Sha'aban 21, 1425/ October 6, 2004             #97
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERSONAL FROM THE EDITOR:
My heartfelt thanks go out to all those who wrote to me to wish my mother, 
Mahmudah Qureshi, well in her hour of ordeal and suffering. I am thankful 
to Allah for such good friends and such sensitivity and compassion. The 
letters were sweet in the extreme, much better than what I expected.
------------------------------------------------------
THOUGHT OF THE DAY
HAITI IGNORED: 
SUDAN 
TARGETED:
That's how 
Zionist 
Propaganda works.
The death toll has reached 2000 in Haiti. Thousands are homeless. 
The Zionist 
media 
are keeping silent about it although Haiti is in America's backyard.
Instead the 
media 
let loose a barrage of killer propaganda aimed at Sudan. 
[See extensive rebuttal of Sudan propaganda below.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christiane Amanpour on Karzai and 
Afghanistan: 
Trying to Mislead the 
American 
People
NewsNight@CNN.com
Dear Newsnight:
Christiane Amanpour's report from Kabul [October 4] on the forthcoming 
"elections" in Afghanistan was non-factual and misleading. In polite 
language, it can be described as disinformation.
Amanpour talked positively about Hamid Karzai and presented some 
interesting clips from a woman supposedly a candidate for Afghanistan's 
presidency! Such reporting is seriously damaging for Amanpour's credibility.
She should read IMPERIAL HUBRIS by a senior officer in the U.S. 
intelligence community. It might disabuse her of the silly idea that 
the western puppets implanted in Kabul by American military might have 
any relevance to Afghan realities.
Karzai can trust no Afghan and is protected by American security guards. 
The women being inducted into the situation by American game masters have 
absolutely no chance of making the slightest dent in Afghanistan's 
history and culture.
As the author of Imperial Hubris has pointed out, any movement in 
Afghanistan which means anything to the Afghan people will come from 
Islam, 
probably from the resurgent Taliban.
I advise CNN to withdraw Christiane Amanpour from Afghanistan. She is 
wasting CNN's funds on the "made in America" version of Afghanistan she 
presented.
Sincerely
Kaukab Siddique, Ph.D
-------------------------------------------------
Letter
Hathout let the Muslim Community Down 
I too was extremely disappointed in Hathout's "performance."  It was so bad 
that I got distracted by something else and I didn't finish watching it.  
When I lived in Los Angeles, it was the Islamic Center that I went to for 
juma'a when I wanted to hear an impassioned response to some injustice 
going on in the world against Muslims.  Almost every other masjid would 
be completely silent.  I went to my first demonstration for 
Palestine 
back in the 80's (in front of the Federal Building) and it was sponsored 
by the Islamic Center.
That Larry King Live thing was sickening.  I know of Dennis Prager.  
He had (maybe still has) a radio program in L.A.  He is one of the 
staunchest zionist radio talk show hosts in America.  For Hathout to be 
"loved" by that man!  What does it say to be loved by a zionist and to 
have his stamp of approval?   I was also disgusted by his waffling on 
the gay issue.  Why the quibbling masquerading as a concern for privacy?  
Islam is crystal clear on the issue.  Who was he trying to please?  Is he 
planning to run for office?    Hathout really let the community down.
Sis. Karen English
California
---------------------------------------------------
MOST SIGNIFICANT NEWS OF THE DAY:
October 5, 2004. The U.S. vetoed a United Nations' resolution urging 
Israel 
to stop its military incursion in Gaza.
----------------------------
WAR NEWS:
IRAQ:
SAMARRA: The "Victory" that Wasn't
by 
New Trend's 
Mid East 
Media 
Monitor
Over the weekend of October 1 to 3, 2004, U.S. forces entered the city of 
Samarra, north of Baghdad. After a three day assault, the U.S. declared 
victory which is now being proclaimed on every TV screen. Below the 
headlines, the news reports [all American too] tell quite a different 
story.
Headline writing is an art and it seems that the headline writers are 
misleading the American people.
Here are the facts of the Samarra story available in the U.S.'s own 
news reports:
- 
Three thousand U.S. troops with 2,000 Iraqi troops trained by the U.S. 
entered Samarra under cover of air and tank fire. That's a total of 
5,000 troops.
 
- 
Opposed to the U.S. were 200 Iraqi Islamic fighters. That's 5,000 versus 
200.
 
- 
The U.S. military has issued a report that 128 "insurgents" were killed 
in Samarra and 88 captured [which would mean that the entire force was 
wiped out, an impossibility in guerrilla warfare].
 
- 
However 
New York Times 
and 
AFP 
are reporting that the "insurgents" melted away as the 
Americans advanced. There were evidently NO fighters killed.
 
- 
Hospital sources and eyewitnesses in Samarra report that 50 people were 
killed in the U.S. attack and several hundred wounded, ALL CIVILIANS, 
including a few women and children.
 
- 
There were no U.S. losses which indicates that there was NO CONTACT at any point with the
Islamic fighters. The Iraqi losses were evidently ALL owing to bombardment by aircraft and
tanks.
 
=============================
Palestine Analysis
ISRAELI JEWS 
ON THE RAMPAGE in GAZA: 72 People Killed by Jewish tanks and Missiles
Defenseless Palestinians being Mauled by the Dregs of International Jewry
From New Trend's Palestine Periscope
October 6, 2004. For a WHOLE WEEK now the military forces of International 
Jewry's armed wing known as Israel have been hunting Palestinians in Gaza. 
A systematic campaign has been launched by Sharon to kill Palestinian 
leaders, activists and youth. The plan seems to be aimed at creating an 
"Red Indian Reservation" type of Palestine in which secularized servants 
of Israel will be allowed to function after all the Islamic resistance 
has been liquidated and those who support the fighters are reduced to 
extreme poverty and denied the basic facilities of human existence.
[Sharon's offensive, our analysts say, is tied to the elimination of 
Islamic charities worldwide to deny the Palestinian people any outside 
help even in the form of medicine, clean water and books for children. 
The removal of President Saddam Hussain was part of the effort to deny 
the Palestinians any outside help. Meanwhile the Jews of America and 
Europe are pouring endless supplies of funds and weapons into the 
illegitimate and racist entity known as Isael.]
The Palestinians are improvising some pathetically inadequate weaponry in 
the form of "rockets" and "mortars" which are no more than grandified 
fire crackers. They are unable to hit anything with precision and 
usually end up killing one or two Israeli civilians every six months, 
thus providing the Israelis the propaganda material needed to justify 
their ongoing GENOCIDE against the Palestinian people.
The Muslim world is aghast at the atrocities the Jews are committing. 
Most observers agree that the Palestinians should be armed and given 
the chance to kill the Jews at the same rate as the jews are killing them. 
Analysts say that the Jewish armada is blatantly genocidal because the 
Palestinians are unarmed. Most agree that  once the Jews are hit hard and 
a few thousand killed every month, they'll start returning to their 
rat holes in Brooklyn and 
Russia..
NOTICE 
IRAN's 
ROLE: Hizbullah and 
Syria 
have not fired a shot during the week long rampage by Jewish tanks and 
helicopter gun ships in Palestinian towns and refugee camps. The 
Iranians are behaving like the Soviet army on the Vistula [1944-45] 
which waited patiently while the Germans destroyed Polish resistance 
in Warsaw
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAKISTAN
MUSHARRAF PREPARES ARMED FORCES for FINAL BATTLE AGAINST ISLAMISTS
from New Trend's Pakistan representative
October 3, 2004: In preparation for the coming battle against Al-Qaida, 
Taliban and Pakistani mujahideen, General Pervez Musharraf has carried 
out a major reshuffle of top brass in the Pakistani army. He has promoted 
5 major generals to Lt. General and placed them in key cities. These are: 
Lt. General M. Afzal Muzaffar will lead the army units in the key hearland 
city of Multan. Lt. Gen. Syed Athar Ali [sectarian name?] has been appointed 
Corp Commander in the tumultuous city of Karachi. Hamid Rab Nawaz, now 
Lt. General, will be in charge of the city of Quetta where the Taliban 
have significant support. Musharraf's ISI, responsible for important 
victories against Islamists captured and handed over to the U.S., will 
now be led by Musharraf's favorite, Lt. General Ashfaq Pervez. The key 
city of Rawalpindi will be controlled by Lt. General Salahuddin Sitti. 
Newly promoted Lt. General Muhammad Sabir will run the strategic city of 
Gujranwalla. [Source: 
