1000
Q :: How does a soldier act as an ambassador to people with a gun in his hand?
A :: A solider can't and should not try, that is for the State Department and policies of government that keeps soldiers out of hideous circumstances that place them in positions of redundancy.
1006
Jamie McIntyre - I've had enough of the stupid conversation about an illegal and failed initiative in Iraq. Nothing you have to say matters. Senator Warner is an old Republican hack and nothing more. He's asking the American People to keep trying? That's his question?
Here is his answer :: NO !
enough
Friday, October 6, 2006
But, do something other than point to tragedy. Take a stand. Make it happen.
Walk the Talk, Anderson
Bill Proposed Banning Contracts for U.S. Firms That Benefit from Darfur Conflict (click on for source)
Date: Thursday, October 05, 2006By: Vincent Sherry, Howard University News Service
Black congressional leaders and activists are urging the United States to help end genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region by placing economic sanctions on some prominent American companies.
Last week, U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) and 48 co-sponsors announced a bill that would bar companies benefitting from the conflict in Darfur from receiving federal business contracts.
Meanwhile, activists are calling for a United Nations peacekeeping force to seize control of the volatile situation.
"No one should have to worry that their tax dollars are supporting genocide," Lee said at a Capitol Hill press conference. "The bill is designed to wash the blood off of our federal contracts, protect the rights of states to divest their own public pension funds from companies doing business in Sudan and increase financial pressure on Khartoum to end the genocide in Darfur."
It is estimated that companies associated with the conflict have amassed about $600 billion since 2004, according to data from the government’s General Services Administration (GSA) Procurement Data System. Precise figures cannot be known since no comprehensive list of businesses said to profit from the conflict exists.
The bill, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act, would require that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission compile such a list. Criteria for making the list would include doing business with Sudan’s government-related entities or selling them military and other equipment that could be used to hurt civilians.
"It is urgent that the international community come together to take decisive action to save the lives of those in Darfur," U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), a co-sponsor of the bill. "I urge my colleagues to adopt, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2006 and o support the effort to end genocide in Darfur."
The legislation is supported by activists, though many insist stronger action is needed.
As activist organizations mount pressure and the situation further deteriorates, Darfur is beginning to receive more attention from the international community. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice issued an ultimatum to the Sudanese government on accepting a UN peacekeeping force just last week.
"We are not going to sit by and watch this kind of death and destruction continue and we will use whatever tools are necessary, through the U.N., to be able to stop that" Rice said."
In response to concerns, President George W. Bush has appointed a new special envoy to the region, whose task will be to employ diplomacy to end the conflict.
Human rights organization Africa Action still questions U.S. commitment to ending the conflict. In a statement, acting Co-Executive Director Anna Louise Colgan praised President Bush’s recent appointment of a special envoy, but called it insufficient.
"The appointment of a special envoy for Darfur cannot substitute for a U.S. plan of action to break the deadlock and stop the genocide. The credibility of the U.S. on Darfur will be judged by the successful pursuit of a diplomatic offensive ... to overcome [Sudan’s] opposition to a UN force and galvanize Security Council Action to protect the people of Darfur."
A resolution approved by the UN would place 17,000 peacekeepers in the region, according to the organization’s web site. But Sudan’s government has rejected it as a violation of its sovereignty.
This has led activists to call upon the U.S. to pressure Sudan to change its position.
But the U.S. confronts several obstacles in the Security Council and elsewhere. China and Russia, Sudanese allies and trade partners, wield veto power on the council. Plus, Sudan is expected to expand nascent oil operations in coming years. Damage to the U.S. relationship with its government could hurt American prospects for access to that oil. Also, as the Bush administration has often noted, Sudan provides intelligence on terror.
"We acknowledge the U.S. has several competing priorities in having a relationship with the government of Sudan," Diana Duarte, 22, a program associate in Africa Action’s Policy Analysis and Communications Department, told BlackAmericaWeb.com.
"I would really highlight that this is a genocide, and that creates a moral imperative to act. I would also highlight that those factors [sharing intelligence and the U.S. role in ending the Sudanese civil war] are examples of a long-standing relationship with the Sudanese government," she said.
Duarte also notes relations between the U.S. and Russia and China and says these ties can be used to compel their cooperation in allowing UN peacekeepers into Sudan.
Currently, the African Union, an organization of African states, maintains a peacekeeping force of 7,000 in the region. It was just given UN approval to continue its efforts in the region, which have so far failed to end violence. Some activists have criticized the effort as underfunded and lacking in manpower.
The conflict began in Feb. 2003 when Arab militias believed to be supported by the government began attacking the western region known as Darfur, where rebel groups live. The conflict has largely been cast as racial and religious, given the targeting of blacks and Christians. Both groups have historically lacked political power.
Death toll estimates vary wildly, though it’s now believed that at least 200,000 have died since the conflict began. This figure, taken from a scientific study from journal, Science, differs sharply from estimates once putting the toll at just 70,000. Africa Action says 500,000 have died; the UN estimate is 400,000.
Last month, the NAACP joined other humanitarian and civil rights groups at rallies in front of the White House and in New York City as part of a continuing campaign to stop the genocide in the Darfur region of the Sudan.
"In recent months, the media has begun to display the desperation in Darfur to the world community, but the situation continues to worsen," Crispian Kirk, NAACP director for international relations, said in a statement. "We must take action. Without our help, thousands more will suffer and die."
---
The Howard University News Service provides articles and photographs to fulfill a public service obligation to contribute to fair and equitable representation of all people in the news media.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SUDAN. A local report adds some information that 'changes' some of the perspective but can't dismiss it. This is the perspective that seeks to dismiss the problem and dismiss the need for a peacekeeper force.
Darfur Eyewitness (click on for more content)
Dreadful events in Sudan’s war-torn Darfur continue to dominate world headlines.
The conflict in Darfur erupted in February 2003 between local tribes and the Janjaweed, an armed group allegedly backed by Khartoum. The conflict involves control over natural resources. More than 180,000 people have been killed in the conflict and more than 2.2 million have been displaced. ...
... There have been horrible images from Sudan such as rape and destitution. Has it changed since 2002?
In a very strange way, in terms of Darfur, actually malnutrition has gotten better in a lot of places in Darfur since the rebellion, because there’s been access for aid agencies. Many of the aid agencies that left Darfur when the Sudanese government was put on the sanctions list went back in when the emergency was at its peak.
In a very strange way, for a lot of people, aside from the people who are dying as a direct result of the war in a lot of parts of Darfur, when the food supply line can be made possible (the violence does break up the supply line), then the nutrition situation is better.
Khartoum is very different. It’s very difficult to explain, because Sudan is so incredibly big and Khartoum to Darfur is a two-and-a-half to three-hour flight. When you land in the capital, in Khartoum, it’s very disconcerting because you see this very thriving and modern African city. There’s a lot of investment coming into Khartoum, there are coffee shops, restaurants. Then you fly out to Darfur and it’s like going back in time.
The Janjaweed continue to hold many people in Sudan hostage. You have some eyewitness accounts of what’s still happening. Tell us about what you saw.
The situation at the moment is that the Sudanese government is in the middle of a military offensive, an aerial bombardment. In recent weeks they have been moving troops in on the ground.
One of the rebel groups signed a deal with the Sudanese government, so they brought with them the territory that they had under their control in southern Darfur. But in northern Darfur other rebel groups, which didn’t sign the deal, have taken a lot of the territory away from the main rebel group, the SLM. This is where the Sudanese government is concentrating its firepower at the moment. It’s no longer a situation where it’s the deniability of the Janjaweed militias just moving in and doing an offensive on the part of the government. This is now full-scale warfare.
You write “yet another orphan, yet another widow, yet another raped girl, Reeling, you end up too busy fighting for breath to fight the tears like a proper journalist would.” Can you talk about this element – the widow, the orphan, the raped girl – how it still continues in spite of world reaction and the many humanitarian agencies that have come into Darfur.
I think what’s so horrific about Darfur is that every time you go back you hear the exact same story. Two-and-a-half, nearly three years down the line, nothing has changed. I think there can be nothing worse than the death of hope. The first few times I went in, people really saw you as a journalist, as bringing hope that people cared. There was a real innocence that “people in the world can’t possibly know what we’re going through because if they did, it would stop.” I think that’s the most horrible thing about going back to Darfur. You can’t lie to these people any more. You go back to the same places and you see a lot of the same people, because it’s the same people who have been sitting in these makeshift shelters for three years. ...
... It’s an emotional story that continues to unfold out of Darfur. You go there as a reporter, come back and tell your story, as do others. You’ve watched over the years what has or hasn’t happened. What do you think will make the world understand how bad the situation continues to be?
There was a day for solidarity with Darfur, when people were going out on the ground and talking about the need to do something. But people need to understand that there’s a lack of political will.
When you’re standing there and lobbying in the U.N., I really feel that if there were the political will, whether in the U.S. or in the UK, for this to actually happen… it’s just such a mess and it’s such a difficult place to operate in. ...
... Can you provide some statistics on the death toll and the rape toll since the beginning of the war?
Both the death and the rape tolls have gone down in the past year. We were hearing much reduced numbers, but in this last offensive they’ve gone up again. The problem is, it’s so difficult to work. I was actually pulled out by my company the last time I was in. A friend of mine, a local Sudanese journalist, was killed in Darfur. I think that’s the problem, that aid agencies can’t put together definitive figures.
My understanding is that in this recent offensive, over 60,000 have been displaced. That’s just within Darfur and we’re talking about a community that doesn’t really have anywhere else to go. There’s nowhere left to run for them. So if 60,000 people have been displaced, that’s a huge shift and that’s without having any figures for the people who have gone into Chad again, and there’s a war brewing in Chad. There’s just no safe place anymore.
Even when you talk about 60,000 [displaced] and you talk about over 1,000 rapes in this recent offensive, you just don’t know. It could be worse than that, it could be less. There’s just no access, there’s no way to go in and that’s the awful thing – the Sudanese government has achieved impunity because there is no way to independently verify any of the figures we’re hearing.
Courageously, you’ve ventured into war-torn Darfur and you’ve been nominated for several awards for your courage. Are journalists taking the same interest now as they have? Are many still frequenting Darfur in order to report what’s happening?
It’s very, very hard. The last time I was there, my colleagues at the Al-Jazeera bureau in Khartoum, in one week they were attacked four times by Sudanese security. It’s impossible to go in as a foreign journalist because you need a travel permit. You saw recently with the Chicago Tribune journalist and the Serbian envoy that going in through Chad is not only dangerous; now that the Sudanese have repaired relations with the Chadian government, it’s almost impossible. ...
1044
Bill Proposed Banning Contracts for U.S. Firms That Benefit from Darfur Conflict (click on for source)
Date: Thursday, October 05, 2006By: Vincent Sherry, Howard University News Service
Black congressional leaders and activists are urging the United States to help end genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region by placing economic sanctions on some prominent American companies.
Last week, U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) and 48 co-sponsors announced a bill that would bar companies benefitting from the conflict in Darfur from receiving federal business contracts.
Meanwhile, activists are calling for a United Nations peacekeeping force to seize control of the volatile situation.
"No one should have to worry that their tax dollars are supporting genocide," Lee said at a Capitol Hill press conference. "The bill is designed to wash the blood off of our federal contracts, protect the rights of states to divest their own public pension funds from companies doing business in Sudan and increase financial pressure on Khartoum to end the genocide in Darfur."
It is estimated that companies associated with the conflict have amassed about $600 billion since 2004, according to data from the government’s General Services Administration (GSA) Procurement Data System. Precise figures cannot be known since no comprehensive list of businesses said to profit from the conflict exists.
The bill, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act, would require that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission compile such a list. Criteria for making the list would include doing business with Sudan’s government-related entities or selling them military and other equipment that could be used to hurt civilians.
"It is urgent that the international community come together to take decisive action to save the lives of those in Darfur," U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), a co-sponsor of the bill. "I urge my colleagues to adopt, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2006 and o support the effort to end genocide in Darfur."
The legislation is supported by activists, though many insist stronger action is needed.
As activist organizations mount pressure and the situation further deteriorates, Darfur is beginning to receive more attention from the international community. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice issued an ultimatum to the Sudanese government on accepting a UN peacekeeping force just last week.
"We are not going to sit by and watch this kind of death and destruction continue and we will use whatever tools are necessary, through the U.N., to be able to stop that" Rice said."
In response to concerns, President George W. Bush has appointed a new special envoy to the region, whose task will be to employ diplomacy to end the conflict.
Human rights organization Africa Action still questions U.S. commitment to ending the conflict. In a statement, acting Co-Executive Director Anna Louise Colgan praised President Bush’s recent appointment of a special envoy, but called it insufficient.
"The appointment of a special envoy for Darfur cannot substitute for a U.S. plan of action to break the deadlock and stop the genocide. The credibility of the U.S. on Darfur will be judged by the successful pursuit of a diplomatic offensive ... to overcome [Sudan’s] opposition to a UN force and galvanize Security Council Action to protect the people of Darfur."
A resolution approved by the UN would place 17,000 peacekeepers in the region, according to the organization’s web site. But Sudan’s government has rejected it as a violation of its sovereignty.
This has led activists to call upon the U.S. to pressure Sudan to change its position.
But the U.S. confronts several obstacles in the Security Council and elsewhere. China and Russia, Sudanese allies and trade partners, wield veto power on the council. Plus, Sudan is expected to expand nascent oil operations in coming years. Damage to the U.S. relationship with its government could hurt American prospects for access to that oil. Also, as the Bush administration has often noted, Sudan provides intelligence on terror.
"We acknowledge the U.S. has several competing priorities in having a relationship with the government of Sudan," Diana Duarte, 22, a program associate in Africa Action’s Policy Analysis and Communications Department, told BlackAmericaWeb.com.
"I would really highlight that this is a genocide, and that creates a moral imperative to act. I would also highlight that those factors [sharing intelligence and the U.S. role in ending the Sudanese civil war] are examples of a long-standing relationship with the Sudanese government," she said.
Duarte also notes relations between the U.S. and Russia and China and says these ties can be used to compel their cooperation in allowing UN peacekeepers into Sudan.
Currently, the African Union, an organization of African states, maintains a peacekeeping force of 7,000 in the region. It was just given UN approval to continue its efforts in the region, which have so far failed to end violence. Some activists have criticized the effort as underfunded and lacking in manpower.
The conflict began in Feb. 2003 when Arab militias believed to be supported by the government began attacking the western region known as Darfur, where rebel groups live. The conflict has largely been cast as racial and religious, given the targeting of blacks and Christians. Both groups have historically lacked political power.
Death toll estimates vary wildly, though it’s now believed that at least 200,000 have died since the conflict began. This figure, taken from a scientific study from journal, Science, differs sharply from estimates once putting the toll at just 70,000. Africa Action says 500,000 have died; the UN estimate is 400,000.
Last month, the NAACP joined other humanitarian and civil rights groups at rallies in front of the White House and in New York City as part of a continuing campaign to stop the genocide in the Darfur region of the Sudan.
"In recent months, the media has begun to display the desperation in Darfur to the world community, but the situation continues to worsen," Crispian Kirk, NAACP director for international relations, said in a statement. "We must take action. Without our help, thousands more will suffer and die."
---
The Howard University News Service provides articles and photographs to fulfill a public service obligation to contribute to fair and equitable representation of all people in the news media.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SUDAN. A local report adds some information that 'changes' some of the perspective but can't dismiss it. This is the perspective that seeks to dismiss the problem and dismiss the need for a peacekeeper force.
Darfur Eyewitness (click on for more content)
Dreadful events in Sudan’s war-torn Darfur continue to dominate world headlines.
The conflict in Darfur erupted in February 2003 between local tribes and the Janjaweed, an armed group allegedly backed by Khartoum. The conflict involves control over natural resources. More than 180,000 people have been killed in the conflict and more than 2.2 million have been displaced. ...
... There have been horrible images from Sudan such as rape and destitution. Has it changed since 2002?
In a very strange way, in terms of Darfur, actually malnutrition has gotten better in a lot of places in Darfur since the rebellion, because there’s been access for aid agencies. Many of the aid agencies that left Darfur when the Sudanese government was put on the sanctions list went back in when the emergency was at its peak.
In a very strange way, for a lot of people, aside from the people who are dying as a direct result of the war in a lot of parts of Darfur, when the food supply line can be made possible (the violence does break up the supply line), then the nutrition situation is better.
