Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
International
U.S.
Anti-War
Global Justice & Anti-Capitalism
Immigrant Rights
Media Activism & Independent Media
Racial Justice
Darfur and the Sudan ‘Hustle’
Friday, June 15, 2007 :Washington Informer , Commentary, Askia Muhammad, Posted: Jun 15, 2007
Now that Darfur has gained notoriety if not prominence as an international concern, the battle for who will define the issues is sure to become more heated.
I confess that at first I was a little embarrassed that I did not join the pack with my own full-throated condemnation of Sudan over Darfur.
So now, here comes President George W. (For “worst in history”) Bush, slapping more sanctions on Sudan, and the chorus screaming “genocide” getting louder still. Uh-oh.
darfur and sudanRecently I talked to several Black folks who visited Sudan, including Darfur this Spring. More than one of them defended Sudan citing Paul Joseph Goebbels, the German Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda during the Nazi regime, and his “Big Lie Technique.”
To wit: “never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.” They said someone is practicing “The Big Lie” against Sudan.
Hmmm, I thought.
That certainly was the case in the story of so-called “slavery” in Sudan five or six years ago, when people–even well-meaning Black Civil Rights leaders–insisted that the Arab-Muslim government in the North of Sudan was practicing slavery against the Black-African-Christians in the South of the country.
Some of my friends went to the region and even claimed to have “bought” slaves and set them free. That was all a hoax. There never was any “slavery” where people were bought and sold as chattel. There was a decades-old civil war raging in Southern Sudan, and often the various warring parties engaged in kidnapping and ransoming captured members of opposing tribal groups, but people weren’t being bought and sold into slavery.
Someone was using The Big Lie Technique to influence Blacks in America, knowing how sensitive we are to and unforgiving we would be of anyone practicing “slavery.” After all, if Black folks turn against an African government, that government can’t count on any friends in the U.S. public opinion.
But Darfur is no “slavery hoax,” although there are many similarities to be found. There is a huge humanitarian crisis, compounded by years of drought, and an old-fashioned “range war” where nomadic camel herdsmen are competing for arable land and water to graze their animals, with farmers trying to grow crops. It’s a bloody fight, a fight which neither side can win outright.
So that’s the pretext and the context. A fight with the Arab-Muslim government on one side, and Black Africans on the other.
And then, a “smoking gun” was revealed. The Save Darfur Coalition, started to unravel from within. Questions were raised about whether or not the now deposed executive director of the organization–David Rubenstein–had wisely used a huge influx of cash from a few anonymous donors, in an advertising blitz, which included full page ads in metropolitan newspapers and in Black media. After Rubenstein walked the plank, Save Darfur board member Ruth Messinger, whose day-job is as president of the American Jewish World Service, said of him: “we wish him the best in his search for new opportunities for public service,” according to a report in the June 2, 2007 edition of The New York Times.
The Save Darfur Coalition, with its $15 million annual budget, wasn’t sending a dime to the refugee camps in Darfur or in neighboring Chad. They were spending big bucks, waging war against Sudan’s “radical Islamic regime,” composed of Arabs, obviously bent on “ethnic cleansing” of Black Africans.
The only thing is, 99.9 percent of all the people of Darfur, are Islamic. And as far as the Arab-government- business goes: they’re all Black! There’s not one person in the Sudanese government, who looks anything like your typical “Arab.” Not President Omar al Bashir, nor any of his cabinet, nor most of his country’s ambassadors, could pass the fabled “paper bag test.” They’re all too dark-skinned!
But we have heard, thanks to the Save Darfur “Big Lie Technique” ads, that the Arab-Muslims have been practicing “genocide” against the Black-Christian-Africans.
More sanctions they insist. Send in U.N. peace-keeping troops. Impose a “no-fly zone” over Darfur. Why that’s just what the U.S. did before invading Iraq, in what is now a luckless war of aggression, which the U.S. can never win.
Why is all of this going on? You might wonder. Oil. Huge un-developed oil reserves.
That Islamic government in Khartoum just happens to preside over the largest, and one of the most mineral rich countries on the African continent. Did I say they have lots of oil?
That Islamic government has ports on the Red Sea, and includes the head waters of the Nile River which can provide electricity all over the country. It has rich agricultural potential, and it borders on nine—count them—nine other African nations.
