@Ijexa

I was just talking to my dad, and he said the same thing as you.

If i say Sudan is an African Country with African people I get opposition.

If I say Sudan has Arabs invaders then my dad tells me that id not true

I do not even know what to think anymore.



@Again. sorry forgot to mention that yes the government did arm the janjaweed intially to keep control of the resources, but like an experiment went wrong the janjaweed shall we say got "cocky" and run around rampage. Now regardng the disarming the government cannot disarm not because they want the killings, but becasue they are unable with most of its troops at the south.

I would say in 5 years time their will be two separate state with local government and a fedral government, abit like england, scotland and wales Inshalah

All of you ignorant people need to read this article.







[align=left]Darfur crisis the result of years of US sponsored terrorism in Southern Sudan[/align]





[align=right]http://www.1924.org


[/align]
The situation in the Darfur region of Sudan has become the new focus of the western world, with reports of an estimated one million people being displaced and ten thousand being killed. There has been pressure largely driven by the international community, and America in particular, to act in order to prevent a catastrophe. US House Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California recently stated, "We must act now to avoid more slaughter and avoid a repetition of the genocide in Rwanda 10 years ago. This is a crisis, an emergency. We have the legal obligation under international law to act.�

Donald Payne, Democratic representative from New Jersey, told a press conference, "We urge the Secretary of State, Colin Powell to support an immediate intervention to stop the killing. If we fail to act a million people could die before the end of the year.�

The Americans have laid the blame for the events in the Darfur squarely at the doorstep of the Sudanese government, whom it claims are sponsoring militias known as the ‘Janjaweed’ to rampage and kill people. President Bush recently stated,

"They [Sudanese government] must stop Janjaweed violence, they must provide access to humanitarian relief for the people who suffer," he said in a speech in Washington.

Such an outcry from the US and western governments would seem to imply that the situation in Sudan was its own making and not through outside interference. However the situation is far from that, and the Americans have been actively stoking the flames for many years. A brief examination of Sudan shows that the South of the country has much of the natural resources and this is where the US has been trying to secure its influence, and has used a number of policies to achieve these aims.

The Americans have for many years actively funded a terrorist rebel militia, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), to fight against the Sudanese government and also to spread disenchantment in the South against the Northern government. This group has been committed untold atrocities throughout Sudan both against government troops as well as civilians, Muslim and Christian. It was under President Clinton that these terrorist militias were given the financial backing to rise up against the Sudanese governments and this policy has been maintained by the Bush administration.

In October 1999 Madeline Albright the then Secretary of State met with the terrorist leader of the SPLA, John Garang. When Madeline Albright met Garang she extended the hand of American friendship and committed to providing huge amounts of “humanitarian aid�. This charitable venture was a means to channel vast quantities of money towards the terrorist cause of the SPLA, which at that point had a flagging military fund.

The Economist magazine described the SPLA as “little more than an armed gang of Dinkas… killing, looting and raping. Its indifference, almost animosity, towards the people it was supposed to be ‘liberating’ was all too clear.� [The Economist, March 1998]

The Sunday Times revealed that the Clinton administration was supporting the terrorist SPLA in order to “… destabilize the government of Sudan... More than $20m of military equipment, including radios, uniforms and tents will be shipped to Eritrea, Ethiopia and Uganda in the next few weeks. Although the equipment is earmarked for the armed forces of those countries, much of it will be passed on to the SPLA, which is preparing an offensive against the government in Khartoum.� [The Sunday Times, 17th November 1996].

Such blatant support and funding by America for a terrorist movement was completely ignored by the western governments, even though it was being reported widely. The SPLA were freely waging tyranny by destroying mosques, tearing up of copies of the Qur’an as they did in Tawreet and targeting the centres for the memorization of the Noble Qur’an in Hamshkureeb. They organised the bombing of Muslims during Fajr prayer and chose the 27th Rajab, the day of Israa and Mi’raj, as the time of heightened aggression.

Yet amidst all this butchery and oppression, they constantly repeat the mantra that they are being oppressed due to the application of the laws of Islam, even though it is clear that such laws are not applied. They have declared that they will continue to fight until the Sudanese government abolishes the Islamic laws. All of this confirms the extent of their hidden hatred and their blatant hostility towards Islam and the Muslims. It also confirms these terrorist rebels are working in a crusader war against Islam, not only to kill Muslims but also to prevent the application of Islam.

The Americans have sponsored this terrorist movement in order to separate Sudan into two separate entities, the North and South, along ethnic and religious lines. This colonialist plan of divide and conquer has been a recurring style used by the western colonialists to facilitate their hegemony over the Muslim world. This policy has been used for many hundreds of years, and was a means to destroy the Islamic Khilafah through the funding and supporting of autonomous entities within the state, that were encouraged to rebel and separate. An example of this was the rebellion of ibn Saud with the help of the British, which led to the establishment of the Saudi regime in the land that was known as Hijaz – a wilayah of the Islamic Khilafah. More recent examples show the creation of Kashmir as a conflict zone, and the recent and ongoing attempts to carve up Iraq into three states; Sunni, Shia and Kurd. Such political manoeuvres have resulted in more than fifty ineffective entities in the Muslim world, where previously only one had existed.

The sponsorship of terrorists is actually quite a normal state of affairs for the American regime. They were able to hire a terrorist militia in the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, which were used to fight and remove the Taliban. This occurred despite the wide spread atrocities being committed by the Northern Alliance.

The Guardian backed up this analogy by comparing the events in Sudan with US actions in South America,

“Welcome to the 1980s. Long live Ronald Reagan. Remember the scenario - a rebel group being trained and armed by the CIA to topple a sovereign government, cross-border incursions from secluded camps, and the whole de-stabilization exercise backed by international sanctions and a massive propaganda campaign. It sounds like Nicaragua or Angola circa 1984. In fact it’s Sudan 1998.� [The Guardian, 1 May 1998]

However, the government in Sudan is not without blame, rather, they have been complicit in the plans of the Americans. They have taken political actions which have led to the SPLA being granted political weight and clout, and have also agreed plans that would see Sudan split into two. The Sudanese governments oppression in Darfur, which they continue even today, is giving licence and credibility for international intervention. With such international focus growing, it will only be a matter of time when foreign troops move in, and Sudan is formally split into two.

Such is the complicated and devious nature of the America’s political games. They stoke the fires of death and destruction, often when the enemy is no more than a puppet, in order to bring about a climate for political change, which they then fashion by their own hands under the guise of ‘humanitarian intervention’.

The time has come for the Muslims to realize the true aims of the western world and the puppet regimes that preside over the Muslims on behalf of the West. The Muslim world must act to prevent its lands from being split ever further into oblivion, to the point that it poses no threat or resistance to any force on earth. The Muslims must realise that the secular political institutions that have been forced upon the Muslim lands, work only to serve the western aims. It is by calling for the implementation of the Islamic political system, and through Islamic politics, that Muslims have a future that will lead to the undoing of the ‘divide and conquer’ policies of the West.

@clock-this

thankyou for shedding the light?

I dont know what is worse westernized black people or Arabs


Remember this is the same America that funded

*the Taliban to fight against the Russians, yet turn around and invade the country.

*put Saddam Hussein in power then turn around and invade them

*put the blame on "arabs" in Sudan then they will turn around and will invade. Then terrorisim will be in my wish list

@Layabout I think in this instance he is refering to the people that are responsible for the crime.

He did not say all Arabs are racists..but he maybe did not explain himself properly so do not get uptight. Do not turn this into something else to suit your own selfish analogy.

LAYABOUT SORRY I AM DRUNK!!! MY EYES ARE BLURRY

I read your posts again and you tell me to run along! you run along and hop skip and jump tooooooo:P

@KUNJUFU

who is cool wicked and what wrong did he do?plse enlighten me

Layabout wrote: Don't you mean "arabs CAN be racist..."
I don't subscribe to this form of sterotyping an entire race with negative comments.




I only said that cause i havent seen any arab government condem the sudanese government. and do not take this to mean that i am a bush or western sympatizer.

[line]


"As real as it seems the American Dream
Ain't nothing but another calculated schemes
To get us locked up shot up back in chains
To deny us of the future rob our names
Kept my history of mystery but now I see
The American Dream wasn't meant for me"

layabout wrote he is coughing uphis lungs down his toilet...down the toilet where you belong you ...go eat the rest of slime you were sucking up.

he did notattackthe arabs@ layabout.

Layabout read your posts and they sounded stupid anyways.

Darfur People's Solidarity - Sudan Third Way Movement?


Women are the strength of African society

On Friday midday the recently formed Darfur People's Solidarity held a conference in Clapham, South London to address the current situation in Darfur.

Perhaps as the conference was timed to coincide with Friday prayers, attendance was minimal, given all people from Darfur are Muslims.

Darfur People's Solidarity (DPS) chairman Mr Eltigani Ali Hamid opened the meeting with a brief introduction to the DPS. He said the primary aim was to stop the carnage in Darfur, restore peace and repair relations damaged by recent events there.

He stated that the Darfur People's Solidarity is willing to talk to all parties involved in the conflict, notably the Arab-islamist military dictatorship regime (so-called Government of Sudan) as well as the two main rebel movements in Darfur, the Sudanese Liberation Movement (SLM) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM).

Tigani said that he DPS believes the problem in Darfur has been caused by factors including the failure of the Sudan governing dictatorship regime to fix the problem at an early stage as well as the failure of the 'international community' to understand the complexity of the Darfur conflict.

