D.C area DUers, what ya doin Thursday? Die in at the WH sound like fun?

[havocmom]

Help draw attention to the plight of victims of genocide in Sudan. The media seems not to be on this devastating situation. What does the junta not want us to know? There is real murder and rape going on here and we need to let bushco know we are not gonna let it be ignored!

The US must get involved. Congress needs to pass a resolution declaring that there is a program of genocide in Sudan. Churches and schools are being destroyed. Pregnant women are being killed and other women are bing raped. People are being forced into camps and starved. Refugees are bing told to go to open spaces for UN food drops and then the government drops bombs on them!

Is this in your local newspaper? Are you hearing about it on TV & radio?

Please help get some legs under this story.

Info to start you with found at:
http://www.darfurgenocide.org/info.htm

Info on the July 22 Die In in D.C.
http://www.darfurgenocide.org/dcprotest.htm
<snip> We're helping organise a "Die-In" at the White House on Thursday, July 22nd. One thousand people will lie down, as if dead, in front of the President's Mansion powerfully reminding the US Government of the number of people who are dying in Darfur each day.

<snip> We'll make sure the protest gets serious media attention. We'll demand that the US act to put an end to the genocide in Darfur and save those innocent lives.

<snip> If you're ready and able to be in DC on Thursday July 22nd and help call for justice for the people of Darfur,

Thanks to gottaB for the great links. Thanks to the DU community of caring people for getting this message out, one way or another!

[rangerfan]

1. The administration is already taking action.

The United States is the largest donor of humanitarian aid to Darfur, having pledged $299 million (through next year) of which $138.5 million has so far been obligated/spent.

[havocmom]

2. A formal charge of genocide must be made

I get word there is a joint resolution now before Congress. When this gets called by its right name, the world community will have to acknowledge. Then leaders must act. This in one of those time when, if the people lead, the leaders will follow.

We need to push our Congressmen to get this done ASAP. Time = lives and there is no time to waste!

Yell and holler at your local media to get this on page one. Write Sec of State Powell. The Nation on-line has made it easy:
http://capwiz.com/thenation/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=6074336

Aid $$ next year won't do it. People are being slaughtered NOW.

Pressure whoever you can to get them to say the word Genocide so the UN will have to get the lead out.

When the refugees go to a food drop site and then get bombed, we need UN Peacekeepers on the ground, not checks in the mail.

[leyton]

3. Erm... I'm gonna get flamed for this

but I have to ask. I'm not espousing one side or the other, but isn't this the bulletin board where people oppose sending US troops to remove a brutal dictator in Iraq? I mean, I know there are other reasons for our opposition too, but people here complain that US lives are being lost in a foreign land... and we're going to have the US "act to put and end..." which basically would mean troops.

Perhaps we at DU could be a little more evenhanded, no?

[havocmom]

4. I would like to see the US go on record declaring that there is indeed

genocide so the UN get moving as send Peacekeepers. Wish I could have my daughter's friend John come and speak to all of us. This is not a case of the junta making excuses for doing what they had already decided to do. This is a case where action is needed and needed quickly.

Seems telling that it is so difficult to get mainstream media to do much on this issue. What do you suppose they don't want us to notice?

Not flaming you, but this is an issue which I am passionate about. Did you check into any of the info in the links?

[leyton]

5. I'm not disputing that there's genocide. What bothers me is this:

that all these people at DU oppose the Iraq war for, among other things, the fact that Americans are sent to die overseas to remove some dictator, and then at the same time call for troops to be sent to this country.

But I do share with you the disappointment that the mainstream media does not pick up stories like this - if you ask me, Africa ought to be on the front pages every day. Sadly, it isn't news anymore; I suppose it is just a region that the US does not care about.

[havocmom]

6. um, wasn't the thing about removing a dictator from Iraq the 2nd or 3rd

reason, no excuse, for war with Iraq? The big push was originally the lie about WMD. We protested the invasion because there was no sound reason for it. And we were right. Each time a bushco reason was submitted to justify what they had decided to do any way, we blew that false reason out of the game. Poof! A new 'reason' gets put into play and poof, we blow that one away too. Why, because there was no legitimate reason for invading Iraq

Sudan is different. There is documented evidence of ethnic cleansing. There are survivors who have made it out to tell the stories.

