Agathon Rwasa

Ce site web publie les atrocités des rebelles FNL du Burundi et mène une campagne pour traduire en justice le dirigeant des FNL, Agathon Rwasa. Nous essayons aussi de mettre à nue la question d'impunité en génerale. This website aims to highlight atrocities by the Burundian FNL rebels, and campaigns to see FNL leader Agathon Rwasa brought to justice. We also aim to highlight the issue of impunity worldwide.

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Talk about it...

This is an open forum for anyone with something to say about Agathon Rwasa, the FNL and the wider situation in Burundi. Click "Comment" to have your say.

24 Comments:

Anonymous RON said...

I am so glad someone has provided an agora where we can inform the world of the innumerable crimes pending against Agathon Rwasa and the PALIPEHUTU-FNL terrorist group that he leads. In a world where the rule is supposed to be zero tolerance to terrorists, it is inadmissible that the UN court and elevate to the rank of a normal politician, a man who has endorsed responsibility for crimes against humanity.
If what follows does not amount to crimes against humanity, or genocide; I invite the UN and the International Criminal Tribunals, to apologize to the NAZI's. After all, they were convicted and punished for similar deeds:

- August 1988: PALIPEHUTU massacred of an estimated 50 000 ethnic Tutsi at Ntega and Marangara in the north of Burundi. In PALIPEHUTU's Communiqué No6 published the same year, the group had called all Hutu of Burundi to stand up as one man and kill all ethnic Tutsi, to such a point that "no one in the world will ever remember what a Tutsi looks like."
- In 1991, precisely on November 23, PALIPEHUTU attacked Tutsi families in the capital city Bujumbura. According to local human rights organizations, at least 561 people died in the attacks. During the same month, entire Tutsi families were massacred by PALIPEHUTU in the procince of Cibitoke, as well as in Mparamirundi, Kayanza province.
- In 2000, PALIPEHUTU attacked a Belgian ailiner as it prepared to land at Bujumbura international airport, wounding 3 harmless passengers.
On December 28, 2000, PALIPEHUTU-FNL attacked a civil transportation bus linking Kigali, Rwanda to Bujumbura. The group, which was under Agathon Rwasa's command, killed in cold blood twenty-one innocent passengers (including women and 4 children), most of them after horrible mutilations. I myself saw the horror as I happened to be at one of the Bujumbura mortuaries were the bodies were sent the day after the massacre.
- In August 2004, PALIPEHUTU attacked a refugee camp and killed 161 Banyamulenge ethnic Tutsi and claimed responsibilty.

This is just a sample of crimes by Agathon Rwasa and his PALIPEHUTU-FNL terrorist group.

4:10 PM  
Blogger Ghislain said...

I am writing to say that I like your actions about Agathon Rwasa. What seems so confusing to me is that everybody thinks that all these guye elected today, and those who have been on power for so long are angels. Burundi will never be a peacefull country if justice is not done. Why having elections before Justice? I just don't get it. Please let us all work for a better future for this so beautifull country.

9:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

il y a beaucoup de genocidaire dans les Grands Lacs,je ne vois pas la raison de commencer par RWASA.Qui a prouvé que RWASA est genocidaire.Commence par Kagame.

9:00 AM  
Blogger RW said...

Bien sur il y a beaucoup des genocidaires dans la region des Grands Lacs. Il y a beaucoup des genocidaires dans autres regions du monde aussi, mais ce n'est pas une raison pour tolerer l'impunité. Si il y a des preuves de grotesque criminalité, il faut intervenir de poursuivre les criminelles, et d'arreter la violence. Chacun doit repondre pour ses crimes - mais c'est absurde de demander qu'on fait rien contre la criminalité de Rwasa et ses FNL jusqu'au moment que c'est possible de poursuivre tous les criminelles dans le monde.

Il y a beaucoup des preuves contre Rwasa et les FNL, par exemple cette rapport du Human Rights Watch:

« Il y avait des chants, des alléluia, les mêmes que ceux qu’on chante dans nos églises. C'est pourquoi certains gardaient encore confiance. Puis les tirs, le feu. L’après-midi, j’avais joué au football avec des amis. Certains ont été tués. »

2:31 AM  
Anonymous Stephanie said...

This comment is in regard of the LRA in Uganda and Sudan.