Nawa-i-Waqt 
daily Urdu language paper, usually  reliable.]
------------------------------------------------------------------
PAKISTANI 
MUJAHIDEEN 
ACTIVE IN SOUTH WAZIRISTAN
October 3. Pakistani newspapers report that Pakistani mujahideen attacked 
Pakistani army positions at 13 places in South Waziristan Some of these 
places had been peaceful before this.
The attackers suffered casualties as they fired machine guns and threw 
grenades at the Pakistani troops who replied with artillery and mortars. 
The attackers took their dead with them while the army suffered 18 killed 
and 30 injured. The mujahideen are also trying to stop Pakistani troop 
convoys bringing reinforcements. A mine was used to blow up a Pakistani 
troop carrier killing 2 Pakistani soldiers, wounding 7.
----------------------------------------------------------
[With thanks to Br. Hodari Abdul-'Ali in Maryland.]
The European-Sudanese Public Affairs Council
1 Northumberland Avenue
London
WC2N 5BW
England
Tel:    020 7872 5434
Fax:    020 7753 2848
Email: 
director@espac.org
http://www.espac.org
Date of Publication: 6 October 2004
ACCESS TO DARFUR CONTRADICTS U.S. "GENOCIDE" CLAIMS
In February 2003, two armed groups, the 'Sudan Liberation Army' (SLA) 
and the 'Justice and Equality Movement' (JEM), launched attacks on 
government administrative centres, police stations and civilians in the 
western Sudanese region of Darfur. The government responded vigorously 
and the conflict spiralled out of control causing a growing humanitarian 
crisis. 
(1) 
Since the international community was alerted to the 
humanitarian crisis in Darfur from early 2004 onwards there has been an 
attempt by the United States government and sections of the Western 
print and broadcast media to portray the Government of the Sudan not 
only as being solely responsible for the crisis, but actively and 
deliberately conniving in the "genocide" of black African peasant farmer 
tribes by nomadic "Arab" tribes. 
(2) 
In August 2004, for example, the 
United States Congress unanimously adopted a resolution labelling the 
situation in Darfur as genocide. 
(3) 
On 9 September, American Secretary 
of State Colin Powell, responding to domestic pressure from conservative 
and anti-Islamic constituencies, in turn declared before the Senate 
Foreign Affairs Committee, "[that] genocide has taken place and may 
still be continuing in Darfur". These declarations echoed attempts to 
compare events in Darfur with Rwanda in 1994.
Central to these claims of genocide have been accusations that in 
preventing humanitarian access to Darfur by UN aid organisations, such 
as the World Food Programme and other non-governmental relief groups, 
the Sudanese government was carrying out a genocide by famine or by 
other means they wished to hide from the international community. 
Secretary of State Powell appears to have forgotten John Adams' powerful 
observation that "facts are stubborn things". The simple facts, as they 
have unfolded in recent months, have exposed American claims of genocide 
as little more than political opportunism in a crunch election year. In 
less than twelve months the Sudanese government has facilitated an 
increase in aid workers, expatriates and Sudanese nationals, from two 
foreigners and a few dozen nationals in September 2003 to just under six 
thousand aid workers - over seven hundred of them expatriates - by 
August 2004. (4) In total, there are now 155 locations assisting with 
internally displaced people in the three Darfur states, of which 136 are 
in areas that UN security officers say the World Food Programme can 
enter and operate within. By September 2004, the World Food Programme 
was feeding some 940,000 conflict-affected people in Darfur. (5)
Not only is the almost six thousand aid workers' presence in Darfur 
clear evidence of the Khartoum government's commitment to the provision 
of food and medical relief to Darfur's war-affected communities, but 
they are able to confirm or refute the existence of any policy of 
genocide on the part of the government. Far from confirming it, 
reputable international aid agencies have criticised American claims of 
genocide. (6)
Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) has been one such group. (7) In July 2004 
MSF President Dr Jean-Herv Bradol stated, for example, that the use of 
the term genocide was inappropriate: "Our teams have not seen evidence 
of the deliberate intention to kill people of a specific group. We have 
received reports of massacres, but not of attempts to specifically 
eliminate all the members of a group". (8) Dr Bradol subsequently 
described the August and September American declarations of genocide in 
Darfur as "obvious political opportunism". (9)
Any study of the humanitarian presence in Darfur would indicate that for 
much of the first half of 2003 the attention of the UN, its aid 
organisations and NGOs as well as the government of Sudan and the whole 
international community was focused on achieving a peace accord between 
the government and the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) to end the 
civil war in southern Sudan. The UN personnel that were on the ground 
were mainly concentrated in south Darfur to deal with the problem of 
feeding and medical care of internally-displaced persons from southern 
neighbouring Bahr El-Ghazal resulting from the war in the south. (10)
The intensity of the conflict in Darfur made humanitarian access to the 
area very problematic. In September 2003, the Government of Sudan and 
the SLA signed an agreement allowing "free and unimpeded" humanitarian 
access within Darfur. (11) The rebels have however escalated 
humanitarian access difficulties by deliberately targeting aid workers. 
They murdered nine World Food Programme truck drivers, and wounded 14 
others, in an attack on a relief convoy in October 2003. (12) In January 
2004, UN media sources reported that "about 85 percent of the 900,000 
war-affected people in Darfur...are inaccessible to humanitarian aid, 
according to the UN, mainly because of insecurity." (13) In addition, on 
11 February 2004 JEM declared its intention to close down every road 
within Darfur in spite of the devastating consequences this would have 
on the ability of the Government and aid agencies (national and 
international) to provide emergency assistance to those communities 
suffering in Darfur. As a UN humanitarian relief spokesman quite simply 
stated: "You can't give aid when there are bullets flying." (14)
The government nonetheless sought to ease access, conflict permitting. 
(15) Negotiations between the government and rebels resulted in a 
further humanitarian ceasefire being agreed on 7 April 2004, 
facilitating humanitarian access to civilian populations in need. In May 
the government introduced further measures aimed at streamlining the 
delivery of humanitarian assistance. (16) From its office in Nyala 
UNICEF initiated assistance to the internally displaced persons during 
the first ceasefire in September-November 2003. Additional offices were 
opened in El Geneina and El Fasher in November 2003. As access improved, 
UNICEF moved quickly in February and March 2004 to assess immediate 
needs, and most importantly, to provide basic services to accessible 
populations. By the end of March, UNICEF had tripled its staff in El 
Fasher, Nyala and El Geneina. (17)
The level of aid access to Darfur is a simple matter of record. In 
September 2003 the World Food Programme (WFP) was the only UN agency 
that had international staff (two) in Darfur. There were in addition a 
few dozen national staff, many of them working on development rather 
than humanitarian relief programmes. (18) Access for relief staff had 
been cut off from March to the beginning of September 2003, when the 
first ceasefire took effect, and operations during this time were 
severely restricted. International UN staff on the ground remained few 
until February 2004, when freer access followed a new ceasefire. The UN 
then began sending as many people to the field as possible. In March 
2004, there were 37 international aid workers in Darfur, and 191 
Sudanese nationals: April, 128 international and 972 national personnel; 
May, 169 international and 1139 national personnel; June, 322 
international and 1721 national personnel; July, 483 international and 
3689 national personnel; August, 705 international and 5004 Sudanese 
personnel.
According to the UN's Sudan Information Gateway website (19), as early 
as April 2004 the following UN agencies and non-governmental 
organisations were working in Darfur. North Darfur: UN Development 
Programme (UNDP), Save the Children UK, SpRC/SRC, UNICEF, SUDO, ITDC, 
SCRC, WHO, IARA, Lep Mission, MSF, WFP, Oxfam Great Britain, USAID, 
ICRC, UN Population Fund (UNFPA), GOAL; West Darfur: UNDP, UNFPA, Save 
the Children UK, SpRC/SRC, UNICEF, WHO, Lep Mission, Oxfam GB, Medair, 
