"NAIROBI (Reuters) - A group of Kenyans filed a case against the British government at the European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday over what it said was colonial-era land theft, torture and mistreatment.

The Kenyans are seeking an investigation and redress for crimes they say were committed in western Kenya's Kericho region, now one of the most important in the world for tea production.

"The UK Government has ducked and dived, and sadly avoided every possible avenue of redress. We have no choice but to proceed to court for our clients so that history can be righted," said lawyer Joel Kimutai Bosek, who is representing the group.

Britain's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It would be up to the court to quantify how much redress could be owed to victims, the legal team said.

British redress for colonial-era crimes is rare but not unheard of. In 2013, Britain agreed on a multi-million dollar compensation settlement for Kenyans tortured by colonial forces during an uprising at the tail end of the British Empire.

The United Nations has said more than half a million Kenyans from the Kericho area suffered gross violations of human rights including unlawful killings and displacement during British colonial rule, which ended in 1963.

Many continue to suffer economic consequences from the theft of their land, the United Nations has said, even as that same land has become profitable for multinational companies.

"Today, some of the world's most prosperous tea companies, like Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton, occupy and farm these lands and continue to use them to generate considerable profits," the plaintiffs said in a statement.

Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Kenya is the world's leading exporter of black tea by quantity, according to the International Trade Centre."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:09:54 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:

"NAIROBI (Reuters) - A group of Kenyans filed a case against the British government at the European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday over what it said was colonial-era land theft, torture and mistreatment.

The Kenyans are seeking an investigation and redress for crimes they say were committed in western Kenya's Kericho region, now one of the most important in the world for tea production.

"The UK Government has ducked and dived, and sadly avoided every possible avenue of redress. We have no choice but to proceed to court for our clients so that history can be righted," said lawyer Joel Kimutai Bosek, who is representing the group.

Britain's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It would be up to the court to quantify how much redress could be owed to victims, the legal team said.

British redress for colonial-era crimes is rare but not unheard of. In 2013, Britain agreed on a multi-million dollar compensation settlement for Kenyans tortured by colonial forces during an uprising at the tail end of the British Empire.

The United Nations has said more than half a million Kenyans from the Kericho area suffered gross violations of human rights including unlawful killings and displacement during British colonial rule, which ended in 1963.

Many continue to suffer economic consequences from the theft of their land, the United Nations has said, even as that same land has become profitable for multinational companies.

"Today, some of the world's most prosperous tea companies, like Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton, occupy and farm these lands and continue to use them to generate considerable profits," the plaintiffs said in a statement.

Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Kenya is the world's leading exporter of black tea by quantity, according to the International Trade Centre."

It has been some years of waiting since 2013 of Britain agreeing to compensate the Kenyan government and people of Kenya. It goes to show how power behind these Western people think of them, even after they agreeing to compensate them to redress their
theft of lands and colonial crimes.

Kenya should sign an executive order like what Donald Trump did to foreign companies in US to force sale of assets to US companies within 60 days of executive order.

Hence, Kenyan government should do likewise by signing executive order or by passing parliamentary statutory law on that so that they can retrieve all their lands to the government of people in Kenya.

British owners of tea plantations in Kenya shall have 60 days to sell their assets to Kenya government appointed Kenyan companies or Kenya government-owned companies within 60 days of order by law or else will have them expelled to exit out of their
Kenya country.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 12:54:40 AM UTC-4, stoney wrote:

On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:09:54 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:

"NAIROBI (Reuters) - A group of Kenyans filed a case against the British government at the European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday over what it said was colonial-era land theft, torture and mistreatment.

The Kenyans are seeking an investigation and redress for crimes they say were committed in western Kenya's Kericho region, now one of the most important in the world for tea production.

"The UK Government has ducked and dived, and sadly avoided every possible avenue of redress. We have no choice but to proceed to court for our clients so that history can be righted," said lawyer Joel Kimutai Bosek, who is representing the group.

Britain's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It would be up to the court to quantify how much redress could be owed to victims, the legal team said.

British redress for colonial-era crimes is rare but not unheard of. In 2013, Britain agreed on a multi-million dollar compensation settlement for Kenyans tortured by colonial forces during an uprising at the tail end of the British Empire.

The United Nations has said more than half a million Kenyans from the Kericho area suffered gross violations of human rights including unlawful killings and displacement during British colonial rule, which ended in 1963.

Many continue to suffer economic consequences from the theft of their land, the United Nations has said, even as that same land has become profitable for multinational companies.

"Today, some of the world's most prosperous tea companies, like Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton, occupy and farm these lands and continue to use them to generate considerable profits," the plaintiffs said in a statement.

Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Kenya is the world's leading exporter of black tea by quantity, according to the International Trade Centre."

