BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Nov 04 - 03:34 PM

My understanding is that the Black Africans in this situation are Muslims also.

And I think you'll find the answers to your questions by looking at who has the most to gain from getting the land cleared of its people.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 14 Nov 04 - 03:08 PM

What I am learning about Sudan is truly frightening.

The Sudanese Liberation Army (the rebels)are backed by the U.S. and Christian Fundamentalist groups who oppose the Arabization of the African majority.

The govt. of Sudan (mainly Arab and Moslem) are comitting atrocities in the Darfour region with the help of the Janjaweed militia. There are also reports of assistance from Syria who may be providing chemical weapons. This is their response to the rebellion.

There is, of course, a struggle to control vast oil reserves.

Here we go again.

If U.S. interests would stop supporting rebel armies, these conflicts might be settled peacefully, at the table. Instead, we have to wait until the situation reaches the point of a humanitarian crisis. Why would the U.S. give military backing to Garang (who leads the rebellion) instead of trying to achieve a peaceful resolution to the conflict? Do they think that war is the only answer?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Nov 04 - 09:49 PM

Canadian P.M Paul Martin says he is going to provide traing to the A.U. to become peace keepers in Sudan. He thinks its a better idea to have African peace keepers who have an understanding of the culture. He has also offerred money and supplies and urges other nations to step forward.


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1100389810591_84?hub=Canada

I wonder what the U.S. contribution will be?

Over to you, beardedbruce.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Nov 04 - 02:35 PM

dianavan, the Sudanese government is using the Arab militias to help them clear the land where they want to have unfettered access to a fairly large oil deposit. The US is sort of egging things on a bit by backing rebel forces on the side of the Black Africans so that the government of Sudan will have a more of an excuse to continue clear the land of the Black Africans. The Arab militias are hopeing that when it's all over, they will be able to claim the land in question. But the US will very probably wait until the land is cleared of the people who have the most legitimate claim to the land (the Black Africans), and then it will depose Sudan's Arab government on the pretext that it has committed genocide, and take control of the oil.

This article, posted by Freda in another thread, does a good job of showing the inconsistancies in the policy of the US in this matter:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sudan/story/0,14658,1318643,00.html

The fact that beardedbruce is only concerned with the situation in Sudan but has not shown an equal amount of righteous indignation about the crises of similar magnitude in both northern Uganda and eastern Congo, illustrates his bias in this regard.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Nov 04 - 01:48 AM

http://search.cnn.com/pages/search/advanced.jsp?Coll=cnn_xml&QuerySubmit=true&Page=1&QueryText=sudan&query=sudan

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Nov 04 - 01:41 AM

The oil is the excuse that the people here who don't want any distraction from their single-minded hate of the Bush administration pull up to let themselves ignore the slaughter of "2 million" since 1983... ( see previous Sudan threads.) If they say "oil", they can blame Bush, regardless of what the facts are.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Nov 04 - 01:32 AM

Where's Freda when she's needed? I need someone to help me sort this out. The news is so confusing!

Do I have it right when I understand that this cannot really be called genocide because although it happens to be Arabs killing Africans, it is really a struggle over grazing land and water? Apparently the Africans are the cowboys and Arabs are the sheep herders (or goats as the case may be) - so we have nomads wanting to use the same land and water as the cattle farmers?

Apparently the Arab govt. of Sudan has enlisted the Janjaweed militia to quell a rebellion by the African farmers. Trouble is, the Janjaweed went overboard.

So where does the oil come in? Where is the oil?

It is definitely time for a coalition of forces to maintain peace in the region until the real source of the problem can be sorted out. I understand Germany is sending in their troops. I sure hope its not a unilateral action.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 12 Nov 04 - 05:46 AM

GENEVA, Switzerland (AP) -- The United Nations refugee agency said Thursday it is pulling staff out of part of Sudan's conflict-ravaged Darfur region to protest government restrictions on the aid workers.

Jean-Marie Fakhouri, Darfur chief for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, said the agency decided to act because Sudanese officials have barred its aid workers from leaving Nyala, in southern Darfur, since Oct. 20.

"It is extremely frustrating for our staff to be forced to sit idle," Fakhouri said in a statement. "If we are not going to be allowed to do our work in South Darfur, then UNHCR has no choice but to go elsewhere where the needs are just as great."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/africa/11/11/sudan.un.ap/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 12:10 AM

KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) -- Police drove through a Darfur camp for displaced people on Wednesday, smashing makeshift homes with their trucks, a UN spokesman and Amnesty International said.

