Thursday, December 07, 2006

"We Lied"

Robert Mugabe is moving to seize a British diamond field, the first to invest in bankrupt Zimbabwe since the political crisis began. It was was ordered off its valuable claim yesterday, after diamonds were found in the area of course.


African Consolidated Resources plc, with about 1,000 claims in Zimbabwe, listed in London in June and says it was granted title by the Ministry of Mines. The order to leave the dry, poverty-stricken Marange district, about 200 miles south east of Harare, comes after months of drama.

When rumours of diamonds spread during the summer, thousands flocked there from all over Zimbabwe and neighbouring countries in what may have been the largest diamond rush in Africa in the last 100 years. Company officials estimate £120 million of diamonds were dug out by desperate people over the last few months. Dirk Benade, 57, an ACR geologist, saw it all. As the hordes massed, they dug deep holes within a metre of one another.

"One man was murdered for diamonds in the hills behind us. And a woman died after a huge Baobab tree fell on her after soil around its roots had been dug away," Sabo Sauke, 31, told The Daily Telegraph, the first Western newspaper to reach the area since the rush began.

Mr Sauke, like all the diggers, was pressed to sell his stones to the state's Minerals Marketing Corporation of Zimbabwe at a fraction of their real value. As the hygiene conditions continued to deteriorate, Tinos Rusere, the deputy mining minister, went to the site on September 25 and told swarms of diggers to carry on mining and sell their stones to the government. Dealers from neighbouring South African also appeared, offering better prices.

ACR has built roads and refurbished dams for the local community and, when the diggers were finally moved out of the area by police last week, the company began sifting gravel to estimate how much had been looted.

At least apartheid is over, and that's something to be thankful for. Ask Jimmy Carter, who recently wrote a book called Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid. This letter from a former Carter associate recently appeared in Power Line asking whether Carter knew the difference. Here's my definition. Apartheid is when you sell your diamonds cut-rate to the White Man. Peace is when you sell it cut-rate to Robert Mugabe. But first, the letter in Power Line.

Professor Stein is apparently terminating his association with the Carter Center, solely as a result of Carter's new book, Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid. The reaction of Professor Stein -- a formerly close associate and collaborator of Carter -- to Carter's new book is, as our reader thought it would be, of great interest to us:

This note is to inform you that yesterday, I sent letters to President Jimmy Carter, Emory University President Jim Wagner, and Dr. John Hardman, Executive Director of the Carter Center resigning my position, effectively immediately, as Middle East Fellow of the Carter Center of Emory University. This ends my 23 year association with an institution that in some small way I helped shape and develop. My joint academic position in Emory College in the History and Political Science Departments, and, as Director of the Emory Institute for the Study of Modern Israel remains unchanged.

Many still believe that I have an active association with the Center and, act as an adviser to President Carter, neither is the case. President Carter has intermittently continued to come to the Arab-Israeli Conflict class I teach in Emory College. He gives undergraduate students a fine first hand recollection of the Begin-Sadat negotiations of the late 1970s. Since I left the Center physically thirteen years ago, the Middle East program of the Center has waned as has my status as a Carter Center Fellow. For the record, I had nothing to do with the research, preparation, writing, or review of President Carter's recent publication. Any material which he used from the book we did together in 1984, The Blood of Abraham, he used unilaterally.

President Carter's book on the Middle East, a title too inflammatory to even print, is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments. Aside from the one-sided nature of the book, meant to provoke, there are recollections cited from meetings where I was the third person in the room, and my notes of those meetings show little similarity to points claimed in the book. Being a former President does not give one a unique privilege to invent information or to unpack it with cuts, deftly slanted to provide a particular outlook. Having little access to Arabic and Hebrew sources, I believe, clearly handicapped his understanding and analyses of how history has unfolded over the last decade. Falsehoods, if repeated often enough become meta-truths, and they then can become the erroneous baseline for shaping and reinforcing attitudes and for policy-making. The history and interpretation of the Arab-Israeli conflict is already drowning in half-truths, suppositions, and self-serving myths; more are not necessary. In due course, I shall detail these points and reflect on their origins.

