Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Why Empower Girls?


  • 70 % of the world’s poorest billion people are women and girls
  • In some countries a woman is more likely to die in childbirth than get an education
  • Two thirds of people who cannot read or write are women

(Source Care, International accessed 21 February 2012)



Watch this two minute video, you’ll get the idea:

Interested in learning more?  Read this Position paper by Care, International


Tuesday, February 28, 2012

My Battle With the Light Bulb

My post today is about something I struggle with.  Not being a snob on the topic of struggles, I take this as an indication that other people probably struggle with this, too.
My struggle?  Maybe you guessed it?  I often fail to turn off the light bulb.
At night, especially when it's dark, I like having light!  Yet, we also know that light bulbs use electricity.  Electricity use affects us at the pocketbook, so we can conserve money by using less of it. 
But money in my or your pocket is really just a side effect.  The truth is that the electric rate could be set at whatever the regulating utility (or the market) wants.  Utility rates, and gasoline tax, are largely determined by demand.  What we each really need to do is to reduce demand, by using less.

When enough of us act in small ways, we link into big picture items, like mountaintop removal mining or tar sands mining.  Just a few days ago, I blogged on justice issues arising from these types of mining activities, which are directly linked to our consumption of energy.

  • Let's put our electric usage into perspective:   Listening to a talk radio show last year, I learned that electricity for just one item in the USA -- air conditioning -- uses more electricity than all the power usage on the continent of Africa combined.   Think about that, Americans!  
  • If you are in North America and click the link HERE and input your zip code, you will probably be able to see that your own electricity use contributes directly to mountaintop removal mining.  The burning of coal also contributes to acid rain and particulate air pollution. 
Each of our actions do, directly, affect these big picture items.  Each of us, no matter how small, can do our small part. 
One of the pastors at my church, on the issue of being more "green," suggests a goal of having one light bulb on in the house per person.  This seems adequate.  If we use moderation, each of us can still have "enough" and not be left in the dark.

Using less.  It's the first among the three item mantra:  "reduce, reuse, and recycle."
The reason "reduce" is first is because it's the most important of the three.  If we don't "use" in the first place, we don't even need to get to the second two.   
And yet, even knowing this, as I look around my house this moment there are five light bulbs on!
Light bulbs are my personal struggle.  If I were to call a spade a spade, I would call it gluttony.   And though I know better, yet I continue to do it anyway.   Overusing, using more than my share. 
So, my Lenten exercise for today is to confess this challenge, bring it to the open and share it, and resolve to do better. 
Will you join me?  Can we mutually resolve to go turn off a few excess lights, literally? 
While we're turning off lights,  can we also renew our commitments to reduce waste, generally?  I think the earth, and future generations, would thank us. 

Monday, February 27, 2012

Do You Dare to Be An Extremist?

One of my friends recently said that at least once per year he re-reads the Letter from a Birmingham Jail, written by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 

I agree with my friend on the value of reading this letter.  I, too, find much to be absorbed and re-absorbed in it.   I find myself re-reading it, and sometimes even (heaven forbid!)  thinking about it when I’m not reading it!  

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Satyagraha: Confronting Power With Truth In Sudan

Meet Ryan Boyette

ryan boyette nuba on his web page

The skinny is, you can support Ryan by making a contribution on
And now, here’s why you’ll want to: 

Ryan is an ordinary American who grew up in Florida.  He is also a Christian, and he went to Sudan as a relief worker for the Christian organization, Samaritan’s Purse.  While working among the Nuba people, he met and married a Sudanese woman, who is pictured here with him. 
Sudan is a large country, approximately the size of the eastern half of the USA.


When the Colonial powers divided up Africa into distinct countries, they often did so without regard to traditional tribal boundaries.  Sudan is an example.  The northern part of Sudan is desert and is inhabited by light skinned, Muslim people of Arabic descent.  The southern part of Sudan is green and inhabited by dark skinner, largely Christian people of traditional tribal descent.  Underneath the fertile soil of the south, is oil.   In a gross oversimplification, the northern, Arabic peoples gained control of the military and of government, and for twenty years conducted a campaign to remove the tribal people who were inconveniently (by virtue of living there) blocking unbridled access to the oil reserves underneath their traditional pastoral lands. 

