Obama: Fecklessness Galore - UN backs Genocidaire?

Who is responsible?  One thing we can count on, anytime a genocide is occuring or has occured, the perpetrators always blame someone else for all the bodies littering the cities, road, fields ...

What is Samantha Power doing at this moment?  She was a vociferous advocate (in her book) for US intervention in Rwanda ...





Charges fly in killings of 1,000 in Ivorian town




By MICHELLE FAUL
Apr 3, 6:06 AM EDT

Associated Press



JOHANNESBURG (AP) -- The United Nations and the government it supports in embattled Ivory Coast are trading accusations over the killings of hundreds of civilians in a western town.

The U.N. accused hunters fighting in a force to install democratically elected President Alassane Ouattara of "extra-judicial executions" of more than 330 people in Duekoue.

Ouattara's government Saturday night accused U.N. peacekeepers of abandoning civilians there to vengeful militiamen fighting for incumbent Laurent Gbagbo, who refuses to accept his election defeat.

The Catholic charity Caritas said more than 1,000 were killed over three days last week in one Duekoue neighborhood controlled by pro-Ouattara forces. Caritas said they did not know who did the killing.





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
genocide

Obama: Dithering while the world Burns (Ivory Coast 1)

There are many adult decisions that should have been made by this time, many that need to be made now, and many more that need to be made within hours and days.  Obama does not make decisions.  He waits and thinks, as anyone who has gone to graduate school or law school remembers - rash decisions are not promoted, clear thinking, slow, seemingly laborious decisions, well-thought out, evaluated, discussed - those ideas and those decisions are beneficial (to everyone but the thousands and hundreds of thousands who happen to be dead).



Ivory Coast: aid workers find 1,000 bodies in Duekoue


The single biggest atrocity in the long battle for control of Ivory Coast has emerged after aid workers discovered the bodies of up to 1,000 people in the town of Duekoue.



By Aislinn Laing
2 Apr 2011
The London Telegraph


Charity workers who reached Duekoue said it appeared the killings had taken place in a single day, shortly after the town fell to troops loyal to Alassane Ouattara, the man internationally-recognised as having won last year’s presidential election.

The apparent massacre came despite the presence of United Nations troops and - if confirmed - will cast a shadow over Mr Outtara’s assumption of the Ivory Coast’s presidency after a four-month battle to oust Lawrence Gbagbo, the former president who lost the November election but refused to step down.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, said he was “gravely concerned” by the violence and loss of life in Ivory Coast and added: “I am determined that all alleged human rights abuses... must be investigated and those responsible held to account.

The International Committee for the Red Cross said its staff discovered more than 800 bodies of people who were clearly local civilians. They were mainly men who had been shot and left where they fell, the organisation said, either alone or in small groups dotted around the town, which lies at the heart of Ivory Coast’s economically crucial cocoa producing region.

Patrick Nicholson, a spokesman for the Catholic charity Caritas, said his team had counted 1,000 bodies, adding that some had been hacked with machetes. The UN said that it already logged 430 killed in Duekoue and was still investigating reports of more dead in the town.

Fighting in the country’s economic capital, Abidjan, appeared to be reaching a bloody climax and there were predictions that the compound occupied by Mr Gbagbo and what remains of his entourage would be overrun within the next 24 hours.

Even though most of Mr Gbagbo’s military chiefs have abandoned him in the past week, allowing Mr Ouattara’s forces to take control of most of the country and lay siege to his powerbase in Abidjan, the 65 year-old strongman remained defiant, with friends saying he would rather die than admit defeat.

Mr Ouattara has instructed that Mr Gbabgo be taken alive if possible, to ensure that is made to answer publicly for his refusal to step down from power, leading to the deaths of 492 people on both sides even before the Duekoue killings.

Kelnor Panglungtshang, a spokesman for ICRC, said its workers were struggling to keep the newly-discovered bodies in a condition to be identified by their families - a task made harder because the town’s mortuary has been looted in the lawlessness left in the wake of the conquering forces.

“Our colleagues on the ground are doing their best but it’s a horrific situation,” he said. “One very experienced colleague says he’s never seen anything like it.”

The charity said it had been told by locals that intercommunal violence erupted soon after Mr Ouattara’s forces took control of the town on Monday. Thousands of people left their homes to escape the fighting and an estimated 40,000 sought refuge in a nearby Roman Catholic mission’s compound. The priests who operate it are running short of food, clean water and medical equipment to treat those they say arrived with gunshot wounds.

The bodies are thought to be of those who did not reach sanctuary in time. They were killed despite 200 United Nations troops operating what it said were “robust” patrols from its base on the outskirts to protect civilians in and around the church.

Hamadoun Toure, the UN spokesman in Ivory Coast, said it had warned both sides fighting in the town that they would be held responsible for any atrocities committed, but said UN troops “were not aware” that civilians were being attacked and killed.

Ivory Coast is the world’s largest cocoa producer and as the gateway to the crop’s heartlands, Duekoue was a strategically vital prize. But there are historic tensions between nationalistic Ivory Coast natives and those descended from people seen as “foreign” settlers, mostly from neighbouring African countries, who originated in the north.

Mr Gbagbo’s support came from the more nationalistic south; but Mr Ouattara, himself the son of immigrants, won 54 per cent of votes cast in an election which was internationally judged to be broadly fair.

Some victims in Duekoue appear to have been killed by mercenaries from nearby Liberia, reported to have been fighting for both Mr Gbagbo and Mr Ouattara.

The Ouattara camp has urgently tried to distance itself from involvement in any of the new deaths. A spokesman said the government “firmly rejects accusations and denies any involvement” in possible abuses. It said it had found mass graves in towns near to Duekoue “whose authors are none other than the loyal forces, mercenaries and militias of Laurent Gbagbo”.

Apollinaire Yapi, an advisor in Mr Ouattara’s camp, said his troops had been warned not to engage in revenge attacks. But he conceded that he could not rule out the possibility of some excesses.

“We have a duty to protect civilians and it is because of that duty that we have taken military action to remove Mr Gbagbo,” he said. “If there are some people among us who are responsible for any breach of the law, they will be punished. We have to investigate exactly what happened.”

Mr Ouattara’s forces continued to attack Mr Gbagbo’s residence and the presidential palace in Abidjan after entering the city on Thursday.

Despite losing the support of military chiefs in recent days, he retains the backing of the Republican Guard and students recruited to the army in recent weekends by his militant youth leader, Charles Ble Goude.

On Friday they seized back the state broadcaster from Mr Ouattara’s forces and today broadcast an appeal for more soldiers to join them for what may prove their final stand.

Heavy gun battles between the two sides has resulted in most of Abidjan’s five million residents being too terrified to leave their homes to replenish their now dwindling supplies of food and fuel. Those who did so last week found themselves threatened and shot at by violent looters.

Henry Gray, a field coordinator for Medecins Sans Frontiers in Abidjan, said one hospital in the city treated 50 people suffering with gunshot wounds on Friday.

He and his colleagues have been trapped in their office. “We had been moving around visiting clinics until a few days ago, but the situation on the streets has deteriorated to such an extent that it’s just become too dangerous to go outside.”

Mr Yapi predicted that Mr Gbagbo would be captured shortly and put the delay down to Mr Ouattara’s insistence that he be taken alive, and for civilian casualties to be kept to a minimum.

