Take sorghum, a staple of the Sudanese diet, typically eaten in flat, spongy bread. Last year, the United States government, as part of its response to the emergency in Darfur, shipped in 283,000 tons of sorghum, at high cost, from as far away as Houston. Oddly enough, that is about the same amount that Sudan exported, according to United Nations officials.
Darfur Withers as Sudan Sells a Food Bonanza
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN
ED DAMER, Sudan — Even as it receives a billion pounds of free food from international donors, Sudan is growing and selling vast quantities of its own crops to other countries, capitalizing on high global food prices at a time when millions of people in its war-riddled region of Darfur barely have enough to eat.
Here in the bone-dry desert, where desiccated donkey carcasses line the road, huge green fields suddenly materialize. Beans. Wheat. Sorghum. Melons. Peanuts. Pumpkins. Eggplant. It is all grown here, part of an ambitious government plan for Sudanese self-sufficiency, creating giant mechanized farms that rise out of the sand like mirages.
But how much of this bonanza is getting back to the hungry Sudanese, like the 2.5 million driven into camps in Darfur? And why is a country that exports so many of its own crops receiving more free food than anywhere else in the world, especially when the Sudanese government is blamed for creating the crisis in the first place?
African countries that rely on donated food usually cannot produce enough on their own. Somalia, Ethiopia, Niger and Zimbabwe are all recent examples of how war, natural disasters or gross mismanagement can cut deep into food production, pushing millions of people to the brink of starvation.
But here in Sudan, there seem to be plenty of calories to go around. The country is already growing wheat for Saudi Arabia, sorghum for camels in the United Arab Emirates and vine-ripened tomatoes for the Jordanian Army. Now the government is plowing $5 billion into new agribusiness projects, many of them to produce food for export.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
It's not easy to finance
It's not easy to finance genocide or mass murder. Mao and the Chinese Communist government sold rice and other food staples to the Soviet Union and other countries while millions of Chinese peasants starved to death. Mao argued that it weeded out the weaklings among the masses.
Follow the money
There is oil in Southern Sudan, for that matter there is vast mineral deposits of every kind in Zimbabwe. Are these African nations poor? Not in the least bit? Ghandi said that poverty is a form of violence. Keep non-white people embroiled in civil wars and ravaged with either man-made or easily curable diseases, and they will be in perpetual turmoil. With people fighting resource wars all over the planet, why would these regions be any different. You gave western govermnents trying to vie for Zimbabwe's resources. Same thing with the Mid-east.
Truth is stranger than fiction. Do people really think that these people really don't want to be productive? I don't buy it. Folks in this part of the world want to make the black pathology argument extend to these African nations. Sorry not buying it. Many people are to blame for these problems, even the black/brown enablers and buffers that keep up the illusion of fairness. The people who are most to blame and are truly responsible, are ALL White Supremacists. China is helping Zimbabwe to work the land that the forcibly removed from the descendants of colonists. They've sent over hundreds of tractors, etc. When the relatively small number of commercial white farmers where forcibly removed from "their" land which their acquired through dubious means, it is met with a large outcry of dictator! dictator! Sound familiar? This coincides with Mugabe supposedly sinking the once awesome economy. It seems like the true masters of deceit and terror the White Supreme-acists, were able to destroy the Zimbabwe currency and economy, without firing a single shot, through sanctions, etc. There are so many other things that nobody knows about that are occuring. Shipping lanes are cut off, sabotage, etc. That's why we really need justice at every corner of this globe.
By design
You see kids in African nations and in the Middle East holding AK-47s but don't have shoes on their feet. This is all by design.
You see kids in African
I'm always amazed by how that happens in places where that AK-47 represents like a year's wages.
The people who are most to
"The people who are most to blame and are truly responsible, are ALL White Supremacists."
I don't understand how white supremacists are responsible for the genocide in Darfur. Please explain.
Responsibility
I'll do the best I can to explain this logically. White Supreme-acists don't belong to countries, countries belong to White Supreme-acists. They control all of the economic institutions including the IMF the World Bank etc. I know this isn't popular to say, but collectively and that's the key. White people are the smartest people on the planet. The other white people don't have to be as smart because they are on a train so to speak. The caveat is that white people *collectively* are not wise. There is a big difference. They are going to see this White Supreme-acy thing out all over the world until the wheels fall of, it's like an addiction. But they could change their mind. Or they could resort to violence.
You've got to check out this article on Zimbabwe:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9707
The reason that the White Supremacists are to blame is because they have the most power. They could do something about Sudan. Which is why I say that Bashir is not blameless. There is a difference between blame and responsibility. If a child steals a lollipop from a store he is to blame, but the mother and father are responsible for the child. Get my drift?
