You are muddled Peter.

1. You interchange Britain and the Labour Party.

2. What not produce some evidence rather than offer a deduction. People have been making this accusation for TEN years - if there is evidence, produce it. Or notice the time that the gramophone has being going round-and-round-and-round.

3. People in UK reverse your argument. They say that ZEC deliberately announced the "results" on a night when the world's attention - yes the world's attention - would be on something significantly more important. Elections of London. London has the same population as us but is one of the world's leading cities. They can also count votes in 36 hours. ZEC are not fools. They had two times to present the results - driven by the election itself meaning the Sunday afterwards or a time to gain some other advantage.

4. If MDC was a project of anyone else, it would have a case officer who would ahead of events. The idea that Zimbabwe is so important that every initiative is made by the Prime Minister of the 6th largest economic power is, I am sorry, just laughable. The Herald embarrasses itself and Zimbabwe by publishing views that would be irritating if expressed by an adolescent.

Your view shows your inexperience in these matters. For something the size of Zimbabwe, despatches go from the Embassy in Harare to a desk in Foreign Affairs. These are summarized with all the issues of the world by professional staff for the Foreign Secretary's attention, who may or may not bring matters to the attention of the Prime Minister and Cabinet depending on how important they are.

Please start producing road maps that take us forward. Indicate clearly to us what steps we can take, one-by-one towards the Zimbabwe we want.

Now that article was funny! I love the way it mentions , "sources at the Ministry of Defence". Well I am a source at the Ministry of Defence and I'd like to tell my fellow visitors to this site that never in a million years would the UK MoD fund a political party in another country. Thats the beauty of public accountability because they have no reason to and they'd never get away with it if for some outlandish reason they ever wanted to. I've already shown this article to collegues who thought it was every bit as funny as I did. "A team of investigators has gone out"? Where have they gone out to? Does the MoD have investigators? I haven't met any. Does the UK MoD have jurisdiction to examine bank accounts in africa? They aren't an arm of law enforcement. They aren't the CIA as the author would have you believe. I suggest everyone who reads it just googles the details of the story and then get your head around the idea that no one else in the entire world not the Times BBC or CNN or Reuters or even Fox(if you consider that to be news) no one except this, "journalist" from the Herald no less knows of the UK MoD's involvement in an alleged foreign plot to rig elections in Zimbabwe when resources are concentrated in Afghanistan and Iraq, either they have a major exclusive or............they just made it up on the spot, you decide. It was entertaining to see what passes for news in the Herald though.

Glyph, the UK is/has been flashing Zimbabwe in all it’s news media on the Internet, to the point that most of us Zimbabweans, wonder if we are a province of UK. Has the UK contemplated funding an army or opposition party in Zimbabwe? Yes indeed. Your denial is typical of British behavior in Africa. You have made Zimbabwe the top priority of Africa news coverage and not Darfur or Somalia or DRC where within 3 years 3 million people have died. The accusation that news on Zimbabwe is motivated by that small racist Anglo community in Zimbabwe resonates with most of us.

Actually the point was that the MoD was financing the opposition parties in Zimbabwe, I can tell you emphatically that they aren't. I didn't mention Darfur or Somalia because the piece in the Herald was obviously on Zimbabwe, maybe you should confine yourself to the comment I made instead of echoing the paranoia in the other posts of yours which I see dotted around the site. If you honestly in your heart of hearts believe that the first thing every white person in the world thinks when they wake up in the morning is, "Oh I wish Zimbabwe was back in the British Empire" you sadly have an over inflated sense of self importance. We are so much less preoccupied with you than you are with us.

Glyph, I'm happy Zimbabwe is not your pre-occupation and I certainly would like your country, especially your media, to act as you said.

Based on the massive propaganda campaign that the Western media has conducted over the past few weeks, right up to The NYTimes' May 9, 2008 editorial, one would get the impression that Zimbabwe is the most important nation on earth and that many, if not all, whites are very concerned about it. Zimbabwe and who rules it is far more significant to the white world for the impact that its success or failure has on the ownership of African resources. To the white world, lead by the UK and US, it is of vital importance that Zimbabweans are not successful in regaining control of the resources that they gained as colonialist. Strong independent Africans in control of their own resources is among their greatest fears.

"Strong independent Africans in control of their own resources is among their greatest fears."

ROFL! What a load of rubbish. You think that the western leaders wake up in the middle of the night in a sweat after a nightmare that Zimbabwe had returned to sub-100% inflation? What a joke!

