Sun, 21 Feb 2010 Feature Article

G8 And The Rest Of Us

G8 And The Rest Of Us

It is not by accident that Africa and the rest of the developing world became so massively indebted to the West exactly at the same time. The control mechanisms are the IMF and the World Bank, and the purpose is to cause as much social dislocation as possible, leading to hunger, diseases and deaths. The group of seven (G7 or as it is called in recent times, G8) came into being (as G5 in 1976 in Paris) on the eve of the anniversary of one hundred years of the Berlin (1884 – 85) conference on African partition and colonization. The purpose of the group was to find solutions to the economic difficulties of the West at the time when some economies in the developing world were just beginning to bask in their newfound oil wealth.

President Reagan of America, soon as he came to power in 1980 decided with his political wife, (the British even suspect something more intimate and sinister) Margaret Thatcher, the Prime Minister of Britain at the time, that some of the leading industrial nations of the West needed to initiate stiff measures to reverse their dwindling economic fortunes and nip OPEC's belligerent oil politics in the bud. The Group of seven, therefore, was a deliberate re-enactment of the Berlin conference on Africa, a hundred years later, to review the cracks in their economic well-being, and introduce firm measures to reverse our economic gains in their favour.

The Group of seven found that there was a strong correlation between their economic fortunes and ours and that the only way their economies could continue to stay buoyant was to keep ours ever dependent on theirs. Even George Bush Jr., the president of the United States admitted this much recently when he told leaders at the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in Chile in January 2005, “………that many powerful nations preferred others to remain underdeveloped and therefore dependent.”

On OPEC, the Group of seven decided to stock pile oil, cut down on their consumption and waste, develop alternative sources of energy, and use, for example, the North sea oil to destabilize OPEC by attacking its weakest link, Nigeria. On Africa, the Group of seven decided that we were to be kept severely under the ambit and influence of the West politically, through direct financial and military support for anti-African forces, and economically through the IMF, the World Bank, London and Paris clubs' coercion. Africans were to be specially trained by the IMF and the World Bank, and designated financial wizards to ease their take over of African economic heights for the West.

The Group of seven decided that South Africa should remain under White control. That all pressures to the contrary should be vehemently resisted while openly condemning the system of apartheid to placate world opinion. The Group of seven mandated Israel to form close links with South Africa, particularly in the area of defence, and to infiltrate African regimes and customs, for information and elimination of anti-western sentiments.

On individual African countries, particularly Nigeria, the Group of seven decided to immediately begin to check our anti-western stance because of our growing influence in Africa as a result of our population, vibrancy and potential mineral wealth. Western leaders were to move closer to us through visits and encouragement with awards and symbolic favours to continue our brainwashing. Plans were finalized to deal with the more articulate members of our society such as students, intellectuals, committed writers and patriots, by branding them as agitators and extremists, and preventing them from holding positions of power and influence. On African-Americans, and African-Britons, Thatcher and Reagan promised benign neglect to mellow Black revolt against increasing White affluence and prosperity. The developing world and Africa in particular were to be goaded to liberalize their economic laws in the name of free market forces, through debt swap and adjustment scenarios.

The 1988 Toronto conference of the Group of seven was called specifically to review the gains they had already made as regards our gradual recolonization. The noise over debt rescheduling then or at subsequent G7/G8 conferences was, therefore, merely a diversion. On the BBC early morning news of Monday the 20th June 1988, Margaret Thatcher was quoted as telling her colleagues at the G7 Toronto conference: “Our economies are buoyant again having achieved complete recovery. We are not here to initiate any change; our purpose is to strengthen our principle and resolve.”

President Reagan was quoted on the same BBC six-o-clock world news to have said: As I leave office, “my advice is, don't change anything, we are on the right track.” What, we must ask ourselves, were their coded messages about? What was the 'thing' they were not supposed to change, now that their economies are buoyant again while ours are stagnating? The communiqué after the conference claimed that “with the co-operation of the G7 leaders, the world's economies are looking up again,” ignoring tottering developing world's economies. The truth of the matter is that we must not be allowed to catch up economically with the West. There is a deliberately engineered dependency relationship between our economies. Without our markets and cheap sources of raw materials, their economies are doomed. The G7/G8 is, therefore, the modern name for a regularized 1884 Berlin conference on African political and economic strangulation. The strategy is to starve us silly because a hungry man lacks the strength to fight back. America leads the G8. Hitler, before handing the baton of heartless leadership to America, headed the most devilish regime in the world in our recent past. He, along with his entire staff were Catholic, and they dabbled in the occult, emphasizing again the solid marriage between religion and the Secret Societies at the top leadership level at least.

As a matter of interest, the Nazis, while trying to escape persecution in South America, shifted their criminal business headquarters from Rio to Lagos, and saturated Africa, creating a strong sub-base in South Africa. The New York Times of April 14, 1990, quoted George Bush, President of America then as saying: “Let's forget the Nazi war criminals.“ George Bush, of course, is a member of the Illuminati. So, it is easy to see that all the evil forces of the world are united in our control. It is a global conspiracy. The senior Bush's innate sadism and nastiness reflects the game plan of his clan that built fortunes on the slaughter of thousands of American Indians and the broken backs of millions of forcefully enslaved Africans. They have turned their neighbouring countries into banana republics to get a chance to mercilessly exploit their victims' resources with ease. Take Panama, for example. To prove that might is right, they have refused to pay their contributions to the UN, turned the UN Security Council into a committee of the White House, precipitated numerous, endless civil wars to promote global lawlessness and reduce the developing world's population.

The USA and Britain blocked a Security Council resolution condemning Iraq's aggression against Iran in 1980. In exchange for technical information on Soviet weapons in 1986, the CIA gave Iraq, satellite pictures of Iranian troop movements. In July 1988, Reagan blocked US congress sanction against Iraq for gassing 3,000 Kurds, and then armed Iraq against its neighbours, while steeling Israel at the same time, to defy UN resolution 242 and 338. When Saddam, goaded by the Americans, foolishly burgeoned, America ordered allied troops to bomb and butcher defeated and fleeing Saddam's soldiers, and to move 100 miles into Iraq's territory to try to force a civil war. That strategy failed so Bush destroyed Iraq's major economic facilities and cut off water and electricity supplies to the civilian population. Then his contractors invaded Iraq like a swarm of locusts to make fortunes from cash strapped Iraq, cleaning up the oil smeared beaches of Bush's one noonday madness. Where there to be order in their methods it would not be so bad. One minute they are on your side, the next minute they are blitzing your home.

A new form of neo-colonialism has surfaced in Africa. It is land grabbing by foreign companies and governments. It is probably not new. Arabs began grabbingNorthern Africa and eliminating the native African owners of the land from BCE and is continuing this today in Southern Sudan, particularly in Darfur. Europeans grabbed the rest of Africa, settled significant populations in Southern Africa and hijacked most of the arable land particularly in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Land is still the issue between Africa and the West in these countries even now.

The new land grabbing phenomenon started in earnest about ten years ago and began to spiral out of control from 2004. The deals that have been concluded so far, place no obligations on the land grabbers. Agreements concerning thousands of hectares of farm land are generally just two to four pages long and lack transparency, oversight, regulations and environmental safeguards. They do not protect the small holding native farmers who lose their customary rights to their land in the deals.

The size of the deals so far is mind bugging. Foreigners are buying off Africa for pittance from stupid, ill-informed, selfish African political leaders looking for personal gains. They put the tokens they collect from the deals in their private accounts in Switzerland.

A study of the media reports on foreigners' recent land acquisitions in Africa by GRAIN, a non-governmental organization and other sources suggests that some 40mn hectares of farm land have been or are being grabbed by foreign interest groups. Some 10mn hectares of these have been given away for variety of food crops and live stock farming in the Republic of Congo. Another 6mn hectares have been signed off in neighbouring countries.

A study by International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), a UK research outfit, estimates that at least 2.5mn hectares have been grabbed by foreign entities since 2004 in Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, Mali and Sudan. The report claims that the scale of the leases is unprecedented and that they do not have complete data on the cases because of the secrecy surrounding the deals.

Commercial enterprises, many of them European as well as Chinese companies have been in the lead in cultivating Jatropha, Sorghum and other bio-fuels in countries such as Madagascar, Mozambique and Tanzania. In Mozambique, Tanzania and Zambia, for example, only some 12 per cent of arable land is actually cultivated, so the political leaders feel they can give the rest away cheaply and without safeguards, to foreign entities.

The Chinese are at the moment negotiating to lease 2.8mn hectares in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to grow oil palm and a further 2mn hectares in Zambia to grow Jatropha (a crop used for bio-fuels). In Mozambique, local opposition to a Chinese project to develop 100,000 hectares was based on plans to import Chinese labour. China sees Africa as virgin land to relocate some of her teaming population.

Indians too are moving into Africa. Their companies, backed by their governments have invested $1.5bn in Ethiopia to meet rising domestic food and animal feed demand.

A deal by South Korea's Daewoo Corporation to lease 1.3mn hectares was a key factor in building support for the overthrow of Madagascar's President, Marc Ravalomanana, in March 2009. Sudan has agreed to lease 690,000 hectares to South Korea to grow wheat.

In Kenya, the confused and unpatriotic government leaders there are trying to bend the rules to overcome local opposition to a proposal to give Qatar, right over some 40,000 hectares of land in the Tana River Valley in return for building a deep-sea port.

Saudi Arabia has not been left out of all these. Saudi has already grabbed 100,000 hectares to grow corn and wheat in Toshika, Southern Egypt and yet unspecified size of land (because of on-going pogrom) from the displaced or eliminated African owners of the land in Southern Sudan. They have moved their peasant farmers into all the land seized from the native Africans driven out in Darfur.

NAIWU OSAHON Hon. Khu Mkuu (Leader) World Pan-African Movement); Ameer Spiritual (Spiritual Prince) of the African race; MSc. (Salford); Dip.M.S; G.I.P.M; Dip.I.A (Liv.); D. Inst. M; G. Inst. M; G.I.W.M; A.M.N.I.M. Poet, Author of the magnum opus: 'The end of knowledge'. One of the world's leading authors of children's books; Awarded; key to the city of Memphis, Tennessee, USA; Honourary Councilmanship, Memphis City Council; Honourary Citizenship, County of Shelby; Honourary Commissionership, County of Shelby, Tennessee; and a silver shield trophy by Morehouse College, USA, for activities to unite and uplift the African race.

Naiwu Osahon renowned author, philosopher of science, mystique, leader of the world Pan-African Movement.

Which team do you think has the higher chance of winning the 2024 elections?

Started: 02-07-2024 | Ends: 31-10-2024