MAKEBI ZULU PLEDGES TO COMPLETE NATIONAL HOUSE OF PRAYER
Patriotic Front (PF) Presidential Aspirant Makebi Zulu has reiterated his commitment to completing the construction of the National House of Prayer, a project initiated under the leadership of former President Edgar Lungu.
Speaking during a church service at St. John United Church of Zambia (UCZ) Congregation in Kabwe, Mr. Zulu said the National House of Prayer remains an important symbol of Zambia’s identity as a Christian nation.
He noted that the facility would serve as a unifying place of worship where people from all walks of life can gather to pray, reflect, and seek God’s guidance.
Mr. Zulu said once completed, the National House of Prayer would not only provide spiritual significance but also stand as a national landmark that promotes unity, peace, and moral values among citizens.
He further urged Christians across the country to intensify prayers for peace, stability, and national cohesion as Zambia prepares for the 2026 general elections.
He emphasized that sustained peace is essential for meaningful development and that the country can only progress when citizens remain united.
“There is power in unity of purpose. As Zambians, we must stand together, work together, and pray together for the prosperity of our nation,” he said.
Mr. Zulu encouraged the church to continue playing its role in promoting social harmony and guiding the nation morally, saying the church remains a key partner in fostering national development.
HOW CHILUBA TRIED TO BREAK KAUNDA: THE UNTOLD WITCH HUNT BEHIND ZAMBIA’S DARKEST CHRISTMAS
It a Political Witch Hunt or a Battle for the Soul of Zambia?
When Zambia turned the page from Kaunda’s 27-year rule to Chiluba’s new multiparty era, the transition looked peaceful on the surface — but beneath the handshake diplomacy brewed one of the most psychologically brutal political confrontations in Southern Africa.
Here are the lesser-known, “twisted” layers behind Kaunda’s arrest and detention:
1. The Arrest Happened at a Moment Designed for Maximum Humiliation
Kaunda was arrested on Christmas Day, 1997, a symbolic strike at the heart of a man known for preaching peace, forgiveness and Christian values. Christmas is usually a day of presidential speeches, unity and holiday calm — but that year, Zambia woke up to the image of KK being bundled by armed officers.
This timing made many senior diplomats whisper that the move was meant to break Kaunda psychologically, not just legally.
2. The Accusation Was Connected to a Failed Coup Kaunda Didn’t Even Participate In
The government accused Kaunda of involvement in the October 1997 failed coup led by junior soldiers. But even Zambian intelligence insiders later admitted there was never a single piece of solid evidence linking Kaunda to the mutiny.
The logic felt twisted:
Kaunda had been out of power for six years
He had no military command
He was running a peaceful political movement (UNIP)
Yet he became the central figure blamed for a coup he never touched.
3. The Real Target Was Kaunda’s Sudden Political Comeback
Few people know that, around 1997, Kaunda was experiencing an unexpected political resurgence. Huge crowds were showing up at his rallies. Many rural districts still viewed him as the “father of the nation.”
Inside State House, Chiluba’s camp feared:
KK might win the 1998 elections if allowed to run
His moral authority still eclipsed everyone else
He remained loved across tribal lines, unlike the new fragmented political elite
The arrest was therefore interpreted by many observers as a pre-emptive political strike, not a national security measure.
4. Kaunda Was Shot and Wounded in the Neck Before His Formal Detention
A rarely discussed fact: During the same tense period, Kaunda was shot in the neck by government forces while leading a peaceful protest.
This injury made him physically vulnerable when he was later detained. For many Zambians, it reinforced the belief that the state was willing to use lethal force on a national symbol — something previously unthinkable.
5. His Prison Cell Was Strategically Chosen to Break His Legacy
Kaunda was held in Mukobeko Maximum Security Prison, a place associated with murderers, armed robbers and political radicals.
It wasn’t just imprisonment — it was reputation assassination. Placing a former president in a maximum-security cell was unheard of in Zambia’s history.
Some prison officials later admitted they were instructed to treat him “as an ordinary dangerous suspect,” a psychological blow aimed at erasing his stature.
6. The International Community Intervened Behind the Scenes
The Commonwealth, the UN, and several African presidents privately pressured Chiluba to release Kaunda. Even Nelson Mandela sent sharp messages behind closed doors.
Diplomats feared:
Zambia was sliding into a personal vendetta politics
The arrest might trigger ethnic tension or civil unrest
Chiluba was using state machinery to crush an elder statesman
This global pressure forced Chiluba to eventually soften his position.
7. Chiluba’s Own Cabinet Was Divided — Some Believed He Had Gone Too Far
Not all MMD leaders supported the arrest. Some ministers warned that humiliating Kaunda could backfire politically.
But Chiluba’s inner circle, especially the more hardline security advisors, insisted that neutralising KK was essential to ensuring Chiluba’s hold on power.
This internal split is rarely discussed publicly.
8. Kaunda’s Detention Became the Moment His Moral Authority Reached Its Peak
Ironically, locking him up did the opposite of what Chiluba intended.
Kaunda emerged from detention:
More respected
More statesmanlike
Seen as a martyr of democratic abuse
With renewed international admiration
The attempt to break him ultimately strengthened his legacy.
So… Was It a Political Witch Hunt?
Most historians agree on three facts:
There was no direct evidence linking Kaunda to the coup
The arrest’s timing and style were deeply political
Chiluba had strong incentives to eliminate Kaunda as a political rival
While official government statements insisted it was “national security,” the sequence of events, symbolism and tactics closely resembled a political witch hunt aimed at:
Crippling Kaunda’s comeback
Intimidating opposition
Rewriting Zambia’s political hierarchy #truestory #neverforgotten #AfricanHero #Zambia a
EDITORIAL RESPONSE BY UPND MEDIA DIRECTOR MARK SIMUUWE TO THE MAST NEWSPAPER’S CLAIMS ON “TRIBAL SHIELDING”
The Mast Newspaper’s editorial alleging that President Hakainde Hichilema “uses tribe as a shield against criticism” is not only inaccurate but also an unfortunate continuation of a long and damaging pattern in Zambia’s political discourse.
It is important to restate the truth clearly: President Hichilema has been a consistent victim, not a beneficiary, of tribal attacks, and much of that toxicity has historically been amplified by the defunct Post Newspaper and media entities connected to Fred M’membe.
For years, particularly during the era of The Post Newspaper, President Hichilema endured some of the most targeted tribal smears seen in modern Zambian politics. It was within that media ecosystem that divisive labels such as “Bantustan” were popularized, terms most Zambians had never encountered before they were weaponised against him.
Those narratives did not emerge organically; they were crafted, circulated, and reinforced with the clear intention of framing him as a tribal figure despite the absence of evidence.
Today, for The Mast, an institution that inherits that political and editorial lineage, to turn around and accuse the President of “using tribe” is not only ironic but intellectually dishonest.
It attempts to rewrite history while ignoring the very real damage that reckless tribal framing has caused to national cohesion.
What must be emphasised is that holding leaders accountable is legitimate; every democratic society relies on a robust, critical press. But accountability must be rooted in fact, fairness, and consistency, not in recycled prejudices or narratives designed to inflame ethnic tensions.
At this stage in our democracy, the country can no longer tolerate the deliberate dissemination of tribal messages disguised as opinion. Zambia has developed sufficient legal precedent and case law to address such behaviour firmly, whether it comes from political actors or from media institutions. Freedom of expression does not grant the right to sow division, manufacture tribal conflict, or endanger the peace that Zambians cherish.
We can debate policy. We can critique leadership. We can disagree on direction. But we must reject attempts, old or new, to drag the nation back into the quagmire of tribal rhetoric.
Zambia deserves a political conversation grounded in truth, not in the recycled grievances of those who once normalised tribal attacks and now feign outrage when the consequences of their own narrative strategies are exposed.
POGBA’S PAINFUL WAKE-UP CALL: ‘WHEN THE PARTY ENDS, THEY ALL LEAVE’”
Football superstar Paul Pogba has revealed the heartbreaking moment he discovered who his real friends were and it came only after his glittering career took a dark turn.
Pogba says when he earned his first massive Manchester United salary, he rushed home to share the joy with his father. But instead of celebrating, his dad gave him a chilling warning: “Son, don’t waste your money. When the party is over, the guests will leave and you’ll be the one left behind.”
At the time, Pogba didn’t grasp the message. Surrounded by crowds, hangers-on and “friends” eager to enjoy his fame, he thought the good times would never end.
But after his recent troubles, he says everything suddenly became clear. The big entourage vanished. Calls stopped. Doors closed.
“Now I see the truth,” Pogba admits. “In the end, only family stays.”
MAKEBI ZULU’S AMBITIONS VS REALITY, WHY THE PRESIDENCY REMAINS FAR BEYOND HIS REACH
Tobbius Chilembo Hamunkoyo
Counsel Makebi Zulu has every constitutional right to speak, criticise, and even dream of becoming a Zambian President someday, and as a lawyer he deserves that respect. But political ambition must be matched with national credibility, wisdom, and maturity, qualities he has failed to demonstrate. His public conduct portrays a man seeking attention rather than a leader preparing for Zambia’s top office. Rights alone are not enough to earn national trust.
In my view when i compared to Zambia’s former presidents, Kenneth Kaunda, Chiluba, Mwanawasa, Sata, Lungu, and Hichilema, Makebi Zulu’s shortcomings become painfully obvious. Those leaders built national identities grounded in service, resilience, and coherent vision. Makebi, on the other hand, is widely known for confrontational behaviour, emotional reactions, and a lack of serious policy direction. He has not shown the depth or discipline required to earn the people’s confidence on a national scale.
His most damaging political mistake was attempting to use the late Edgar Chagwa Lungu’s funeral and legacy as a weapon against the government.
This mishandling of national mourning exposed him badly even when he underestimated it, it revealed arrogance, poor judgement, and a shocking lack of wisdom in resolving complex issues that borders on national interest. He believed the public and the Lungu family would benefit politically from such theatrics, but the opposite happened. Zambians saw the manipulation clearly; they are not dull. This alone disqualified him in the eyes of many Zambian citizens.
Public feedback has been brutal and honest. Social media discussions, especially from voices like Evaristo, show that people have lost trust in Makebi’s leadership approach. They see him as divisive, immature, and unfit to unify a nation. His actions during the funeral period intensified public disappointment, proving that he misunderstands the mood of the nation and overestimates his own influence. Public opinion has turned into a political mirror, and Makebi does not like what he sees.
Despite being a qualified Snr lawyer, Makebi has not demonstrated the patience, humility, or strategic clarity needed for the presidency. He thrives on drama over ideas, confrontation over dialogue, and media theatrics over national vision. Zambia’s presidency is not a stage for emotional guesswork or political gambling; it is a position earned through consistent credibility and national respect. Makebi has shown neither.
The truth must be stated respectfully but firmly: Makebi Zulu is far from being presidential material. His ambition is not the problem, his approach is. Unless he undergoes a serious transformation in judgement, strategy, and public conduct, he will remain a political dreamer rather than a realistic contender. Zambia needs statesmen, not opportunists. And until he rises to that standard, the presidency will remain far beyond his reach.
PRESS STATEMENT BY CELESTIN MAMBULA MUKANDILA PATRIOTIC FRONT DEPUTY SECRETARY GENERAL – ADMINISTRATION
WHY THE SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY’S DECLARATION OF HON. TASILA LUNGU’S PARLIAMENTARY SEAT VACANT IS ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL
The Patriotic Front wishes to address the Speaker of the National Assembly’s recent declaration that the Parliamentary seat of Hon. Tasila Lungu is vacant, purportedly on the basis of alleged breaches of the National Assembly Standing Orders, 2024.
We issue this statement to clarify the grave illegalities and constitutional violations inherent in the Speaker’s decision. The rule of law, not political expediency, must guide the functioning of Parliament at all times.
1. Constitutional Framework Governing the Loss of a Parliamentary Seat
The Constitution of Zambia clearly and exhaustively stipulates the grounds under which a Member of Parliament may lose their seat. Article 72(2) provides that a seat may only be vacated through: • Resignation; • Disqualification under Article 70; • Breach of a prescribed code of conduct; • Expulsion or resignation from the sponsoring political party; • Loss of citizenship; • Joining a political party when elected as an independent; • Declaration of disqualification by the Constitutional Court; or • Death.
At no point does the Constitution mention breach of Standing Orders as a ground for vacating a Parliamentary seat.
The Speaker’s action therefore directly contradicts Article 72(2).
2. Only Legislation Can Prescribe a Code of Conduct, Not Standing Orders
Article 72(2)(c) refers specifically to breach of a “prescribed code of conduct”. The only law prescribing such a code is the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act of 1994, which governs: • Corruption; • Conflict of interest; • False declarations; • Abuse of office.
The Act does not regulate absenteeism, lateness, defiance of a ruling, or any procedural or behavioural issue encountered during parliamentary business. Such matters are purely disciplinary, not constitutional.
Therefore, Standing Orders, being procedural, cannot be stretched into grounds for disqualification.
3. Standing Orders Regulate Procedure. They Do Not Provide for Loss of Seat
Standing Orders are internal procedural rules made under Article 77(1). They cannot override the Constitution.
Key provisions include: • Standing Order 223, which provides for suspension (7, 14, or 30 days) for absenteeism; • Standing Order 215, which provides disciplinary measures for disorderly conduct.
None of these Standing Orders authorise the Speaker to declare a seat vacant.
The maximum penalty for such infractions is suspension, not removal from office.
4. The Speaker Cannot Create New Grounds for Disqualification
The Speaker’s mandate is strictly procedural. The Speaker cannot: • Create new grounds for loss of a Parliamentary seat; • Convert procedural breaches into constitutional offences; • Override or amend Article 72 of the Constitution.
Any declaration of vacancy based on Standing Orders is: • Unconstitutional, • Unlawful, • Ultra vires, • Void and without legal effect.
This action amounts to an abuse of authority and a breach of constitutional duty.
5. Commonwealth Parliamentary Practice Confirms This Position
Zambia’s parliamentary system is inherited from the Westminster tradition. In the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, India, and other Commonwealth jurisdictions: • Procedural infractions attract suspension, • Only constitutional or statutory grounds lead to loss of seat.
Zambia cannot depart from this foundational parliamentary principle without violating constitutional safeguards.
CONCLUSION
The Patriotic Front reiterates that the Speaker’s declaration of Hon. Tasila Lungu’s Parliamentary seat as vacant is illegal, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and politically motivated.
It violates Article 72, undermines constitutionalism, and disenfranchises the people of Chawama Constituency whose democratic mandate must be respected.
We therefore call upon the Speaker to immediately rescind her decision, restore the seat, and uphold the rule of law, parliamentary integrity, and constitutional supremacy.
No political manipulation, procedural abuse, or unconstitutional action should overturn the will of the people.
Issued by: Celestin Mambula Mukandila Patriotic Front Deputy Secretary General – Administration
CONSTITUTION MUST NOT BE SHAPED BY INTERESTS OF ONE PERSON – HON MUNDUBILE
…………..says genuine constitutional reforms must be led by Citizens.
Solwezi……………November 30, 2025 (Smart Eagles)
Patriotic Front presidential aspirant Brian Mundubile has pledged that opposition MPs will ensure that the controversial Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7 is blocked.
Speaking in Solwezi today, Hon Mundubile said this is because the Bill does not reflect the will of the many Zambians.
Hon Mundubile said the proposed amendment comes from an individual rather than the broader public adding that the constitution must never be shaped by the interests of one person.
He said the constitutional reform should not originate from those in power.
“The constitution is not supposed to be about one person but about the majority of Zambians. On behalf of Members of Parliament, we will stand with the people in ensuring that this bill does not go through. The constitution is there to discipline the powerful and to discipline government. That is why it cannot come from government,” he said.
Hon Mundubile added that genuine constitutional change must be led by citizens if it is to stand the test of time.
“We are performing a civic duty to ensure that a broad national consensus is reached. It cannot be a consensus of a few. Those involved must understand that every contribution in this process is important. Zambia needs a durable, people driven constitution that reflects the collective will of the nation,” he said.
THE TRUTH AND MAIN REASON SOME PF CADERS DON’T WANT Bill 7 IS HERE- PLEASE READ TILL THE END
BY DR LARRY MWEETWA
It is both curious and instructive that certain political stakeholders, particularly some Patriotic Front (PF) cadres, appear averse to substantive engagement on Bill 7. Each time they are invited quite reasonably to identify the precise clauses to which they object and to propose alternative wording, a conspicuous silence follows. Instead, the default response is a procedural cliché: “We do not like the process because not all stakeholders were consulted.”
Yet the record speaks for itself. Traditional leaders were consulted. Public notices were disseminated through television and other media platforms. An online portal was established to facilitate nationwide submissions. When pressed to specify which stakeholders were allegedly excluded, the response invariably narrows to two civil society organisations: the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) and the Non-Governmental Organisations’ Coordinating Council (NGOCC).
With respect, these two bodies, while important, do not constitute the entirety of civil society, nor do they monopolise the civic space. LAZ represents a segment of the legal profession; NGOCC advocates largely for women’s interests. Both were aware of the process and had every opportunity to make submissions. Their choice not to participate cannot, in law or logic, invalidate a national consultative process. As the law would put it: volenti non fit injuria one who chooses not to act cannot later claim to have been wronged.
The argument is then swiftly shifted: “The process has been rushed.” Rushed when compared to what benchmark? Zambia’s constitutional history offers useful context. President Kenneth Kaunda amended the Constitution in 1991 an election year. President Frederick Chiluba did the same in 1996 also an election year. President Edgar Chagwa Lungu amended the Constitution in January 2016, barely seven months before general elections. None of these processes were invalidated on the mere ground of timing. One is therefore entitled to ask, with some measured irony: since when did the calendar become a constitutional gatekeeper?
Strikingly, the same voices now opposing Bill 7 were silent when previous amendments were effected under arguably similar or even tighter timelines. The principle of equality before the law demands consistency. Selective outrage is not a constitutional doctrine.
Equally perplexing was a recent statement attributed to the Chairperson of the Oasis Forum, suggesting that a referendum be held to amend even the Bill of Rights. This demand is legally misplaced in the present context. The Bill of Rights is not under amendment in Bill 7. Even former President Lungu, during the 2016 process, did not reopen the Bill of Rights nor did he establish a fresh Law Reform Commission; he relied on existing commission reports. The sudden insistence on a referendum now, where none is constitutionally required, raises legitimate questions of motive rather than method.
The central legal question therefore remains unanswered: Why do some PF cadres and allied voices refuse to make formal submissions specifying which provisions of Bill 7 they oppose? In constitutional practice, objections must be clause-specific, evidence-based, and remedial in nature. Political slogans are no substitute for constitutional drafting.
It bears recalling that Bill 10 was allowed to proceed to Parliament, where it ultimately collapsed on procedural and numerical grounds. Democratic consistency demands that Bill 7 be accorded the same opportunity to rise or fall on the floor of Parliament, not in press conferences, clerical corridors, or NGO boardrooms. As one might quip in civic satire: “A constitution is not amended on Facebook; it is amended in Parliament.”
It is therefore unten_toggle_able that a nation of over 20 million citizens should be held hostage by the positions of two civil society organisations, two clerics, or a handful of political commentators. The constitutional architecture of Zambia vests the final amending authority in Parliament, subject to prescribed procedures not in veto by protest.
For the avoidance of doubt, many citizens have made their submissions in good faith and in accordance with the law. Those submissions are lawful, valid, and must be respected. No individual or group holds a monopoly over constitutional patriotism. As the old legal adage reminds us: “Equity aids the vigilant, not the indolent.”
In sum, if objections to Bill 7 exist, let them be articulated with legal precision, not political anxiety. Let the contest be one of ideas, not of obstruction. And above all, let Parliament do what the Constitution empowers it to do to deliberate, to amend, or to reject in open session, on behalf of the people of Zambia.
LET THERE BE GENUINE DIALOGUE IN ZAMBIA – BISHOP CHISANGA
November 29, 2025.
The Bishop of the Diocese of Mansa, Rt. Rev. Patrick Chisanga has called for genuine dialogue on the Constitution making process. Speaking during the live address on the Diocesan Facebook page and Radio Yangeni yesterday, the Bishop asserted that citizens have the right to voice their thoughts on national matters and participate fully in the constitution making process.
The Bishop commended the Republican President for opening the doors for dialogue. Bishop Chisanga guided that “Dialogue is a ‘give and take’ process which involves listening without any prejudice and respecting the views of others.” He further praised the Oasis forum for taking their civic duty deligently.
On the issue of the Church speaking out on national issues, the Bishop defended the Catholic Church’s historical and consistent stance of speaking out for the common good on national issues, citing their previous opposition to Bill 10 under former late President Edgar Lungu and other numerous examples throughout the history of Zambia: “The Catholic church stands for the common good of all people and the Church has consistently done so. This is not the first time the Catholic Church has opposed the constitution making process.”
Commenting on Bill 7, Bishop Chisanga observed that the current Bill appears to be very narrow and has tones of partisanship.
On violence, Bishop Chisanga pointed out the regrettable incidents of violence in the country. He strongly condemned all acts of political violence and disrespect for leaders, specifically calling the incident in Chingola, where stones were thrown at the president, unacceptable: “It is unacceptable that people would disrespect the office of the president.” He also condemned other incidences of political violence: “If there was an attack on the PF secretariat, that too was unacceptable, if Given Lubinda was roughed up by young people in Kabwe, equally that was unacceptable…” He called for restraint and mutual respect.
Furthermore, Bishop Chisanga poured solidarity with the people of Mwense regarding the reported pollution of their river due to mining activities. He called the pollution incident sad and preventable, emphasizing that the river is a vital life source for the region and beyond, calling for God’s protection for the affected community.
Bishop Chisanga concluded his address by blessing the nation, “May God bless our nation Zambia, let peace prevail , let dialogue be genuine, let us find common ground, without any alarming statements, without insults without dispising anyone, let there be respect of every citizen”
HH AND THE OASIS FORUM – EXAMINING THE ANATOMY OF HIS NEGOTIATING SKILLS
In disuading the OASIS Forum from protesting at the State House gates, President Hichilema argued that dialogue in a structured fashion had better prospects for desired results given the intricate nature of the issue at hand
He had also argued that court processes were not ideal as well.
With baited breath, I waited for the answer from OASIS Forum. When it came, it was exactly what the President wanted – they agreed to meet him where he wanted them to meet him.
However the meeting proceeded away from television cameras, the President had succeeded in depriving the OASIS Forum of the optics often exploited by civil society – the media coverage of public protests that are intended to project national leaders as hardwired against the voice of reason!
No President wants bad publicity especially when the drums announcing the approaching elections are growing louder and louder.
In addition, the man just had a flury of high profile international engagements – the Chinese Premiere, a US delegation and Trump, Jr.
He’s not about to throw away what projects him as a leader worth of a seat at the table of international players!
Remember the lines he began to throw around when rumor had it that he was about to return KCM to Vedanta contrary to his pre-election campaign?
“We cannot be mining in court”, he began to say, a refrain quickly picked up by his Ministers and his supporters.
By the time KCM was back in the hands of Vedanta, public opinion had largely aligned with him.
With a skillful combination of both logic and moral arguments, Hichilema has mastered the art of extricating himself out of tricky situations and emerging looking good and innocent.
But at the heart of such negotiations often lies the preservation of one’s will presented as collective good.
The parties to the negotiation come out thinking they have won when in essence they have simply helped one man get what he wanted.
That may be called skilled negotiating but it’s also called manipulation, a dishonest way of obtaining something under false pretenses.
And sometimes, such negotiating skills are seen for what they are by alert parties to a matter.
Take for instance the impasse regarding the burial of the former and late President Edgar Lungu.
Projecting sensitivity and reverence, Hichilema did what is expected of a leader and a statesman – declared a national mourning, extended the mourning period, assigned others to negotiate with the family, etc, etc.
But he broke one of the most important tools of negotiations – remain in control of the process – when his government went to court to stop the Lungu family from burying his predecessor in South Africa.
The same way he resolved the KCM saga by saying “we can’t be mining in court”, he should have said, “we can’t be burying in court”.
Consequently, his predecessor remains unburied and her daughter, Tasila, has ended up losing her parliamentary seat.
Ordinarily, negotiations involve a spirit-of-give-and-take. You win some, you lose some.
But when the intention is to win, come high, come low water, an avoidable impasse results.
But even in this impasse, Hichilema is projected in some quarters as a statesman who only wants to accord his predecessor a befitting send-off.
It’s the widow and the family lawyer who are now projected as the obstacles to the “good intentions” of “a good leader”.
Having said this, make no mistake. I am not suggesting that every negotiation Hichilema goes into is about himself.
You will find many other instances that are in national interest or else he wouldn’t be a national leader.
What do you see in the anatomy of Hichilema’s negotiating toolkit?
President Hakainde Hichilema is aggressively advancing a divisive Bill 7 that could potentially to cause anarchy. Among other provisions, it seeks to establish 55 new constituencies, purportedly to address disparities resulting from population growth.
But people are apprehensive because he does not want to release the underlying delimitation report that shows the current population numbers for each constituency. This data would help people understand why the proposed redrawing of boundaries is being made.
This hesitance is one of the reasons people are saying the delimitation exercise is a political ploy, strategically deployed to entrench President Hichilema’s hegemony rather than to ensure equity based on the current demographic reality.
The lack of transparency in this process is not only a serious issue for good governance; it is also damaging to the integrity of democracy.
If there is nothing clandestine about the creation of 55 new seats, the delimitation report for the creation of those seats must be made public.
Citizens want to see the delimitation report as the evidence base, outlining which areas are overpopulated and thus warrant division.
President Hichilema’s failure to make this data available to the public fuels suspicions that his government is doctoring population statistics and the delimitation effort is politically motivated rather than population-driven.
He is afraid to release the delimitation report, most likely because constituencies in opposition strongholds with demonstrably high population density have been overlooked in favour of areas in UPND strongholds with slower population growth, confirming that the delimitation process is intended to cement President Hichilema and his party’s hegemony.
Let him release the report for civil society organizations, opposition parties, and citizens to verify whether the delimitation truly aims for equity or for electoral advantage.
As a result of diminished trust in President Hichilema due to perceptions of lying, citizens are concerned that President Hichilema will use the creation of 55 new seats to disproportionately benefit his regional strongholds by drawing boundaries that concentrate opposition voters in fewer, larger constituencies while spreading ruling party supporters across multiple, smaller, winnable constituencies.
Based on the reluctance to publish the report, it is plausible that the data indicates that regions already regarded as strongholds of the ruling party are not the most densely populated but are nonetheless targeted for delimitation, raising concerns of potential political gerrymandering.
Without the delimitation report, how can citizens verify that the demographic metric is being applied uniformly or that delimitation favours constituencies with high population densities to promote equity rather than merely reinforcing President Hichilema’s political dominance?
If President Hichilema insists on creating new constituencies based on population size yet appears hesitant to provide population distribution statistics, it suggests an intentional withholding of information that could show partisan objectives, which is one of the reasons Bill 7 should be rejected.
The legitimacy of the 55 new seats hinges entirely on correcting existing imbalances not creating new politically advantageous for the ruling party.
If he was transparent to release the delimitation report, the process would have allowed for public debate on the methodology: focusing purely on raw population numbers, or whether factors like geographical size, community cohesion, and infrastructure accessibility also play a role?
Without the delimitation report, the public is forced to conclude that the process is designed by President Hichilema for his own political gain, undermining democracy.
The successful integration of Bill 7 into Zambian law requires more than legislative approval; it demands public confidence. President Hichilema’s administration must understand that withholding the delimitation report, which details population metrics and proposed boundary changes, severely jeopardizes this confidence. Transparency in electoral boundaries is crucial for upholding democratic fairness.
I was thrown back while watching the arrivals at the prayers organised by OASIS Forum.
It looked like it was a gathering of opposition political leaders and their members. It did not appear as a prayer rally. I mean, you don’t wave party symbols at a prayer rally! See image.
It was not a good idea for all those opposition political leaders to attend the prayers. One would also ask, was the group of women singing outside, a church choir or a political party choir?
The focus was on the political leaders. Even in the seating arrangements, they were given prominence. The Bishops and Priests should have taken that prominence because it was a prayer meeting.
Meaning that, if the peaceful protest had taken place these opposition political leaders would have been there! And most of them being either PF or TONSE Alliance, the peaceful protest would have quickly turned into a PF/TONSE event!
That being the case, certainly “others” from the other side of the political divide would have “reacted”. Even if the police had been there, clashes would have occurred. By the time peace would have returned damage to property, injuries, may be even loss of life would have occurred. And the police would have been accused of having taken a side.
At this stage, I thought to myself, maybe the President was right, maybe he foresaw the possibility of such a potential playing out.
Looking at this whole scenario, I think it was good that the protest was cancelled.
Lesson: As we head into the Electoral Campaign Period, those of us who organise genuine prayers, need to ensure that politicians don’t take advantage and infiltrate the gatherings.
THE UNTOLD STORY OF LEVY MWANAWASA’S DEATH. WAS HE ASSASSINATED, POISONED OR HE SIMPLY FELL TO NATURAL CAUSES?
⭐ PART I — THE FACTUAL TIMELINE OF HIS FINAL DAYS
️ June 29, 2008 – The Collapse in Sharm El-Sheikh
President Levy Mwanawasa collapsed in Egypt while attending the African Union Summit. He suffered a massive stroke — his second major one after 2006.
He was rushed to a French military hospital.
For weeks, Zambia received controlled updates:
“He is stable.”
“He is improving.”
“He is talking.”
“There is no need for panic.”
Behind closed doors, however, diplomats reported a far more severe condition
️ July–August 2008 – The Silent Hospital Weeks
For over a month, Mwanawasa remained hospitalized in Paris.
African leaders visited. Officials issued short statements. Cabinet ministers gave contradictory updates.
Zambians began whispering:
“If he is improving, why has no one seen him?”
“Who controls the information?”
“What are they hiding?”
On August 19, 2008, the Zambian government announced that Mwanawasa had died.
⭐ PART II — THE DARK QUESTIONS THAT EMERGED
Immediately after his death, suspicions exploded. These were NOT proven facts — but widespread public doubts whispered across Zambia and beyond.
喝 1. Was Levy Mwanawasa Poisoned?
Why people suspected poisoning:
a) His fierce anti-corruption stance
Mwanawasa aggressively pursued powerful business and political figures. He reopened the case against former President Frederick Chiluba. He chased billions siphoned from state coffers.
This earned him enemies — inside Zambia and outside.
Many believed he was “too clean for his own safety.”
b) Reports of sudden health deterioration
Some Zambians found it strange that Mwanawasa:
had been active
traveling
giving speeches
chairing SADC
…then suddenly collapsed.
When the severity of his condition didn’t match the official statements, suspicions deepened.
c) The timing
He collapsed right when:
Zimbabwe’s crisis was heated
SADC was divided
He was one of the few African leaders openly criticizing Mugabe
Rumors said he was “pressured,” “threatened,” or “targeted.”
None of these allegations were ever proven — but they spread widely among citizens.
喝 2. Was Mwanawasa Assassinated?
This theory came from a mixture of politics, timing, and geopolitical tension.
Why people believed in assassination:
a) He publicly confronted powerful regional players
Mwanawasa was rare among African presidents — he challenged leaders openly. Some believed this put him in danger.
b) His sudden collapse during an international summit
Some Zambians asked:
“How does a president collapse out of nowhere at an AU meeting?”
“What happened behind closed doors?”
Again — speculation, but widespread.
c) Physicians’ silence
French doctors were extremely guarded. Medical reports were not released to the public.
Where information is scarce, suspicion grows.
⭐ PART III — THE OFFICIAL EXPLANATION (WHAT WAS CONFIRMED)
The verified cause of death was:
✔️ A massive stroke resulting from long-standing hypertension.
He had suffered a previous, well-documented stroke in 2006 and had a history of blood-pressure issues.
There is no official evidence of:
poisoning
assassination
foul play
Yet the rumors persisted.
⭐ PART IV — WHY THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES NEVER DIED
1. Zambia was not prepared for transparency
The government released minimal medical details. Lack of openness always breeds suspicion.
2. Political transitions are always tense
Whenever a leader dies in office, especially in Africa, conspiracy theories bloom.
3. Mwanawasa’s personality
He was firm, clean, fearless, outspoken — the kind of leader who inevitably gains enemies.
4. Contradictory government statements
Officials disagreed publicly on:
how he collapsed
how he was responding
how stable he was
This inconsistency fed the belief that something was being hidden.
⭐ PART V — THE MORBID TRUTH
No confirmed evidence proves Mwanawasa was assassinated or poisoned.
But…
The timing, The political climate, The lack of transparency, The powerful enemies he made, The mysterious silence of French doctors…
…allowed the story to grow into one of Zambia’s darkest political mysteries.
️ CONCLUSION: SO WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?
There are three layers of truth:
1. The official truth → He died from a stroke.
2. The political truth → He had many powerful enemies, local and international.
3. The public truth → The secrecy around his final days created a void filled with fear, rumor, and suspicion.
And in that void, the legend of “Mwanawasa was killed” was born.
SAMIA’S TAKEOVER! SUBHEAD: Tanzania Erupts as President Packs Government With Her Own Relatives
Tanzania’s President Samia Suluhu Hassan has set social media ablaze after a jaw-dropping list of her newly appointed officials revealed what many are calling a full-blown family takeover of the government.
The viral outrage erupted after it emerged that Samia has placed several close relatives in powerful posts. Her brother-in-law has been handed the crucial Finance Ministry, while her son-in-law now runs the Ministry of Health. Her daughter has secured not one but two roles Deputy Minister of Education and a Special Seat MP.
The circle tightens even further with the appointment of her niece as Deputy Minister of Works and a long-time family friend famously the matchmaker who brought the family together taking over the Defence Ministry.
Critics are calling it the most blatant display of political nepotism in years, while supporters insist the appointments are based on “merit” and “trust.” Tanzania is watching and talking.
TAGWIREI’S HALF-BILLION BLITZ! SUBHEAD: Cash king squares off with the Generals in explosive 2030 succession war
Zimbabwe’s 2030 succession race has erupted into a high-stakes showdown between money and the gun, as billionaire tycoon Kudakwashe Tagwirei unleashes an unprecedented wave of political spending to shape the battle to succeed President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
Zanu PF insiders say Tagwirei has already pumped over US$500 million into party structures, election machinery and a vast patronage web stretching back a decade. From funding three elections to splashing US$21 million on 300 Ford Rangers for Central Committee bosses, the Sakunda magnate has now become the party’s most powerful financier in its 62-year history.
In Harare alone, he has poured over US$5 million into clinics, boreholes, disability support, war veteran payouts and empowerment schemes moves seen as buying loyalty ahead of the 2030 showdown.
Yet despite Tagwirei’s unstoppable momentum, Zanu PF insiders warn that Vice President Constantino Chiwenga, backed by the military, remains the frontrunner.
The 2030 race is now clear: Tagwirei’s money vs Chiwenga’s gun.
Jerabos apologize to President Hichilema! Small-scale miners in Chingola have apologised to President Hakainde Hichilema following violent disturbances by some youth during his recent visit to the district.
The miners, commonly referred to as jerabos, distanced themselves from the unruly behaviour and pledged to work with Government in promoting peace and economic development.
The apology comes after an incident last month when a group of youth ran amok, damaging public and private property and stoning the podium where President Hichilema was addressing marketeers who had lost their goods in a fire.
The miners said they regretted the actions of the youth and assured the Head of State of their commitment to law and order.
Speaking on behalf of the miners, Sydney Mwila condemned the violence and said the group supports the President’s fight against illegal mining activities.
Ousted Guinea-Bissau President Arrives in Brazzaville
Guinea Bissau : former President Embalo Arrives in Congo
General Umaro El Mokhtar Sissoco Embalo has fled to Congo after leaving Senegal.
The ex-president of Guinea-Bissau arrived in Brazzaville where President Denis Sassou N’Guesso welcomed him at his request.
Umaro Sissoco Embaló dismissed by the junta that took power had first found refuge in Dakar.
It wasn’t easy for General Umaro El Mokhtar Sissoco Embalo to remain in Senegal, even though Senegalese law protects exiled citizens, in accordance with the international conventions the country has ratified.
However, he found himself facing a 21st-century “Sékou Touré Junior” or “Kwame Nkrumah Junior”: Ousmane SONKO, a self-proclaimed revolutionary who detests traitors.
I have great admiration for this man, who dares to say aloud what many only whisper.
The true motives for the coup in Guinea-Bissau remain unclear, with speculation and conspiracy theories circulating — including that the coup was carried out with Embalo’s blessing.
“Embalo arrived in Brazzaville late in the morning on a private jet,” a source close to the Congolese government said on condition of anonymity.
A presidency source said Embalo, who had claimed victory in the election, intended to remain in the country, which is also known as Congo-Brazzaville.
Embalo, 53, is rumoured to be close to Congolese President Denis Sassou Nguesso, and has visited the Republic of Congo many times.
– ‘Narco-state’ – After taking power on Wednesday, the officers in charge argued they had taken control to restore order, warning of a plot by the country’s drug barons to destabilise Guinea-Bissau.
The opposition and some experts however suspect that Embalo, in power since 2020, orchestrated the takeover to halt the electoral process.
Those suspicions intensified when the junta named General Horta N’Tam, considered a close ally of the president, to head a transitional administration set to last a year.
Former Nigerian president Goodluck Jonathan has accused the ousted president Général Umaro El Mokhtar Sissoco Embalo of staging a ceremonial coup after indications that he lost to opposition candidate.
“Ramaphosa Confronts Washington Head-On” — A Bold Stand or a Dangerous Gamble?
President Cyril Ramaphosa has once again taken a firm stance on South Africa’s sovereignty, making it clear that Pretoria will not be bullied, dictated to, or threatened by Washington.
According to Ramaphosa, South Africa will confront the United States head-on whenever accusations, misinformation or political pressure threaten the country’s democracy, justice system, and foreign policy independence.
He emphasized that South Africa is not a junior partner of any global superpower and will defend its right to engage with any nation, including those Washington may disapprove of. Whether it’s BRICS relations, the ICC debate, the Gaza conflict, or American politicians making reckless comments about SA – Ramaphosa says South Africa will respond directly and robustly.
—
Why This Matters
South Africa is finding itself in the middle of global power tensions. The world is changing – the West is losing some influence, BRICS is rising, and African countries are demanding respect.
Ramaphosa’s position sends a message that:
South Africa will protect its sovereignty at all costs.
Global powers must engage SA as an equal, not a subordinate.
Africa has its own voice, interests, and alliances.
For many South Africans, this stance reflects long-overdue confidence on the international stage.
—
⚠️ But Why Is It Dangerous?
Confronting the United States is not without risks. America remains:
One of SA’s biggest trade partners
A key investor in the economy
A major player in global finance and diplomacy
Going head-on with Washington could create:
Economic pressure or trade consequences
Diplomatic tension
Negative investor sentiment
Targeted political attacks from US lawmakers, similar to recent remarks from Donald Trump, AfriForum’s lobbying in Washington, and other groups pushing anti-SA narratives.
South Africa must balance sovereignty with strategy — standing firm without isolating itself.
—
Final Thought
Ramaphosa’s words show a South Africa that refuses to bow down. But with global powers watching closely, the path ahead requires wisdom, unity, and careful diplomacy.
Is this bold stand a sign of a stronger South Africa, or are we stepping into dangerous global waters?
IRAN JUST LOST ITS MOST VALUABLE COLONY LEBANON – AND NOBODY’S COMING TO SAVE IT
Tehran is watching its 40-year investment in Lebanon evaporate in real time, and the silence from its remaining proxies is deafening.
Hezbollah isn’t just bleeding fighters and prestige; it’s losing the one thing Iran paid billions to own: the Lebanese state itself.
For decades, the deal was simple. Iran funds the guns, Lebanon supplies the territory and the human shields. In return, Beirut gets to pretend it’s sovereign while Tehran uses its soil as a forward base against Israel.
That contract just got shredded, publicly, by every sect in the country – including large chunks of the Shia street.
The moment Egypt handed over Israel’s “disarm or be dismantled” letter, Lebanon’s entire political class chose national survival over loyalty to the Axis of Resistance.
Even Amal, Hezbollah’s nominal Shia partner, is openly negotiating separate security arrangements in the south.
Meaning: most of the Lebanese body politic has decided that being Iran’s meat shield is no longer worth the oxygen.
What happens next is the forced divorce of a parasitic marriage.
Hezbollah can either:
Accept total disarmament under international supervision and become a toothless political party (i.e., die with dignity),
or
Trigger the civil war everyone fears, and in doing so prove once and for all that it was never Lebanese – just an Iranian expeditionary force in local clothing.
My money’s on door number 1, because the party’s grassroots are exhausted and its patron is broke. Iran can’t even pay the electric bill in Tehran, let alone re-arm 100,000 fighters after Israel and the U.S. turned their bunkers into archaeological sites.
The region just flipped. Saudi and Emirati money is already circling Beirut like vultures over fresh roadkill, ready to bankroll reconstruction – on the single condition that the Lebanese state regains monopoly on force.
In 6 months, Lebanon will either be the Arab world’s 1st post-Iranian state, or it will cease to exist.
Either way, the Islamic Republic’s grand strategy of forward defense through proxies just suffered a fatal stroke.And nobody – not Hamas, not the Houthis, not even Iraq’s militias – is volunteering to be the next hostage.
The empire of martyrdom is suddenly looking very mortal.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: HOW NIGERIA DEFUSED U.S. PRESSURE WHILE VENEZUELA WALKED INTO IT
There is a lesson unfolding in real-time in global geopolitics and anyone watching the U.S–Venezuela tension today can now understand what Nigeria quietly avoided.
Trump has just announced closure of Venezuelan airspace.
Within minutes, flight trackers showed a near-empty sky over Venezuela. That is not noise; that is the final stage before military coercion, exactly the script Washington has used in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Panama.
But here is the key question: Why did Venezuela end up here, while Nigeria, faced with similar escalatory rhetoric successfully reversed the pressure?
Let us break it down with clarity.
1. THE FIRST SIGNALS: BOTH NATIONS WERE WARNED, BUT RESPONDED DIFFERENTLY
Venezuela: Trump’s first threats came as far back as 2017, when he said explicitly:
“We have many options, including a military option, if necessary.” That was an open declaration of readiness for force.
Nigeria: Trump’s rhetoric was couched in diplomatic escalation; CPC designation, “genocide”, “religious persecution” and even the “guns-a-blazing” phrase. Anyone who understands foreign-policy language knows those are the steps before military involvement through AFRICOM.
But Nigeria did what Venezuela didn’t. Nigeria absorbed the pressure, reorganized and engaged diplomatically instead of reacting emotionally.
2. VENEZUELA ESCALATED… NIGERIA DE-ESCALATED
Venezuela’s response: Insults, defiance, counter-threats, anti-U.S. rallies and public confrontation. That is how you invite intervention.
Nigeria’s response: Institutional consolidation, intelligence restructuring and a deliberate shift from confrontation to strategic cooperation. This repositioned Nigeria from “accused state” to equal partner. That is why the U.S moved from CPC rhetoric to a Joint Security Working Group with Nigeria.
Washington escalated Venezuela… Washington partnered Nigeria.
3. MULTILATERAL BACKING: NIGERIA HAD WHAT VENEZUELA DID NOT
Nigeria: AU, ECOWAS, EU officials and even key U.S. Congress members opposed the hawkish approach, insisting on cooperation over coercion. This global pushback limited Trump’s options.
Venezuela: Isolated. Sanctioned. Few allies. No regional bloc protection. Isolation invites intervention.
4. SECURITY POSTURE: NIGERIA CREATED LEVERAGE, VENEZUELA LOST IT
Nigeria became indispensable to regional stability; Lake Chad, Gulf of Guinea, ECOWAS security, counter-terrorism architecture. You cannot stabilise West Africa without Nigeria.
Venezuela, however, became a regional destabiliser in U.S eyes; migration crisis, narcotrafficking allegations and anti-U.S. alliances.
Lebanon learned this the hard way. So did Libya. Now Venezuela is next in line.
Nelson Chamisa: The People of Zimbabwe Deserve Better
By Reason Wafawarova
Nelson Chamisa has posted another devotional on Facebook — this time from the book of Habakkuk — and once again, Zimbabwe has been invited to gather at the national virtual altar for a weekly dose of “Hold On, God Is Cooking Something.” At this rate, the opposition should just register as a church and save ZEC the paperwork.
