Refutation of Addis Voice Dictatorial and Barbaric Ethos – Part IV

A Call for Oromo Sponsorship of two Oromo teenagers

Before you read this article, especially if you are Oromo national, you are reminded to read A Call of Help: Save Two Young Tormented Oromo refugees (http://www.buzzle.com/articles/a-call-of-help-save-two-young-tormented-oromo-refugees.html) and come to their help, by presenting yourself as sponsor for the young boys who face deportation after September 23, 2007. Any person willing to help should contact the President and/or the Secretary General of the Oromo Refugee Community in Cairo (website: http://oromocairo.jeeran.com/ / email: orococa@yahoo.com / mobile: + 2012 2917839) as soon as possible. Do not let the two Oromo teenagers of Cairo end up in the Hell of the Abyssinian jails!

Following the three earlier parts of the present refutation of letters and protestations sent by Addis Voice editor, Mr. Abebe Gelaw, and by the Amhara Abyssinian US resident Mr. Eliab Tarkghen to the AmChron editorial board (http://www.buzzle.com/articles/refutation-of-addis-voice-dictatorial-and-barbaric-ethos-part-i.html; http://www.buzzle.com/articles/refutation-of-addis-voice-dictatorial-and-barbaric-ethos-part-ii.html; http://www.buzzle.com/articles/refutation-of-addis-voice-dictatorial-and-barbaric-ethos-part-iii.html),
we complete - with the present article - the quadripartite analysis. Following the mail sent to Mr. Abebe Gelaw by Mr. Eliab Tarkghen, who supposedly provided him with evidence as regards my supposed hate speech against the Amhara Abyssinians, Mr. Abebe Gelaw sent a second letter to the AmChron editorial board.

In fact, through the discussion it becomes clear that I simply denounce the tyrannical nature of Abyssinia (fallaciously named Ethiopia) to which fervently stick Mr. Abebe Gelaw and the entirely Amhara Kinijit party that threatens to return in power in order to implement an incredible agenda of racism, tyranny, oppressed nations’ cultural disfigurement, linguistic discrimination, and ultimate eradication. We will first publish the integral text of Mr. Abebe Gelaw’s second letter (sent 24/8), and then the refutation of its contents.

Mr. Abebe Gelaw’s Second Letter

Dear Editor,

Thank you for you reply. Though I have no time to list down the highly offensive, vitriolic and racist diatribe of Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis, here are a few reasons why I feel that the good Doctor is in breach of your editorial policy.

Refutation of the Kinijit Neo-Nazi Amhara Abyssinians
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=35897

The Real Face of the Kinijit Neo-Nazi 'Ethiopian' Interlocutors of the US
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=35828

In these 'articles' Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis referred to the people of Amhara as neo-Nazi. By doing so he insulted over 30 million Amhara Ethiopians, the majority of whom are peasant farmers who have been subjugated under succeeding tyrannical rulers throught their long history like any other ethnic groups in Ethiopia. Nazism is alien not only to Amharas, but also to the rest of the Ethiopian population. Contrary to his allegations, the Amhara people have long been in the forefront of fighting against colonialism, fascism and dictatorship. Testimony to this fact is the victory of Adowa against Italian colonizers in 1896 and the conquest of Fascist Italy which invaded Ethiopia is 1936. The invasion of Ethiopia involved brutalities and atrocities such as the use of chemical weapons, such as mustard gas and phosgene, as well as the indiscriminate slaughter Ethiopians, the majority of whom were Amharas.

Though I am neither a defender nor member of Kinjit, as a journalist I know that it is a party of highly respected intellectuals and human rights defenders. As you probably know, the entire leadership of Kinjit has been thrown in jails since November 2005 and hundreds of its supporters and members have been killed by the tyrannical regime in power. Some of the leaders were released last month. Kinijit is the most popular party in Ethiopia, which as an editor you should have been aware. Referring to Kinijit, which is a multi-national party, a Neo-Nazi Amhara "Abysinnians", a derogatory word coined by Italian colonizers, is not only offensive but also indicative of Dr. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis' ignorance or hateful nature.