China is rapidly becoming the next superpower and, fool that you are, you think western leaders are worried about small African countries becoming less of an economic disaster. That's funny!

Oh please Phiri you talk absolute nonsense. Go onto the BBC news website now and click on world news. The way you talk most of the links should be about Zim. Right now (20:47) there's ONE link to a Zim story out of about 30.

Your blatant lies are typical of a ZANU-PF propaganda sucker.

Selector

And can you please enlighten us on what you mean by the "Zim situation"- peace, prosperity,harmony?- Is that what you would have us believe were it not for the venal imperialists? Sophisticated as you may sound, please leave Western powers out of this; the battle lines in Zimbabwe are between Mugabe and a traumatized people who have seen through his perfidy- he was given a job to build not to burn and maim. Tell me what have the British and Americans got to do with rural Zimbabweans finally waking up to the truth that ZANU is indeed a sinking ship and all they are doing is jumping from it?

Its as simple as that and don't you tell us about this country's history- you were probably not even there when it was being forged. Mugabe messed in 2000 when he destroyed the country's economic base for short-term political gain and don't tell us it's Western sanctions stopping the beneficiaries of this monumental political gaffe from farming.

In the end, someone has to stand up and speak for the hapless Zimbabwe people at a time they are being strangled and no amount of apologizing for Mugabe will change that. The West, in my view, does not want to colonize anyone( it is no longer a profitable enterprise), rather it is telling Mugabe this world has minimum rules of conduct to be considered a responsible member of the international community.Zimbabweans had already sent this message to him in 2000- even before the so called regime change agenda came to the fore of ZANU propaganda.

Mugabe has broken everyone of them and forfeited his right to international respect. SADC and the AU are also waking up to the fact that Mugabe has become a liability which they cannot afford- and if you don't see that reality then you obviously are locked in a time warp. He will go and international pressure whether from the West, SADC or AU will ensure that. He will go because he offends our sensibilities and reinforces the stereotypes of African politics- and we can no longer afford that.

If you think I am in the pay of "imperialism" so be it, but I don't relish seeing one more innocent life lost so Mugabe's monumental and misplaced ego is assuaged. His vapid fulminations against the West no longer impress anyone.

Such apocryphal pretensions to journalistic sophistry can on happen in Zimbabwe.The writer of this article obviously believes all Zimbabweans are dim wits to the extent they can lap ad neusium the preposterous suggestion that the country is under siege from the British.Such wild allegations against a country whose only crime is to have been a former colonial power, is to say the least an abdication of rational thought and the product of compulsive liars who populate Herald House.

I have been wondering what's so special about Zimbabwe that Britain would want to colonize it again given its sorry state. It also defies logic brazenly charge that the British could have instructed over a million citizens to kick out ZANU, it just does not happen in the real world. Simply put what ZANU is alleging is a physical impossibility, which they know but can't admit with a straight face Zimbabweans are tired and simply want change.

Why does Mugabe behave as if there is something special about Zimbabwe having born out of a liberation struggle? Six million Algerians died in what some have called a savage war of peace against the French. Where is this country today after having endured the debilitating rule of it original liberators- and who were ignominiously kicked out of power by an incensed people. Its a matter of time before ZANU suffers the same fate. Ignorance and arrogance are not usually good bedfellows

If the UK were to try recolonise Zimbabwe they would be crucified by the EU. There is no way they could do it in secret, something like that would leave an enormous paper trail.

Here's a question: Although there have been many articles covering Zimbabwe in the British news recently, how many of those articles have suggested that Britain wants control over Zimbabwe? It's clear Britain does not like Mugabe, and prefers any alternative, but if the British people wanted some kind of puppet government someone would have suggested it. Zimbabwe is a humanitarian crisis that the whole world wants resolved.

Another question: Even if Britain somehow got control of Zimbabwe, what would Britain get out of it? The UN currently supplies a third of Zimbabwe's population with food aid.

If you can answer me that last question I'd be very interested to hear it.

blackship, don't make yourself out to be naive, Blood.

You seem to think the UK is some bastion of honesty, nobility and altruism. Not only is this not the case today but it also has never been the case in Britain's history. Indeed Britain's past and present is packed with skulduggery, treachery and where that's not worked to further whatever aims Britain has had, she's employed good, old-fashioned, military oppression.

Even today, the UK media reports Tsvangirai coming home to face the election run-off that he's spent the last month saying "I will, I won't, I will, I won't" like a spoilt child in a fairground. But UK media's pre-occupation with the home-coming news is only that Zanu PF 'militia' (whoever these phantoms are) will not allow free and fair run offs.

