Posted on 12/14/2006 3:15:09 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Harare, Zimbabwe (AHN) - Zimbabwe will not turn over former Former Former Ethiopian dictator Mengistu Haile Miriam, despite his conviction of genocide.
William Nhara, a spokesperson for President Robert Mugabe's government, says, "As a comrade of our struggle, Comrade Mengistu and his government played a key and commendable role during our struggle for independence and no one can dispute that."
"The judgment is an Ethiopian judgment and will not affect his status in Zimbabwe. As far as we know there is no extradition treaty between Harare and Addis Ababa."
Mengistu, who has been living in exile in Zimbabwe since he fell from power in 1991, was convicted of charges ranging from genocide, to imprisonment, homicide, and illegal confiscation of property.
Ethiopia's Federal High Court convicted Mengistu and 71 other defendants for their parts in the "Red Terror." According to the U.S. government, "The enormity of government-sponsored operations against suspected political opponents during the 'Red Terror' has defied accurate analysis and has made attempts at quantification of casualties irrelevant."
"Sources estimated that, during 1977-78, about 30,000 people had perished as a result of the Red Terror and harsh conditions in prisons, kebele jails, and concentration camps."
The jihadi cells in the aforementioned places are already under watch, and many have already been arrested. I am confident in the ability of DHS to continue that work. I am not confident though in the loyalty of the jihadi neighbors and family members of those same jihadis as they have done nothing to demonstrate that it's their.
...and yet still no numbers.
More gratuitous hyperbole. The policy suggested by EPWR is based on the U.S. internment program in WWII and has nothing to do with the Hitler model.
And like it or not, the U.S. internment program was constitutional per Korematsu.
Too many.
I quote my previous statement:
"Roman rule never officially ended in Spain save for the transition of power to the Visigoths."
A first step would be to show how the Roman governorships in Iberia were transferred to the Visigoths.
As already noted, the last Roman governing authority in Iberia was granted by Honorius to his half-sister Galla Placidia. She married Athaulf, the Visigothic king, and allowed his people to settle in Iberia. Athaulf was assassinated in Barcelona in 415. His throne briefly seized by the assassins, but the Visigothic succession was quickly restored under Wallia. Wallia became a close ally of Roman Emporer Honorius and was recognized by treaty as a Foederatus of the empire with settling rights in Iberia, thus completing the cession as Rome withdrew. As Gibbon describes it:
"A solemn treaty was stipulated and observed; Placidia was honorably restored to her brother; six hundred thousand measures of wheat were delivered to the hungry Goths; and Wallia engaged to draw his sword in the service of the empire. A bloody war was instantly excited among the Barbarians of Spain; and the contending princes are said to have addressed their letters, their ambassadors, and their hostages, to the throne of the Western emperor, exhorting him to remain a tranquil spectator of their contest; the events of which must be favorable to the Romans, by the mutual slaughter of their common enemies. The Spanish war was obstinately supported, during three campaigns, with desperate valor, and various success; and the martial achievements of Wallia diffused through the empire the superior renown of the Gothic hero. He exterminated the Silingi, who had irretrievably ruined the elegant plenty of the province of Btica. He slew, in battle, the king of the Alani; and the remains of those Scythian wanderers, who escaped from the field, instead of choosing a new leader, humbly sought a refuge under the standard of the Vandals, with whom they were ever afterwards confounded. The Vandals themselves, and the Suevi, yielded to the efforts of the invincible Goths. The promiscuous multitude of Barbarians, whose retreat had been intercepted, were driven into the mountains of Gallicia; where they still continued, in a narrow compass and on a barren soil, to exercise their domestic and implacable hostilities. In the pride of victory, Wallia was faithful to his engagements: he restored his Spanish conquests to the obedience of Honorius; and the tyranny of the Imperial officers soon reduced an oppressed people to regret the time of their Barbarian servitude."
A second step would be to demonstrate how and when these appointed positions became hereditary.
Through the hereditary line of the Visigothic kingdom. The line continued through Roderic, who was slain by the mahometan invaders in 711. The line eventually passed to Pelagius of Asturias, the highest nobleman to survive, whose reign founded most of the dynasties that became parts of the Spanish crown today.
...and yet you've failed to answer why Hitler sent tens of thousands of blue eyed, blonde haired Germans to fight side by side with the mahometans in the defense of Vienna, his second city to Berlin alone and capital of his beloved birthplace, Austria. The inescapable fact that you wish to avoid, of course, is that some 21,000 mahometans joined the SS and fought with Hitler in defense of the heart of his empire till the bitter end.
