When Leaders Resist: The Fatal Pattern of Challenging Empire

A Socratic Dialogue on State-Sanctioned Elimination

Part 6 of 8: The Enforcement Mechanism

In Part 5, we explored how France maintains colonial control through the CFA Franc currency system. But what happens when African leaders try to break free? What becomes of those who dare to imagine true sovereignty?

The answer is a pattern so consistent, so thoroughly documented, that it ceases to be conspiracy and becomes simply: policy.

This is the story of what happens when you challenge empire.

The Original Sin: Patrice Lumumba

Me: You mentioned the pattern of eliminated African leaders. Let’s start at the beginning. Who was the first?

Respondent: Patrice Lumumba. The first democratically elected Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Assassinated with direct CIA and Belgian involvement in 1961—barely six months after independence.

His Crime

Lumumba’s crime was believing that Congo’s resources should benefit the Congolese people. He wanted to nationalize the mining industry, accepted Soviet technical aid when the West refused to help, and spoke openly about the continuing Belgian economic domination of his newly independent nation. His famous independence speech on June 30, 1960, infuriated Belgian King Baudouin when he declared: “We have known ironies, insults, blows that we endured morning, noon, and evening, because we are Negroes… We have known that the law was never the same whether dealing with a white or a Negro… We have known atrocious sufferings… We are no longer your monkeys.” The West called him a communist, a radical, dangerous and unstable.

What Actually Happened

The timeline tells a different story. In August 1960, the CIA authorized his assassination. In September 1960, Mobutu staged his first coup with CIA backing. By January 1961, Lumumba was beaten, tortured, and executed, and in February 1961, Belgian officers dissolved his body in acid.

Why He Had to Die

The reason was simple: Congo contained (and still contains) approximately 80% of the world’s coltan, which is essential for electronics, along with massive copper deposits, diamonds, gold, uranium, cobalt, and an estimated $24 trillion in untapped mineral wealth. If Lumumba had succeeded in nationalizing these resources, the entire neo-colonial project in Africa would have been threatened, as one success would have inspired others to follow.

The Replacement

The man installed in Lumumba’s place was Mobutu Sese Seko, who ruled for 32 years with full Western support despite stealing over $5 billion while his people starved, running a brutal dictatorship complete with political assassinations, and destroying Congo’s economy and infrastructure. However, he kept the country’s resources accessible to Western companies and was reliably anti-communist.

The Message

The lesson sent was clear: challenge resource extraction and die, or cooperate with extraction and rule forever.

The Prophet: Thomas Sankara

Me: Jump forward. Who’s the most inspiring example of resistance?

Respondent: Thomas Sankara. “Africa’s Che Guevara.” President of Burkina Faso (formerly Upper Volta) from 1983 to 1987.

Africa’s Che Guevara

In just four years, Sankara achieved what many African nations failed to accomplish in decades. He vaccinated 2.5 million children against meningitis, yellow fever, and measles, and planted 10 million trees to combat desertification. His government built roads and railways with local labor, increased school attendance from 6% to 22%, and took bold social steps by banning female genital mutilation and polygamy while promoting women’s rights—women made up a significant portion of his government. He renamed the country from the colonial “Upper Volta” to “Burkina Faso,” meaning “Land of Upright People.”

In a display of personal integrity rarely seen among world leaders, Sankara reduced his own salary to $450 per month, refused air conditioning in the presidential palace, sold off the government’s Mercedes fleet, and made his ministers use the cheapest cars available.

His Economic Philosophy

Sankara’s guiding principle was simple but radical: “He who feeds you, controls you.” Acting on this belief, he rejected IMF and World Bank loans, promoted food self-sufficiency, and redistributed land from feudal landlords to peasants. He launched literacy campaigns and insisted on building the nation with local resources rather than foreign aid, believing true independence required economic sovereignty.

His Critique of Debt

At the Organization of African Unity in 1987, Sankara delivered a powerful call for unified African refusal to pay foreign debts: “Debt is a cleverly managed reconquest of Africa… We cannot pay the debt because we are not responsible for it… Debt is neo-colonialism, in which colonizers have transformed themselves into ‘technical assistants’… We should say that debt cannot be paid, so that we don’t become the accomplices of financial killers.” He went further, challenging the CFA Franc itself: “The CFA Franc is a weapon of French domination. It is the sign of the continued subjugation of Africa.” He planned to remove Burkina Faso from the CFA Franc zone entirely.

October 15, 1987

On this date, Sankara was assassinated in a coup led by his deputy and best friend, Blaise Compaoré.

