Renegades: Dr Kambanda Defends Indefensible:

Kambanda calls all work done (writings) on renegades inaccurate and reckless. But this is a flat statement that again is far below the expectations of an academician. It smacks all logic expected from an academic, for all we have written is factual, verifiable and on record, leave alone being in public domain of all Rwandans now than ever before. Simplifying serious issues raised over renegades will not wish away nor wash away the criminal record they have left behind, and one that will haunt them for life, no matter how their play this down in their western ‘homes’. Does Kambanda want to refute the fact that Gahima fled after his corrupt practices that saw him blacklisted by all Rwandan banks, and his extreme mismanagement of our judiciary where Gahima, had taken on the character of prosecutor, judge and prison commissioner? Does Kambanda wish to refute Rudasingwa’s mismanagement of all institutions he headed through extreme arrogance, corruption and nepotism, that saw him aligned to court? Does Kambanda want to refute that Karegeya’s abuse of power through nepotism, insubordination and corruption that saw him serve a prison term. Does Kambanda want to refute the fact that, Kayumba had for some used highly opportunistic, nepotism and favouritism that led to this renegade to commit acts of treason by scheming to gain power by force? If all these hard facts are inaccurate, and reckless, Kambanda should re-assess his analytical methodologies, and how much these make sense in light of issues raised over these renegades. Furthermore, Kambanda questions the association of the renegades with FDLR and Ingabire’s FDU and tries to unsuccessfully erase their indelible terrorist state of the most unholiest association in the history of our country – all for demonic reasons. But it is not in the powers of Kambanda and his like minded to imagine that, they can use any means least highly flawed academic and legalistic polemics to negate the fact that, FDLR and FDU-Inkingi are terrorist organizations whose agenda is the ‘last solution’. That these renegades have found this unholiest alliance with terrorist has baffled Rwandans beyond any possible imaginations. They should have listened to what Rwandans think about them back home. Their imaginations or perhaps lack of it, cannot change their knowledge by Rwandans back home, which should ideally have been their best constituency, by which they unfortunately lost when they were in office and eternally admonished in their self exile. But their association has been aired openly by these renegades. Did’nt Kambanda know that, these renegades are busy recruiting other disgruntled elements from refugee camps in Uganda, as well as demobilized soldiers, all aimed at waging war against their country? What comes out of Kambanda’s writings is simply epistemological disposition he holds with regard to these renegades, but this does not negate their ‘substance’ which they have explicitly exposed to Rwandans who as pointed out earlier, got to know the real character of these renegades fighting hard to turn into politicians with diabolic constituencies. Kambanda seems to want to understate the centrality of the ‘substance’ of these renegades, but unfortunately it is not in his powers to do so, and will soon realise that, their messy past and worse still their present circumstances catches up with him too, if it has not done so already.Beside, Kambanda questions whether FDLR is a terrorist organization using very basic assumptions (even too basic for a postgraduate student) that defeats logic assumed to be an asset of any serious research. What comes out of Kambanda’s writings is but window dressing statements that are too shallow to append a name of “Dr” that he claims to be. The objective of his writing, and lack of substantive arguments therein highly questions the scholarly essence of Kambanda. He knows pretty well that, ALIR (Army for Liberation of Rwanda) was listed as a terrorist organization by USA/UN. He also knows that, FDLR is a product of ALIR, for ALIR changed into FDLR in 2000, and by inference/deduction, FDLR is a terrorist organization. Period! Calling it any other name especially by a person who claims to be scholar and attempts to justify his arguments using emotive mindset questions not only the works of Kambanda, but goes beyond... The change of ALIR to FDLR was simply a change of form, but not a change of substance. All commanders of ALIR became commanders of the new outfit, FDLR, and so were their combatants. In any case, what defines a group or individuals as terrorist is their actions and thus ideology. The FDLR ideology is exactly similar to that of ALIR (final solution) ie to exterminate all Tutsis in Rwanda, so that no one remains behind to remind any body of their identity. Thus, in the world of Kambanda, if al-qaeda changed its name, Osama Bin Laden transfers to another out fit eg, al-qayu, they will cease to be terrorists. For Kambandas, the dodgy change of name is synonymous to change of objective. But Rwandans know the contrary and I do not know which audience/constituency Kambanda and his cohort of renegades are appealing to, or trying to convince. Kamanda knows that, genocide ideology is the core training and operational guideline of FDLR as it was for ALIR. For Kambanda, a ‘researcher’, when an organization is on the UN/USA List, these killers as such qualify to be a terrorist organization, otherwise it is not. It is rather their past as well as the current horrendous/heinous actions of such organization that qualifies the same as a terrorist organization. FDLR not only espouses genocidal ideology but also rapes, and maims innocent civilians in Eastern DRC, that defending its identity is tantamount to supporting these heinous activities. Thus, his arguments of no crime by analogy exposes serious flaws in Kambanda’s articles, and by extension his methodological tools of assessment. Kambanda further alludes to the fact that, FDU-Inking, is not a terrorist Organization, and that no one is supposed to debate the same, just because he is in the government. A very simple argument indeed for a person who claims to be a scholar. Being in the government does not deprive of one’s liberty to comment on issues which are concern to Rwandans, and especially so when such comments are authentic. Records of Victoire Ingabire wiring money to FDLR and even visiting Kinsasha to meet FDLR Leadership was public knowledge even before she was aligned in court. Rusesabagina accepted his responsibility to sending money to FDLR, except that for him, it was ‘small amount’. When you collaborate, and finance a terrorist,you are a terrorist by inference/association/unit of purpose. RNC which is the renegades’ political organization signed an MoU with FDU-Inkingi in Montreux, Switzerland, on January, 25th, 2011. Condo Gervais singed on behalf of RNC, and witnessed by Gerald Gahima. Now, how do you define RNC, that signed an MoU with sponsors of terrorism? Kayumba and Rudasingwa are on record claiming Ingabire’s heroism, through various statements in the media that outraged Rwandans, at first, but who have now come to terms with the extremism and lack of judgment on their part. But these renegades have taken to be the lowest substance, any human soul can assign to, and with life time consequences. To be continued....Email: mnshuti@yahoo.co.uk

Opinions

Renegades: Dr Kambanda Defends Indefensible: