Rwanda: Never Say the Word

Tags:
Clinton Genocide Rwanda
AmatekaRwanda
  • Affiliate Submitter:
    AmatekaRwanda
  • International International
  • Comments: 0
  • Views: 150
  • Added: 03-Nov-06

In 1994, the President Clinton's spokeswoman was talking about "acts of genocide" referring to the genocide of Tutsi in Rwanda. She was not allowed to say the word "Genocide".

  1. Categories: News & Events
Comments on

Rwanda: Never Say the Word

15 Comments | Add Comment
  • If I were the ...

    If I were the Republicans at that time, I would have focus on Rwanda instead of Monica.

    But then again the last thing I want is those jerks to get the upper hand.

    By donjabroni [Affiliate User] 1215144581 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • 800,000 deaths is ...

    800,000 deaths is understandable?

    By donjabroni [Affiliate User] 1215144470 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Clinton just feared ...

    Clinton just feared another black-hawk down incident. This is the biggest blunder of his presidency

    By tranord [Affiliate User] 1212398777 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Also, the ...

    Also, the justifications for getting involved in Rwanda simply weren't there for the same reasons the world admonishes the U.S. for involvement in Iraq; it was an internal matter, and despite humanitarian concerns, the lack of involvement given the absence of a UN sanction or multilateral effort was understandable.

    By jkiska2 [Affiliate User] 1206859650 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • All in all, ...

    All in all, President Clinton acted as was to be expected...it is unlikely that any of us (or any of the Democratic nominees currently running for the president) would have behaved differently given such dynamics.

    By jkiska2 [Affiliate User] 1206859396 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Other, non-partisan ...

    Other, non-partisan reasons:

    1)The legacy of Somalia led to the development of an assertive Congress (concerning overseas interventions) that was likely to pull constitutional rank on the executive.
    2)The French were unlikely to seek a resolution authorizing force; without authorization from the UN, Clinton was unlikely to act.
    3)There were no strategic interests in the country that could be pitched.

    Emotional comments are understandable, but let's have an intelligent conversation on Rwanda.

    By jkiska2 [Affiliate User] 1206859283 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Kofi Annan has no ...

    Kofi Annan has no power except what the security council (US, UK, France, Russia & China) allow him. He was not given authority to allow his men to attack and take the weapons before the genocide began.

    Please direct you anger at the proper targets. (US, UK, FR, Russia & China)! The UN is only a puppet organization for these 5.

    By carhac66 [Affiliate User] 1202004072 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • hillary clinton: ...

    hillary clinton: LYNCHIN' (YouTube)

    In it, Randall Robinson discusses the clintons' WILLFUL failure in Rwanda and elsewhere that cost hundreds of thousands of black lives. The clintons didn't mention the word because they would have had to do something if they had.

    Cowardly and self-serving, this unspeakable failure reveals how little the clintons value blacks. The clintons' insidious brand of racism is especially deadly.

    By miat1111 [Affiliate User] 1200212598 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Excellent point ...

    Excellent point about the 'cry.'
    The clintons cry only for themselves.

    Missus clinton is no feminist. And not simply because she is married to a rapist. She is an abuser of women (and power) in her own right.

    "There's not a sex act mentioned in the book. What is important is Hillary savaging the women." (Carl Bernstein)

    (FROM CARL BERNSTEIN TO BROADDRICK R**e Connecting the Dots-YouTube)

    By miat1111 [Affiliate User] 1200211689 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Hillary Clinton ...

    Hillary Clinton cried recently in public when it seemed her dream of being a US President was coming to an end.

    No tears for the victims of Rwanda? Not sad enough for her that hundreds of thousands of women were raped and 800,000 blacks were butchered.

    What would have happened if she had put her feminist hat on and disagreed publicly with her husband about helping whites in Kosovo and abandoning blacks in Rwanda?

    Justice 4 Rwanda - Vote 4 Obama.

    By Look2theWest [Affiliate User] 1200165178 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • satan always work ...

    satan always work upstairs ,that why the blood of inocent people will always be thrown

    By papicooler [Affiliate User] 1198758637 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • oh my GOD what is ...

    oh my GOD what is she WEARING!?!?!?

    By TSXboy26 [Affiliate User] 1194541443 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • She is no more than ...

    She is no more than an escape goat for Ex. President Clinton. Mr. Clinton'Soul will burn in Hell. He is and will always be seen as a COWARD in the eyes of the world.Our brother Kofi Annan is even worse. Both of them should try to clean their conscience by helping Darfur, maybe then,will God have pitty on their sorry souls.
    Aime - Rwanda

    By aime1456 [Affiliate User] 1193717129 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • Google "Bystanders ...

    Google "Bystanders to Genocide". Great article.

    By zupf [Affiliate User] 1184714668 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
  • exactly, if she ...

    exactly, if she used the words act of genocide, then it's equivalent to saying it's not a full blown genocide yet. The second they called it a genocide, the UN would be forced to intervene out of conscience and principle

    By darkslifer [Affiliate User] 1183167545 Reply Spam Moderate Up Moderate Down
15 Comments | Add Comment