It has been some years of waiting since 2013 of Britain agreeing to compensate the Kenyan government and people of Kenya. It goes to show how power behind these Western people think of them, even after they agreeing to compensate them to redress their

theft of lands and colonial crimes.

Kenya should sign an executive order like what Donald Trump did to foreign companies in US to force sale of assets to US companies within 60 days of executive order.

Hence, Kenyan government should do likewise by signing executive order or by passing parliamentary statutory law on that so that they can retrieve all their lands to the government of people in Kenya.

British owners of tea plantations in Kenya shall have 60 days to sell their assets to Kenya government appointed Kenyan companies or Kenya government-owned companies within 60 days of order by law or else will have them expelled to exit out of their

Kenya country.

But Kenya is not the US. Iran's 1953 democratic government was regime changed for doing that.

"Mosaddegh had sought to audit the documents of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British corporation (now part of BP), in order to verify that AIOC was paying the contracted royalties to Iran, and to limit the company's control over Iranian oil
reserves.[12] Upon the AIOC's refusal to co-operate with the Iranian government, the parliament (Majlis) voted to nationalize Iran's oil industry and to expel foreign corporate representatives from the country.[13][14][15] After this vote, Britain
instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically.[16] Initially, Britain mobilized its military to seize control of the British-built Abadan oil refinery, then the world's largest, but Prime Minister Clement Attlee (in power
until 1951) opted instead to tighten the economic boycott[17] while using Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh's government.[18]: 3  Judging Mosaddegh to be unreliable and fearing a Communist takeover in Iran, UK prime minister Winston Churchill and
the Eisenhower administration decided in early 1953 to overthrow Iran's government, though the preceding Truman administration had opposed a coup, fearing the precedent that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) involvement would set.[18]: 3  British
intelligence officials' conclusions and the UK government's solicitations were instrumental in initiating and planning the coup, despite the fact that the U.S. government in 1952 had been considering unilateral action (without UK support) to assist the
Mosaddegh government.[19][20][21]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

Might made right. Will it be the same today?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 7:54:49 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 12:54:40 AM UTC-4, stoney wrote:

On Friday, August 26, 2022 at 1:09:54 AM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:

"NAIROBI (Reuters) - A group of Kenyans filed a case against the British government at the European Court of Human Rights on Tuesday over what it said was colonial-era land theft, torture and mistreatment.

The Kenyans are seeking an investigation and redress for crimes they say were committed in western Kenya's Kericho region, now one of the most important in the world for tea production.

"The UK Government has ducked and dived, and sadly avoided every possible avenue of redress. We have no choice but to proceed to court for our clients so that history can be righted," said lawyer Joel Kimutai Bosek, who is representing the group.

Britain's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It would be up to the court to quantify how much redress could be owed to victims, the legal team said.

British redress for colonial-era crimes is rare but not unheard of. In 2013, Britain agreed on a multi-million dollar compensation settlement for Kenyans tortured by colonial forces during an uprising at the tail end of the British Empire.

The United Nations has said more than half a million Kenyans from the Kericho area suffered gross violations of human rights including unlawful killings and displacement during British colonial rule, which ended in 1963.

Many continue to suffer economic consequences from the theft of their land, the United Nations has said, even as that same land has become profitable for multinational companies.

"Today, some of the world's most prosperous tea companies, like Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton, occupy and farm these lands and continue to use them to generate considerable profits," the plaintiffs said in a statement.

Unilever, Williamson Tea, Finlay's and Lipton did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Kenya is the world's leading exporter of black tea by quantity, according to the International Trade Centre."

It has been some years of waiting since 2013 of Britain agreeing to compensate the Kenyan government and people of Kenya. It goes to show how power behind these Western people think of them, even after they agreeing to compensate them to redress

their theft of lands and colonial crimes.

Kenya should sign an executive order like what Donald Trump did to foreign companies in US to force sale of assets to US companies within 60 days of executive order.

Hence, Kenyan government should do likewise by signing executive order or by passing parliamentary statutory law on that so that they can retrieve all their lands to the government of people in Kenya.

British owners of tea plantations in Kenya shall have 60 days to sell their assets to Kenya government appointed Kenyan companies or Kenya government-owned companies within 60 days of order by law or else will have them expelled to exit out of their

Kenya country.

But Kenya is not the US. Iran's 1953 democratic government was regime changed for doing that.

