Nyarota's fatal errors Against The Grain

Nyarota's fatal errors Against The Grain

By Jonathan Moyo

Dear Geoff,

I have just finished reading your memoirs, Against the Grain, published by Zebra Press in South Africa.

After you alerted me to your book's publication last month, I had really looked forward to reading it given your rich experience in your professional field as an internationally acclaimed investigative journalist and award winning editor.

My expectation was that your book would add new methodological and theoretical insights into media politics, press freedom, media propaganda, human rights, transparent and accountable governance, human rights, democracy and the rule of law among other relevant thematic concepts.

But to be honest with you Geoff, I am very disappointed by what I have read. In fact, I wish I had not read the book because it has left me feeling rather sad. I have decided to share some of my sadness with you through this open letter because you were at least kind enough to encourage me to buy and read your book. I believe you have an interest in the conclusions I have drawn from reading your book.

Accordingly, here goes.

Geoff, I find your book to be a shocking piece of narcissistic writing underpinned by a scandalous disregard of historical facts about people, media and politics in Zimbabwe.

Your book is replete with numerous cases of what comes across as deliberately distorted and misrepresented facts out of unmitigated malice. In the same vein, and maybe for the same reasons, the book has a lot of tribal nonsense. In general, your book is amazingly badly written in terms of its syntax and style.

Let me now give you some concrete examples of your shocking disregard for historical facts which you butcher with reckless abandon throughout your book. I will not cite any examples of your disgusting narcissism because I found that to be so unfortunate that nothing useful will be gained by detailing it here save for another occasion, if that should be necessary.

I am, therefore, going to select only a few out of the many examples of your factual irresponsibility and your shocking tribal opinions that have found expression in your book.

• On page 102, the second paragraph, you write that "…disenchanted with Nkomo's Leadership style and obsession with foreign travel, Mugabe, Sithole, Enos Nkala, George Nyandoro, Maurice Nyagumbo, Chikerema and Tekere broke away from Zapu to form a rival organization, the Zimbabwe African Union (Zanu) on August 1963".

Comment
I don't know why some of the names in the above paragraph are given in full while others are not. But now, while I know you have admitted to this error in your column in the Financial Gazette which will not be read by many readers of your book, Geoff, do you really think you will find any fool out there who either does not know, did not know or cannot independently know that, for instance, James Chikerema and George Nyandoro remained with Joshua Nkomo after the 1963 split that led to the formation of Zanu? Is it not a well known fact that James Chikerema was Joshua Nkomo's deputy in Zapu for a considerable time during the liberation struggle?

In any event, since you cannot attribute such a distortion to a typographical error, what exactly made you imagine that George Nyandoro and James Chikerema left Joshua Nkomo and Zapu to join Zanu in 1963? Their tribe?

• I raise the question about tribe Geoff because on page 126 you write that, "Zapu was formed in 1962 after Ian Smith had banned the NDP, but no sooner was it established than it too, was outlawed. Sithole, Mugabe, Nkala, Herbert Chitepo and others broke away from the party to launch Zanu, while Zapu became an essentially ethnic-based Ndebele organization".

Comment
Do you know this for a fact or you are just being reckless with history because of your disposition to tribal matters? What expertise or experience do you have to reach such a patently tribal conclusion? Would you use the same reasoning to conclude that Zanu became an essentially ethnic-based Shona organization or that was only a Zapu affliction? Why are you so foolish Geoff and why did your editors not save you from this tribal foolishness to protect the integrity of your book as well as their own?

To me, and I say this with the greatest of respect given your professional credentials, it is hard to imagine how a supposedly seasoned journalist and award winning editor with university education can distort and misrepresent basic facts such as the above which are fundamental to the history of African nationalism in Zimbabwe. The young and gullible students exposed to this kind of nonsense will be misled and poisoned for reasons that I really cannot understand Geoff.

• On page 137, second last paragraph, you claim that, "To spare Enos Nkala from further embarrassment and humiliation in the 1985 general election, the Zanu-PF campaign strategists nominated him as the candidate in what they believed to be a safe constituency. He stood for election in the town of Kariba on the Zambian border in Mashonaland West, far from his beloved Bulawayo. While Nkala must have accepted this virtual banishment to a political Siberia with a lump in his throat, he possessed limited options. But in the parliamentary election in question, even the presumably docile voters of the picturesque tourist resort overwhelmingly rejected the nomadic politician from Bulawayo."

Furthermore on page 138, second paragraph, you allege that "Despite his dismal showing in the 1985 election, Nkala was appointed minister of home affairs".

Comment
I am sure you will agree that facts are sacred and that they must be respected at all times even when they are applied to people one might despise or detest for whatever reason. The need to respect facts is particularly true for journalists like you as it is for academics like me. Therefore, you did not need to hold a brief for Enos Nkala to realize that what you have written above about his election contest in Kariba in the 1985 parliamentary elections is false in every respect.

The true position is that the original Zanu PF candidate for Kariba constituency in the 1985 election was Robson Manyika while the PF Zapu candidate was Kenneth Mano. Manyika died before the election after which Zanu PF nominated Enos Nkala as a replacement candidate in what would have been a by-election for that constituency. But the by-election did not take place because Kenneth Mano withdrew his candidacy leaving Enos Nkala the duly elected 1985 Member of Parliament for Kariba constituency unopposed.

As such, your claim that the "presumably docile voters of the picturesque tourist resort [of Kariba] overwhelmingly rejected the nomadic politician from Bulawayo" is an unfortunate figment of your imagination. The same applies to your conclusion that, "Despite his dismal showing in the 1985 election, Nkala was appointed minister of home affairs". Winning unopposed cannot be said to be a 'dismal showing' by any stretch of the imagination.

This is not to say Enos Nkala was an angel or even a good politician because he certainly was not, judged by the way he brutalized the very community that brought him to this world. But this fact cannot be a license for you to blatantly lie about him.

• On page 202, the second last paragraph, you claim that "Appointed minister of local government at independence, Zvobgo became minister of justice, legal and parliamentary affairs before he was shunted from one ministry to another until he died a broken man in 2003, without getting anywhere near State House, except as a guest at official functions."

• And on page 288, bottom of second last paragraph, you write that, "Until [Joshua] Nkomo's death in 1998, the rationale behind the ailing old man's intervention [in Strive Masiyiwa's Econet case] remained shrouded in mystery.

Comment
The late Edison Zvobgo died at the age of 69 on 22 August 2004 and not in 2003 as you allege. And surely, you ought to know better that the late Vice President Joshua Nkomo died at the age of 81 on July 1, 1999 at Parirenyatwa General Hospital after you had launched the Daily News and not in 1998 before the birth of your much acclaimed newspaper. Many children in Zimbabwe know this fact.

• On page 316, third paragraph, you allege that, "The [2000 parliamentary] campaign gave [Jonathan] Moyo a springboard to launch his own tempestuous political career. Mugabe appointed the garrulous intellectual as minister of information, replacing the affable but ineffectual Chenhamo Chakezha Chimutengwende, who lost his parliamentary seat.

Comment
Your disregard for basic facts that can be easily cross checked against the public record is breathtaking. Chenhamo Chakezha Chimutengwende did not lose his parliamentary seat in 2000. He won it. In fact, Zanu PF won all the seats in Mashonaland Central province.

• On page 282, the third last paragraph, you write with purported authority that "On 7 May 2003, the Supreme Court passed a landmark judgment against AIPPA, and declared Section 80 of the Act, which made it an offence for journalists to 'abuse journalistic privilege by writing falsehoods', unconstitutional. The ruling by a full bench headed then by Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku, soon to be appointed minister of justice, effectively absolved Mudiwa and me of any culpability".

Comment
I have underlined the falsified information for the ease of your reference. Please Geoff, on what basis do you glibly yet falsely assert that the full bench of the Supreme Court was "then (in 2003) headed" by Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku? Do you care to say who heads it now?

Even more strange, what do you mean by asserting again falsely that, following the judgment in question in 2003, Chief Justice Chidyausiku was "soon to be appointed minister of justice"? Are you crazy or what? Where does this nonsense come from Geoff and why is it in your book, a book that should be of the highest integrity in terms of respect for the truth?

I ask because everyone, except you and your high profile editors some of whom are apparently lawyers, knows that Godfrey Chidyausiku replaced Anthony Gubbay as Zimbabwe's Chief Justice in 2001 and has remained in that capacity to this day. He was not appointed Minister of Justice at any time since then nor was he ever considered for the post of Minister of Justice except in your own mind as recorded in your book. Patrick Chinamasa has been Minister of Justice since 2000!

My problem Geoff is that this blatant fabrication finds space in a book that is supposed to be written by an award winning professional journalist, with experience in investigative journalism, who respects the truth and who was supported by a high powered international team of editors some based in Harare. If you tell such lies, with such technical support, why should anyone believe anything else that is in your book? Indeed, why should anything that you write be believed?