The 'international community' was referred to extensively throughout the speeches of the members of the Executive Officers of DPS and was the subject of a question by the Mathaba correspondent, upon which it was acknowledged that indeed 'there is no such thing as an International Community' and 'what me mean by that is exactly the United Nations (UN).'

In response to further questions, the DPS executive confirmed that they are in favour of observers from the United Nations as well as support, however any troops on the ground should be organised by the African Union and not alien non-African forces.

The conference was very friendly with the Executive Officers on the panel giving the floor to questions at an early stage so that most of the meeting was mostly an extended question and answer session.

However, in addition to the fuzzing around constant references to what the 'international community' should do, numerous references were made claiming that the Darfur People's Solidarity 'represents the silent millions of Darfur.'

When this contradiction was pointed out to the panel, that it is even theoretically impossible to 'represent' the 'silent millions' for it is a contradiction in itself, it was explained that one of the key aims of DPS is to call for a conference where '90% of the participants should be from the people living in Darfur' and that should include 'all the ethnic groups in the region, the national political parties, all the armed factions and the African Union (AU) with the UN as observers.

Speakers from the Darfur People's Solidarity Executive Office all emphasised that in Darfur there is only one ethnicity and that even tribes are heavily mixed. They asserted that there is no such thing as "Arabs and non-Arabs" in Darfur, and the the term "Janjaweed" has been misused by western media to broaden it as if it included anyone who spoke Arabic or even whole tribes.

The executive said each of their number is from a different combination of tribes, all people from Darfur are Muslims and Africans as well as Arabs. "Janjaweed" are armed bandit gangs, taking their name from "Kalashnikovs on horses" and these gangs of unorganised bandits are a problem that should be solved by the governing dictatorship regime long ago.

On the other hand, the Darfur People's Solidarity organisation said that the humanitarian disaster in Darfur has been caused by two opposing forces: the Sudanese government and the Darfur armed rebels such as the SLM and JEM. The victims are the ordinary people in their millions.

Adam Babiker Salih, Secretary General of the Darfur People's Solidarity, ended an analysis of the current situation in Darfur under the headline 'The Third Way' saying that "we think that there are no only two ways, either with the rebels or with the government. We represent the third way as we do not agree with both. We represent the people of Darfur - the silent majority."

However, the General Secetary of Green Charter International said that this is a contradiction and the very problem that has caused Africa's longest conflict in its largest state, Sudan, and cost more than six million lives. A genuine third way movement cannot claim to represent anyone and must call for the silent majority (everyone is without voice except few politicians and media personalities) to be given a voice via popular conferences.

"The Green Book says that 'representation is fraud' and 'no one knows the needs of the masses better than the masses themselves" he said, and added that the SLM in taking military actions against the dictatorship without involving the whole population has found itself begging to the Anglo-American elite to intervene and now is just an extension thereof. They have lost their focus and their constituency is no longer the people of Darfur but small circles of power in Washington, New York and London."

During questions and follow up from the audience it became apparent that there was suspicion that the DPS was not clearly against the dictatorship regime and minimising the catastrophe in Darfur. This was categorically denied, and that the focus of DPS was on finding an extension to the cease fire and on easing the humanitarian disaster in the first instance.

The panel said that escalation of the conflict in Darfur by bringing in foreign troops from outside Africa would result in a disaster far worse than that in Iraq, and that is would be a loss to everyone, including Britain and the United States, were they to send troops.

This was partly because of the memories of the British having killed important leaders in the Darfur Kingdom during colonisation and also by the fact that all tribes and people of Darfur look the same and they would not be able to distinguish between SLM and non-SLM or pro-government and others.

"Although relations between farmers and nomads of Darfur have long been hostile and marred by tribal conflicts, the current tribal war was touched off by a rebellion of certain groups, namely Zaghawa and Fur with tribal and ethnic connotations.

Darfur, an area about the size of France, has three ethnic zones. The north includes Arab and non-Arab, manuly Zaghawa, Tama, Bani-Hussain cattle nomads and Rezeegat camel nomads. Largely non-Arab sedentary farmers such as the Fur, Masalit, Gimer, Tungor, Barti and others, inhabit the central zone. The southern part of Darfur is inhabited mainly by the Baqqara Arabs.

All are Muslims, and no part of Darfur was every ethnically homogenous. For example, once a successful Fur farmer had a certain number of cattle, he would 'become ' Baqqari ('of the Cow'), and in a few generations his descendents would have an 'authentic' Arab genealogy", according to a publication of the DPS.

Many of the DPS said they are "proud to be Arabs" and that this is not a conflict between Arab and non-Arab. Western media was especially criticised for going so far, in some cases, as to say that it was a conflict between Black African Christians and Arab Muslims, when in fact all people in Darfur are Muslim.