There’s genocide, and then there’s genocide, you know? If you don’t, then thank goodness Jimmy Carter can make that fine distinction for you:
“There is a legal definition of genocide and Darfur does not meet that legal standard. The atrocities were horrible but I don’t think it qualifies to be called genocide,” he said. Washington is almost alone in branding the 4 1/2 years of violence in Darfur genocide. Khartoum rejects the term, European governments are reluctant to use it and a U.N.-appointed commission of inquiry found no genocide, but that some individuals may have acted with genocidal intent. Carter, whose charitable foundation, the Carter Center, worked to establish the International Criminal Court (ICC), said: “If you read the law textbooks … you’ll see very clearly that it’s not genocide and to call it genocide falsely just to exaggerate a horrible situation I don’t think it helps.”
Yes, Darfur, the land where legal niceties prevail! The locals were, sadly, just a few thousand corpses shy of being able to wear the ICC’s Official Seal of Victims of Genocide, but thanks for playing, and here’s your year’s supply of Turtle Wax.