It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

We Aren't Ignoring The Genocide in Sudan After All...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
More hypocrisy in the name of "intelligence", in one hand we offer food and relief supplies, in the other we participate in the financing of a terror regime in the name of intelligence gathering. People are dying and we are writing checks to these murderers. The Bush regime killed a bill that could have ended this hypocrisy and sent some real relief efforts to Darfour.


www.truthout.org...
But now-thanks to a carefully documented report by Ken Silverstein in the April 29 Los Angeles Times, which has had far too little follow-up by the media-it is clear that the CIA, with the blessings of the Bush administration, is closely connected to the horrifying government of Lieutenant General Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, the head perpetrator of the ongoing genocide in Darfur: over 400,000 black Africans dead, with some 500 more dying every day, and more than two million, many in peril of starvation, turned into refugees as their homes and villages are destroyed....
In his April 17 column, Kristof wrote: "President Bush seems paralyzed in the face of the slaughter. He has done a fine job of providing humanitarian relief, but he has refused [for months now] to confront Sudan forcefully or raise the issue himself before the world."
In his May 3 column, Kristof-who has made repeated trips to Darfur, at some risk-added: "Incredibly, the Bush administration is fighting to kill the Darfur Accountability Act, which would be the most forceful step the U.S. has taken so far against genocide."
The bill, passed by the Senate, "calls for such steps as freezing assets of the genocide's leaders and imposing an internationally backed no-fly zone to stop Sudan's army from strafing villages." (That bill has now been killed.) ...
unmistakable evidence that Sudan's equivalent of the CIA, the Mukhabarat, is indeed providing the CIA with exceptionally valuable information on terrorists' organizing, and their planned actions, against the United States. Can the Bush administration make a reasonable survival argument that for America's self-defense, it has no choice but to continue its "fruitful relationship" with this ruthless force of evil-even if more white-robed children, like those outside the school in Um Seifa, are raped and murdered?




posted on May, 23 2005 @ 04:28 AM
link   
There is no real surpises here Sudan is like Tibet it has very little or no natrual resouces to offer to a hungry globe hence the world is quite happy to overlook human rights abuses. The world only cares about human rights when there is something to gain for example a stable Middle east ensures sercuity for the worlds oil supply. I think I will add Sudan to the list of countries in need of a regime change.

[edit on 23-5-2005 by xpert11]



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 05:09 AM
link   
You're talking about Sudan in AFRICA, right?

Hey - I think that NOBODY cares about this continent and for the People that live there.

Its like this Big Prison Camp, that you just cant get off - but you die in it, fighting for survivial.

If wars dont get you, there plenty other factors will: hunger, diseases, water shortages.



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 06:52 AM
link   
And who's fault is that? The US i suppose right
. you know i here a lot of slander from other countries, why are they not contributing to help those people. It's a common them with liberals, we have lots of money but let us tell you how to spend yours!

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 30-4-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
And who's fault is that? The US i suppose right
.

Let me say it again, so you may grasp this post...


People are dying and we are writing checks to these murderers. The Bush regime killed a bill that could have ended this hypocrisy and sent some real relief efforts to Darfour.

Or I can narrow down to one word here.

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 30-4-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on May, 23 2005 @ 07:04 AM
link   
oh, i completly agree that we should not do anything in darfur nor should we act like we really care. That would end the 'hypocrisy' because then we finally show that we dont really care. Then again who does right?



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Wow some members of US Congress were arrested outside the Sudanese Embasy in DC, Rep. Tom Lantos, Reps. James McGovern and John Olver of Massachusetts, Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and Jim Moran of Virginia.
Congress Members Arrested at Sudan Protest

Bah, 'Let them eat cake'.

Darfur Food Rations Cut in Half



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
And who's fault is that? The US i suppose right
. you know i here a lot of slander from other countries, why are they not contributing to help those people. It's a common them with liberals, we have lots of money but let us tell you how to spend yours!