As far as I know, Kinijit (Coalition for Unity and Democracy) is not an Amhara party. Here is the ethnic composition of the party's leadership: Ing. Hailu Shawel (Amhara), Bertukan Mideksa (Oromo), Dr Hailu Araya (Tigre), Dr Berhanu Nega (Gurage), Muluneh Eyuel (Kembata), Dr Yacob Hailemariam (Gurage)…. Can this party of pro-democracy and human rights defenders be labeled as a party of Neo-Nazis?

Some of his insulting articles that you need to review also include:
Kinijit: the unrepentable 'Ethiopian' mendicants
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=35459

Usurping the name 'Ethiopia ', Abyssinia provokes Islamic Terror
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=17647

This is just to mention a few among so many other diatribes full of factual distortion and insinuation……. I agree with you that every human being is entitled to freedom of expression. However hate speech, distortion, falsification, racism and offensive production and dissemination of materials for public consumption stands against the basic principles of freedom of expression.

Thanks for your attention.

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Yours faithfully

Abebe Gelaw

Refutation of Mr. Abebe Gelaw’s Second Letter

With the beginning of Mr. Gelaw’s second letter, the masks fall, and it becomes clear why he protested and whom he represented. Although supposed to offer specific excerpts from my articles, to make his case stronger, Mr. Gelaw lists two of my articles focused on the Kinijit Neo-Nazi political party. Why Kinijit is to be considered as a Neo-Nazi political party, and what Neo-Nazism is we already described in both the series of articles about Kinijit (that have not yet been completed – wait more!) and in the three earlier parts of refutation.

The real reasons behind Mr. Gelaw’s reaction

Mr. Gelaw mentions the titles of my articles "Refutation of the Kinijit Neo-Nazi Amhara Abyssinians" and "The Real Face of the Kinijit Neo-Nazi 'Ethiopian' Interlocutors of the US" that provoked a shock among many circles in Washington D.C. as to how such people dare travel to America in an effort to possibly portray themselves as a credible alternative to Tigray tyrant Zenawi’s ailing dictatorial and inhuman regime.

Point 1.

This was the real reason behind Mr. Gelaw’s attempt; he wished to prevent me from further writing elucidating articles about the perverse and cruel political agenda of a tribal party that is still unknown in America; he had thus hoped that through some low level PR the - otherwise penniless - visiting delegation could extract some money in the name of trashy promises for Democracy in Eastern Africa and Break Wave against Islamic Terrorism.

In fact, the Kinijit Amhara guys – if in power – would be far worse than the murderous dictator Meles Zenawi, probably inflating Islamic Terrorism throughout Eastern Africa by 1000000%.

The effort to silence someone without even attempting to answer and thus annul the severe accusations for Neo-Nazi and Neo-Stalinist ideology, attitudes, mentality and agenda shows the dictatorial nature of that party’s Polit-bureau; it highlights what they would do, if offered the ominous chance to rule Abyssinia, which they still insist on fallaciously calling ‘Ethiopia’, while ridiculously celebrating an absolutely inconsistent, bogus-Millennium that we will have the opportunity to analytically uncover as fabricated propaganda of the lowest sort.

If they tried to silence me on the web, one can easily imagine what methods they would employ – if in power – to quash the Oromos, the Ogadenis, the Sidamas, the Gambellas, the Afars and so many other Kushitic Ethiopian – inhumanly tyrannized – nations that they, with utmost contempt, do not even name in their website!

You cannot silence anybody in the Internet Era!

At the same time, their incredibly totalitarian attitude and mentality is absolutely futile within the context of modern world; this is what they are absolutely unable to understand, living back in their erroneously assumed past. Whom can one stop in the Internet Era? Articles are usually quoted, reproduced, re-posted, republished from one website to another, discussed in fora, refocused in blogs, identified by crawlers, sent to thousands RSS subscribers, information is diffused to such extent that even a simple thought of preventing someone from publishing something is totally unrealistic. Even if the effort meets an initial success, in the end nothing can be prevented from being said in the Internet world.

What mattered for the Kinijit delegation that had planned a trip to America on August 20, only to postpone it for August 29, and then to practically cancel it, was the awareness campaign that I had launched; they had counted on an early success in their contacts in America, based on the total unawareness of the American administration as regards the real Kinijit face, targets, and - perilous for US interests - agenda. Every administrator’s, every statesman’s, every diplomat’s, every politician’s assistants would initiate an Internet search about the supposedly important delegation that asked for a meeting.

Kinijit: no 906.741 website in the world!

Who knows Kinijit outside Abyssinia and beyond Abyssinia’s oppressed peoples’ Diasporas?

Nobody!

The main Kinijit website (www.kinijit.org) ranks …. no 906.741 website in the world; www.kinijitethiopia.org ranks even worse …. no 915.528, whereas Washington DG based Kinijit members’ website (www.kinijitdc.org) is merely the website no 5.006.650 in the world! That’s no too bad, as the Los Angeles based and the Minnesota based Kinijit members’ websites seem to be even less visited: www. kinijitla.org is no 8.628.668 website in the world, and for www.kinijitmn.org there are no data in www.alexa.com. In Europe, it is even more dispiriting for Kinijit, as www.kinijitswiss.org ranks no 7.554.484, and for www.kinijitsouk.com (UK based) there are absolutely no data in www.alexa.com.

Any Internet search involves one name first step search (f.i. Kinijit) and combined names second step search (f.i. Kinijit, Democracy or Kinijit, Human rights, etc). There, any person will find the – already unpleasant for Kinijit – reality.

Point 2.

Then, Mr. Gelaw totally misinterprets my statement; "the Kinijit Neo-Nazi Amhara Abyssinians" does not mean that the Amhara Abyssinians are Neo-Nazi. It means only that the Kinijit people are some Amhara Abyssinians who happen to be Neo-Nazis. And this is what I truly said about that political party; I did not say that the entire Amhara population is Neo-Nazi. This would be an exaggeration; we know that in Nazi Germany, even during WW II, there were people who did not accept Hitler and his totalitarian ideology – although few. The same should be probably true anytime anywhere.

At this moment, Kinijit is an Amhara political party of the extreme right that is totally dedicated in the opposition to the murderous Tigray tyrant Meles Zenawi. We have reasons to believe that, if in power, Kinijit will be far worse than Tigray tyrant Meles Zenawi. Denouncing federalism and taking an inimical and contemptuous stance towards the outright majority of the country that consists in a multitude of oppressed nations are a clear indication that Kinijit will try to impose a more oppressive and totalitarian policy than the current Melse Zenawi course of action. If at that time the Amharas accept Kinijit in their totality, the entire people will be considered as active accomplices, and therefore responsible.

As a matter of fact, the Amharas have not ruled Abyssinia since the times of the collapse of the communist Mengistu regime, and this makes a difference. For long decades of cruel Amhara tyranny under either monarchical or communist regime, the quasi-totality of the Amhara population accepted the governmental policies and took large benefits from the inhuman measures implemented in the illegally occupied lands of Ogaden, Oromia, Afar, Sidama, Gambella, etc. The entire Amhara nation bears a tremendous historical responsibility for the inhuman oppression policies applied on all the invaded nations. However, this does not entitle anyone to call collectively all the Amharas as Neo-Nazi now.

I have good reason to hope that Kinijit will be kept out of Finfinne, which with the rise of the Oromos will become capital of the Oromo Ethiopia, then the Amharas will be limited in their own land around Gondar, and they will have no opportunity to demonstrate an active contribution to dictatorial and inhuman policies as they did at the times of the monarchical and communist Amhara regimes. However, the Amharas will not stay in Finfinne.