This was the context in which the genocide in Darfur took place.   At its worst, this campaign of removal turned into a campaign of eradication, resulting in the extermination of the people of Darfur.  According to U.N. sources, the genocide in Darfur has largely been accomplished.

The resource conflict also resulted in a 20 year civil war in Sudan between the north and the south.  At the end of this 20 year “civil war,” a peace deal was brokered in which the Khartoum government allowed the people of South Sudan to declare independence by way of a referendum. In July of 2011, South Sudan became the world’s newest country, as its people voted to sever ties with the government of Khartoum.   Unfortunately, woe to those dark skinned peoples of tribal descent who were sympathetic to (and supported) secession but who have the misfortune of now residing north of the line of demarcation. 

Now that eradication of the tribal peoples in Darfur is fundamentally complete, the Khartoum government (by all appearances to outside observers) seems to have zeroed in on the dark skinned people remaining in the (northern) Sudanese state of Southern Kordofan state (just to the east of Darfur) as its next target for eradication.  The Khartoum government’s enmity toward these peoples is also fueled by the fact that the the tribes in what is now Sudan’s southern border areas sought independence along with South Sudan, but were thwarted by political forces. 

The first map, below, is divided into political names, but the second map is very illustrative. 

Fundamentally, the areas on the second map that are marked in green, pink, and yellow, are inhabited by dark skinned, tribal and pastoral peoples.  And these people have been marked for extermination by their own government.  

sudan political regions

The dark skinned, tribal people have been mostly exterminated from the green areas of this map (Darfur).  Now, the focus has moved to the yellow and  pink portions:  the states of Southern Kordofan, White Nile, and Blue Nile.

Among these inhabitants of South Kordofan,  residing in the Nuba mountains, are the Nuba people.

Discussion of the Nuba people brings conversation back to the ordinary guy, Ryan Boyette, the relief worker.  When the Khartoum government began its bombing of the Nuban people, Samaritan’s Purse evacuated its workers and told Ryan to get on a plane and leave. 

Ryan refused, quitting his job instead so that he could stay behind.  He explains that his conscience compelled him, instead, to bear witness to the facts.   
Bearing Witness

Bearing witness is a fundamental component of justice, and of peace.   The term Satyagraha , termed by Gandhi, describes the active force of truth and the power of applied loving-kindness, not as a passive means of resistance but as an active spiritual force that confronts evil.  The truth is like a mirror, forcing evil to look itself in the face. 

In Syria, in Egypt, at Occupy encampments, and elsewhere around the world, people bearing witness have cameras and cell phones, twitter and Facebook, to take photos and to communicate with the outside world, to bear witness to the truth.  In Sudan, its infrastructure destroyed by 20 years of civil war, the people don’t have these ways of communicating with the outside world. 

Ryan decided to change that. 

He stayed behind and is equipping peace warriors with cameras and cell phones.  With these, victims can now record what is happening and communicate this to the outside world.  Thanks to Ryan, when a bomb falls on an elementary school or on a refugee camp, and the Sudanese government denies that it happened, cameras are now in place to record the event and prove to the world that yes, a bomb was indeed dropped on this school. 
Speaking Truth To Power
Confronting the world with the truth
Truth telling
In so many words, TRUTH is an essential component of nonviolent direct action.  Ryan is a warrior for truth.   The world lacks political will to intervene.  Yet, by focusing the spotlight on atrocity and making it impossible to deny, Ryan’s work is erecting a shield of shame that is saving lives. 
No one says that nonviolent direct action is easy or that it doesn’t have risks. Ryan, now the target of assassination attempts, is clearly putting his life in danger. 
What can you do to help?
To pay for operations, Ryan Boyette is hoping for foundation grants, or public donations. 

To accept donations, he has set up an account on
Would you like to make a contribution to help the cause? 


The minimum donation on Kickstarter is One Dollar.  I promised to give each day one action item people can do.  Today, this is it. 

And finally, with all that said, I’d also like to mention another peace worker who is making Ryan’s work possible.   Thanks very much to New York Times writer Nicholas Kristoff for writing about this and bringing it to the world’s attention.  Kristoff’s writing has given Ryan the attention he needs to help raise awareness of this issue. 

