The ideology of radical Islam will undoubtedly be promoted once Bashir turns Sudan into a state based solely on Sharia law. To make matters worse, it is growing increasingly close to Iran and has declared the beginning of a nuclear program. Government agents have reportedly contacted remnants of the Abdul-Qadeer Khan nuclear black market network and the completion of a nuclear reactor is set for 2020. In 2006, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was in Khartoum when he said that Iran would share its nuclear technology with Islamic countries.
The de-listing of Sudan sends the wrong signal to the South Sudanese, the victims of the regime’s oppression and the protestors currently demanding the resignation of President Bashir. He has been indicted by the International Criminal Court on genocide charges and is one of the biggest mass murders alive. His government is already threatening South Sudan, saying that war will follow if it harbors rebel forces from Darfur or if the tribes in the oil-rich Abyei Province unilaterally declare that they’ll unite with the South. The regime has also been accused of being behind a militia in the south that massacred over 200 people in the South this month.
The announcement will infuriate the protestors in Sudan that have become active since the overthrow of Tunisian President Ben Ali. There have been scattered protests, sometimes numbering hundreds, and dozens of demonstrators have been arrested and even more assaulted. The regime has reacted with swift brutality, including the deployment of members of Bashir’s political party carrying knives to attack students on campuses. The protestors are still trying to organize online with one group having over 16,000 members and a rallying call of, “Our brothers in Tunisia did it and so did our brothers in Egypt. It is about time for us.” The regime has responded by creating an “Electronic Jihad” unit to shut down the opposition’s websites and block Internet access for its enemies.
The Bashir regime seems particularly concerned about female activists, having arrested a group of them on February 10, including the daughter of former Prime Minister Sadeq al-Mahdi, only to release them shortly after. They were dropped off in different areas of Khartoum, indicating the regime was worried about a gathering forming yet fearful of detaining them for a prolonged period. On February 13, two dozen women demonstrated outside the headquarters for the security service to demand the release of political prisoners. At the same time, a group of journalists tried to hold a protest over the arrests of reporters but were stopped. Three journalists were arrested for trying to cover the protests.
The removal of Sudan as a State Sponsor of Terrorism will be a slap in the face to all those who suffered from Bashir’s evil, from the innocents massacred in Darfur to those threatened by the terrorists he coddles to the protestors that have been beaten and jailed.
At first I thought the picture in the article was our president, but I was wrong.
At first I thought our enemy was the conciousness of Islam, but I was wrong.
So, where are we going with this?
New World Order with Islam as our religion?
Hey, What's going on here???
I'm sure the media(being utterly fair and objective when it reports on Obama) will no doubt have headline stories on what a mistake Obama is making with respect to the Sudan. Katie Couric, ABC, MSNBC, and CNN I'm sure will all be reporting on this in depth.
“For those who meet all of their obligations, there is a path to greater prosperity and normal relations with the United States, including examining Sudan’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism,” President Obama said.
Yep, just in time for Southern Sudan to vote to break away and become a Christian State, he is rewarding them with normal relations. Never mind that he granted them a "waiver" for the use of Children Soldiers! Why would such a waiver be granted to anyone? Yet our President did just that. So much for the man who chocked up over the death of a 10 year old victim of a shooting in AZ. He proves he really cares for children with this waiver! Do you think he doubts if these people would hestate to use their children against the infidels of South Sudan? He knows exactly what he is doing and it is EVIL.
For secession to work in Sudan it must happen here, the South will rise again! I envision a secessionist/sovereignty movement in the US where hundreds of sovereign regions spring up. This will facilitate secessionist movements throughout the whole world.
Why do I have the feeling that taking Sudan off the terrorist sponsors list isn't a good idea?
Also for PhilDru,the reason for the Civil War in the first place was slavery,not states rights. You might want to read up a little,okay?
Oh okay, let's give Sudan a chance. Reminds me of a joke I once heard.
It goes like this.
Two men get captured by some uncivilized native group.
The chief says to the men "Roo Roo or death!"
So the first man says "Roo Roo." Then the whole tribe proceedes to rape him.
Then the chief says to the second man. "Choose Roo Roo or Death!"
So the 2nd man says Death!
The members of the tribe are sad and say "Awwww" in hearing the news.
So the chief (being sensitive to the wishes of his people) says to the captive,
"Okay death!"
The 2nd man is very relieved and says "thank you, thank you!"
Then the chief says,
"But first Roo Roo!"
Seriously folks, this administration is a joke.
Sorry, Ghostwriter, it was state rights and the desire of the South to not be overrun by the industrialised (and richer) North. Only when the Civil War was beginning to become unpopular in the North, Lincoln moved the emphasis (finally) to the question of slavery in order that he continue to maintain the momentum of preventing secession by the South. Of course, the South never stood a chance against the industrial-military complex which had already been developed by the North, but it was basically the last hurrah of the old "Gentlemenly" social order before the rise of the "Elites" – more accuratly descibed as a "Clique".
Sorry,TechOps but you're wrong there. There were an incredible amount of concern about slavery before the Civil War even began. You seem to overlook the Abolitionist movement in this country and concerns about the spread of slavery. Writings by a diverse group of people from Fredrick Douglass to Harriet Beecher Stowe testify to the inhumanity of slavery,a thing which you seem to overlook. Slavery was but one cause of the Civil War. Unfortunately,the South was never going to abolish it voluntarily so the war happened.
TechOps,I still think that you and PhilDru need to read up on your history a little bit more before making statements like this,ok?
"Slavery was but one cause of the Civil War. Unfortunately,the South was never going to abolish it voluntarily so the war happened. "
Not contradictory at all.
There might have been widspread concerns over serfdom but honest Abe mererly exploited it for political capital, it wasn´t among the reasons he nor the Confederacy got engaged in that war in the first place.
The US "praised" Sudan for cooperating with the investigation into the murder of two US Embassy workers…
Strange…the murderers were duly imprisoned: then they escaped, all four of them, never to be heard of again.
This kind of "cooperation" has flies on it.
Imagine if the Obama and US State Department put the same intensity behind asking the Sudanese leadership to stand down the same way the did with Mubarak.
The reason they didn't is because they don't consider the Sudanese government to be an enemy or evil or stained by the sin of imperialism the way they do about traditional American allies like Israel or England. On the contrary the Sudanese government is perfectly moral and decent according to their defective moral compass.
I am not understanding that what's going on here…………