Khartoum is very different. It’s very difficult to explain, because Sudan is so incredibly big and Khartoum to Darfur is a two-and-a-half to three-hour flight. When you land in the capital, in Khartoum, it’s very disconcerting because you see this very thriving and modern African city. There’s a lot of investment coming into Khartoum, there are coffee shops, restaurants. Then you fly out to Darfur and it’s like going back in time.
The Janjaweed continue to hold many people in Sudan hostage. You have some eyewitness accounts of what’s still happening. Tell us about what you saw.
The situation at the moment is that the Sudanese government is in the middle of a military offensive, an aerial bombardment. In recent weeks they have been moving troops in on the ground.
One of the rebel groups signed a deal with the Sudanese government, so they brought with them the territory that they had under their control in southern Darfur. But in northern Darfur other rebel groups, which didn’t sign the deal, have taken a lot of the territory away from the main rebel group, the SLM. This is where the Sudanese government is concentrating its firepower at the moment. It’s no longer a situation where it’s the deniability of the Janjaweed militias just moving in and doing an offensive on the part of the government. This is now full-scale warfare.
You write “yet another orphan, yet another widow, yet another raped girl, Reeling, you end up too busy fighting for breath to fight the tears like a proper journalist would.” Can you talk about this element – the widow, the orphan, the raped girl – how it still continues in spite of world reaction and the many humanitarian agencies that have come into Darfur.
I think what’s so horrific about Darfur is that every time you go back you hear the exact same story. Two-and-a-half, nearly three years down the line, nothing has changed. I think there can be nothing worse than the death of hope. The first few times I went in, people really saw you as a journalist, as bringing hope that people cared. There was a real innocence that “people in the world can’t possibly know what we’re going through because if they did, it would stop.” I think that’s the most horrible thing about going back to Darfur. You can’t lie to these people any more. You go back to the same places and you see a lot of the same people, because it’s the same people who have been sitting in these makeshift shelters for three years. ...
... It’s an emotional story that continues to unfold out of Darfur. You go there as a reporter, come back and tell your story, as do others. You’ve watched over the years what has or hasn’t happened. What do you think will make the world understand how bad the situation continues to be?
There was a day for solidarity with Darfur, when people were going out on the ground and talking about the need to do something. But people need to understand that there’s a lack of political will.
When you’re standing there and lobbying in the U.N., I really feel that if there were the political will, whether in the U.S. or in the UK, for this to actually happen… it’s just such a mess and it’s such a difficult place to operate in. ...
... Can you provide some statistics on the death toll and the rape toll since the beginning of the war?
Both the death and the rape tolls have gone down in the past year. We were hearing much reduced numbers, but in this last offensive they’ve gone up again. The problem is, it’s so difficult to work. I was actually pulled out by my company the last time I was in. A friend of mine, a local Sudanese journalist, was killed in Darfur. I think that’s the problem, that aid agencies can’t put together definitive figures.
My understanding is that in this recent offensive, over 60,000 have been displaced. That’s just within Darfur and we’re talking about a community that doesn’t really have anywhere else to go. There’s nowhere left to run for them. So if 60,000 people have been displaced, that’s a huge shift and that’s without having any figures for the people who have gone into Chad again, and there’s a war brewing in Chad. There’s just no safe place anymore.
Even when you talk about 60,000 [displaced] and you talk about over 1,000 rapes in this recent offensive, you just don’t know. It could be worse than that, it could be less. There’s just no access, there’s no way to go in and that’s the awful thing – the Sudanese government has achieved impunity because there is no way to independently verify any of the figures we’re hearing.
Courageously, you’ve ventured into war-torn Darfur and you’ve been nominated for several awards for your courage. Are journalists taking the same interest now as they have? Are many still frequenting Darfur in order to report what’s happening?
It’s very, very hard. The last time I was there, my colleagues at the Al-Jazeera bureau in Khartoum, in one week they were attacked four times by Sudanese security. It’s impossible to go in as a foreign journalist because you need a travel permit. You saw recently with the Chicago Tribune journalist and the Serbian envoy that going in through Chad is not only dangerous; now that the Sudanese have repaired relations with the Chadian government, it’s almost impossible. ...
1044
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)