[TheBest-Host]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DcFs4NSDT0

^^^--DarFur Genocide Clip...




Who???

Darfur is a region in the Western Sudan. It is divided into three federal states: Gharb Darfur (West Darfur), Janub Darfur (South Darfur), and Shamal Darfur (North Darfur). The first genocide of the 21st century is happening there.

Why???

Darfur has a government that has a large Arab population. In 2003 two freedom groups rebelled. They accused the government of tyrannizing non-Arabs and favoring the Arabs. In society that has both Arab and non-Arab people, the non-Arabs had been targeted for extinction. The government issued a campaign of aerial assault supported by ground attacks by an Arab militia called the Janjaweed. The government publicly denies supporting the Janjaweed. Yet, they provide these killers with weapons. Trough a series of rapes, village burnings, and mass killings; at least half a million non-Arabs have perished.


In addition, millions have been displaced. The janjaweed have committed crimes against humanity. The sudan government is trying to deny this genocide. We must stop another Holocaust from happening again!

How???

There are ways we can help this horrendous situation. We can write letters to influential people to help this seemingly unending tragedy. This contains names and addresses of influential people who can put a stop to this. You can write to them and ask:

• What have they done?
• What are they doing?
• What are they going to do?

For more information, contact Mr. Zegars or another social science teacher at RHS. We need all the help we can get!!


URGENT!!


-:-Addresses to write to-:-


--Congressman--
Adam Schiff
35 S. Raymond Avenue #205
Pasedena, CA 91105

--President--
George Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

--Vice President--
Dick Cheney
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

--Secretary-General--
Kofi Annan
760 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017

--Secretary of State--
Condeleeza Rice
2201 C. Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

--Senator--
Dianna Feinstein
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Barbara Boxer
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

REPOST!!!!!
& HELP SPREAD THE WORD

[movlabs]

November 17, 2006

Sudan Says It Will Accept U.N.-African Peace Force in Darfur

By ROBERT F. WORTH

UNITED NATIONS, Nov. 16 — The Sudanese government on Thursday agreed in principle to allow a joint United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force into the war-stricken Darfur region, reversing its longstanding refusal to let United Nations troops in.

The agreement, reached after a day of talks with United Nations officials in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopian capital, raised hopes for a more effective peacekeeping effort in Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have been killed in brutal ethnic and tribal warfare since 2003. A small African Union peacekeeping force has been unable to quell the violence.

It is not clear how soon the new force can enter Darfur. Two major issues must still be worked out before the agreement becomes final: the number of troops, and how the commander will be selected.

A document issued by the parties in the talks — members of the Security Council, the Arab League, the African Union and a number of African leaders — specified a force of 17,000 soldiers and 3,000 police officers. The issues will be taken up at a meeting scheduled for next Friday in Brazzaville, Congo Republic.

“This is welcome news, after working tirelessly to find a solution for Sudan,” said Richard A. Grenell, a spokesman for John R. Bolton, the American ambassador to the United Nations.

Andrew S. Natsios, the American special envoy for Sudan, was at the meeting in Addis Ababa.

The agreement was a breakthrough. Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, had repeatedly rejected requests by Western leaders for a United Nations force in Darfur, a vast arid region in western Sudan. Fighting has grown worse in recent weeks, despite a peace accord signed in May by Sudan and the main Darfur rebel group.

It was not clear what made the Sudanese leaders change their minds. But a United Nations official who was present said the Chinese ambassador to the United Nations, Wang Guangya, had played a role in persuading Sudan’s foreign minister, Lam Akol, that there was no hidden agenda in the effort to introduce a stronger peacekeeping force. The official spoke on condition of anonymity, citing diplomatic protocol.

The agreement is something of a personal triumph for Kofi Annan, the departing United Nations secretary general. He introduced the idea of a hybrid force and lobbied African leaders for days before convening the meeting.

Sudanese rebels said Thursday that government troops and militias had killed more than 50 people in an attack in northern Darfur, Reuters reported. Sudanese officials told Jan Egeland, the United Nations under secretary for humanitarian affairs, that all of his proposed destinations for a three-day tour of Darfur were too dangerous to visit.

The agreement calls for more money, troops and equipment to be given to the African Union force, whose mandate expires on Dec. 31, to supplement a $21 million package that is already being delivered with the permission of the Sudanese government. But the core proposal is the new joint force, which is to be “predominantly African in character” while including “command and control structures” provided by the United Nations.

The agreement notes that all parties agreed to take into account “the security situation along the Chad-Sudan and Central African Republic borders,” where violence has spilled over from Darfur.

The conflict in Darfur pits non-Arab tribes against the Arab-dominated government of Sudan, which has armed deadly militias that have massacred civilians. The government says the violence has been exaggerated for political reasons.


Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

[Valdoyes]

why are there no mass demonstrations demanding an end to the genocide in darfur, as there are in support of the palastinian problem?
Funny how some issues are more 'trendy' than others.
Hundreds of thousands dead in Sudan and the rest of the world ignores the situation - disgusting.

[Skete]

This is what I mean by my comment on the other topic about a sex-change operation. There are far more pressing and important issues to face up to, and Darfur is certainly one of them!

[bortycuz]

Who is "the World," actually? I don't see Argentina or Indonesia stepping up to the plate to condemn the killings in Sudan. However, if the United States were to intervene, "the World" would be up in arms that the U.S. was meddling in other people's affairs. You can't have it both ways...either the U.S. is the policeman of "the World," or it isn't.

[LongaDonga]

What is the African Union (AU) with all its high-sounding principles doing about Darfur? Nothing by the look of things!
If you go onto their website, enter "Darfur" into the search box and see what comes up!

http://www.africa-union.org/root/au/index/index.htm

[br`lorance]

There search page is broken. The AU does have information some things about Darfur right on its homepage.

