Maasai pushed out of land {in Tanzania} for {Arab} royalty to hunt big game

totemtourism.com ^ | 28 August 2012 | Valerie Tjolle

[Cronos]

Middle Eastern kings and princes may force up to 48,000 people in Tanzania from their land to make way for corporate-sponsored big game hunting says Avaaz

Representatives from the Maasai community have urgently appealed to Avaaz to raise the global alarm call and save their land.

Avaaz claims that Middle Eastern kings and princes are about to force up to 48,000 people in Tanzania from their land to make way for corporate-sponsored big game hunting. But Tanzanian President Kikwete has shown before that he will stop deals like this when they generate negative press coverage says Avaaz.

At any moment, a big-game hunting corporation could sign a deal which would force up to 48,000 members of Africa's famous Maasai tribe from their land to make way for wealthy Middle Eastern kings and princes to hunt lions and leopards. Experts say the Tanzanian President's approval of the deal may be imminent, but if we act now, we can stop this sell-off of the Serengeti. Says Avaaz

The last time this same corporation pushed the Maasai off their land to make way for rich hunters, people were beaten by the police, their homes were burnt to a cinder and their livestock died of starvation. But when a press controversy followed, Tanzanian President Kikwete reversed course and returned the Maasai to their land.

The Maasai are semi-nomadic herders who have lived in Tanzania and Kenya for centuries, playing a critical role in preserving the delicate ecosystem. But, says Avaaz, to royal families from the United Arab Emirates, they're an obstacle to luxurious animal shooting sprees.

A deal to evict the Maasai to make way for rich foreign hunters is as bad for wildlife as it is for the communities it would destroy. While President Kikwete is talking to favoured local elites to sell them on the deal as good for development, the vast majority of people just want to keep the land that they know the President can take by decree.

President Kikwete understands that this deal would be controversial with Tanzania's tourists - a critical source of national income - and may therefore be  trying to keep it from the public eye. In 2009, a similar royal landgrab in the area executed by the same corporation that is swooping in this time generated global media coverage that helped to roll it back.

Oxfam, an international charity, also reported on the eviction which took place in July 2009 in Tanzania leaving nearly 2,000 people homeless. They aded that “two of the most infamous land conflicts are with Emirates hunting company Ortello Business Corporation and American-owned Thomson Safaris Ltd.”

[Cronos]

Just saw this. When you think about hunting lions, keeping slaves in the 21st century, think Moslems....

[GeronL]

Make way for the new masters

[FES0844]

big game hunting....Where’s PETA????

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Plan B should be to issue the Maasai sniper rifles, to let them hunt “corporate sponsored Middle Eastern kings and princes”.

However, I suspect there may be more to the story than meets the eye. Notice the keywords in the article, “corporate sponsored”, “Middle Eastern kings and princes”, and “delicate ecosystem”. Something smells funny.

And how about this little burble of socialist internationalist crapola:

“Recently, Oxfam has claimed that the lifestyle of the Maasai should be embraced as a response to climate change because of their ability to farm in deserts and scrublands.

“Many Maasai tribes throughout Tanzania and Kenya welcome visits to their village to experience their culture, traditions, and lifestyle.”

Compare this to a description of Oxfam:

“For anyone that has followed the rise and activities of Oxfam throughout the years, it is well known that their primary focus is political advocacy - always of a socialist variety - and secondary focus is on actually delivering aid.

“Oxfam is becoming less and less embarrassed about advocating its socialist agenda due to not been challenged in our now morally inverted, post-modern world.

“The first give away that they’re a leftist advocacy group is their motto “United for a more equitable world”.

“Less than half of every dollar donated to Oxfam goes to what the public expects a charity to be doing. The rest goes on supporting the socialist political goals that, ironically, maintain the ongoing poverty of their core constituency as was proven beyond doubt, and to the cost of 100 million people, in the 20th century.”