But he is powerless in relationship to the White Supreme-acists. They will intervene when it is in their interest. Ask yourself who is it who determines who can have nuclear weapons or not? Who determines for the rest of the world who are dictators? Who can most brazenly disregard the U.N.?
Ultimately I think that The West will go to war with China or Russia, or both. I'll link to that Zimbabwe story I was writing about how The U.S. and Britain are demonizing Mugabe because he has probably the most mineral rich land in the world, but he and China choose to go outside of the auspices of the World Bank and IMF. The idea that Africa is in massive debt is ludicrous. If the White Supreme-acists were wise, they would see the tremendous growth opportunity that would come with a symbiotic trade relationship with Sub-Saharan African nations as China is doing but that would give African nations power and eventually eliminate White Supreme-acy. White Supreme-acy WILL go out of business. You could say that it's going out of business right now. The good news is nations like China are getting smarter, other nations have disagreements about things like Russia, where many of the people aren't white. The goal here is to speed the process up. Bring justice a little sooner.
It's easy to forget
It's easy to forget sometimes that the White Supreme-acists overthrew an oil rich nation and have been occupying it for years. I'm sometimes taken aback by all of the white righteous indignation. Many have said that what was done to the Iraqis was immoral. What's moral in a system of White Supreme-acy?
Are you of the opinion that
Are you of the opinion that it is white supremacists who are directing the attacks on the people of Darfur?
Yes
Yes, I believe they have something to do with it. We know that they provide arms to these nations. They don't mind people of a nation killing themselves everyday. Remember it's about a value system. They value power over anything else, and Darfur has oil. You should check out that link in my response to P6, it's very informative. It's about the resources in Africa, not about the people. It's not about killing the non-white people, maybe leaving them malnourished and disease stricken. You can't have a system of White Supreme-acy without non-white people.
Providing arms to people is
Providing arms to people is not even remotely close to directing them to go out and kill people. The government of Sudan and its agents are killing people. It doesn't matter who they are buying the guns from does it?
Actually it does matter
Actually it matter. These Western nations prop up dictators to begin with. And they could stop doing it. The point is if the West wanted Bashir dead or apprehended it would be easy to do. It's a shame that he isn't toppled if that's what it takes.
It has been said that those with the ability to change this situation don't have the will. Those will the will do not have the ability. The only thing lacking is will. And it's a stain on humanity. There is a cure for polio, malaria and other diseases, the only thing lacking is will. I'd be for some form of population control like China, if I knew that the people that needed the most help in this part of the world were getting it. Every church in America should be fully involved. The people suffering are black Christians. Which brings in race. There are always strings attached to their aid. Bashir himself as you probably know is Arab hybrid Arab, he probably foolishly thinks he's superior. You gotta start with the biggest problem which is race before moving on to all of the others. Because race affects whose going to have clean water to drink, etc.
Yes, it does matter. You are
Yes, it does matter. You are right. The question is, however, whether the selling of guns to the Sudanese government is the efficient or sufficient cause of the killing of people in Darfur. I would argue that it is the former. We're not going to go much further in this discussion if you don't place most of the responsibility on the Sudanese government. The people who are selling them the guns are indifferent to the plight of those who are killed but that's not quite the same as what the Sudanese government is doing. They are not acting as proxies for the Chinese or white supremacists.
My approach is simple and, perhaps, more difficult to implement. The killing, raping and pillaging against the people in Darfur needs to stop ASAP.
Same stuff, different place
Yes Bashir is to blame but the whole point I'm trying to make here is that there is more than meets the eye.
Below is an excerpt from Keith David Snow of blackagendareport.com about what is going on in Congo which borders Sudan to the south.
"Conze's behavior epitomizes white supremacy masked by "humanitarianism" and "peacekeeping" in Africa. The "peacekeeping" operations of MONUC, like the "humanitarian" or misery industry, are merely well-cloaked disguises for more predatory capitalism with the added insidiousness of a supposed and self-righteous "higher moral purpose" that allows the exploiters in the West to celebrate our "goodness" and our "humanity" and to claim that our hands are clean and, of course, that we care. But this is big business and nothing else. To question such things are themselves written off as complete heresy, and that is why MONUC does not take any notice of such writings as this one: good journalists produce tripe for Harper's, they don't point the finger at modern day conquistadors and attach blame to the names of U.N. officials, corporate executives, or high society philanthropists and diamond tycoons."
From the mouth of the Nile in the Northern part Africa all the way down to South Africa is something called the Great Rift Valley. It is home to the richest mineral deposits on earth. From diamonds, platinum, copper, nickel even coal-bed methane gas, and last but not least uranium reserves even?
If you haven't already check out this article you should
it's very detailed and informative: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9707