Genocide Jihad Is Over In Darfur

[NATO AIR]

there are no more blacks left to kill....

http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=686

The first genocide of the twenty-first century is drawing to an end
There are no black people left to cleanse or kill

At last, some good news from Darfur: the holocaust in western Sudan is nearly over. There’s only one problem – it’s drawing to an end only because there are no black people left to cleanse or kill.

The National Islamic Front government has culled over 400,000 “Zurga” – a word which translates best as “*******” – and driven two million more from their homes in its quest to make western Sudan “Zurga-free”. Their racist Janjaweed militias would love to carry on rampaging and raping, but the black villages have all been burned down and the women have all been raped with “Arab seed” to “destroy their race from within” – what’s a poor militiaman to do? The first genocide of the twenty-first century has proceeded without a hitch, and the genocidaires have won.

Some of the survivors have washed up on Britain’s shores. Adam Hussein now lives in Doncaster. He explains, “My father was a teacher and my brother was working in a gold mine. We had a small shop in the town and a farm too. In Darfur, people are very kind. Even if you have nothing you can live with other people who help you.” One day last year, he was out with his uncle and sister when “suddenly we saw an aeroplane come through the town and start bombing. After a few minutes, we saw the Janjaweed, who attacked my sister and uncle and… they died. I saw them catch other young girls and rape them.” Adam was tossed into jail by the Janjaweed as part of their pogrom. He only escaped by luck, and scrambled to catch a boat which ended up in London. (Ah, but no doubt the right-wing press believes he only left Sudan so he could live in luxury on the £38.50 the British government lavishes on him every week).

The primary responsibility for this holocaust lies, of course, with the National Islamic Front government in Khartoum. For decades, they treated Darfur in western Sudan as a nothing more than a source of loyal Muslim conscripts to fight in their civil war against Christians in the South. The “Zurga” were good enough to use as cannon fodder – to die in their hundreds of thousands fighting in a futile war – but not good enough to be allowed into government or to have any public funds spent on them. When in 2003 the “Zurga” staged a minor rebellion against decades of being treated like this, Khartoum reacted with staggering ferocity. They unleashed the Janjaweed militias – a fancy term for men on horseback with knives and machine guns – and backed their raids up with helicopter gunships.

As the violence grew more and more wild, the hardliners in Khartoum saw this as an opportunity. Darfur sits on the geographical faultline between Arab Africa and black Africa, and since the 1980s Khartoum’s Islamists have longed to “completely Arabize our part of Africa” and drive the “inferior” black population out. This was their chance. They ensured the crushing of a local rebellion slid gradually into genocide.

It was clear very early on that this was a rerun of Rwanda. Romeo Dallaire was the head of the UN peacekeeping force in Rwanda who tried desperately – and in vain – to persuade the world to intervene, only to watch helplessly while hundreds of thousands of people were systematically murdered. Last year, he called Darfur “Rwanda in slow motion.”

So where were all those people who watched that genocide on their TV screens and solemnly intoned, “Never again?” They did not come for Adam and his family. Tony Blair had pledged in 2001 that “if Rwanda happened again, we would have a moral responsibility to act.” But confronted with precisely that, he offered nothing but a moral fig-leaf: he proposed an African Union (AU) force should be sent to monitor a ceasefire in Darfur. But the AU did not have the physical capability to pacify Tunbridge Wells, never mind Darfur. They sent just 3000 troops to monitor an area the size of France – and the handful of troops they did send didn’t even have a mandate to protect civilians. Darfur expert Gerard Prunier says the AU force consists of “thousands of little black Dallaires, who can only watch while the killing continues. Sending them was the world’s way of doing nothing without actually admitting it.” This was illustrated with hellish clarity last week when a refugee camp supposedly guarded by AU troops was entered by Janjaweed militiamen who butchered 37 people without a single shot being fired against them. It was Darfur’s mini-Srebrenica, a moment that exposed the futility of the world’s interventions so far.

