Hello there everyone, glad to see you're with us at the start of 2009. For us, 2008 was a great year what with starting up the site and getting the basics all fired up. We're very happy to have the bloggers that we have so far and we're looking to add more in the near future, exposing African voices that were previously unheard.       Obviously, the next year is going to hold a lot of changes for Maneno as you can see there is still that Beta bubble in the upper left which will need to be removed once we're feeling solid that the site is out of the initial development phase. Getting to that point is going to mean that in the next 2-3 months, we're going to be rolling out a number of changes we've been working on. One is that the translation system is going to get an overhaul. While it (along with most all the functions) will remain the same in essence, it's going to be made more user friendly. Since we're one of the few sites approaching translation in this manner, it means that there will be a lot of trial and error, feedback and rebuilding before we get a system that we know is the best.       Also on the list are smaller things like cleaning up Themes to be a bit more involved, deeper, and plentiful. Along with this, we're going to set it up so that people who are more technically inclined can upload their own 'CSS' file to fully customize the look of their blog above and beyond what we provide. We know how important having ones own signature is on the web.       Once we get all of these items and a few more minor ones taken care of, we're going to move on to the "big tomato" elements of the site which will involve the mobile aspect. For the second half of the year, we're going to really focus on having a system that will allow people to blog from their mobile phones. We'll have a mobile version of the site available for those on smartphones, but more importantly, we're planning to have a mechanism for people to blog via SMS and eventually MMS. This will allow the site's focus on being a platform for Sub-Saharan Africa come to light. We're very aware that while localization, a lightweight system, and a focus on Africa are great, it's the ability to submit data in a non-internet based form that is crucial. In case you were wondering, we're looking in to the system that Ken Banks and team developed for Frontline SMS. Ushahidi has made great use of it in their notification system and we're looking to have similar success, but in the much different format that is Maneno.       That's a quick rundown of the year ahead. We'll have other items to announce in the coming weeks, so as always, stay tuned!

Looking on the web for some info about Zimbabwe (I'm visiting the Victoria Falls in a few days time), I stumbled across an article dated the December 12 in the Zimbabwean state-owned propaganda machine The Herald about how that beleaguered nation intends to make tourism a key foreign currency earner, increasing its contribution to the Zimbabwean GDP by 400% by 2010.       Apparently, the Zimbabwe Council for Tourism president somehow expects tourism-generated-foreign currency earnings to surge from US$ 50 million to $1 billion by 2010 -- i.e. in the space of little over more than a year. He also miraculously predicts a global downturn-defying tripling of visitor arrivals from 1 million people to 3 million. He doesn't explain where the money -- or the visitors -- will be coming from or quite why they'll be swarming into the country in 2009 when they've been avoiding the place since the land invasions began in 2000.       In true Zanu PF mouthpiece style, The Herald blames the tourism industry's current woes on the West:

Since then [2000], it has been negatively impacted on by the harsh economic environment arising from warnings against travel to Zimbabwe from traditional source markets, resulting in reduced arrivals, low occupancies, job redundancies and business closures.

      Sunny optimism won't get Zimbabwe's ruling cabal anywhere. It might make for uplifting newspaper copy but it's certainly not going to save the nation. But then again, that's the last thing the ruling party's thugs are concerned with.       Thanks to Mugabe and his cronies' systematic destruction of a once vibrant country and economy, the Zimbabwe tourism brand is dead -- and is set to remain so for quite a while. Even were democracy to be restored and the Zanu PF dictatorship removed within the next few months (which, considering the current stalemate, is highly unlikely), there's absolutely no way that there would be the kind of tourism growth projected by the ZCT. With a cholera epidemic, widespread starvation, chronic shortages, rolling power cuts, civil unrest and hyper-inflation, there's a lot that needs to be resolved before most visitors even consider it a holiday destination option. Of course it doesn't help that Zimbabwe Tourism's website isn't functioning either -- although it's hardly surprising and a rather more accurate reflection of the current state of Zimbabwe's tourism.       Tourism will one day return to Zimbabwe which is an extraordinarily beautiful country with friendly, hospitable people. But, whatever The Herald might say, the day that visitors return en masse is still far, far away.       Read The Herald article on AllAfrica.com.

Our friend Carmen brought an article to our attention, a report by Human Rights Watch, Nigeria: Arbitrary Killings by Security Forces in Jos. The point of the article is in the title, the claim that the military and police went beyond necessary force in their reaction to the rioters in Jos.

Nigerian police and army forces were implicated in more than 90 arbitrary killings in responding to inter-communal violence between Christian and Muslim mobs in Jos, Nigeria, on November 28 and 29, 2008, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch called on the Nigerian government to investigate and prosecute those responsible for the killings, mostly of young Muslim men from the Hausa-Fulani ethnic group.

      Human Rights Watch researchers documented seven separate incidents of arbitrary killing by the police during which at least 46 men and boys, all but two of them Muslims, were killed. The vast majority of police killings were perpetrated by a specially trained anti-riot unit called the Police Mobile Force, known locally as the MOPOLs. Human Rights Watch also documented six incidents involving the arbitrary killing of 47 men by the military. According to witnesses, all of the victims were Muslim men, nearly all were young, and most were unarmed at the time. Most of the killings came on the same day after the Plateau State governor issued a "shoot-on-sight" order to security personnel on November 29.

      I circulated the link to the article on our missions-in-Jos mailing list and and there have been several responses, which I'll append as comments below as I receive permission. One response theme is that this shows once again the one-sided nature of the international reporting of the riots. I think that idea comes from the fact that the report says that nearly all of those killed were Muslim. On the other hand, a different explanation of the disproportionate number of Muslims killed could be that they were the ones most engaged in the fighting at the time, and did not retreat when the security forces appeared.       It seems frustratingly impossible to find out what actually happened during the riots, or how they began. Let me try to state some factors that seem to be generally accepted:       1) There is a problem with ethnic-geographic discrimination in Nigeria. Although in theory everyone is a Nigerian and receives equal treatment regardless of tribe or state of origin, the practice is that one's "indigeneity" matters very much. It is frequently mentioned that the Hausa-Fulani in Jos North are considered "settlers" rather than "indigenes" and are discriminated against when it comes to civil service and political appointments, university admission, and so on. However, the situation is not unique to Jos. In neighboring Bauchi state, for example, a Christian spokesman expressed "displeasure over Christians' marginalization concerning government activities", and everyone seems to agree that non-indigenes are at a disadvantage wherever they are. The Human Rights Watch report "They Do Not Own This Place" explains the nationwide scope of the problem.       2) There is an ongoing background of tension, fear, and conflict between Muslims and Christians in Nigeria (hmm, is that true anywhere else?). Of course this does not mean that there are no moderate voices, no cooperation, no friendships between the two groups. However, you have only to google "nigeria religious violence" to see that the problem is persistent and widespread, not simply sporadic. The conflicts may be triggered by political, tribal, or even personal issues, but religion often becomes rather quickly the major divide. For more on this, see "Churches destroyed in wave of religious violence in Nigeria" (Christianity Today), "Nigeria Christian/Muslim Conflict" (GlobalSecurity.org) and "Religious Violence Fueled by Impunity" (Human Rights Watch).       Some argue that the recent violence was political or at least politically motivated. While it may be true that the elections were a political trigger, it's hard to deny that the fighting quickly became a Muslim-Christian affair. Even the reports that try to de-emphasize religion are not very convincing: have you seen any headlines such as "ANPP mobs attack and burn homes of PDP members over rigged elections," or reports of how many of the dead belonged to each political party?       3) There is widespread poverty and lack of basic services such as water, health care, and education. That much is obvious. Is poverty a root cause for the violence? It seems plausible that it might at least be a predisposing factor, but even that is debatable. Regardless of the relation to violence, the living conditions of many people in Nigeria are a tragedy in their own right.       

