Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congo Militiamen Grilled and Boiled Alive Victims, U.N. Says
AP ^ | Mar 16, 2005 | Eddy Isango

Posted on 03/16/2005 8:32:39 PM PST by headsonpikes

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 last
To: headsonpikes

Panties on the head?


101 posted on 03/17/2005 1:58:29 PM PST by Feiny (Too bad drinking scotch isn't a paying job or Kenny's dad would be a millionare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes

Oh well!


102 posted on 03/17/2005 2:15:09 PM PST by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
Nobody can ever convince me that there are not sick, evil, warped, primitive, barbaric, demented, insane, vile, twisted, demonic and corrupt cultures.

This is NOT a culture -- its a barbarism. Most of West and Southern Africa nowadays has no culture. East Africa has some while North Africa north of the Sahara is Arab/Berber.
103 posted on 03/17/2005 4:40:52 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tobor
Africa is totally eat-up with socialism. The barbaric thugs in power there see socialism for what it is, guaranteed power for the elite. Support from their like minded thugs in Europe and the American left allows them to enjoy it.

Actually you got it wrong -- let's separate Africa into 3 components: the Sahara and north of the Sahara -- these are all Arab cultures (excpet for Sudan which is a mix of Arab and WEst-South African), the second East Africa (Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania etc): these have old cultures -- some like Ethiopia having developed to greatness on their own (there's a lot to suggest that Ethiopians are more Semitic, at least their language is!) and finally West and South Africa.

The North and the East have some culture and whatever problems they have can be blamed on that culture or on socialism.

South and West Africa is barbaric, with no culture. They are not advanced enough to appreciate civilisation. It's like trying to foist democracy on Germanic barbarians in the 1st century BC.

This does not denigrate all Africans -- especially not those from the EAst, but we got to treat each of these portions of Africa differently. I see no hope for Congo, Sierra Leone, Liberia etc. but I see hope for Ethiopia, Kenya etc.
104 posted on 03/17/2005 4:48:41 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: R_Kangel
UN is still deliberating on this conduct. It will still be about 4 days until they receive the results of the investigation into the matter. Apparently, unless they find bodies with panties on their head.........it will still not rise to the disgusting behavior of the American infidels.

There IS a difference -- we are a civilised people, so anything we do is measured with a different yardstick. I think its great that our society has progressed so far that we think something as small as humiliation of terrorists is a bad thing -- Americans do NOT torture or maim people for sport, our soldiers are noble beings.

These Congolese are stone-age barbarians and need to be judged in that light. THere can be NO comparison to the acts of civilised countries. THat is why the world was shocked by the holocaust -- there had been similar genocides in the past but these were committed when civilisation was not advanced, but for the advanced Germans to have done that was shocking.
105 posted on 03/17/2005 4:54:39 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ExpatGator
As I did the write-up I was thinking that as poofy as the Belgians are, the Congo would still be better off with them in charge

IMO the Belgians caused the problems in the Congo, giving guns to stone age tribes and raping the land
106 posted on 03/17/2005 4:55:36 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes

Is eating Frog troops cannibalism?


107 posted on 03/17/2005 4:58:33 PM PST by bert (Peace is only halftime !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Well, I reckon' you are entitled to that opinion, but you are wrong just the same. The Europeans were, contrary to the post-modern re-written revisionism that poses as "history" today, a civilizing influence on the continent and the only hope for the incredibly backward culture, or "stone age tribes," of Africa.

As far as the rape of the land: agriculture and mineral extraction is not rape. In fact I have always been under the impression that they are fairly effective cures for famine, a cure that Africa badly needs, still today. Anyway, raping the land in Africa could be hazardous to ones health (have you seen the termites in the ground over there?)

Please do not construe any statement of mine as a defense of the Belgians, who are a culture beneath contempt.


108 posted on 03/17/2005 7:19:40 PM PST by ExpatGator (Progressivism: A polyp on the colon politic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
Yes indeed, you make your point well. Believe it or not, my statement was yet another failed attempt at political humor.
109 posted on 03/17/2005 9:14:50 PM PST by R_Kangel ("Liberals are like a broken pencil.......useless with no point.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
Good post.

But, I still think the struggle between collectivism and individualism, usually expressed as socialism vs. free-markets, has had a great influence on all of Africa.

The 'no culture' barbaric places remain as such for a reason.

I will suggest that the reason is that the forces of collectivism won the war in that region. The forces of individualism and free-markets simply lost the battle in the areas of Africa that are still barbaric, and dictatorial.

I am glad that there are outposts of hope in Africa. But, I suspect they are only places that remain worthy of hope and are surrounded by a sea of horror.

Please educate me more. Are the places worthy of hope, really worthy, or are they just not quite as bad as the rest ?
110 posted on 03/18/2005 7:29:45 PM PST by Tobor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: ExpatGator
Well, I reckon' you are entitled to that opinion, but you are wrong just the same. The Europeans were, contrary to the post-modern re-written revisionism that poses as "history" today, a civilizing influence on the continent and the only hope for the incredibly backward culture, or "stone age tribes," of Africa.

Err.... we're not actually disagreeing -- what you said about European's civilising influence is true -- only for africa South of the Sahara (excepting Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania).

The North Africans and Ethiopians were always part of the mainstream of civilisation (Queen Sheba may have been part of the Yemeni-Ethiopian Empire)

Bantu Africa was and is, largely, stone age


In Asia, the opposite happened -- the Europeans were initially (16th,17th and early 18th century), civilisationally BEHIND the Asian powers. The Asian powers were then dismembered and they deteriorated civilisationally and economically until reviving again after WWII/
111 posted on 03/18/2005 7:36:07 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Tobor
Please educate me more. Are the places worthy of hope, really worthy, or are they just not quite as bad as the rest ?

Let's take each case individually. Arab North Africa is part of the Arab and Mediterranean world -- it's not Black Africa. Ethiopia has a 4000 + year old culture. They were socialist until recently but now they've junked that and are opening up to the world -- the spectre of a famine stricken Ethiopia was mostly caused due to the socialist nature of the government and now it seems to have diminished.

East Africa: Kenya, Tanzania even Uganda are firmly in the Indian Ocean belt with heavy influences from the Arab world and India (Indian merchants run the economies of those countries -- and when Idi Amin of Uganda threw out the Indians in the 70s, his country's economy collapsed, while these Indians who left to the UK with barely the clothes on their back did pretty well for the UK: one of them, Lakshmi Mittal is now the 3rd richest man in the world while another: Swraj Paul was the guy who saved the London Zoo).

So, yes, East Africa has a lot of hope. The Republic of South Africa must make peace with its whites, Indians, Chinese etc. or it will become a god-forsaken place like the rest of South and Western Africa.


That being said, I see some good signs in Nigeria, the President is not corrupt, seems genuinely interested in improving his country and not aggrandising himself and his anti-corruption drive is really working -- and importantly, his country has moved away from the victim culture and is saying: "its our fault our people are corrupt, this is destroying our country, let's stop it"
112 posted on 03/18/2005 7:43:32 PM PST by Cronos (Never forget 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Actually you got it wrong -- "

Don't the leaders of these dictatorships through-out Africa use the ideas and propaganda of socialism to support themselves? Don't American and European leftists support them because of their socialism? Does not the MSM ignore their murder and rape because they are socialists?

Is that not true through-out the whole of Africa?

Have these 'countries of hope' rejected socialism?



113 posted on 03/18/2005 7:46:34 PM PST by Tobor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Cronos


Please forget my last post, sir.

I posted it before I saw your reply to my first one.

Thank-you



114 posted on 03/18/2005 7:55:56 PM PST by Tobor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
What kind of an Enemy could two little girls possibly Be?
115 posted on 04/16/2005 3:02:19 PM PDT by Onexmate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth
There is a line, I think, that once crossed separates a creature of evil from a human - even a depraved human.

Sometimes, in my more draconian moods, I think that we ultimately may need to define 'human being' in behavioral terms rather than genetics. Instances like this leave me just about convinced.

116 posted on 04/16/2005 3:22:20 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-116 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson