The above is the last time, I am calling the She-Devil by her name. I ask others to follow my suit when referring to this political nobody. Isn't it contradictory to call one a 'nobody' and she-devil at the same time? Yes, it is; but I can explain - very simple.

A Political Nobody

One bright Eritrean once wrote, 'Hager is people' in a reply to a comment "Eritrea Qorchach" made by another. For most of us, the reason we spend sleepless nights thinking about the a possibility of another war, or another 'Gifa', or even a dry rain-season, is because we can put faces and names to the people who could potentially suffer.

For most of us, when we hear the word "Eritrea" it is not a news material or educational research topic, it is Life . Life of people we grew up with. Life of people who went to school with us. Life of parents who raised us up and made us men / women in all senses of the words. So, when we hear that there is Gifa going on, we think 'who of those people we know suffered this day?' 'which household stayed sad this night?" That's why is it personal.

The she devil does not have any personal ties whatsoever to Eritrea. She never lived in Eritrea. She definitely lived in Ethiopia, and some other African countries including Tanzania, Ghana, and US. The records of her articles show that her first trip to Eritrea was less than 10 years ago, for few days. I wonder if she would name any person in Eritrea with whom she can closely relate to. If she had one, she would definitely try to understand the misery that person is going through and would have toned down her devilish articles. In one of her earlier articles, she openly supported the arrest of Papayo, whom she admits is a family member. I assume, now, she definitely knows the arrest of Papayo's sister Senait. Expectedly of a devil, her arrogance is even bolder.

How can one person not only keep quite, but also support and propagate the indefinite arrest of ones own brother/sister/both without indictment, visit by spouse, children and parents, without access to lawyer, medical attendant and total condemnation not to see the daylight. The she-devil did this for more than six years from the 10 minus years she knew Eritrea in person.  My point is if 'Hager is people', and you deny mere existence to these people, who are you defending when you defend Hager. Nobody. For the She Devil, Hager is nobody.

By that some token the She Devil is nobody; and unitll she starts to show some 'Halyot' and respect to every single Eritrean, she will remain a nobody with regards to Eritrea and its politics.

A Political She Devil

If her topic was not politics that involves the life of our dearest brothers and sisters, we would let her go as another "Gossip" "Hamen" or "Bela-Belew". But this is politics, and her 'bela-belew politics' is designed to break the social networks that held together the Eritrean communities everywhere and boost the morale of her boss (Abdu-Robo) and, inevitably, ruining lives of so many. Why would she do that?

After looking at the she-devil's articles for a while I have concluded that this is not a case of understanding of facts differently; or a case of an honest overlooking of events. In fact, one can easily deduce the nature, logic and trend of all her recent articles.

1. In most of her articles, there is at least one targeted person that she attacks due to a recent speech or article or some act done by the targeted person.
2. Her reference is a chunk of PFDJ or Pro PFDJ literature that she refers as a fact on the ground on which all her arguments stand. (sometimes irrelevant - inserted to confuse people) She never refers any other document unless it is a subject of an attack.
3. She goes to the personal history of the person whom she is attacking and distorts his past as it suits her current essay.
4. The final message or conclusion of her article is "Mr Target/ Ms Target, I am wiser than you" "Eritrea prefers me than you" Through her articles, we have learned that she is wiser than Bereket HabteSellassie, Dan Connel, Mikias Mihret-Ab, Kevin Turner, Mesfin Hagos, Jendayi E. Frazier, John Swan, Vicki Huddleston, Adhanom Gebremariam, Habtu Ghebre-Ab, Meles Zenawi, some people at Human Rights Watch, others in Amnesty International and State Departement, and Chatham House, the UN, Kofi Anan .....

Although not in the proper format, most all her articles can fall into the basic frame of legal writing; a format called IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) and when her articles are broken down on the basis of that formula, one finds:

Issue= "the target' ,
Rule (law) = The PFDJ propaganda document
Analysis = The twisted personal history of the target
Conclusion = I am better than 'the target.'

I am not decrying her education or writing skills (which could be better than mine). In fact, she seems to me a well educated person. However, even this factor counts against her by showing her insincerity. A person of her level of education cannot just miss, forget, overlook or deny as bold facts as missing of more than one family-member to nothingness.

Why?

Why would she then still continue to pursue this denial? My conclusion is that she has other ulterior motives. Is it to defend the Eritrean government at any cost? Not so much. Praising government officials would have worked better, but with the alarming number absconding government officials, everyone is a suspect of potentially absconding - risky. Besides, her future plan " to try to expand on Paulos Tesfagiorgis" shows that her articles are meant to attack not to defend. (BTW - Hands-Off my dear Memhir Paulos)

One may ask, 'isn't attacking one form of preemptive defense? Couldn't she be helping the government this way?' It could be. But, it does not makes sense (and is of no value) for institution as big as government to attack or endorse an attack on an individual as a defense from future attack from that single individual. Thats why, despite all its ill deeds, even the Eritrean state media seldom mentions names of individuals when attacking the opposition. Their reason could be different - to get us forget the names at all - but basic truth is that they know Eritrea and Eritreans well to understand attacking individuals is counterintuitive to the Eritrean psyche, and thus counter productive. The ultra extra patriot nationalist devil, however, is alien to the culture these much; and is engaged in attacking individuals feeling more catholic than the pope.

In whose interest would is she be doing this? No one but her own.
 
Her  motive is  shameless self promotion. For her all the innocent victims are pawns on a chess-board; and she uses a poorly improvised legal maxim "The rule of law must prevail over the law of the jungle!" as marketing catch phrase.

Her goal is evident that she is trying to step on diplomatic ladders of international organizations. There is nothing wrong with such goal per se. Good for her - she seems to have achieved this partially.

Her questionable tactic: as an American citizen when she addresses herself as 'Eritrean American' she tries to pass as a neutral person amongst non-Eritrean audiences; and Ultra-Patriot Eritrean when she speaks to Eritreans. There is something wrong here. dubious allegiance. A compromised integrity on the issue of allegiance . Still, her integrity is not a problem for the public to worry.

Her Offensive tactic
She becomes a problem of everyone when, in different fora, she denies the sudden disappearance of people to nowhere, including members of her family, when she denies the arrest of 100s of people in containers and underground. She is a problem, when she steps on Eritrean victims to achieve her personal goals. This is a big fat "I do not care - enQua'E esey konkum" to those victims - some of whom may not be alive - and their families. This is inhumane and this is why she is a Devil.

Last point,

Gual Hidirtina:
Had I believed, this was an honest misunderstanding on your part, I would have asked you to go to Aderser, Adi-Abeyto, Shadushay-Brigade, May-Serwa on her next State Sponsored Terrorism, I mean State Sponsored Tourism (My bad, for mixing the two up; but hey, you do too when you do both at the same time) Anyway, I see no point in suggesting you should visit those places - since you wrote that you went to Gelalo, and saw nothing but a Hotel with no sign of its very recent past. You definitely have a sight problem.
                                              ________________________
 
Afterthought

after I finished this essay, I showed it to a friend of mine. He thought if this was a character assassination that we should avoid. I do not think so. But if there are people who are convinced otherwise, so be it - Gual Hidrtina never existed anyway.


Comments:  This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it