The government there denies entry to relief workers. They know they will get caught red handed if they let officials in.

So the US Congress fell for bushco lies in the matter of Iraq and as a result we are supposed to never get involved in anything again? Not good logic. That is sorta like saying nobody should ever impeach a sitting President no matter what the evidence because it was bogus when they did it to Clinton.

No, Sudan is not Iraq.

[havocmom]

7. It isn't news because somebody in power doesn't want it to be

people are still fighting for their lives. That is happening RIGHT NOW. How is that not news?

When more people find out more about this, more people will care. Help get the story out instead of trying to blow it off.

[leyton]

10. Well, gee, no need to read my first or second post then.

I'm not trying to blow if off. I'm trying to state that I think there's some hypocrisy here at DU.

[havocmom]

11. Did read your posts, all of them

You are comparing apples to oranges. I do not portest sending troops when there is a reason. There was no reason in the case of Iraq. Iraq was not a threat. Iraq was contained and reasonably stable, though in need of trade for medicine and food stuffs. people were working and going to school.

In the Sudan, refugees are bombed while waiting for aid drops. That is NOT the same as Iraq.

[manic expression]

8. Sudan is completely different

It really depresses me when right after the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide, everyone was saying how they wish they had done more and that we need to end similar situations. Cut to Sudan at almost the same time. Very scary reports were coming out of there for months, people knew this had been going on for a VERY LONG TIME. And what exactly does the UN do? NOTHING. What does the US do? NOTHING. No one moves a finger.
On to your claim. How is Sudan different from Iraq? Simple: Sudan is a growing chaotic catastrophe. People are being wiped out indiscriminitly. No one is safe from being killed or raped. How is this, in any way, like Iraq? Iraq was a relatively stable country with a sense of order and law. Granted, there was a brutal dictator, but there are plenty of other places that are/were even worse (North Korea, Afghanistan, China, Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan) and the U.S. has absolutely no remorse for those oppressed civilians. In Sudan, a massive genocide and campaign of fear and displacement is underway. Actually, the action that was most detrimental towards the Iraqi people were the U.S. imposed sanctions which killed countless innocents. We need to act, or else 10 years from now, we will look back on this present event and think about all that we could have done.

[havocmom]

9. Good points, manic expression.

"Iraq was a relatively stable country with a sense of order and law".

Your are absolutely right, Sudan not the same at all. Iraq also had inspectors and others from all over the world in there looking at things. The al-Bashir government will not allow any relief workers aor rights observers. His militias are killing the black population who do not share the Islamic faith.

It is genocide. It is now and it needs to be dealt with by the people of the world NOW

And, manic expression, welcome to the DU :hi:

Love your screen name and looking forward to reading more of your posts!
:toast:

[gottaB]

12. points of difference

I won't flame you, leyton, because although I disagree with your conclusions it's a reasonable kind of thing to ask.

Some differences between the two situations:

• The scale of involvement. Reasonable calls for humanitarian intervention in Sudan seek to secure the delivery of humanitarian aid and/or put a stop to the genocide. 15,000 peacekeepers might be adequate for the task, far fewer troops than were needed for the invasion of Iraq.
  
  
• Through the AU, and with support from EU allies, any humanitarian mission would be truly multilateral. In contrast to Iraq, the US might be called upon to contribute at most 25% of the peacekeepers.
  
  
• There is largely agreement in the UN that Sudan represents "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world today." The same could not be said of Iraq.
  
  
• When Powell visited a refugee camp in Darfur, thousands of refugees rushed to cheer him. People were driven back with whips, yet still they flocked to see Powell (and Annan too). In Iraq, what happened at Firdos Square was a psyop. When Wolfowitz visited Baghdad, he was greeted by mortar fire.
  
  
• The American people understand and support the moral imperative of preventing genocide. Although much animosity was generated towards Saddam Hussein, American support for the occupation is slipping. People are asking, Why are we there?
  
  
• The US position on Darfur is not informed by bogus intelligence. Independent groups have used the same kinds of data-- satellite images, testimony, documents--to confirm USAID's assessments.