Trump-fake-news-yellow-bg-950x108px.jpg

Talk:Safari Club

From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search

content moved:

Safari Club refers to either an anti-environmental organization or to a group of countries organized to coordinate anti-communist foreign policies in Africa in the 1970s and 1980s.

Safari Club International

Safari Club International is an anti-environmental organization organized to promote the interests of its members in hunting game as a blood sport. Safari Club members aspire to collect the heads or skins of big game animals. In the past their attempts to import trophies of endangered animals from shooting expeditions outside the United States have often landed them in hot water with the Fish and Wildlife Service. To solve that vexing conservative public policy problem, the second Bush administration appointed Matthew J. Hogan, the former chief lobbyist for Safari Club International, as the Fish and Wildlife Service on March 17, 2005.

Organized with the blessing of Henry Kissinger, U.S. Secretary of State for the Nixon and Ford administrations, the Safari Club was the brainchild of French spy chief Comte Claude Alexandre de Marenches and consisted of France, Egypt, Iran, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Information about the group came to light after the 1979 Iranian revolution exposed previously secret documents of the former Iranian regime's Foreign Ministry.

Sources

  • Mammood Mamdani. 2004. Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror. New York: Doubleday, Three Leaves Press. ISBN 0385515375. Pp. 84-87.

Links


either anti-enviromental or anti-communistic front from in the 80s? How about a hunting advocacy group, that has some members so stupid, and with such an grievious case of genitalia deficit disorder, that they are willing to pay big bucks for the "honor" of going to African game reserves and getting to cull the herds? That what the idiot Nugent did. The Big hunter got to shoot an elephant that the wardens had already decided had to go, and he paid them way to much for this.

Source this crap, OK? Safari Club is not the conservation group they claim, but if you are going to state they were a anti-marxist goverrnment front, give up better data that this.

Do the research; give us cited data about who the membership at the top is. Don't just parrot, and then toss one obscure book ref at the bottom. Point to articles about the hot water they got into. There must be some, if this is true.

--Hugh Manatee 09:03, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Dr Rachel Bronson, Director, Middle East Studies, Council on Foreign Relations, speaking at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Tuesday, May 24, 2005 said:

"In 1976, when the United States was pulling back, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Morocco, France, and Iran formed something called the Safari Club. The name was taken because it was exotically African." (Hmmm. Not a very plausible seeming reason. Anyway.) "It was set up by Intelligence Ministers and held its first meeting in 1976 in Riyadh. The goal was to stop the Soviet penetration in Africa. If the United States could not or would not repel it, this group sought to do so. The Safari Club helped to reverse a coup in Zaire and win Somalia from Soviet clutches. Its efforts were directly intent to combat Soviet penetration. "

[1]

So it must be true! ;-)

Mahmood Mamdani is the Herbert Lehman Professor of Government and Anthropology, Columbia University [2], so perhaps what he says can be taken seriously. The context of the assertions are important, however, as are the references. Please look for a copy of this book to check the accuracy of the article text. Some quotes and references (footnotes?) if provided would be helpful, too. If this is not done in a couple of weeks, I'll re-instate the article as there's no reason for it to be removed. Mememe 09:45, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Aren't we all just a little too excitable! Sourcewatch isn't a newsroom and the articles here are written when people have time away from their real jobs to work on them. RWBIAD. If you don't like the existing content why not contribute new text to improve it? I think we are all on the same side here - the Truth. 66.20
It's reasonable to question the validity of single-sourced assertions. Also, people do post nonsense to this wiki, so a bit of frustration is understandable, as is the confusion with another (somewhat irrelevant here) group of near enough the same name. Let's be nice to each other and try to be understanding and forgiving :-) Group hug! Mememe 09:55, 19 Aug 2005 (EDT)