Genocide in Darfur: Psyops Deconstruction

It is ultimately China which is the primary target

In has been reported that the African Unity will not cooperate with the ICC indictment of Sudan’s President, Omar al-Bashir.

This is a positive development, and I would like to submit my own analysis and testimony on behalf of Sudan, in a spirit of defiant resistance, and for the cause of truth. 

The AU leaders decided that “in view of the fact that the request to the African Union has never been acted upon that AU member states shall not cooperate pursuant to the provisions of Article 98 of the Rome Statute on the ICC…or the arrest and surrender of African indicted personalities”


Presently, we have a planet Earth straining under the extreme stress of the Pentagon’s “Full Spectrum Dominance” ideology, a phenomena which we will here conceptualize in psychiatric terms. Reflecting a distinct and peculiar hyper-neurotic drive to control everything and everyone in the universe. The American Establishment and the “international community” has leveled the “genocide” charges against Sudan’s president.

Accordingly, the primary preoccupation of the Pentagon is preventing other countries from becoming powerful enough to challenge the US, and the “Genocide in Darfur” campaign being directed against Omar al-Bashir’s government in Sudan, and their partner China, occurs in this context. Indeed, it is ultimately China which is the primary target, and we can recall the self-righteous US operatives throwing their “genocide supporter” daggers at China prior to the Olympics. Thanks Mr. Spielberg.

The Surface Appearance Script

Here is the settled-upon manuscript for the Sudan project, in all its counterintuitive eye-popping demented absurdia. The “Genocide in Darfur” narrative goes something like this:

”The “Arab-dominated” government of Sudan, headed by the stereotypical Black African tyrant Omar al Bashir, in response to an uprising, has conducted a genocidal pogrom characterized by racist brutality; incidents of mass rapes, sexual slavery, mass killings and a whole manner of different acts of obscene human depravity have been committed against poor, helpless “ethnic Africans” at the hands of the dreaded, government-sponsored, camel-riding “Janjaweed militia”, Bashir’s army of racist Arab killers. Perhaps as many as 400,000 have perished in the great horror. The intention behind this ethnic-cleansing pogrom is to replace the uprooted and killed Africans with Arabs imported from other countries.

The entire terrifying calamity has been captured magnificently in the sweeping documentary “THE DEVIL CAME ON HORSEBACK”, featuring former Marine Brian Steidle, a dashing and heroic do-gooder American, swollen with compassion for the poor, suffering, native Black ethnic African persons.

Omar al Bashir is currently under indictment for war crimes in the International Criminal Court, a juridical institution impeccable with integrity, concerned only with responsible international adjudication and humanitarian intervention, in accordance with the highest ideals and greatest principles.”

Glorious, isn’t it? Glorious and titillating. Racist conflict between Arabs and Africans, with Africans as the “good guys” and Arabs as the “bad guys”. Anglos swollen with empathy and nobility documenting the shocking scenes, attempting to bring the perpetrators to justice.

The reader should note how in the script the “uprising” is hardly mentioned, and the actions of the “rebels” are not discussed at all.


So what actually happened in Darfur? How can we put the puzzle pieces back together? Let us begin:

The first impulse of imperial subterfuge is always to “divide”. Always, a division to exploit is the first thing sought, and in Sudan we have a Turabi-Bashir division. Husan al Turabi has been a prominent political figure in Sudan for many years and had a falling out with Omar al Bashir in 1999, making him a prime candidate for recruitment. Turabi’s presence in the Darfur affair is important to highlight as he enjoys a great deal of popular support and his involvement gives the operation an apparent legitimacy, or authenticity. In other words the people of Sudan see the unfolding Darfur conflict in terms of a political battle between Turabi and Bashir, between two factions of Sudan’s Islamist movement, as opposed to seeing a covert Pentagon-inspired operation. Turabi and his gangs – along with an assortment of other players including foreign soldiers – are given cash and weapons, likely channeled through Chad, and are best characterized as corrupt individuals compelled by a lust for the power promised them by the imperialist masters of the universe. Further, I can recall one video in particular of a former Sudanese soldier turned “rebel”, describing how he is fighting the government because he was angry about not being promoted. These are important facts to bear in mind, as the two main insurrectionary groups, the Sudanese Liberation Army or SLA(not to be confused with John Garang’s SPLA) and the Turabi-led Justice and Equality Movement or JEM both masquerade themselves as popular uprisings fighting against ethnic discrimination and economic inequality at the hands of the government. Turabi would be arrested in March 2004 and held for over a year in a Khartoum prison.

SLA and JEM: Fighting the power?

Beginning in early 2003, these two groups attacked and destroyed 80 or so police stations, killing upwards of 700 innocent policemen. They attacked government garrisons and killed civilians. They have also attacked a number of different key developmental, educational and infrastructural projects, and have murdered a number of engineers working on those same projects. They attacked even a school examination center, stealing the national examination papers and affecting the lives of tens of thousands of school students. Later in the conflict they can be seen attacking oil development projects and kidnapping and even killing Chinese citizens working on those projects, demanding that the Chinese oil companies be replaced by “Western” companies. The “rebels” can be found again and again expressing hostility toward China, accusing them of supporting the genocidal Sudanese government.

