04-87
04835 04814
C C
LOD COMP LOD COMP
9M 519-2 9M 519-2
3555406 5945107
Below is the review by the parliamentarian fact-finding mission of the documents pertaining to the missiles, and essentially the handwritten report by Lt-Engineer Augustin Munyaneza and the pictures of the missile launchers.
Lessons from type and origin of the missiles
· In order to supplement the information resulting from the hearings that it conducted, the Mission requested to be provided with documents which were communicated to it either by the Executive or by appearing witnesses the list of whom is attached as annex. Some of these documents were of particular interest to the Mission. The French Defence Ministry forwarded to the Mission identification pictures of the missile launchers taken in Rwanda on April 6 and 7, 1994, as provided to it by the DRM which received them from the Military Cooperation Mission. Attached to these was a photocopy of the DRM register pages from May 22-25, 1994 as well as original pictures of an anti-aircraft missile. Attached to the documents were also two lists of SAM 16-type missiles drawn by the DGSE, the first of which provides an inventory of missile stockpiles in the Ugandan army and the second one listing missiles retrieved by the French army from Iraqi stockpiles during the Gulf War.
As a result of the review of such documents and the supplementary hearings conducted by your rapporteur, it can be said that: the pictures taken in Rwanda were only recorded in the DRM register on May 24, 1994; such pictures show a launcher - and merely one - with legible identification numbers corresponding to one of the two launchers mentioned by Prof. Filip Reyntjens in his book Rwanda: Les trois jours qui ont fait basculer l’histoire; - following a primary thorough examination of the pictures, it is likely that the missiles contained in the launchers have not been shot: on the photocopies of the pictures, the tube is in order, the caps at the edges of the launcher are in place, and so were the firing grip, the cell and the battery. The reference numbers provided for the launchers (9M322) seem to be associated with SAM-16 “Igla” models the Russian reference number of which is 9K38. In view of these elements, the following observations should be made: as the number on the launcher in the picture forwarded by the Ministry of Defence is consistent with one of the two missiles identified by M. Filip Reyntjens on the basis of a testimony by a Rwanda Army Forces (FAR) officer in exile, Mr. Munyasesa, and since the pictures show launchers likely to be full, it therefore means that the missiles identified by the Belgian academic are in all likelihood not the weapons used for the attack, unless it is assumed that the registration dates in the DRM book are erroneous; in the forwarding slip of the missile pictures to the Mission, as communicated by MMC to the DRM, as well as in the DRM register where records were kept of the pictures, no mention was made of the author of such pictures, their venue or the conditions surrounding their forwarding to the French central authorities, which significantly alters the scope of these materials. When asked about the origin of the pictures and the reasons why their existence was not mentioned during the hearings in which they were involved, both Messrs Michel Roussin, a former French Cooperation Minister now providing political trusteeship to MMC and Jean-Pierre Huchon, former Head of MMC, stated that they could not remember having been addressed the said pictures at the time of their recording, while MMC was, according to the slip communicated by the Defence Minister to the Mission, the transit administration of the pictures before they reached the DRM. It should also be noted that, from the information gathered by the Mission, these documents were allegedly extracted in 1998 from the archives of the Ministry of Cooperation before being availed to the Parliament for its proceedings. In his book, Prof. Filip Reyntjens states that the launchers, the number of which he communicates, were allegedly retrieved near Masaka, around April 25, 1994. And yet, the pictures corresponding to one of these launchers were only recorded by the DRM in its registers a month later, i.e. on May 25, with no explanation provided to the Mission to help understand the reasons for such delay, or to determine the conditions for forwarding such documents. Finally, it results that the missiles identified by Mr. Filip Reyntjens, one of which corresponds to the above-mentioned pictures, feature in the Ugandan serial numbering and not in the French one.
However, these remarks do not situate any liability in the performance of the attack. Beyond the doubts already expressed regarding the reliability of the pictures provided to the Mission, we know from consistent sources that in 1990 and 1991, the FAR had retrieved soviet missiles from military operation scenes and from FPR, and could have used such missiles to commit the attack. These missiles were mentioned in a telegraph from the French Defence Attaché dated May 22, 1991 as follows : “The Rwandan Army General Staff is prepared to hand over to the Defence Attaché a sample of soviet SAM 16 ground-air defence weapon retrieved from rebels on May 18, 1991 during a fight in the Akagera Park. The weapon is new; it could be of Ugandan origin; it bears various inscriptions the details of which being provided hereafter could help determine its country of manufacture” (Cf. Annex). “In case any agency is interested in acquiring this weapon, I hereby request you to kindly indicate its destination and transport arrangements in France”, concludes the French Defence Attaché, Mr. Galinié. Furthermore, in a correspondence addressed to the Mission following the publication by Libération, of a paper reporting on the mission by the two rapporteurs to Kigali, Sébastien Ntahobary, former commander in chief of the Rwandese military aviation, mentioned the information he had regarding the ground-air weapons stockpile held by FPR, thereby partly corroborating the piece of information held by Col. René Galinié.
· The featuring of these missiles among a Ugandan list as such does not mean that FPR is the author of the attack for the following reasons; Hutu fundamentalists, who did not have anti-aircraft weapons, could have used those retrieved from the FPR to commit the attack against the presidential plane, either by resorting to mercenaries, or to Rwandese servicemen specially trained in the operation of such weapons; - since genuine uncertainty still surrounds the date and conditions of shooting of the pictures provided to the Mission, nothing prevents to say that these are missiles retrieved from the FPR and shot by the FAR before or after April 6. Finally, France having been, in many instances, accused by foreign journalists or observers of having directly or indirectly lent a hand to the perpetrators of this attack, why wait four years to provide the evidence of the guiltiness of FPR and Uganda using these pictures and the lists of their accompanying missiles?