Al Massar, USAID, IARA, Dawa; South Darfur: Save the Children UK, 
ICRC/SRC, UNFPA, UNICEF, Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), SCRC, 
OCHA, WHO, Lep Mission, WFP, Oxfam GB, SRC. The Catholic agency CAFOD, 
Catholic Relief Services and Adventist Development and Relief Agency, 
began operations in South Darfur as well. (20)
On 28 May Kofi Annan welcomed the government's announcement that aid 
workers wanting to travel to Darfur would receive entry visas quickly 
and would no longer need travel permits for Darfur. (21) Speaking in 
June 2004, Kevin Kennedy, the acting UN Humanitarian Coordinator for 
Sudan confirmed that "access has improved somewhat over the last several 
weeks. Various procedures, [including] restriction requirements that had 
been imposed have either been eliminated or have been softened." He also 
stated that "there has been significant progress made in the last few 
weeks in terms of visas, travel permits, registration of new NGOs, 
release of items from customs clearance, and so forth." Mr Kennedy 
confirmed that visas were generally being granted within 48 hours - as 
promised by the Government of Sudan - and that "people are experiencing 
very few visa difficulties". (22) An indication of this NGO access could 
be seen in the July 2004 United Nations announcement that two million 
children in Darfur had been immunised against measles. (23) This was 
carried out by 2,000 health teams made up of World Health Organisation, 
UNICEF and other humanitarian workers.
In July 2004, Jan Egeland, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General 
for Humanitarian Affairs (and a fierce critic of the government), found 
it necessary to challenge some of the claims being made about Darfur: 
"It is strange to see that there is still the notion in the world that 
nothing is happening and we're completely blocked from accessing Darfur. 
We are reaching some 800,000 people at the moment with some sort of 
assistance and food." (24) Mr Egeland also had something to say about 
claims of "ethnic cleansing" in Darfur, stating that the term "ethnic 
cleansing" did not fit events in Darfur: "I think we have more reports 
actually of a kind of scorched earth [policy] - and that nobody has 
taken over....It's complex, because some have said that it doesn't fit 
the legal definition of ethnic cleansing. The same tribes are 
represented both among those who are cleansed and those who are 
cleansing." (25)
The government also appears not to have impeded UN agencies operating in 
rebel-controlled areas of Darfur. On 26 August, for example, UNICEF 
started a polio immunisation programme of 50,000 children in the SLA- 
controlled part of North Darfur. (26) And on 30 September, a WFP food 
convoy reached an IDP camp behind SLA/JEM lines in South Darfur. (27)
Compared with 2003 it is obvious that by September 2004 the number of UN 
and other agencies and their personnel had increased substantially in 
response to the humanitarian crisis in Darfur without any hindrance of 
GOS, although continuing clashes between GOS forces and rebels was 
causing difficulty for humanitarian access. (28)
Governments involved in genocide do not tend to enable, facilitate and 
speed up access to the area or population allegedly targeted for 
genocide. A sovereign government can restrict access to its territories. 
What emerges from any study of UN documents on the crisis in Darfur over 
2003 and 2004, or the reports of any of the non-governmental 
organisations active in Darfur, however, is that the government appears 
to have assisted as much as possible with opening Darfur up to 
humanitarian assistance. There were under thirty aid workers in Darfur 
in mid 2003. The government sanctioned and facilitated the increase in 
that presence to just under six thousand less than a year later. 
Similarly, the Khartoum authorities have allowed unfettered access to 
Darfur by the international and national media, including reporters from 
the BBC, Sky News, New York Times, the London Times and Sunday Times and 
Time magazine to name but a few. The media, however, ultimately comes 
and goes. It is the humanitarian community, in the form of dozens of 
non-governmental organisations, that has maintained a personal or 
institutional presence in Darfur virtually throughout the past year. It 
is the humanitarian aid community who are now challenging opportunistic 
claims of genocide in Darfur.
