Talk:Robert Kajuga (Interahamwe)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Africa: Rwanda

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rwanda (assessed as High-importance).

A Tutsi?![edit]

A Tutsi and national president of the Interahamwe? I've heard it all now, just unbelievable! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.4.117.35 (talk) 13:54, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This Wikipedia entry was probably made by Kagame's lobbyists. The entry seeks to mislead the public about what happened before and during what is now wrongly called " Tutsi genocide". The fact is that around 1992, multiparty party politics, which had just been introduced in Rwanda, took a crazy twist. Each political party had its own militia to animate their public and private meetings, providing security as well as recruiting members for their parties. The then ruling party had its " youth wing"/ militia called interahamwe. MDR party had its " youth wing"/militia called Inkuba. PSD had their " youth wing"/militia called Abakombozi. CDR had theirs called Ingiramugambi. PL, which was basically for intellectuals only ( Hutu and Tutsi intellectuals) did not have militia; it was not a famous party. It had no members beyond " speculating philosopher s". The author of the entry on Robert Kajuga gives an impression that (1) Kajuga was not known to be Tutsi because he had his famly IDs marked " Hutu". (2) there were no known Tutsi among the interahamwe; if there was any Tutsi among the interahamwe, that Tutsi was there under false Hutu ID. (3) there were no Tutsi among the interahamwe. The author is absolutely wrong. All the different political parties " youth wings" had Hutus and Tutsis in their ranks. Until 1994, it was actually prestigious to belong to these groups. Naturally, the then ruling party " youth wing" had more money and other resources; it was more " prestigious" to belong to that group. Kajuga did not lead, and recruit members for, interahmwe because they mistook him for a Hutu. Rwandans do not need IDs to know who is Hutu, Tutsi or TWA, at least for many people. Kajuga, like many other Tutsi interahamwe, was known to be Tutsi. It is not true that other " youth wings" ( for other parties) did not slaughter people. No political party " youth wing" was exclusively Hutu or Tutsi. Of course, the Tutsi were only 14% of the entire population; the Hutu were the majority even in " youth wings". It is not true that any of the youth wing specialized in slaughtering one ethnic group. It is not true that people were killed exclusively because they were Hutu or Tutsi or TWA. Some were killed because of their property, others were killed because they were beautiful, others were killed for their executors " amusement", others were killed because the killers wanted yo have more piles of dead bodies to create fear and chaos which would create a favorouble environment for them to grab power. That's why I believe that the framers of this thing called " Tutsi genocide" did so in bad faith. They needed a big and confusing veil to cover their responsibility in the massacres. Rwandans need to revisit this absurd "episode" of their history as a people with a more critical approach; not the current Victor narrative - " Tutsi genocide" propaganda

Based on the above well elaborated story. This article should be deleted or corrected. The article provides misleading information in its current form.Carcasone321 (talk) 02:21, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]