 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
kondorong
Gambia
4380 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Jul 2008 : 17:29:46
|
Ther tragedy of Sudan is the tragedy of the effects of colonialism. Sundan is 25% the size of the United States and rich in oil.
Sudan, ruled Egypt for centuries even before the current Pharoahs you hear. That era in Egyptian history was called the era of the "Black Pharoahs". Like any empire, they rise and fall and so were the Black Pharoah's. The idea of religion and worship was brought to Egypt by these people. The Pyramids were developed from the sand mounds of the graves of these Balack Pharoahs. Infact, the Egyptian Pharoahs used to travel south for Coronation( Sudan) until it was changed to the area we now know as Valley of Kings in Egypt.
Lets dissect how the Arab influence came in Sudan. Its directly related to the Suez Canal. When Egypt refused acess for European ships, cargo was going around the Cape of Good Hope (Cape Town) to the far East. It almost led to a war. As a compromise, Egypt was handed adminstration of the Sudan for giving acess to dig the Suez canal.
They are not indegenous to the land called Sudan and never were. Its in recognititon of the rise of Black Power in the region that Senegal and Mali formed a Union after indepence and named themselves the union of Sudan.But you see, i studied Egyptian and Sudanes History for two years in High School, but the text books never mentioned the Black Pharoah's.
The same tragedy has played itself in West Africa in a country called Liberia. Since 1821, no indegenous African had ever led that country until the current sitting President. The rights of indegenes must be protected in every part of the world. The Liberian civil War was largely a protest for recognition. Their Constitition very much ignored local conditions. Liberian political life and adminstrion is a copy of the United States. The presidency is called the Executive Mansion which was the original name of the seat of the Presidency in the U.S before it became the White House.They have a Senate, Congress and the only country to impeach a sitting President in Africa. Monrovia was named after james Monroe, the then sitting U.S. President.
The Africans who have become vicims of genocide in Sudan are mainly the Nuba Tribe, the very tribe that ruled Egypt for centuries. Out of this are the Janjawee, a mixed breed between arabs and africans. They enjoy the same priviledges as the "colored" did in South Africa and Namibia.
Like Mandela once said at a peace conference durimg negotiations for racial equality "... that even an illegitimate government has certain morale standards to uphold...." That speech, marked the beginning of the end of De Klarke.
A government MUST serve the interest of its people. To kill and maim just to stay in power is a disaster. But you see, international politics is a complex web and full of irony. Whilst Britain was against sanctions against apartheid in S/Africa, its ironical that Mandela celebrated his birthday in London and i believe hosted by the monarchy.
Home grown capacity in Africa is the only menas for change. Outside help will never come. Until then, there will be many more Dafurs, and Liberia and Sierra Leone. The same genocide happened in Europe and the world said " We never Knew". History always repeats itself. |
“When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always.” |
 |
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jul 2008 : 10:21:50
|
I still believe whether practical or not, that these brutal African leaders should not be left alone. I think they should be threaten with arrest and imprisonment for dehumanizing their own people who pays their salaries and protect their families at the expense of the people.
These are ruthless leaders who have the gots to live a lavish life style while ophans are dying of hunger, starvation and preventable diseases.
I am quite confident that the Sudanese President has been shaken and he is going to think twice before he continue to scavenge on his peoples' flesh. He is now out on a public campaign claiming to be representing the interest of the people. Yah right? after slaughtering thousands of natives, now you claim to represent them.
Since our own leaders cannot stand to protect us, we might as well get help from the world body. Where is Charles Taylor my friends? He deserve to be no where but behind bars.
When you humiliate your people in the name of loving your country as jammeh does, you deserve a day in court and behind bars.
Thanks for weighing in... |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
toubab1020
12311 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jul 2008 : 13:32:27
|
Well said Dbaldeh.
You have opened the flood gates now for some of the more "outspoken" members of bantaba,I don't know where they have been for the past couple of days, but they will return just watch and see. |
"Simple is good" & I strongly dislike politics. You cannot defend the indefensible.
|
Edited by - toubab1020 on 26 Jul 2008 13:35:50 |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2008 : 06:26:44
|
dbaldeh
In ideal world, there should be international organizations taking actions people like Sudan. However, when these international organizations only take action selectively, based on western agenda/interests, the action became a part of a tool of new-imperialism. See, iraq action, israel no action, sudan action, rwanda no action, iran action, israel no action. no?
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2008 : 10:53:07
|
Turk, you are absolutely right. I still think some action is better than no action. There are certain conflicts that are very hard to justify one way or the other, but some of them like that of Sudan or Rwanda inaction in itself becomes the genocide.
When leaders brutalize their own people that they seek to protect to the level of killing them in mass numbers, then the world cannot stand by and watch. The African conflicts are very much different than other parts of the world in that the people are poorer and much more supressed.
I read somewhere that the current UN secretary General is proposing the creation of an African Human Rights Commission. This is a welcome idea and hopefully with concentration on African conflicts this will prevent many leaders from going brutal route.
