james
Full Member
Posts: 62
|
Post by james on Oct 19, 2005 11:15:05 GMT 4
Forward:
Anwaar's gentle observation that 'we need one another now more than ever before' is true on a number of levels: in the sense that 'we are in this together.' — Indeed, but also insofar as everyones input will be necessary first to pinpoint the most urgent challenges humanity faces 'not as easy as it may seem' and second to begin defining potential solutions to them. — Each of us is straddled with the task of sifting through immense quantities of information and 'disinformation' in an attempt to see a bigger picture. An impossible undertaking for any one person, in sum.
I would like to recommend that we use this section as an experimental, informal 'sketch pad' where for the sake of fluidity of debate we keep contributions relatively succinct and avoid the accumulation of threads; where the comments we post reflect our personal viewpoints, impressions and even intuitions as 'far-fetched' as they may seem and at the risk that, upon peer review, they be shown incorrect.
Rather than provide cast-iron arguments, contributors to this section should be encouraged to risk speculation and to suggest new ways of seeing and 'responding' to the problems we face.
A forum in order that we might confront issues head-on, a definition of problems while offering proposals for solutions and suggested reading, beyond that of chronic US-related issues. ~ dana
Thank you dana james
Whats your opinion on this new 'sketch pad' please do tell..
|
|
|
Post by jay paulson on Oct 24, 2005 21:45:02 GMT 4
24 Oct
Over a week ago Dana posted a message which ended as follows:
"Precisely, Jebeltariq. US foreign policy has been a problem since its inception, but it has brought us to a major crossroads at this point. I can't presume to have answers, myself. All anyone can do at this point is galvanize opinion in hopes of arriving at collective plans for action. My impression is that the American people are going to need major support from beyond their borders in order to help them overcome what amounts to a deep-rooted state of collective denial. That they've arrived at mass occultation of the obvious has been carefully calculated; it is no accident. In order that our thoughts and ideas not finish in local dead-ends, I suggest that we create a forum subject dedicated specifically to problem-defining and problem-solving. Jay, Jebeltariq, might this be a reasonable way to proceed?"
.............
Both Jebeltariq and I responded in the affirmative, he with a suggested reading list.
Looks like others are ready to get going on this discussion so I'll start it off with a simple observation, sort of an comment on Dana's impression.
There are supposed to be over 6 billion people inhabiting at this moment our beautiful earth. Most of these people live outside the borders of the U.S.
My impression is that of the numbers of those billions who know that the U.S, exists not a significant number of them really care one way or another about the fate of the U.S. My impression may be faulty, be happy to correct it upon proper evidence.
But, of those who do care, how are they going to "help" the U.S. in its woeful state? Politically, militarily, financially, culturally, emotionally,--or what?
But another but: The people of the U.S. are responsible for getting themselves into the mess they are in. Don't you think they should have integrity and decency enough to get themselves out of the mess?
|
|
|
Post by jebeltariq on Oct 25, 2005 2:27:10 GMT 4
Ladies and gentlemen,
Peace be with you
Although over a week ago I intentionally prodded the esteemed contributors to this forum with my now oft-mentioned question, I feel it would be foolish and self-defeating to discuss "extra-American" contributions to the "reversal" and subsequent "improvement" of US foreign policy in an open forum. Current legislation in place around the "free” world already caters for the treatment of such "discussion", nay the very thoughts, as a threat to global security and, as you are well aware, is being used specifically against Muslims.
Hypothetically speaking, an open forum is consequently the wrong place for such discussions. Such forums are incessantly monitored via the "free" world's global telecommunications surveillance network ( Google: Echelon) not to mention HUMINT operatives (infiltrators). Suffice it to say that we may have already opened the door for further scrutiny with statements like:
"But, of those who do care, how are they going to "help" the U.S. in its woeful state? Politically, militarily, financially, culturally, emotionally,--or what?" (emphasis added)
Some might consider my statements naïve and cowardly but I prefer to think of them more so in a pre-emptive context. I admire the fact that some of you, as learned as you are, have the courage to pose such questions to a Muslim in an open forum. (chuckle, chuckle)
Many in the “rest of the world” do care. They tried all civilised avenues of communication, dialogue (e.g. UN) and persuasion but to no avail. Then those that were most affected and were driven to madness (like a cornered animal) hit back and manifested 9/11 upon America (“manifest destiny” indeed!). Here is an example: “ (Reuters) 23 October 2005 BAGHDAD - Adel Abed Hammed was a skinny 31-year-old so withdrawn he sometimes went days without talking to anybody and would let only his mother touch him. Mentally ill since childhood, he used to wander the streets of Baghdad alone. One day he chanced on some American soldiers who shot him dead after he took fright at a bullet fired over his head. “I wouldn’t feel such misery if he wasn’t so sick but that makes it double for me,” said his mother. “He was like a child.” “He always used to go walking for hours,” Adel’s mother said, sitting with her husband and two more sons in the living room of the family house in an upscale Baghdad neighbourhood. “When he came home he used to tell me about what he saw on the road. I used to take him to the bathroom and wash him.” Adel’s father, Abed Hammed Abbas, 73, says his son left the house mid-morning, wearing jeans and a shirt, and when he did not come back by nightfall, they began to fear for him. “I stayed up all night crying, waiting for him outside the house,” Adel’s mother said, speaking through tears. “I pictured him dead, with blood coming from his face.” The following day a neighbour told them he had seen Adel shot on a highway near their home. The neighbour, who did not want to be identified, said he was walking home when he saw the US patrol in Humvee armoured vehicles and tanks, stationed on both sides of the road. “I saw Adel coming walking slowly towards the Americans from the other side. They fired a warning shot over his head. Adel panicked and ran to the other side of the highway. “He’d just started running when they shot him with a couple of bullets. Then he fell to the ground. Four soldiers approached his body and checked him, then they carried his body to a Humvee and put him inside and took him away.” Adel’s father Abed went to the police, who directed him to a hospital. “They told us the Americans brought a person there that was killed and we could find the body in the morgue. We checked it and it was my son, Adel,” Abed said. ’Shot from behind’ “We found he was shot from behind, right through the kidneys. The other bullet wound was near the hip,” he said. The Americans had left a “claims card” with details of the incident and how the family could seek compensation. Adel’s family has not decided whether to press a claim. Adel’s cousin Abdullah Hussain, a doctor, said it should have been clear that Adel was mentally ill. “He was very innocent. Anyone could tell he was ill from the first moment.” “The Americans are spreading terror in Iraq because they are terrified,” he added. “These are not the qualities of liberators but criminals.” Adel’s older brother Ali said the Americans should leave Iraq. “These rivers of blood should be stopped,” he said.
" (emphasis added)
Stories like this one make my blood boil and a primordial blinding rage wells up within me. I often pray to Almighty God to have mercy upon the wronged and to ease their final pain and suffering and to visit upon the wrong-doer such a calumny as that befell Sodom and Gomorrah and the Pharaoh in ancient Egypt in the aeons gone by. But then I realise that in my creed the Almighty has assured us that justice will be done.
The All-seeing does not need a mortal's prayer.
And surely justice will be done.
|
|
|
Post by jebeltariq on Oct 25, 2005 2:54:56 GMT 4
Adel Abed Hammed was a "walking angel". He was sinless and guiltless in his simplicity. In my creed the likes of him and those that cherish, nurture and sustain them are assured Jannah (Heaven). These simpletons and so called "morons" are manifested upon us as a test by the Almighty so that we me bring out from within ourselves all that is good and uplifting in Humanity. I know this for a fact because I have a brother who is more or less just like him.
Adel's mother says: “When he came home he used to tell me about what he saw on the road. I used to take him to the bathroom and wash him.”
May Almighty Allah open to Adel and his mother the gates of Jannah (Paradise).
Insha Allah (God-willing) it will be done!
|
|
|
Post by jay paulson on Oct 25, 2005 6:44:43 GMT 4
24 Oct
Jebeltariq--
I know that you have important and valid concerns about the attitude of the present government of the U.S. and the dangers of talk on the Internet. And I know that the tragedies inflicted daily on the Arab world are beyond belief. Please be assured that there are many of us who grieve with you and are doing what we can to stop the daily insanity.
Please understand that my first question--not a statement--was directed to Dana who noted that her impression: “ is that the American people are going to need major support from beyond their borders in order to help them overcome what amounts to a deep-rooted state of collective denial.” That first question of mine was meant to be rhetorical. really rhetorical
The statement that followed and my final question in that post was: “Don't you think they (the Americans) should have integrity and decency enough to get themselves out of the mess?” And this is not merely rhetorical, and certainly indicates that I thought Americans should do the job themselves.
Peace.
|
|
|
Post by jebeltariq on Oct 25, 2005 7:03:04 GMT 4
Jay,
I didn't mean to criticise. I was just asking everyone to be cautious. The questions you asked and suggestion you made are indelibly pertinent.
My kindest regards to you who has so accurately reflected my views.
Peace
|
|
|
Post by jay paulson on Oct 26, 2005 21:26:16 GMT 4
26 Oct The following news item indicates that the rest of the world is not at all willing to work with the U.S.--at least so far as McDonald's, movies, Coca Cola, etc are concerned. "PARIS (AFP) - Most of the world's countries adopted a convention on cultural diversity, prompting an embittered and isolated United States to deride the document as protectionism in disguise. The "Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions" -- widely seen as a buffer against US cultural domination -- was voted through by an overwhelming majority of the 191 member states at UNESCO's biennial General Conference. Israel was alone in joining the United States in opposition, while Australia was one of four countries that abstained." uk.rd.yahoo.com/afp_logo/SIG=11f0118r3/**http%3A%2F%2Fwww.afp.com%2Fenglish%2Fhome%2FP.S. Be happy to discuss the problem with members of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by jebeltariq on Oct 27, 2005 1:19:41 GMT 4
Very interesting observation jay.
Another interesting observation that comes to my mind is how the political elite in the USA, UK and Australia always seem to act in unison against all odds. They stand together in supporting illegal wars and they stand together in passing draconian laws. It is almost as if an unwritten pact amongst these three forces the UK and Australia to follow the USA's disastrous foray in domestic and foreign policy, and that even against all rational reasoning and popular opinion. It seems that the elite in these countries are so confidently esconsed and entrenched in their positions of wealth and power that they are bold enough to go against popular will with an attitude that reads: do what needs to be done immediately to preserve the global status quo and we will pacify our masses as we go along. I am not a racist by nature and it goes against my very grain to say this but the common denominator that I cannot help but notice is: Anglo-Saxon. The current ruling elite are the proteges and progeny of the same elitist and racist clique that colonised their parts of the globe in the past centuries wreaking similar havoc albeit more blatantly, then in the name of their monarchy and now under the guise of "Freedom and Democracy". Somewhere along the road there was a geographical shift in the power base from the UK to the USA (that is why Blair and Howard are considered Bush's sidekicks) but there has never been any real shift in ideology.
|
|
|
Post by jay paulson on Oct 28, 2005 1:34:36 GMT 4
27 Oct
“Another interesting observation that comes to my mind is how the political elite in the USA, UK and Australia always seem to act in unison against all odds. They stand together in supporting illegal wars and they stand together in passing draconian laws. It is almost as if an unwritten pact amongst these three forces the UK and Australia to follow the USA's disastrous foray in domestic and foreign policy, and that even against all rational reasoning and popular opinion.”
I agree with you Jebeltariq and would only add to your triumvirate the state of Israel. As matter of fact I was surprized to learn recently that a number of members of Bush’s government and his advisory team hold dual citizenship: U.S.—Israel.
I’m not sure that a person who criticizes the policies of governments or political groups should be called a racist. If people raise questions about the state of Israel’s actions in regard to the Berlin-type walls they’re erecting to steal land from the Palestinians or to the atrocities of Israel, those people are termed antisemites. If Muslims criticize the actions of nations that have an Anglo-Saxon heritage they are likely to be called racist.
But criticizing actions or policies of nations, even of individuals, is not in itself a condemnation of peoples or persons. It’s not racism.
|
|
cmr
Junior Member
Posts: 25
|
Post by cmr on Oct 28, 2005 4:37:47 GMT 4
Gentleman, please take a moment Anwaar's gentle observation that 'we need one another now more than ever before' is true on a number of levels: in the sense that 'we are in this together.' — Indeed, but also insofar as everyones input will be necessary first to pinpoint the most urgent challenges humanity faces 'not as easy as it may seem' and second to begin defining potential solutions to them. — Each of us is straddled with the task of sifting through immense quantities of information and 'disinformation' in an attempt to see a bigger picture. An impossible undertaking for any one person, in sum. I would like to recommend that we use this section as an experimental, informal 'sketch pad' where for the sake of fluidity of debate we keep contributions relatively succinct and avoid the accumulation of threads; where the comments we post reflect our personal viewpoints, impressions and even intuitions as 'far-fetched' as they may seem and at the risk that, upon peer review, they be shown incorrect. Rather than provide cast-iron arguments, contributors to this section should be encouraged to risk speculation and to suggest new ways of seeing and 'responding' to the problems we face. A forum in order that we might confront issues head-on, a definition of problems while offering proposals for solutions and suggested reading, beyond that of chronic US-related issues. ~ danaNow that issue is settled, Oct 24, 2005, 6:27pm, jebeltariq wrote:I admire the fact that some of you, as learned as you are, have the courage to pose such questions to a Muslim in an open forum. (chuckle, chuckle)Thats truly funny, good call
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Mar 1, 2006 8:11:54 GMT 4
Tomorrow at DC Gandhi Statue, Opposition to Bush's Defiling of Gandhi Peace Memorial2/28/2006 4:48:00 PM Contact: Scott Lynch, 301-565-4050, ext. 330, 703-725-5680 (mobile) or Paul Kawika Martin, 951-217-7285 (mobile), both of the Peace Action Education Fund News Advisory: WHO: Kevin Martin, the executive director of Peace Action Education Fund, Gordon Clark, the coordinator of the Iraq Pledge of Resistance and Carah Ong, the office director of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation will speak about the hypocrisy of Bush's plans to lay a wreath at the Gandhi memorial in India on Thursday. They will also speak in opposition to Bush's plans to sell sensitive nuclear technology to India. WHAT: Press conference and photo op in front of Gandhi statue with Indian Embassy as a backdrop. WHERE: Washington DC, Corner of Q St NW and Massachusetts Ave NW, in Gandhi park (btwn 21st and 22nd on Mass Ave). WHEN: March 1, at 11:30 a.m. WHY: "Bush's presidency is steeped in war and violence. Bush's policies and record in government have been and continue to be antithetical to the teachings of Gandhi. It is hard to imagine a public relations stunt crasser than that of Bush paying false homage to Gandhi-a man who gave his life to the pursuit of non- violent change." said Kevin Martin, executive director of Peace Action. Photo opportunity: Other participants will be holding posters with the likeness of Gandhi the say, "Gandhi says No Nukes No War" in front of Gandhi statue with Indian Embassy as a backdrop. ---- Background: Bush should not visit Gandhi memorial: Peaceniks timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1430344.cms Bush, Gandhi, and the Bomb www.peace-action.org/PeaceBlog/wordpress/?p=137 Nation's Largest Peace Group Denounces Cynical Bush Plan to Lay Memorial Wreath in Honor of Mahatma Gandhi on Trip to India. www.commondreams.org/news2006/0227-02.htm --- The Peace Action Education Fund is sister organization of Peace Action, the United States' largest peace and disarmament organization with over 100,000 members and nearly 100 chapters in 30 states. www.peace-action.org the merger of Sane and The Nuclear Freeze. www.peace-action.org
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on Mar 2, 2006 13:03:37 GMT 4
Bush in India: Just Not Welcome Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:14:00 -0800Summary: Seems that US President George W. Bush’s upcoming tour stop in India will be greeted with much fanfare and praise by the denizens of the Delhi Zoo after two previous plans were scrapped due to the logistics of ridicule and security. After this, on to a stop at Ghandi’s memorial to lay a wreath.