Note that the “rebels” are very-well armed, with mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, heavy machine guns, all-terrain vehicles and satellite communications.

So what kind of popular uprising is this, exactly? Destroying developmental projects in the name of fighting economic marginalization? Killing innocent people for being in the employ of the government’s clean water project? Attacking agricultural projects, telecommunications projects? Does that sound like responsible, rightful revolt, people power in action? Not in the least.

Moreover, is there any truth to the claim that the various “ethnic Africans” have been marginalized in some way? Politically or economically? Just the opposite is true in fact. The Zaghawa, Fur and other tribes at the forefront of the “rebellion” have been prominent, even dominant, in the economic and politic scene in Darfur( ‘dar’ meaning ‘abode’, Dar-Fur meaning ‘home of the Fur’).

So we see how the chaos and ensuing public misery experienced throughout Darfur is primarily because of the actions of the “rebels” themselves, and is to be expected when you blew up police stations and kill all of the policemen, along with destroying the community’s infrastructure and killing engineers. Not very bright, these “rebels”.

The government of Sudan then engaged its military against the “rebels”, and also recruited an all-volunteer ‘Popular Defense Force’ from the local and national communities.

Into this mix we can add the “Janjaweed” phenomenon(“jinn” meaning devil or evil, combined with “jowad” meaning horse). The expression “janjaweed” simply translated means “armed bandits on horseback”, and the reader’s brain should compute something like “organized crime” upon hearing it, but they are a kind of irregular community in their own right. The specifics regarding the Janjaweed element are not important for our purposes here, and the reader only need understand that the Janjaweed are certainly not a racist Arab army employed as genocidaires by the government. These charges come from the “rebels” themselves and from the US military/intelligence script writers, who have seized upon the term ‘Janjaweed’ primarily because it sounds chilling and creepy, having a useful Hollywood-horror type of impact upon the ears of the intended audience. The Janjaweed are naturally emboldened by the absence of security occuring in the wake of the violent assault against police forces, and the reader should understand that there was already a kind of Wild West quality to life in Darfur, prior to the rise of the SLA and JEM.

Quickly, to better understand what the scriptwriters have done here with the Janjaweed phenomenon, we might imagine an agent of Sudanese military intelligence travelling to a US ghetto and hearing people discussing the “crackheads”, drug-fiends who steal to support their drug habit. The agent hears people saying things like “man, some crackhead busted out my car window and stole my CD player” and “I guess government welfare checks ain’t enough for those damn crackheads” and “some crackhead shot and killed my cousin last year”. The Sudanese agent then returns to Sudan and writes an editorial for a prominent Sudanese newspaper detailing how American citizens are being brutalized by the “Crackheads”, a government-sponsored army of crazed, killer drug fiends, paid to terrorize and murder the populace.

There is a clever trick being played here. Because the Janjaweed are a real phenomenon, the scriptwriters are able to insert their distortion with a straight face. In other words, if a US intelligence operative posing as a journalist were to ask of Bashir “what are you doing to stop the Janjaweed attacks, why haven’t the Janjaweed been disarmed?” the question has an air of legitimacy, as the people are abused by the Janjaweed criminal element. But the purpose of the operative is to advance the notion that ‘Janjaweed’ refers to racist Arab killers employed by the government. If one is familiar with this entire affair, it is quite clear that the introduction of this distortion of reality has caused a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding.

How did the operation unfold?

Here is the timeline:

– After a year or so following the SLA/JEM attacks beginning in early 2003, the “Arabs genocide-ing Africans” propaganda narrative is disseminated through reports issued by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. It is worth mentioning that both of these institutions issued chilling reports on the same day on April 1st 2004, or “April Fools Day”. It is within these reports that the fundamentals of the genocide narrative are seeded. Mass rapes, mass killings, Arabs vs Africans, government-sponsored Janjaweed etc. etc.

-On July 14th 2004 a “Darfur Emergency Summit” is organized by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum and the American Jewish World Service at the CUNY Graduate Center in Manhattan, featuring Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize-winner Elie Wiesel as guest speaker. This is the genesis of the “Save Darfur Coalition”, the various professionals and specialists behind the media campaign, masquerading as “concerned citizens” and “charities” and such. We can mention here that this is primarily a Jewish-American affair, with little Afro-American representation or input. These so-called charities would be exposed later by mainstream US media as being involved only with public relations. Whatever donations they received only served to perpetuate the media campaign, the displaced people of Darfur seeing not one penny.

– On July 23rd 2004 the US House of Representatives passes a resolution encouraging then- president Bush to employ the word “genocide” in describing Darfur. It further suggest a need for intervention there. Said Bush on the same day:

“We made our position very clear to the Sudanese government – they must stop Janjaweed (militia) violence, they must provide access to humanitarian relief for the people who suffer”.