As for the Iraq conflict it cannot be justified in any way, but if you look at what Saddam Hussein was engage in threatening his neigbors, seeking to acquire nuclear arms and flat out disobeying the international community, one can only be relieved that he is gone. Was it justified to remove him by force? I don't think so because he was basically contained by the UN.
On the other hand, if you look at nuckle heads like Iran's President Amadinajad, you can hardly see anything positive about him. Every nation and people have a right to exist, Israel is doing gross human rights violation against its neighbors but at the same time it is threaten by the same neighbors. They should learn to recognize and live side by side. Easier said than done, but that is the only solution.
More on this topic....
Thanks for a civil debate |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2008 : 13:42:34
|
'Justice for all' is the fundamental base for law. I think the situation of 'selective' action taking, while you still think there are some benefits, has still more harm to world justice than the benefits. Because, it violates the fundamental base of law. Countries lose confidence in the organizations such as UN, ICC. For example, in my opinion, not taking any action against US, Israel for their crimes, while lesser comparable crime of Sudan is being punished will destroy the credibility of the international organizations. So once you lose this credibility, if the judge is corrupt, you lose more than the benefits. It seems to me, a poor boy is being punished for petty crime, while the rich boy is getting away for rape.
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2008 : 21:39:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by turk
'Justice for all' is the fundamental base for law. I think the situation of 'selective' action taking, while you still think there are some benefits, has still more harm to world justice than the benefits. Because, it violates the fundamental base of law. Countries lose confidence in the organizations such as UN, ICC. For example, in my opinion, not taking any action against US, Israel for their crimes, while lesser comparable crime of Sudan is being punished will destroy the credibility of the international organizations. So once you lose this credibility, if the judge is corrupt, you lose more than the benefits. It seems to me, a poor boy is being punished for petty crime, while the rich boy is getting away for rape.
Turk, you know administering international law and justice is much more complicated that you put it. Countries like your own UK and US uses gray areas of the law in running their foreign policies and in the process violate tons of human rights with an almost impossible scenario to prosecute them and their soldiers.
You know for sure, when leaders in U.S and UK or any western country commits serious crimes against their own people, they often get prosecuted like what is happening to the Israeli Prime Minister and possible impeachment of George Bush or Blair.
These western leaders know very well not to commit such crimes like genocide or mass murder if you may because the law of the land do not allow it and legislative branches will conduct investigations if need be.
Now a completely different scenario when it comes to African countries and other developing nations. Simply because leaders of such nations control all branches of government and there is no accountability whatsoever, they can commit any crime and get away with it.
The question now becomes, how do you protect the ordinary citizens against such brutal leaders if there is no system in place to prevent such abuses? How do you hold such leaders accountable for preying on the weakness of their starving people?
Do you see the paralel or difference if you may where there is need for the international body UN to intervene and try to protect the local people? Can you see the amount of deterrent such policies like prosecuting cruel leaders make sense to the defenseless?
This is the basis for my arguement. We are better to have not perfect laws than perfect laws under such circumstances. The question of equal justice between the haves and the have nots can be debated for good. This is why I embraced the U.N call to the arrest of Sudanese President. When leaders allow systems of checks and balances to be instituted, then we will advocate self reliance when it comes to international justice. I hope I make sense...
Thanks for reading |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
kaanibaa
United Kingdom
1169 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2008 : 21:53:50
|
| Good argument DBaldeh, anything less than positive action as suggested by you against tyranny leaves the weak unprotected civilians at the mercy of their torturers ,to wit the unscrupulous rulers.The AU has become a toothless bulldog just yapping useless rhetoric and bearing no fruitful results for the continent and its people.Bravo for the comments |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2008 : 22:29:03
|
dbeldah
quote:
This is why I embraced the U.N call to the arrest of Sudanese President
Why are you so certain that he commited the crime? Why we all certain israel commits the crime but nothing happens? Do you think rich man have the best lawyer to represent the case than poor man who does not have the lawyer? The control of media or news agencies, do you think ordinary person get the truth from the news agencies? |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 01 Aug 2008 : 19:40:16
|
Turk, don't argue for the sake of it. The whole reason for bringing someone to justice is to proof that they committed the crimes. Evidence can be presented in court and it is upto the defender to proof he is innocent.
One thing I know for sure, whatever attrocities committed in Sudan were done in his watch. The buck stops with him.
The Israeli arguement goes back to my previous points, they have contended that they are dealing with a group that hates them and want to eliminate them. Is their uneven handed retarliation against the Palestinians justified, NO! but how do you defend people who go around blowing other people up?
To compare the Israeli situation to some genocides committed in Africa is to ignore the extend to which the African people have suffered. If no body cares we do, and we want the African vulnerable population to be protected.
Off course the rich man have better lawyers than the poor man and that is why the world body need to pay for the representation of the poor man. That is exactly what we are advocating here. Right? |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