It was the second alleged government raid in two weeks on El Geer camp, near Nyala in southern Darfur.

cnn story

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 11:05 AM

beardedbruce, the point isn't that the US is getting the oil. The point is that the oil supply is now under the control of US oil companies. That's been the point all along. We here in the US, you and me... the little guys... we were never intended to benefit from anything our troops do overseas.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 04:21 AM

Are they? Is that for certain? Apparently the Sudanese Government denies that.

How do we know?

The important thing now is to mount a humanitarian relief. Since Doctors without Borders and CARE International have left Iraq. Maybe they will be able to help in the Sudan.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 03:18 AM

and I do not see that the US is getting any oil from Iraq. What is pumped seems to be going out to the world market, where we buy just like everybody else.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 03:10 AM

dianavan

Tha Arab militias are supported by the government, NOT the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 03:00 AM

beardedbruce, I agree, oil is an oversimplification. Its oil for the war machine, the weapons industry, the jet fuel, the armies and the re-constuction contractors, the t.v. evangelists and their investment companies.

What makes you think the genocide would be occurring if there was no conflict? Seems to me that Arab militia armed with American assault weapons might be causing a fair amount of instability in the region.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 02:29 AM

The ONLY troops there are to protect the UN observers. Like in Rwanda, if there is violence, they are supposed to leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 02:19 AM

CarolC

They have sent some observers, who are not allowed to interfere, just make comments.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 02:11 AM

My understanding is that the UN has sent people to Sudan to help protect the Black Sudanese.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 12:16 AM

Bobert

What about little green men, or blue ones? You haven't ruled them out, so they must be the cause...

ANd it is France and Germany that do not want to call it genocide, since that requires the UN to act. The US has already said it is- the UN is refusing to deal with it.

So, we should UNILATERALLY invade Sudan, and put things to right- and the whole world will love us?

Can I PLEASE get some of what you are smoking?

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Nov 04 - 12:12 AM

No, bruce. You are wrong on both counts...

The evidence of the neocon/bush on the invasion of Iraq is "in the pudding"... Rvery concievable excues for the invasion has been dismissed except the oil. WMD's? Nope. Nukes? Nope. Al Quida? Nope, etc. Whats left? Oil!!!

Oh, democarcy you say, BB? Hmmmm? If Bus is so intersted in democracy he'd be pushing for it here at home...

No, an action based on nuthin' more than concern for ones fellow man can't be put down as ones greed... thus the Sudan....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:59 PM

Bobert,

You keep claiming that the US invaded Iraq for oil. We are not taking their oil- if anything, we are shipping IN oil. The oil that does come out is being sold on the open market, and we are not making money on it. So, why do you think that we attacked anyone for oil?

With the cost of the attack, it seems to me that we would have gotten a lot more oil by just buying it with the money.

You keep making this claim- So, what evidence do you have?

If I am wrong on the French, you are wrong on the oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:49 PM

Since when is the UN of any importance to you, bb?

Yer wrong on the French...

Anything that the US could do as the world's remaining "super power" that looks humanitarian can't hurt the US's reputation.

Attacking countries fir oil don't fall in that category..

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:38 PM

Bobert:

From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 12 Sep 04 - 07:29 AM

From Sunday's Washington Post:

"the admnistration will continue to press other countries to press the United Nations to press Sudan's government. The uncertainty of this strataegy was immediately apparent after Mr Powell spoke. Brushing aside the evidence, France and Germany declined to call the killings genocide. ... China, the leading foreign investor in Sudan's burgeoning oil fields, said it might veto a tough Security Council resolution."


The French will not see us as heros, no matter what we do. They still ( the government, NOT the people) resent the fact that they needed us in WWII.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:33 PM

Tell ya what, BB. If the US would intervene in Sudan they would be seen ad heros by the French and the Germans...

Big difference when on one hand you invade a country for what you can gain and another on what you have to give.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:26 PM

Bobert,

The problem is that the US went to the UN, like you all keep saying it should, and the UN said it would study the problem. Do you think we should act unilaterally, without the help of our loyal allies like France and Germany?