Sudan has the potential of being a bridge between Islamic Arab North Africa and Bantu Black Sub-Saharan Africa. In my book, that makes Sudan, an “enemy” of Western Imperialism, by simple definition.
I am not embarrassed any more to openly question the Save Darfur movement, because it is just the same old anti-Sudan movement, just dressed up in a different coat, a coat of many colors, including well-meaning conservatives, liberals, and even Blacks, all of whom have been duped by someone’s anti-Sudan “Big Lie” which has also proven to be a very profitable hustle.
Read More
So now, here comes President George W. (For “worst in history”) Bush, slapping more sanctions on Sudan, and the chorus screaming “genocide” getting louder still. Uh-oh.
darfur and sudanRecently I talked to several Black folks who visited Sudan, including Darfur this Spring. More than one of them defended Sudan citing Paul Joseph Goebbels, the German Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda during the Nazi regime, and his “Big Lie Technique.”
To wit: “never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.” They said someone is practicing “The Big Lie” against Sudan.
Hmmm, I thought.
That certainly was the case in the story of so-called “slavery” in Sudan five or six years ago, when people–even well-meaning Black Civil Rights leaders–insisted that the Arab-Muslim government in the North of Sudan was practicing slavery against the Black-African-Christians in the South of the country.
Some of my friends went to the region and even claimed to have “bought” slaves and set them free. That was all a hoax. There never was any “slavery” where people were bought and sold as chattel. There was a decades-old civil war raging in Southern Sudan, and often the various warring parties engaged in kidnapping and ransoming captured members of opposing tribal groups, but people weren’t being bought and sold into slavery.
Someone was using The Big Lie Technique to influence Blacks in America, knowing how sensitive we are to and unforgiving we would be of anyone practicing “slavery.” After all, if Black folks turn against an African government, that government can’t count on any friends in the U.S. public opinion.
But Darfur is no “slavery hoax,” although there are many similarities to be found. There is a huge humanitarian crisis, compounded by years of drought, and an old-fashioned “range war” where nomadic camel herdsmen are competing for arable land and water to graze their animals, with farmers trying to grow crops. It’s a bloody fight, a fight which neither side can win outright.
So that’s the pretext and the context. A fight with the Arab-Muslim government on one side, and Black Africans on the other.
And then, a “smoking gun” was revealed. The Save Darfur Coalition, started to unravel from within. Questions were raised about whether or not the now deposed executive director of the organization–David Rubenstein–had wisely used a huge influx of cash from a few anonymous donors, in an advertising blitz, which included full page ads in metropolitan newspapers and in Black media. After Rubenstein walked the plank, Save Darfur board member Ruth Messinger, whose day-job is as president of the American Jewish World Service, said of him: “we wish him the best in his search for new opportunities for public service,” according to a report in the June 2, 2007 edition of The New York Times.
The Save Darfur Coalition, with its $15 million annual budget, wasn’t sending a dime to the refugee camps in Darfur or in neighboring Chad. They were spending big bucks, waging war against Sudan’s “radical Islamic regime,” composed of Arabs, obviously bent on “ethnic cleansing” of Black Africans.
The only thing is, 99.9 percent of all the people of Darfur, are Islamic. And as far as the Arab-government- business goes: they’re all Black! There’s not one person in the Sudanese government, who looks anything like your typical “Arab.” Not President Omar al Bashir, nor any of his cabinet, nor most of his country’s ambassadors, could pass the fabled “paper bag test.” They’re all too dark-skinned!
But we have heard, thanks to the Save Darfur “Big Lie Technique” ads, that the Arab-Muslims have been practicing “genocide” against the Black-Christian-Africans.
More sanctions they insist. Send in U.N. peace-keeping troops. Impose a “no-fly zone” over Darfur. Why that’s just what the U.S. did before invading Iraq, in what is now a luckless war of aggression, which the U.S. can never win.
Why is all of this going on? You might wonder. Oil. Huge un-developed oil reserves.
That Islamic government in Khartoum just happens to preside over the largest, and one of the most mineral rich countries on the African continent. Did I say they have lots of oil?
That Islamic government has ports on the Red Sea, and includes the head waters of the Nile River which can provide electricity all over the country. It has rich agricultural potential, and it borders on nine—count them—nine other African nations.
Sudan has the potential of being a bridge between Islamic Arab North Africa and Bantu Black Sub-Saharan Africa. In my book, that makes Sudan, an “enemy” of Western Imperialism, by simple definition.
