Category Archives: Uncategorized

YAHAWE AMAFARANGA ASENYA URUBUGA RW’INYANGENEWS.COM

Amakuru aturuka kurubuga rw’Inyangenews.com,avuga yuko JOSEPF KAIIZI,war’uhostinze urubuga rw’inyangenews.com yahawe amafaranga na leta y’Urwanda maze asenya urubuga rw’Inyangenews yarahostinze imyaka igera kuri 2 nigice.


Nyuma yaho leta y’Urwanda ikoze ibishoboka byose kugirango ibashe kubona webmaster wakoreraga icyo kinyamakuru inyangenews Majeshi Leon,nyuma yogufungurwa bamushakiye hasi no hejuru ariko ntibahirwa kumubona,byatumye bashakisha abantu bari bazi neza aho icyo kinyamakuru cyari gihostinzwe maze babasha kubona uyu Joseph Kaiizi wari yaragiranye amasezerano n’ikinyamakuru inyangenews ariko ntiyigeze ayubahiriza nyuma yokubona amafaranga leta y’Urwanda yamwemereye.

Yatangiye kujya akuraho urwo rubuga kugirango banyirarwo batangire bahamagare ariko twaramwihoreye gusa twabashije gukoresha e-mail tumusaba kubahiriza amategeko twagiranye mbere yuko twemera kumubera umukiliya tukishura ifatabuguzi.

Ibyo babonye yuko bibananiye bahisemo gushaka umuzungu waduhaye DNS,nawe bamugeraho kugirango abashe kuvugana n’abayobozi b’inyangenews kugirango atumenyeshe yuko ifatabuguzi rirangiye ko tugomba kwishyura ayandi mafaranga,tumwemerera kumwishyura hakoreshejwe Western Union cyangwa Money gram,ariko arabyanga ngo arashaka ko dukoresha Pay pal,wakwibaza impamvu ituma atemera ayo madollar ashobora kumugeraho ugasanga ar’inkinamico.

Nibwo twahisemo ibyo byose kubireka duhitamo gushakisha ubundi buryo twakoresha kugirango tubone urundi rubuga tubashe kujya ducishaho amakuru agere kubasomyi bacu.

inyangenews

 

Yabasembereje mukirambi,none inzu bayimurukanyemo.

Kuwa 21 gashyantare 2014,iibihugu byo mukarere k’Afrika y’Uburasira-zuba bahuriye mu murwa wa kampala mu gihugu cya Uganda.Aba bayobozi ejo bambuka kuwa 20 gashyantare 2014,bakoresheje indangamuntu mu gihe byari bisanzwe ko hkoreshwa passport,urupapuro rw’inzira.


Amakuru atugeraho yemeza ko,bashyize umukono kumasezerano y’ubufatanye mu byumutekano,aho police zibihugu 3,Uganda,Urwanda,Kenya,ndetse n’inzego z’ubutasi,n’igisirikare bagiye kujya bafatanya kurwanya iterabwoba.Ibi leta y’Urwanda ikaba ibyungukiyemo kuba izabona uko ikontorola abo itavuga rumwe nayo.

Turaburira impunzi zaba zarahungiye muri ibyo bihugu,kuba bagomba kuba maso kuko musanzwe muzi yuko leta y’Urwanda ishimuta abanyarwanda bayihunze ikahimbira ibyaha ikabajyana ikigali kujya kubacira urwa pilato,urumva rero ko amazi atakiri yayandi yamaze kurenga inkombe,ariko ntimwihebe kuko Uwiteka nawe ntabwo aryama ntasinzira kuko aje kudutabara vuba bishoboka.

Cyakora ibibazo byabantu biratandukanye,uwabishobora yakwimukira mubindi bihugu,amakuru akomeza avuga yuko uwo muryango wa EAC,watangijwe n’igihugu cya Tanzania,wagerageje kuva kera kurwanira ubumwe bw’Abanyafurika,ariko abategetsi ba Uganda buri gihe nibo batuma uwo muryango utagera kunshingano zawo.
Amakuru afite gihamya,avuga ko muri iyo nama Tanzania yohereje intumwa  ibahagararira nk’Indorerezi,ariko ntamasezerano basinye kubijyanye n’ubufatanye by’umutekano kuko ishinjwa kuba yaragiriye inama abayobozi bakuru b’Urwanda na Uganda ko bashyikirana na FDLR,ibyo bikaba byarazanye igitotsi mu mubano wibyo bihugu bihuriye muri uwo muryango w’Afrika y’Uburasira zuba.

Ibi bihugu 3,byemeye gushyirahamwe, bivugwa ko Uganda yizeye gushyiramo Sudani y’Amajyepfo,naho Kenya nayo ikinjizamo Somalia.amakuru aravuga ko ibyo bihugu byombi uko ari 2,ngo bifite ubukungu mubijyanye namavuta ya Essanse,kuba rero igihugu cya Tanzania basa nkabashaka kukivana muri uwo muryango hamwe na leta y’Abarundi yanze gushyigikira igitugu cy’Abatutsi bayoboye ibyo bihugu bya Uganda n’Urwanda ndetse nigice kimwe cya repubulika iharanira demokarasi ya Congo.

Birashoboka rero ko nkuko Imana yabivuze ko Urwanda ruzarwana na Tanzania,wabona bagiye gupfa umuryango bitangiriye none Uganda n’Urwanda rukaba bigiye kuwubategekaho,muri za 1978,perezida wa Uganda Iddy Amin dada niwe washubije inyuma uwo muryango warugeze aho ugeze ubu,ibyo byose amakuru atugeraho avuga ko hari bimwe mubihugu bikomeye bifite inyungu kuri ibi bihugu,mu gihe rero bizishyira hamwe ntabwo za nyungu bazongera kuzibona nkuko babyifuza,ibyo bigatuma bacanira umuriro w’intambara kugirango batazigera bashyira hamwe.

Ikindi ni uko politiki ya Tanzania itandukanye cyane n’Urwanda na Uganda,ibyo bigatuma batabona ibintu kimwe kubera kumenyera igitugu,mu gihe abandi bamaze imyaka muri demokarasi,ariko kuruhande rw’ubuhanuzi Imana yavuze ko Tanzania hamwe n’America izabahana kubera gukoresha imbaraga z’umwijima zindenga kamere.USA ubu iri murubura rwayibujije amahwemo,naho Tanzania yo igiye guhanishwa umuriro wamasasu.

Will Mahmoud Abbas Pay Salaries to the Arsonists? by Itamar Marcus

While Palestinian Authority (PA) leader Mahmoud Abbas was accepting praise for sending Palestinian firefighters to help put out fires in Israel, the PA Finance Ministry was busy doing the paper work to start paying salaries to the Palestinian arsonists who were arrested for setting many of those same fires. So far Israel has arrested 23 suspected arsonists connected to the hundreds of fires that raged across Israel in the last week of November, burning more than 500 homes and 32,000 acres of forests and national parks. According to Palestinian law documented by Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), anyone imprisoned for “resisting the occupation” receives a high monthly salary. Therefore, all of those convicted and imprisoned for arson will receive PA salaries “from the day of arrest until the day of release.”

 


A fire rages in central Haifa, November 24, 2015. (Image source: Haaretz video screenshot)

Of course, it is not only arson-terrorists who receive a PA salary. All Palestinian, Israeli Arab and Arab terrorists from any country who are imprisoned are rewarded with high salaries from the PA. (See PMW Special Report) According to PA law and practice, “resisting the occupation” includes any Arab imprisoned for attacking Israelis by any means, including throwing a stone at a car, driving a car into people at bus stops, building bombs for suicide bombers to blow up at cafes, or shooting and stabbing civilians to death in their sleep. Since the PA automatically includes anyone who attacked Israelis or their possessions as “fighters” who are “resisting the occupation,” there is no justification under Palestinian law and practice not to include last week’s arsonists among the Palestinian “heroes” who receive monthly salaries.

Significantly, these salaries for terrorists rise the longer terrorists are in jail. Terrorists convicted of murder and serving life sentences will reach a high salary of NIS 12,000 a month – more than four times the average Palestinian salary.

The PA has already paid the five Hamas terrorists who murdered Eitam and Naama Henkin in front of their four children last October in total NIS 91,000 as reward for their murders. And terrorist Abdallah Barghouti has already received NIS 645,000 for building the bombs that murdered 67 Israelis at the Sbarro pizza shop, Sheffield Club, Moment Café, the triple bombing at the Ben Yehuda pedestrian mall, Hebrew University and No. 4 bus in Tel Aviv.

Today there are approximately 7,000 Palestinian prisoners on the PA payroll. The PA rewards them every month for terrorism, and this generous arrangement will cost the PA NIS 488 million in 2016 alone, according to the PA’s publicized budget.