I have to say that I randomly came across this blog and became exhilarated when you began to discuss the atrocities going on in Uganda and Sudan. It is unfortnate that not enough people are aware of what is going on in that part of the world and I would hope that you continue informing us with this information. My passion is humanitarian efforts, and because of this, I have been working with a grassroots organization called INVISIBLE CHILDREN. Please go to our website! I believe it would really interest you and I would hope that you would give us feedback on what we have to say. Thank you so much for exposing this terrible, disgusting truth.

http://www.invisiblechildren.com

10:18 AM  
Blogger RW said...

Stephanie,

Many thanks for your comments - and thankyou also for taking the trouble to look at this site. Please do pass it on to others who might be interested.

We're keen to do whatever we can to raise awareness of human rights issues across Africa, particularly with regard to conflict and impunity. The Lord's Resistance Army seems very comparable with Palipehutu-FNL, not only in terms of their fundamentalist ideology and criminal methods - but also in the way that some members of the international community seem determined to appease (and perhaps even reward) their leaders rather than applying the rule of law. We share the view of human rights groups who believe that justice (fairly and humanely conducted) is essential in deterring future atrocities.

The Invisible Children project looks like an excellent initiative. I'll try to add a permanent link from this site very soon - but do remind me!

11:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let the world know...

We should include Paul Kagame, the dictator of Rwanda or Saddam Hussein of Iraq on this site they're both killers as Rwasa.

5:28 AM  
Blogger RW said...

Readers are welcome to add information here about other issues relating to impunity and war crimes committed elsewhere in the world, and we will occasionally extend our scope beyond Burundi, but the main focus of this site is Agathon Rwasa and the FNL. The reason we do this is partly because this is the area we know most about, and partly because there seems to be a relative lack of detailed information available about FNL atrocities. The crimes of Saddam Hussein, by contrast, are well-documented elsewhere. Unfortunately we don't have the resources to provide comprehensive information about war crimes worldwide, but we hope that by collating information and running campaigns in one specific area we are offering something that would otherwise be unavailable.

1:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is a lack of information on the dictatorship of Buyoya regime, which is behind the assassination of the first elected president of Burundi. There is a lack of information for the killings that took place after Kagame went to power in 1994 and the two invasion of Rwanda to Congo. Why the focus on only Rwasa? What about focusing on all three of them? Buyoya, Kagame and Rwasa are all criminals and destabilize the great lakes region.

6:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I understand your concern, but the honest answer is that we don't have the resources - or expertise. We'd be very grateful, however, for any information you can include here about other atrocities in the region.

4:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a student of the current and continuing conflict in Burundi, I am very appreciative of the information contained on the site and for the opinions of those readers who have posted comments. My only lingering question at this time concerns the issue of long-lasting peace in the region. So many talk about bringing justice to Rwasa as a known terrorist because this would further the signal that terrorist groups cannot be dealt with, however, I am unsure of the total longstanding ramifications of excluding them entirely - isn't it likely that this is just reinforcing their radical ideology and thus ensuring peace will never prevail. I do understand the reasoning and emotional response to the situation, but when the current leaders of Burundi are all former rebel groups who have their own documented histories of attrocities, why is one extremist group being further marginalised and forced out of the mainstream into a place where their only possible course of action to achieve any goals are violent? And as for the signal sent to the FNL and Rwasa specifically, isn't the fact that ex-fighters currently dominate politics in that country enough of an incentive to continue their terror tactics? Please let me know your opinions on these issues, I am only trying to see the true nature of ethnic strife and armed rebel insurgency in the larger world context where the players are constantly in flux and their immunity or lack thereof always seems to depend chiefly on their relative positions of political power.

10:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like to echo someone’s comment that I thought was a great point mention. Alienating, the FNL leader, Rwasa, will make him even more radical. We all know before bring onboard the current government under Nkurunziza, which was also listed as a terrorist group did drastically reduce the Hutu-Tutsi tension in the country. Why can we do it again by bring peace to the poor people who continue to experience war inside a country so called peaceful. We continuously forget that there is a powerful rebel group that remains active in the country.

9:05 AM  
Blogger RW said...

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Rwasa is a self-confessed mass-murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people, including many of his own lieutenants, and the war crimes are continuing. The Dutch and the Tanzanians have tried their hardest to appease Rwasa, and to cover up the evidence of FNL atrocities, and it has failed, just as the appeasement policy failed in Yugoslavia. Perverting the course of justice and denying Rwasa's victims an effective remedy by a competent tribunal will not further the cause of peace. It will reward torture and murder and perpetuate the war. Peace without justice is meaningless.

3:13 PM  
Blogger RW said...

Many thanks to the previous anonymous contributor here. The reason this site singles out Agathon Rwasa is because you have to start somewhere, and the FNL is, in our opinion, a) the most extreme and b) by far the most politically isolated of the many groups responsible for war crimes in Burundi. But really the point is this: Justice is not a matter for political negotiation and horsetrading between competing interest groups. It's about the human rights of the victims, and the overwhelming need to deter future atrocities. Justice demands that all those responsible for war crimes be brought to justice. We are fully supportive of all efforts to hold Burundi's war criminals to account - but because we are a network who have been personally affected by FNL crimes, our focus is the FNL.

Bringing Rwasa to justice does not necessarily entail excluding from the political process all those who have ever had any association with the FNL. But unless you can start to pick off the criminal elite, there will never be an end to the violence and corruption.

It's also worth being cautious about the claims made by FNL apologists that the group represents a significant swathe of opinion in Burundi. CNDD-FDD won the elections by a landslide, with Frodebu - arguably the FNL's main ally in the mainstream - coming a distant second. A well-placed source recently suggested to us that the FNL has less than 1,000 troops, many of them child soldiers.

The FNL's main strength is not, arguably, its base among the Burundian population but rather the political support they have received internationally - from sympathisers in Tanzania who still view them as the noble heirs of Remy-Gahutu's Palipehutu, and the political support they have had from naive western politicians hung up on an over-romanticised view of "liberation fighters" in general and Agathon Rwasa in particular (note Agnes Van Ardenne's glowing words about the "legendary Agathon Rwasa").

Burundi has already tried the "letting murderers go free and giving them positions of power" approach - and it didn't work. The genocidaires of 1972 - both Hutu and Tutsi - have never been brought to justice. The Palipehutu genocidaires of 1988 were awarded an amnesty for their troubles. The senior army officers responsible for the murder of Ndadaye were exonerated by a farcical "trial" in 1999 - and the violence still goes on. The extremists - of both persuasions - will always try to mitigate/justify their crimes by referring to the crimes of "the other side" - but this argument only works if you accept that the murder of an innocent Hutu can somehow cancel out the murder of an innocent Tutsi, and vice versa. Equally, both kinds of extremists will seek to obstruct efforts to hold them accountable for their crimes by insisting that it's somehow wrong to pick out an individual crime or group rather than focussing on all crimes by all groups simultaneously. The extremists well know that it's impossible to address every crime all at once. The logical conclusion of that argument is perpetual impunity - and the only people who will benefit from that are the extremists. Burundi doesn't need Rwasa, or the FNL - any more than France needs Jean-Marie Le Pen and the Front Nationale.

4:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would like to clarify the intention of my previous comment so as to continue this dialogue in a constructive manner, as I very much appreciate the response from RW. The issue as I see it is not about either over-romanticizing known terrorists, or compulsively reacting against them, it is a question that goes right to the heart of any democracy - but especially one that is just beginning to find its footing. It is a question of what happens to a group that may have originally been founded on rational grievances, but has since become nothing more than a band of thugs. In a democratic system where might is less politically viable than numbers (in voting populace), a group that sees its power slipping has no reason to cease its relentless attacks unless it seems an alternative course open to it. Rwasa himself is no doubt a monster who deserves to be brought to justice, though claiming this as the end all and be all misses the point that it may very well encourage an even more radical individual to rise to power in his stead. After all, the guns are still out there, and there are enough sick puppies who can make a living off of keeping the region in regular low-level turmoil that simply removing the current leadership would most likely have very little impact on the long-term peace prospects of the region. Given the number of rebel groups operating in and around the Great Lakes region it seems to me unlikely that simply attacking their leadership would do much to curb the violence. And since many of the worst attrocities have been committed in the context of violent power stuggles between the dominant political groups and the rest, it would appear that the best outcome that could be hoped for is to integrate as many different perspectives into the common fold as possible. Also, with some governmental transparency and international support, even a group such as the FNL, if made to be part of the system, could turn its force more to the betterment of the people rather than resorting again and again to vicious terror tactics. The issue as I see it comes down to this, you're not going to get rid of extremist elements in any society simply by ignoring them. If anything this simply encourages more radical elements to emmerge within them and rise to the ranks of leadership. The best that can be hoped for therefore is to try to provide incentives and possible routes through which they might return to their original stated objectives of bringing the will of the people to the national setting. This is of course a long and arduous process, though it is in my opinion the only workable solution for someone who truly seeks peace. Again, thankyou for any and all comments - dissent can only aid in understanding