Point 3.

While attacking me, Mr. Gelaw diffuses his own propaganda, which is full of lies. The Amharas do not exceed 20% of Abyssinia’s entire population, which suggests something around 15 million people. To double the figure, Mr. Gelaw has an easy task: he incorporates numerous Oromos, who live in the provinces Amhara, Benishangul, and Finfinne (in Amharic: Addis Ababa), being sure that if Kinijit comes to power, these Oromos will be left voiceless and with no right to state their national and cultural identity. Amharas are not 30 million people.

Point 4.

Speaking about his compatriots, Mr. Galew says they are farmers "who have been subjugated under succeeding tyrannical rulers through their long history".
This is preposterous; who were these "tyrannical rulers"? The Amhara kings of Abyssinia, and for the period after 1974 and before 1991 the Communist Amhara dictator Mengistu.

His denunciation of the Amhara kings suggests a rather Communist standpoint, which is possible for anyone supporting Kinijit leader Hailu Shawul, who was a minister of Mengistu’s communist Amhara gang. Perhaps, Mr. Gelaw’s anti-royal feelings are due to simple republican inclination; perhaps he supports an anarchist viewpoint on the Abyssinian History. All this matters very little, as long as moral principles and concepts, humanism, equity, justice, fairness and impartiality do not constitute the foundations of his approach. When he will publish in his website a new version of the Abyssinian History, solidly placing his evaluations, conclusions and approaches on these moral principles, he will become credible.

Point 5.

Mr. Gelaw embarks then on an effort to dissociate Amharas from Fascism! This is unbelievable! Neo-Nazism was the term I used, not Fascism. And as I have already explained in earlier parts of my Plead, you don’t have to be supporter of Hitler in 2007 to be classified as ‘Neo-Nazi’; suffice it that you support in your country, in your place, ideas that are parallel to those dreaming of a Nazi comeback in Germany.

Neo-Nazism was a figure of speech in my text; it referred to any possible totalitarian ideology and practice, as attested in so many varied forms throughout History. Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Phalangist Spain, Khomeini’s Iran, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, North Korea, and several other regimes were all totalitarian; picking up an epithet from this or that example makes no difference. ‘Neo-Stalinist’ would perhaps be more accurate in the case of the Amhara Kinijit party, and never forget that its leader Hailu Shawul was minister and friend of the Amhara murderous Communist leader Haile Mngistu.

The most critical point of Mr. Gelaw’s comments is the overt historical falsification he tries to diffuse while supporting his ideas; he tries to make an equation that simply does not exist in politics. By highlighting the Abyssinian – Italian wars, mainly those in the period between the two world wars, he attempts to dissociate Abyssinia from Fascism – which is irrelevant to the term I used, namely Neo-Nazism.

The fight of the Abyssinian cruel dictator Haile Selassie against Italy has nothing to do with possible anti-Nazi feelings of the Amhara Abyssinians. It was a fight against Italy, another colonial power against which England had mobilized Abyssinia already since the end of the 19th century. To avert Italy’s expansion in the Red Sea and the Horn of Africa area, England had conceived the plan of helping the tiny, mountainous and anachronistic kingdom expand colonially. England manipulated the traditional anti-Catholic hysteria of the illiterate, heretic, Monophysitic monks of Abyssinia, and the entire clash occurred at the prejudice of Abyssinia’s oppressed peoples. The wars between Italy and Abyssinia cannot be interpreted as Abyssinian opposition to a political ideology.

This is true for many other similar confrontations; Greek dictator Ioannis Metaxas declared war on Italy when Italy demanded facilities in UK ally Greece (28 October 1940). Fighting against Italy did not help turn Metaxas to a democratic statesman, and the Greek jails were at those days full of Liberals, Democrats and Socialists.

Truly, the Amharas have "been in the forefront of fighting against" Italy because if they did not, they would lose the great financial benefits ensuing from the illegal occupation of so many lands and the subjugation of so many peoples. This confrontation between two colonial powers, one regional and the other international, Mr. Gelaw tries to misrepresent as Amharas’ fight against "colonialism, fascism and dictatorship".

In fact, the Amharas did not fight against colonialism because they were a colonial power; they did not fight against dictatorship because they were ruled dictatorially, and in addition they exported their dictatorial system to democratically ruled peoples. Finally, they did not fight against fascism but against Italy; either 1930 Italy was a democratic, fascist or communist country, the subjects of Haile Selassie would be constrained to fight against them, and only the Amharas would be passionate in doing so for illegal benefits’ and privileges’ preservation.

So, the battle of Adua and the Italian invasion of Abyssinia do not testify to anything Mr. Gelaw says. In addition, it is wrong to say that the majority of those killed by the Italian armies in 1936 were Amharas; Haile Selassie had placed Oromos and Ogadenis in the front’s first line, to save his Amhara cronies.

Point 6.

Mr. Gelaw goes on defending Kinijit party, although he says he is not a member or defender! Why then bother? Any person defending an instance turns automatically to be a defender. He should know that you cannot defend something or someone and at the same time claim you are not a defender; it makes no sense.

In defense of Kinijit he says that several of its members were in jail; being in jail does not necessarily entitle someone to laurels. Although it is an undeniable truth that Kinijit members were imprisoned by the Tigray Meles Zenawi regime, this event does not prove either that the Kinijit people are democratic or that they would bring forth something better if offered political power.

Many Nazis have been in Soviet jails and vice versa; Khomeini’s associates were imprisoned while exiled in Iraq, but this was not a guarantee that they would bring something better when in power in Iran. The only difference between Meles Zenawi regime and the Kinijit aspirant tyrants is racial: the Meles Zenawi gang are Tigrays, the Kinijit folks are Amharas. Of Semitic origin, both tribes do not represent more than 30 – 32% of the entire country’s population, and they are culturally similar to one another and totally different from the African Kushitic Ethiopian peoples they commonly invaded and oppressed.

With the Tigray rulers accepting the multi-ethnic, multi-national, multi-cultural and multi-religious reality of Abyssinia, Meles Zenawi was able to survive 16 years in power thanks to the docility of a segment of Oromos who easily accommodate themselves with nominal positions, power, benefits and rights. But the Kinijit rejection of the nominally federal character of the country will help the entire situation explode in the most disastrous way.

So anachronistic and irrelevant the Kinijit aspirant tyrants are that they are not able to understand that the oppressed peoples of Abyssinia, who have at last been recognized as national entities without being in reality given the rights they had been promised, will not accept to be deprived of the minimal and nominal recognition they had been offered.

An eventual Kinijit regime would turn the fight of the oppressed Kushitic Ethiopian nations against the Abyssinian tyrants to an extremely frontal Islamic rejection of the Monophysitic Christian minority rulers with disastrous consequences for the entire Black Continent.

Point 7.

Mr. Gelaw tries then to portray the Amhara gang of Kinijit as a multi-national party! By so doing, he demonstrates that their rejection of the current nominal federalism is an anti-democratic attempt! It is clear that if there are many nations in a country, they have to be independently, separately, and con-federally organized. As a matter of fact, Kinijit is not a multinational party, and the explanation of the reasons will demonstrate to unspecialized Western readership another aspect of the perverted Abyssinian tyranny.

Since the beginning of the Abyssinian colonial expansion in the second half of the 19th century, the Amhara monarchical regime tried to divide the invaded nations in a way to weaken the resistance, and to perpetuate the tyrannical imposition, and the illegal extraction of profit from the exploitation of the natural resources of the occupied lands.

To do so, it offered several privileges to eventual renegades who would collaborate with the racist Amhara regime, against their own nation, accepting the illegal invasion of their land by the Amhara monarchical army. These collaborators originated from all the oppressed nations, the Oromos, the Ogadenis, the Sidams, the Afars, the Gambellas, the Shekachos, and others, but they were always few and marginal. Not only they worked with the Amhara enemy of their own nation, not only they helped the pernicious Amhara plans against their own nation, but they also tried to find accomplices among their compatriots and introduce to the occupiers other people ready to collaborate.