If Abbas was ever serious about stopping the PA’s ongoing support for terrorism, he now has the perfect opportunity to make a difference. Instead of merely enjoying complimentary headlines and nice photo ops of Palestinian firemen with Israelis, Abbas should decree that the arsonists will not receive PA salaries.

Even though this is contrary to current Palestinian law and practice.

Should Abbas insist on adding the imprisoned arsonists to the PA payroll, his hypocrisy in sending a few fire engines to Israel will be exposed to the world.

Should Abbas decide to deny salaries to the arsonists this may indicate the beginning of a fundamental change in the PA attitude toward terrorism. However, if Abbas cancels salaries only to the arsonists, it will not be enough. If he says to the world that the PA will not pay salaries those who burned trees, rocks and homes while it continues to pay salaries to murderers of men, women and children, his values and behavior, which cause many to see him as a terrorist leader, will remain unchanged.

If Abbas’ act of sending fire trucks to help Israel was a sincere act indicating that he is no longer a terrorist leader, he now has a great opportunity to prove it.

Right now while he has the world’s attention, having made this small gesture in the direction of peace, let him take a serious step. Abbas should announce that not only will the arsonists not be rewarded with PA salaries, but he is changing Palestinian law and canceling the payments to all imprisoned terrorists altogether.

And what better opportunity than now to announce this, during Fatah’s Seventh General Conference.

If Abbas continues to pay salaries to murderers and arsonists, his gesture of sending fire trucks to Israel must be seen as an act of contemptuous hypocrisy.

Itamar Marcus is director of Palestinian Media Watch.

Will Iran Walk Away from Nuclear Deal? by Lawrence A. Franklin

  • The world powers are now experiencing what it means to negotiate with Persian theocrats. All is negotiable; nothing is ever finally decided. Words never commit one to action.

  • Iran demands right to implement a phased plan of centrifuge expansion to 150,000 over a period of 15 years.

  • Iran demands that no sanctions are to be leveled against it because of alleged support for terrorism or human rights violations.

  • Iran demands that it must be free to explore all future advances in nuclear enrichment technology.


The world powers are now experiencing what it means to negotiate with Persian theocrats. All is negotiable; nothing is ever finally decided. Words never commit one to action. Changing circumstances vitiate the substance of any prior commitment, leaving the door open to additional demands. Although the Islamic Republic insists that it be recognized as a normal member of the international community, it will continue to behave as if it is not bound by global norms.

Despite Iran’s apparent acceptance of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA}, known as the “Iran Deal,” after the document’s submission to the relevant state bureaucracies, these institutions have agreed to it only on a conditional basis. The JCPOA was approved by Iran’s Consultative Assembly (Majlis), the Council of Guardians, the Supreme National Security Council and by the Office of the Leader. These seeming approvals can tempt those who desire the implementation of the nuclear deal to assume falsely that the bellicose rhetoric of Iran’s leaders and the continued opposition to the JCPOA are just face-saving turns of phrase.

This same shallow mode of thinking assumes that last week’s launch of an experimental ballistic missile by Iran was a bone thrown in the direction of hardliners who oppose the nuclear deal. Iran’s leaders seem to have calculated that the missile test would not invite a reassessment by the P5+1 signatories, despite the fact that the launch was a clear violation of the JCPOA. Iran’s leaders were proven correct: both Russia and China refused to condemn the missile test at the United Nations.

The publication of the letter of October 21 by Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, to Iran’s President, Hassan Rouhani, leaves little doubt that Iran is now demanding fundamental changes to the JCPOA. The conditions spelled out by the Leader will derail the timetable for the document’s implementation probably beyond President Obama’s term of office. In part, Tehran most likely wants to embarrass the U.S. and President Obama personally by denying him a legacy-related political victory, just as Tehran apparently wants to embarrass them by arresting yet another American hostage two weeks ago, American-Iranian business executive, Siamak Namazi. The hostage count of Americans now imprisoned in Iran is now five: Namazi,Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian, Pastor Saeed Abedini, former U.S. Marine Amir Hekmati and Robert Levinson.

