As I wrote previously:
"The international community should carefully listen to the way Paul Kagame expresses himself in public, it gives important information on his political method. He often speaks in riddles which need solving."Olivier Nyirubugara, a well known Rwandan journalist living in the Netherlands has a very good discussion with Congolese journalist Roger Bongos in which he explains that Paul Kagame has a very peculiar communication style "Kagame-speak".
On the day of Green Party's vice-president André Kagwa Rwisereka's funeral Paul Kagame stated:
"My job has not been to create an opposition, my job is to create the environment where legitimate things can happen."Several months before the assassination attempt on Kayumba Nyamwasa:
"those leaving the country are like human waste"
The reason he uses these riddles is simple: Paul Kagame is speaking to two audiences at the same time. His friends in the UK and the US who want to portray him as a "beacon of hope for Africa", but also his own RPF.
As I wrote earlier:
On the one hand, in the US and UK people like Hillary Clinton and Frederick Kempe can claim that indeed Kagame never said he killed opponents and that this statement only means that Rwandan civil society is still fragile after the genocide, that democracy is more then just opposition parties.
On the other hand, in Rwanda the RPF can claim, based on this statement, that it's proud leader doesn't care what the international community thinks. That the definition of what is "legitimate" is made by one man: Paul Kagame. And that in that context he is proud to have given orders to kill André Kagwa Rwisereka, and that he won't hesitate for one second to do it again if deemed necessary.
Kagame has consistently been advocating at Westpoint, through his Ugandan PR channels (@Andrewmwenda and @kasujja ) and in other east african countries that he has the right to assassinate his opponents (at home and abroad):
" The Kigali government accuses Kayumba of terrorism (linking him to the FDLR). In global comparison, Kayumba and Karegyeya are terrorists like Osama Bin Laden. It is the stated policy of the US government to find Bin Laden and, if he cannot be captured alive, kill him. Therefore, the government in Kigali would not need to deny or apologise for trying to kill a terrorist."
Stephen Sackur's interview with Paul Kagame is a good example of Kagame-speak in which Paul Kagame answers the question about Habyarimana's assassination by claiming he had the right to do so.
Yesterday Kasule Ivan asked the same question (again) :
It's clear from the PR spin the Kigali regime is desperately sending out through it's Ugandan friends Alan Kasujja and Andrew Mwenda that they are shifting from denying to defending the assassination of Juvenal Habyarimana by Paul Kagame.
Since the BBC put Rudasingwa's statement on their website two Ugandans, Alan Kasujja and Andrew Mwenda (a paid Kagame propagandist), are attempting to sell the story that Habyarimana's assassination is entirely justifiable.
Alan Kasujja has three arguments. First he makes the claim that Juvenal Habyarimana is somehow comparable to Osama bin Laden:
Then (to stir up some anti-white sentiment) he claims that that blaming Kagame for the assassination is somehow a "whiteman's" conspiracy:
Then he claims Habyarimana was the architect of the genocide: