Darfur: The Holocaust of the 21st Century

[DJ V Lawrence]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3827256.html

I'm pissed. The killings and rapes have been going on in Darfur, Sudan for well over three years, and FINALLY it's getting media attention? It takes 4 congress-leaders to get arrested and Oscar-Award winner George Clooney to risk his life to visit Darfur for it to make news? Why does news have to be glamourous to be heard? I first heard about the Darfur situation at the end of 2003, (the year the Iraqi war began), and the reason why it caught my eye was because Baghdad wasn't named the most dangerous city to live in that year by the U.N.. Darfur was.

I'm not saying what actions the U.S. or U.N. should take just yet, but I would have expect much more acknowledgement about Darfur from the U.S. government and ALL media from 2003 to now prior to Clooney's trip. If we can push Iran to not pursue nuclear weapons and talk about the possibility of military action on them as a last resort, we and the U.N. can't use that same threat on Sudan for them to not pursue genocide? Doesn't Sudan deserve a "regime change"? Hell, I don't even know what the name of the Sudanese president is, and he's probably killed more of his or her own people than Sadaam Hussein did.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3827256.html

I'm pissed. The killings and rapes have been going on in Darfur, Sudan for well over three years, and FINALLY it's getting media attention? It takes 4 congress-leaders to get arrested and Oscar-Award winner George Clooney to risk his life to visit Darfur for it to make news? Why does news have to be glamourous to be heard? I first heard about the Darfur situation at the end of 2003, (the year the Iraqi war began), and the reason why it caught my eye was because Baghdad wasn't named the most dangerous city to live in that year by the U.N.. Darfur was.

I'm not saying what actions the U.S. or U.N. should take just yet, but I would have expect much more acknowledgement about Darfur from the U.S. government and ALL media from 2003 to now prior to Clooney's trip. If we can push Iran to not pursue nuclear weapons and talk about the possibility of military action on them as a last resort, we and the U.N. can't use that same threat on Sudan for them to not pursue genocide? Doesn't Sudan deserve a "regime change"? Hell, I don't even know what the name of the Sudanese president is, and he's probably killed more of his or her own people than Sadaam Hussein did.

Holocaust is a strong word........and thats what is going on there. I have been doing some reading on it, and not suprising, the Israeli gov. has raised the possibility of sending troops or special forces to the country to try and put an end to it....the same proposal they had for the former Yugoslavia when genocide was going on there.......

[DJ V Lawrence]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/3830275.html

Let's hope this is the beginning of the end...

[editor]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3827256.html

I'm pissed. The killings and rapes have been going on in Darfur, Sudan for well over three years, and FINALLY it's getting media attention?

No. It's finally gotten Hollywood's attention. If by "the media" you mean the news networks, the big newspapers, radio news networks, most local television news, and news magazines, then "the media" have been reporting this story for years.

It's just E! Entertainment Television, and "Sheila Jackson Me" who haven't.

Serious politicians in Washington have been paying attention to this for years. Colin Powell did a world-wide tour two years ago when he was secretary of state to raise awareness of the problem and get other nations to help find a solution.

What's changed recently is that Hollywood celebrities have woken up to the Darfur problem and are bugging their pals in Congress to make a stink about it. The politicians in Washington who are buddies with Hollywood types tend to also be the loudest, and the ones who do the least.

In summary: no, it's not new to anyone who's been paying attention.

[DJ V Lawrence]

No. It's finally gotten Hollywood's attention. If by "the media" you mean the news networks, the big newspapers, radio news networks, most local television news, and news magazines, then "the media" have been reporting this story for years.

It's just E! Entertainment Television, and "Sheila Jackson Me" who haven't.

Serious politicians in Washington have been paying attention to this for years. Colin Powell did a world-wide tour two years ago when he was secretary of state to raise awareness of the problem and get other nations to help find a solution.

What's changed recently is that Hollywood celebrities have woken up to the Darfur problem and are bugging their pals in Congress to make a stink about it. The politicians in Washington who are buddies with Hollywood types tend to also be the loudest, and the ones who do the least.

In summary: no, it's not new to anyone who's been paying attention.

I guess the better question is if enough people have been paying attention. The Darfur region rarely ever got to the front pages because we were so caught up with our own news stories like Iraq, Katrina, the Oscars, TomKat's new baby, etc.

By the way, I got my hopes up for no reason, I guess...

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/disp/story...nt/3830275.html

[editor]

There are a few other problems, too.

It's a hard area to get to.

There's little infrastructure to bring in aid.

Neither side has been very willing to allow the outside world to help.

There has been Muslim v. Christian fighting there for centuries.

The French keep promising to stabilize the area, but never do.

[DJ V Lawrence]

There are a few other problems, too.

It's a hard area to get to.

There's little infrastructure to bring in aid.

Neither side has been very willing to allow the outside world to help.

There has been Muslim v. Christian fighting there for centuries.

The French keep promising to stabilize the area, but never do.

You heard the news that food aid to the region will be cut by 50% due to lack of funding?

The French keep promising to stabilize the area, but never do.

I'm trying to avoid a smart comment here

[TJones]

U.N. Soldiers are half the problem DJ, they are well-known rapists and deviants.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I think whats happening in that country is a stain on humanity. I also think the US military should not get involved in any way. If the United Nothings...err United Nations would like to get involved, then so be it. I think the best way to handle or help is to call on the Muslim community. Sudan is a mostly Muslim country, no? We hear a lot about how theres 1 billion Muslims in the world when theres talk of war or invasion....i would like to hear how theres 1 billion Muslims in the world that will rise and take care of thier brothers/sisters in a severe time of crisis in Sudan.....

[DJ V Lawrence]

U.N. Soldiers are half the problem DJ, they are well-known rapists and deviants.

Not all U.N. soldiers were rapists, but the few troops that did that gave the whole U.N. that rep.

I think whats happening in that country is a stain on humanity. I also think the US military should not get involved in any way. If the United Nothings...err United Nations would like to get involved, then so be it. I think the best way to handle or help is to call on the Muslim community. Sudan is a mostly Muslim country, no? We hear a lot about how theres 1 billion Muslims in the world when theres talk of war or invasion....i would like to hear how theres 1 billion Muslims in the world that will rise and take care of thier brothers/sisters in a severe time of crisis in Sudan.....

The Sudanese government was pushing the world away from sending aid and food to it's own people for the past three years. It's true that Sudan's mostly Muslim, but so what? If you die a Christian to genocide, a jew to genocide, or a Muslim to genocide, you're still dead. The world's strongest international humanitarian nation is the U.S., and the Bush administration have recently been doing a good job of pushing Sudan's government to create a peace deal with the rebels. If Sudan doesn't work towards a deal, the U.N. may have to seek other actions, with Bush's help.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Not all U.N. soldiers were rapists, but the few troops that did that gave the whole U.N. that rep.

The Sudanese government was pushing the world away from sending aid and food to it's own people for the past three years. It's true that Sudan's mostly Muslim, but so what? If you die a Christian to genocide, a jew to genocide, or a Muslim to genocide, you're still dead. The world's strongest international humanitarian nation is the U.S., and the Bush administration have recently been doing a good job of pushing Sudan's government to create a peace deal with the rebels. If Sudan doesn't work towards a deal, the U.N. may have to seek other actions, with Bush's help.

I hope those other actions do not involve the US military or and open check to be paid by the American tax payers......

[RedScare]

I hope those other actions do not involve the US military or and open check to be paid by the American tax payers......

Yeah, we sure don't want our precious tax dollars wasted on frivolous things like food. We've got bombs and tanks to buy.

[Laurence Simon]

The French keep promising to stabilize the area, but never do.

Yeah, Haiti and the Ivory Coast are doing just great now.

[DJ V Lawrence]

I hope those other actions do not involve the US military or and open check to be paid by the American tax payers......

...like Iraq?

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Yeah, we sure don't want our precious tax dollars wasted on frivolous things like food. We've got bombs and tanks to buy.

You and your "we" open your wallet and give to that economic stink hole, the UN. Lets take a poll and see how many people here actually support the UN, especially after reading the UN Charter.

[DJ V Lawrence]

I hope those other actions do not involve the US military or and open check to be paid by the American tax payers......

then later...

You and your "we" open your wallet and give to that economic stink hole, the UN. Lets take a poll and see how many people here actually support the UN, especially after reading the UN Charter.

If it wasn't the for the U.N.'s food aid programs and troop presence, American troops would probably already be there. What's your beef with the U.N.? They're not trying to be a superpower; they're trying to aid the world in a unified manner. Where's the harm, and how do you plan to convince us that the UN is not helpful to the world?

[nmainguy]

I suggest you read Nicholas Kristof's columns in the NYT. He has been reporting on Darfur for months. He also just was awarded the Pulitzer for his reporting on Darfur amoung other subjects.

Here's one example. Note the bold-face type regarding the amount of media coverage Darfur has recieved.

Helping Bill O'Reilly

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF (NYT) 864 words

Published: February 7, 2006

Please, readers, help Bill O'Reilly!

After Mr. O'Reilly denounced me in December as a ''left-wing ideologue'' (a charge that alarmed me, given his expertise on ideologues), I challenged him to defend traditional values by joining me on a trip to Darfur. I wrote: ''You'll have to leave your studio, Bill. You'll encounter pure evil. If you're like me, you'll be scared and you'll finally be using your talents for an important cause.''

A few days ago, I finally got my answer. Mr. O'Reilly declared in his column: ''I do three hours of daily news analysis on TV and radio. There's no way I can go to Africa.''

No need to give up so easily, Bill. With a satellite phone, you can do your show from anywhere.

But maybe Mr. O'Reilly's concern is cost, so I thought my readers might want to give him a hand. You can help sponsor a trip by Mr. O'Reilly to Darfur, where he can use his television savvy to thunder against something actually meriting his blustery rage.

If you want to help, send e-mail to sponsorbill@gmail.com or snail mail to me at The Times, and tell me how much you're willing to pay for Mr. O'Reilly's expenses in Darfur. Offers will be anonymous, except maybe to the N.S.A. Don't send money; all I'm looking for is pledges. I'll post updates at nytimes.com/ontheground.

(Note: pledges cannot be earmarked. It is not possible to underwrite only Mr. O'Reilly's outgoing ticket to Darfur without bringing him home as well.)

Sure, this is a desperate measure. But with several hundred thousand people already murdered in Darfur and two million homeless and living in shantytowns, the best hope for those still alive is a strong dose of American outrage.

Worse, all the horrors that we've already seen in Darfur may be remembered only as the prelude. Security in the region is deteriorating, African Union peacekeepers are becoming targets, and the U.N. has warned that if humanitarian agencies are forced out, the death toll may rise to 100,000 per month.

Just as dangerous, the government-supported janjaweed -- the brutal militia responsible for the slaughter -- is now making regular raids across the border into Chad. There is a growing risk that Chad will collapse into war as well, hugely increasing the death toll and spreading chaos across a much larger region.

Last week, the United Nations agreed to plan for an international force. It will be nice if the force materializes -- but even that half-step is probably almost a year away. The solution isn't American ground forces, but a starting point would be American resolve to put genocide at the top of the international agenda. Unfortunately, Mr. Bush barely lets the word ''Darfur'' past his lips.

The best way for President Bush to honor Coretta Scott King isn't simply to recite platitudes at her funeral today, but to push loudly and forcefully to stop genocide. Was the essential message of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. about the need to be seen at funerals? Or about standing up to injustice, like a genocide in which infants are grabbed from their mothers' arms and tossed onto bonfires?

The reality is that the only way the White House will move on Darfur is if it is flooded with calls from the public -- and that will happen only when the genocide is brought home to living rooms around America.

According to the Tyndall Report, which analyzes the content of the evening newscasts of the broadcast networks, their coverage of Darfur actually declined last year. The total for all three networks was 26 minutes in 2004. That wasn't much -- but it dropped to just 18 minutes during all of 2005.

ABC's evening news program had 11 minutes about Darfur over the year, NBC's had 5 minutes, and CBS's found genocide worth only 2 minutes of airtime during the course of 2005.

In contrast, the networks gave the Michael Jackson trial in 2005 a total of 84 minutes of coverage. There aren't comparable figures for cable networks like Fox, but Mr. O'Reilly and other cable newscasters pretty much ignored the Darfur catastrophe.

Mr. O'Reilly has a big audience and a knack for stirring outrage. Lately, he (quite properly) galvanized an outcry over a ridiculously light sentence for a sexual predator in Vermont. The upshot was that the sentence was increased. Good stuff!

So imagine the furor Mr. O'Reilly could stir up if he publicized the hundreds of thousands of rapes, murders and mutilations in Darfur. He could save lives on a grand scale.

Join the pledge drive! I'm starting with my own $1,000 pledge to sponsor Mr. O'Reilly's trip. Please help.

[editor]

Sudan is a mostly Muslim country, no?

From the CIA:

Sunni Muslim 70% (in north), indigenous beliefs 25%, Christian 5% (mostly in south and Khartoum)

Here's the capsule:

Military regimes favoring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated national politics since independence from the UK in 1956. Sudan was embroiled in two prolonged civil wars during most of the remainder of the 20th century. These conflicts were rooted in northern economic, political, and social domination of largely non-Muslim, non-Arab southern Sudanese. The first civil war ended in 1972, but broke out again in 1983. The second war and famine-related effects resulted in more than 4 million people displaced and, according to rebel estimates, more than 2 million deaths over a period of two decades. Peace talks gained momentum in 2002-04 with the signing of several accords; a final Naivasha peace treaty of January 2005 granted the southern rebels autonomy for six years, after which a referendum for independence is scheduled to be held. A separate conflict that broke out in the western region of Darfur in 2003 has resulted in at least 200,000 deaths and nearly 2 million displaced; as of late 2005, peacekeeping troops were struggling to stabilize the situation. Sudan also has faced large refugee influxes from neighboring countries, primarily Ethiopia and Chad, and armed conflict, poor transport infrastructure, and lack of government support have chronically obstructed the provision of humanitarian assistance to affected populations.

So... much like Iraq and Afghanistan, it's another country that Britain completely failed to civilize, then pulled out leaving it a festering boil for other countries to clean up.

Also... How bad does life have to be in Chad that you're fleeing TO SUDAN!

[TJones]

Why doesn't Mr.Kristof, do a little reporting on the starving and homeless who are dying everyday right here in his own country. Libs are always crying that we can't be the police of the world. I don't condone genocide either, but some would claim that our own Government is guilty of THAT VERY THING, by letting there be sooooo many homeless and jobless and starving Americans. Get off your high horse Kristoff, and use your $1000 and the rest of the money you are pandering to finance a few 100 sacks of grain and potable water for those Darfurians, instead of wasting it on O'reilly.

[DJ V Lawrence]

Also... How bad does life have to be in Chad that you're fleeing TO SUDAN!

Chad hasn't even been mentioned in the mainstream media. Good point.

[nmainguy]

Why doesn't Mr.Kristof, do a little reporting on the starving and homeless who are dying everyday right here in his own country. Libs are always crying that we can't be the police of the world. I don't condone genocide either, but some would claim that our own Government is guilty of THAT VERY THING, by letting there be sooooo many homeless and jobless and starving Americans. Get off your high horse Kristoff, and use your $1000 and the rest of the money you are pandering to finance a few 100 sacks of grain and potable water for those Darfurians, instead of wasting it on O'reilly.

TJ,

His "beat" is Africa, Asia and the Middle East. It's what they pay him for. It seems it's more of a far right wing rant to say we can't be the police of the world even as our current right wing government seems hell-bent on being. I don't know what amount of his personal wealth he contributes to Darfurians if any. It may be quite substansial or it may be zero-from reading his writings, I'm guessing it's somewhere in the middle.

I would hope a round-trip all expense paid trip to Darfur for O'Reilly would jog him out of his tedious habit of making up false wars on _________[fill in the blank] and use his podium to inform and educate not just on genocide in Darfur but perhaps homelessness and poverty right here at home.

[TJones]

TJ,

His "beat" is Africa, Asia and the Middle East. It's what they pay him for. It seems it's more of a far right wing rant to say we can't be the police of the world even as our current right wing government seems hell-bent on being. I don't know what amount of his personal wealth he contributes to Darfurians if any. It may be quite substansial or it may be zero-from reading his writings, I'm guessing it's somewhere in the middle.

I would hope a round-trip all expense paid trip to Darfur for O'Reilly would jog him out of his tedious habit of making up false wars on _________[fill in the blank] and use his podium to inform and educate not just on genocide in Darfur but perhaps homelessness and poverty right here at home.

I agree with you, that perhaps Mr.O'reilly WOULD benefit from such a trip. I am 100% confident that O'reilly is indeed fully versed in the goings on in Darfur and other countries like it in that part of the world already, but actually being there may give it a little different perspective for him. Nmain I would ask you, what is more important after a plane crash, do you take care of your own first, i.e. your husband, or do you run over to passenger 83 from Somalia who you will never have a possibility to meet ? My answer, you take care of your own first, then what is left over you share with the world.

The current administration is NOT hell bent on being the police of the world, but as soon as the SHIITE hits the fan, who does the world call upon ?

[RedScare]

The current administration is NOT hell bent on being the police of the world, but as soon as the SHIITE hits the fan, who does the world call upon ?

Dude, you crack me up. Google 'Pax Americana' and 'The Wolfowitz Plan', and see if you change your mind a bit.

[TJones]

Dude, you crack me up. Google 'Pax Americana' and 'The Wolfowitz Plan', and see if you change your mind a bit.

Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am saying is that that is NOT a mission of the administration to be the "police of the world". The U.S. is forced into it, because we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. You of course, already know this.

[RedScare]

The US was not forced to go into Iraq. In fact, they were begged not to. Likewise, they are being asked not to invade Iran.

I might actually agree that the mission is not to be the police of the world. The mission is to be the American Empire, the world's only superpower. For some reason, the term 'Empire' is frowned upon, so they cook up lame excuses like 'spreading democracy'. The reason that the administration is unconcerned with Darfur is that it has no strategic relevance. This may seem to conflict with other statements made by the Prez, such as invading Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people, but that is not why he invaded Iraq. He invaded Iraq to secure the oil supply.

He apparently botched the real objective, as well as the stated ones.

[editor]

Never trust those studies that count minutes of coverage. Their methodologies are so flawed they rarely reflect what actually appears on TV.

[Gary]

The U.S. is forced into it, because we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. You of course, already know this.

Good quote TJ. Although I have my problems with Bush, I still think your statement rings true.

[TJones]

Good quote TJ. Although I have my problems with Bush, I still think your statement rings true.

Gary, it is also my belief that it doesn't matter, what party is in power, that statement goes for both. Clinton's hand was forced a couple times also, you don't hear the Republcians denounce him for it. We just have to remind the Dems. sometimes of it.

Vietnam War wasn't started by a Republican admin. either, but we are blamed for the outcome. A bitter pill we are willing to swallow.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Gary, it is also my belief that it doesn't matter, what party is in power, that statement goes for both. Clinton's hand was forced a couple times also, you don't hear the Republcians denounce him for it. We just have to remind the Dems. sometimes of it.

Vietnam War wasn't started by a Republican admin. either, but we are blamed for the outcome. A bitter pill we are willing to swallow.

Step away from the political party garbage and your eyes will be opened even more. The republicans and democrates are a LOT closer in thoughts and actions than you think.........

For DJ, im not trying to convince anyone of anything, just offering a different look. Have you read the UN Charter? Read it, all of it, and let me know how much you still support that garbage anti western and anti American institution.......

[editor]

Here's the link. Have a ball.