The dangers of crying wolf on such issues are all too clear. The cynical 
use of allegations of genocide or ethnic cleansing for propaganda 
reasons is morally repugnant. It may also have international and 
domestic consequences, enflaming an already fraught situation in Darfur 
as well as misinforming international opinion.
APPENDIX
US 'hyping' Darfur genocide fears
'The Observer' (London)
Sunday October 3, 2004
Peter Beaumont
American warnings that Darfur is heading for an apocalyptic humanitarian 
catastrophe have 
been widely exaggerated by administration officials, it is alleged by 
international aid workers in Sudan. Washington's desire for a regime 
change in Khartoum has biased their reports, it is claimed.
The government's aid agency, USAID, says that between 350,000 and a 
million people could 
die in Darfur by the end of the year. Other officials, including 
Secretary of State Colin Powell, have accused the Sudanese government of 
presiding over a 'genocide' that could rival those in Bosnia and Rwanda.
But the account has been comprehensively challenged by eyewitness 
reports from aid workers 
and by a new food survey of the region. The nutritional survey of 
Sudan's Darfur region, by the UN World Food Programme, says that 
although there are still high levels of malnutrition among under-fives 
in some areas, the crisis is being brought under control.
'It's not disastrous,' said one of those involved in the WFP survey, 
'although it certainly was a disaster earlier this year, and if 
humanitarian assistance declines, this will have very serious negative 
consequences.'
The UN report appears to confirm food surveys conducted by other 
agencies in Darfur which 
also stand in stark contrast to the dire US descriptions of the food 
crisis.
The most dramatic came from Andrew Natsios, head of USAID, who told UN 
officials: 'We 
estimate right now, if we get relief in we'll lose a third of a million 
people and, if we don't, the death rates could be dramatically higher, 
approaching a million people.'
A month later, a second senior official, Roger Winter, USAID's assistant 
administrator, briefed foreign journalists in Washington that an 
estimated 30,000 people had been killed during the on-going crisis in 
Darfur, with another 50,000 deaths from malnutrition and disease, 
largely among the huge populations fleeing the violence. He described 
the emergency as 'humanitarian disaster of the first magnitude'.
By 9 September Powell was in front of the Congressional Foreign 
Relations Committee 
accusing Sudan of 'genocide', a charge rejected by officials of both the 
European and African Unions and also privately by British officials.
'I've been to a number of camps during my time here,' said one aid 
worker, 'and if you want to find death, you have to go looking for it. 
It's easy to find very sick and under-nourished children at the 
therapeutic feeding centres, but that's the same wherever you go in 
Africa.'
Another aid worker told The Observer : 'It suited various governments to 
talk it all up, but they don't seem to have thought about the 
consequences. I have no idea what Colin Powell's game is, but to call it 
genocide and then effectively say, "Oh, shucks, but we are not going to 
do anything about that genocide" undermines the very word "genocide".'
While none of the aid workers and officials interviewed by The Observer 
denied there was a 
crisis in Darfur - or that killings, rape and a large-scale displacement 
of population had taken place - many were puzzled that it had become the 
focus of such hyperbolic warnings when there were crises of similar 
magnitude in both northern Uganda and eastern Congo.
Concern about USAID's role as an honest broker in Darfur have been 
mounting for months, with diplomats as well as aid workers puzzled over 
its pronouncements and one European diplomat accusing it of 'plucking 
figures from the air'.
Under the Bush administration, the work of USAID has become increasingly 
politicised. But 
over Sudan, in particular, two of its most senior officials have long 
held strong personal views. Both Natsios, a former vice-president of the 
Christian charity World Vision, and Winter have long been hostile to the 
Sudanese government.
Notes
- 
See "Sudan: One Million At 'Imminent Risk' in Darfur, Says US 
Government", News Article by Integrated Regional Information Networks, 
UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 3 March  2004.
 