See two of Nick Kristoff's articles:   Battling Sudan’s Bombs With Videos   (February 26, 2012) and The Man Who Stayed Behind (October 19, 2001)
If you’d like to learn even more, please read the links in this blog post, including:  and  

An update to this blog post appears HERE

(Note:  all photographs are in the public domain)

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Switch It Off! (Switch Off That Extra Light Bulb, I Mean!)

Surface mining affects many people economically and environmentally, and often in ways which are destructive of economic and environmental justice:

Because surface mining tends to occur in locations remote from densely populated areas, many of us have never witnessed first hand the environmental devastation which accompanies it.  The ordinary person also may not be aware that surface mining itself has transformed radically with the advent of technology in the last 30 years.  Surface mining is now occurring on a scale never before seen on the earth.  It has become much more damaging environmentally than ever before.

(See, for example, this interactive satellite map, courtesy NASA, showing growth of Athabasca Oil Sands mine 1981-2011:  (notice that each unit is 4 kilometers!).)

In central Appalachia, mountaintop removal mining (in which an entire mountain is blasted to expose the coal underneath) has become the dominant driver of regional land-use change.  I have blogged in other posts about the effects on people and wildlife.  People are driven off their ancestral lands, economic independenceand diversity is lost as communities become dependent upon one, powerful employer, streams clog up from sedimentation, chemicals pollute the waters and air, and children develop asthma.   Because of imbalance of power related to economics, local communities profoundly affected by these mountaintop removal mining have found themselves powerless to stop the devastation to their health, economy, and way of life.

Autosave-File vom d-lab2/3 der AgfaPhoto GmbH
Photo by Mark Schmerling,

I hope I’ve written enough to alert you to the issue.  But, what to do about it? 

Start with your light switch! 

As Shirley Burns writes in her article, “Mountaintop Removal in Southern Appalachia,”
It is easy for the rest of the country to flip on their light switches and never think where the energy is coming from. More than half of all US electricity comes from coal. It's the nation's dirty little secret. Even filthier is what is done to the land to get the coal. People talk passionately about clean coal technology, but this discussion revolves around whether it's possible to clean the burning of the coal. Overlooked in the "Clean Coal" dialogue is the extraction of coal through mountaintop removal. This process is inherently filthy, and it can never be clean! Along with the incessant dust and danger from blasting apart a mountain, the processing of this coal results in huge coal slurry impoundments that hold billions of gallons of toxic sludge, which contains concentrated toxic substances such as selenium, cadmium, boron, arsenic and nickel. In addition to the knowledge that these dams can break (as one did in Buffalo Creek, West Virginia, in 1972, killing 125 people and, more recently, in October 2000 in Martin County, Kentucky, polluting more than 75 miles of stream from Kentucky to West Virginia) is the fear that they are contaminating underground aquifers. The valley fills that are created with the refuse of the blasted apart mountains bury hundreds of miles of streams that feed the waters of the eastern United States.
Half of all U.S. electricity comes from coal.  That means, when you use electricity, you are using COAL. 
Dirty coal.  

As long as the nation is gulping down coal like a famished beggar, our politicians will lack the political will to rein in the coal companies to alter the power balance back in favor of environmental regulations designed to protect people and communities affected by coal extraction, and all of us who reside downstream in the figurative sense. 

So, please, ask yourself:

“What can I do today to reduce my use of electricity?” 

Here are some ideas.  Can you add to the list?  Please DO leave a comment below to add to this list! 
  • Aim to use no more than one light per person in the house, at a time.  (How many bulbs are burning where you are, right now?)
  • Ventilate with outside air rather than motor driven ventilation.  
  • If you use heat or air conditioning, dress for the weather so that you can moderate your use of the thermostat.
  • Put your hot water heater on a timer.  
  • Lower the temperature settings on your hot water heater.
  • Use electric strips that can be shut off for all electrical items in your house.
  • Unplug all electronics and battery chargers when not in use.  These sap electricity at all times. 
  • Bake less often and stir fry more often (as this uses less energy)
  • Use energy efficient light bulbs
  • Please, leave a comment to add to this list!

Friday, February 24, 2012

Ethics and Property Rights In Tar Sands and Mountaintop Mining

Both tar sands mining and mountain top removal in the Appalachian mountains raise ethical issues related to the very idea of land “ownership”.  