Anywhere the US is involved, and something goes wrong it is invariably the US' fault. Its kind of what happens when a country is the largest power in the world most of the responsibilty will fall on your shoulders. Its kind of like Somalia. We went there to help the people of Somalia, who were being starved by their own. There was still much criticism from the world about that because some said it led to the unecessary deaths of civilians.(which in some cases were true) But we were there to stop that starvation and genocide. It doesnt matter what the US does or doesnt do, there will always be criticsm because of the inherint responisbility of being a superpower. Its how it is. If youre on top, be prepared to take the shots.



posted on Apr, 30 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   
The whole "who's fault is it" thing misses the point. Frankly I don't see why everyone's in such a rush to assign blame for something that doesn't even seem to bother most of us?

The real point, if anyone actually cares that people are dying, is not who is at fault, but as twitchy has brought us information on, Why isn't anyone doing anything.

Well, for the US, we now seem to have the answer. The genocide presumably was not our idea, so that's not to say we're the sole culpable party, but we've got as much blood on our hands as every other country who has the means but not the will to do the right thing there.

So the question that remains is, why isn't anyone else taking the lead? The least sinister explanation that anyone can have is that they lack the moral courage to step up to the plate for 400,000 murder victims and another 2 million potential victims.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall if a Sudanese refugee could wander into the UN and ask each major power in the world why they haven't done anything.

"Um... Germany would love to help but um... we've given our army the year off in memory of victims of the Holocaust... yeah, that's it."

"Sorry chap, Great Britain can only do so much at once... we're busy helping the yanks... do whatever it is we're doing in Iraq."

"The Comra... um I mean President Putin says we cannot spare any arms for you right now; we're selling them all to belligerent Muslim nations. Come to think of it, I think I recognize those rifles the Sudanese militias are carrying... *awkward silence*... I think I'll be going now."

"The People's Republic of China only has this big military to scare the pants off of the West. We don't do peace keeping."

etc etc etc. Wonder how many other nations have their dirty little fingers in that bloody Sudanese pie? They can't all be just plain spineless- there's a motive here sure as there was for the US. Maybe the same where some European powers are concerned, maybe others elsewhere.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond
"Sorry chap, Great Britain can only do so much at once... we're busy helping the yanks... do whatever it is we're doing in Iraq."

"The Comra... um I mean President Putin says we cannot spare any arms for you right now; we're selling them all to belligerent Muslim nations. Come to think of it, I think I recognize those rifles the Sudanese militias are carrying... *awkward silence*... I think I'll be going now."

"The People's Republic of China only has this big military to scare the pants off of the West. We don't do peace keeping."


Putting natuarl resources aside Africa as we western people know it dosnt exist. Post WW2 the colone powers drew up political rather then tribal boundries along with rampted corrupation this sent Africa on its current course. Once the map of Africa is redrawn we may see nations send peace keepers to the new nations.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
The truthout article is a copy of a Village Voice article. The LA Times article upon which it is based seems to be copied here:
www.globalpolicy.org...

After noting that the Sudanese government is on a terrorist watchlist and associates with terror groups, the article notes:

Sudan's Mukhabarat, its version of the CIA, has detained Al Qaeda suspects for interrogation by U.S. agents.
• The Sudanese intelligence agency has seized and turned over to the FBI evidence recovered in raids on suspected terrorists' homes, including fake passports.

• Sudan has expelled extremists, putting them into the hands of Arab intelligence agencies working closely with the CIA.

• The regime is credited with foiling attacks against American targets by, among other things, detaining foreign militants moving through Sudan on their way to join forces with Iraqi insurgents.



So it seems like the Sudanese government is 'walking a fine line' between supporting some terror groups and complying with the US in breaking up others.

This, undoubtedly, is why the US hasn't been forcing the Genocide issue.

At the same time, one has to recall that, after 911, one of the reasons that officials were saying they were in the dark was because they didn't want to associate with 'unsavory' characters, to which the general public flipped their lids.

So, basically, to get al-qaida, we're helping and protecting other terrorists.

Probably not the best way to go. But, who would exchange, say, another 911 in order to stop the genocide in Darfur? Can the US government even do such a thing? I mean, technically, the US government has to protect the US citizens, not the Sudanese.

These are the questions people should be having a 'national' discussion about. But it looks like the general public would rather freak out about illegal aliens.

[edit on 17-5-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
These are the questions people should be having a 'national' discussion about. But it looks like the general public would rather freak out about illegal aliens.


The media tends to have a large bearing on what the public interests are. I would say both issues are of equal importance.
Cheers Xpert11.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join