Even worse, they identified in some very small and marginal ethnic groups (that total far less than 1% of the entire country’s population) their strategic allies against the main oppressed nations, namely the Oromos, the Ogadenis, the Afars, the Sidams, the Gambellas and the Shekachos. By portraying the main oppressed nations as threatening the identity of the minor groups, they pursued tactics and policies introduced by the British in India and by the French in the territories of the Ottoman Empire.

So, we have to deal with the Petains and the Quislings of the Oromos, the Sidamas and the other invaded nations, whom the Amharas illegally annexed and exploited. These traitors can reside in the capital of the Abyssinian tyranny, but they do not dare go to the provinces where their beleaguered and tyrannized compatriots live.

To what extent can we take Petain as representative of 1940 France and Quisling as a model for Norwegians during WW II? Certainly they express a minuscule portion of their nations. The same concerns the names of Oromos who may appear high on the list of Kinijit hierarchy; they do not represent the Oromos at all. One should perhaps publish selected comments by average Oromos’ about collaborators who defame the entire Oromo Nation to make it plainly understood that such immoral and antidemocratic Kinijit Amharas’ practices highlight in an even more marked way the totalitarian mentality of the occupying forces.

However, I understand through this that the typical dictatorial tactics of the Abyssinian elites may not be clearly understood in the West, and soon I will come with an insightful about the pernicious Amhara policy of producing traitors and collaborators among the ranks of the invaded and occupied nations.

Point 8.

Contrarily to Mr. Gelaw’s lies, ‘Abyssinian’ is not a derogatory word, and it was not coined by the Italians. It is the real and only national name of the Amhara and Tigray tribes that they had used until the moment colonial French and British convinced them to use the name Ethiopia; since that moment the Abyssinian ruling elites stuck to the new name with the utmost fanaticism probably because the dividends promised were significant. Abyssinia is the westernized form of the tribal name of the Tigrays’ and Amharas’ ancestors; the name of Abyssinia has been attested in Ancient Yemenite epigraphic evidence as Habashat. That tribe migrated from Yemen to the area of today’s Eritrea and the Abyssinian North during the second half of the 1st pre-Christian millennium.

Ignorant of the reasons for which the colonial academia wants them to use the name ‘Ethiopia’ and extremist in their insistence, the Amhara and Tigray elites proscribed their own national name ‘Abyssinia’, becoming therefore the first victims of the colonial academia’s and diplomats’ machinations. The article Mr. Gelaw refers to an article of mine as insulting; I suggest it as a good reading with focus on the nefarious consequences of the use of the name ‘Ethiopia’ by the Abyssinians (Usurping the name 'Ethiopia ', Abyssinia provokes Islamic Terror
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=17647).
As I complete at this point my refutation of Mr. Gelaw’s attack, I want to thank Mr. Greg Adams for his support and his willingness to deplore Mr. Gelaw’s attempt (AddisVoice.com Editor Threatens Right to Free Speech / http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36197).

At the same time, I want to express my gratitude to all those who wrote letters of encouragement and backing, totally rejecting Mr. Gelaw’s pretensions. With a selection of links to their pleads I terminate my quadripartite refutation:
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36185,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36180,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36186,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36182,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36184,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36183,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36181,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36214,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36432,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36179,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36178,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36177,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36176,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36175,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36174,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36173,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36172,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36171, and
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=36170.

My last words concern Mr. Gelaw himself; I hope that through the present dispute he will manage in the future to improve his website’s mediocre rank, as www.addisvoice.com (although bilingual English / Amharic) is no 495.307 website in the world.

Note
In the picture we see the remains of Russian bombs thrown against the people of Eritrea; an Amhara present!