Both forms of mining are what is known a surface mining.  Instead of digging subterranean tunnels underground to access material, the earth is scraped away to the level of the mineral deposits.  There has been a worldwide increase in surface mining in the last 30  years.  Mountaintop removal mining has become the “dominant driver of land-use change in the central Appalachian ecoregion of the United States.”  A description is the practice is as follows:  “Upper elevation forests are cleared and stripped of topsoil, and explosives are used to break up rocks to access buried coal (fig. S1). Excess rock (mine “spoil”) is pushed into adjacent valleys, where it buries existing streams.” Palmer, et al. “Mountaintop Mining Consequences,” Science January 2010 (accessed 2/25/12). 

Mountaintop removal mining removes all layers of topsoil, shoving them into streambeds.  What is left after extinguishment of mining operations is rock and pulverized stone.  Additionally, the pH of the remaining land is altered so that it is inhospitable to plant life.   In effect, mountaintop removal mining permanently and forever renders what is left of the mountain incapable of further productive use, for all future generations.

The Western idea of land ownership, where one party has exclusive rights to use of land and may prevent others from any use of it, is not universal. However, even in the Western model of land ownership, there has also been an unstated but implicit understanding that that right of exclusion is not permanent.  For instance, the rule against perpetuities prevents a landowner from tying up property for “perpetuity.”   It expressly states that no interest in land is valid if it may not vest within the span of a life in being plus 21 years. Thus, historically and in general, while uses of land might encumber that land for more than a single generation, it has been an implicit policy that a landowner does not have a right to encumber land for all time forward. 

Can this, in turn, be used to assert that no land owner has a property right to turn land into an unusable wasteland for all time, forever, going forward?   What ethical principles apply, or should apply, to inform legal standards of use for property ownerships? 

Please leave a comment, below.

Photograph of mountaintop mine by J.W. Randolph, Courtesy Wikimedia Commons

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Guest Blogger Economist KIENAN MICK, on Capitalism and the Value of Sustainability

Kienan Mick landscape
Photo courtesy of Kienan Mick, all rights reserved
“Labor is the father of material wealth, the earth is its mother” – William Petty

Capitalism knows the price of everything but the value of nothing.  Capitalism ignores the fact that, regardless of the self-bestowed entitlements to the fruits of our “hard work,” everything we have or create is, ultimately, dependent on the freely given gifts of clean air, rain, and soil.

It should be obvious that the natural resources of the earth -- the minerals, the metals, the fuels -- must all be preserved in perpetuity for future generations until the day when God rescinds the payment. These natural gifts are not free. While we may not make a monetary payment for every breath of air we breathe, or every drop of rain that falls, it is essential that we acknowledge the cost of preserving these essential gifts.

But capitalism ignores all of this. The ultimate manifestation of greed and selfishness is the generation that only puts prices on its own borrowed time, ignoring the costs to future generations.   Polluting a river today because the cost of cleanup is “too high” should not be praised as part of the “entrepreneurial spirit.” Poisoning the earth today for profits should not be considered a side effect of “innovation.” Pumping toxic chemicals into the air should not be acceptable in the pursuit of “growth.”

“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” – Chinese Proverb

Another mantra of capitalism is self-sufficiency. But any wisdom found in this quote is lost by the true nature of capitalism, which is to consume today at the expense of tomorrow. How can one be self-sufficient if there is nothing to subsist on?
If the river is polluted and kills all the fish, then what? If the river is dammed off, destroying the habitat if the fish, then what? If the river is overfished and there are no fish left, then what? Teaching the man to fish is a noble sentiment, but in order for it to benefit the man there must be insurance that he will always be able to fish from the river. There must be sustainability.

Perhaps capitalism is not about hard work. Perhaps it is really about laziness. Future generations are expected to not only face an earth with depleted resources, but to clean up the mess left behind by the last generation who were too selfish and greedy to think about them.

Instead of blindly extolling the virtues of capitalism, perhaps we should ask; is capitalism and its corresponding emphasis on consumption sustainable? Or is it just a shoddy excuse for selfishness and greed to satisfy the wants of today at the expense of the lives of tomorrow?

This blog post was contributed by guest blogger, Kienan Mick. Kienan is a resident of the beautiful, lake filled Twin Cities. In his spare time, he enjoys amateur photography, nature hikes, and bird watching. He graduated with a BA in Economics from the University of Minnesota in 2009, and just recently finished a MS in Applied Economics from the University of North Dakota. He is interested in “alternative” economic systems where the public, unions, and co-ops take up a greater stake in our economy. He writes, “The idea is that when people are invested in their communities, they will invest wisely, with a long-term view towards sustainability for future generations.”

End Mountaintop Removal Mining


Dear friend,

I just signed a pledge to help save the Appalachian Mountains from mountaintop removal coal mining.  It was quick and easy, so please do the same by visiting:

This web page has lots of resources for you to learn more (including interactive maps so you can even see your own connection to mountaintop removal mining) and has lots of resources if you are inspired to take action, as I have been. 

This terrible form of coal mining – in which entire mountains are literally blown up -- destroys the mountain not just for decades, but for all future generations.  It’s not just ugly in appearance but in effect.  Because it removes the topsoil and leaves nothing but pulverized rock, all life is destroyed and an environment is left behind that lacks the elements to sustain life.  As bad as Mt. St. Helens appeared after the volcanic eruption and devastating fires, there were still elements to sustain life.  Not so here. 

This is happening on a scale that is almost unimaginable, with more than 500 mountains already destroyed in America.

But the truth is, most people don't even know that mountaintop removal is happening.

Thank you for joining with me and helping spread the word about our efforts to save the mountains.   We must muster the political will to stop it.  Not for ourselves, but for future generations. 


As a presidential candidate in 2008, President Obama told the nation that we needed to find a way to generate energy without “blowing off the tops of mountains.”

Four years later, we are still blowing off the tops of mountains—and needlessly so, as a clear environmental and human rights violations, following a 40-year policy of “regulating” mountaintop removal violations, not abolishing them. In truth, mountaintop removal operations have been plundering central Appalachian since 1970—more than four decades of regulated criminal violations, civil rights abuse, and death.

Read more by expert Jeff Biggers, HERE

(Photo by J.W. Randolph courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)


Tuesday, February 21, 2012

The World’s Dirtiest Oil

Learn the facts about tar sands oil.  In this YouTube video from TEDxVictoria, Garth Lenz alternates photographic footage of the land as it presently is, with land after it has been affected by tar sands mining operations. 

Besides subjecting large swaths of land to strip mining, the extraction process has also so far produced the largest toxic impoundments in the history of the planet.  So far, the water polluted and then impounded as the result of tar sands mining could cover Lake Eerie with a foot of water.   Then, Lenz reminds us, “Let’s face it, we all live downstream ….”

This collage of Tar Sand mining operations was created by Jungbim and used courtesy of author and of Wikimedia Commons





Monday, February 20, 2012

Rumi for Mediators

I was just browsing through some blogs, and ran across an entry by London mediator Amanda Bucklow on her beautiful site and blog, The Mediation Times

In a couple of blog entries, Bucklow reminds us that storytelling is an integral part of the mediation process. 

In the blog post entitled “A Story is Like Water – Rumi for Mediators, Parties, and Their Lawyers,” Bucklow refers to the following Rumi poem, which I agree bears repeating: 

A story is like water that you heat for your bath.

It takes messages between the fire and your skin,

It lets them meet, and it cleans you!

Very few can sit down in the middle of the fire itself

like a salamander or Abraham.

We need intermediaries.


Jalāl ad-din Rumi (1207 – 1273)


Salamander from The Story of Alchemy and the Beginnings of Chemistry

Salamander from The Story of Alchemy and the Beginnings of Chemistry

Sunday, February 19, 2012

Food Justice

Stephen Ritz teaches in a challenging environment.  Many of his kids are homeless, have special education needs, and would be considered unemployable when they graduated, if they graduated.  Ritz has transformed those statistics, improved the odds for those kids, and turned this idea into a project that is feeding hundreds if not thousands of people. 

Saturday, February 18, 2012


I have a birthday in a few weeks!  Aging is beautiful.  Enjoy this song, as I do:

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Justice Sonya Sotomayor Rules On Sesame Street!

For a great example of judicial problem solving, check out this video of Justice Sotomayor resolving a dispute between Goldilocks and Little Bear.



This meeting has a nice casual, win-win feel to it.  The parties can even have a little snack while they talk, so it's a lot like mediation.  But there are a few key differences.

