Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
History of Darfur
The Darfur region was a scene of rebellion against the Sudanese government in 2003. Two local rebel groups- The Justice and Equality Movement and the Sudanese Liberation Army, accused the government of oppressing non-Arabs in favor of Arabs. The government was accused of neglecting the Darfur region of Sudan. The government was accused of neglecting the Darfur region of Sudan.
The Darfurians spoke Proto-Afro-Asiatic language in pre-historic times. Developments in the Darfur regions are divided into various kingdoms. The Darfur region is dependent on semi-arid terrain and climate. The British, Egyptians, and the Daju (inhabitants of Jebel Marra) are the dominant groups in the Darfur region.
Under Egyptian colonization, the Darfurians were restive. In 1879, British General Gordon declared his desire for a reinstatement of the royal family. He decided, instead, to make Slatin Bey the governor of the province in 1881. A state of constant warfare ended the gradual retirement of Mahdi’s forces from Darfur.
The Darfur region was ruled by the British in the early 1900s. The Darfur de jure autonomy became convinced the sultanate was falling, so the region was incorporated into Sudan in 1916. Khartoum and the Blue Nile Province referred to themselves as the children of the country (a.k.a. awlad al gharb).
The Umma Party is a secular Islamic centrist political party in Sudan formed in 1945. The Umma Party, led by Sadiq al-Mahdi, became a major power base after the Darfur region received its independence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur
The Darfurians spoke Proto-Afro-Asiatic language in pre-historic times. Developments in the Darfur regions are divided into various kingdoms. The Darfur region is dependent on semi-arid terrain and climate. The British, Egyptians, and the Daju (inhabitants of Jebel Marra) are the dominant groups in the Darfur region.
Under Egyptian colonization, the Darfurians were restive. In 1879, British General Gordon declared his desire for a reinstatement of the royal family. He decided, instead, to make Slatin Bey the governor of the province in 1881. A state of constant warfare ended the gradual retirement of Mahdi’s forces from Darfur.
The Darfur region was ruled by the British in the early 1900s. The Darfur de jure autonomy became convinced the sultanate was falling, so the region was incorporated into Sudan in 1916. Khartoum and the Blue Nile Province referred to themselves as the children of the country (a.k.a. awlad al gharb).
The Umma Party is a secular Islamic centrist political party in Sudan formed in 1945. The Umma Party, led by Sadiq al-Mahdi, became a major power base after the Darfur region received its independence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
History of Female Genital Cutting
GENITAL MUTILATION
Female genital mutilation is also known as female circumcision (FC) and female genital cutting (FGC). Circumcision gained a growing support in the 1970s. This term was adopted at the Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children.
The World Health Organization uses the term Female Genital Mutilation to describe varying types of genital cutting. Type I is the total or partial removal of the clitoris or prepuce. Type II focuses on partial or total removal of the clitoris and labia minora. Type III is the narrowing of the vaginal orifice with creation of a covering seal that cuts the labia minora and/or labia majora. Type IV is referred to as “all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes such as pricking, pinching, piercing, incising, and scraping. It is found in many diverse ethnic groups. These ethnic groups include: Senegal on the West Coast, Ethiopia on the East Coast, Egypt in the north, Tanzania in the south, Sudan, and Mali. Northern Saudi Arabia, southern Jordan, and Iraq are the other countries where genital mutilation is prevalent.
Below is a link to a picture which shows the prevalence of female genital mutilation in Africa.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Fgm_map.gif
Female genital mutilation is also known as female circumcision (FC) and female genital cutting (FGC). Circumcision gained a growing support in the 1970s. This term was adopted at the Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children.
The World Health Organization uses the term Female Genital Mutilation to describe varying types of genital cutting. Type I is the total or partial removal of the clitoris or prepuce. Type II focuses on partial or total removal of the clitoris and labia minora. Type III is the narrowing of the vaginal orifice with creation of a covering seal that cuts the labia minora and/or labia majora. Type IV is referred to as “all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes such as pricking, pinching, piercing, incising, and scraping. It is found in many diverse ethnic groups. These ethnic groups include: Senegal on the West Coast, Ethiopia on the East Coast, Egypt in the north, Tanzania in the south, Sudan, and Mali. Northern Saudi Arabia, southern Jordan, and Iraq are the other countries where genital mutilation is prevalent.
Below is a link to a picture which shows the prevalence of female genital mutilation in Africa.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Fgm_map.gif
Friday, October 17, 2008
More on History of Turks
dd on to post: Resolution 219
United Nations Security Council Resolution 219, adopted on December 17, 1965, after reaffirming previous resolutions on the topic the Council extended the stationing in Cyprus of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus for an additional 3 months, now ending on the 26th of March, the next year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_219
United Nations Security Council Resolution 476
June 30, 1980
The Security Council,
Having considered the letter of 28 May 1980 from the representative of Pakistan, the current Chairman of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, as contained in document S/13966 of 28 May 1980,
Reaffirming that acquisition of territory by force is inadmissable,
Bearing in mind the specific status of Jerusalem and, in particular, the need for protection and preservation of the unique spiritual and religious dimension of the Holy Places in the city,
Reaffirming its resolutions relevant to the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, in particular resolutions 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980,
Recalling the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,
Deploring the persistence of Israel, in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem,
Gravely concerned over the legislative steps initiated in the Israeli Knesset with the aim of changing the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem,
1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;
2. Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly;
3. Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;
4. Reiterates that all such measures which have altered the geographic, demographic and historical character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council;
5. Urgently calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by this and previous Security Council resolutions and to desist forthwith from persisting in the policy and measures affecting the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem;
6. Reaffirms its determination in the event of non-compliance by Israel with this resolution, to examine practical ways and means in accordance with relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations to secure the full implementation of this resolution.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unres476.html
United Nations Security Council Resolution 219, adopted on December 17, 1965, after reaffirming previous resolutions on the topic the Council extended the stationing in Cyprus of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus for an additional 3 months, now ending on the 26th of March, the next year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_219
United Nations Security Council Resolution 476
June 30, 1980
The Security Council,
Having considered the letter of 28 May 1980 from the representative of Pakistan, the current Chairman of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, as contained in document S/13966 of 28 May 1980,
Reaffirming that acquisition of territory by force is inadmissable,
Bearing in mind the specific status of Jerusalem and, in particular, the need for protection and preservation of the unique spiritual and religious dimension of the Holy Places in the city,
Reaffirming its resolutions relevant to the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, in particular resolutions 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 271 (1969) of 15 September 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980,
Recalling the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War,
Deploring the persistence of Israel, in changing the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem,
Gravely concerned over the legislative steps initiated in the Israeli Knesset with the aim of changing the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem,
1. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem;
2. Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly;
3. Reconfirms that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal validity and constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;
4. Reiterates that all such measures which have altered the geographic, demographic and historical character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council;
5. Urgently calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to abide by this and previous Security Council resolutions and to desist forthwith from persisting in the policy and measures affecting the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem;
6. Reaffirms its determination in the event of non-compliance by Israel with this resolution, to examine practical ways and means in accordance with relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations to secure the full implementation of this resolution.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unres476.html
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