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 11:11 PM

I'm stickin' with my earlier observation that if it ain't entertaining for the NASCAR folks it ain't gonna get done uner Bush...

Blow the Hell outta some folks and all is well...

Yes, it is way late for the US to do more than "talk". Bush is good at talk but can't walk the walk...

Meanwhile, upwards of 1,000,000 Sudamese will die while Bush, and others, enertain the NASCAR crowd blowin' the crap outta Iragis.

That's the way it looks from these Wes Ginny hills anyway...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 10:23 PM

If the US stopped arming the rebels, there would be no need for UN intervention- the black population would be dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 10:22 PM

It is my understanding that this issue is on the table at the U.N. It is difficult to declare that genocide is occurring when there are so many outside forces involved. If the U.S. would stop arming the rebels, I believe the case for genocide would be more easily defined. At present, the people are collateral damage of a war. Just like in Iraq.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 08:39 PM

dianavan,

"beardedbruce - what makes you think that your thread regarding Sudan was hi-jacked? The last post on that thread was Sept. 13. This thread was started on Sept 29."

My apologies, again, if I did not make myself clear. I am not accusing you or this thread of hijacking the earlier one- I was merely stating that it had been hijacked. I did not intend to place any of the blame upon you.



"The U.N. is doing nothing because its hands are tied due to the unilateral action of the U.S. in Iraq. If the U.S. had stronger allies, Russia and China wouldn't be so bold."

I do not understand this. You are stating that because the US acted unilaterally, the UN cannot follow the US statement that this is genocide, and mobilize forces?


"Its my understanding that Russia and China are supplying arms to the Sudanese govt. while the U.S. is supplying arms to the rebels. What kind of action do you suppose the U.N. should take when it is their own members who are creating the conflict?"

Why should this be different than Iraq, then? There, France and Germany were violating the UN sanctions, and objecting to US interferring with their profits, but everyone her thinks that is ok. Why not have the UN deal with Sudan????



"Don't you think it is best settled at the table? Once the problem is resolved, the U.N. can provide humanitarian relief but why would they enter a conflict only to find they are caught between? Don't blame the U.N. when it is the U.S. and Russia and China who have a callous disregard for the lives of Africans."

I do not think that to allow genocide to continue, when it is known, is ever right.

I think it is more than the US , Russia, and China. Where are the voices from Europe? The rest of Africa? All the other nations that make up the UN? READ my post- the US has declared this to be genocide, but the UN will not, since that would require action under the charter.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 08:30 PM

beardedbruce - what makes you think that your thread regarding Sudan was hi-jacked? The last post on that thread was Sept. 13. This thread was started on Sept 29.

The U.N. is doing nothing because its hands are tied due to the unilateral action of the U.S. in Iraq. If the U.S. had stronger allies, Russia and China wouldn't be so bold.

Its my understanding that Russia and China are supplying arms to the Sudanese govt. while the U.S. is supplying arms to the rebels. What kind of action do you suppose the U.N. should take when it is their own members who are creating the conflict?

Don't you think it is best settled at the table? Once the problem is resolved, the U.N. can provide humanitarian relief but why would they enter a conflict only to find they are caught between? Don't blame the U.N. when it is the U.S. and Russia and China who have a callous disregard for the lives of Africans.

d

P.S. I don't even know my IQ. I do know that I can survive without oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 07:57 PM

dianavan


hardly a valid arguement on your part. Shall I judge your intelligence from your posts? It appears to me that you are ignorant of the facts, and make no attempt to learn what they are.

I will admit to being a lousy typist, sometimes rash in my postings, and opinionated- like most of us here. If you choose to think that I am less intelligent than you for having my own opinions, feel free- but try posting some numbers as to YOUR intelligence, and see if you have anything further to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 07:26 PM

Pardon me. My post of 02 Oct 04 - 04:41 AM , quoting from the other thread on Sudan that was hijacked.


As I have brought up in other threads, the US HAS declared that there is genocide going on in Sudan- But the UN refuses to make that statement, since it would require the UN to take action, which the UN is unwilling to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Muslim genocide in Sudan
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 12 Sep 04 - 07:29 AM

From Sunday's Washington Post:

"the admnistration will continue to press other countries to press the United Nations to press Sudan's government. The uncertainty of this strataegy was immediately apparent after Mr Powell spoke. Brushing aside the evidence, France and Germany declined to call the killings genocide. ... China, the leading foreign investor in Sudan's burgeoning oil fields, said it might veto a tough Security Council resolution."