“We don’t want to kill the man, he must be tried for all he has done,” he said. “If he dies, he becomes a martyr. Our goal is to capture him alive.”

Guy Labertit, one of Mr Gbagbo’s closest friends and a member of France’s Socialist Party, said he had spoken to him on Thursday and he had made clear he would not leave.

“He will not resign and he will not come out alive,” he said.





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
genocide

Ivory Coast: Brink of Genocide

Ivory Coast on brink of 'genocide,' says envoy



December 30, 2010

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Political unrest following Ivory Coast's disputed presidential election has brought the West African country to the "brink of genocide," its new ambassador to the United Nations said.



World leaders have stepped up pressure on Laurent Gbagbo to quit in favor of Alassane Ouattara, widely recognized as having won the vote.



Youssoufou Bamba, appointed as ambassador to the United Nations by Ouattara, described him as the rightful ruler of Ivory Coast.



"He has been elected in a free, fair, transparent, democratic election. The result has been proclaimed by the independent electoral commission, certified by the U.N.," Bamba told a news conference on Wednesday.



"To me the debate is over, now you are talking about how and when Mr. Gbagbo will leave office," Bamba said.



He said there had been a "massive violation of human rights," with more than 170 people killed during street demonstrations in Ivory Coast.



"Thus, one of the messages I try to get across during the conversations I have conducted so far, is to tell we are on the brink of genocide. Something should be done," Bamba told journalists.



Bamba said he planned to meet every member of the United Nations Security Council.



"I intend to meet all the 15 members. I will meet all of them to explain to them the gravity of the situation ... We expect the United Nations to be credible and the United Nations to prevent violation and to prevent the election to be stolen from the people," Bamba said.



The November 28 election was meant to reunite Ivory Coast, the world's top cocoa growing nation, after a 2002-03 civil war. But a dispute over the results has provoked lethal street clashes and threatens to restart open conflict.



The U.N. General Assembly last week recognized Ouattara as Ivory Coast's legitimate president by unanimously deciding that the list of diplomats he submitted to the world body be recognized as the sole official representatives of Ivory Coast at the United Nations.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Africa

Sudan and the dance of the Fairies

One of those things that will not happen ... and Obama knows this very well, as do most reasonable people.

BUT ... everyone can pretend, and they seem to do very well at pretending - Gnomes, fairies, leprechauns .... they are all real.





Obama 'pleased' with Sudan action

By MATT NEGRIN
11/15/10 5:14 PM Updated: 11/15/10 5:30 PM

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs released this statement as southern Sudanese prepare to vote in an independence referendum:

"The President is extremely pleased that voter registration has begun in Southern Sudan in preparation for the January 9th, 2011 referendum on self-determination. Voter registration is a critical milestone in that process, and we hope that it will continue unabated. We call on Northern and Southern leaders to finish the work started with the voter registration process to ensure the referendum is peaceful and occurs on time, and that the will of the people of South Sudan are respected regardless of the outcome. Both parties also must urgently work to find an agreed-upon way forward for Abyei in the interest of lasting peace, and we call on the government of Sudan to fully fund the Southern Sudan referendum commission."





 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
sudan

Rwanda: Genocide News Update (Hint: US butts in)

I find it difficult to read or listen to people (Americans) argue issues on which they are so uninformed.  The State Department arguing anything, and I mean, anything in regard to genocide makes me want to laugh, cry, and throw up all over them.  Rwanda should hand down indictments against a few Americans (now retired from their previous positions) and slap a few morons around who are now holding positions.  I cannot believe Samantha Power would sit still while the State Department made such a fool of the United States.

It was not the US that lost nearly one million people to a genocide the US pretended wasn't happening and ignored at every opportunity.  It was Rwanda, and Rwandan justice has taken all these years to catch some guilty parties - let them continue and stay out of their internal affairs lest they cast their net wider and scoop up a few retired Americans.

The US is so busy condemning events everywhere.  I am amazed we get much done with all the condemnations going around.



Rwanda: US genocide lawyer 'attempted suicide'


Thursday, 3 June 2010 19:30 UK

A US lawyer arrested on allegations of genocide denial tried to commit suicide in his cell, Rwandan officials said.

Peter Erlinder arrived in Rwanda last week to help defend opposition leader Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, who has been charged with promoting genocide ideology last month.

Police spokesman Eric Kayiranga said Mr Erlinder has "admitted" that he tried to kill himself.

His daughter told the BBC shes does not believe he would try to take his life.

Rwanda's 1994 genocide claimed the lives of about 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus.

'Concern'

According to the spokesman, Mr Erlinder swallowed a cocktail of drugs after realising the "gravity of the charges against him".

Mr Erlinder's daughter told the BBC that her father was not the type of person who would consider committing suicide.

"We are now concerned that this is really laying the groundwork for something else to happen to him and for it to be blamed on suicide," Sarah Erlinder said.

Earlier the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Johnnie Carson had accused the Kigali government of restricting freedom ahead of the 9 August presidential election, in which Ms Ingabire wanted to be a challenger.

Mr Erlinder is the lead defence counsel for top genocide suspects at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha, Tanzania.

He had been planning to help Ms Ingabire's defence team but chief prosecutor Martin Ngoga said he had been arrested for remarks made in publications and statements.

The Rwandan opposition leader, an ethnic Hutu, was arrested for allegedly propagating genocide ideology after she called for action to be taken against those responsible for killing Hutus during the 1994 conflict.

She was freed on bail but her passport was seized and she was banned from leaving the capital, Kigali. She could be sentenced to more than two decades in prison if convicted.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
rwanda

Congo and Death

The Unnumbered Dead



Jan 21, 2010 08:20 EST
Reuters


The simple answer to the question of how many people died in Congo’s civil war is “too many”.

Trying to get a realistic figure is fraught with difficulties and a new report suggests that a widely used estimate of 5.4 million dead – potentially making Congo the deadliest conflict since World War Two – is hugely inaccurate and that the loss of life may be less than half that.

The aid group that came up with the original estimate unsurprisingly says the new report is wrong.

The problem is the way estimates are reached.

One way is to do a body count, but that is next to impossible in a country like the Democratic Republic of Congo. Very few of the victims are shot, blown up or otherwise die as a result of violence. Most succumb to disease or malnutrition. But then who died as a result of the war and who would have died anyway in a country where survival is normally so tough?

That is where the other methodology comes in. It is based on using the difference between the rate at which people were dying before the war and the mortality rate once it has started. It should indicate the number of those who have died as both a direct and indirect result of the war. This sort of calculation led to the figure of 5.4 million dead in Congo.

The problem is that if you get the wrong mortality rates, even by a small margin, the estimate can be way off. That is what the Human Security Report Project says happened with the Congo figures. The International Rescue Committee stands by its estimate.

Basing estimates on mortality rates can also have odd consequences – for instance mortality rates for those being helped by aid agencies can fall to below pre-war levels in places where living conditions were already very poor – meaning that not only could the death toll fall over time but in a sense more people might be alive as a result of a war.

The Congo figures have been nowhere near as controversial as calculations for Iraq or Darfur, but once figures are repeated often enough they tend to become established and treated almost as fact.

The United Nations estimate for the Darfur death toll of 300,000 is another example of how figures can enter common usage. It originally came from John Holmes, U.N. under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, in April 2008.

“A study in 2006 suggested that 200,000 had lost their lives from the combined effects of the conflict. That figure must be much higher now, perhaps half as much again,” Holmes said, although he later described it as a “reasonable extrapolation”.

But because mortality rates were used in the 2006 study, the figure didn’t have to be much higher. It might even have been lower in some areas because of the immense efforts of humanitarian workers in reducing mortality rates for the millions of displaced.

While potentially wrong, such figures could have a use in drawing the eyes of the world to tragedies and finding the resources needed to end them. The question is whether, when challenged, they undermine the credibility of those who produce them? Then again, does it matter if they are wrong? Are those who challenge them at risk of harming efforts to save lives?

 
 
 
 
Congo

Cambodia: Khmer Rouge

Comrade Duch pleads for clemency



Thursday, November 26, 2009
By Zoe Daniel in Phnom Penh
ABC News (Australia)


The first defendant in Cambodia's Khmer Rouge war crimes trials has made a final plea for clemency as lawyers wind up the case against him.

Comrade Duch has admitted his crimes and apologised to the Cambodian people in the interests of national reconciliation.

But prosecutors say he has only partly confessed and they want him jailed for 40 years.

Duch has listened intently, took notes and occasionally shook his head as the case against him was summarised over more than two days.

When it was his chance to speak through an interpreter, he passionately broke his silence.

"I am deeply remorseful of and profoundly affected by destruction on such a mind-boggling scale," he said.

The former head of the S21 prison is the first of the regime's leaders to come before the specially convened court, more than 30 years after the "Killing Fields" horrors committed by the Khmer Rouge.

But for the families of those killed, the blood is still fresh.

Chim En, 62, says he lost family and friends in S21, and he wants the prison leader punished with a long sentence.

The UN-sanctioned court has heard graphic details of violence against so-called enemies of the extreme communist regime.

Duch is accused of ordering and overseeing his subordinates to mutilate and kill. Babies were bashed to death on tree trunks, men had needles inserted under their fingernails, women were raped with sticks and worse.

Almost no-one left the prison alive.

Prosecutor William Smith says the victims never had the chance to plead their case as Duch has done.

"They were falsely accused and arbitrarily punished," Mr Smith said. "On the contrary, the accused ensured they were treated as animals.

"To him, they were enemies of the state who deserved no mercy and no compassion."

Duch is seeking a shortened sentence because he has apologised to the families of his victims.

He argues that he was acting under orders from his superiors and would have been killed if he had disobeyed.

Duch is now a born-again Christian and says he wants to contribute to national reconciliation.

"For the victims of S21 and their families, I still claim that I am solely and individually liable for the loss of at least 12,380 lives," Duch said

"I still and forever wish to most respectfully and humbly apologise to those dead souls. I have worshipped God to honour the dead."

But both the prosecution and lawyers for ordinary Cambodians who have appeared before the court say his confession has been selective and not completely honest.

Prosecutors are calling for a sentence of 40 years which, for 67-year-old Duch, means the rest of his life. The court will deliberate its verdict until the New Year.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
cambopdia

Chavez Pontificates: Oliver Stone sits attentively.

Busy Busy Busy. The genocidaires have been busy … says Chavez.




Venezuela's Chavez accuses Israel of genocide

Wed Sep 9, 2009


PARIS, Sept 9 (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has accused Israel of genocide against the Palestinian people, telling a French newspaper that the bombing of Gaza late last year was an unprovoked attack.

"The question is not whether the Israelis want to exterminate the Palestinians. They're doing it openly," Chavez said in an interview with Le Figaro published on Wednesday.

The Venezuelan president, who has just completed a tour of Middle Eastern and Arab countries, brushed aside Israeli assertions that its attack on Gaza was a response to rocket fire from Islamist group Hamas which rules the coastal enclave."What was it if not genocide? ... The Israelis were looking for an excuse to exterminate the Palestinians," Chavez said, adding that sanctions should have been slapped on Israel.

Israel launched an offensive against the Gaza Strip on Dec. 27 2008 with the declared aim of curbing rocket fire from the region into southern Israel.

The land, sea and air assault lasted 22 days, and left some 1,300 Palestinians dead, according to medical sources.

Chavez said he recognised Israel's right to exist, as with all countries, but added that the Jewish state must respect the Palestinian people's right to self-determination.

The Venezuelan president said he wanted more clarity from the United States on its foreign policy, adding that he was disappointed by recent U.S. dealings in South America, including the installation of military bases in Colombia.

"Sadly, the arrival of Obama brought with it a lot of hope, but little change," he said.









Venezuela

The UN and Sudan - Let us in or its a war crime.

No one but the Europeans or the Chinese care about leaving the status quo alone in Sudan - as it has for nearly a decade, and while no rational human being wants to leave the murderous regime in place in Sudan .... there are more serious implications for the below story than simply Sudan.

We all understand the implications in Sudan - kick out the aid groups - people die. I mentioned that a couple days ago. But what if the UN goes in to a country like ... Britain, after a cataclysmic event, and before everyone is housed or fed, Britain asks the UN to leave. Would that be a war crime?

What if in the case of a terrible hurricane in the US - destroys a city, somehow some foolish leader asks the UN aid agencies to come in and help - what if that foolish and moronic leader suddenly decided (or through someone speaking to him or her) that the UN should leave. Would that be a war crime?

And if so, has the UN not just expanded its power and jurisdiction!







UN to see if Sudan's aid group ban is war crime
Mar 6, 2009
By FRANK JORDANS, AP


GENEVA - The U.N. human rights office will examine whether Sudan's decision to expel aid groups constitutes a breach of basic human rights and possibly a war crime, a spokesman said Friday.

Rupert Colville said the Sudanese decision to expel relief workers from 13 of the largest aid groups constitutes a "grievous dereliction" of duty, putting the lives of thousands at risk.


[To read the rest of the story, click on the title link]








UN

Sudan: Bashir a War Criminal. Clooney happy.

Mr. Clooney. Now that the ICC has given you what you were hoping for. Now what? Do you expect to negotiate his surrender? This week or next? Next month maybe. After he has stopped aid shipments to tens of thousands of people and stepped up his campaign to erase the peoples in the South from the map of Sudan. Maybe 1000 more dead, maybe 5,000 more dead. Then you will see negotiation work for his surrender and you will pat yourself on the back. But what of the tens of thousands who will lose their aid, starve, be killed as a result? What of them Mr. Clooney. Charge Bashir for their deaths. You can only be charged with so much Mr. Clooney. Check the dock at the ICC and review the sentences other genocidaires have received. You want us to involve ourselves but not be involved. How does that work? We negotiate. We use diplomacy. Yes, with people who shout 'Jihad' all day. I believe that will work. With the Chinese, who have their fingers deep into Sudanese politics and oil - who don;'t give a rats ass about what you feel Mr. Clooney.

Mr. Clooney - there is no way to save these people now that the ICC has acted, and they know it. They are willing to allow them to die, but that was your big issue - the people dying.

It is unfortunate that you open your mouth about an issue you do not understand the complexities of, and when the deaths mount and the violence increases - as it will in the next 100+ hours, you will be aghast at what happened. Why. Everyone who knew, knew it would happen. Except you.

Sometimes Mr. Clooney, we do have to use military force to kill bad people in order to save tens of thousands of starving children who have done no wrong. That would be too much for you. You'd prefer to negotiate. Perhaps Bashir will negotiate how many he allows to die.





In Darfur, street protests over Bashir arrest warrant

International aid groups fear the Sudanese government will respond by putting up more obstacles to their relief work.

By Rob Crilly Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
March 5, 2009 edition

EL FASHER, SUDAN - The angry crowd had one thing on its mind.

"Jihad, Jihad, Jihad," was the chant, before they listed their enemies: "Luis Moreno-Ocampo" and "America."

Speaker after speaker shouted their defiance Wednesday before a fist-waving audience of about 2,000 people in the center of El Fasher, the dusty capital of North Darfur. The city is a hub for international aid being distributed in the region.

The crowd assembled about an hour after the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague had announced that it was issuing its first-ever warrant for the arrest of a sitting president: Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir.

They arrived on foot – chanting and waving placards that read "Down with Ocampo" and "Stop the Conspiracy" – or in government buses.

Mr. Ocampo is the chief prosecutor at the ICC.

They heard from a succession of government officials and community leaders, who all voiced their anger.

"We are ready to set up camps to train our youths to defend our country against America and the enemies of Islam," Dirdiri Mohamed Ahmed, head of El Fasher's police. "We are with you President Bashir and are ready to die for you."

A sea of raised fists greeted every word.

There were similar scenes in Khartoum, where banner-waving crowds massed on the banks of the Nile, chanting, "We love you President Bashir," and trampling on portraits of Ocampo.

The public outcry was not unexpected. Embassies had warned foreign nationals to stock up on water and essentials and stay home Wednesday. Charity offices closed for the day and the United Nations sent nonessential staff home.

Certainly, there is genuine popular outrage over the arrest warrant, but the government-led protests organized around the country seemed a little lackluster, a little routine. They will allow the Bashir government to cite "public anger" with the ICC, while fighting the charges and keeping its options open too.

Most people here are waiting to see what comes next. Diplomats in Khartoum say the regime's real reaction will take weeks to emerge. Much will depend on how the world now treats a president accused of war crimes, they say.

Darfur aid workers worry

But international aid agencies here fear a backlash that could further disrupt the world's largest humanitarian operations. They are some of the most visible representatives of the international community and have long had a fraught relationship with the government.

Six – including Care International, CHF International, and the British charity Oxfam – have already seen their operations pared back. On Sunday, they were told to pull international staff out of 10 camps and towns in the region.

In El Fasher, NGO officials spent Wednesday morning in discussions with the wali (governor), trying to ensure that their activities would not be further disrupted.

"No one knows what will happen," said Thierry Durand, director of operations for MSF-France, reached by telephone in Khartoum. "Since the request by Ocampo to the judges last year, things have been very difficult in terms of the administrative burden and red tape. We are caught in this arm wrestling between Sudan and the ICC."

A show of military might

Earlier in the day, the government gave a more palpable and unmistakable statement about the ICC rulng – and any suggestion that instability might follow.

Sudan's military machine put on a show of force in and above the streets of El Fasher.

It began with a steady rumbling. As it drew nearer the ground began to shake.

Armored personnel carriers led the column. Then came the "technicals," pick-ups converted into battlewagons armed with heavy machine guns and anti-aircraft guns. Soldiers lounged against the high-caliber barrels.

And behind them were the trucks crammed with infantry, some wearing balaclavas, others with scarves wrapped around their faces – all shouting, "Allahu Akhbar" ("God is Great").

"This is to show that the government is still in control of the town and if any of the rebel movements think they can try something then they should think again," said Elesail Abdul Munim, as more than 150 military trucks rumbled past a growing crowd in the town's market.

Just as the vehicles disappeared in a cloud of dust, the screech of two Air Force jets split the air. Two Chinese-built Sukhoi ground-attack planes passed low and fast overhead to the cheers of a gathering crowd.

The message to the people of Darfur was clear. While the ICC issued warrants for the arrest of Bashir, there should be no doubt about who was in control.







Sudan

Kremlin says ...

I was expecting startling news - that Stalin tried to feed the Ukrainians with food he grew in his own garden, and cut back on the food allotments for the soldiers in order to feed children and women. I was surprised the Kremlin didn't find those secret documents. perhaps next time, when they have more time to devise historical documents.


Russia: Famine that killed millions not genocide

By STEVE GUTTERMAN, Associated Press
Steve Gutterman, Associated Press Writer
Wed Feb 25, 3:06 pm ET


MOSCOW – Russia issued a DVD and a thick book of historical documents on Wednesday to dispute claims that the Ukrainian famine of the 1930s amounted to genocide.

Russian archivists and historians pressed the Kremlin's case that the Stalin-era famine — which killed millions of people — was a common tragedy across Soviet farmlands, countering efforts by Ukraine's pro-Western president to convince the world that Ukrainians were targeted for starvation.

"Not a single document exists that even indirectly shows that the strategy and tactics chosen for Ukraine differed from those applied to other regions, not to mention tactics or strategy with the aim of genocide," said Vladimir Kozlov, head of Russia's Federal Archive Agency.

He said the famine was a direct result of Josef Stalin's brutal collectivization campaign and the widespread confiscation of grain that was exported to secure equipment needed for the Soviet dictator's frenetic industrialization drive.

Kozlov said the policy was class-based, targeting the kulaks — wealthy farmers seen as enemies of Communism — and was implemented virtually identically across the Soviet Union.

"There were no national or ethnic undertones," he told a news conference at the headquarters of state news agency RIA-Novosti.

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko contends the famine was aimed at rooting out Ukrainian nationalism.

"Hunger was selected as a tool to subdue the Ukrainian people," he said at a November ceremony marking the anniversary of what Ukrainians consider the onset of the 1932-1933 famine.

Ukrainian lawmakers and a U.S. commission have labeled the famine an act of genocide, and Yushchenko has pushed for more governments and international bodies to follow suit. However, neither the United Nations nor the European Union has done so.

The heated dispute over the past comes amid a mounting tug-of-war over the future of Ukraine, whose European aspirations and tight historical ties to Russia make for a potentially volatile mix.
Yushchenko is pushing for NATO membership, a prospect Russia has said it will do its utmost to prevent.

Russian officials have cast the genocide claim as part of an effort by Yushchenko to discredit Russia in he eyes of Ukrainians and the West.

Months before his death last summer, the renowned writer and Soviet dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn dismissed the genocide claim as a "fable" that could only fool the West.

On Wednesday, Alexander Dyukov, director of Historical Memory, a Moscow-based foundation that helped organize Wednesday's news conference, said: "It is aimed, among other things, at inciting ethnic hate, at tearing Ukraine away from Russia."

Journalists were given an English-language DVD and a 500-page book reproducing documents — some of them recently declassified — that are to be included in a three-volume study of the famine in the U.S.S.R. from 1929 to 1934.

They include letters portraying the dire situation at the time in what is now Russia and in other ex-Soviet republics and orders — some with Stalin's stamped signature in red ink — denying pleas for a letup in grain procurement quotas. Other documents suggest officials in Ukraine misled Moscow about the extent of hunger there.

The famine's death toll is disputed, but it is widely believed that it killed between 3 million and 7 million people in Ukraine.

Yushchenko has said as many as 10 million Ukrainians died, while Russian historian Valery Tishkov said more conservative estimates of 3.5 million deaths in Ukraine and 3.5 million in Russia are likely about twice the true toll.





Russia

Congo: Rwanda all over again?

Listening to the 'debate' a few nights ago, you would think Obama would call for intervention in cases of genocide or ethic cleansing (Iraq is a good example of this). He would never sit by while another Rwanda occurs. McCain said basically the same, but added that the US cannot be everywhere all the time, and fix all the problems. Obama would work with our allies - you know the ones, that Bush alienated.

These same allies, apparently alienated, or not, worked very hard to put together a peace treaty in the Congo. It has collapsed. In twelve years, 3 million people dead. THAT should constitute crimes against humanity, and quite possibly acts of genocide. It is going on as you read this, as the debate was occurring, and Obama never raised it - because it would qualify as a cause to intervene in, based on his criteria - militarily.

Rwanda may be over, but Rwanda is involved in the Congo, and the massacres involve Tutsi and Hutu.

Obama's 'never again', is "never again, when I am elected, but whatever happens until then is Bush's fault and I won't say anything and hope I don't have to deal with it because the Europeans sat down as did the UN and created a peace treaty by negotiating and compromising and talking, and it has fallen apart and hundreds are dying each day and no one is acting to prevent further deaths or punish those responsible, and I really don't like making decisions or taking decisive action so I would rather I spend time uniting the world to take action and maybe in the meantime the problem will get sorted."

Bush should be addressing this issue. The bloody world should be intervening, TODAY. Money can be recovered, stock markets will rise again - a million dead, will not.

(I assume Ms. Power has or will be speaking out about this and will get Obama interested sooner than later.)




Congo blames Rwanda for fresh fighting
Clashes between government forces and Tutsi rebels could force 30,000 people from their homes in eastern Congo.
By Scott Baldauf Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the October 11, 2008 edition

GOMA, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO - Renewed fighting between Congolese rebels and government forces has worsened one of the world's worst humanitarian crises, sending thousands of villagers from their homes, while Congo's government accuses the Rwandan government of intervening on its soil.

Fighters from the rebel faction of Gen. Laurent Nkunda – an ethnic Tutsi thought to be backed by the Tutsi-led government in neighboring Rwanda – took the strategic town of Rumangabo and a military base from the Congolese Army during heated battle this week, but have since withdrawn. Casualty numbers were not known, but internal refugees told the Monitor that the fighting was fierce and that they were urged to leave their homes by government soldiers.

"Soldiers told us to leave because they were going to fight strongly against the Tutsis," says Appoline Nyiranza Bimana, a mother of three children, speaking on the morning of her arrival this week at Kibumba camp 25 miles north of the regional capital of Goma. "There was so much shooting, I couldn't stay at home anymore."

The fresh wave of fighting comes just 10 months after the signing of a peace deal between most of the major armed factions in the troubled eastern region of Congo. Nearly 3 million Congolese have died since 1996, when a rebel army – backed by a number of neighboring foreign countries, including Rwanda – forced the government of President Mobutu Sese Seko out of power. The January peace deal, brokered by the European Union and the United Nations, was seen by many as Congo's best chance for finally sending rebel armies home, but now political experts and peacekeepers say that it is clear the deal itself was never given a chance to work.

"One of the parties did this deliberately to derail the peace process, we're just not sure which one did it," says Lt. Col. Charles McKnight, a senior peacekeeping official within the UN peacekeeping force, MONUC. MONUC is the UN's largest peacekeeping operation in the world. "As of August, I was actually optimistic that this would all work."

[What an inspiring person - his judgment is brilliant. He believed it would work - may i ask based upon what precedent? And now he doesn't know who it was that derailed it. Amazing.]


The problems in Congo – one of the richest countries in the world, in terms of natural resources, but among the poorest in terms of human development – are rooted in a tangled mess of bloody ethnic rivalries, foreign interventions, and the violent sparring for control of lucrative mining resources. Congo's government, elected in the fall of 2006, has proved incapable of controlling its own vast territory and relies heavily on UN troops to keep the peace in the eastern provinces, where much of the mineral resources lie, and also, where much of the ethnic fighting has continued for more than a decade.

Nearly 100,000 Congolese have been displaced in the last three months alone, and given the population in the areas attacked in the past few days, as many as 30,000 additional people could be forced from their homes.

The peace deal, hailed for its inclusiveness of all Congolese armed groups, fell apart after fighting erupted Aug. 28, north of Goma. Nkunda complains that the government was never serious about peace, because it never attempted to shut down the Democratic Liberation Forces of Rwanda (FDLR), a group made up of Hutu rebels blamed for the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. But government peace brokers say it was Nkunda who wasn't serious about peace, and that the violent clashes of the past few weeks show he is trying to provoke a regional conflict.

"It wasn't a realistic deal in the first place," says Gregory Mthembu-Salter, an analyst for the Economist Intelligence Unit in Johannesburg, and expert on Congo. Too many armed factions profit from their control of mineral resources, and worry about facing possible war crimes if they come out of the bush, he says. "They just haven't gotten beyond the zero-sum game."

The Congolese government says the current troubles are the instigation of Rwanda and the government of Paul Kagame. On Wednesday, the Congolese government announced plans to ask the UN Security Council to meet to discuss what they called the invasion of Rwandan soldiers on Congolese soil. Congolese Foreign Minister Antipas Mbusa Nyamwisi told Reuters news agency that he had "hard evidence," including captured Rwandan soldiers, to prove that Rwanda was intervening in Congo.

"The Rwandans are indeed there. They now want to take Goma [capital of North Kivu province]," Nyamwisi told Reuters. Rwandan officials deny the charges.

On the day of the attack on Rumangabo, it was clear that the conflict had escalated. Government tanks lined the road in the front line village of Rugare, pointing their turrets toward the hills where Nkunda's troops make their home. Even a day later, when Nkunda's troops retreated from Rumangabo and the military camp had returned to government control, local villagers continued to pack up their belongings and head for crowded displacement camps.

"We never thought that the camp could be taken, that's why we are forced to leave our village," says Sekibibi Sibomana, a farmer who left during the fighting on Wednesday and has returned to collect food for his family in the displacement camp at Kibumba. "We were sure that the army was very strong, and they could protect us, but they didn't."

Most of the refugees in this area blame the recent fighting on Nkunda, a former Congolese army general who took up arms against the government because of its inability or unwillingness to protect his ethnic Tutsi group against the Hutu-led FDLR.

Gen. Nkunda recently announced his plans to widen his rebellion to liberate the whole of Congo from the control of the government in Kinshasa.

Col. Delphin Kahimbi, commander of the Congolese army effort to retake Rumangabo, pulls out Rwandan Army backpacks and Rwandan Army ID cards as evidence that the recent takeover of his military camp at Rumangabo was a direct intervention by Rwanda.

"This was the Rwandan army with a small group of CNDP [Nkunda's rebel group]," says Col. Kahimbi. "We know that CNDP does not have the capacity. It is the Rwandan Army that has the capacity to come here."

One MONUC official, speaking on condition of anonymity, says he still holds out hope that the January peace agreement can be patched up. He also says that it is unlikely at this stage that the conflict will draw in neighboring countries, even if Congo pushes the UN Security Council to act.
"Kagame has too much to lose [than to enter Congo]," the MONUC official says. "He wants Rwanda to join the Commonwealth. The only way he gets involved here is if there is a massacre of Tutsis. Then he has the humanitarian justification to intervene."






genocide

China = Genocide in Darfur

Just like the French MORAL HIGH ROAD against war in Iraq, which was in truth, a road covered in blood money for oil, China sucks up all the oil from Sudan, has signed on to Khartoum's program - stability = oil = China Happy.