Unanswered questions

      By "unanswered," I include questions with "clear" but very different answers for different people, so if I include a question here that seems to have an obvious answer, it's probably because I don't know the evidence and/or people don't agree.       *Was the conflict planned or spontaneous? If planned, who planned it?       *Were there combatants from other countries or other parts of Nigeria? (See "50 Foreign Nationals Arrested Over Jos Riot.")       *Would a political solution work? If the indigene issue were solved and there were fair elections, would the tribal/religious conflict fade away?       

Does it matter?

      I can't see much reason for optimism over the big picture. I can't think of any such conflicts historically or in the world now that have been resolved equitably and peacefully (so please encourage me by giving me examples!).       Still, it's possible or even likely that wise and community-minded leaders from all sectors could at least help avoid the worst catastrophes. In fact, the present riots may in part represent such a success in that they did not spread throughout or beyond Plateau State.       It also matters to me whether or to what extent the ongoing conflict is religiously based. To the extent that it's political or tribal, my friends and family are just innocent bystanders, as we have been so far. The more religion becomes the defining factor, the more likely it is that we could become targets.       Most importantly, the conflict matters to me because I am committed to sharing the good news of God's love for all people, powerfully shown to us in the life and ministry of Jesus (Nabi Isa). That good news is not proclaimed at gunpoint or by the sword, but offered as a gift freely received or rejected by anyone, whatever his or her clan, language, or religious group. Every incident of religious violence makes it harder for all of us to receive and live by that good news: harder for Muslims, because they will naturally tend to feel threatened by anything associated with "Christians;" harder for Christians, because it will be harder for them to follow Jesus' teachings of love and forgiveness toward their neighbors and enemies.

As you can see in the screen capture of a twit below, even Israelis are getting tired of the lopsided coverage of the ongoing, never ending, ridiculous Israel-Palestine conflict that we've had with us for over a half century now. As always, this latest bout has been a massive loss of life and a horrid continuation of a war that just won't stop that ends up killing countless civilians in its wake. But, these things happen everywhere in the world. Why is it that when say, the Rwanda Genocide was happening, we heard nearly nothing about it in the us?       I find it amazing that a local paper I read a great deal like the SF Chronicle goes along with local coverage of news and events. The occasional US national item will pop in there and then BAM, 200 killed in Gaza Strip offensive. Yet, there is no coverage about the peaceful elections taking place today in Ghana or in any events happening in the rest of Africa unless of course it's massive atrocity in the Congo.       It's just the epitome of the lazy journalist and one of the reason that print media is dying. No one goes out and finds the stories anymore. Sure, they find out about what's happening in Israel, but that's their "go-to" foreign location. Anywhere else is largely ignored because trying to get there, digging in, and writing a proper story is too taxing and these days, too expensive despite the irony that flights cost a lot less than they did 20 years ago.       Yeah, I'll admit that getting in to the Kivus of Eastern Congo isn't the easiest place to get to, but Accra? Please... These aren't cut off locations in the middle of nowhere. They're large cities with regular flights and for the most part a great many have solid infrastructure that even the biggest loser newsman should be able to get around on.       Of course, as I'm reading "Chief of Station Congo: Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone" by Larry Devlin right now, I'm realizing that the US didn't give a fat rip about Africa until about 1960 or so. This naturally gave the whole shebang in Israel a nice, decade plus to be in the news more before Africa was even realized to exist.

This Christmas Eve, even as we think of peace on earth, we are getting a view on a small scale of the way fear and hate are perpetuated between peoples. Luke woke up in the early morning hours and called me to come. When I sat down on his bed and asked what the problem was, he said he'd had another bad dream. "What was it this time?" I asked.       "Remember how M. was talking yesterday about the Muslims going into Christian's houses and killing them? I dreamed that a bunch of people came at me and killed me with rocks." I didn't have a bad dream myself, but I, too, slept fitfully, disturbed by the sound of many sirens and wondering what was going on.       Violence breeds fear and distrust, and even though the children don't march in the streets shouting slogans and brandishing pretend guns, they catch the fear, and the distrust of the Other gradually becomes a part of their identity.       Luke went shopping with Barb today, too, since school is out. He wanted to go and meet all his "friends," the shopkeepers and merchants who know him and greet him. They were happy to see him, and one of the Hausa vegetable sellers even phoned another one, who had traveled to another city, so that Luke could greet him too. I didn't think of it until now, but we should take this opportunity to point out to Luke that those men are Muslims, but are kind and friendly to him. Maybe we can help in a small way to stop the deadly cycle.