12:52 AM  
Blogger RW said...

I think you're right that the international community should, all other things being equal, seek to win over those who are capable of being won over. I'm not an expert on CNDD-FDD, but clearly there's a good argument that engagement worked in that instance. I also agree that the arms dealers flooding Central Africa with guns are deeply morally complicit in the atrocities taking place there. Personally I'd like to see a robustly enforced system for tracking such people and bringing them to account for their crimes.

The danger I see is that in relentlessly pressing the "constructive engagement" button, even when it clearly isn't working, international mediators are in danger of making things worse. The most blatant example I'm aware of is from January 2004, when just weeks after the assassination of Michael Courtney, widely believed to be the work of the FNL, the group's leadership were feted in the Netherlands for talks with President Ndayizeye. By taking Rwasa so seriously, the Dutch were undoubtedly helping to enhance his credibility at home (and internationally). The talks fell apart after the FNL declared that they wouldn't negotiate with Ndayizeye because he was a Hutu, and their beef was with the Tutsis. Obviously they knew this well before they ever flew out to the Netherlands. It was all part of the game. The Dutch persisted throughout 2004, while FNL attacks continued. The international community made no attempt whatsoever to arrest the FNL leadership for these crimes. Finally, on August 13th 2004, the FNL carried out the Gatumba massacre, then took the unusual step of admitting responsibility, declaring that they had no fear of the consequences because they had become untouchable. It seems pretty clear to me that the international community, and the Dutch in particular, was responsible for the FNL thinking that they were free to kill with impunity. Worse still, inasmuch as they were taken seriously exactly because they were a threat to peace and stability, it seemed that the more they killed, the more seriously they would be taken. Gatumba was a natural consequence - Rwasa was simply trying to "maximise rewards". Unfortunately, the reward he believes God has preordained for him, is absolute victory. I think it's important we recognise that negotiation has its limits. Rwasa may not have the power or nous of a Hitler or a Stalin, but he's in the same bracket psychologically. Unfortunately the Dutch and Tanzanians are so deeply committed to the process they've started that they don't seem capable of admitting that. Note Agnes Van Ardenne's preposterous piece of holocaust negationism when she proclaimed, amid the smouldering remains of the Gatumba refugee camp, that this was the first time the FNL had ever attacked civilians.

You'll probably know that in the aftermath of Gatumba, the international community (including van Ardenne) loudly proclaimed that this was the last straw - the FNL were terrorists and war criminals who should be brought before the International Criminal Court. Now all that has been quietly forgotten, which makes a mockery of all the rhetoric. The real question for me is this - how can the international community expect to be a force for good in Central Africa if we don't formulate a clear policy and stick to it? For me at least, that policy has to be grounded in a commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Others might see it differently, but most of all I think it's important to have a consistent line rather a perpetual, ineffectual relativistic flip-flop!

Thanks again for your comments!

2:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you again RW for your prompt and enlightening response, your posts are indeed helping me to formulate some ideas on the complexity of the issues and what needs to be considered in making any kind of reasonable peace proposal. As I mentioned before I am currently studying Burundi in relation to a school project in which we are expected to formulate a workable peace plan - being graded chiefly on the viability of such a proposal. Though what I have is far more wide reaching than just the Rwasa issue, I will post some of what I have here so that you might share some of your opinions and wisdom with me - The current leadership under Agathon Rwasa is not at all concerned with brokering peace, though they will continually hold out the flag so as to appear as though they serve a respectable purpose, while simultaneously pursuing alternate plans to destabilize regions in which they hold out so that they can maintain their unfettered control there. This is why they only way to deal with the FNL as a whole is give it some degree of autonomy with regards to enforcing local rules and working for the betterment of the people there (using strategic aid packages for which they would be responsible for accounting for how every penny was spent), while using this freedom as a bargaining chip to gain absolute legitimacy for governmental action against those in the group’s leadership who have blood on their hands. This will do two things; first, it will allow for the rise of leaders who have some sense of financial planning and community development, and second it will allow for the enactment of justice. If either of these factors was done without the other the situation would not improve. That is, if the leadership was targeted and brought to justice alone it would only give rise to more radical and extreme leadership, and if the group were only to be given autonomy and some degree of financial aid it is likely that the current leadership would simply reinforce its authority and brutally suppress any dissent or calls for change in direction within the group. This is why I say it is the only workable solution, for it addresses the problem of the current leadership while giving incentives for others to regain their original focus and primary impetus at the groups founding.
again thankyou for your comments, and as for your comment on international flip-floppery, believe me, I couldn't agree more.

10:10 PM  
Blogger RW said...

Hi again - what an excellent idea for a study exercise. I can't claim any great wisdom, but I have been following the situation for some time, read a fair amount and had contact with a range of people who have been directly involved.

I would strongly recommend looking up Eugene Nindorera, the former human rights minister, and Alexis Sinduhije, one of Burundi's best respected journalists. I found this piece particularly good as a general overview: http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/presspol/Research_Publications/Papers/Discussion_Papers/D30.pdf

Internationally, I personally think that the research done by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty is second-to-none. I found this report particularly illuminating: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2003/12/21/burund6789.htm, but it's definitely worth having a good dig around on the HRW and Amnesty sites. There's also a really in-depth study of Palipehutu ideology here.

While I'm at it, I may as well plug my book, which comes out in the US in July. It's very much a personal view born out of a personal experience but my aim has been to give a much wider overview.

The overwhelming impression I've drawn from those I've had contact with is that impunity is at the heart of Burundi's crisis. Palipehutu was created as a direct result of the unpunished injustices of 1972. As an aside, though in my view an illuminating one, you may want to have a look through these recently declassified state dept documents, of which this one seems particularly interesting - note all the rhetoric from the Burundian government about 'national reconciliation', and then compare that with what actually happened for the next 30 years!

It therefore seems imperative to break this cycle of impunity. Prosecuting the FNL leadership would only be a start, but I do believe that it would help, because it would start to "break the spell", and send a very clear message that politicians could no longer be sure of their own immunity. The current situation - where a group like the FNL can massacre 153 unarmed refugees (half of them children), brag about it afterwards, and still have their leaders travelling freely throughout Europe and East Africa, seems guaranteed to bring on more of the same. As one Burundian massacre survivor put it to me - if we allow these people to kill their way into a position of power, what message are we sending to the next generation? The general view of human rights groups like AI and HRW is that justice is absolutely essential in breaking the cycle of violence.

I think you're absolutely right, though, that prosecutions alone aren't enough. The average FNL foot soldier is in a very different bracket than the likes of Rwasa. Many were forcibly conscripted as child soldiers, many others are part of the movement only because they'd otherwise be unemployed and destitute. So I completely agree that there needs to be an economic solution for the rank and file - otherwise you won't solve the problem in the medium term.

As I understand it, your proposal would involve working within the existing para-state FNL structures in areas (eg. Bujumbura-Rurale and perhaps Bubanza?) where the FNL is a dominant administrative authority, and try to incentivise good practice with "smart aid" via these existing structures, rather than ignoring/trying to dismantle them (much as the US-UK governments tried to dismantle Baathist party structures in Iraq). I can see the logic, but the danger would surely be that it might not be possible to control/monitor where the money went once it had been handed over. Following the Rwandan genocide, thousands of Hutu-extremist ex-government officials fled to the camps in Tanzania and what was then Zaire, replicating the political structures that had existed in Rwanda. People who had been mayors and local administrators in Habyarimana's regime soon set themselves up as community leaders in the camps. When the international community poured in aid, it was these people who got to decide where the money went. One of the general criticisms of the international community's response to the Rwandan genocide was that it came much too late and that when it did come it actually ended up benefitting the people who'd carried out the genocide, ultimately helping them to reorganise and keep fighting (there's an account of that here.

