Nathalie Yamb, aka “The Lady from Sochi,” is peddling the double genocide revisionist theory, indirectly stoking the flames of Hutu Power genocidal extremists hell-bent on “finishing the job”. Yamb’s delusions place her in a realm of lunacy that even the most fervent deniers would find perplexing. In a recent tweet on X, she stated that “Genocides sometimes become genocidaires,” a statement that, to any rational person examining the evidence, reveals Yamb’s sadistic intentions towards the survivors of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi.
First and foremost, Yamb’s actions must be seen for what they are – a deliberate effort to propagate the double genocide theory, originally concocted by Mitterrand, Balladur, and Juppé. This theory, conceived to downplay the gravity of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, was a desperate attempt to conceal the Elysée’s disastrous policies in Rwanda between 1990 and 1994. Ironically, Yamb, barred from entering France due to her endorsement of violence against symbols of the French presence in Africa, is now peddling the very fictional theories created by France to mask the atrocities she claims to oppose.
Moreover, if the post-genocide Rwandan government (she referred to as Tutsi) harbored intentions of committing a new genocide against Rwandan refugees (referred to as Hutu), it would have started with the “Hutu population” already present in Rwanda. Yet, for Yamb to consider such facts, it might take repeatedly dousing her with buckets of ice-cold reality like how the government invested significant financial and intellectual efforts into the reconciliation process following the 1994 genocide. Of course, such logical reasoning is lost on Yamb, a fervent sympathizer of the tropical Nazis in the great lakes’ region fanning the flames of Congolese xenophobia and hatred against Rwandan-speaking Congolese populations in the Kivu.
Furthermore, Yamb should be aware that genocide implementation is precisely defined by well-classified characteristics outlined in the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. None of these characteristics align with the Rwandan military operations to end the genocidal threat in the DRC. In reality, it’s not that Yamb lacks knowledge of these facts; the issue lies in her consistent display of arrogance, daring to venture into wild analyses on subjects she comprehends nothing about.
Additionally, the gullible Yamb overlooks the efforts made by the so-called “Tutsi” government to rebuild a devastated and traumatized nation, helping survivors to live alongside those who once sought to annihilate them. Yamb, a complete madcap, deliberately ignores such realities and refuses to acknowledge the post-genocide government’s initiatives like community dialogues and restorative justice, which have successfully liberated both perpetrators and victims from the shackles of shame, unforgiveness, hatred, revenge, and genocide ideology.
In essence, Yamb, as a sympathizer of the genocidaires, perpetuates hate messages against the victims of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi. She does so by weaving a toxic narrative that blends conspiracy theories, rumors, stereotypes, and a distorted rewriting of history, blurring the lines between fiction and reality. Sadly, despite the absurdity of Yamb’s claims, many Congolese seem captivated by her gibberish.
ellenkampire 
mkuser12