Across South Africa, the malls are crowded with busy shoppers buying presents and food for the festive season. And yet just across the border in neighbouring Zimbabwe, thousands of people are dying of cholera and countless more face starvation, with only a meagre assortment of wild berries, seeds and fruits from the veld to provide sustenance.       Under the brutal oppression of Zanu PF’s dictatorship and the continued post-election stalemate, Zimbabwe has steadily disintegrated. Hospitals have closed. Supermarkets are empty. Raw sewage spills into potholed roads. The politicians continue their interminable bickering. Doubtless both Tsvangirai and Mugabe won’t be going hungry this Christmas. But most of their countrymen (the ones who haven’t fled to safer, saner shores) will.       Zimbabwe is a disaster. It is time for South Africa, and the rest of the world, to step in before any more innocent lives are lost. The unnecessary, intense sufferings of millions of Zimbabweans must come to an end.       Firstly, Zanu PF must no longer govern. Having systematically destroyed a country and having lost the March 29 election (despite blatant vote-rigging and intimidation), those thugs have no claims to being a part of the new Zimbabwean government.       An interim government must be installed by the United Nations, supported by South Africa and other regional players. This government, staffed by non-political technocrats, can handle humanitarian operations to ensure the rollout food supplies and healthcare countrywide.       The UN must demobilise the security and army, and provide a “peacekeeper” contingent of soldiers and police to ensure safety and security.       And then, some time next year, proper elections must be held – free and fair elections implemented and monitored by the international community.       To those who think this is an internal affair, or must be resolved “by Zimbabweans”, the time is long past for such trifling excuses. Quiet diplomacy and regional SADC involvement has been an abject failure – and has merely propped up an illegitimate and wicked regime hell-bent on remaining in power. Of course that was Thabo Mbeki’s intention all along. His inaction on Zimbabwe casts a dark, bloodstained shadow on his presidential record and role as so-called “mediator”.       President Motlanthe must act in the spirit of our constitution and democracy and do his utmost to resolve the situation. This is long overdue. So much suffering could have been avoided. And yet so much suffering still can be avoided.       It is the festive season and yet Zimbabwe has absolutely nothing to celebrate. This Christmas, let us not forget the ongoing crisis – the hunger and pain and misery – across our border.

In what is a rather complete lack of surprise, Ethiopia has continued to not pull its troops out of Somalia. This of course is a continued issue which apparently those in control claim, "Look, we upgraded to the new OS from Palm and well, it just isn't cutting it. You see, the calendar was just like, whacked, so yeah, we missed that Friday deadline thing. Sorry about that. Hope you don't mind the troops that are like, everywhere." Obviously these are people that need to switch to a Blackberry or maybe just get an organizing system in the first place.       Naturally, it's understandable why Ethiopia would want to have a toe hold in Somalia since they are receiving great swaths of refugees across their border with the country. Still, don't other countries get it that only the US and Britain are able to dump their forces inside a foreign state indefinitely? Let's see if they make the December deadline, although I'm sure that Christmas dinners and Boxing Day will be the blame for missing that one.

I've just discovered Maneno and already like it a lot. I already have blogs on blogspot.com (Computer Doc in Jos and Kids Doc in Jos) but, for now at least, will copy some of those posts to this one on Maneno ... it is so Africa friendly!       