The decade I spent at the Carter Center (1983-1993) as the first permanent Executive Director and as the first Fellow were intellectually enriching for Emory as an institution, the general public, the interns who learned with us, and for me professionally. Setting standards for rigorous interchange and careful analyses spilled out to the other programs that shaped the Center's early years. There was mutual respect for all views; we carefully avoided polemics or special pleading. This book does not hold to those standards. My continued association with the Center leaves the impression that I am sanctioning a series of egregious errors and polemical conclusions which appeared in President Carter's book. I can not allow that impression to stand.

Through Emory College, I have continued my professional commitment to inform students and the general public about the history and politics of Israel, the Middle East, and American policies toward the region. I have tried to remain true to a life-time devotion to scholarly excellence based upon unvarnished analyses and intellectual integrity. I hold fast to the notion that academic settings and those in positions of influence must teach and not preach. Through Emory College, in public lectures, and in OPED writings, I have adhered to the strong belief that history must presented in context, and understood the way it was, not the way we wish it to be.

In closing, let me thank you for your friendship, past and continuing support for ISMI, and to Emory College. Let me also wish you and your loved ones a happy holiday season, and a healthy and productive new year.

As ever,
Ken

Dr. Kenneth W. Stein,
Professor of Contemporary Middle Eastern History, Political Science,
and Israeli Studies,
Director, Middle East Research Program and
Emory Institute for the Study of Modern Israel
Atlanta, Georgia

Some people are doubtless asking themselves why African Consolidated Resources would ever trust Robert Mugabe. After all, what sort of mentally challenged persons would begin negotiations with known liars and plunderers; actually trust those with a long record of duplicity and breaking their word? Enlist their help in getting them out of a situation that these liars themselves created? Who could be so stupid? Oh wait ...

36 Comments:

Blogger Cosmo said...

Brilliant close, Wretchard.

How is it that so many of our 'best and brightest' are so routinely snookered by the geopolitical equivalent of streetwise hoodlums?

Hard to recall, I know, but elites used to be good at besting thugs -- that is, if they wanted to remain elites for very long.

12/07/2006 09:12:00 PM  
Blogger bjbarron said...

Cosmo - Best comment I've read today.

12/07/2006 09:51:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

cosmo,

I met a man once who described to me how he was swindled as a kid. He wanted a Leica camera, but couldn't afford it. But he was always looking into a second-hand camera display window in a seedy part of town. One day a man noticed him peering longingly at a Leica for the nth time and said that he knew a man who had a really cheap, nearly new Leica for sale. But there was a hitch. He needed to make a deposit to "hold" the camera before it was sold to anyone else. I guess you can fill in the blanks.

Reflecting on his lost money, the man figured that at the bottom of every swindle is a desire to get something for nothing. And every swindler exploits this weakness. "If I had gone into a Leica dealership I would spent a lot of money, but I would have gotten the real deal. But I wanted something for nothing. And I got nothing for something."

I figure international swindlers and boondoggles work the same way. Everyone wants the fruits of victory, but for political reasons we all we want it on the cheap. And when someone notices us balking at the price, out comes the Promise. "We are gonna solve everything for next to nothing. All you've got to do is leave Iraq, hand over the Golan heights, give the Palestinians a state, let Nasrallah take over Lebanon and we'll get you out of Iraq. Guaranteed. And then you'll be elected in 2008, 2010 and 2012. Just throw a few gomers to the dogs is all." Sounds good. But the catch is it sounds too good.

A lot of people say they got swindled by Bush. Or say Bush got swindled by all these exile groups he believed. They'll say it and walk right into the next scam. If we want something important, it'll cost. Any time you're not prepared to pay is the time to keep your peepers open.

12/07/2006 10:25:00 PM  
Blogger Stephen Renico said...

Has anyone read Forsythe's The Dogs of War? I often find myself thinking that it's time to bring back the cigar-chomping mercenary.

12/08/2006 04:48:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

Great answer, wretchard. Thanks.

The guy in your parable looking for a Leica on the cheap learned his lesson. Unfortunately for us, the West's political leaders have become serial 'marks' -- gullible, easily outwitted and, when they discover they've been taken, incapable of turning the tables or doing much of anything about it.