Khamenei’s letter indicates that he will not approve implementation of the JCPOA unless the following conditions are met:

  1. The U.S. and European nations must draft a letter promising to end all possibility of “sanctions snapback.”
  2. The West must lift — not “suspend” — all sanctions immediately and permanently.
  3. The International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) must issue an irreversible declaration ending any future investigation into alleged military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear programs.
  4. Iran will postpone any renovations at its heavy water (plutonium) reactor at Arak until the signatories of the JCPOA produce an alternative usage plan.
  5. Iran will not begin shipping out of country any of its enriched uranium unless the signatories agree to deliver uranium to Iran (albeit at a lower level of enrichment).
  6. Iran demands right to implement a phased plan of centrifuge expansion to 150,000 over a period of 15 years.
  7. No sanctions are to be leveled against Iran because of alleged support for terrorism or human rights violations.
  8. Iran must be free to explore all future advances in nuclear enrichment technology.

Iran’s leadership seems to have decided it will be able to endure a modified version of its “resistance economy,” and that widening fissures among the P5+1 signatories of the JCPOA can be exploited to end its isolation. Rouhani, with Khamenei’s endorsement, evidently calculates that Iran’s economy will improve with or without the nuclear deal. Since taking office, Rouhani’s cabinet has attempted to institute economic reforms designed to make Iran less vulnerable to sanctions. Rouhani, for instance, has dispensed with former President Ahmadinejad’s populist polices of extensive cash grants and subsidies to provinces in rural Iran. Additionally, Rouhani has re-empowered the Budget Control Office, which had been politically sidelined by Ahmadinejad. Rouhani has also reduced somewhat the galloping inflation of the Ahmadinejad era, which had reached about 30% [1] by appointing professionally qualified fiscal officers to monitor adherence to the government’s five-year plan. He also has sought to reduce corruption by discontinuing the practice of appointing unqualified cronies from the Basij militia and Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) — a practice routine in Ahmadinejad’s administrations.[2] Under his presidency, however, executions have skyrocketed to a degree that Amnesty International called “staggering,” especially in view of trials it calls “blatantly unfair.” In just the first months of 2015, accord to Amnesty International, nearly 700 people have been put to death.

The proponents of this so-called “resistance economy” in Iran seem to believe the country will be aided by increased trade with Russia and China and investment from other countries — including West European ones — that no longer feel bound by the U.S.-orchestrated sanctions regime. One prominent Iranian-born economist estimates that sanctions account for only about one-fifth of the downturn in Iran’s economy during the last few years.[3] A more significant factor in the economy’s downturn may be the continued decline in the price of oil, which accounts for the largest share of Iran’s exports and hard currency earnings. Perhaps the change felt most keenly by the individual Iranian citizen has been the impact of the plummeting decline in the purchasing power of the Rial, which lost about 80% against the dollar in the last years of the Ahmadinejad presidency.[4]

It is probably safe to assume that the Western negotiators of the JCPOA have been introduced to the Middle East bazaar method of negotiation: After an agreement has been concluded, it becomes a basis for further demands.

If Iran succeeds in garnering the benefits of even partial relief of sanctions, and if it attracts additional foreign investment as well as increased international commerce, it will ignore the JCPOA altogether. The only improbable question is: Will Iran walk away before or after picking up its $150 billion?

Western negotiators of the Iran deal, who sat across the table from Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif (right), have been introduced to the Middle East bazaar method of negotiation: After an agreement has been concluded, it becomes a basis for further demands. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani (left) evidently calculates that Iran’s economy will improve with or without the nuclear deal.

Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin was the Iran Desk Officer for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. He also served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve, where he was a Military Attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Israel.

Will Europe Refuse to Kneel like the Heroic French Priest? by Giulio Meotti

  • Go around Europe these days: you will find not a single rally to protest the murder of Father Jacques Hamel. The day an 85-year-old priest was killed in a French church, nobody said “We are all Catholics”.Even Pope Francis, in front of the most important anti-Christian event on Europe’s soil since the Second World War, stood silent and said that Islamists look “for money”. The entire Vatican clergy refused to say the word “Islam”.

  • Ritually, after each massacre, Europe’s media and politicians repeat the story of “intelligence failures” — a fig leaf to avoid mentioning Islam and its project of the conquest of Europe. It is the conventional code of conduct after any Islamist attack.
  • Europe looks condemned to a permanent state of siege. But what if, one day, after more bloodshed and attacks in Europe, Europe’s governments begin negotiating, with the mainstream Islamic organizations, the terms of submission of democracies to Islamic sharia law? Cartoons about Mohammed have already disappeared from the European media, and the scapegoating of Israel and the Jews started long time ago. After the attack at the church, the French media decided even to stop publishing photos of the terrorists. This is the brave response to jihad by our mainstream media

Imagine the scene: the morning Catholic mass in the northern French town of Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, an almost empty church, three parishioners, two nuns and a very old priest. Knife-wielding ISIS terrorists interrupt the service and slit the throat of Father Jacques Hamel. This heartbreaking scene illuminates the state of Christianity in Europe.