Yawn. According to the Chilean constitution of 1925 the succession to the president fell to a vice president chosen from the heads of the executive departments in an order established not by the constitution but by the legislature. AFTER the executive departments, succession went to the President of the Senate, followed the President of the Chamber of Deputies, and the head of the Supreme Court. Traditionally, the Interior Minister was first on the succession line and had been elevated in all but two successions since 1925. Of course in 1973, the only non-Allendist executive department was the military, and Pinochet had just been named its head following the forced resignation of an Allendist general amidst a scandal a few weeks earlier.
Seeing as Pinochet abolished the constitution upon seizing power in the coup, it's fair to say that Frei was speaking under a very different set of circumstances.
...except that Frei had been endorsing the military's intervention against Allende since at least two months BEFORE Pinochet was even named commander in chief.
His familiarity with the Chilean constitution had little weight under the rule of a military junta that did not recognize that constitution.
Much to the contrary. The junta was nothing more than a temporary governing structure established to fill the absence of functioning constitutional government caused by Allende. When Pinochet moved to restore the constitution in 1976 he gave the task to Frei, who then headed the convention.
Indeed, it was quite likely that his immediate post-coup statements were influenced by a desire to keep from running afoul of the leaders of the unconstitutional coup.
You have yet to produce evidence of that. In fact all existing evidence is to the contrary. Frei is on record calling for the military to depose Allende several months before the coup.
Seeing as Pinochet wasn't named commander in chief until after July 6th, it is unreasonable to expect that Frei would have mentioned him on July 6th. What Frei did say then, however, was this:
"There is nothing that can be done by myself, by Congress, or by any civilian. This problem can only be fixed with arms. I share your apprehensions, and I advise you to state them plainly to the commander in chief of the Armed Forces, hopefully today."
Pinochet was named commander in chief a few weeks later, thus becoming the officer that Frei had endorsed to depose Allende.
Finally! A statistic! Now was that so hard?
Next you can tell me in what capacity, and where, did they serve?
Comparing the relative strength of 20,000 troops among 18 million Wermacht soldiers with considerably more among the "100-something million or so participants in the allied side of the war effort" is apples and oranges to say the least
We are looking at relative mahometan soldier support for each side, are we not? That means adding up all the troops in the Atlantic theater (i.e. everything in Europe and Africa) on both sides then taking a percentage of them that were muslim. Considering the vast numerical abundance of clearly non-muslim American, British, and Russian forces in that theater, as well as millions of resistance fighters in occupied northern Europe and the non-muslim French, it's safe to say that the handful of muslim french you mentioned were a tiny percentage of allied forces. Now compare that with the atlantic theater Axis troop strength. Muslims were indeed outnumbered there, but I'll venture to guess they were a higher percentage of manpower numbering in the tens of millions combined than in the hundreds of millions combined.
More dishonesty from you.
You suggested, without evidence, that the French concentrated recruitment efforts among muslims. I had previously pointed out that the strongest colonial french support by far came out of the non-Vichy sub-saharan colonies: chad, gabon, cameroon, middle congo, and ubangu-chari. I had also pointed out that only one of those colonies - chad - had a substantial muslim population (50%). Of the others, two were 15% and two were 1%, among them gabon.
Given those statistics, even concentrated intentional muslim recruitment in four out of five of those colonies would still produce a small minority of the troops raised there...which is a far cry from the vague and unspecific numbers originally suggested by you, when you attemtped to claim nearly all French african colonial forces for islam.
Except that:
1. The muslim northern French Equatorial colonies were Vichy controlled for the first half of the war and contributed far less to the allied side than non-Vichy colonies.
2. The bulk of the FFL came from the De Gaulle controlled colonies of Cameroon, Gabon, Chad, Middle Congo, and Ubangu-Chari. Of these five colonies, ONLY Chad had a muslim population of any sizable percentage. The other four ranged from 85% to 99% non-muslim.
Echenberg's sources for the numbers are the annual recruitment reports of the 2G, 4D, and 5D series in the Senegalese National Archives, Fondes Modernes.
That's nice and all, yet you've still failed to give country by country numbers. Surely if you know the source, you also know the numbers they are referring to. Do you not?
This issue was addressed in #274, which you clearly did not read.
Not so much. Your post 274 contains this vague, unsourced statement: "average breakdown out of a recruiting quota of 10,000/yr. Actually enlistment numbers jumped to 70,000 at the start of the war." It says little about actual numbers and NOTHING about muslim numbers.