Summary

      Using a public computer is risky business and cannot made safe for entering or reading sensitive information including accessing your email account. You must consider the risks and benefits in any situation. The best alternatives in a cybercafe are to use a secure laptop (preferably your own), or to boot the public computer from a live Linux CD or flash drive.       We all know that net cafes are not ideal and that they have security issues. Sometimes, though, there doesn't seem to be a good alternative. Maybe you're traveling and don't have any other way to connect. Maybe you have a home connection but it has been down for several days. Whatever the reason, you may find yourself in a cybercafe.       If you read no further, just remember this one point: never enter or access any personal or confidential information on a public computer. Or, putting it another way, you should assume that any information you type or copy on a public computer could end up in the hands of criminals.       Personal data that you must not enter or access includes       * Bank information, account numbers, credit card numbers and so on       * Personal identifying data such as date of birth, social security, drivers license, passport, national id, mother's maiden name, or phone number       * Email accounts and passwords       * Any other user names and passwords       This might seem too extreme, especially when you realize it will prevent you from even accessing your email. You must realize, though, that there is nothing you can do to make that public computer completely safe. Anything you type or view could be stored or transmitted to people who would love to add your information to their files. This danger is no longer an occasional problem, but common and serious.       Even if you boot from your own CD or flash drive (see below), anything you type could still be captured by a hardware keystroke logger.       Besides the risk of your personal data being captured, there is also the risk, or inevitability depending on the location, of your flash drive being infected with malware if you insert it into a public computer. Always use a clean computer with an up-to-date virus and malware scanner to clean your flash drive after using it in a cybercafe (or, for that matter, in any computer).       WHAT TO DO?

      Balance the risks and benefits       As in any situation, you should always balance risks and benefits. If you access your email on a public computer, there is a risk that your email account will be compromised. That means someone could gather the addresses of your contacts, email them from your own account, send spam under your name, view sensitive information (financial records, orders, addresses ...), and potentially steal your identity. That's a pretty big risk.       On the other hand, if you access your email account on a public computer in a "reputable" cybercafe and can then change your password soon afterward on a secure computer, the risk would be decreased. My own assessment of that risk-benefit balance for case would be that (a) I would only want to take the risk if it was very urgent to access my email and (b) I would try other alternatives first: SMS messages, phone contact, or whatever I could think of.       Use your own laptop       If it's possible to connect your own laptop at a cybercafe, you will avoid the problem of all the malware that could be on a public computer. Needless to say, you won't want to do this unless your own laptop is well protected with at least a software firewall (like the one built-in to XP and Vista, or an add-on) and an up-to-date antivirus program. (There are portable hardware firewalls available that plug into your USB port. But you can probably do almost as well with free software.)       Use a Linux Live CD       Using a Linux live CD or flash drive, you reboot the public computer from your own copy of Linux designed to run only in memory. The hard drive is not used and does not even need to be present. This means that drive infections are no longer a risk.       It's easy to make such a CD; you just download the file (called an iso image) and burn it to a CD or DVD. See the good article, Why you want a Linux Live CD, for some more information, or just google "Linux Live". Many current Linux installation CDs will work as well. Ubuntu (~ 700 MB) and Slax (~ 200 MB), are two examples. As these are large downloads if you have limited, expensive Internet access, you may want to copy a friend's disc or get someone to send you one (Ubuntu will mail you a free copy).       Don't be scared off by the word "Linux," either. You need no experience with Linux to use these. Just boot the computer from the CD or flash drive, and you'll see a familiar desktop with a web browser (usually Firefox), text editor, and others depending on the exact version.       Limitations of Linux Live       * The computer must be configured to boot from a CD or flash drive. If it is not, a co-operative cybercafe manager may be able to set it up for you (or you could do it yourself if you know how).       * While web browsing is almost always supported, it may be tricky to connect to the cafe's printer. But you could save what you need to a flash drive and print it later.       * Hardware keyloggers could still intercept your typing. These are devices intentionally installed between the keyboard and main computer box; I have no idea how common they are but certainly much less common than malicious software.       If you have no other alternative ... making the computer safer       It's important to stress that you cannot make the public computer safe. You can only reduce some of the risk. Kris Littlejohn lists and explains "10 things you should do to protect yourself on a public computer" including:        * Delete your browsing history        * Don’t save files locally        * Don’t save passwords        * Don’t do online banking        * Don’t enter credit card information        * Delete temporary files        * Clear the pagefile        * Reboot        * Boot from another device        * Pay attention to your surroundings and use common sense       Apart from booting from another device, as I discussed above, none of these measures will stop keyloggers from spying and reporting on everything you type. As long as you don't type anything sensitive, you'll be fine, so these precautions would help in a situation where, for example, you need to print an existing document with sensitive information, since you wouldn't be using the keyboard. And they will help in a situation where there happen to be no keyloggers or other malware intercepting what you type.