Whatever it takes. Genocide in Sudan = China gets oil and is happy.

It is very nearly that simple. Those sorts who push for action in Sudan, will in most cases, be on the other side of action against Iraq, on the side of the French and Chinese who opposed action.

Yet this time, they are on the right side, and I cannot understand how. Their moral clocks are so out of whack, it is near mind-blowing that they get this.

The US needs to take stronger action, and push for world condemnation, push for a UN military action into Sudan, as Bishop Tutu has called for, and they must do it now.

Each day hundreds of lives are lost. Each day families ripped apart, never to be repaired. Each day, it is the end of the world for thousands of people - one way or another, and the UN does NOTHING but talk.

Talk = hundreds dead.

Military action = hundreds dead.

In both cases, innocents will die, BUT at the end of one is freedom. At the end of the other, is continued enslavement.







Uselessnations

What utter nonsense - British excuse the French in Rwanda

Why does the world hold such animus toward the West?

The answer is simple - it is not because we are wealthy, nor because we remove a dictator who threatened a world, rather, because we refuse to accept our role/responsibility in oppressing or subjugating a people (whoever they might be) - from Vietnam (Indo-China), Algeria, Ivory Coast, to Cambodia, or Rwanda.

The following report, from the BBC, rationalizes, and nearly ignores the atrocities the French commit, instead, focusing attention on Paul Kagame.

This article (BBC article) written by Martin Plaut, was directed by the French. Plaut did not conceive of and devise this article out of the blue. It was dictated to him by someone at the BBC who wished to defend French actions against those people, or directed by French political figures using Plaut as a tool to discredit and draw attention away from the blood dripping from their hands.

It is enough to wish Martin Plaut would fall into a crevice and vanish from our midst. He is a silly man with no idea.

Paul Kagame is NOT a good friend of Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton may think he is a friend of Kagame, but I do not believe for one moment that Rwanda thinks of Bill Clinton without throwing up.

And Mr. Plaut, if you did not realize you were used - you were!

How do you combat liars when they all (complicit parties) are in on it, they defend each other in order to prevent each other from facing responsibility, to prevent the house of lies from collapse. Why not admit your governments were so concerned about diamonds, oil, and other minerals that a genocide was preferable to chaos in your client states. Just admit it. You will feel better.








Rwanda report raises issue of motive

By Martin Plaut BBC News

A Rwandan report naming 33 senior French military and political figures for their alleged role in the 1994 genocide raises a number of issues.

For the French there is the problem of how to deal with the commission's detailed allegations against eminent figures.

Late President Francois Mitterrand, former Prime Minister Edouard Balladur, as well as two men who went on to become prime minister - Alain Juppe, foreign minister at the time, and his then chief aide, Dominique de Villepin - are all accused of having had a hand in such terrible events.

Allegations of this kind have been made before.

The French military were certainly involved in advising the Rwandan army prior to the genocide and their precise role during the genocide is far from clear.

Yet the fact that Rwanda has decided to publish such a damning report, making such detailed allegations against another country, makes the report extremely unusual.

Diversion tactic?

It certainly raises questions about Rwanda's motivation in taking this step.

The public reason given is a search for justice.

As Rwanda's Minister of Justice Tharcisse Karugarama put it to the BBC, those responsible for the Jewish Holocaust are still being hunted down decades after World War II, so why should we rest while the people behind the genocide are still at large?

But other reasons have spurred Rwanda to take this step.

Chief among them has been an iron determination to keep the world's attention focused on the genocide, rather than on the role of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the force that took power in 1994, bringing President Paul Kagame to power.

In recent years uncomfortable questions have been raised about the war crimes the RPF are alleged to have committed during and after 1994.

While stressing there can be no equation between genocide and war crimes, Alison Des Forges of Human Rights Watch says RPF leaders do have a case to answer.

"Their victims also deserve justice," she says.

The case against the RPF:
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was mandated to look at all crimes committed in 1994, yet with their mandate supposed to run out by the end of this year they have so far failed to indict any members of the RPF.

In 2006 a French judge, Jean-Louis Bruguiere, issued arrest warrants against nine of President Paul Kagame's senior officials, alleging their complicity in the murder of the late Rwandan President, Juvenal Habyarimana, in April 1994 - the event that sparked off the genocide.

And in February 2008 a Spanish judge, Fernando Andreu, issued international arrest warrants against 40 senior Rwandan officials for crimes allegedly committed in the 1990s.

Painful questions

There is also a political dimension.

Since the RPF took power, relations with France have been distinctly cool.

President Kagame and his closest associates come from a group of English-speaking Tutsi refugees who grew up in Uganda.

The country has moved away from the French sphere of influence in Africa and towards the Anglophone bloc.

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now an adviser of President Kagame, and former American President Bill Clinton is a close friend.

Rwanda believes it does not need France and feels free to raise painful questions about Paris's role in the genocide.

*******************************************

Law recognizes various levels and forms of illegal activity. Doing the act, aiding those who do the act, supporting those who aid those who do the act, not aiding those who were acted upon, not trying to stop those who did the act ... various levels ...

In March 2004, Koffi 'Responsible Party for the Genocide" Annan, said that "the international community is guilty of sins of omission."

Mr. Annan, SINS are moral - God judges sins, what you have admitted to is NOT JUST SINS, but to being an accomplice to the genocide during, and after the fact. Don't weigh it down in morality Annan, that diminishes the illegal, and unconscionable actions, of the UN member states, AND of you more directly.

I hope you believe in a forgiving God Mr. Annan.

damn

the

euros

for

their

role

The French - Hands Dripping With Blood

Yet they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge their role, while every sane person who knows anything about the genocide, knows France was intimately and inextricably linked to the genocide in Rwanda.


BBC News
August 6, 2008

France denounces genocide claims

France has rejected Rwandan claims accusing French officials of playing an active role in the Rwandan genocide of 1994 as "unacceptable".

On Tuesday, an independent Rwandan commission said France had been aware of preparations for the genocide and helped train the ethnic Hutu militia.

The report also accused French troops of direct involvement in the killings.

Paris has consistently denied any responsibility for the genocide, in which about 800,000 people were killed.

Among those named in the report were the late president Francois Mitterrand and the then prime minister Edouard Balladur.

Two men who went on to become prime minister were also named - Alain Juppe, the foreign minister at the time, and his then chief aide, Dominique de Villepin.

"This report contains unacceptable accusations made against French political and military officials," a French foreign ministry spokesman said.

But Rwandan Information Minister Louise Mushikiwabo said she hoped the French officials named would be indicted for war crimes.

"The government has asked the courts to use this report. We hope that legal proceedings will follow," she is quoted as saying by the AFP news agency.

Some 800,000 minority Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered by Hutu militias in just 100 days in 1994.

Earlier this year, France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner denied French responsibility in connection with the genocide, but said political errors had been made.

The Rwandan report says France backed Rwanda's Hutu government with political, military, diplomatic and logistical support.