• On page 224, from the second last paragraph, you write that, "During his stint as a university lecturer, [Trevor] Ncube had had a close relationship with a colleague in the political science department, Professor Jonathan Moyo. Moyo had contributed the odd column to the Financial Gazette, and, impressed by his style, eloquence and choice of topics'the one-party state was his favourite'I asked Ncube to find out if Moyo would consider writing a regular column under his name.

"Moyo agreed, and thus embarked on the tortuous road that saw him achieve both fame and notoriety."

Comment
Now Geoff while I can understand your desire to claim credit at the beckoning of any opportunity, I cannot understand why you should falsify a fact that can be independently cross checked and verified by anyone with the historical record.

Fortunately for the public record, your claim above that you, "asked [Trevor] Ncube to find out if [Jonathan] Moyo would consider writing a regular column under his name" (page 224) is contradicted by your own words on page 316 where you write that, "When I became executive editor of the Financial Gazette in 1990, my deputy, Trevor Ncube recommended that we commission a regular column from Moyo, an unknown but apparently indefatigable political science professor at the University of Zimbabwe".

Which is which Geoff, since both claims about the same event at the same time involving the same people cannot be true? I think even your editors should have done better on things like this.

Anyhow, the true position is that I never ever had a regular weekly or monthly column in the Financial Gazette whether during your time or before or after it. Never.

This can be easily verified by checking the record. So why are you claiming that you gave me a regular column and I accepted when nothing of the sort ever happened in reality except maybe in your head? And why do you recklessly seek to give the impression that my career was shaped by my contributions to the Financial Gazette? How about my many publications elsewhere, including several books? How about my teaching, university and community service? Do you really think all that should not count because you were not involved in it?

In any case, and this is for your information Geoff, I started writing regular contributions in the media in Zimbabwe in 1981 when I was an undergraduate student. First, I wrote for the Business Herald when it was edited by the late Linda Laxton (I hope that is how she spelt her last name). Between 1981 and 1989 I wrote a series of articles for the Sunday Mail under the encouragement of the late Willie Musarurwa. You are obviously ignorant of all this and you are blissfully happy with your ignorance to the point of publishing rubbish as fact.

Between 1989 and 1990 I wrote extensively for Parade magazine which at the time was edited by Andrew Moyse and Peta Thornycroft, both of whom worked very closely with me than you ever did notwithstanding your fanciful hallucinations. Ask them and I am sure they will be kind enough to tell you a few truths you need to know and respect. Most of my media articles on and against the one-party state appeared in Parade magazine not the Financial Gazette. All this is material in the public record Geoff and thus it can be independently verified.

Regarding the Financial Gazette, I started making occasional contributions (the "odd column" as you call it) long before you and Trevor Ncube got there. One of my widely debated articles on the one-party state in the Financial Gazette was published on January 5, 1990 when Clive Wilson was the editor. I continued writing for the Financial Gazette through what your call the "odd column" when Trevor Ncube joined the paper and continued the same relationship during and after your short stint there.

At that time, my point of editorial contact was always Trevor Ncube. I never ever spoke to you or interacted with you about anything editorial or otherwise. On some occasions, I was told that you complained about my articles against the Zanu PF government and that you wanted me to tone down my criticism but that was always through a third party.

The fact here Geoff, is that I only had the "odd column" at the Financial Gazette and not a regular column under my name as you claim. The only person then whom I remember had a regular column under his name is Eric Bloch. Clive Wilson and Trevor Ncube know all this very well and I am sure they would be astonished by yourself-serving false claims.

The only regular (weekly) column I had in Zimbabwe was with the defunct Sunday Times that had been launched by the late Herbert Munangatire. He was the only person to specifically offer me a regular weekly column under my name which I accepted. Again, if you respect facts as you really should because they make for good journalism, this can be easily verified because the record is still there at the National Archives in Harare.

• On page 134, the fourth paragraph, you write that "Almost from the very first issue, the Daily News, of which I was the founding editor, was targeted for reprisal by the government. I was repeatedly arrested, threatened with death and finally forced to flee the country. The man who was Mugabe's most zealous defender and chief spin doctor at the time was Professor Jonathan Moyo. Speaking in his capacity as minister of information on 11 April 2002 about deployment of the army against civilians, Moyo expressed his considered opinion that, "where the army is deployed, people should not expect a picnic."

