12 year old Darfur rape victimIt all depends on whom you talk to.
The Sudan has agreed to accept UN 'help' in Darfur..but it all depends on what `help' means.
Now,on the one hand, Kofi Annan was preening himself about a compromise solution
he and the Sudan came up for the ongoing genocide in Darfur that involved a hybrid UN-AU (African Union) force, to protect Darfur's spopulation and resolve the deadlock over Darfur caused by the Chinese and Soviets.
But, not so fast.
President Omar al-Bashir told state TV: "The government of Sudan welcomes all financial, material, logistic or technical assistance from the UN in order to strengthen the AU mission in Darfur."
And Sudans' Foreign Minister Lam Akol specified that "there should be no talk about a mixed force" and there would be no UN troops whatsoever!
Meanwhile, Sudanese Defence Minister Abdel Rahim Mohamed Hussein said Darfur would become an "invaders' graveyard" if a UN peacekeeping force was sent there.
Maybe I'm cynical, but it seems like the accord Kofi Annan was so excited about is the typical UN shuffle...some money gets spent, (or stolen), reports gets issued about what's been done or not been done, as it's business as usual.
Meanwhile, the ethnic cleansing of Darfur continues without a letup. And the jihad goes on.
And I'm still wondering - where's all the outrage and protests over this? Where are all the hundreds of TV cameras and network talking heads like there were following the Israel/Lebanon war? Where are the marches?
If Islamic 'values' really are so much higher than the decadent West's,if Arabs really are "the best of peoples" [Qu'ran 3:100], then where's the outcry from CAIR, the MPAC, the Muslim council of Britain?
Why are the usual leftist `protestors' determindedly looking the other way? Is it because China, the Muslim world and Russia are backing the Sudan? If the US suddenly started backing the Sudanese government, would these same protestors come out of the woodwork?
I think we know the answer, unfortunately.
No comments:
Post a Comment