"French forces directly assassinated Tutsis and Hutus accused of hiding Tutsis... French forces committed several rapes on Tutsi survivors," said a statement from the justice ministry quoted by AFP.

"Considering the seriousness of the alleged crimes, the Rwandan government has urged the relevant authorities to bring the accused French politicians and military officials to justice," the statement said.

It further alleged that French forces did nothing to challenge checkpoints used by Hutu forces in the genocide.

The two countries have had a frosty relationship since 2006 when a French judge implicated Rwandan President Paul Kagame in the downing in 1994 of then-President Juvenal Habyarimana's plane - an event widely seen as triggering the killings.

President Kagame has always denied the charge.

He says Mr Habyarimana, a Hutu, was killed by Hutu extremists who then blamed the incident on Tutsi rebels to provide the pretext for the genocide.


******************************

The French have so much blood on their hands, not on just one man's hands - not on Mitterand's dead cold hands, but across the board - the French government, complicit in a genocide of proportions still incomprehensible. 800,000 is a low figure, a million is more likely.

The evidence is clear, it exists, it is indisputable, and those who question would deny the genocide, for it could not happen but for the French and UN collusion (in no way do I imply that UN Lt General Romeo Dallaire and his brave, over-matched, small contingent did anything but save lives during the genocide).

There is no morality to actions by France. There is nothing but blood dripping from their hands.


Indict the living, and the dead, try them, and find them guilty and sentence the living to prison in Rwanda - Blair, Clinton, Annan, Alain Juppe, dig up Mitterand and drag his corpse over, Dominique de Villepin, and others - where they would be forced to face the victims, and their stories every day until they confess, and seek the apology of the dead.



The story, by the BBC, of the genocide.
If you do not know the story, find out, learn.

I am shamed each time I re-read the stories or think about the suffering. One day, we should all sit and face those who suffered and apologize, in Rwanda and in Sudan. Unfortunately, by that time, the world will have many places to visit.




Rwanda

Sudan: Warning to the UN

Indictment of Sudanese Leader Seen as Threat to Peacekeepers

By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, July 20, 2008; Page A01

UNITED NATIONS -- Six days before Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir was charged with genocide, a group of 200 fighters on horseback, supported by more than 40 vehicles mounted with machine guns, carried out the bloodiest and most sophisticated ambush yet on a fledgling U.N. and African peacekeeping mission.

The July 8 attack -- which killed seven peacekeepers and wounded 22 -- bore similarities to Sudanese-backed raids by Janjaweed horsemen that have led to the deaths of more than 300,000 civilians and forced nearly 3 million people from their homes in Darfur over the past five years, according to internal U.N. accounts.

Some U.N. officials suspect the operation was intended to serve as a warning to U.N. peacekeepers and humanitarian workers of Sudan's intent to use deadly force if the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court targeted the country's leader. On Wednesday, those fears were heightened after a Nigerian company commander was killed by unidentified assailants in the town of Forobaranga in West Darfur.

"We are very worried there could be a gradual increase in violence, which could make the mission quite vulnerable," Jean-Marie Guéhenno, the U.N. undersecretary general for peacekeeping, said in an interview. But it "will be very hard to pin down responsibility" for the attacks, he predicted.

[To read the remainder of the article, click on the title link]




Sudan




genocide

UN Shame and Sudan Genocide

Back in 2005, I posted a column from the Washington Post on the UN determining that no genocide was occurring in Sudan.

You may search out the full article by clicking on the SUDAN label and selecting the article.

President Bush, through his Secretary of State Colin Powell, told the world in no uncertain terms that genocide was occurring in Sudan.

The response - oddly, the left said nothing, except perhaps - he should have said something sooner. The left did not cheer the fact SOMEONE had FINALLY called it genocide. No one else in the world, of any importance or authority had called it what it was. Odd isn't it.

Sidebar:
The ODDITY is less odd than it is incredulous.The fact the left hates Bush interferes with their ability to recognize the most vocal opponent on earth of the Sudanese genocide. I do not count Greenpeace or Yellowpeace or Amnesty or Doctors without Borders, for all of them together do not have the authority and position that the President of the United States possesses. Yet, all the clamoring for a leader to speak out, one does, and the left ignores the position. Intellectual honesty necessitates my saying that fact alone discredits the left.

- Good part is still coming

End of Sidebar:

So a world leader calls it genocide and the world yawns. Sort of. By calling what was occurring in the Sudan, a genocide, the US forced the UN to do 'something'. That 'something' was to commission an inquiry to look into the claims. The response? Well, the whole world was calling it genocide. The US called it genocide. Every actor and actress called it genocide. Every human rights group called it genocide. Students, teachers, mothers, fathers - the world recognized genocide.

What did the UN do (remember, this is the entity some political leaders in the US believe we should put more faith in, and turn over nearly a trillion dollars to, so they can solve poverty) ?

The commission put out the Report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur to the United Nations Secretary-General (PDF), United Nations, 25 January 2005, and it states: "The various tribes that have been the object of attacks and killings (chiefly the Fur, Massalit and Zaghawa tribes) do not appear to make up ethnic groups distinct from the ethnic group to which persons or militias that attack them belong. They speak the same language (Arabic) and embrace the same religion(Islam)" (p. 129).

So it is not genocide.

That makes me feel a lot better. Whew. I was worried for a moment that it might be genocide. That there might be a repeat of Rwanda or Uganda or Somalia or ... (insert almost any African country). I feel so much better that the respected, esteemed, much vaunted institution of the United Nations reached a conclusion.

Except .... not quite.

- Good part is still coming


Why didn't they (UN) find genocide?

To find genocide one must define the groups. In Rwanda - Hutu, Tutsi. One group versus another group. Genocide.

So - in Sudan who is it and what is it?

The UN and NY Times and other less controversial sources will claim it is to do with land (and within the issue of land is oil and water). Everything is water and oil. At first glance that might make sense and apparently if you are the NY Times, you only look for the simple and easy answer - like water, else you might be forced to confront inherent contradictions in your ideological outlook on the world.

What if we asked someone who lives in Sudan (Southern region) and has an orphanage and has lived in Sudan since the 1990s and before that, had made excursions into Sudan for months at a time. What about people who have escaped - what do these voices say.

The majority of those voices, and many other individuals with intimate knowledge of the events - the NORTH, a MUSLIM government, using an Arab / Muslim militia to terrorize, kidnap, torture, rape, murder those people in the South who happen to be Christian and or pagan. THAT is the MAJORITY of what is going on in the Sudan.

Are there Arabs who are killed by the Arab militia. Yes, just as there are women killed by women in car accidents. It is irrelevant and immaterial to the issue. We can be of the same tribe - and I am Christian and you are Muslim.

The UN report walks a fine line and plays semantics with words, especially how it defines groups and or people.
(The thing about the word games and semantics is - they do it on purpose. They know what they are doing and trying to avoid!)

Nice. Responsible.

NEVER AGAIN. - what a meaningless phrase.