Look, I say this with love: I am a Bible-believing, tongue-speaking, Pentecostal Christian myself. I’ve prayed mountains away and fasted meals I wasn’t even planning to eat. I respect Scripture. But even I must confess — we are now dangerously close to replacing political planning with prophetic poetry.
Chamisa quotes:
“Though the fig tree may not blossom…”
My brother, the fig tree did not just refuse to blossom — ZANU-PF uprooted it, burned the field, arrested the farmer, and is now exporting the ashes to Dubai. The situation requires more than a Sabbath reflection. Zimbabweans don’t need a verse; they need a plan. They need a movement. They need leadership that knows the difference between a rally and a sermon.
But instead, we get:
“We hold on to the promise…”
A promising thought — but hold on to what, exactly? Because at this point, holding on feels like gripping the edge of a cliff while the leadership is busy singing worship songs instead of pulling us up. You don’t win against a militarised state with “Blessed Sabbath” posts and cute hashtags like #GodIsInIt. ZANU-PF is playing chess while the opposition is playing Hillsong.
Let’s be honest: Chamisa’s weekly devotionals have become a soft, spiritual air freshener covering the stench of political paralysis. Each time accountability creeps in, he sprays a verse from Habakkuk or Isaiah, and suddenly people feel guilty for demanding actual strategy. It’s the oldest trick in the Pentecostal handbook: if you don’t have a plan, quote Scripture until people forget you needed one.
Zimbabwe does not need a national prayer warrior-in-chief. We already have 40 years of those. We need someone who can plan, organise, resist, mobilise, and negotiate — preferably all in the same week.
Faith is important, yes — but faith without works is dead. And faith without a political plan is Zimbabwean politics.
Even the miracles in the Bible required effort:
God parted the Red Sea — but Moses still had to stretch his hand.
God brought down Jericho — but Joshua still had to march.
God fed Elijah — but Elijah still had to walk to the widow’s house.
Meanwhile, Chamisa seems to be praying for victory while refusing to walk to the polling station of responsibility. Miracles don’t replace action; they respond to action.
There is a growing sense that Chamisa is either avoiding the political battlefield, trying to impress an invisible constituency, or simply exhausted. Either way, the people of Zimbabwe deserve better than a weekly scriptural pep talk to distract them from the fact that nothing is happening.
And let’s face it: used too often, inspirational verses become political paracetamol — they reduce the pain but cure nothing. They keep the people calm while reality gets worse. They create the illusion of momentum where there is none.
Zimbabweans are tired. They don’t need another Sabbath blessing; they need a Monday-to-Friday strategy. They need leadership that understands that “waiting on the Lord” does not mean sitting on your hands while authoritarianism remodels the constitution.
Zimbabwe is not short of faith. Zimbabwe is short of functional opposition politics.
Chamisa has the charm, the intelligence, and the affection of the nation. But he now needs to graduate from prophetic optimism to practical leadership.
Because the people of Zimbabwe will always love God — but they are beginning to wonder whether their political leader loves strategy just as much.
Faith without works is dead. And in Zimbabwe, dead faith is what keeps bad politics alive.
MADURO’S THROWING A SOVEREIGNTY FIT OVER TRUMP’S AIRSPACE LOCKDOWN
Hours after Trump’s Truth Social bomb, Caracas fired back with their usual screech:
“The Bolivarian Republic forcefully repudiates the insolent attempt to issue orders over Venezuelan airspace… a hostile act violating UN Charter Article 2(4).”
Translation: “How dare the gringos play air traffic controller when our cartel buddies need clear skies for their joyrides?”
Maduro’s scrambling his rustbucket air force – 23 jets, half Russian Sukhois held together with bailing wire and prayers – for “combat patrols.” Regional airlines are rerouting like rats from a sinking ship.
Latin America’s lefty chorus? Dead silent. Even Lula’s biting his tongue, because defending a narco-enabler over dead American kids is a tough sell back home.
But let’s cut the crap on the drugs. This isn’t about fentanyl raining from Caracas.
Experts – DEA, UN, even the State Department’s own 2025 reports – say Venezuela’s a sideshow.
This is about Maduro himself. The guy who stole the 2024 election, starves his people while pocketing billions in oil graft, cozies up to Putin and Xi for arms and loans.
Trump’s not closing skies for dope; he’s choking the regime’s lifelines – private jets for bagmen, smuggled cash, Russian resupplies.
USS Gerald R. Ford’s steaming south with F-35s on deck, AWACS painting every blip. One cartel Cessna – or Maduro’s escape chopper – touches that sky? It’s modern art on the jungle floor.
The real tantrum? Sovereignty my ass. Maduro’s boxed: 80% of Venezuelans want him gone, military’s half-starved and bounty-hunting their own brass ($50 million on his head), allies like Russia too bogged in Ukraine to send MiGs.
Trump talked to him last week – easy way or hard way. Nicolás picked hard.
Enjoy the blackout, dictator. Your narco sugar daddies won’t save you when the bill comes due – and it’s landing soon.
Source: Venezuelan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sky News, Al Jazeera, DEA 2025 National Drug Threat Assessment Media: MINT
Riot on Bolivia’s football pitch, 17 men see red card
A Copa Bolivia quarterfinal ended in chaos as 17 people were sent off after a massive brawl between Blooming and Real Oruro. Police had to use tear gas to stop the fight, as players and staff threw punches after the final whistle.
The match ended 2-2, but Blooming reached the semifinals 4-3 on aggregate.
Reports say the fight started when Oruro’s Sebastian Zeballos and Julio Vila lost their temper. Coaches from both sides were also involved.
Around 20 police officers intervened. One Blooming official reportedly suffered a fractured cheekbone, while Oruro’s coach Marcelo Robledo was hospitalised with injuries.
The referee has sent the case to Bolivia’s Sports Disciplinary Tribunal for further action.
Jay-Z’s actions have made people believe he’s the father of Rymir, the guy who claims to be his son.
Fans say he’s definitely the dad because Jay-Z refused to take legal fees after the paternity case got dismissed.
They also point out that he’s allegedly been dodging the case for years until it finally got thrown out, and the fact that he keeps refusing the DNA test is proof he’s the father.
According to them, if he was 100% sure he wasn’t the dad, he’d take the test without hesitating. But deep down he knows it’s his son, and his past with the boy’s mom makes him scared to do the test because she wad younger at that time
Do you agree… or what if the boy just wants to be Jay-Z’s son because he’s a billionaire❓
Small-scale Miners in Chingola Apologise for Boeing, Stoning and Chasing President Hakainde Hichilema
Minister of Mines and Minerals Development, Paul Kabuswe Wrote:
Earlier today , joined by Copperbelt Province Minister Hon Elisha Matambo MP , Commerce, Trade and Industry Minister Hon. Chipoka Mulenga MP , UPND Party officials, and various stakeholders as we received our Small-Scale Miners (Jerabos) who marched in support and solidarity with His Excellency President Hakainde Hichilema . This follows the unfortunate incident at Chiwempala Market during the Head of State’s recent visit.
In line with the Presidential directives to curb illegal and unsafe mining especially after the tragic Senseli pit accident of November 2023 that claimed more than 40 precious lives we reaffirmed President Hakainde Hichilema’s unwavering commitment to ensuring that mining in Zambia is conducted in a formalized, safe, and environmentally sound manner. The security of mining sites remains a top priority as we work to guarantee real and sustainable beneficiation of our natural resources.
We are pleased to announce that a total of $4 million has been secured under the guidance of President HH to support the Small-Scale Miners as we find a safe and secure site for them to conduct formalized mining operations.
During our engagement, we emphasized the importance of dialogue as the rightful avenue for airing grievances. We strongly cautioned our youths never again to resort to acts such as throwing stones at the President or any national leader. Respect, order, and peaceful engagement are the pillars on which our nation must continue to stand.
Together, we move forward towards safer mining, unity, and development for all.
Hon. Paul CC Kabuswe MP Chililabombwe Constituency, Minister Of Mines And Minerals Development.
Copperbelt Minister Hon. Elisha Matambo writes…
Beloved Citizens,
SMALL – SCALE MINERS GIVES THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT MR HAKAINDE HICHILEMA SOLIDARITY, IN CHINGOLA DISTRICT
Today, with Minister of Mines and Minerals Development Hon Paul kabuswe and Minister of Commerce and Trades Hon Chipoka who is also area member of Parliament for Chingola central, we recieved a solidarity from Small Scale Miners (Jerabos) in support of the Republican President Mr Hakainde Hichilema in Chingola District.
Contrary to the assumptions that we have denied our small-scale miners chance to benefit from the illegality, we were actually walking the talk of our vision leader, Mr Hakainde Hichilema, of legal mining, safe mining and formal mining.
We stressed that we have been losing the lives of our youths every day in the Sensele pit. We all remember that on 30th November 2023, we lost close to 40 of our youths at the same pit, and thereafter, we kept on losing lives almost every day. Which parent will allow a situation where his children will die every day in the name of mining? If this is called ukuchinga abaiche, let it be so. The same people who are accusing us today are the ones who were calling us names when our children were dying every day in the pit. We have never abandoned our youths in chingola. Instead we went ahead and negotiated under the guidance of our republican President for USD 4 million to assist our youths as we continue negotiating for a safe place where they will be operating from.
We appreciate the solidarity match in support of our beloved president that the Jerabos had today. Nevertheless, we reminded them of the gravity of the case, which was committed when the president visited chingola. We assured them that the law would deal with all those who were involved in that very unfortunate incident. We reminded them how good-hearted our president is . We told them that had it been other President’s, a lot of people would have died that day. We appreciate that they have pledged to support the president all the way and also bring peace and harmony to chingola.
We will give our small-scale miners a benefit of doubt but remain steady fast when it comes to maintaining law and order in our province. It has not been easy to run Coppperbelt, but the grace of God and support from the great people of Copperbelt Province has been sufficient to reach where we are today.
We will not be obstructed by those who have decided to accuse and fight us. We will remain focused and work for the people to achieve the vision of our great leader, President Hakainde Hichilema. To the great people of Copperbelt, we thank you for your unwavering support to us and our beloved president. We don’t take it for granted.May God bless our Republican President, may God bless our province.
PF DECLARES WESTERN PROVINCE SHIFT AS LUBINDA’S POPULARITY SURGES
The Patriotic Front has intensified its internal momentum as senior party figures continue to mobilize across the country. The party’s National Women Deputy Chairperson Kavumbu Hakachima has positioned the latest developments in Western Province as a sign of renewed confidence in the PF’s leadership ambitions.
During a tour of Western Province yesterday, Acting President of the PF, Given Lubinda, drew significant attention from residents as activity in parts of the province temporarily came to a halt. His arrival generated heightened excitement among supporters who gathered to welcome him, signalling a shift in the province’s political atmosphere.
The Patriotic Front National Women Deputy Chairperson underscored that Lubinda’s presence on the ground indicates a growing acceptance of his leadership within communities traditionally viewed as strongholds of the ruling UPND. The reception was framed as a demonstration of changing public sentiment ahead of the presidential race.
Within PF structures, Lubinda’s entry into the presidential contest is being promoted as a decisive moment for the party. Kavumbu emphasized that his increasing popularity reflects the party’s renewed confidence as it positions itself for national governance.
The PF leadership continues to project Western Province as a region experiencing political realignment. According to the National Women Deputy Chairperson, the enthusiastic response from residents strengthens the party’s belief that the political landscape is shifting in favour of the Patriotic Front.
*MWATA KAZEMBE PUSHES FOR PF UNITY, MEDIATES MUNDUBILE-MAKEBI DEAL*
By Micheal Lombe
Pastor Emmanuel Mwewa, the immediate past Executive Secretary of the North Zambia Union Conference (SDA), held a meeting on 28 November 2025 with Mporokoso Member of Parliament and PF presidential aspirant Brian Mundubile at his office in Lusaka. The meeting, which was also attended by former PF Secretary General Davies Mwila, centred on Pastor Mwewa’s efforts to promote unity within the Patriotic Front in the run-up to the 2026 general elections.
Pastor Mwewa told the two PF leaders that his mission to reconcile factions within the party was being undertaken with the blessing of Senior Chief Mwata Kazembe, who he said was opposed to the continued rule of the UPND and President Hakainde Hichilema beyond 2026. According to Pastor Mwewa, the Mwata believes that a united PF stands a better chance of returning to power and has therefore encouraged dialogue among the party’s competing camps.
He revealed that he had already held talks with Makebi Zulu, accompanied by Richard Musukwa and Chanda Kabwe, during which he conveyed the Mwata’s proposal that Makebi should not contest the PF presidency in 2026 but instead serve as Brian Mundubile’s running mate, arguing that Makebi is still young and can seek the presidency in future. However, Pastor Mwewa explained that Makebi expressed reservations, questioning why Mundubile should not be his running mate instead.
Makebi reportedly told Pastor Mwewa that while he had no personal issues with Mundubile and was open to negotiations, he was concerned about some of the individuals surrounding him, particularly PF National Chairman Hon. Musonda Mpankata and Mwansabombwe MP Hon. Kampampi.
Pastor Mwewa said he persuaded Mundubile to agree to direct talks with Makebi, to be facilitated through the Mwata, with the hope of eventually securing an agreement for Makebi to take the running-mate position. Their first meeting is scheduled for this weekend.
If successful, this deal would reinforce the long-standing political makeup of the Northern–Eastern alliance, a pattern that has dominated Zambian politics for over six decades. This regional power bloc continues to view itself as a counterweight to emerging political centres.
A recently leaked audio featuring former PF Deputy Secretary General Mumbi Phiri, an unwavering loyalist of the late President Edgar Lungu, reveals the depth of this sentiment.
In the recording, Phiri stresses the need to “restore Northern and Eastern hegemonic power” to reclaim authority from what she describes as the “Zambezi region,” a reference to President Hichilema’s base in the south-western parts of the country.
Senior Chief Mwata Kazembe has also been openly critical of the current political configuration, which he believes does not reflect the historical balance of power. His involvement in mediating PF unity efforts is therefore not merely political, it underscores a broader regional strategy aimed at reasserting influence and reshaping the 2026 electoral landscape.
Whether this renewed push for unity will hold, and whether it resonates with the broader electorate, remains to be seen. But the dynamics unfolding inside the PF reveal a party grappling with both internal rivalry and the weight of regional expectations that have long defined Zambia’s political foundations.-ZWD
ZAMBIA’S DEMOCRATIC RECKONING – THE CIVIL SOCIETY ARISING
29 November 2025
On a Friday now etched into Zambia’s civic consciousness, the Cathedral of the Child Jesus in Lusaka transformed into a sanctuary of resistance. Beneath its ceilings, the Oasis Forum, a coalition of the nation’s most venerable civil society and faith-based organisations, political actors and the Law Association of Zambia gathered not to march peacefully, but to pray. Their decision to abandon a peaceful protest against Constitution Amendment Bill No. 7 was not an act of retreat, but one of profound defiance. When the state closes the streets, the people turn to sanctuaries.
Their demands were lucid and constitutionally grounded. They called for the immediate withdrawal of Bill 7, already declared unlawful by the Constitutional Court. They urged the government to uphold the rule of law, to cease its procedural sleight of hand, and to prioritise the long-neglected Bill of Rights. They insisted on the right to peaceful assembly, not as a favour from the state, but as a constitutional guarantee under Article 21(1) of the Zambian Constitution, which affirms every citizen’s right to assemble freely and associate with others for the protection of their interests.
Yet the state’s response was anything but conciliatory. Reports surfaced that a Catholic bishop was summoned by police for his role in the mobilisation. This followed earlier episodes in which clergy were harassed or branded “Lucifer” for daring to speak truth to power. Archbishop Ignatius Chama, President of the Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops, warned that “division and anger” were replacing national unity, and that the country risked being “separated from God’s love” if it continued down this path.
President Hakainde Hichilema, a self proclaimed symbol of democratic renewal, addressed the nation from State House. On camera, he projected an image of openness, listening attentively as Oasis Forum Chairperson Beauty Katebe articulated the public’s concerns. Viewers saw a President seemingly willing to engage, to dialogue, to find common ground. But once the cameras were switched off and the media ushered out, the tone shifted dramatically.
According to sources present in the room, the President’s posture hardened. If the Oasis Forum “felt injured,” he said, they should take the matter to court. If they wished to stop the bill, they should “go and lobby their MPs.” It was not a conversation; it was a command. The contrast between the President’s public magnanimity and private intransigence is stark, and deeply troubling.
This duplicity has ignited fresh alarm over the integrity of the constitutional process. By directing civil society to courts whose rulings his administration has already disregarded, the President stands accused of operating outside the rule of law. His suggestion to lobby MPs is further tainted by allegations of inducements, claims that some opposition lawmakers have been offered K3 million to support the bill, first raised by historian Dr Sishuwa Sishuwa and later echoed by former Petauke MP Jay Jay Banda.
The President’s insistence on pushing Bill 7 through Parliament before its 17 December recess appears less a matter of policy than of political survival. His framing of opposition as tribal hostility, suggesting that church resistance stems from his ethnicity, has been met with widespread scepticism. Analysts note that he won the 2021 election by over a million votes, rendering claims of ethnic persecution politically untenable. Critics argue that such rhetoric is a calculated diversion from the procedural violations and public disapproval surrounding the bill.
The Choma procession, where UPND supporters marched in favour of Bill 7 under police escort, further exposes the administration’s selective application of the law. Peaceful assembly is permitted when it flatters the executive, but criminalised when it challenges it. Ms Katebe, with unflinching clarity, reminded the President of his activist past. “When he was in the trenches,” she said, “he knew it was perfectly fine to march peacefully. What has changed?”
Amid this constitutional turbulence, the story of Tasila Lungu casts a long and sombre shadow. The daughter of the late President Edgar Lungu has endured not only the loss of a father but the indignity of political interference in her mourning. For months, she was unable to bury him, a delay that defies cultural norms and human decency. The grief of a daughter was compounded by the machinery of a state that seemed more preoccupied with political calculus than compassion.
Speaker Nelly Mutti, who had previously stated that Tasila could return to Parliament within fourteen days of her father’s burial, later reversed course. Citing Standing Orders 215 and 243 and Article 72(8) of the Constitution, she declared the Chawama seat vacant. The timing,mere months before a general election, raises uncomfortable questions about the politicisation of grief and the erosion of parliamentary integrity.
This administration, once buoyed by the hopes of 2.8 million voters, now appears adrift from its founding promises. It governs not through consensus, but through contradiction. It speaks of unity while sowing division. It invokes the Constitution while undermining its core tenets. It calls for peace while criminalising peaceful assembly.
The Oasis Forum’s prayer was not merely a spiritual act. It was a constitutional lament. A call to conscience. A plea for Zambia to remember that democracy is not a slogan, but a discipline. It requires consistency, humility, and above all, fidelity to the truth.
In the quiet of the cathedral, as citizens bowed their heads in prayer, the contrast could not have been starker. Outside, a government bristling at dissent. Inside, a people refusing to be silenced. The question now is not whether Zambia will hear their prayer. It is whether those in power will heed it.
Africans are really cruel to each other. I have criticised Edgar Lungu throughout his presidency, but I do not understand how his daughter is expected to come and start politicking in Parliament before her father is even buried. I simply do not understand it.
Yes, the law might say so, but the law is made by human beings. The law is made by people, and every law in the world has a caveat that can be applied with basic common sense and basic decency.
I wish Zambians would stop being cruel to each other like this. Their former president has been lying in a mortuary in South Africa for over five months now, and instead of resolving that indignity, they pile more pressure on a grieving daughter. Why are Africans cruel to each other like this?
The reason she has not been able to attend Parliament is straightforward: she has been absent because she has been dealing with the unresolved death and unburied body of her own father, something no child should have to endure for this long. Any society with compassion would understand that grief, shock, and an international dispute over burial arrangements naturally make parliamentary attendance impossible.
Removing her for “continued absence” under these circumstances is not just legally rigid, it is morally tone-deaf and politically foolish. Her party will almost certainly retain that seat, and this move will backfire badly on the ruling party and on President Hichilema. It paints the government as vindictive at a time when empathy should have guided their decisions.
Does the president not have advisors? How could they not foresee that punishing a grieving daughter, while her father remains unburied in a foreign country, would harden public sympathy towards her and erode the ruling party’s moral standing?
You expect this kind of rigid reasoning from uneducated cadres and street-level supporters, but not from a president and not from a government. “The law says this, the law says that” is the type of argument you hear in the streets. Leadership, however, is supposed to rise above that level and apply both the law and common sense.
Politics and the presidency should operate the same way. A president and a government should not behave like overzealous street activists. They should interpret the law with fairness, compassion and basic human decency, especially when dealing with a grieving family and an unburied former head of state.
The president and his government should be ashamed by the fact that this MP has not been able to attend Parliament because they are busy fighting the family and blocking them from carrying out the wishes of the former president. This entire situation has been created by the president’s insistence on presiding over a funeral for a man who explicitly said he did not want him anywhere near his burial.
It is embarrassing, not just for Zambia but for Africans as a whole. It has become a spectacle, a public display of pettiness and vindictiveness at the very moment when dignity, compassion and leadership are required.
For real leaders, the issue here is not about what the law says. The first question any responsible leader would ask is simple: why has she not been able to attend Parliament? The answer is equally simple: her father is not buried, and the state has helped create that situation.
A proper leader would say, “Gentlemen and ladies, before we talk about parliamentary attendance, let us fix the real problem.” The real problem is the massive national indignity of a former president lying in a mortuary for over five months. That should shame any nation, regardless of politics. The duty of the state is to act fairly and to remove obstacles, not to weaponise them.
If Edgar Lungu said he did not want Hakainde Hichilema presiding over his funeral, why then is President Hichilema insisting on presiding over a funeral of someone who made his wishes clear? Why? These are the questions that real leaders ask.
Supporters, cadres and cheerleaders will not ask those questions, because they simply follow the wind. But leaders—true leaders—are expected to rise above petty politics and focus on restoring dignity, fairness and common sense.
‘I didn’t choose where to be born’ and his people are cruel for declaring Tasila’s seat vacant – Sishuwa
First, they effectively killed Edgar Lungu by blocking him from leaving the country to seek medical attention until it was too late.
