This is a fine piece of concise journalism that BLINK is rarely capable of. Someone who well knows his history and how to apply the relevant facts to the relevant ethical arguments. Whites are only concerned with Blacks insofar as They affect the lives of Whites. It matters not the relative demerits of the various Black African Leaders – only that They do or do not affect White Interests. This is true for everyone, of course – but only Whites pretend that they are ethically consistent when They clearly aren't. Whites can get away with this con trick by virtue of the simple fact that the Whites They spread this racist propaganda to are as racist and as unethical as They Themselves are. Whites are always preaching to the converted, after all; that is, to Themselves. All of the above are designed to conceal the fact of White neo imperialism. 'The people of Zimbabwe need and desire regime change, but they know no amount of slavering from Britain's media at the prospect of a revolution will bring this reality closer... '...Violent upheaval could mean black blood flowing on the streets of Harare, and black lives being lost'. That's precisely the point. Whites aren't going to put Their own lives where They claim Their ethical imperatives are. This explains why the British media is 'slavering' rather than proposing anything practical. The old "send a gunboat" policy formerly used to pacify (Black) natives no longer works and can no longer be afforded by Western countries with more financial problems than you can shake a stick at.
Article copyright © 2007 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it electronically and in print; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker.blogspot.com/) is included: E mail notification requested. All other rights reserved. Frank TALKER is also the author of Sweaty Socks: A Treatise on Toe Jam (East Cheam Press: Groper Books, 1997) and is University of Bullshit Professor Emeritus of Madeupology.