Yassir Arafat: 'partner in peace' or stone killer? The UN and most NGOs: forces for good or shakedown rackets? Flying imams and Muslim taxi drivers: legitimate grievances or con artists gaming Western naivete and guilt?

Syria and Iran: Part of a regional solution to our difficulties in Iraq, or enemies at war with us through proxies in Iraq?

12/08/2006 06:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cosmo said, "Syria and Iran: Part of a regional solution to our difficulties in Iraq, or enemies at war with us through proxies in Iraq?"

Bush says Syria and Iran are potential democracies, since his plan in his second inaugural address was to cure tyranny around the globe with democracy. But he won't even talk to them, so I guess he wants to make them democracies by force of arms, ala the Iraq model.

12/08/2006 06:11:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice comments there.

We're like the man with the Leica who's just been conned out of his money, but now tempted by the fact that he is only that close to getting a real one, becomes ever more desperate to acquire it.

And thus when a third-hand Leica is promised by another swindler, our man wants to believe that it isn't deja woe, that he can't be that unlucky to get conned twice. He hands over the money.

And again he finds himself with nothing. And again, his desperation grows with each passing day. He becomes more and more willing to pay for the one in the store, but somehow as long as he believes that a cheaper option abounds, he's going to keep on searching...and continue getting swindled.

When will the Leica man discover that his predicament of being repeatedly conned has absolutely nothing to do with luck, but everything to do with a syndicate of swindlers who work together to squeeze every single cent out of him?

As long as we believe there's a cheaper, second-, third- or fourth-hand option to resolve the Iraqi dilemma, as long as we believe in it despite its futility, we'll never look beyond our shortcomings and actually realise that there isn't any other way than the costliest measure: to stay in Iraq and give the Iraqis as much help as we can afford.

12/08/2006 06:46:00 AM  
Blogger peter said...

i was just wondering what the US plan is to get the UN involved (if any), what the UN plan is to involve itself, and if after the historical precedent of UN troops sitting by watching (rather than stopping) genocide and atrocities in areas of conflict, if it is even a viable option to bring a third party such as the UN in to help police iraq while it gets on its feet.

if the UN force were mostly arab/muslim in composition, would there be less animosity towards the "occupying forces" and less justification for roadside bombings and things of that sort (i.e., someone who plants a roadside bomb that kills americans would be looked at differently by the local population than one who planted one that killed saudi peace keeping troops).

i just put an interesting video online entitled Responding to Anti-Americanism in the Arab World: Have We Been Effective Since 9/11. it is from a debate between David Frum, from the American Enterprise Institute, Craig Charney, Middle East Pollster, and Leon Hadar of the Cato Institute. they all have wildly different views. thought provoking...to me at least :-)

peter

12/08/2006 07:23:00 AM  
Blogger Catfish 'n Cod said...

Wretchard, maybe I am dense... but aside from the rhetorical point you are making, what in the name of glory does Carter's opinion on the Holy Lands have to do with Mugabe being a thug?

I know you disagree vehemently with Carter but trying to tie Mugabe to him reads like grasping at straws. There are plenty of things in the I/P relationship to criticize Carter's stance on; bringing in unrelated matters is not needed... unless you are just enjoying complaining about Carter.

12/08/2006 07:51:00 AM  
Blogger 49erDweet said...

Good comments, most all, and great connection! I got it, even if catfish didn't. And it's tempting to say, "It's just the Brit's", but cosmo's use of the term "elites" is closer to the truth.

It's the "beeb-led-fed-soon to be dead" elite 'wishers' around the world who keep falling into the same trap, again and again and ag---.

Thanks.

12/08/2006 08:09:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

Peter:

I think that any "UN force (which was) mostly arab/muslim in composition" would be even more corrupt and criminally incompetent (UNFIL) than the usual cast of freeloaders, grifters, organized crime concession operators and white slavers the UN dispatches to the world's festering hellholes.

Hard to image, I know.

Catfish:

Carter and Mugabe are related in that the former sort enable the latter sort.

12/08/2006 08:37:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

Harrison:

Unfortunately, commitment, hardship and sacrifice are no longer considered either routine or unavoidable stops on the road to success.

Indeed, they are now seen exclusively as indicators of failure which only a chump would endure and, thus, are to be avoided at all cost, even at the cost of one's honor.