Then, after the former president died, they moved to block the Lungu family from burying their loved one unless “I didn’t choose where to be born” was allowed to attend the funeral.
Now they have grabbed the daughter’s parliamentary seat on the premise that she has chosen to remain with the father’s unburied body in South Africa rather than return to Parliament.
MATTERS ARISING | State House Widens the Table as Bill 7 Storm Enters New Phase
The constitutional standoff entered a new chapter on Saturday after State House confirmed that President Hakainde Hichilema will meet additional civil society organisations on Monday, a move that disrupts the growing perception that the Oasis Forum alone embodies the national mood on Bill 7.
The announcement, delivered by Chief Communications Specialist Clayson Hamasaka, was deliberate in tone and strategic in timing. It came barely forty-eight hours after the President’s seven-hour meeting with the Oasis Forum and one day after their prayer rally that featured a heavy line up of former cabinet ministers, opposition presidential hopefuls and senior PF figures.
That rally, black-clad and symbolic, has increasingly been framed as a reunion of the old political elite rather than a broad civic reflection.
Hamasaka’s statement sought to reset the narrative. He said the President emphasised that the constitutional review “is not about advancing the interests of government, but about empowering citizens,” and that the reforms aim to widen participation for women, youth and persons with disabilities.
The message signals that government wants to reclaim the centre ground by broadening the list of voices deemed legitimate to speak on national reforms.
This shift matters. The anti-Bill 7 coalition has built its strength on the claim that “the people” reject the process. But those who submitted views to the Technical Committee through public sittings, online platforms and chiefdom consultations rarely feature in the public theatre. Instead, opposition pages and PF-aligned tabloids have filled the space with daily accusations that MPs are compromised and “bought.”
The Oasis Forum’s demand at State House that Bill 7 be “completely withdrawn” was presented as the national position, but its prayer gathering was dominated by familiar political faces who once occupied state power.
This is why Monday’s meeting is politically significant. It signals that the government will not accept the Oasis Forum as the sole custodian of public sentiment. By inviting organisations that support aspects of the reform process, State House is challenging the idea that dissent alone equals majority.
The President’s line that the Constitution “belongs to the people” is a reminder that the only institution mandated to reflect national will is Parliament, not ecclesiastical coalitions or partisan prayer blocs.
Anti-Bill 7 voices remain intense. Their media allies describe the reforms as a “power grab” and insist MPs cannot be trusted to vote independently. Pro-Bill 7 voices argue the reverse, saying legislators from all ten provinces are elected to settle national questions precisely because emotions shift, interests collide and pressure groups claim to speak for millions.
The reference to Edgar Lungu’s January 2016 amendments, which passed through Parliament despite UPND opposition, is a useful historical anchor.
Constitutional change has always been settled in the House, even in election years.
Hamasaka’s statement has landed in the middle of this clash. It carries a subtle challenge: if the Oasis Forum speaks for “the people,” who do the thousands who made submissions to the Technical Committee speak for? And if protesters claim MPs are compromised, does that render the entire representative system illegitimate?
These are not theoretical questions. They go to the heart of who has the authority to define Zambia’s future.
With dialogue continuing into next week and both sides retreating to review their strategies, the country enters a new phase where legitimacy, not volume, will determine the next direction.
The coming days will test whether consensus is possible in a climate where every group claims to speak for Zambia and where the central question remains unresolved: who truly stands in for “the people” in a constitutional democracy?
The Curious Case of the Guinea-Bissau coup or not …Goodluck Mr Jonathan
Amb. Anthony Mukwita reflects on Saturday
29 Nov. 25
I have scoured news sources, continentally and beyond starting from Lagos all the way to Doha and back, to try and get to the bottom of the Guinea-Bissau sad coup story.
Verifiable reports indicate soldiers toppled President Umaro Sissoco Embaló, suspended institutions, and installed General Horta Nta Na Man as interim leader for one year; Embaló then left for Senegal after being detained.
Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan publicly argued it was not a “real” coup, calling it closer to a “ceremonial coup,” noting the unusual sequence in which Embaló announced a coup before the military spoke—an account that risks trivializing a forceful seizure of power.
Guinea-Bissau has long been described as a cocaine gateway from Latin America to Europe, with narco-traffickers exploiting corruption and instability; the military even framed its actions as a response to “drug barons.”
While the country’s drug problem is serious, open-source reporting focuses on routes and influence rather than concrete, verifiable quantities; the principal drug is cocaine transiting to European markets.
Analysts have characterized the state as a “narco-state in flux,” with overlapping fault lines in politics and security.
Leaders, resources, and context
The ousted president is Umaro Sissoco Embaló; the interim leader is General Horta Nta Na Man (also referred to as Horta N’Tam/Horta Inta-A in some reports in image).
Guinea-Bissau’s economy relies on cashew exports, but it also has bauxite, phosphates, gold, diamonds, fisheries, and potential offshore oil—largely underdeveloped due to instability.
Credible scholarship and analyses consistently argue that coups—by any name—undermine democracy and should be condemned, documenting their negative impacts and regional democratic relapse.
Debunking the “fake coup” narrative, with a caution
When a president is arrested, institutions are suspended, and an army chief is sworn in as interim head of state, the event meets the core characteristics of a coup.
Calling it “ceremonial” risks normalizing extra constitutional power grabs and eroding deterrence. Madagascar’s Andry Rajoelina fled and was ousted amid a military-led takeover—his own statements confirmed flight under threat—showing how denial does not change the reality of a coup situation.
Goodluck Jonathan’s framing invites a “boy who cried wolf” problem: repeated minimization may diminish Africa’s credibility in condemning and deterring coups.
Pros, cons, and lessons for Africa • Pros (limited and contested): o Checks on constitutional abuse: Coups sometimes halt leaders governing in legal grey zones, as alleged in Guinea-Bissau’s contested political trajectory. o Security reset claims: Juntas often justify action as combating criminal capture (e.g., narco networks), though outcomes rarely match rhetoric.
• Cons (overwhelming and evidence-based): o Democratic backsliding: Coups derail elections, suspend institutions, and deepen mistrust in governance. o Instability and economic harm: They scare investment, freeze reforms, and prolong poverty—especially in fragile, resource-rich states like Guinea-Bissau.
o Regional contagion: Scholarship shows coups feed cycles of relapse and weaken continental norms against military rule. • Lessons for Africa: • Clean elections matter: Transparent, well-administered polls reduce grievance and legitimacy crises that trigger interventions.
• Rule-of-law and inclusion: Broad consultation, independent courts, and legislative oversight prevent “grey zones” where elites normalize extra constitutional manoeuvres. • Unambiguous condemnation: Coups must be called what they are—military seizures of power—and unequivocally condemned to preserve deterrence and democratic norms.
• Tackle illicit economies: Robust anti corruption and transnational crime cooperation are essential so security pretexts don’t become coup cover.
In sum, Guinea-Bissau’s takeover was real: the president was detained and left the country; a General was installed; institutions were suspended.
The drug factor must not be dismissed while former President Goodluck’s rhetoric must be taken with a pinch of salt because if it walks like a duck, clucks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.
One wonders what his motivation for the statement is but then Mr Goodluck is a big man and former President, not like simple diplomats and analysts like myself.
Africa’s credibility depends on rejecting euphemisms and insisting on clean elections, inclusive governance, and firm norms against unconstitutional power.
Ambassador Anthony Mukwita is a published Author & International Relations Analyst.
WELCOME TO FIRE WARFARE: THERMITE DRONES TURN UKRAINE’S DEFENSES TO ASH
Forget explosives. Russian drones are now dropping thermite – the stuff that burns at 4,000°F and can’t be extinguished with water – directly onto Ukraine’s anti-drone nets.
The nets were supposed to be the low-tech answer to the drone swarm problem. Cheap, effective, scalable.
String them up, catch the quadcopters, move on. Except now Moscow’s burning through them like they’re made of tissue paper.
This is a preview of how future wars will be fought – constant adaptation, weaponized chemistry, and defensive infrastructure that’s obsolete before it’s even deployed.
Ukraine builds a corridor defense system; Russia brings literal hellfire to melt it.
The real question? How fast can Kyiv iterate before the next countermeasure shows up.
Because if thermite drones are this easy to deploy, what stops Russia from using them on fuel depots, ammunition stores, or anything else that burns?
LITTLE – KNOWN FACTS ABOUT TUNDU LISSU’S NEAR – FATAL ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT
The assassination attempt on Tundu Lissu happened in 2017, during the presidency of John Pombe Magufuli.
Lissu was shot outside his residence in Dodoma on 7 September 2017, making it one of the most politically shocking events of Magufuli’s first term in office.
1. He was shot 16 times — but the bullets were clustered in a way meant to kill instantly
Most people hear “16 bullets.” What’s less known is that many shots were concentrated around his abdomen and lower torso, a pattern trauma surgeons say is typically intended to cause massive internal bleeding and organ failure within minutes.
2. Surgeons said it was one of the worst gunshot traumas they had ever seen in a surviving patient
Doctors in Dodoma and later Nairobi described his injuries as:
shattered bones
torn internal organs
destroyed soft tissue
extensive loss of blood He reportedly arrived at the hospital with barely measurable blood pressure.
3. His intestines were perforated multiple times
Multiple bullets passed through his abdominal cavity, tearing sections of his intestines. Even after emergency surgery, he suffered weeks of infection risk due to leakage and repeated internal repairs.
4. He underwent around 26 surgeries — some lasting over 10 hours
The lesser-known part is how long and grueling these operations were. Surgeons had to:
remove shrapnel
repair shredded organs
rebuild bone sections
stop recurrent internal bleeding
Some surgeries involved reopening previously closed wounds because of complications.
5. He carries at least one bullet that doctors could not remove
A bullet lodged deep in his lower back was considered too risky to extract — attempting removal could have damaged nerves or major arteries.
To this day, he lives with that metal fragment inside him.
6. He clinically “crashed” more than once during treatment
Accounts from the medical team indicate he went into critical decline multiple times, requiring emergency resuscitation measures. He was at the edge of survivability for several days.
7. His blood loss was catastrophic — he received unusually high transfusion volumes
He reportedly required dozens of units of blood, far more than a standard trauma case. Doctors described his survival as “biologically unlikely.”
8. Rehabilitation was brutally painful
Because of shattered bones, repeated surgeries, and nerve damage, he spent months:
learning to sit again
regaining leg strength
managing chronic pain He also developed severe scar tissue restrictions that required physiotherapy just to regain partial mobility.
9. The vehicle he was in was so riddled with bullets that investigators struggled to determine the exact firing angles
Photos (publicly available) show clusters of bullet holes on both sides of the car. The volume of fire suggested:
multiple attackers
synchronized shooting
close-range intent to finish the target
This is rarely talked about publicly in detail.
10. His survival required medical coordination across two countries
He was:
1. Stabilized in Dodoma
2. Rushed to Nairobi’s Aga Khan Hospital
3. Later flown to Europe for long-term reconstructive treatment
At each stage, doctors reportedly did not expect him to live long enough for the next transfer. #kenya #everyoneシ゚viralシviralシfypシ゚viralシalシ #neverforgotten #tanzania #AfricanHero #freedomfighter
Hawks arrest four in Russia-Ukraine recruitment probe as Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla resigns
The net is slowly closing in for the people who participated in the recruitment process of the South Africans in the Ukraine-Russia war.