Neither the UK government nor the UK media are ignorant of the wider Zimbabwe situation and neither are they stupid - although I am sincerely beginning to think the average Brit has become stupefied by mantras from the state and media - (BBC messageboards in particular reveal a distinct lack of knowledge on the Zim situation). But whilst the state and media know the truth, neither report that Tsvangirai is liable to, at some time, be arrested and questioned regarding illegal pronouncements of election results before official ZEC announcements (this can be labelled Mugabe oppression at some later date should the law catch up with the scoundrel that is Tsvangirai) and neither report on what the UN, SADC, the AU and South Africa have all identified as political violence instigated and carried out by opposition MDC-T supporters (or militias as they like to call these people). This blatant bias towards the MDC is precisely because the UK seeks a lapdog as a government in Zimbabwe.

blackship, you then go on to say, "Even if Britain somehow got control of Zimbabwe, what would Britain get out of it? The UN currently supplies a third of Zimbabwe's population with food aid. If you can answer me that last question I'd be very interested to hear it".

I give you the benefit of the doubt as you pose this question for it is obvious that you are literate and therefore cannot be as simple-minded as your question suggests. There was no profit in the Falklands campaign except British pride. Both Afghanistan and Iraq were economically broken when the UK, America and others invaded after years of Western-led sanctions - just as Zimbabwe's economy has been crippled after years of UK & US led economic sanctions. These people think longer-term financial goals whilst stating short term, humanitarian drivers. South Africa receives more UN aid than Zimbabwe. Despite this it is still the gold, diamond and platinum capital of the world and its economy has thrived on foreign investment since apartheid, although the gap between rich non-blacks and poor black Africans has continued to widen. I hope this goes some way to answer your somewhat simplistic question.

Guidance and peace, always.

Blackship, which western country comes on openly and say they want to impose a puppet regime or invade another country? If is so overt, people would know. You want to learn how the western world operate, read a few mercenary books, then you will know how ruthless, heartless, devilish western nations can be? It is not so overt, as you may think. Consider the lies about the reason to invade Iraq?

Once again you answer your own question Phiri. If you think for one moment that a western political leader would commit career suicide by taking their armed forces into a little blot on the landscape called Zimbabwe because africans are killing eachother(again) you are so very much mistaken. The US learned that lesson in Somalia and look at that place right now and the AU is doing such a wonderful job there(sarcasm). There is an overwhelming movement to bring the troops home from iraq and the British public know that there is no legitimate reason to be there. Finding a legitimate reason to send one of the worlds best equipped and battle hardened armies to Zimbabwe, a country with 1950s tanks and 1970's aeroplanes would be a stretch of anyones imagination because the only thing Zimbabwe is a threat to is Zimbabwe itself, that and it wouldn't wash with the British public because contrary to what is said on this site they don't believe everything they're told. I've always held the view that a country will ulimately get the government it deserves. I wish the Zimbabwean people everything they would wish for themselves and the best of luck.

"I've always held the view that a country will ulimately get the government it deserves. I wish the Zimbabwean people everything they would wish for themselves and the best of luck".

Glyph, I think you'll find many in complete agreement with you. Can you do us all a favour, please, and let your government know that Zimbabweans can do without them? Thanks.

If Zimbabwe can do without the British etc, why cry when it imposes sanctions? If the country does not feel the bite of sanctions then it is a true confession to the fact that its down spiraling is due to no other than Mugabe and his fat morons' squandering and mismanagement of all the resources that the people sweat blood for prior to independence. Perhaps the day will come when we shall all find out how much money that belongs to the people Mugabe has stashed in Western banks and all over the place. The main reason he cries out about the West is that he can no longer easily lay his hands on the stash. To those of you who listen to his brain washing about how the British want to colonize Zimbabwe once more - it is all a cover up. The man is lashing out to cover up for the destruction that he himself is causing. If the West really wanted to take the country, Mugabe would have woken up a has been with very little effort on their part a long time ago. Perhaps Mugabe should be taken to traditional healers to relieve him of his tyrannical and murderous demons.

Phiri, we all know that the UK and US governments used lies as a cover for invading Iraq. There was plenty of evidence to show they were lying. So, now, show us the EVIDENCE of Britain wanting to colonize Zim. What would they want with it?

You should take off those blinkers of yours and take notice of CHINA buying up Zim resources.