Well, it appears that all the Congo travelin' Mr. Affleck has been doing has resulted in the video I've embedded below. I agree with what Wronging Rights wrote. It's like Affleck was scanning the blogosphere just a bit after his whole Nightline thing and saw that people were really annoyed by him popping his mug in to the camera frame so often. In this video, he instead pimps the UNHCR of all things. I'll get to that a bit later though.       As with his previous attempts, I have to say that Affleck is working to be one of the least annoying celebrities prancing around Congo these days. That being said, he is still a celebrity and still an American. I'm guessing that Ben doesn't speak French. If he does and I'm wrong, je lui rends hommage. But, I would put money down that he doesn't. Why you might ask? Because instead of having a single word spoken by the subjects being filmed (despite this shot, Affleck was not the DP) he runs the Stones' "Gimme Shelter" as a soundtrack. Now, that's a great song and it would seem to be more than fitting given that the UNHCR does indeed give shelter (as well as food, water, basic medical care, and varied degrees of security), but again, it strays in to the gaping void that is Western objectification of a downtrodden people.       America is a damned fine country in that when we set our minds on doing something, we make it happen. I mean, we defeated Nazis, split the atom, went to the moon, outlasted most of Communism, and elected a (sorta) black president. That's a pretty impressive record despite all the backfires (Great Depression, Nixon, the 80's). But the reason this worked was because it was "us" doing it. We made it personal. The reason that the problems persist in Congo and we're still fighting a war in Iraq is because this strife is remote and/or with people we really don't care about. Affleck's video unfortunately falls prey to this and while it gives a boost to the UNHCR, it does absolutely nothing for the Congolese in the long term. Why were there no interviews? No personal stories? No perspectives of the actual people? You see how people are looking disdainfully at the cameras in so many of the shots? That's because they're freakin' tired of being zoo animals for the Western media to take pity shots off. I'd be tired of that crap too and I wouldn't give a damn if Oscar Winner (for screenwriting let's remember), Ben Affleck was making a five minute pity video about my life, which isn't really going to net me anything but (hopefully) another cup of rice.       I was wondering when Affleck would get on board and start directing his efforts at a specific agency. With this latest move, he has, but why oh freakin' why the UNHCR? I mean, I recognize that the UNHCR does a massive job that is so incredibly difficult most folks can't even comprehend it. Building an emergency city for a fleet of thousands of refugees is absolutely not like building Burning Man. The people coming a refugee camp have nothing and are often sick as opposed to Burners who come in their own cars funded by daddy's Amex.       The UNHCR has also done an atrocious job at times. In the Yugoslavian Wars, they helped the Serbs (unknowingly) in ethnically cleansing the Bosniaks out of Bosnia. While the collective, "Oh, seriously, our bad on that one" doesn't hold water, you'd think that would have learned and just a scant few three years later, they wouldn't set up a refugee camp that ended up (unknowingly) becoming the base of the Hutu genociders, from which they were able to emerge a regrouped and more powerful force. The "unknowingly" aspect to what the UNHCR does is pretty typical. They just plunk down in an area and don't really spend the resources needed to know what is really happening on the group. They claim that this is because they have to remain neutral and provide aid to all who need it, but in reality it makes them often guilty of helping the wrong side. These things happen I suppose.       The issue in the Afflecks and Jolies doing all this "work" for the UNHCR is that for better or worse, it's an agency that's going to stay with us forever. No matter how much positive or negative light is shined its way, nothing will really change it. They only move in to an area when the shit builds up so much you don't even know that there was fan under that pile to start with. And when they do move in, there will always be the money from foreign governments to take care of these issues. You see, it's the least they could do, since they don't work to actually stop the refugee problems before they start. In not even a perfect and more poignant world, the UNHCR would be completely unneeded.       So, the real problem in all of this is that Affleck's energy is still massively misdirected. I feel bad, since I can see he's really and truly making an effort to help and as opposed to what Jolie does, there is no glitterati element to this. He's out on the ground trying something, although because obviously no one close enough to him is educated enough in the issues, his shots aren't long enough on the subjects to reveal what a delightful people the Congolese are and how these constant stories of suffering only work to boost short term aid projects and not long term development work.       