"I am Shona. Ironically, Moyo is Ndebele."

Comment
The link between the above five sentences would require the services of a Tsikamutanda (goblin) to fathom. What point are you trying to make Geoff besides showcasing your self-indulgent and shameful attempt at falsifying history at the expense of the public record?

You allege that the Daily News was targeted for reprisal by the government from its very first issue. We all know that very first issue was in early 1999. Then you claim that at the time when the Daily News was targeted for reprisal from its first issue, "Mugabe's zealous defender and chief spin doctor at the time was Professor Jonathan Moyo".

Come on Geoff, I only became a minister of information in July 2000, long after the first issue of the Daily News which you say invited reprisals from the government. Are you afraid of naming the people who were in charge of Information at the time or you are just a stupid fellow who is incapable of containing his malice?

I have two other points here. First, yes Geoff I indeed did say in April 2002 that where the army is deployed people should not expect a picnic. This was true before I was born and thus before I said it. And it is true today and will be true tomorrow and long after I am gone from this world.

Therefore, what I said was not original because it is a perennial truth from time immemorial. Unless you think anyone should expect a picnic where the army is deployed? If you do, then you are a fool.

Please note that my statement in 2002 was aimed at (a) those in authority that deploy the army, (Posted Image those who are where the army is deployed and © those who observe or write about such deployment. Surely, none of these people should expect a picnic when the army is deployed in a civilian population and therefore each and all of them should be serious and responsible to avoid disaster from the deployment of the army for many crucial reasons that should be obvious to any thinking person.

I get the impression that you somehow foolishly think that you can twist my very clear statement on April 11, 2002, to water down and justify the persistent accusations you are facing about your role in supporting, covering up or not reporting the Gukurahundi atrocities in Matabeleland and Midlands provinces when you edited the Chronicle in the 80s and 90s.

I hope I am wrong about this and I stand corrected if I am. But if I am not, then there is indeed something very sad about you Geoff Nyarota. Mugabe's Zanu PF government did not deploy a regular unit of the army in the two provinces in question but it deployed a special killer unit, the Fifth Brigade, which was specifically set-up and trained to massacre people as part of a political campaign against Zapu and its supporters in Matabeleland and the Midlands provinces.

Geoff I have seen the nonsense you keep writing to try and white-wash your duplicitous role. But the fact is that your worst sin is not so much about what you wrote in some of the editorials in support of the killer Fifth Brigade that some concerned people have cited, but about what you did not write Geoff, about the human tragedy that happened under your nose and pen in real time.

You were part of the cover-up and falsification of the tragedy even though you most definitely knew that innocent citizens were being butchered right under your nose or your pen on a daily basis for a long period. How could a long standing human rights activist and champion of democracy and freedom of the press let that happen?

This is an issue Geoff only if we must see you as a person who has always believed in freedom of the press, human rights and the rule of law among other such values that have earned you the awards you often boast about. But if your belief in these things starts in 1999, then there is nothing to talk about because the whole matter becomes a tale of crude opportunism.

Otherwise, if you really did not know that innocent people in Matabeleland and Midlands provinces were being butchered by the Fifth Brigade when you lived and worked in Bulawayo as an investigative human rights reporter and editor of the Chronicle, then you are either a useless or dangerous journalist.

How could you not know what was happening Geoff and how could you remain silent as a champion of human rights and freedom of expression?

And, in any event, when did you really discover the importance of human rights, human life, democracy and the rule of law Geoff? In 1999 when you were with the Daily News and as an MDC activist or what?

My second and last comment on your incomprehensible reference to my statement that people should not expect a picnic where the army is deployed is that you end by writing that, "I am Shona. Ironically, Moyo is Ndebele."

What is your tribal meaning of this sentence Geoff? Yes you are Shona and I am Ndebele. So what? What is the irony?

Your preoccupation with tribalism Geoff is sickening and stinks to high heaven because it knows no bounds. Because I believe learning does not end, I hope that one day you will learn and accept the limits of tribalism especially now in the global village. That you are Shona and I am Ndebele is a demographic reality that does not define or diminish our humanity.

• There are many other examples in your book where you deal with facts in the most reckless way and I honestly believe that your publisher and the many editors you claimed went through your manuscript ought to be ashamed for a job terribly done. Your book does not deserve to be anywhere near innocent beginning students in any field because it has no respect for facts. Perhaps graduate students can use it as an example of 'trash writing not to be emulated'.

