Thursday, June 26, 2008
Mugabe vs. Mubarak and others. Any Hypocrisy?
Angry words are being swirled against Robert Mugabe by the heavyweights. Fair enough. But why don’t the heavyweights reserve the same condemnation or worse for the Hosni Mubarak’s and the King Abdullah’s of the world? When will the hypocrisy end?
Mugabe was certainly a victim before. What were Hosni and the King victims of? Their policies have certainly led to the establishment of the world’s major terrorist groups.
Would they allow the ruling party to lose legislative elections as has happened in Zimbabwe? I am not apologizing for what Mugabe is doing, but there is worse, much worse than him in the world today.
Where are the invectives and exclusionary statements from the United States and Britain against the much more dangerous, violence-inducing tyrants of the world?
What does Mugabe have? Farmland which he is taking away from the sons and daughters of former oppressors, and giving away to cronies, leading to an economic collapse …
He does not have oil to keep himself in power by showering would be opponents or quieting oil-needy outsiders.
Where were the condemnations or journalists in oil-rich Equatorial Guinea when the ruling party there won 99 out of 100 seats? That election was a sham, but barely a whisper registered on international airwaves.
Here is an interesting list of the world’s worst dictators according to Parade magazine.
Mugabe, King Abdullah, Mubarak, Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema all figure on the list, in an order that could be debated, but the choices seem well made.