By ARUNDHATI ROY Republished from The Nation Cant take him anywhere... On his triumphalist tour of India and Pakistan, where he hopes to wave imperiously at people he considers potential subjects, President Bush has an itinerary that’s getting curiouser and curiouser.
For Bush’s March 2 pit stop in New Delhi, the Indian government tried very hard to have him address our parliament. A not inconsequential number of MPs threatened to heckle him, so Plan One was hastily shelved. Plan Two was to have Bush address the masses from the ramparts of the magnificent Red Fort, where the Indian prime minister traditionally delivers his Independence Day address. But the Red Fort, surrounded as it is by the predominantly Muslim population of Old Delhi, was considered a security nightmare. So now we’re into Plan Three: President George Bush speaks from Purana Qila, the Old Fort.
Ironic, isn’t it, that the only safe public space for a man who has recently been so enthusiastic about India’s modernity should be a crumbling medieval fort?
Since the Purana Qila also houses the Delhi zoo, George Bush’s audience will be a few hundred caged animals and an approved list of caged human beings, who in India go under the category of “eminent persons.” They’re mostly rich folk who live in our poor country like captive animals, incarcerated by their own wealth, locked and barred in their gilded cages, protecting themselves from the threat of the vulgar and unruly multitudes whom they have systematically dispossessed over the centuries.
So what’s going to happen to George W. Bush? Will the gorillas cheer him on? Will the gibbons curl their lips? Will the brow-antlered deer sneer? Will the chimps make rude noises? Will the owls hoot? Will the lions yawn and the giraffes bat their beautiful eyelashes? Will the crocs recognize a kindred soul? Will the quails give thanks that Bush isn’t traveling with Dick Cheney, his hunting partner with the notoriously bad aim? Will the CEOs agree?
Oh, and on March 2, Bush will be taken to visit Gandhi’s memorial in Rajghat. He’s by no means the only war criminal who has been invited by the Indian government to lay flowers at Rajghat. (Only recently we had the Burmese dictator General Than Shwe, no shrinking violet himself.) But when Bush places flowers on that famous slab of highly polished stone, millions of Indians will wince. It will be as though he has poured a pint of blood on the memory of Gandhi.
We really would prefer that he didn’t.
It is not in our power to stop Bush’s visit. It is in our power to protest it, and we will. The government, the police and the corporate press will do everything they can to minimize the extent of our outrage. Nothing the happy newspapers say can change the fact that all over India, from the biggest cities to the smallest villages, in public places and private homes, George W. Bush, the President of the United States of America, world nightmare incarnate, is just not welcome.
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Apr 25, 2006 15:14:43 GMT 4
Oiloholic nation has no business lecturing ChinaBy Cynthia Tucker Originally published April 24, 2006 ATLANTA // President Bush is reportedly annoyed that the Chinese are using so much petroleum. With the world's fastest-growing economy, China's oil consumption has soared to at least 6.5 million barrels a day, and its market for automobiles is growing. If the boom continues, the Chinese may eventually be somewhere in the neighborhood of the United States, which burns up about 20 million barrels a day. Who do those Chinese think they are - Americans? If that sounds arrogant, well, it is. Indeed, it takes a lot of chutzpah to chide a country that consumes about a third of the petroleum the United States does. While we account for less than 5 percent of the world's people, we use up about a quarter of the world's energy. And we Americans apparently think we have the God-given right to do so. President Bush is annoyed not only by China's consumption but also by its efforts to ensure access to enough petroleum in the decades to come. China has done that by putting its interests ahead of considerations such as world peace - conducting business with unsavory characters such as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. If China were a proper superpower, like us, it would just invade a sovereign nation to guarantee access to oil. After all, that was one of the reasons for Mr. Bush's fierce determination to topple Saddam Hussein; the administration was after permanent bases for U.S. troops, so they could guarantee our access to vital Middle East oilfields. You still don't believe oil was a factor in the invasion of Iraq? Just listen to retired Army Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Colin L. Powell. In a speech in Washington last year, Mr. Wilkerson, an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's unilateralism, revealed a plan that was far more ambitious - and ominous. "We had a