This is followed by impassioned statements from a number of prominent US political figures. One of these is Colin Powell. It is worth pointing out that Powell had originally refrained from applying the term “genocide” to Darfur, and was not brought on board until early September 2004, when he for some reason changed his mind and begins spewing the “government-sponsored Janjaweed” narrative.

– On July 30th 2004 the UN Security Council passes its own resolution, threatening sanctions against Sudan if it does not “disarm the Janjaweed” and restore order.

This is followed by the usual stream of propaganda disinfo; video testimony of alleged Darfuris describing the horror, broadcast news television specials, the aforementioned “documentary” propaganda film “THE DEVIL CAME ON HORSEBACK” featuring former Marine Brian Steidle(a laughably crude production) and there is even a “darfur-is-dying” website featuring a video game that allows the viewer to play the part of a Darfuri child searching for firewood, the object of the game being to avoid the dreaded Janjaweed and return safely to the refugee camp.


The Darfur project consists in destroying Sudan and it’s government via proxy militia’s and a psychological warfare campaign. On the Sudan homefront, the reality is hidden underneath a public perception of a conflict between two factions of Sudan’s Islamic movement, while on the Western homefront the reality hides underneath the genocide narrative. The actions and activities of the proxy rebel groups themselves accounts for the collapse of order and ensuing chaos and displacement, in a region where there was already a kind of Wild Wild West quality to life.

Out of this reality, the particulars of the “genocide in Darfur” unreality have been drawn. Omar al Bashir is eventually indicted by the International Criminal Court, an institution explicitly designed to get rid of troublesome African leaders or to dispose of former US-supported African agents who for whatever reason have since lost their usefulness.

Rwandan Parallel

Comparatively, the Pentagon’s anti-Bashir Darfur campaign bears a strong resemblance to the campaign carried out against the Habyarimana government and the people of Rwanda, beginning in 1990 and continuing to this very day.

Now, for most people, when you say the name “Rwanda”, the mind immediately recalls the events beginning in April 1994, wherein a ferocious outburst of genocidal violence accounted for the killing of 800,000 or so people – all hacked to death with machetes – over a period of three or four months. The mind also seems to recall some type of ethnic conflict, centered around a majority ‘Hutu’ population terrorizing a minority ‘Tutsi’ population.

This narrative is also utterly false from beginning to end, another gigantic, fabricated unreality.

The Pentagon in 1990 initiated an invasion and war against the government of Juvenal Habyarimana in Rwanda, by way of a proxy army, the primarily Ugandan “Rwandan Patriotic Front” associated with the current President of Rwanda Paul Kagame, and with the militaristic help of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni. Burundi’s President Cyprien Ntaryamira and President Habyarimana were both assassinated in April 1994, as a part of this offensive.

Kagame studied under the Pentagon’s Joint Combined Exchange Training program over at Fort Leavenworth beginning in 1990, and was dispatched to Rwanda, in time for the RPF’s takeover of the country in 1994. The RPF was comprised mostly of Ugandan soldiers and Kagame himself was a citizen of Ugandan. The RPF is guilty of committing all kinds of egregious and very brutal crimes against humanity from 1990 to this very day. The RPF was/is a cold, calculating human rights-violating machine. A merciless, lying, sociopathic governmental administrative apparatus.

The people of Rwanda were brutalized by the RPF for years, an invading proxy army. In April 1994 an offensive was undertaken by very desperate, victimized Rwandan citizens after their president was killed when his plane was destroyed in what was then reported as a “mysterious plane crash”. It was right at this time that the US began running the “genocide” hype, through public pronouncements from prominent political figures. In the Rwanda script the “Hutus” are the bad guys, while the “Tutsis”, along with “moderate Hutus”, are described as the victims. Note that the term “moderate Hutus” is identical to “ethnic Africans”, making no sense at all. The conflict is in truth between the Habyarimana-led government and the invading US-supported RPF, between Rwandans who support the government and those who support the invaders.

In the propaganda film “Hotel Rwanda” we see how reality is turned upside-down as the RPF is portrayed as the heroic-rescuers, while the brutalized resisting Rwandan citizens and the Rwandan military are portrayed as the hate-filled “genocidaires”.

We should note that all the Rwandan military oficers were found not guilty of planning and committing genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, a “victors justice” court if there ever was one. The only convictions were based upon particular acts of atrocity. We should also note that the high court of Spain issued international indictments against 40 different RPF officials.

The Kagame goverment benefits mightily from the popular “Rwandan genocide” narrative. It acts as a powerful mechanism for crushing political opposition and silencing critics of Kagame’s regime. Dissenting Rwandans in asylum and critics of the Kagame regime live in a state of constant fear of being hunted down, kidnapped and killed, or of being accused as “genocide” apologists and accessories. Kagame has reportedly dispatched hundreds of his agents worldwide for the express purpose of finding and neutralizing opposition.

We can safely assume that the “genocide in Darfur” project was patterned after the “genocide in Rwanda” project, and hoped to achieve the same end.

The writer is Richard Kurdt and resides in Long Island, New York. He can be e-mailed at [email protected]  

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Richard Kurdt

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]