The Official Story vs. The Reality

The official narrative claimed it was an internal power struggle, that Sankara was becoming too authoritarian, just a natural political evolution. The reality painted a very different picture. French troops were present in the country during the coup. Compaoré immediately reversed all of Sankara’s policies, rejoined IMF and World Bank programs, and maintained the CFA Franc. He then ruled for 27 years with French support while Burkina Faso went from food self-sufficient to food aid dependent, and foreign debt skyrocketed again.

France’s Role

France publicly denied involvement, but documents later revealed the truth. French advisors were present with Compaoré, the weapons used were French-supplied, and the coup’s timing aligned perfectly with Sankara’s planned withdrawal from the CFA Franc zone. Compaoré received immediate French diplomatic recognition.

The Message

Once again, the lesson was clear: promote African self-sufficiency, debt refusal, and sovereignty, and you will be eliminated. Replace a visionary leader with a compliant one who reinstates dependency, and you will be rewarded with decades of power.

The Unifier: Muammar Gaddafi

Me: Gaddafi’s controversial. Was he really killed for challenging neo-colonialism?

Respondent: Gaddafi was many things—dictator, megalomaniac, human rights violator. But the timing and nature of his elimination reveal what truly threatened Western interests: pan-African economic unity.

A Controversial Figure with a Dangerous Vision

In 2009, Gaddafi proposed something that would shake the foundations of Western economic control in Africa: the Gold Dinar. This pan-African currency would be backed by Libya’s 144 tons of gold and would replace the CFA Franc in Francophone Africa. More threatening still, it would denominate oil sales in Gold Dinars rather than dollars or euros, uniting African economies independent of Western control and ending French monetary dominance across the continent.

Why This Terrified France

If successful, the implications were staggering. Fourteen CFA nations could abandon French control, and Libyan gold made the proposal credible—Libya actually had the funds to back it. Oil pricing in Gold Dinars would bypass the dollar and euro entirely, threatening French access to cheap resources and endangering the entire neo-colonial monetary system.

Gaddafi’s Other Threats to Western Interests

The Gold Dinar wasn’t his only challenge to the established order. Gaddafi had invested $30 billion in African development projects and planned an African satellite to break the European telecom monopoly. He funded an African Monetary Fund as an alternative to the IMF and promoted a unified African military. Under his rule, Libya had achieved the highest Human Development Index in Africa, offering free healthcare and education while sharing oil wealth with the population so generously that gasoline was cheaper than water.

The 2011 Intervention

The official narrative presented the intervention as humanitarian—Gaddafi was killing his own people, and the international community had a Responsibility to Protect. The mission was supposedly about democracy and human rights.

The reality tells a different story. France led the NATO bombing campaign with surprising eagerness. Hillary Clinton’s emails, released later, revealed fears about the Gold Dinar and pan-African currency. French corporations immediately secured contracts in post-Gaddafi Libya, while the country transformed from a stable state into a failed terror haven. Slave markets returned to Libya after its “liberation,” a mass migration crisis was triggered, and regional destabilization benefited Western intervention in the Sahel.

Sarkozy’s Connection

Years later, explosive details emerged. Gaddafi had financed Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential campaign, and Sarkozy sought to eliminate evidence of this. Gaddafi threatened to expose the corruption before the intervention began—conveniently, he died before revealing the details.

Hillary Clinton’s Emails

A March 2011 email laid bare the real concern: “Qaddafi’s government holds 143 tons of gold, and a similar amount in silver… This gold was accumulated prior to the current rebellion and was intended to be used to establish a pan-African currency based on the Libyan golden Dinar. This plan was designed to provide the Francophone African Countries with an alternative to the French franc (CFA).”

The translation was clear: he had to be eliminated before the Gold Dinar could threaten French control.

The Message

Once more, the pattern held: unite African economies against Western control, and NATO will bomb you into the Stone Age. Your country will be destroyed as an example to anyone else who dares to dream of true independence.

The Lesser Known: A Gallery of the Eliminated

Me: This seems like an unbeatable block of terrorizers. There must be a lot more who tried and met similar fates?

Respondent: Dozens. Here are some lesser-known examples that follow the same disturbing pattern.

Mehdi Ben Barka (Morocco, 1965)

Mehdi Ben Barka was a Moroccan politician who opposed French neo-colonial influence and organized the first Tricontinental Conference, which united Africa, Asia, and Latin America against imperialism. He “disappeared” in Paris under mysterious circumstances with French intelligence services implicated. His body was never found.

Ruben Um Nyobè (Cameroon, 1958)

Ruben Um Nyobè led the independence movement against French control and opposed continued French economic dominance. He was killed by the French military before official independence, with his movement portrayed as “terrorist.” France maintained control through puppet leaders.

Felix Moumié (Cameroon, 1960)

Felix Moumié continued Um Nyobè’s work but was poisoned by French intelligence in Geneva. The thallium poisoning was later confirmed when a French agent confessed. Another voice for true Cameroonian independence was silenced.

Laurent Kabila (DRC, 2001)

Laurent Kabila replaced Mobutu and tried to reduce Western mining company influence by renegotiating mining contracts to benefit Congo. He was assassinated by a bodyguard with foreign connections and replaced by his son Joseph, who proved more compliant with Western interests.

Samuel Doe (Liberia, 1990)

Samuel Doe was initially US-backed in a 1980 coup but later sought economic independence from US influence and attempted to diversify away from American control. He was captured, tortured, and executed by a rebel group with external funding, after which Liberia descended into civil war.

The Pattern Is Consistent

The cycle repeats itself across decades and borders: a leader seeks genuine independence, challenges foreign economic control, gets labeled as a dictator, terrorist, or communist, faces a coup, assassination, or intervention, and is ultimately replaced with a compliant leader who restores Western access.

The Leaders Who Survived: The Control Group

Me: You mentioned leaders who cooperate with France rule for decades. Give me examples.

Respondent: Here’s the control group—the leaders who played along and thrived.

Omar Bongo (Gabon, 1967-2009: 42 years)

Omar Bongo maintained the CFA Franc system and gave French companies preferential oil contracts. He allowed French military bases and visited Paris more than Libreville, his own capital. He amassed billions while Gabon remained poor, yet France called him a “great democrat.”

Paul Biya (Cameroon, 1982-Present: 43 years and counting)

Paul Biya spends more time in Switzerland than Cameroon while maintaining total French economic control. Despite brutal suppression of dissent and repeatedly rigged elections, he’s still considered “legitimate” by France.

Teodoro Obiang (Equatorial Guinea, 1979-Present: 46 years)

Teodoro Obiang seized power via coup and has never held a fair election. His son owns $100 million worth of supercars while the country lives in poverty. But because he allows Western oil companies total access and maintains close ties with France and the US, he’s celebrated as a “partner in stability.”

Idriss Déby (Chad, 1990-2021: 31 years)

Idriss Déby came to power via a French-backed coup, and Chad hosted a major French military base throughout his rule. He was a brutal dictator who rigged every election, but because he fought terrorism—which conveniently justified French presence—he was protected. When he was killed in battle in 2021, his son was immediately installed with French blessing.

The Common Thread

These leaders all share certain characteristics: they ruled for decades despite being dictators, amassed massive personal wealth while their populations suffered, rigged elections and committed human rights abuses, yet were never threatened with “humanitarian intervention.” Why? Because they maintained Western economic access.

The Message

The lesson is brutally clear: brutality is fine, corruption is fine, dictatorship is fine—just don’t threaten resource extraction or monetary control.

The Mechanisms of Elimination

Me: How exactly do they do it? What are the actual methods?

Respondent: The toolkit is well-established and depressingly consistent.

Method 1: Direct Assassination

Sometimes they don’t bother with subtlety. Sankara was shot during a coup. Lumumba was beaten and executed. Olympio was shot outside the US embassy. Moumié was poisoned. Quick, brutal, effective.

Method 2: Coup Installation

This one’s more sophisticated. They support opposing military officers, provide intelligence and weapons, coordinate the timing, and then immediately recognize the new government. It’s usually blamed on “internal politics,” and most people buy it.

Method 3: Rebel Funding

Here’s where they get creative. They identify opposition groups, channel weapons and money through third parties to create “legitimate” armed resistance, and portray the opposition as freedom fighters. Eventually, the rebels overthrow the targeted leader, and everyone thinks it was a grassroots revolution.

Method 4: Economic Strangulation

This method is slower but just as deadly. The IMF and World Bank apply pressure, credit dries up, loans get recalled, the currency is attacked, and inflation spirals. Then they blame the government for the economic crisis, and the population turns against their own leader. It’s brilliant in its cruelty.

Method 5: International Isolation

They apply diplomatic pressure through allies, run media campaigns painting the leader as a dictator, impose travel bans and asset freezes, and exclude the country from international institutions. The pariah status becomes self-fulfilling.