• I wish to end by bringing your attention to two other very strange things I have found in your book. On page 132, the middle of the last paragraph, you write that "…Much later, in 2005, there were widespread allegations that Ndebele [security] agents had been deployed in Harare during the iniquitous Operation Murambatsvina, which rendered hundreds of thousands of people homeless when their shacks were destroyed.."

Comment
What is your tribal point here Geoff? That Ndebeles were used against the Shonas in Harare during Operation Murambatsvina? Is this your sick way of trying to equalize Gukurahundi atrocities?

You say there were "widespread allegations" to this effect. Why don't you cite even one such source of such widespread allegations through a footnote as a balanced writer would do in such cases? I must tell you that I for one encountered this allegation for the first time in your book.

What is going on here Geoff? Are you trying yet again to defend yourself against very serious allegations that you supported or covered up the Gukurahundi atrocities by inventing an iniquity you want your readers to believe was done by Ndebeles against the Shonas as recent as 2005 during the evil Operation Murambatsvina?

Come on, Geoff! The fact is that you are making this allegation that Ndebeles brutalized Shonas in Harare during Operation Murambatsvina for your own personal tribal purposes.

What is worse is that you were not in Harare at the time of Operation Murambatsvina but you were in Matabeleland during Gukurahundi. To me the false claim in your book alleging that Ndebele security agents were deployed in Harare against the Shonas during Operation Murambatsvina in 2005 shows that you are a very stupid, irresponsible and dangerous person masquerading as an award winning human rights journalist. This is my considered view and that is why I was very sad after reading your book.

If you really do not know anything about Operation Murambatsvina, take note that it was a countrywide operation that included Harare and Bulawayo at the same time. Operation Murambatsvina affected everyone in the country directly or indirectly.

The claim on page 132 in your book that Ndebele security agents were used against the Shonas in Harare is therefore idiotic.

Don't be surprised if many lose respect for you because this is just too much from a person who seems determined to stir tribal tension at very turn or opportunity.

• Lastly, Geoff, after reading your book, I asked myself what it is in terms of substantive issues or values that you as the author expect your national and international reader to take from it or benefit. What is your thematic message Geoff? As I mentioned at the beginning, you wrote a lot about yourself in exaggerated narcissistic terms and you butchered basic facts like nobody's business. What was the purpose?

That your book is full of these narcissistic things is very bad Geoff. But what is worse is that you have absolutely nothing thematic or substantive to say or advance about things which some of us thought are supposed to be the reasons you are said to be an award winning journalist. I mean thematic or substantive things like press freedom, human rights, democracy, the rule of law and tolerance to name the obvious important cases. You have nothing to say about these things. There is no new methodology or theory beyond your narcissism. So what are you about Geoff?

The quickest way for any reader to find out that you have nothing thematic or substantive to say about these fundamental values is to check the index of your book. They will find skimpy references to things like "apartheid" but no entries on press freedom (only press freedom award that you probably won heavens knows what for) or human rights or democracy or the rule of law and so forth. No. It is pathetic Geoff. How can you write from Harvard University, of all liberal universities in the world, and have nothing to say about the very liberal concepts that define the media and politics?

Anyhow, I hope your book will be reviewed by competent people soon. But I can tell you without any prejudice or fear or favour that your book is plain trash. It does not add anything to human civilization, let alone to literary development.

I feel compelled to tell you this truth because you made a point of alerting me to your book's publication in the hope that I would buy it in order to read it which I did. Also, I hold you in high esteem as one of the internationally renowned Zimbabwean journalists. Your professional achievements are a credit to all Zimbabweans.

Finally, I am aware that your initial reaction to this open letter was to say that it is an attempt to silence you. Far from it. There is no way I or any other reader can silence you by merely reacting or responding to what you have already published.

The fact is that your book is now in bookstores and only you and your publisher know who is distributing it and how. I have no interest in that whatsoever save to say at least I am one of the few who had to part with scarce forex to buy your book in South Africa as it is not available in Zimbabwe. I don't therefore see how buying your book and contributing to your income can be seen as an attempt to silence you.

Only you and your friends can try to silence your readers, like myself, by blackmailing or somehow intimidating them into keeping quiet about any factual error or misrepresentation they find in your book. That kind of blackmail or intimidation would definitely not work on me.

Even so, I have only commented on matters of fact and obvious omissions without giving you my overall impression of the book as a whole about which I reserve my comment for another occasion should that be necessary.

Best regards,

Jonathan Moyo