Outstanding Issues
A careful review of the materials provided to the fact-finding mission as well as the hearings conducted to supplement the review allow to make a few observations. In view of the strong likelihood that the missile launcher in the picture has not been used, this missile can by no means be, in reliable manner, considered to be the weapon used to shoot down President Juvénal Habiarymana’s plane; since the attached picture of the missile displays one of the numbers corresponding to those published by Mr. Filip Reyntjens, it is therefore unlikely that the missiles identified by the Belgian academic correspond to those actually used to shoot down President Juvénal Habyarimana’s plane. There is consistency between the theory disseminated by the exiled faction of the FAR (Cf. documents forwarded by Mr. Munyasesa to Mr. Filip Reyntjens) and the theory originating from the materials communicated to the Mission with the view of arbitrarily designating the FPR and Uganda as the likely perpetrators of the attack (Cf. attached pictures and lists of missiles). This assumption was made by some French government officials, with no further precautions, as witnessed by the hearings of Messrs Bernard Debré, former Cooperation Minister or François Léotard, former Defence Minister; - since the consistent information provided by both the parliamentarian mission and some academics - though having been disseminated by variable channels - appear to be very relative, and since they have not succeeded in pointing at the weapon used for the attack, the question is now to know the reason for such a confusion. The involvement of the exiled faction of the FAR in this attempt disinformation is likely to point at the latter faction as possible proponents in an attempt dissimulation. Unless in full sincerity, the exiled faction of the FAR itself was manipulated; but, in this case, by whom?
Conclusion
This abstract of the Parliamentarian Fact-finding Mission Report shows, for that matter, the integrity of the members of the Mission, who refused to be manipulated by former FAR members, the Military Intelligence Department (DRM) and former ministers Debré and Léotard over such a serious matter. The parliamentarians went further in denouncing this attempted manipulation, even though, as regards French institutions and personalities, they do so without having to spell things out.
Thus, following close examination of evidences, they disqualified the track related to missiles N° 04-87-04814 and 04-87-04835 which proves to be an attempted manipulation, although it is proven that the two missiles originate from the Uganda military arsenal.
The trick is quite simple. Ground-air missiles were eventually seized from the FPR during confrontations in the Eastern part of the country. Thus, on May 18 1991, during a clash with the FPR troops, the FAR had retrieved a SAM 16 missile of serial number 04-87-04924. This missile was identified by the Moscow Military Prosecutor’s Office as being part of a series of 40 missiles sold to Uganda in like manner as the two missiles which are of concern to us. Nothing tells that this was the only SAM 16 missile retrieved under such conditions.
Following the attack against President Habyarimana’s plane, the FAR must have taken two of such missiles out, pretending that they were found on the scene of the attack. The FAR produced an identification report with the reference numbers and took pictures of the SAM 16 missiles. On the pictures, only one number is visible and corresponds to one of the two numbers in the missile launcher tube identification report. The fact is the launcher did not shoot the missiles resulting in the pictures showing loaded missile launcher tubes. These missiles, one of which is clearly identified, can therefore not have been used to shoot down the presidential plane.
It is this attempted manipulation, now discovered since 1998, that Judge Bruguière is trying to recycle by making it one of the main grounds for his accusation against President Kagame and his military collaborators.
Finally, on November 17, 2006, the date of the signing of his ordinance, Judge Bruguière could not ignore that the Arusha ICTR has been for months now in possession of pieces of evidence indicating that the FAR had SAM 16 missiles and that it is very likely that these were purchased in Egypt.
In the meantime, the French judge makes this assumed lack of SAM 16 missiles in the FAR military arsenal one of the grounds for his accusation against the FPR. He is displaying intellectual dishonesty by drawing the only clues of tangible evidence he has to show from the proceedings of the French Parliamentarian Fact-finding Mission, while keeping away - though only to reject it - from reproducing the full assessment which denounces a manipulation manoeuvre. Thus, Judge Bruguière knowingly makes himself a relay for this attempt manipulation masterminded by a few FAR military leaders accused of triggering the genocide, such as Col. Bagorosa and Major Ntabakuze, and some French servicemen.
Jean-Paul KIMONYO is a commissioner on the Commission of Inquiry into the Alleged Role of the French Government in the Rwandan Genocide. He compiled this information from the Internet. http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dossiers/rwanda/r1271.asp#P3836_543860
ZANZIBAR NCHI ATI!! MSIFIKIRI MKOA SO BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU GIVE YOUR COMMENTS
ReplyDeletewafaranza wanaionea Rwanda sababu Rwanda imechoka kifaranza imeamua kutumia kiingereza kama lugha ya mawasiliano.Wafaranza na kujiona kwao inawauma! Walie tu muda si mrefu Burundi na Kongo wanakuja.
ReplyDeleteWafaranza ndio walikuwa wakimlinda raisi muuaji wa watusi na ndege yake ndio walikuwa wakiendesha.
Kifaransa ni kigumu kukielewa na wafaranza ni wagumu kuwaelewa.
Leave Kagame alone you french speakers.We don`t need french in East Africa.