Gravitymaster 0 #1 January 31, 2005 Does this surprise anybody? I guess by not using the word "genocide" it means it didn't happen. QuoteU.N. Darfur report does not see genocide - Sudan ABUJA, Jan 31 (Reuters) - A keenly awaited United Nations investigation into human rights abuse in Sudan's Darfur region does not describe violence against villagers there as "genocide," said Sudanese Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail. Pro-government militia are accused of a two-year campaign of raping civilians, and burning and pillaging villages in the vast, arid region where tens of thousands have died and 1.8 million have been driven from their homes. The United Nations report is currently in the hands of Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the Sudanese government, and is expected to be made public this week after being presented to the Security Council. "We have a copy of that report and they didn't say there is a genocide," Ismail told reporters on Monday on the sidelines of an African Union summit in the Nigerian capital. The U.N. report does contain names of people suspected of being responsible for atrocities, Ismail said, but he did not disclose who was on the list. The conflict erupted in western Sudan after rebel groups took up arms in February 2003, accusing Khartoum of neglect. The government is accused of deploying Arab militias known as Janjaweed to put down the rebellion. Khartoum denies the charge and calls the militias outlaws. The United States described the Sudanese Darfur campaign as "genocide," but the United Nations has shied away from using the term, which compels specific reactions under international law. DEFINITION Genocide is legally defined by international conventions as the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." Annan said on Sunday that "gross violations of human rights" had occurred in Darfur and recommended the Security Council consider sanctions on the oil exporting country. Western powers argued for imposing sanctions on Khartoum last year, but opposition by China, which has oil interests in Sudan, and Russia, which supplies arms, blocked the motion. Ismail said "sanctions will not help Darfur." The United Nations has proposed trying Darfur's suspected war criminals at the International Criminal Court, but the plan has been opposed by the United States, which does not recognise that tribunal. Rights groups and some governments have become increasingly frustrated by the lack of action over Darfur while fighting and massive displacements continue. Last week the Sudanese government launched a bombing raid that killed about 100 civilians and displaced 9,000, the United Nations said. Ismail said the bombing was being investigated by the government and African Union monitors. An AU source said its monitors had been blocked from investigating the bomb site. "It is not our policy to bomb any civilians. We will punish those who committed it, but it is not our policy," Ismail said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #2 January 31, 2005 I'm not saying that the document says otherwise, as i have not seen a transcript (and it seems that indeed the UN considers it as Crime against Humanity and not Genocide), but I wouldn't take anything the Sudanese Foreign Minister says at face value... "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #3 January 31, 2005 QuoteDoes this surprise anybody? I guess by not using the word "genocide" it means it didn't happen. Regardless of what words they use, it's a fucking outrage that it has taken them this long to acheive absolutely nothing. The UN could should have used this issue to prove that it isn't useless WRT conflicts, but it has failed to do so in a manner that can best be described as craptacular. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #4 January 31, 2005 QuoteRegardless of what words they use, it's a fucking outrage that it has taken them this long to acheive absolutely nothing. The UN could should have used this issue to prove that it isn't useless WRT conflicts, but it has failed to do so in a manner that can best be described as craptacular. I thought you liked the UN....Or is that only when they are saying things you like?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tink1717 2 #5 January 31, 2005 Not really. Not using the word "Genocide" only means they don't have to act. Typical chickens.Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off. -The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!) AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #6 January 31, 2005 QuoteI thought you liked the UN....Or is that only when they are saying things you like? To quote my dad: "Thought thought his feet were hanging out the end of the bed, so he got out to have a look." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoadRash 0 #7 January 31, 2005 QuoteI'm not saying that the document says otherwise, as i have not seen a transcript (and it seems that indeed the UN considers it as Crime against Humanity and not Genocide), but I wouldn't take anything the Sudanese Foreign Minister says at face value... I agree...sounds to me like the UN likes to pick and choose which battles to fight...especially when China is involved......I wonder who in particular got payed off to say that it wasn't genocide...... ~R+R...~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #8 February 1, 2005 How could you be surprised? I mean the UN says it didn't happen in Rwanda either and how many died there...a million?... The UN is USELESS.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #9 February 1, 2005 New U.N. inspectors uniform, it's standard issue now. http://www.emerchandise.com/browse/MRMAGOO/b.FAVORITES+COMICS+CARTOONS+MRMAGOO/s.RBan6Bk6 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #10 February 1, 2005 Hi GM Damn the UN sounds like SC People are being killed in large numbers and the UN is arguing about a definition to describe the killings, instead of taking some positive action to stop the killing. Very strange, very sad R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #11 February 1, 2005 QuoteHi GM Damn the UN sounds like SC People are being killed in large numbers and the UN is arguing about a definition to describe the killings, instead of taking some positive action to stop the killing. Very strange, very sad R.I.P. Sad when it seems the reason they don't want to use the word "Genocide" is it will require them to do something and they don't want to piss off China and Russia. Very sad. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #12 February 1, 2005 QuoteSad when it seems the reason they don't want to use the word "Genocide" is it will require them to do something and they don't want to piss off China and Russia. Very sad Who do you mean by "they"? "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #13 February 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteSad when it seems the reason they don't want to use the word "Genocide" is it will require them to do something and they don't want to piss off China and Russia. Very sad Who do you mean by "they"? The U.N. Try to pay attention. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rmsmith 1 #14 February 1, 2005 QuoteDoes this surprise anybody? I guess by not using the word "genocide" it means it didn't happen. Don't worry the EU has things under control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #15 February 1, 2005 QuoteThe U.N. Try to pay attention. Oh! THAT UN... "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #16 February 1, 2005 QuoteDon't worry the EU has things under control. Good! I was worried for a minute! "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #17 February 1, 2005 QuoteQuoteDon't worry the EU has things under control. Good! I was worried for a minute! Especially those damned French. It's all their fault. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #18 February 1, 2005 QuoteEspecially those damned French. It's all their fauly. Damn right! And proud of it...! "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #19 February 1, 2005 Quote Sad when it seems the reason they don't want to use the word "Genocide" is it will require them to do something and they don't want to piss off China and Russia. Very sad. Or they know that they can do jack shit about it so they pretend that there isn't a problem. Don't worry they'll make an award winning movie in 5 years so everyone can feel good about feeling bad over the slaughter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Frenchy68 0 #20 February 1, 2005 QuoteDon't worry they'll make an award winning movie in 5 years so everyone can feel good about feeling bad over the slaughter. Indeed! And rewrite history so the future generation, which is more interested in catchy sound bites and explosion thanks to the current generation's guidance, will take it as historical fact. Someone may wonder how the majority of movie goers fuels such things... Masses, I tell you... "For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikkey 0 #21 February 1, 2005 I just fail to understand this urge to use anything against the UN. Here is an article that gives an overview of the report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4225353.stm Quote A United Nations report has called for those accused of carrying out war crimes in Sudan's Darfur region to be put on trial. The report stopped short of calling the violence genocide, but said the government and its militia allies had killed, tortured and raped civilians QuoteThey found that a policy to commit genocide had not been formed but pointed to "killing of civilians, enforced disappearances, destruction of villages, rape and other forms of sexual violence, pillaging and forced displacement, throughout Darfur". "The conclusion that no genocidal policy has been pursued and implemented in Darfur by the government authorities, directly or through the militias under their control, should not be taken in any way as detracting from the gravity of the crimes perpetrated in the region." I am not sure if the conclusion is right or wrong. What is interesting that the reason for the US right wing bashing of the report could be found in the following: QuoteThe five-man team called for trials at the International Criminal Court (ICC). But this is opposed by the United States, which does not recognise the ICC and favours the creation of a special court for Darfur instead. and QuoteThe United States objects to the ICC in case its soldiers are accused of war crimes. It wants a separate court to be set up to try those accused of war crimes in Darfur, possibly based in Tanzania, which hosts the tribunal for the 1994 Rwanda genocide. But most European countries, the UN and lobby group Human Rights Watch believe the trials should take place at the ICC. "This is a case that is tailor-made for the ICC," said Britain's UN ambassador Emyr Jones Parry. "It's time for the Bush administration to back-pocket its abstract objections to the ICC so justice can be done," said Richard Dicker from Human Rights Watch. --------------------------------------------------------- When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonto 1 #22 February 1, 2005 QuoteHow could you be surprised? I mean the UN says it didn't happen in Rwanda either and how many died there...a million?... The UN is USELESS. Umm. Only 800 000 I'm afraid..In 3 months. tIt's the year of the Pig. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #23 February 1, 2005 I thought the president of the US just finished saying that they will provide freedom for all who need it. They went into iraq to save the poor people...right?!?!?!?! They called it a genocide and have been yelling all along that the UN is useless. Adding that all together, how come the US didn't do anything. They so desperately want to be the policeman of the world. Don't tell me they are stretched to thin, since it seems they would have no problem going into Iran, to liberate other poor opressed people and bring freedom. Why the inaction on Sudan? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #24 February 1, 2005 QuoteAdding that all together, how come the US didn't do anything. They so desperately want to be the policeman of the world. Don't tell me they are stretched to thin, since it seems they would have no problem going into Iran, to liberate other poor opressed people and bring freedom. Why the inaction on Sudan? Maybe after all of you bitched about how the US ignored the UN maybe we were wishing the UN would get off their asses and actually do something for once? Maybe if the UN did its damn job for once the US would not have to do everything by itself. And then later be bitched at by you for not going with the UN? Just a thought."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #25 February 1, 2005 QuoteI thought the president of the US just finished saying that they will provide freedom for all who need it. They went into iraq to save the poor people...right?!?!?!?! They called it a genocide and have been yelling all along that the UN is useless. Adding that all together, how come the US didn't do anything. They so desperately want to be the policeman of the world. Don't tell me they are stretched to thin, since it seems they would have no problem going into Iran, to liberate other poor opressed people and bring freedom. Why the inaction on Sudan? Because the UN said they had Sudan under control. Are you saying the "International Community" needs the US? I can assure you that given the worlds attitude towards the US, that they are going to find their screams for US help falling on deaf ears quite often in the future. It's about time the rest of the world started carrying their part of the burden. The debacle in Sudan is a good example of things to come. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