I am not embarrassed any more to openly question the Save Darfur movement, because it is just the same old anti-Sudan movement, just dressed up in a different coat, a coat of many colors, including well-meaning conservatives, liberals, and even Blacks, all of whom have been duped by someone’s anti-Sudan “Big Lie” which has also proven to be a very profitable hustle.
Read More
For more information:
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Stop the U.S. and Zionist War Against Sudan
By David Rolde
From the Green-Rainbow News and Election Guide 2006
The United States has been waging war against Sudan for the past 15 years, and we need to stop it. Just like with Iraq, the U.S. war against Sudan is a war for oil and a war for Israel. The proposed invasion of Sudan is based on lies. The lie of accusing the government of Sudan of “genocide in Darfur” serves the same function as the lie a few years ago accusing the government of Iraq of “possessing weapons of mass destruction”. The U.S. government, and its allies the Israeli and UK governments, are the real world champion purveyors of genocide and possessors of WMDs.
Sudan, the geographically largest country in Africa and the home of 35 million people, has been devastated by U.S. attacks for the past 15 years. In the early 90s the U.S. government declared Sudan to be a "state sponsor of terrorism" because the government of Sudan does not support Israel. The U.S. government imposed sanctions against Sudan. The U.S. sanctions and trade boycott escalated in severity several times during the 90s and 00s and damaged the Sudanese economy causing immense human suffering. Throughout the 90s the U.S. government armed and funded the SPLA rebels in the south of Sudan in a war against the Sudanese government, and against rival southern groups, in which millions of persons were killed or displaced. Millions of southern refugees fled from the SPLA and now live in Khartoum, the northern capital. The culmination of U.S. support for war in Sudan was the so-called "Sudan Peace Act", signed by George W Bush in 2002, which allocated one hundred million dollars per year to the SPLA.
One notable episode of the US war against Sudan happened in 1998 when the U.S. government of Bill Clinton, with a missile strike, destroyed Sudan's only pharmaceutical plant, the al-Shifa plant near Khartoum. This rendered Sudan unable to produce needed human medications to treat endemic diseases such as malaria and also veterinary medicines needed by Sudan's livestock industry which is a major part of the livelihood of the people of Sudan.
In 2004, during the U.S. presidential election campaign, the U.S. government started leveling false allegations of "genocide" against the Sudanese government in regards to the new civil war in Darfur in the west of Sudan. The U.S. media and pro-imperialist “human rights” organizations (such as Human Rights Watch which is controlled by billionaire George Soros and the Council on Foreign Relations) falsely portrayed the conflict in Darfur as a slaughter of Black Africans by a "White Arab" Sudanese government. In reality it was a civil war among many armed groups, some of which were supported by the US and Israel, fighting over limited resources in an impoverished region. Nearly everyone in Sudan is a Black African. And nearly everyone in Darfur is a Black African Arabic-speaking Muslim. The numbers cited for the “genocide” in Darfur were inflated estimates of how many people might die from famine and disease.
This year the propaganda against Sudan in the United States has intensified again. On April 30, 2006, the U.S. government in conjunction with U.S. Zionist groups, staged a large pro-war rally in Washington DC. U.S. congresspersons, as well as members of the Bush administration, spoke at the rally calling for the war against Sudan to be escalated by sending in an invasion force of U.N., NATO or U.S. troops. Nearly every pro-Israel group in the USA has anti-Sudan "genocide in Darfur" propaganda on the front of their website. In Massachusetts an example of a Zionist group doing pro-war activism is the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) of Greater Boston.
The anti-Sudan rhetoric is no different than the rhetoric that the U.S. government uses against other countries that the United States is attacking. One aim of U.S. attacks against Sudan is to gain or maintain control over Sudan’s natural resources: notably petroleum but also uranium, other minerals, gum arabic, and the Nile River which supplies water to Egypt. China currently has access to oil from Sudan, and the U.S. government wants to cut China off. Destabilizing and impoverishing Sudan serves American and Israeli hegemonic interests to make sure there are no prosperous independent nations in the Middle East and North African regions.
