Posted on 05/26/2005 8:35:01 PM PDT by doug from upland
Monday, January 3
Idi-otic Idea
by David on January 3, 2005 03:10PM (IST)
Idi Amin: Murderer. Tyrant. Good samaritan?
In one of the more unlikely and misjudged diplomatic interventions of modern times, brutal Ugandan dictator Idi Amin offered in 1974 to act as a peace broker in Northern Ireland, official British records showed on Saturday.
The offer, while privately dismissed as "preposterous" by officials in London, was nonetheless thought to be serious, meriting a formal reply to the negative, according to the newly-released files.
The move by Amin, whose rule over Uganda from 1971 to 1979 saw an estimated 400,000 deaths as well as the expulsion of the country's entire Asian population, came in mid-1974.
At the time, the conflict in Northern Ireland had entered one of its bloodiest periods.
"It appears that the political and security situation in Northern Ireland is becoming worse every passing day without any apparent feasible solution to it in sight," Amin wrote in a letter, now released by the National Archives.
"This serious and regrettable development calls for Britain's best and sincere friends to come to her assistance. Consequently, I avail my good offices at the disposal of the opposing sides in Northern Ireland.
"I suggest that representatives of your Catholic and Protestant communities in Northern Ireland as well as representatives of your government come to Uganda, far away from the site of battle and antagonism, for a conference on how to bring peace to their Province."
The letter was signed "General Idi Amin Dada", followed by a series of top British military honours the dictator had conferred on himself.
In a covering note, the British High Commission in Kampala said that while the offer showed Amin's "naive view of world affairs", it was nevertheless "a genuine and sincere effort to be helpful".
In London, Foreign Office officials noted that while they did not wish to spur Amin's "delusions of statesmanship", a polite reply would be necessary.
"As the general's messages go, this is one of his more lucid and, although it is as preposterous as one might expect, the acting high commissioner believes that it was sent with the best of intentions," one official informed Downing Street.
"It would therefore seem appropriate and courteous to return some acknowledgment."
Several briefly fell asleep after lunch during closing arguments. By what I read and saw, they should have had a verdict very quickly.
Re#22 Whose argument? Defense and prosecution or just the one? (Sorry to pester you with questions--d#mn the media blackout)
At one time or another, in both arguments, there were 5 or 6 jurors who dipped their heads and closed their eyes. I think it was mostly right after lunch during the prosecution's performance.
Let's say Rosen is found guilty:
1) Feds squeeze him to fess up or do major time. The wussy squeals like a stuck pig and lays out a perfect paper trail all the way to Hillary.
2) Dem illegal fundraising (the only kind they do) drys up faster than ether in the Mojave desert. Nobody wants to end up like Paul and Rosen.
OK, let's say Clinton-appointee-conflict-of-interest Judge Matz influences the trial and intimidates the jury onto a not-guilty verdict:
1) Feds open new Grand Jury investigation based on results of trial. Since the jury found that Rosen was innocent, and was merely duped by "Higher Ups," which Rosen had claimed all along, we'll supeona him and force him to testify in front of the GJ under penalty of perjury as to WHO the higher ups are, and of course, get the GJ to indict THEM. (Hopefully HILLARY.)
2) Dem illegal fundraising (the only kind they do) drys up faster than....
Rosen will be testifying. So will Hillary. Peter Paul's civil trial is moving forward, and her final effort to avoid it will soon be shut down.
"Seeing is believing, or believing is seeing. Which is it?"
A lot of the Clinton co-conspirators and groupies surely have trouble looking themselves in the mirror.
And we've got to get the TRUTH out by email, word-of-mouth etc. to our neighbors. Print out some of the articles, the Photoshopped cartoons etc. and share them. There will always be those who are in positions of public trust yet refuse to acknowledge or tell the truth, so we have to go around their obstructionism and complicity and get the word out ourselves.
Jim Robinson's deliberately made this site a FREE to help educate, he's not in it for the money.
(THANKS JIM!)
Thanks for the ping!
I only wish I'd known about FR sooner, I'd be more astute politically and more able to contribute to FR. Thanks to Jim for starting FR.
I do my best to get the word out. One friend quit speaking with me for about 6 months after I got on to her for believing "Vanity Fair." She was smarter than that.
Thanks for the ping; Thanks Doug.
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.