Monday, January 31, 2005


Instapundit is noting that the UN report on the ethnic cleansing in Darfur, Sudan does not use the word "genocide". Why? The answer lies in the UN Convention on Genocide. The UN defines Genocide as:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Genocide itself is crime, but conspiracy, incitement, and complicity are also crimes which require punishment.
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.
It is the "shall" that matters here. It means the UN is required to act. Despite the fact that (a), (b), and (e) have been performed in Darfur, you won't see the word genocide used because that would require the world community to do get off their asses and do something about it.

Now we can blame this all on the UN, but keep in mind the US sits on the Security Council and can call this genocide just as much as any other nation. But we haven't done it, mostly because we don't have the resources to do that and fight the WoT.

For more on this look here. My apologies to The Shadow of the Olive Tree, I trackbacked without a link going his way.


job opportunitya said...

Captivating blog. I love surfing the web for the
type of blogs that you do. It had me on the edge of my
seat and I kept going back to again and again!
Come as you are and look at my plastic surgery illinois blog.

Wi Wisconsin House Cleaning said...

Wondrous blog. Your site was very pleasing and I
will go back again! I like surfing the net for blogs
as good as yours.
Look into my ms mississippi house cleaning blog.