The Bush administration talked tough about Darfur at first, becoming one of the first governments to publicly use the g-word. But at the same time, as the Los Angeles Times has revealed, they were sending jets to Khartoum to fly Sudan’s intelligence chief Salan Abdallah Gosh – the man overseeing the holocaust – to Washington. He was ushered into secret meetings where he was feted as a “close ally” for sharing some intelligence about al-Quaida and moving towards opening Sudan’s oil fields to US corporations. Ah well, what’s a spot of genocide between friends? The state department has even begun spouting the Sudanese propaganda line that the Janjaweed are “wild out-of-control tribesmen” not under the control of Khartoum. But how many wild out-of-control tribesmen have helicopter gunships bearing the insignia of the
Sudanese army?

The list of people who have betrayed the Darfurians continues. China and France both have oil interests in Sudan – so they told Kofi Anan they would veto any attempt by the Security Council to end the genocide. At the height of the murders in Darfur, the United Nations itself appointed the Sudanese government to a three-year term on the UN Human Rights Commission. The jihadists who claim to be fighting on behalf of Muslims from Palestine to Chechnya to Iraq have said nothing to condemn the mass slaughter of 400,000 innocent Muslims in Darfur. No: they support it, because the Khartoum government imposes sharia law wherever it goes and even invited their hero Osama Bin Laden to make Sudan his home from 1991-6. Major corporations – including Siemens and Alcatel – continue to work and pay taxes in Sudan even though they know the money is being funnelled towards mass murder.

The Darfur holocaust is a bleak demonstration of how little the most powerful institutions in the world are motivated by basic human morality. Confronted with a clear example of the most terrible crime of all, they have all conspired to carry on working with the killers as if the holocaust in Darfur is at best a minor inconvenience.

A few weeks ago, it was suggested that we abolish Holocaust Memorial Day. The reasons that were given then – that it ‘discriminates’ against Muslims – were clearly absurd. But I am beginning to think we should indeed remove it from the calendar. How can we bow out heads and murmur ‘Never Again’ next year when Adam and his family know we don’t mean a damn word of it?

Feedback welcome at [email protected]

 

[dilloduck]

there are no more blacks left to kill....

It's hard to believe, isn't it. People are too busy with their own lives to even care. Worldwide indifference to genocide.

 

[NATO AIR]

It's hard to believe, isn't it. People are too busy with their own lives to even care. Worldwide indifference to genocide.

Yep (or outright support, as Russia, Britain, Poland, Ukraine, China and France have done in gleefully selling weapons and arms to Sudan).

Even America is all too eager to talk loud but not do anything in the face of developing a better intelligence relationship with the architects of genocide.

 

[Gunny]

I think it's more a matter of there just not being anything of interest for us in Sudan. The French on the other habd, have mucho dollars invested in the Government of Sudan.

I was and still do favor unilateral action on our part, that's if there's anything left to save.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Once again I ask, where is the UN? Why do they exist if they can't respond to horrors such as this?

 

[Gunny]

Once again I ask, where is the UN? Why do they exist if they can't respond to horrors such as this?

France made it clear they would veto any UN vote to intervene. The UN buckled under and made no further attempt to provide anything more than lip service to the situation.

 

[insein]

Then they are living up to their name. The Useless Nations. How do they repeatedly allow do nothing countries like France, Russia and Germany block humanitarian efforts due to financial interests? Then they take a blind eye and allow countries like China and Sudan on the freaking security council? They have the same say as the US in terms of world security?

The UN has long been a defunct body but the problem is it still gets funded. US needs to pull out and start another world body with governments that arent dictatorships or communists. Trust me for all the hate worldwide people say they have for the US, watch how many countries leap at the opportunity to follow us OUT of the UN.

 

[Abbey Normal]

France made it clear they would veto any UN vote to intervene. The UN buckled under and made no further attempt to provide anything more than lip service to the situation.

IMO, the UN is a corrupt, organization-sized Eunuch.