Being that I am neither metrosexual nor gay, I read Men's Journal about as often as I get my nails done; ie never. But, apparently in an attempt to get "edgy", in this month's issue, there between Ask Dr. Bob and an article on T. Boone Pickens on Page 60 is an Emile Hirsch's account of traveling to Congo on the protected wings of Oxfam.       Obviously, this is another case of "Celebrity Goes To Africa to Raise Awareness and/or Save African Babies". I don't like these cases. They're a flash in the pan and then they're gone. People forget about what whomever it was, was talking about when they did that thing that was... you know, somewhere over there.       But to just blindly say that Hirsch is an ass would be arrogant and childish. In his account, he is very honest about what he saw, what he knew going in, and what he got coming out. He was only there for five days, but he saw a lot. Of course, given such a short amount of time and such vast ground that he was covering around the Kivus, one could say that it was all pointless. But, what good does that do? Sure, it doesn't really help anyone and I don't really support celebrities doing this, but on some level he is trying do something, although like Ben Afflecks out there, the energy is largely misdirected. For better or worse, I can say that I've read the whole article and here are a few of the things that stuck out.

And I'm reading these pages and thinking about the $600 in 20s and 50s I was told to carry for "security reasons"...

      Someone really told him wrong on this front. First of all, it's a cash economy and one that runs on external cash (dollars or euros) at that. Your day to day needs are going to have to be met solely with the cash that you bring in. $600 would probably be more than enough to cover his five days there given that his stay was taken care of by Oxfam. But the "security reasons" part was laughable. First, there was no way anything was going to happen to Hirsch and secondly, if it did, $600 was going to do little to make things better.

As we wait on the runway, Lyndsay points to a demolished plane nearby. Two months ago it crashed as it tried to take off, catching fire and killing 21 people. Gulp.

      Why "gulp"? That was a pathetic sub-contractor airline of the slightly less, yet still completely, abysmal Hewa Bora airline. Again, there was no way Oxfam was going to toss Hirsch on anything close to resembling a Hewa Bora flight. Also, that flight crashed in the market nearby (which was the reason for all the ground casualties.) Maybe that was another plane they were referring to as it would seem it wouldn't be where the girl thought it was?

I can't believe it, but he's wearing a Marilyn Manson T-shirt.

      Apparently no one filled him on on the whole t-shirt thing in Africa. Might have been a nice thing for him to know as he could have brought extra clothes to give someone to sell at the local market.

For a boy such as Prince, the support from NGO's represent a chance to take his destiny into his own hands. And for a rape victim such as Kimanizani, donations to Oxfam go toward her medical costs and food and give her a chance to rejoin the world.

      I was sorta okay with Hirsch's whole account up to this point. This chunk makes me cringe as it feels like it was written by the marketing people at Oxfam. It cheapens the whole account by him as it makes it suddenly one big sales pitch for throwing more money in to the NGO's that in all truth really aren't making much progress. They're just bandaid solutions to the much bigger issue that the government of Congo and all those in MONUC actually need to actively work for change, which they aren't. Throwing money at Oxfam is not the answer, although I'm sure that readers of this article will see it that way.       The real solution is to educate yourself and not listen to some actor who is being used as a pawn. If you actually know what is going on in Africa (and know much more than Hirsch, whose soundbite history lesson left out France's involvement in the start of the Rwandan Genocide as well as other crucial facts) you are going to understand a lot better what needs to be done. Informed people can actually do something. Otherwise you're just a very obedient sheep foolishly giving your wool to an all too eager recipient who just waits for your next wool to grow in.