And you ignore the FACT that I presented, that the UN is doing NOTHING.

My apologies- you are entitled to take your own thread anywhere you want, unlike the rest of us here who have to go where the posts lead us...

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 07:24 PM

Actually, I guess you can read at a somewhat functional level or you wouldn't be able to post at all. You do need, however, to improve your comprehension and your ability to think critically.

I guess you are another good, little, functionally literate, consumer.

Lick Bush boot you fool.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 07:20 PM

beardedbruce - You are a fucking idiot.

How can I hijack a thread that I started. What do you mean your post of Sept 12? The thread wasn't even started until Sept 29.

Learn to read. Maybe if you start reading, your intelligence will increase and you will stop voting for warmongers like Bush.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 07:00 PM

DougR... generous in giving poverty and death, in robbing other countries of their resources and propping up oppressive dictatorships in order to secure wealth for our most priveleged few. Not so generous in leaving people alone to live their lives in freedom.

You're the one who's full of horse pucky. You know nothing of the world. Pity too... you've had so long to learn. But you just keep your little velvet-lined blinders on and ignore the suffering all around you that has been created by the people whose asses you have your mouth so firmly attached to.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 06:46 PM

dianavan,

You miss the point that the UN IS NOT taking action.

See my post here of 12 Sep 04 - 07:29 AM

And why do you try to hijack a thread about Sudan to Iraq? Aren't there enough threads about Iraq? Or do you think that Iraqi lives are worth so much more than Sudanese?

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 06:28 PM

DougR - Here is the point.

Saddam wasn't bombing the people of Iraq. What is the U.S. doing there? Bombing the people of Iraq! The people of Iraq hated Saddam but they hate the U.S. even more.

Now maybe if the U.S. directed their energy to more humanitarian efforts, they might once again be called the good guys.

From the article linked above:

"The United Nations has called Darfur the world's worst humanitarian crisis, saying the conflict has claimed 70,000 lives since March, mostly through disease and hunger.

A U.N. report released last Wednesday said the violence has affected 2 million people and mentioned strong indications of war crimes "on a large and systematic scale."

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: DougR
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 06:18 PM

Carol C: your post of September 30, 2:30 P.M. What a bunch of horse pucky you sling. The United States is the most generous country in the world. And you call it greedy! What a pile of you know what.

Dianavan: one conflict at a time. Perhaps you should be directing your criticizems at France, Germany and Russia. Their armies don't seem to be particularly occupied at the moment. Well, I guess Russia is having a bit of trouble of it's own, though, now that I think about it.

What about the U.N.? Should it be a bigger player in the Sudan? Perhaps if Kofi got more involved there, he might have less time to try to screw things up for the coalition in Iraq.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 05:57 PM

In southern Darfur, several thousand people who were forced out of a camp in the middle of the night returned to find the site destroyed and its generators and water pump looted, U.N. officials said Friday.

The camp, known as El Geer, was at the center of an outcry Tuesday when security forces allegedly forced people who had taken refuge there and in nearby camps to leave.

The top U.N. envoy to Sudan, Jan Pronk, called it a violation of international law.

full article

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 10:52 PM

UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- "Sudanese forces" have removed several thousand people from a refugee camp in the Darfur region, despite assurances they would not, U.N. officials said Tuesday.

"As far as I'm concerned it has to stop ... and people will also have to be brought back, said Jan Pronk, the U.N. envoy to Sudan, who said the situation there is deteriorating. "Stop it and reverse what has happened."

Pronk said "a couple of thousand" refugees had been moved from El-Geer on the outskirts of Nyala in South Darfur to Sherif, just north of Nyala.

He said the government had misrepresented the facts in the case.

"The government has told these IDPS (internally displaced persons) that this was happening in close consultation with the United Nations and in consultation with nongovernmental organizations, which is not the case," he said.

U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said preliminary reports indicated that between 3 a.m. and 9 a.m. (midnight to 6 a.m. GMT), 15 trucks were used to relocate "a proportion of the population" north of the Nyala camp.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Oct 04 - 01:45 AM

ABUJA, Nigeria (Reuters) -- The African Union has recommended a four-day postponement of peace talks over Sudan's Darfur region after a transport mix-up left delegates stranded across the continent.