From the numbers published in Echenberg's book, recruits from the French Sudan (approx 22% of West African military recruits, as demonstrated above) numbered 3163, 6950, 7558, 8550, 11000, 6429, and 5109 for the respective years in question.
So finally we're starting to get somewhere! First tell me - was that so hard? Second, please describe what these units did, what their jobs were (were they a legion of soldiers of a legion of cooks?), where they were assigned, and what battles they fought in. Seeing as I have described the numbers, locations, battles, and dates for Hitler's mahometan nazi SS troops in detail already, your doing so for the Sudanese side of things is but customary.
319 hits, all of them FR threads where you made apologies for mahomet & co. In fact, with only minor exceptions, it's practically the only thing you post about here.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=+site%3Awww.freerepublic.com+zimdog+muslim&btnG=Search
You have yet to demonstrate that your guess is an educated one.
I asked the author of a bad idea to justify one of the many bad results of that bad idea. If such a result can't be justified, the blames lays with the author who is either unable or unwilling.
When others see through your game and refuse, you get all pissy and start accusing them of avoiding your contrived question.
Yes. God forbid we expect people to be responsible for their words and actions.
Ever since then you have spun and distorted his views into a copy of the Hitler-style "concentration camp" for Jews, when they were nothing of the sort and more accurately resembled the U.S. policy in WWII that was personally designed by Franklin Roosevelt and found to be constitutional by the Supreme Court in Korematsu v. United States.
EPWR has clearly stated that he wants to imprison -- without charges and for an indeterminate time -- a group of American citizens throughout the entire country based on their ethnic and/or religious background alone. The concentration camps that would result his dream of a moslemrein America might come to resemble FDR's internment camps or they might resemble Hitler's execution camps. Given the sentiments of EPWR's colleagues in the Nuke Mecca Crowd, and educated guess is that he would prefer to follow the old mantra, deemed Constitutional at the time but immoral for all time, that "the only good Indian is a dead Indian". His concentration camps make this easier, which is the greatest reason to oppose them.
I am defending Muslims, yes. And decency. Your definition of "jihadi" is loose enough to sometimes refer only to terrorists and sometimes refer to Muslims in general, so you're claim that I am "defending muslim jihadis" is meaningless because you use words that are rendered meaningless by your unwillingness to define them.
Then why do you disagree with their choice to ignore the Nuke Mecca Crowd's braying about the need to arrest all Muslims everywhere, regardless of their actions, intentions, or affiliations?
Plessy was Constitutional then too, but that was overturned, as I believe Korematsu would be if it were challenged.
Can't count that high?
So Roman rule ended with the transition of power to the Visigoths. Thanks for clearing that up.
Wallia became a close ally of Roman Emporer Honorius and was recognized by treaty as a Foederatus of the empire with settling rights in Iberia, thus completing the cession as Rome withdrew.
In other words, Visigothic Iberia was an ally of Rome but had a very different legal and administrative system and was recognized both by its own rulers and those of Rome to be a new state on the peninsula.
Through the hereditary line of the Visigothic kingdom.
Which is another break with the Roman administration of the province. Furthermore, Honorius's grant to Galla Placida could not pass through hereditary succession because neither she nor her husband left any heirs. As Gibbon describes it:
The fondness of Adolphus for his Roman bride, was not abated by time or possession: and the birth of a son, surnamed, from his illustrious grandsire, Theodosius, appeared to fix him forever in the interest of the republic. The loss of that infant, whose remains were deposited in a silver coffin in one of the churches near Barcelona, afflicted his parents; but the grief of the Gothic king was suspended by the labors of the field; and the course of his victories was soon interrupted by domestic treason. He had imprudently received into his service one of the followers of Sarus; a Barbarian of a daring spirit, but of a diminutive stature; whose secret desire of revenging the death of his beloved patron was continually irritated by the sarcasms of his insolent master. Adolphus was assassinated in the palace of Barcelona; the laws of the succession were violated by a tumultuous faction; and a stranger to the royal race, Singeric, the brother of Sarus himself, was seated on the Gothic throne. The first act of his reign was the inhuman murder of the six children of Adolphus, the issue of a former marriage, whom he tore, without pity, from the feeble arms of a venerable bishop.
The line eventually passed to Pelagius of Asturias, the highest nobleman to survive,
Since you have proven eager to hide unpleasant facts in vagaries, you will have to prove the legitimacy of Pelayo's claim.
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.