"Mosaddegh had sought to audit the documents of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British corporation (now part of BP), in order to verify that AIOC was paying the contracted royalties to Iran, and to limit the company's control over Iranian oil

reserves.[12] Upon the AIOC's refusal to co-operate with the Iranian government, the parliament (Majlis) voted to nationalize Iran's oil industry and to expel foreign corporate representatives from the country.[13][14][15] After this vote, Britain
instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically.[16] Initially, Britain mobilized its military to seize control of the British-built Abadan oil refinery, then the world's largest, but Prime Minister Clement Attlee (in power
until 1951) opted instead to tighten the economic boycott[17] while using Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh's government.[18]: 3  Judging Mosaddegh to be unreliable and fearing a Communist takeover in Iran, UK prime minister Winston Churchill and
the Eisenhower administration decided in early 1953 to overthrow Iran's government, though the preceding Truman administration had opposed a coup, fearing the precedent that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) involvement would set.[18]: 3  British
intelligence officials' conclusions and the UK government's solicitations were instrumental in initiating and planning the coup, despite the fact that the U.S. government in 1952 had been considering unilateral action (without UK support) to assist the
Mosaddegh government.[19][20][21]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

Might made right. Will it be the same today?

It will not be the same. Countries will be enlightened by lessons of the past events like this one, will not deal with these 5 eyes countries. Whatever then, there will be other small allies loyal to them will get trapped by them, when they invested in
their countries. Hence, the rule of the game is to write your own rules and terms and regulations on them and not let them write their own rules and terms and regulations to suit them. This is because as they had said they lied and cheated and stole and
occupied, too.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 7:54:49 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:

But Kenya is not the US. Iran's 1953 democratic government was regime changed for doing that.

"Mosaddegh had sought to audit the documents of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British corporation (now part of BP), in order to verify that AIOC was paying the contracted royalties to Iran, and to limit the company's control over Iranian oil

reserves.[12] Upon the AIOC's refusal to co-operate with the Iranian government, the parliament (Majlis) voted to nationalize Iran's oil industry and to expel foreign corporate representatives from the country.[13][14][15] After this vote, Britain
instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically.[16] Initially, Britain mobilized its military to seize control of the British-built Abadan oil refinery, then the world's largest, but Prime Minister Clement Attlee (in power
until 1951) opted instead to tighten the economic boycott[17] while using Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh's government.[18]: 3  Judging Mosaddegh to be unreliable and fearing a Communist takeover in Iran, UK prime minister Winston Churchill and
the Eisenhower administration decided in early 1953 to overthrow Iran's government, though the preceding Truman administration had opposed a coup, fearing the precedent that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) involvement would set.[18]: 3  British
intelligence officials' conclusions and the UK government's solicitations were instrumental in initiating and planning the coup, despite the fact that the U.S. government in 1952 had been considering unilateral action (without UK support) to assist the
Mosaddegh government.[19][20][21]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

Might made right. Will it be the same today?

Currently one can see many more countries have not checked out these experiences and of these lessons that were entrapped by these Western countries on them. Many of them are still blinded by their allied with them, instead.

This is especially so to those countries where they have already a lopsided investments made by them. They will come in group of allies and will hang and anchor down to the country of strategic importance to them.

In short, if we cannot get to invade and conquer your country, we will use our asset investments to invest and anchor in your country that will make your country belongs to them at their terms of whims and fancies.

They will form or use their existing big business association that is exclusive for their own kinds of people in their allies to contain and control the country. They will will meet, discuss, and collude in secret and in private among themselves to put
pressure on the government. They will use their group to influence politics such as taking side or to be their ally.

They will set goals, formulate and set and regulate to the country of their investment, instead. This means also to the employment of their own people while their tail-end of their jobs were left for the locals. At some point in the future, they will
anchor down the country as their assets. too.

They will not exit their asset from your country. They will not withdraw even if you tell them to exit. They will not obey to the request and demand on them. They would want their own people of their own country or of the same blood kinds to be in their
employ in the country invested.

They will not comply and conform to audit and investigation of tax evasion and anti-national security issues, etc. They will form and use their group-think to make group attack like a bunch of hyenas to upturn the government of the day.

In short, they can mount the same campaign to evict the legitimate government like what the Mosaddegh's government of Iran had experienced from them.

If one looks further ahead in Southeast Asia, one can be sure they will break up this Asean group. They will scheme them and conflict them in order break them up when they are already shown up as not united.

One is going on private mode frequenting US and ending up given a big 150 million bill with a US cutter presence. Some other members going for China and some were not interested and distanced themselves from them.

But one was in unhappy mode on one for supporting of US used their food shortage reason as economic sanction on that country such as banning of export of chicken sales.

Even chicken's export farmers have more than enough stock for their local, their government's sanction on that country is still on "no limit" time. This is how anger power can be displayed by sanctioning the supplies of chickens and not gas to that
country.

Just look into your distance future, step by step Asean will be broken up into separated pieces by Western group of allies. They will be happy to see them hate each other, and outfox each other. The Western allies will take side and use them to get
alienated and conflicted into cold front, instead.

When the Asean group is broken up "to each their own", the allies of the 5 eyes will create fights and conquer them, instead. Their invested business assets will be used to demand their presence and ownership of their business lands, too.





--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)