discussion in policy planning about actually mounting an operation to take the oilfields in the Middle East, internationalize them, put them under some sort of U.N. trusteeship and administer the revenues and the oil accordingly. That's how serious we thought about it," he said. Or listen to Newt Gingrich, who has led the chorus of right-wing saber-rattling against Iran. As Mr. Gingrich told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, "The American people, if you put the decision in the context of controlling Iran and maintaining our access to oil, you'd get 60 to 65 percent reluctantly agreeing to do what it takes." At least Mr. Gingrich was principled enough to own up to a fundamental tenet of U.S. policy toward the Middle East: Preserve our access to petroleum. If we are willing to spend enough in bombs and blood, the United States can continue that policy for a while longer. But China's military is rapidly modernizing (using all the dollars we ship to them for cheap electronics, textiles, toys and so on) and will be able to stand up to us soon enough. If we go up against them in 20 years over the world's remaining oil reserves, it will be ugly - far worse than Iraq. Mr. Bush is right about this much: China's growth has as much to do with rising oil prices as hurricanes, floods or rumors of war with Iran. As long as demand is high for a limited resource, prices will remain high. But even Mr. Bush ought to be ashamed to suggest the Chinese should go back to riding bicycles so we can keep driving Hummers - cheaply. The president should have told Americans years ago that the days of cheap gas were over. It's too bad he didn't remind us of that when he had our attention - in the days and weeks after the terrorist strikes of 9/11. Even a nation of oiloholics was prepared to make sacrifices. If the president had imposed a stiff tax on gasoline at the pump, American motorists would have grumbled, but we would have gotten over it. Consumption would have decreased as driving became more expensive. And, by now, there'd be hundreds of millions to fund research on alternative sources of fuel. At the very least, the nation would be on the road to recovery from oiloholism. Instead, we are still swilling straight from the bottle - while lecturing others on the merits of temperance. Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Her column appears Mondays in The Sun. Her e-mail is cynthia@ajc.com. Source: tinyurl.com/mhz7z
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Apr 28, 2006 13:10:29 GMT 4
Statement by Embassy of Sudan4/27/2006 5:16:00 PM Contact: Embassy of Sudan, 202-338-8565 WASHINGTON, April 27 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following statement was released today by the Embassy of Sudan: THINK ABOUT YOUR ACTIONSIn the early 1990s some individuals and organizations attempted to exploit negative aspects of the civil war in Southern Sudan, specifically inter-tribal abduction exacerbated by the war, to create a huge industry called "Slave Redemption." In the interim millions of dollars have been donated by well-intentioned Americans, including school children, to obtain freedom for their fellow human beings. As it became more certain that a negotiated peace was within reach to end the North-South conflict, meticulous reporting by The Irish Times, The Independence and The Washington Post concluded that "Slave Redemption" was a fraudulent campaign, designed to defraud people of their money. A segment on CBS's Sixty Minutes, hosted by Dan Rather, interviewed that movement's co-founder, Jim Jacobson, who said "it is a hoax, a staged story and a circus." The Reverend Mario Riva, an Italian Priest who lived in Southern Sudan for decades said "most of the time slave redemption was a trick." (See the video on the website www.sudanembassy.org ). Contrary to the claims of the slave redeemers that about 200,000 slaves were redeemed, research by the pro-SPLM institute in Kenya, the Rift Valley Institute, concluded that during the two decades of the civil war the total abductees never exceeded 11000. The Slave Redemption industry became defunct soon thereafter. The only factory in Sudan that produced medicine to combat malaria and tuberculosis, which was labeled a chemical weapon facility owned by Osama bin Laden, was completely destroyed by American missiles in 1998. The allegations that the factory produced chemical weapons turned out to be completely unfounded. Indeed, Sudan now cooperates closely with the US and others in the war against terrorism. The immoral tactics of sensational campaigns and bogus allegations of those campaigns, which are focused on increasing US hostility toward Sudan, have cost the Sudanese people years of killing and destruction....They have undercut peace and hampered unity. The Sudan Coalition, a "bipartisan entity" as its members strive to describe it, deserves credit for prolonging the miseries of all Sudanese throughout the civil war by pressuring the