- 
See, for example, "Thousands flee war in Sudan", 'The Guardian' 
(London), 30 January 2004, and "Rape, torture, and one million forced to 
flee as Sudan's crisis unfolds. Will we move to stop it?", 'The 
Independent' (London), 23 April 2004.
 
- 
It is not the first time that the US Congress has made these 
sorts of claims. On 17 June 1999, for example, the U.S. House of 
Representatives approved a resolution condemning the Sudanese government 
"for its genocidal war in southern Sudan". The measure, House Concurrent 
Resolution 75, passed by a vote of 416 to 1, claimed that the Sudanese 
government was "deliberately and systematically committing genocide in 
southern Sudan",  stating that an estimated 1.9 million Sudanese have 
died of war-related causes and that "Millions have been displaced from 
their homes" (See, for example, "U.S. House Passes First Sudan Measure 
in Six Years; Calls War 'Genocidal' and Urges Stronger U.S. Peace 
Efforts", Press Release by US Committee for Refugees, Washington-DC, 16 
June 1999).
 
- 
Figures provided by the UN press office, Khartoum.
 
- 
"Darfur: Humanitarian Emergency Fact Sheet Number 24", US Agency 
for International Development, 1 October 2004.
 
- 
"US 'Hyping' Darfur Genocide Fears", 'The Observer' (London), 3 
October 2004.
 
- 
See, for example, "Doctors Without Borders/Medecins Sans 
Frontieres Challenges US Darfur Genocide Claims", Mediamonitors, 5 
October 2004, available at 
www.mediamonitors.net
 
- 
"Thousands Die as World Defines Genocide", 'The Financial Times' 
(London), 6 July 2004. See also, Bradol's views in "France Calls on 
Sudan to Forcibly Disarm Darfur Militias", News Article by Agence France 
Presse, 7 July 2004.
 
- 
"From One Genocide to Another", Article by Dr Jean-Herv Bradol, 
28 September 2004, available at Medecins Sans Frontieres (UAE) website, 
www.msfuae.ae
 
- 
See, for example, UN publications covering early 2003 such as 
the "Sudan Assistance Bulletin", published by the Office of the UN 
Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator for the Sudan, 
http://www.unsudanig.org.
 
- 
"Agreement Reached Allowing Humanitarian Access to Darfur Region 
of Sudan", Press Release by United Nations Office for the Coordination 
of Humanitarian Affairs, New York, 17 September 2003.
 
- 
"Workers in Sudan Aid Convoy Killed", News Article by BBC News, 
28 October 2003.
 
- 
"Authorities Forcibly Close IDP Camps in Southern Darfur", News 
Article by Integrated Regional Information Networks, UN Office for the 
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 16 January 2004.
 
- 
"Aid Workers Unable to Reach Most War Zones in Darfur, Western 
Sudan", News Article by Deutsche Presse Agentur, 13 January 2004.
 
- 
"Aid access to Sudan's war-torn west improves", News Article by 
South African Broadcasting Corporation, 11 February 2004.
 
- 
See, "Sudan Adopts New Measures to Facilitate Delivery of 
Humanitarian Aid in Darfur", News Article by Sudan News Agency, 20 May 
2004.
 
- 
"UNICEF Humanitarian Action Sudan, Children Affected by Darfur 
Crisis", donor update 19 May 2004.
 
- 
According to a spokesperson for the UN's Office for Co-
ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Khartoum in September 2004.
 
- 
"Starbase: Agency Interventions North" 
http://www.unsudanig.org/ 
system.
 
- 
"Sudan Transition & Recovery Database, South Darfur State", 
version 2, 17 June 2004, Office for Co-ordination of Humanitarian 
Affairs, Sudan.
 
- 
"The UN Responds to the Crisis in Darfur: A Timeline", 
available at 
www.un.org/news.
 
- 
"Interview with Kevin Kennedy, Outgoing Acting UN Humanitarian 
Coordinator for Sudan", News Article by UN Integrated Regional 
Information Networks, Nairobi, 23 June 2004.
 
- 
"Two Million Darfur Children Get Measles Shot", Press Release by 
UNICEF, Geneva, 6 July 2004.
 
- 
"Interview with UN's Jan Egeland on the Situation in Darfur", 
News Article by UN Integrated Regional Information Networks, Nairobi, 5 
July 2004.
 
- 
"Sudan: Interview with UN's Jan Egeland on the Situation in 
Darfur", News Article by UN Integrated Regional Information Networks, 
Nairobi, 5 July 2004,.
 
- 
"Darfur aid worker's diary XIX", News Article by BBC News Online 
17 September 2004, available at 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/africa
 
- 
"Behind the invisible frontline", Press Release by World Food 
Programme, 2 October 2004, available at 
www.wfp.org.newsroom.
 
- 
 "Sudan Assistance Bulletin" no 34, United Nations, 15 September 
2004.
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
click here to email
 
a link to this 
article
2004-10-08 Fri 20:27ct