Numerous protests have been raised by prisoners at the US military detention centre at Guantanamo Bay. Over a 100 inmates went on a hunger strike against the brutal treatment and indefinite confinement. These protests rapidly gained media’s attention. Prison authorities responded to the strike by restraining the inmates in a feeding chair with their arms, legs and head strapped to it until the food digested properly.

Though internationally it’s a duty to respect the protest and the strikers’ decision not to eat anything, the American policy directs force feeding the prisoners for the own ‘safety and welfare”. President Barack Obama has defended this practice at Guantanamo, telling a news conference last year, “I don’t want these individuals to die”.

As for me, I stand for the right of the prisoners in this very case.  I don’t know what the situation at Guantanamo prison is, have no idea about their treatment. But if the government goes against the right to go on a strike, it automatically blocks the inmates’ all other rights, in fact, the people are treated like animals having no ability to speak and to be heard.  And this is all despite the fact that their wines, in many cases, have not been proven…

As of now, 155 detainees remain at Guantanamo but the current number of strikers is unknown. The prison authorities stopped disclosing the details of the protest last December, saying it’s no longer in their interest to publicly release the information. However, according to some hidden sources, at the latest count, 17 of the strikers continue to be force-fed.

Christian Karembeu is a French footballer, a European champion, taking the third place among the best players of the xx century on Oceania. At first sight, an ordinary star who is respected by millions of fans...

 But there is a very interesting thing about him – although being a French footballer, he never sang the French national anthem - La Marseillaise. He did so in memory of his great-grandpaexhibited at the Human Colonial Exhibition in a Paris museum in 1931.

Human Zoo - once a common form of entertainment in the West for the general public in the XIX - early XX century, whose purpose was to demonstrate immigrants from Asia and Africa in the natural and sometimes primitive savage form and also those people who had physical abnormalities. Similar zoos pronounced racist overtones, exhibiting those people next to the monkeys to show their common origin. 

Today, Jardin d'Agronomie Tropicale is seen as a stain in the history of France. But then more than 35,000 men, women and children were brought as exhibits in human zoos, most of them – against their will.

      

       Five Indians kidnapped from Chile in 1881 and exhibited in the human zoo. Died after a year in Europe.                                                                                      

Ota Benga, a pygmy from the valley of the Congo. In 1916, unable to return to his native Congo, he shot himself.

Labrador Eskimos family. In the course of five months they all died of smallpox, to which they had no immunity. Abraham Ulrikab had a diary in which he described all the humiliations his family had experienced from the missioners.

  

Sarah Baartman

The fact that she had protruding buttocks and society view her as this “wild or savage female”. She was then considered to be part of the "Negro race," which at the time was considered the lowest race of humans. She was sometimes likened to an orangutan instead.

It’s said for the nowadays European liberals to admit their grandfathers and fathers willingly made ​​money on human suffering. The last human exhibit disappeared from European zoo only in 1935 in Basel and in 1936 in Turin. But the last "temporary exhibition" with blacks was in 1958 in Brussels at the Expo, where the Belgians introduced "Congolese village with its residents."  Such a cavalier violation of international human rights!  So cruel and inhumane that I even have no words to say anything…

One factor. 2 nations. No similarity.

It has turned into one of the most important, if not the principal, factor of the global and regional geopolitics, the subject of great debates among countries who possess it and those experiencing deficits. In the modern globalizing world, this interconnection between it and geopolitics is rising.

As we know, previously, it was the military power to establish the framework of the character of international relations. Later, the role of religion was regarded as a determining factor. Nowadays it’s oil that plays first fiddle.

One would say governments rich in oil can be sure that their country is going to prosper in the course of the 21^st century. “No! “, I would tell you. Why? Just because my country is an object lesson of the falsity of that statement.

The government always tells people that the Norwegian experience was taken as the basis for the development of the oil sector of our country. Without any comparative analyses, schemes and numbers I can tell you either they work insufficiently or simply almost all revenue from oil export goes into the pockets of senior officials. Why such a conclusion?  Do you observe totally free and yet highly qualified public service here in Kazakhstan, is the level of unemployment at its minimum, can the average salary be compared to that of Norway? By no means, I think. We are not a poor country, but we could be a rich one. Should all revenue be nationalized, we could be. If only Kazakhstan weren’t that corrupted, if only…