49er:

Further shame is that the cowardice of our elites has infected institutions (like our courts) designed to mediate on behalf of and to protect the rest of us from the physical and ideological bullies and predators.

Cops have to think about career-ending media firestorms and investigations triggered by the flimsiest charge of 'racism'. Same goes for businesses or pundits facing cococted, media-fueled accusations and denunciations.

Decades of blame-shifting apologetics and theoretical wishful thinking about human nature has led us to excuse the criminality and violence of politically fashionable groups, who know this and use it, often blatantly, to advantage.

No one seems to have the courage to call all this out for the obvious shakedown it truly is.

12/08/2006 09:10:00 AM  
Blogger NahnCee said...

so it's a scandal and we cluck about the West's stupidity when Mugabe does it in Zimbabwe, but it's business as usual and the way things are done when Putin does it in Russia.

12/08/2006 09:44:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

nahncee:

Remember the quip about the Soviet Union being Upper Volta with missiles?

Same goes for Putin, who is Mugabe with oil and missiles. They are little different in my mind. One get credibility from a no longer, if ever, deserved seat on the UN Security Council, the other gets legitimacy from red carpets rolled before him by oily European politicians.

12/08/2006 10:08:00 AM  
Blogger Sardonic said...

Cosmo,

"The guy in your parable looking for a Leica on the cheap learned his lesson. Unfortunately for us, the West's political leaders have become serial 'marks' -- gullible, easily outwitted and, when they discover they've been taken, incapable of turning the tables or doing much of anything about it."

Let's not be that guy. So when the political leaders say "Gosh lookie, we were duped AGAIN. Gee.", we need to ask ourselves... why do we believe them? Whenever you see a pattern of behavior that makes no sense, look for alterior motives. Nobody is THAT stupid all the time by accident. So... don't be the next dupe in line. Stop assuming that they are innocent dupes and start considering what it means if they aren't. Where does that trail lead? No place good, I'll wager.

12/08/2006 10:36:00 AM  
Blogger gumshoe1 said...

"When will the Leica man discover that his predicament of being repeatedly conned has absolutely nothing to do with luck, but everything to do with a syndicate of swindlers who work together to squeeze every single cent out of him? "


harrison,i disagree.

the swindler
plays on the victim's flaw.

or his greed,if you prefer.

and i doubt the boy's swindlers "worked together",
they just ran identical scams that played on a predictable weakness,
which they leveraged each and every time a vicitm showed up.

12/08/2006 10:50:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

Sardonic:

Good point. Maybe Occam's razor isn't the right approach. Setting aside my peanut gallery jeering, most of those in our leadership classes are not stupid and they, literally, carry the weight of the world on their shoulders. Hence, our anxiety about where they're taking us.

The fans always play the game better than the players and all that.

I look forward to being amazed by the declassified history of this war, hopefully, in the comfort of a cozy armchair and an excellent Bordeaux within reach.

12/08/2006 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger al fin said...

Jimmy Carter and Robert Mugabe deserve each other. Mugabe enjoys playing the con, and Carter enjoys being conned.

How Carter must miss his old friend Yasser Arafat. How he will miss Fidel when he is gone. Thank goodness for Hugo Chavez, and Daniel Ortega, men after Jimmy's own heart. What will they, and shifty cheating dictators like them, do when Jimmy himself is gone?

12/08/2006 01:04:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Peter - "if the UN force were mostly arab/muslim in composition, would there be less animosity towards the "occupying forces" and less justification for roadside bombings and things of that sort?"

Given the tribalism of Arabs, the result of evil outsider Sunnis in Shia territory or heretic Shiite interlopers patrolling in lands dominated by Sunnis of 16 tribes for 800 years would be the same as Sierra Leonans expecting a good time or giving one to Nigerian tribesmen sent as "peacekeepers".

Cosmo - Same goes for Putin, who is Mugabe with oil and missiles. They are little different in my mind.

The difference is Putin heads a nation that has a superbly well-educated population and which has had a very bad experience with crony capitalism allowing Russia's national asssets to be plundered from the people by a few well-connected, wealthy Oligarchs.