Clinton Administration to pursue an irrational policy toward Sudan. In April 2001 former President Carter said "the people in Sudan want to resolve the conflict. The biggest obstacle is the U.S. government policy. Any sort of peace effort is aborted basically by policies of the United States. Instead of working for peace in Sudan, the U.S. government has basically promoted a continuation of war." Today, the organizers of the April 30th rally include veterans of the Sudan Coalition. As part of their protest they are targeting the peace negotiations in Abuja, Nigeria, which, by all accounts, will reach a successful conclusion in the very near future. By implication, the message that will be sent by the demonstrators to the Darfur rebels is: Don't Make Peace. The US supports you. These are the same misdirected, naive tactics that delayed a peace deal in Sudan for more than eight years. Yet we are certain that delaying peace is not the reason why so many of you are motivated to participate in this rally. Emily Wax of The Washington Post recently reported on Sunday, April 23, that: "in September 2004, then-Secretary of State, Colin L. Powell referred to the conflict as 'genocide'. Rather than spurring greater international action, that label only seems to have strengthened Sudan's rebels; they believe they don't need to negotiate with the government and think they will have U.S. support when they commit attacks." She also noted "although the conflict has also been framed as a battle between Arabs and Black Africans, every one in Darfur appears dark-skinned, at least by the usual American standards." The situation in Sudan is not comparable to apartheid in South Africa. The Darfur conflict, which is tragic and must be resolved as quickly as possible, is not the world's worst. The Washington Post reported last year that 3.5 million people were killed in the last four years in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The recent Council on Foreign Relations 56th report on these issues noted that the figure in the DRC was closer to 4 million. More than 1.4 million Somalis are suffering today in one of the worst famines to hit that region. One concludes that the hostility toward Sudan is propelled by ethnic, religious and ideological hatred, not humanitarian concerns. The manipulation of good hearted people who care deeply about Sudan, through the use of disinformation about Slave Redemption, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, genocide and other false allegations, is wrong and counterproductive. It was wrongheaded years ago and remains the same today. There is a human tragedy today in Darfur that will be most effectively and quickly addressed through peace negotiations, not rhetoric. Peace will not be achieved by sending the wrong message at just the wrong time to the perpetrators of that tragedy, the Darfur rebels, who demonstrated their goals and methods through violent attacks in Southern Darfur earlier this week. Also see:The Fight for Darfur Grassroots movements take action to stop genocide —By Evan Noetzel, Utne.com April 27, 2006 Issue SNIP:Mired in its fourth consecutive year of unchecked atrocities, Sudan's Darfur region still awaits a legitimate semblance of international intervention. Unfortunately, the world's collective non-response has legitimized nothing more than the status quo -- which, for Darfurians, has translated to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children. With the Bush-led government stalled in an apparent combination of apathy, bureaucracy, and geopolitics, a number of US-based grassroots movements are rallying their constituents to take action. www.utne.com/webwatch/2006_247/news/12106-1.htmlWe Can Stop The Genocide In Darfur But We Must Act Nowwww.savedarfur.org This is a letter to Bush and links for other info. For background on this letter read the United Nations reply below:United Nations, reply #7 airdance.proboards50.com/index.cgi?board=generalworldaffairs&action=display&thread=1127372089&page=1
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on May 2, 2006 20:17:57 GMT 4
Jews Protest Against Israeli Independence Day Rally5/2/2006 10:53:00 AM Contact: Rabbi Lipa Fisher of Neturei Karta International, 514-806-0839 News Advisory: Anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews will be counter demonstrating the rally celebrating Israeli Independence Day. They will be denouncing the existence of the State of Israel, which is strictly forbidden according to Jewish Law (the Torah). This condemnation also encompasses all acts committed by Zionists under the guise of Judaism whether against people of the Jewish faith or the Palestinian people.WHEN: Wednesday, May 3, 10:30 a.m. WHERE: Pierre Elliot Trudeau Park (Centennial Park), On Mackle Rd, Cote St. Luc, - Montreal For more information please contact: Rabbi Lipa Fisher at: 514-806-0839 www.nkusa.org/activities/Statements/IIDstatement.cfmSource: Neturei Karta International
|
|