The AU-sponsored talks between the rebels and the government come against a backdrop of the imminent deployment of thousands more troops to monitor renewed fighting in Darfur, where 1.5 million people have been driven from their homes.

U.N. officials said they feared an end to the rainy season could lead to fresh fighting and urged governments to do more to help speed African Union troops to the troubled area.

Rebels and AU officials traded blame over who was responsible for failing to airlift rebel negotiators from Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia and Chad to the talks in the Nigerian capital, which analysts say have little chance of success.

A previous round collapsed last month without an agreement on the conflict, which the United Nations says has caused one of the world's worst humanitarian crises.

After a 30-minute opening ceremony, which went ahead despite the absence of several senior rebel delegates, the AU special envoy for Darfur, Hamid al-Gabid, suggested formal talks should begin on Monday.

Government negotiators said they still wanted them to start on Saturday.

Delegates are expected to hold preliminary consultations on the agenda and timetable on Friday.

African force
The AU's Peace and Security Council agreed on Wednesday to expand its force in Darfur, deploying more than 3,000 troops to bolster 150 ceasefire monitors and 300 AU troops already there.

The force's main job will be to monitor a ceasefire agreed in April which both sides accuse each other of violating.

Najeib Abdelwahab, Sudan's state minister for foreign affairs, said Khartoum wanted the rebels to recognize the ground situation had substantially improved.

"The government has made serious efforts in the security and humanitarian fields. But as they say, it takes two to tango," he told Reuters.

A U.N. official said while there had been progress in getting food, water and sanitation to Darfur's 2 million people in need, the security situation was deteriorating for aid workers and local inhabitants.

"I told the Security Council that security is long overdue ... and that every effort now has to be made to bring in the African Union observers and troops," said U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland.

"Every effort has to be made to ensure that the rebels and others do not use the end of the rainy season to step up fighting."

A U.N. official in Khartoum said on Wednesday there were reports of a heavy bombardment in north Darfur.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the United States commended the AU's efforts to end the conflict and called for more international help.

"We also urge the international community to respond generously to fund the vital programs that support the victims in both Chad and Sudan. Only when the people of Darfur can safely return home will the job be done," McClellan said in a statement.

Arms
After years of skirmishes between Arab nomads and non-Arab farmers over scarce resources in arid Darfur, rebels took up arms early last year.

Rebels accuse the government of using Arab militias, known as Janjaweed, to loot and burn non-Arab villages. The Sudanese government admits arming some militias to fight the rebels, but denies any links to the Janjaweed, calling them outlaws.

The United Nations estimates 70,000 people have died from malnutrition and disease in the last seven months alone, a figure the Sudanese government disputes.

There are no reliable estimates of how many have been killed in the violence, which the United States has called genocide.

Analysts said both sides had an interest in dragging out the talks and that they were unlikely to reach a deal to resolve the crisis in Darfur, a region the size of France.

Ahmed Mohamed Tugod, the chief negotiator for the JEM rebel movement, said the success of the talks depended on "whether the government genuinely wants to resolve the real problems or not."

"I don't think there is any pressure on us, our position is very clear. We are not going to sign the humanitarian protocol unless we sort out the security issues," he told Reuters.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 12:40 PM

We didn't elect Bush, THE CURATOR. Gore got more votes than Bush. The US Supreme Court intervened in that election and the result is that the US has a president who lost the popular vote. It's a big mistake to think that the US is a democracy these days. It is not. It's a hegemonic kleptocracy.

And now, this year, with all of the questions about the fallibility of the voting machines and how easy it is to tamper with them, many of us don't have very high hopes for a legitimate election this time, either. Of course, even if Kerry is elected this time around, it will be because someone with a lot of money and a vested interest in certain outcomes will have made that possible, and he will also be owned by huge, money and power hungry corporations, just as Bush is.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: GUEST,THE CURATOR
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 09:41 AM