Putin has raised the standard of living, returned some measure of stability and influence to the country. He is very popular, outside the Oligarch and looter's circles. He has also used Authoritarian means to end the "anything goes, Wild West" period where assets were plundered.

Now, there are ample signs Putin is no Boy Scout...that he may be getting rid of some despised Oligarchs and looter gangs only to replace them with HIS supporters becoming as venal and corrupt...even cutting deals to keep 3 of the 8 Big Oligarchs and their plunder together.

But Russia is now improving for the Russian on the street - his/her security and future looks better. National pride is being restored, Russia is no one's bitch anymore. Putin is term-limited, but could easily been reelected if eligible.

Little comparison exists between him and Mugabe.

Every metric of national productivity and industry and metrics of rule of law are down in Zimbabwe. Most are up in Putin's Russia.

12/08/2006 02:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder how the 'Conflict Free Diamond' crowd will deal with this?

http://www.conflictfreediamonds.org/

12/08/2006 03:31:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

Cedarford:

I think you're lint-picking my comparison (but I appreciate your detail discipline, nonetheless).

Declining life expectancy, deathbed birth and abortion rates, GDP in the middle of the Eurozone pack . . . I could go on, but it's hardly a Cinderella comeback story.

All this from a "superbly well-educated population" which has allowed "Russia's national asssets to be plundered from the people by a few well-connected, wealthy Oligarchs."

Which begs the question of why this was allowed to happen (I have a pretty good idea of what would lead to atrophy on such a massive scale).

Indeed, "national asssets . . . plundered from the people by a few well-connected, wealthy Oligarchs" sounds very much like the fate of Rhodesia and most of post-colonial Africa.

OK, so I'll amend my assessment -- Mugabe is Putin without missiles or oil.

12/08/2006 03:39:00 PM  
Blogger Wu Wei said...

> Every metric of national productivity and industry and metrics of rule of law are down in Zimbabwe. Most are up in Putin's Russia.

Unfortunately as far as economic freedom goes, things are very, very bad in Russia. They should be absolutely fantastic since Russia has so much oil. But Putin is retro, a old KGB agent who hates the country so much that he is pushing it back into the communist dark ages. Over all, Red China is much more friendly to free enterprise than Russia.

To give one example Putin took over the biggest oil company is Russia, just basically seized it under the color of law. Then the government was so uncaring and incompetent that production went down.

Western businesses who try to work in Russia find that same thing, massive corruption, contempt for the law, and the attitude that everything belongs to the state.

If things are getting better at all in Russia, it is in spite of the government, and solely because they have massive quantities of oil, some say more than Saudi Arabia. But most of it just sits underground because no one in their pseudo-communist society will bother to get the oil out.

12/08/2006 04:43:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wu Wei said, "If things are getting better at all in Russia, it is in spite of the government, and solely because they have massive quantities of oil, some say more than Saudi Arabia.

Russia has proven reserves equal to only 6% of the world total, while Saudi Arabia is more like 25% of the world total.

"But most of it just sits underground because no one in their pseudo-communist society will bother to get the oil out."

This is actually good because the oil they do not pump will push off beyond the foreseeable future the date of global peak oil.

12/08/2006 05:19:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmo said...

In other words, all comparisons fall apart at some level of detail.

For purposes of the comparison I made, the distinctions cited are without without much of a difference. Who cares if Russia is taking the scenic route to national inconsequence -- and is only able to do so at its leisure because it has nukes and oil -- while Zimbabwe took the interstate?

12/08/2006 05:27:00 PM  
Blogger sam said...

Samson Tigere, another Mahusekwa new farmer, said serious problems are caused by the uncertainty about future land tenure or ownership, which currently is subject to the arbitrary decisions of Lands and Security Minister Didymus Mutasa, one of Mugabe's closest lieutenants. "Today I am here, but there is no guarantee that I will be here tomorrow," he told IWPR.

"Mutasa can issue an offer letter to somebody else soon after I invest my money in the land. It is risky business."


Farmers Fail to Deliver

12/08/2006 05:49:00 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

Yeah, actually Russia is a cesspool. I know at least 100 emigrees who would laugh at an assertion otherwise.

12/08/2006 06:39:00 PM  
Blogger Mike H. said...

