Several of the comments on the BBC website accuse the western media in general and the BBC in particular of bias against Mugabe. I would have to agree that the media is biased on the subject of Zimbabwe, not against but TOWARDS Mugabe. The western media and its governments are so terrified of being seen as not politically correct or of being pro-imperialist that the do not speak out against Mugabe as strongly as they should. They weakly protest and can barely agree to kick him out of the commonwealth when they should be doing all within their power to pressure him towards democratic rule. Imagine if you would, a country without the sad legacy of British Imperialism where a president began his tenure with genocide (in the early 80's Mugabe's 5th Brigade went on a systematic campaign of genocide against the mainly Ndebele people of western Zimbabwe), where that same president took western money aimed at land reform and squandered it on his own corrupt party and who when finally faced with real political opposition embarked on a campaign of terror against whites AND BLACKS (whilst at the same time bringing a once prosperous country to its knees). Would the west so limp wristedly ask "will the election be fair"?? I think not, they'd be screaming their heads off. It infuriates me how little the west has protested the tyranny of Mugabe. And as for Tsvangari being accused of being a British lackey? He is a man who was once a leading light in Zimbabwe’s trade union movement and a staunch supporter of Zanu PF, it’s only the corruption and abuses of Zanu PF that has lead him and others like him to make a stand; he is a true Zimbabwean patriot and a brave, brave man to stand even though it may mean his life or liberty.
