Reply
Fri 28 Apr, 2006 11:29 am
By ANDREW MIGA, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Five Congress members were willingly arrested and led away from the Sudanese Embassy in plastic handcuffs Friday in protest of the Sudanese government's role in atrocities in the Darfur region.
"The slaughter of the people of Darfur must end," Rep. Tom Lantos (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., a Holocaust survivor who founded the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, said from the embassy steps before his arrest.
Four other Democratic Congress members ?- James McGovern and John Olver of Massachusetts, Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and Jim Moran of Virginia ?- were among 11 protesters arrested on charges of disorderly conduct and unlawful assembly, a misdemeanor subject to a fine.
"We must hold the Sudanese government accountable for the attacks they have supported on their own citizens in Darfur," Olver said.
Dozens of demonstrators carried signs, some reading "Stop the slaughter" and "Women of Darfur suffer multiple gang rapes," in front of the embassy Friday morning.
The protesters cheered as the Congress members and others were cuffed, hands behind their backs, with plastic ties and quietly led to a white police van by U.S. Secret Service uniformed officers.
The arrests were expected. Lantos' office issued a news release about them in advance.
The protesters called on the Sudanese government to accept a U.N. peacekeeping force in Darfur and allow humanitarian relief organizations full access to victims. The three-year-old conflict between rebels and government-backed militias has left at least 180,000 people dead, mostly from war-related hunger and disease, and some 2 million homeless.
President Bush on Friday renewed his call for a stronger international presence in Darfur.
"The message to the Sudanese government is: We're very serious about getting this problem solved," Bush said at the White House. "We don't like it when we see women raped and brutalized. And we expect there to be a full effort by the government to protect human life and human condition."
The United States has authorized more than $300 million for victims of the violence and to support peace talks.
Rallies against the violence in Darfur are planned in more than a dozen U.S. cities this weekend, including on Washington's National Mall on Sunday.
What was it they did wrong?
Two were from MA. They were detained for, for, what was it.... for some sort of conduct issue.
Totally symbolic, but imo not a complete waste of time.
The Darfur disaster is the latest in the long list of UN failures to act when faced with undeniable evil.
Shall the US preemptively take care of the situation, as we did in the Balkans, Haiti, and Iraq? Can we look forward to protests or is this a cool war?
Good for them for doing what they can to attract attention to the issue
You think it's good for lawmakers to draw attention to an issue by breaking the law?
Tico, certainly it's good. All kinds of people got busted protesting apartheid in S. Africa and calling for Mandela's release from prison. Very effective campaign.
blueflame1 wrote:Tico, certainly it's good. All kinds of people got busted protesting apartheid in S. Africa and calling for Mandela's release from prison. Very effective campaign.
Read my prior post and focus on the word "lawmakers." Same answer, I presume?
Ticomaya wrote:You think it's good for lawmakers to draw attention to an issue by breaking the law?
If need be, yep. We're talking about an ongoing genocide here, and nothing else seems to have succeeded.. "Unlawful assembly" in front of the Sudanese embassy doesnt seems too exaggerated a step to take, in face of apathy vis-a-vis ongoing mass slaughter. Kudos to 'em.
Tico, yeah same answer. Lawmakers did get arrested protesting against apartheid in the 80s.
paull wrote:Shall the US preemptively take care of the situation, as we did in the Balkans, Haiti, and Iraq?
Wouldn't that require time-travel, seeing as the atrocities are happening now?
Ticomaya wrote:You think it's good for lawmakers to draw attention to an issue by breaking the law?
What is worse, is WHERE in the Oath of Office that these US CONGRESSPEOPLE TAKE, does it say that US LAWMAKERS get involved in other nations internal affairs, which are illegal IN THAT NATION?
Obviously he meant preempt the UN.
And would the left applaud the introduction of American Troops in Darfur?
After all, we must stop the genocide? We are only neglecting them because they are Blacks--clear cut racism.
The left will not point out that the murderous genocide is being perpetrated by the Muslim groups in that country. The same kind of fanatic killers found in Iraq, Iran and Palestine.
I thought the US wasn't the world police? What are all the other countries of the world doing about Darfur?
We have our hands full at the moment, it would be nice to see Sweden or Denmark, or Germany or France or someone to take the matter into their own hands and do something about besides complain about the US not doing something.
McGentrix-I am sure that you realize that the left would love to smear the administration for doing nothing to prevent the "genocide" in Darfur, thus proving that the administration is not disposed to aid people of color. Your query about the enlightened countries of Sweden, Denmark, France or Germany becoming involved falls on deaf ears. Such aid would indeed help the people in Darfur but would upset the left's smear campaign.
That is why the NY Times will not call on the Euro block for help!!!
BernardR wrote:And would the left applaud the introduction of American Troops in Darfur?
I dont know about "the left", but I would - if part of a UN mission.
BernardR wrote:The left will not point out that the murderous genocide is being perpetrated by the Muslim groups in that country.
What are you on about here? Everyone know the Sudanese regime is Muslim - I've never seen anyone writing about Darfur trying to obscure that fact.
McGentrix wrote:I thought the US wasn't the world police? What are all the other countries of the world doing about Darfur?
Too ****ing little - especially if we're talking the mighty & the powerful (at least the African Union has done something, if also too little).
IMO tho, that makes them
as guilty of inaction in the face of genocide as the US - and vice versa. What's the point of pointing fingers at each other when a people is being murdered? One party's apathy does nothing to defend another's.
But nimh ... how can the US take military action without UN approval?
Ticomaya wrote:But nimh ... how can the US take military action without UN approval?
It all depends upon whether or not the CIA tells George about all the oil in Dafur.
Joe(oh, that's different)Nation
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace