Rich: You assume I did little research; this assumption is incorrect. Did you actually read the documents your search turned up, including the ones in Swedish? I spent a few hours last night reading documents that Altavista found, including the U.S. State Department's report on human rights in Zambia under Chiluba. It says in part: Police often ignore procedural requirements and engage in abusive and brutal behavior, including beating and at times killing criminal suspects and detainees... The press and other media continued to run afoul of legal restraints on freedom of expression and suffered political reprisals for expressing independent views. I also read enough back issues of _The Post_ to get a feel for their editorial tone, and even if they had ties to the former dictator (an assertion you don't back up), their recent coverage of events was not unfair, IMHO. I've also read three reports by the Media Institute of South Africa (MISA), calling for sanctions and a withholding of foreign aid to Zambia for their human rights abuses, especially of members of the media. I agree, and I also called for pressure through foreign aid. You seem to be unduly critical of my report. *shrug* I don't expect everyone to agree with me, and I suppose I should be happy that you think I'm "95% right," whatever that means. -Declan On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, Rich Graves wrote:
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 01:55:01 -0800 (PST) From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Bravo, mostly (Re: Banned Zambian newspaper now on the Web)
[Please forward along to fight-censorship if non-redundant]
I applaud your quick response. However, you should read more and consult people with area expertise. At least do the five-minute AltaVista and DejaNews search I did; don't just trust the information that gets sent to you, or you're likely to be used.
I think you're at least 95% right here, but it is worth noting that The Post has ties to the former dictator of Zambia, who was replaced by the more or less democratically elected Chiluba whose ouster you so precipitously are demanding. First impressions and fast action are often necessary, but it's not responsible to stop there. Life & death politics isn't a toy. Chiluba is no saint, but he's no two-bit dictator, either. I'd probably rate him a notch or two below Aristide, no worse. He's certainly no Castro, Kim, or Idi Amin.Chiluba is pretty good by Sub-Saharan African standards (which, unfortunately, isn't saying much).
For informed opinion, you should start with the Association of Concerned African Scholars:
http://www.prairienet.org/acas/
You might want to add Amnesty International's 1995 report on Sub-Saharan Africa, which has some background on Zambia and Chiluba:
http://www.amnesty.org/Africa95/360195.AFR.txt
For those who read Swedish, this appears to be a more specific Amnesty report:
http://www.everyday.se/amnesty/zambia2.html
See Chiluba's comments on Nigerian human rights violations:
http://www.prairienet.org/acas/chiluba.html
Official statements of the Zambian government:
http://www.zamnet.zm/zamnet/grz/govstate.html
Two trivial stylistic whines:
HTML bug: You need to prepend mailto: to the link to fstuart@vetmed.auburn.edu
Graphical excess: And as I'm sure you're aware, the lead graphic is a bit large for most browsers. It takes up the whole 13" screen I have at home.
-rich