The other point I'd make is that there is an alternative to the FNL's para-state structures - Burundi now has a democratically elected government who, for all their faults, do seem to be making progress and have managed to regain control of most of the country, including many former FNL strongholds. The FNL has never been elected by anyone, and there's no clear evidence that they enjoy tremendous support even in the areas they control (massacring hundreds of Hutus suspected of disloyalty is hardly a votewinning tactic in Bujumbura-Rurale). Might it not be better to support - and work through - government structures?

Ultimately, I guess that much of this comes down to whether the FNL still has much of a popular support base or whether they are more of a mafiaesque organisation, reigning through terror and extortion. It's very difficult to know, but the impression I have is that they're more in the latter category - in which case solving the problem, as Burundi begins to return to some form of peace, might be more of a law-and-order / criminal justice issue than a political question per se. Interesting questions, though.

4:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. RW, I’m doing some research to learn more about the FNL movement and I somewhat stumble on this blog. I went through all the comments and several questions came up in my mind. I understand from your view point that you do not support any negotiation with the movement in this case the FNL. I noticed that you said that the movement has about 1000 fighters mostly children. You also mentioned that the movement might have been involved in the assassination of Michael Courtney.

This movement doesn’t sound that threatening to me if it only possesses 1000 fighters mostly made up of children. How come this movement can’t be toppled if it is miniscule as you’re referring to? This should make us reevaluate the capability of the movement.

The movement is also allegedly accused of the death of Michael Courtney. However, I have read some of the documents released by the movement and the movement accused the death of Michael Courtney to have been orchestrated by the Burundi army financed by BUYOYA. Actually another foreigner, Kassy Manlan, has lost his life in Burundi. How’s behind his life?

My point here is that alienating FNL will never solve the FNL issue nor avoiding bringing to justice the people behind the root cause of the great lakes region turmoil.

11:53 AM  
Blogger RW said...

Thanks for those questions, anonymous. Your question about how the FNL could pose such a threat when they have less than 1,000 combatants is indeed a good one. If you have any alternative figures on their manpower I'd be very interested - but for the last few years the highest estimate I've seen is 3,000 and the latest was around 1,000. There are all kinds of conspiracy theories about neighbouring countries bolstering FNL strength with money and weapons, some of which are more credible than others. But 1,000 well-armed combatants can still cause a lot of trouble. As I understand it, the Burundian government is working hard to defeat the FNL, arresting more of their combatants every week. What I find hard to understand is why the international community has been pressurising Burundi's democratically elected government to accomodate the FNL if it's true that they are such a relatively insignificant force.

On the question of the Courtney murder, I'm aware that the FNL continues to deny responsibility for the attack and blames the Burundian army - but then they almost always deny responsibility for their attacks and blame the Burundian army, so it's very hard to tell what really happened. I've said that the murder was "widely believed" to be the work of the FNL, because I think this is still the case - but of course if there is hard evidence implicating the Burundian army this might change. The one thing that really seemed odd to me was that when the FNL denied responsibility for Courtney's murder they simultaneously threatened to kill the archbishop who had accused them. This made them look very guilty!

Whatever the truth about the Courtney murder and the true size of the FNL, there is consistent evidence that Rwasa's little group continue to pose a deadly threat to civilians, as they showed with the Gatumba massacre and the smaller attacks they've carried out more recently.

This site opposes any amnesty for the FNL - and seeks the prosecution of Agathon Rwasa and his fellow war criminals. We take no position on the question of negotiations, so long as those negotiations do not stand in the way of justice.

The (very limited) information I've seen suggests that Manlan was murdered by some element within Buyoya's government, and I would not be at all surprised if Buyoya himself was involved. Clearly there are many more criminals out there than Rwasa, but that can never excuse or negate what Rwasa has done. Again, I'd be interested in any further info you have on the Manlan case.

12:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please follow the link to the last report I have seen on the mystery death of Dr. Kassy Manlan.

http://burundi.news.free.fr/actualites/Affairemanlanabarundinews.html

4:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe link is incomplete. try this one.

http://burundi.news.free.fr/actualites/Affairemanlanabarundinews.html

4:56 PM  
Blogger RW said...

Thanks for the link - I've added a post highlighting the story.

2:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home