The streetwise hoodlums are bereft of information not intellect. It appears that the elites are not bereft of information...

12/08/2006 06:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

gumshoe1 wrote: the swindler
plays on the victim's flaw.

or his greed,if you prefer.

and i doubt the boy's swindlers "worked together",
they just ran identical scams that played on a predictable weakness,
which they leveraged each and every time a victim showed up.


You do have a point there; I was referring to Iran, Syria and their hordes of vermin chancing on every opportunity in "Palestine", Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, and just about any Muslim-populated territory to exploit and proselytise others into capitalising on our unwillingness to learn from our mistakes.

But then again, other swindlers like Russia, China, Venezuela do make things harder for us as well.

peter wrote: if the UN force were mostly arab/muslim in composition, would there be less animosity towards the "occupying forces" and less justification for roadside bombings and things of that sort?

Actually, it would result in Arabs killing Arabs left and right, judging from the inherent inter- and intra-sectarian differences within the Middle East. Of course, that does sound like a much better prospect than having our own forces getting killed.

12/08/2006 06:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cedarford said, "But Russia is now improving for the Russian on the street - his/her security and future looks better. National pride is being restored, Russia is no one's bitch anymore."

You could have said the exact same thing for Germany in 1936.

12/08/2006 07:43:00 PM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

WC - Reducio ad Hitlerum.

Any society that collapsed and tries to pull itself out is obviously a nascent Nazi Germany. Any authoritarian regime, even Lincoln's, is Hitler-aspiring. All wars can only be understood in relation to WWII.

Such is the limit of most American's education they cannot fail but to make Hitler and WWII analogies to explain all events.

12/08/2006 08:47:00 PM  
Blogger Fellow Peacekeeper said...

Such is the limit of most American's education they cannot fail but to make Hitler and WWII analogies to explain all events.

Not even education but inclination. It is a measure to which the cultural_marxists have succeeded in infecting popular consciousness with their ideas.

WWII replaces both Genesis and Apocalypse. Hitler the Antichrist has replaced both Christ and Satan in one (since there is no positive image to strive towards in negative dialectics).

In many ways BC/AD is obsolete, to truly reflect postmodernism, we should restart the calender with dates in the age of aquarius being "PH" - Post Hitler - with 1946 as year 1 PH. Today is 9th December 61 PH.

In this world the new spiritual beacon is Martin Luther King, who fights against evil! segregation! segregation, and discrimination!. He's dead, but like the Dalai Lama, is reborn anew in Nelson Mandela, who fights against evil! Discrimination! Evil, discrimination and Apartheid!

Which would be a meaningless rant unless one considers the era whence Jimmy Carter comes from.

12/08/2006 09:30:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cedarford said, "Such is the limit of most American's education they cannot fail but to make Hitler and WWII analogies to explain all events."

So when President Ineedanewjob talks about wiping six million Jews in Israel off the map, I suppose I can't draw a parallel to the holocaust because it would be a simplistic Hitler analogy that would betray my limited education.

12/09/2006 04:29:00 AM  
Blogger Don Cox said...

"Yeah, actually Russia is a cesspool."____Inevitable after seven decades of Marxist rule. It will take at least a couple of generations to recover.

12/11/2006 04:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The UN fits that bill. It promises world peace and human rights for the mere payment of our membership dues. It delivers very little.

12/11/2006 10:44:00 AM  
Blogger sexy bikinis said...

The diamonds that are being questioned are being sourced from a mine near the southern town of Beitbridge whose ownership is in dispute, and from the Marange region in eastern Zimbabwe, where in late November, the Zimbabwean government was accused of using security forces to seize an industrial diamond mine in violation of a high court order supporting the claim of British-based African Consolidated Resources to rightful ownership of the mine.

2/25/2007 07:00:00 PM  
Blogger sexy bikinis said...

The diamonds that are being questioned are being sourced from a mine near the southern town of Beitbridge whose ownership is in dispute, and from the Marange region in eastern Zimbabwe, where in late November, the Zimbabwean government was accused of using security forces to seize an industrial diamond mine in violation of a high court order supporting the claim of British-based African Consolidated Resources to rightful ownership of the mine.


sexy bikinis

2/25/2007 07:01:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Powered by Blogger