- Good part is still coming

The UN is very good at dealing with countries who abide by norms - social, cultural, political standards. Countries that seek to be part of the brotherhood of man. Countries and governments that respect the basic structure of decency / humanity and compassion for others less fortunate. When it comes to countries and ideologies that do not regard human rights issues as relevant, do not adhere to basic human rights policies - the UN is pretty ineffective. Therefore, the UN expends vast amounts of energy criticizing the US, Israel, or the West more generally - and the reason is clear - the rest do not care, and or ... have no interest in listening. The UN does not wish to confront anyone unless they are willing to be confronted (The West). If the nation/state/regime in question is not interested in hearing what the UN has to say - the UN pretends to find something else to occupy itself and immediately files a resolution against Israel - the nation/state/regime simply continues doing whatever it was doing and tells the world it isn't doing it, will not let the UN check to see if it is doing it, the UN blows steam, throws out some 'recognizes', 'implores', 'demands', 'abhors', 'requests', 'urges' ... and the issue is lost in the cavernous files of the UN.

It is therefore no surprise what they concluded. There was no other option.

For the UN to recognize that it was Islam at war against Christians and others in Sudan would require the UN to do something and the UN would rather wage war against the US, than confront Islam.

- Good part is still coming


GOOD PART ---> ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
GOOD PART ---> Report of the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court, 6 July 2000
Also from the June 30, 2000 meeting in New York.

The GOOD PART is also the part that judges and CONDEMNS the UN and all those esteemed individuals / countries, some politicians wish to sign treaties/and oblige the US to serve ---

A person ['PERSON' IN THIS SENTENCE WOULD BE STATE/NATION or ENTITY, not necessarily a person as in an individual] with knowledge of such a crime has a duty to alert authorities and continue telling others until appropriate action is taken. Additionally persons with such knowledge have a duty to assist victims, and warn other potential victims targeted by the perpetrators. In the case of "initial acts in an emerging pattern" of genocide, prompt action is essential to save threatened population groups from greater destruction.

Hmmm. Let's see. Admit publicly that it is genocide and YOU HAVE A DUTY TO TAKE ACTION IMMEDIATELY ... pass go, pass nap, pass meetings on the subject - go directly to ACT. Any nation or group who call it genocide, MUST take action. Failure to take action would be a violation of international law.

It was not an option whether or not a country acts against genocidaires. It is incumbent upon all nations who recognize genocide to ACT - not to debate, urge, condemn, but to STOP it using WHATEVER FORCE IS NECESSARY.

Therefore, if the UN does not wish to act, it most certainly would not call it nor find an event to be genocide! If I did not wish to get involved, I would call it anything but genocide. For example, I could call it: Big Death, or something like Massive Humanitarian Crisis, maybe even - Bad Stuff Happens ... you could call it anything you'd like, just as long as you avoid the WORD genocide.


The evidence presented, court assembled, judged, and found guilty.


Why on bloody earth would any reasonably bright person wish to place the US in any position, but superior to the UN. And why would anyone vote for anyone who calls for the US to obligate itself to an entity that is complicit in the murder of millions of innocent people worldwide, and an accessory to the murder of millions more. They have more blood on their hands than Hitler's Nazi regime.


They have damned themselves.









UN





GENOCIDE






SUDAN

Sierra Leone - War Crimes and Genocide

Sierra Leoneans look for peace through full truth about war crime

By Jina Moore Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the July 8, 2008 edition


Bomaru, Sierra Leone - Little but its history distinguishes Bomaru from other villages scattered across Sierra Leone's countryside. A quiet place with mud houses the same color as the dust kicked up by the occasional passing vehicle, it would seem, on an ordinary day, impoverished and washed out.


But today, women dress in freshly laundered wrappers ablaze in color; men wear regal Muslim gowns or their best T-shirts. An anonymous few sweat beneath layers of straw and fabric, in costumes like something from Sesame Street: They are – or are dressed as, depending upon your belief system – the village's local devils, whose appearance signals celebration; their rapid footwork leads a dancing procession to the village center.


Nearly 800 people from Bomaru and nearby villages have gathered for Fambul Tok, a grass-roots reconciliation initiative John Caulker wants to bring to every Sierra Leonean village. The phrase is Krio (English-based creole) ­for "family talk," the old way of resolving disputes through conversations around bonfires.


Mr. Caulker, whose human rights organization, Forum of Conscience, developed Fambul Tok over the past three years in villages across Sierra Leone, wants the bonfire to be a space for confession and forgiveness for war crimes. Bomaru is the first test of whether the idea works –­ or whether anyone even cares.


Dozens of people have come to Bomaru 17 years to the day after the war began here in March 1991. They're here to recount crimes they committed after their abductions and forced conscriptions in the 1990s into the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), a rebel group from neighboring Liberia infamous for chopping limbs off civilians. But by the time the bonfire is lit and the crowd settles in for storytelling, they've changed their minds.


Maybe it's coming face to face with the moment, maybe it's the half-dozen white people here to document it, but something has spooked the former war criminals.


"They are afraid that if they talk, they will be prosecuted," Caulker explains.


It's a legal impossibility; Sierra Leone negotiated its peace in part by offering fighters blanket amnesty. But here, legal promises can feel like borders – slippery when interests shift.


Caulker sends a film crew, print reporter, and intern – all white – away from the assembly briefly. He talks with the town chief and convinces them to proceed; the chief, a former RUF rebel, promises to offer the first testimony.


And so, the perpetrators talk one after another, until 2 in the morning. Mostly men speak, confessing atrocities they committed as unwilling soldiers forced to choose: kill, maim, rape, or be killed.


If any of the victims in these stories are present, they don't speak. Which is not what Caulker, whose career in human rights began with dangerous undercover research for Amnesty International during the war, had imagined. He'd thought he'd see perpetrators apologizing to victims, and victims reaching out in forgiving embrace.


"I don't want to make the mistake that this is reconciliation," he says. "This is not reconciliation. This is the beginning of the process."

**************************************

The idea of reconciliation forums became 'the thing to do' with the fall of apartheid in South Africa.

However noble and endearing it may be, it is naive, foolish, and dangerous. The events in South Africa are as far from events in Sierra Leone or Rwanda as you can get. The West ignored Rwanda, and now feel terribly guilty - they work very hard to absolve themselves, without realizing it is not the West that can absolve them, but Rwanda, and from my perspective - THAT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN ANYTIME SOON.

What we find is do-gooders, liberals from the West, want to develop social and cultural dynamics peculiar to Western culture onto the 'other' and they have no idea the consequences. Often are amazed it didn't work out as they thought it would (above quote).

When one tribe slaughters another, the remaining members of the tribe being slaughtered do not want to talk about it, hear apologies, or forgive. Not the next day, not ten years later, not twenty years later - maybe sixty years later. I am ashamed of what the US and the West did not do, for that matter - the bloody world did not do in April of 1994. Telling people to sit down and hear what their killers have to say ... does not bring people closer together - it takes the wound and pain, and forces you to rub salt in the wound. It is time that heals and time that allows one to begin the process for reconciliation. TIME NOT jawbone sessions.

It is odd that the left become apoplectic at the idea of 'installing democracy' in the Middle East, yet have no issue with reconciliation forums. First, the West is NOT creating democracy where none existed nor where no foundation exists to support it, yet reconciliation forums are trying to implement a procedure / dynamic that does not and has never existed. Sure tribes would sit around and settle disputes without war - that isn't the point. The war happened and millions were butchered - now they want to sit around and discuss and apologize and create reconciliation avenues for both sides.

IT DOES NOT WORK. IT HAS NEVER WORKED. It has created more animosity in Rwanda and Cambodia. It is a silly Western liberal idea.

Yet another reason why the left are out to lunch.











genocide




sierra leone






reconciliation