On Friday, Umkhonto Wesizwe Party member of parliament and former President Jacob Zuma’s daughter Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla resigned as an MP.
In the latest developments, it has emerged that the Hawks have arrested four individuals that are alleged to be involved in the recruitment of the South Africans to the Russia-Ukraine war at the O.R Tambo International Airport today.
The four are charged with breaking the Foreign Military Assitance Act.
Hawks Spokesperson Colonel Katlego Mogale confirmed the allegations.
“Four suspects are to appear in the Kempton Park Magistrates court on Monday, 01 December 2025 following their arrest on Friday, 28 November 2025 on suspicion of contravention of the Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance Act, 15 of 1998,” said Mogale.
The Hawks said that the arrests emanate from a tip off from OR Tambo SAPS regarding four males en route to Russia via the United Arab Emirates who were removed from the boarding gate as suspicious and referred to the Hawks’ Crimes Against the State (CATS) section.
“Preliminary investigation revealed that a South African female had been facilitating the travel and recruitment of these individuals into the Russian Federation Military. A search and seizure warrant was obtained for an additional suspect who is believed to be involved in the facilitation of the four individuals as well as the fifth who had already left the country for Russia.
“Upon the individual’s arrival at OR Tambo International Airport (ORTIA) on 27 November 2025, the individual was interviewed, during which further evidence was uncovered. This led to the arrest of three additional male suspects on 28 November 2025. Electronic gadgets and two backpacks were seized for further investigation,” Mogale.
Mogale further said that coordination with intelligence and international counterparts is ongoing to determine the full extent of the network and any further security threats.
Are Diamonds Forever?: Why Angola and Botswana Trying to Buy De Beers Is a Strategic Mistake
The news that Angola and Botswana are considering a joint bid to buy De Beers has generated excitement across the continent. On the surface it looks like a historic reclamation of African mineral wealth. But when you look closely at what is happening in the global diamond market and at the economic priorities of both countries, the move is not visionary. It is deeply misguided.
The biggest problem is simple: the diamond market has changed forever. Natural diamonds no longer hold the power they once did. Over the past five years, prices of natural diamonds have collapsed, with some categories dropping 50 to 60 percent, especially smaller commercial stones. This is not a temporary dip. It is a structural shift driven by technology.
Lab grown diamonds have rewritten the rules. They now command 15 to 20 percent of the global jewellery market, and in engagement rings, the most important segment, they are capturing 40 to 50 percent of sales in the United States, China, India and parts of Europe. They are chemically identical, cheaper, ethically appealing and infinitely scalable. This has destroyed the old De Beers model built on scarcity and price control.
But the shock goes deeper. In the industrial diamond market, lab grown diamonds have completely taken over. Nearly 99 percent of industrial diamonds used for drilling, cutting, polishing, electronics, heat spreaders and quantum technologies are now synthetic. Natural industrial diamonds are essentially obsolete. The high tech future of diamonds, including semiconductors, quantum chips and diamond batteries, belongs entirely to laboratory production. Mining companies have no competitive edge here.
It is against this backdrop that Angola and Botswana want to buy De Beers, an empire built for a world that no longer exists.
This is especially worrying because both countries have more urgent and future oriented economic priorities. Angola should be focusing on expanding its oil refining capacity. The country exports crude and imports fuel, losing billions in value every year. By building refineries and selling processed fuel to the region, Angola could create a stable and scalable industrial base with far higher returns than diamonds can ever offer in the coming decades. Buying De Beers would divert resources from this critical national transformation.
Botswana is already dangerously over reliant on diamonds. The country should be investing aggressively in diversification: technology, financial services, manufacturing, energy and value added industries. Buying De Beers would not strengthen Botswana’s diamond revenues. It would trap the country inside a fading sector just as the global market shifts toward synthetics and branded jewellery.
Then there is the cost. Anglo American has valued De Beers at roughly 4.9 billion United States dollars after writing down its value by nearly 3 billion due to collapsing demand and weak pricing. They now carry it on their books at about 4.1 billion dollars. When a multinational writes down one of its crown jewels that aggressively, it is not offering a bargain. It is signalling decline. Angola’s finance minister has already stated that the national budget will not fund the bid, which means this acquisition would require debt, private consortium financing or risky restructuring.
If African nations want real economic sovereignty, the answer is not to inherit a shrinking business built on a 1950s market structure. The future lies in refining, manufacturing, technology, renewable energy, advanced materials and high value supply chains. Lab grown diamonds are reshaping the industry. Natural diamonds will survive, but they will never again dominate global jewellery or industrial sectors the way they once did. De Beers, for all its history, cannot reverse that trend.
Buying De Beers today is like buying a film camera company in the age of digital or a typewriter company in the age of smartphones. It may feel symbolic or patriotic or historic, but symbolism cannot overturn market physics.
If Angola and Botswana want to build real power, they should invest in the future, not in the remnants of the past.
PF VOWS TO CHALLENGE SPEAKER’S RULING ON CHAWAMA SEAT
The Patriotic Front says it will support legal efforts to challenge the decision by Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti to declare the Chawama parliamentary seat vacant.
PF Chairperson for Legal Affairs George Chisanga tells Phoenix News that the party believes the ruling lacks constitutional backing and must be revisited to maintain legal integrity in the legislature.
Mr. Chisanga has questioned the timing and basis of the Speaker’s decision, stating that it contradicts earlier guidance that had allowed the former Chawama lawmaker Tasila Lungu time to attend to family matters following the death of her father, former late President Edgar Lungu.
He maintains that the Speaker’s action risks creating uncertainty in parliamentary procedures and sets what he views as an inappropriate precedent.
Mr. Chisanga stresses that the ruling disregards matters still before the courts and fails to take into account the broader context affecting the former Chawama MP. He has warned that holding a by-election in Chawama will impose a heavy financial burden on the country.
And Ms. Lungu’s lawyer Makebi Zulu says a comprehensive statement will be issued soon after the matter is studied in full.
President Hakainde Hichilema told the Oasis Forum that if they object to Bill 7 they should either take the matter to court or lobby Members of Parliament not to vote for it, a blunt ultimatum delivered after cameras were switched off at State House and the media was asked to leave. The contrast between his public posture and his private message has raised new alarms about the integrity of the constitutional process and the President’s determination to push the bill through before Parliament goes on recess on 17 December.
On camera, Hichilema projected an image of openness, listening attentively as Oasis Forum Chairperson Beauty Katebe articulated the public’s concerns. Viewers across the country saw a President apparently willing to engage, dialogue, and find common ground. But according to insiders who witnessed the private meeting, the tone shifted immediately once journalists were ushered out. What followed was not negotiation, but a declaration.
The President reportedly told the Oasis Forum that he would not reconsider Bill 7, would not halt the process, and would not entertain further objections. If they “felt injured,” he said, they should take the matter to the courts. If they wanted Bill 7 stopped, they should “go and lobby their MPs.” That, according to the whistleblower, was the extent of the President’s engagement once the room was cleared of cameras.
The statement struck the delegation as a dismissal rather than consultation, particularly given the Constitutional Court’s earlier ruling that Bill 7 was illegal. By advising civil society to return to the same courts whose decision his administration has effectively ignored, the President has opened himself to accusations of operating outside the rule of law. His comment about lobbying MPs is also being read in the context of fresh allegations that some opposition lawmakers have been compromised with K3 million payouts to support the bill. The claims were first made by historian Dr Sishuwa Sishuwa and later reinforced by former Petauke MP Jay Jay Banda, who went on to name those he alleges have already received the inducements.
Hichilema’s insistence that the Oasis Forum should “go and lobby MPs” therefore raises troubling questions about whether the parliamentary process remains free from undue influence. Sources say the President is “fully committed” to bringing Bill 7 back to Parliament before recess and views the amendment as essential to his political security ahead of 2026.
Yet the bill’s legal foundation remains highly contested. The government has pressed ahead despite the Constitutional Court ruling, despite appointing a technical committee under the wrong legislation, and despite widespread public rejection from church groups, civil society bodies, and constitutional experts. Speaker Nelly Mutti has aligned firmly with the executive, adding to concern that the amendment process is being pushed through by political will rather than legal merit.
In recent days, the President has also framed opposition to Bill 7 as tribal hostility against him, claiming the church resists his reforms because of his ethnicity. The argument has been met with widespread scepticism. Analysts note that the President won the 2021 election by more than one million votes, a result that renders claims of ethnic persecution politically untenable. Critics say he is turning to tribal rhetoric to divert attention from the procedural flaws, legal violations, and public disapproval surrounding the bill.
Yesterday’s meeting at State House was meant to cool tensions. Beauty Katebe entered the room calling for constitutional clarity and urging the President to withdraw Bill 7 entirely and instead prioritise the Bill of Rights, the most pressing and long-neglected component of Zambia’s constitutional architecture. On camera, her message appeared to land. Off camera, it was reportedly swept aside.
After the meeting, Katebe announced that future talks will involve smaller teams from both sides, but gave no indication that the President had softened his stance. Instead, the sense emerging from State House is that the administration is buying time, using the extended recess to prepare the bill’s return to Parliament.
The carefully staged public image of dialogue has now collided with a much harder private reality. The country is left grappling with a President who speaks the language of consultation in front of cameras but delivers ultimatums when the press is gone.
Bill 7, once again, has become the crucible testing Zambia’s democracy. Whether the next few days bring restraint or a further erosion of constitutional norms will determine more than the fate of one amendment. It will shape the credibility of the institutions meant to protect the Republic.
Admin: We have watched this movie before. It never ends well ultimately we the Zambians decide at the ballot and we are brutal, merciless and precise.
If the motivation for the Nullification of the Chawama seat is to have a bye election at all costs then the ECZ has only about 75 days in which conduct that election because beyond the 12th of February there can not be a bye election according to the constitution.
If time will not be on the side of the ECZ and the UPND the question is why would you nullify a seat and let it remain vacant instead of allowing Tasila as per the recommendation of the Privileges committee to be attending parliamentary business and thereby representing her constituants virtually.
This subject is technical dear friends. For the praise singers please wait the CDF discussion.
The future is #ichabaice #JoinTheRevolution
To avoid this chipantepante leadership join the Movement on
NGOCC BEMOANS NULLIFICATION OF CHAWAMA PARLIAMENTARY SEAT
The Non-governmental Gender Organisations’ Coordinating Council — NGOCC — has expressed sadness over the nullification of the Chawama Constituency seat previously held by Honorable Tasila Lungu.
This follows the decision by Speaker of the National Assembly, Nelly Mutti, who declared the seat vacant after a vote by Members of Parliament, in line with Article 72 subsection 2 paragraph C of the Constitution.
NGOCC says the development is a major setback to women’s representation in Parliament, noting that Zambia has never surpassed 18 percent female representation, with numbers declining since the 2021 elections.
The organisation says the ongoing burial impasse of the late Sixth Republican President, Dr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu, prevented Hon. Tasila Lungu from fully executing her duties, ultimately resulting in the loss of another woman-held seat.
NGOCC has urged political parties to demonstrate commitment to women’s empowerment by adopting female candidates in the upcoming Chawama by-election.
The Speaker has since begun the process of notifying the Electoral Commission of Zambia to facilitate the by-election.