But within the United States the anti-Sudan rhetoric is useful for more than just getting Americans ready for more overt war against Sudan. Anti-Arab and anti-Muslim rhetoric regarding Sudan is part of the general anti-Arab and anti-Muslim propaganda that is used to gain U.S. domestic support for the war in Iraq, continued U.S. support for Israel, and the so-called “war on terror”. Zionist groups in the United States have been purveying anti-Arab propaganda regarding Sudan for many years before the Darfur war, making false claims about “slavery” in Sudan. Slave redemption efforts in Sudan have been shown to be a hoax. Divesting from Sudan is a Zionist anti-Arab counter-proposal to the idea of divesting from Israel. Lies about Arabs divert attention from efforts to end Israeli apartheid in Palestine.
On September 1, 2006, the US rammed a resolution through the UN Security Council calling for tens of thousands of UN troops, ostensibly "peace-keepers" but really an imperialist invasion force, to be sent to Darfur to replace the current smaller US-puppet African Union force. On September 17, Zionists and other pro-war Americans held an anti-Sudan rally in Central Park in New York City. The keynote speaker at the rally was Madeleine Albright, Clinton's Secretary of State, who is infamous for having admitted that the Clinton administration and the UN had killed half a million Iraqi children through the sanctions in the 90s but nevertheless defending the actions against Iraq as worthwhile. Rally attendees were asked to wear blue hats to signify their desire to send "blue helmet" UN troops to invade Sudan. These UN troops would not be "peace-keepers". We can see the likely outcome by looking at Haiti where, in 2004, the US deposed the legitimate government and then sent in a UN occupation force which has terrorized the country and brutalized the Haitian people. When foreign UN soldiers get to Darfur and can't determine which Black Arabic-speaking Muslims are the "bad Arabs" and which are the "good Africans", the UN troops will kill people indiscriminately. The Sudanese people will rightly resist. The situation will escalate. US warmongers will call for sending more troops, including US troops, and bringing the war to Khartoum. It will be a disaster. The US war against Sudan needs to be stopped and reversed now.
Anti-war activists are not working hard enough to stop the US and Zionist war against Sudan. The current threats against Sudan are just as serious as the threats against Iran. Anti-war activists should be focusing more effort to stop the war against Sudan and to work against US imperialism in Africa in general - the current war against Sudan is just one manifestation of centuries of European colonialism and neo-colonialism in Sudan and Africa. The situation for the people of Sudan will improve once foreign intervention in Sudan stops.
http://bazabaza.blogspot.com/2006/09/all-sudan-links-all.html
.
By David Rolde
From the Green-Rainbow News and Election Guide 2006
The United States has been waging war against Sudan for the past 15 years, and we need to stop it. Just like with Iraq, the U.S. war against Sudan is a war for oil and a war for Israel. The proposed invasion of Sudan is based on lies. The lie of accusing the government of Sudan of “genocide in Darfur” serves the same function as the lie a few years ago accusing the government of Iraq of “possessing weapons of mass destruction”. The U.S. government, and its allies the Israeli and UK governments, are the real world champion purveyors of genocide and possessors of WMDs.
Sudan, the geographically largest country in Africa and the home of 35 million people, has been devastated by U.S. attacks for the past 15 years. In the early 90s the U.S. government declared Sudan to be a "state sponsor of terrorism" because the government of Sudan does not support Israel. The U.S. government imposed sanctions against Sudan. The U.S. sanctions and trade boycott escalated in severity several times during the 90s and 00s and damaged the Sudanese economy causing immense human suffering. Throughout the 90s the U.S. government armed and funded the SPLA rebels in the south of Sudan in a war against the Sudanese government, and against rival southern groups, in which millions of persons were killed or displaced. Millions of southern refugees fled from the SPLA and now live in Khartoum, the northern capital. The culmination of U.S. support for war in Sudan was the so-called "Sudan Peace Act", signed by George W Bush in 2002, which allocated one hundred million dollars per year to the SPLA.
One notable episode of the US war against Sudan happened in 1998 when the U.S. government of Bill Clinton, with a missile strike, destroyed Sudan's only pharmaceutical plant, the al-Shifa plant near Khartoum. This rendered Sudan unable to produce needed human medications to treat endemic diseases such as malaria and also veterinary medicines needed by Sudan's livestock industry which is a major part of the livelihood of the people of Sudan.