[zoneouddy]

There is a lot of meetings and endless talk but I see very little action on Darfur or Zimbabwe where that dictator Mugabe has reduced that once-rich country to poverty and 1700% inflation and beats up or even kills members of the opposition.

If the AU is to mean anything at all its got to take positive action instead of conducting on-going conferences debating almost everything except that that is immediately urgent.

[venediene]

Who is "the World," actually? I don't see Argentina or Indonesia stepping up to the plate to condemn the killings in Sudan. However, if the United States were to intervene, "the World" would be up in arms that the U.S. was meddling in other people's affairs. You can't have it both ways...either the U.S. is the policeman of "the World," or it isn't.

Says who?

So our not saying anything about or doing anything about the killings is somehow a show of support since our support would only bring criticism?

[iOqedeyH]

Mexico, China, and Gabon should take the lead and fix what's going in Sudan. There you go. Great world leaders, all. Better still, how about France? The French are obviously the smartest people on the planet. So smart, in fact, they deserted Africa many moons ago. The rest is history.

[papadopul]

Mexico, China, and Gabon should take the lead and fix what's going in Sudan. There you go. Great world leaders, all. Better still, how about France? The French are obviously the smartest people on the planet. So smart, in fact, they deserted Africa many moons ago. The rest is history.

What is the hostility to France?

Are you saying that the French are much better at this? That they have the military force needed in order to do things like this? How about the political leverage? What about the economic power?

Pointing fingers at what others could have/should have done while at the same time avoiding responsibility yourself is not a viable excuse for getting out of humanitarian work.

[Snocioncilm]

Why blame the European ex-colonial powers? History is history, its time for Africa to start taking responsibility for helping itself. An endless stream of vicious dictators have been tolerated whilst they go about committing genocide.

http://www.ssn.flinders.edu.au/globa...berts/body.htm

Yes the EU and the US should offer political, financial, and moral support but the action has to be taken by the African states themselves.For too long they've sat on their hands wailing about the problem when they themselves should form part of the solution. If the AU is to mean anything at all it should act as a unifying force for action in resolving some of the world's greatest human rights abuses.

[cenRealliat]

As I see it, the colonial powers did Africa wrong be leaving it prematurely. For the most part, the new countries did not have the institutions and practices firmly established to ensure smooth administration of government.

[OEMCHEAPSOFTDOWNLOAD]

As I see it, the colonial powers did Africa wrong be leaving it prematurely. For the most part, the new countries did not have the institutions and practices firmly established to ensure smooth administration of government.

Which means they never should have invaded in the first place?

[saopinax]

As I see it, the colonial powers did Africa wrong be leaving it prematurely. For the most part, the new countries did not have the institutions and practices firmly established to ensure smooth administration of government.

Rubbish! The British left most of their ex-colonies with an excellent infrastructure, schools, hospitals, democratic government, backed up by an honest efficient civil service. One of the main reasons they left was because the Africans themselves decided they wanted independence and rose up against the occupying powers, e.g, the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya, (remind you of Iraq folks?).
The problem was that once the colonial powers left corruption became rife, despots took over, and tribalism once more came to the fore, all factors, along with racism against the whites that has caused many of the problems.

[konanoileaski]

So now we're going to pretend that colonialism all around was a boon to the locals?

[jeepgrandch]

So now we're going to pretend that colonialism all around was a boon to the locals?

It had its upside as well as its downside, it wasn't all bad ..... Just thank us for leaving you the English language (which we forgive you for bowdlerising!!), you could easily have ended up with Dutch!!! Now thats a thought!

[gZAhTyWY]

I'll go so far as to say colonialism was FAR better than what exists in Africa, today. Arguments against colonialism are eerily similar to that line from the comedy, "Life of Brian," in which the rebels argue, "Yeah! What have the Romans done for us?!" answered with "Well, they did give good roads, and architecture, water systems, the alphabet," etc. etc. I don't deny that the British or French probably left in place good systems of government, but the fact these institutions fell apart in short order indicates the people simply weren't ready to take over. So, the good people of Africa wanted independence, eh? OK, brothers and sisters, YOU GOT IT. Deal with your own stinking mess, the one YOU created!

[Elelaytet]

Comparing rome to modern invasion is not exactly fair in that teh time scales and technological differential is not as large and decisive as it is today.

In the case of Africa, there was a system of balance that was obtained after centuries of their own political and social conflict. It was not eden, but it was a balance.

Then, in the span of less than a generation, we take and shove modern society at them. While it does give many advantages, it can be likened to giving an elderly person broadband internet and an unsecured system. Before you know it, they will be infected with more stuff than you can wave an AVP at.

Whether you leave or not, you have unbalanced things and it will take quite a while to achieve a new balance. Restraining it too much will produce very little and may cause more problems than solutions, but simpley leaving it in the hands of the locals will produce high stress areas as you pretty much give loaded firearms to children.

So what can be done abouty it now? Sanctions and other ways of applying pressure are one thing, but when one faction aims to eliminate another based on nothing more than they are not them, it gets hard to rationalize. Even harder to placate and remediate.

[Reocourgigiot]

MODS: Any chance of changing the title of this thread so that the idiosyncratic spellig of "DARFUR" is altered?

The way it is now a person searching for a Darfur-related thread would be hard pressed to find it.

Given recent developments it might be helpful to change the Thread Title to:

Darfur / Sudan / Chad -- Africa

When one tries a SEARCH none of the four words above bring forth anything.

Note: The poster who created this thread has not posted anything else since the initial post.