For one thing, neither side has a lawyer running the show, getting in the middle and telling them what to do.   Both are feeling like they get a chance to tell their story, without the lawyers interrupting and telling them to stop.   In a real, live courtroom situation, things are not run this way.  Evidence is tightly controlled.   While “your” side is intent on telling your side of the case, the “other” side is intent on keeping out any evidence that doesn’t meet strict standards for admissibility.  In some cases, this can make parties feel as if their entire story has not been heard, even after they have their full day in court. 

If a party really wants the other side to hear what they have to say, mediation is more likely to be the forum in which the issues can be fully aired without being limited by what the lawyers view as being “relevant” and “admissible”. 

Next, Justice Sotomayor demonstrates a key difference between a judicial decision and mediation.  Namely, she makes a decision (in law, called a “ruling”), imposing a “judgment” in the case, in which she tells the parties what to do.   This is very unlike mediation, because a mediator doesn’t impose a solution from the outside in.  In sharp contrast to a judicial “ruling,” a mediator would have kept asking questions and facilitating discussion until the parties came up with their own, voluntary solution. 

It’s possible that a solution agreed upon by the parties would have involved fixing or replacing the chair, but there is a broader range of possibilities that they could have considered and agreed upon.   Perhaps little bear had outgrown his chair, or would have preferred a hammock?  The parties could have discussed that.   Remedies in mediation are not limited to what a court could order.  The parties are free to agree on anything they both feel is fair. 

I note also that the solution imposed by Justice Sotomayor, to fix the chair, was one that is unlikely to be ordered by a U.S. Court.  To order a party to do something in particular, such as to fix an object, is called “specific performance.”  While specific performance is in the range of possible options, there are challenges with imposing this as a matter of law.  Who decides if the chair is fixed well enough?  What if it costs more to fix the chair than the chair is worth?  Because of these and other issues, as a practical matter a court of law is more likely to award money damages:   A court is more likely to order Goldilocks to pay Bear a set amount of money, perhaps the amount of money it would cost to replace the chair, or the amount of money Bear could have sold it for as used furniture.  To allow Goldilocks to repair the chair is a “restorative justice” approach less likely to be ordered by an American court than monetary damages. 

When the parties come up with their own ideas and own solutions, there is also more “buy in” and therefore more likelihood for two things:  (1) that both parties will be happy in the end, and (2) that both parties will follow through with what they agreed to do.   It is faster for a judge to jump to a conclusion and order the parties to do something.  But it’s possible that what is so obvious to everyone else may not be obvious to one of the parties.  Perhaps they need time and space to mull things over, to think through the possibilities, and to consider all options before they would arrive at exactly the same conclusion.  Having the parties think through and take responsibility for their own decisions results in problem solving that is deeper and more authentic, and thus more likely to be accepted by all involved on a deeper, emotional level. 

Perhaps Sesame Street would like to invite a mediator to demonstrate in a similar case? How about “The Three Little Pigs?”   Goldilocks is an EASY case!  Three Little Pigs is a bit more challenging, but it can be done!  (Every case, no matter how intractable it may seem at the outset, has potential to benefit from conflict transformation if only the parties will listen and try to find ways to work things out. )



Monday, February 6, 2012

Sudanese People Need Your Advocacy Now

Dear Friends,

Please tell the Obama Administration that waiting is not an option for the people of Sudan, as their government masses its armed forces to attack Sudanese civilians and blocks humanitarian aid.

Recent satellite imagery shows that the government of Sudan is massing its armed forces in preparation for a full-scale military assault on the Nuba people in South Kordofan.   Hundreds of thousands of civilians are at imminent risk, with evacuation routes blocked by Sudan’s army.  This grave threat is compounded by the government of Sudan’s continuous blockade of humanitarian assistance since June 5, 2011.

If you think racism is bad in the USA, it’s worse in Sudan.   Genocide has its roots in the deep divide between the light skinner Arabic peoples who control the government in Khartoum and the Black Africans in the South. 

US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, recently stated, “If there is not a substantial new inflow of aid by March, the situation in Southern Kordofan will be “one step short of full- scale famine.”

With another major attack imminent, the Obama Administration must lead and take action, unilateral if needed, to save lives immediately. Time has run out for dialogue and negotiations with Omar al Bashir’s genocidal regime in Sudan that, for decades, has killed while it talks. The innocent civilians in Sudan can’t wait any longer.

Save a life! Take action now: Ask the United States to urgently take necessary steps to save lives and avoid complicity in genocide.