In 2004, during the U.S. presidential election campaign, the U.S. government started leveling false allegations of "genocide" against the Sudanese government in regards to the new civil war in Darfur in the west of Sudan. The U.S. media and pro-imperialist “human rights” organizations (such as Human Rights Watch which is controlled by billionaire George Soros and the Council on Foreign Relations) falsely portrayed the conflict in Darfur as a slaughter of Black Africans by a "White Arab" Sudanese government. In reality it was a civil war among many armed groups, some of which were supported by the US and Israel, fighting over limited resources in an impoverished region. Nearly everyone in Sudan is a Black African. And nearly everyone in Darfur is a Black African Arabic-speaking Muslim. The numbers cited for the “genocide” in Darfur were inflated estimates of how many people might die from famine and disease.
This year the propaganda against Sudan in the United States has intensified again. On April 30, 2006, the U.S. government in conjunction with U.S. Zionist groups, staged a large pro-war rally in Washington DC. U.S. congresspersons, as well as members of the Bush administration, spoke at the rally calling for the war against Sudan to be escalated by sending in an invasion force of U.N., NATO or U.S. troops. Nearly every pro-Israel group in the USA has anti-Sudan "genocide in Darfur" propaganda on the front of their website. In Massachusetts an example of a Zionist group doing pro-war activism is the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) of Greater Boston.
The anti-Sudan rhetoric is no different than the rhetoric that the U.S. government uses against other countries that the United States is attacking. One aim of U.S. attacks against Sudan is to gain or maintain control over Sudan’s natural resources: notably petroleum but also uranium, other minerals, gum arabic, and the Nile River which supplies water to Egypt. China currently has access to oil from Sudan, and the U.S. government wants to cut China off. Destabilizing and impoverishing Sudan serves American and Israeli hegemonic interests to make sure there are no prosperous independent nations in the Middle East and North African regions.
But within the United States the anti-Sudan rhetoric is useful for more than just getting Americans ready for more overt war against Sudan. Anti-Arab and anti-Muslim rhetoric regarding Sudan is part of the general anti-Arab and anti-Muslim propaganda that is used to gain U.S. domestic support for the war in Iraq, continued U.S. support for Israel, and the so-called “war on terror”. Zionist groups in the United States have been purveying anti-Arab propaganda regarding Sudan for many years before the Darfur war, making false claims about “slavery” in Sudan. Slave redemption efforts in Sudan have been shown to be a hoax. Divesting from Sudan is a Zionist anti-Arab counter-proposal to the idea of divesting from Israel. Lies about Arabs divert attention from efforts to end Israeli apartheid in Palestine.
On September 1, 2006, the US rammed a resolution through the UN Security Council calling for tens of thousands of UN troops, ostensibly "peace-keepers" but really an imperialist invasion force, to be sent to Darfur to replace the current smaller US-puppet African Union force. On September 17, Zionists and other pro-war Americans held an anti-Sudan rally in Central Park in New York City. The keynote speaker at the rally was Madeleine Albright, Clinton's Secretary of State, who is infamous for having admitted that the Clinton administration and the UN had killed half a million Iraqi children through the sanctions in the 90s but nevertheless defending the actions against Iraq as worthwhile. Rally attendees were asked to wear blue hats to signify their desire to send "blue helmet" UN troops to invade Sudan. These UN troops would not be "peace-keepers". We can see the likely outcome by looking at Haiti where, in 2004, the US deposed the legitimate government and then sent in a UN occupation force which has terrorized the country and brutalized the Haitian people. When foreign UN soldiers get to Darfur and can't determine which Black Arabic-speaking Muslims are the "bad Arabs" and which are the "good Africans", the UN troops will kill people indiscriminately. The Sudanese people will rightly resist. The situation will escalate. US warmongers will call for sending more troops, including US troops, and bringing the war to Khartoum. It will be a disaster. The US war against Sudan needs to be stopped and reversed now.
Anti-war activists are not working hard enough to stop the US and Zionist war against Sudan. The current threats against Sudan are just as serious as the threats against Iran. Anti-war activists should be focusing more effort to stop the war against Sudan and to work against US imperialism in Africa in general - the current war against Sudan is just one manifestation of centuries of European colonialism and neo-colonialism in Sudan and Africa. The situation for the people of Sudan will improve once foreign intervention in Sudan stops.
http://bazabaza.blogspot.com/2006/09/all-sudan-links-all.html
.
For more information:
http://bazabaza.blogspot.com/2006/09/all-s...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network