Father Jacques Hamel was murdered this week, in the church of Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, by Islamic jihadists.

It happened before. In 1996 seven French monks were slaughtered in Algeria. In 2006, a priest was beheaded in Iraq. In 2016, this horrible Islamic ritual took place in the heart of European Christianity: the Normandy town where Father Hamel was murdered is the location of the trial of Joan of Arc, the heroine of French Christianity.

France had been repeatedly warned: Europe’s Christians will meet the same fate of their Eastern brethren. But France refused to protect either Europe’s Christians or Eastern ones. When, a year ago, the rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, Dalil Boubakeur, suggested transforming empty French churches (like that one in Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray) into mosques, only a few French intellectuals, led by Alain Finkielkraut and Pascal Bruckner, signed the appeal entitled, “Do not touch my church” (“Touche pas à mon église“) in defense of France’s Christian heritage. Laurent Joffrin, director of the daily newspaper Libération, led a left-wing campaign against the appeal, describing the signers as “decrepit and fascist“.

For years, French socialist mayors have approved, in fact, the demolition of churches or their conversion into mosques (the same goal as ISIS but by different, “peaceful” means). Except in the Saint-Germain-des-Prés quarter of Paris, and in some beautiful areas such as the Avignon Festival, France is experiencing a dramatic crisis of identity.

While the appeal to save France’s churches was being demonized or ignored, the same fate was suffered by endangered Eastern Christian being exterminated by ISIS. “It is no longer possible to ignore this ethnic and cultural cleansing”, reads an appeal signed by the usual combative “Islamophobic” intellectuals, such as Elisabeth Badinter, Jacques Julliard and Michel Onfray. In March, the newspaper Le Figaro accused the government of Manuel Valls of abandoning the Christians threatened with death by ISIS by refusing to grant them visas.

Go around Europe these days: you will find not a single rally to protest the killing of Father Hamel. In January 2015, after the murderous attack on Charlie Hebdo, the French took to the streets to say “Je suis Charlie”. After July 26, 2016, the day an 85-year-old priest was murdered in a church, nobody said “We are all Catholics”. Even Pope Francis, in the face of the most important anti-Christian event on Europe’s soil since the Second World War, stood silent and said that Islamists look “for money“. The entire Vatican clergy refused to write or say the word “Islam”.

Truth is coming from very few writers. “Religions overcome other religions; police can help little if one is not afraid of death.” With these words, six months after the massacre at the magazine Charlie Hebdo, the writer Michel Houellebecq spoke with the Revue des Deux Mondes. Our elite should read it after every massacre before filling up pages on “intelligence failures.”

It is not as if one more French gendarmerie vehicle could have stopped the Islamist who slaughtered 84 people in Nice. Perhaps. Maybe. But that is not the point. Ritually, after each massacre, Europe’s media and politicians repeat the story of “intelligence failures”. In the case of the attack in Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, the story is about a terrorist who was placed under surveillance.

The “intelligence failure” theory is a fig leaf to avoid mentioning Islam and its project of the conquest of Europe. It is the conventional code of conduct after any Islamist attack. Then they add: “Retaliation” creates a spiral of violence; you have to work for peace and show good intentions. Then, in two or three weeks, comes the fatal “we deserve it”. For what? For having a religion different from them?

We always hear the same voices, as in some great game of dissimulation and collective disorientation in which no one even knows which enemy to beat. But, after all, is it not much more comforting to talk about “intelligence” instead of the Islamists who try, by terror and sharia, to force the submission of us poor Europeans?

Europe looks condemned to a permanent state of siege. But what if, one day, after more bloodshed and attacks in Europe, Europe’s governments begin negotiating, with the mainstream Islamic organizations, the terms of submission of democracies to Islamic sharia law? Cartoons about Mohammed and the “crime” of blasphemy have already disappeared from the European media, and the scapegoating of Israel and the Jews started long time ago.

After the attack at the church, the French media decided even to stop publishing photos of the terrorists. This is the brave response to jihad by our mainstream media, who also showed lethal signs of cowardice during the Charlie Hebdo crisis.

The only hope today comes from an 85-year-old French priest, who was murdered by Islamists after a simple, noble gesture: he refused to kneel in front of them. Will humiliated and indolent Europe do the same?

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

Translate »
Skip to toolbar