Having read with great interest the above comments, I am relieved to see there are still some people in this mad world still with feeling and understanding. I can assure you no one has any idea what it is like to see fear in the eyes of innocent people who just happen to unfortunate enough to live in a country invaided by a surpressive army. I know because I was once part of that army.I served in Northern Ireland and the Balkans.My father always said that war was started by old men and fought by young men, who's job it was not to question. Well I have been part of group who now feels it is their right to question. I ask the Bush and Blair double act, does the sight of dead women and children caught in yesterdays air strikes in Iraq not affect you ? 75% of those hospitalised yesterday were under 21.My own head still buzzs with actions I myself was involved in, there is no limits in the actions of modern armies to obtain what the leadership wants. Believe me I was told it, as an order.Those who support the actions of these two misguided individuals, and they are misguided, Bush is there to impress daddy, and be the son daddy wanted, not a failure. And Tony is there because British still haven't paid American back the money to cover World War one, let alone World War Two.Must accept that when your armed thugs go into other countries and attempt to rape nations of their faith, traditions and resources, that people will fight back. Not always on the blood soaked soil of their own country.So less tears please when large holes appear in the cities of your countries. Look at yourself and the leadership you elected.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: GUEST,Yorkshire Lad
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 06:48 AM

Quite simply I despair, and if the guy in the sky isn`t really pie in the sky, I pray that others may see the light.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 05:00 PM

I'm very sorry to have to tell you, Yorkshire Lad, that many of them do indeed believe what they see on Fox. And it's not just Fox that is misleading them. All of the mainstream media sources are misleading them. What we are being told is that we are there to help those people whose faces show so much dispair, and that we are doing a good job of it. The majority of people in the US do believe this.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: GUEST,Yorkshire Lad
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 02:57 PM

Thank you Carol, surely the majority cannot be so naive as to believe the lying propaganda I see daily on Fox News, the despair on the face of those Iraqi people would make any sane person seeth with anger.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 02:31 PM

It's not that they don't care, Yorkshire Lad, it's that they are being misinformed by their government and their news media, and they just don't understand what's really going on.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: GUEST,Yorkshire Lad
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 02:24 PM

Have any of you seen the destruction in Samarra on to-days news, the BBC pictures are horrific, men women and children dead and dying, homes flattened from air raids, what an evil society that can send terriorists in aircraft to bomb the defenceless.
God help the Iraqi people who are suffering while the majority of Americans couldn`t care less.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 02:22 PM

All of this for oil. Please people, do something, anything, to cut down on your consumption. It just ain't worth it.

Amen to that, dianavan.

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 02:00 PM

...and this from a Pakistani source:

Sudan says US armed Darfur rebels

CAIRO: The United States helped train and arm rebels from west Sudan who rose up against the Sudanese government last year, Sudanese President President Omar Hassan Al Bashir said in remarks published on Thursday. "Who else than the United States is behind this ... They took rebels to Eritrea, and set up training camps for them, spent money on them, armed them and gave them Thuraya mobiles (telephones) to speak between anywhere in the world," Bashir told Egypt's Al Ahram daily when asked about the involvement of foreign powers in Darfur. The US embassy in Khartoum declined to comment on the report.

Sudanese officials have previously said the United States has exploited the Darfur crisis to further its own political agenda in the region and to exploit the country's oil and other resources. Sudan produces up to 320,000 barrels a day of crude.

"Eritrea ... was the land used, but the training, spending and planning was paid for by foreign powers, at the head of them the United States, represented in its agencies," Bashir told the semi-official Egyptian daily in the interview in Khartoum. He said encouragement came from US pressure groups, such as right-wing Christians. Bashir said he had evidence and documents to support his charges, but he did not give details. "There are many ways to resolve it, and the ways are known internationally, but those who lit the fire don't want to put it out," he said. The UN Security Council has threatened Sudan with possible sanctions if it fails to stop the violence in Darfur. A ceasefire between the government and rebels agreed in Chad in April has proved shaky. reuters


All of this for oil. Please people, do something, anything, to cut down on your consumption. It just ain't worth it.

d

d

Subject: RE: BS: Time to re-deploy to Sudan
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 01:51 PM

From the Taipei Times:

"The council on Sept. 18 passed a resolution calling for an international commission to investigate claims of genocide in Darfur.

It also gave the thumbs-up for a significantly expanded African Union force in Darfur, and threatened sanctions against the Khartoum government if it doesn't act to rein in Arab militias blamed for killing over 50,000 people and forcing 1.2 million to flee their homes.

Last week, Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, who heads the African Union, said the 53-nation body can quickly mobilize up to 5,000 troops to help end the looting and killing in Darfur but it needs hundreds of millions of dollars to deploy the force.

d