Method 6: Military Intervention

When all else fails, there’s always bombs. They use “humanitarian” justifications, manipulate the UN Security Council, launch NATO bombing campaigns, execute regime change operations, and install a friendly government. Libya is the textbook example.

The Beauty of the System

What makes this so effective is that multiple methods are always available. If one fails, they try another. Eventually, one succeeds. And it always looks justified to the international community.

The Question of Complicity

Me: Are you saying the US and Europe deliberately kill African leaders?

Respondent: I’m saying the documentary record speaks for itself.

Confirmed Cases

The CIA authorization to kill Lumumba has been declassified. French involvement in Sankara’s assassination is documented. Hillary Clinton’s emails about Gaddafi’s Gold Dinar threat are public. Sarkozy’s Libyan campaign finance scandal was proven in court. French intelligence agents have confessed to poisoning Moumié. These aren’t conspiracy theories—they’re historical facts.

Pattern Evidence

Look at the pattern: every leader who challenged Western interests was removed, while every compliant dictator was protected for decades. Every resource-rich nation that attempted sovereignty was destabilized. Every successful African economy that threatened the neo-colonial model faced intervention. The consistency is impossible to ignore.

The Plausible Deniability

But here’s the genius of it—they always have cover stories. “Internal political conflicts.” “Civil wars.” “Human rights violations requiring intervention.” “Terrorist threats.” “Protecting democracy.” It all sounds so noble and justified.

But notice something: human rights only seem to matter when leaders threaten Western interests. Compliant dictators can violate rights for decades without facing any consequences whatsoever.

Why This Matters for You

Me: This is depressing. What’s the point of knowing this?

Respondent: Because the same patterns that eliminate African leaders who seek sovereignty also suppress individuals who seek consciousness sovereignty, economic sovereignty, and health sovereignty.

The Universal Pattern

It works the same way at every level. Challenge the profitable status quo, get labeled with whatever term discredits you most effectively, get eliminated or marginalized, the system continues extracting value, and the official story tells you it was all for your own good.

Your Version

When you explore consciousness beyond materialism, you’re called delusional. When you question pharmaceutical dependency, you’re called anti-science. When you seek economic alternatives to debt, you’re called financially irresponsible. When you research suppressed information, you’re called a conspiracy theorist.

Their Version

When a leader seeks monetary sovereignty, he’s called a dictator. When a leader tries to unite Africa against neo-colonialism, he’s called dangerous. When a leader nationalizes resources, he’s called a communist. When a leader challenges Western control, he faces a coup, assassination, or intervention.

The tactics are the same. The goal is the same. Only the scale is different.

Same Mechanism. Different Scale.

Once you see how empire eliminates threats at the state level, you start recognizing the same patterns at the individual level. The suppression of consciousness research and the assassination of African leaders? Branches of the same tree. And honestly, I find it scary, sad, and infuriating all at once.

It’s scary because these are organizations with virtually infinite power to do as they wish to anyone. They operate on every continent, and their victims include people with power too. So I wonder: who can stand up to them? Who can beat them? Will their brutal reign ever end? Only divine intervention seems capable of stopping them.

The sad part is the most visible. People live in poverty, hunger, and fear because of this system’s thirst and greed. But worse, others are so brainwashed they actively defend their oppressors—some hoping to join the powerful, some believing they already have, most simply unaware they’re being used. This is the strongest shield these organizations have: their victims work and cheer for them. It breaks my heart every time I think about it.

Then there’s the frustration, which hits me from two angles. First, the willfully ignorant who refuse to see the truth, and those who, despite being victims themselves, profit from this setup by harming others. Second, the sheer inhumanity and lack of shame in how these organizations operate. I can’t comprehend having the means to be happy and choosing instead to dedicate yourself to destroying others. What kind of emptiness drives that?

In Part 7, we’ll examine the terrorism business model: how instability is profitable, who benefits from eternal war, and why “anti-terrorism” operations always seem to protect resource extraction rather than people.

Sources

Documented Assassinations

“The Assassination of Lumumba” by Ludo de Witte – Belgian/CIA involvement
“The Murder of Patrice Lumumba” by Emmanuel Gerard – Based on declassified files
UN investigation into Sankara’s assassination (2021, ongoing)
French parliamentary documents on Françafrique operations

Hillary Clinton’s Libya Emails

Available via WikiLeaks and FOIA requests
March 2, 2011 email explicitly mentions Gold Dinar threat

Documentaries

“Lumumba: Death of a Prophet”
“Thomas Sankara: The Upright Man”
“Gaddafi: The Truth” (various sources, compare narratives)
“Françafrique” by Patrick Benquet