TewMuch:

Nigeria does not owe them anything. I dare you to try stepping into and American or US embassy and alleging all what these women are alleging, just to get citizenship and recognition. In just 2 minutes, you will be thrown out on your backside in the cold. Their country should take responsibility, those are the negative aspects of war. Next time they will look out for the best interest of their citizens, rather than letting rebels take them over. Too bad, Nigerians are not the baby daddy's.

Now you are not only being insensitive but inhuman!  By the way, if the women can show their kids are americans by DNA, it is AUTOMATIC american status for the kids. I know of a similar case, no despoil or violence involved but simply presenting DNA evidence and Child was made US citizen.

Anyways, back to the possible rape issue. Rape is a serious issue in AFRICA -- Nigerians are not saints, we have records and reports of this. Rape was used as a tool of war in Uganda, congo, Liberia etc.

Kobojunkie:

Now you are not only being insensitive but inhuman!  By the way, if the women can show their kids are americans by DNA, it is AUTOMATIC american status for the kids. I know of a similar case, no despoil or violence involved but simply presenting DNA evidence and Child was made US citizen.

Go back and get that your story right. So the whole of America has one type of DNA? Dont you have to know who the father is and be able to identify him physically and have him give samples willingly? Think.

TewMuch:

Go back and get that your story right. So the whole of America has one type of DNA? Dont you have to know who the father is and be able to identify him physically and have him give samples willingly? Think.

To say I am not shocked that someone is asking me that question is a lie . . . where exactly did you get that raggedy logic from? Where do people get this crap that women who have kids for soldiers do not have a clue who the fathers are? Even rap-ed women have an idea who raped them, let alone people who are raped by people of another nationality, while in their own country. My Gosh!!!

Of course that one got my attention cause I was surprised you would say that

i made that comment when the issue of r a p e came up

 No they are different because First of all US was at war but Nigerian army was suppose to protect these women. All is fair in war but the soldiers that were reported to have rap-ed women in Iraq are in military jail right now.

in simple logic,would yous say all the children are a product of an intiamte relationship between the soldiers and their mothers ? if you can establish r a p e case,then i see no reason why they are different from the americans just that the americans are rotting away in jail while nigeria soldiers are free men

TewMuch:

Go back and get that your story right. So the whole of America has one type of DNA? Dont you have to know who the father is and be able to identify him physically and have him give samples willingly? Think.

If the DNA is already in the system, you dont need to take it from them physically.

And as a soldier, I'm sure that their DNA would ready be in the system.

Ileke-IdI:

If the DNA is already in the system, you dont need to take it from them physically.

And a soldier, I'm sure that their DNA would ready be in the system.

Great point!

TewMuch:

Go back and get that your story right. So the whole of America has one type of DNA? Dont you have to know who the father is and be able to identify him physically and have him give samples willingly? Think.

Hahahaha common, They will match the kid's DNA with that of every American soldier sent on the mission during the time the rape occurred. If it matches then the kid will get an American passport while they will open another inquiry which some politician will use in their next campaign if you know what I mean. Every American soldier has a DNA record on a computed database and it will be narrowed to the one on the mission in that particular area.

~Bluetooth:

i made that comment when the issue of r a p e came up in simple logic,would yous say all the children are a product of an intiamte relationship between the soldiers and their mothers ? if you can establish r a p e case,then i see no reason why they are different from the americans just that the americans are rotting away in jail while nigeria soldiers are free men

Free and Boasting about it too!! Not just the rapists but the murderers in our midst. Those who partake in slaughtering people on ethnic or religious grounds and then go back to their daily lives as if nothing changed.

Ileke-IdI:

If the DNA is already in the system, you dont need to take it from them physically.

And a soldier, I'm sure that their DNA would ready be in the system.

Nigerian Soldiers have DNA in a system? funny stuff. dream on.

Kobojunkie:

To say I am not shocked that someone is asking me that question is a lie . . . where exactly did you get that raggedy logic from? Where do people get this crap that women who have kids for soldiers do not have a clue who the fathers are? Even rap-ed women have an idea who despoiled them, let alone people who are despoiled by people of another nationality, while in their own country. My Gosh!!!

If you have been reading the previous posts, you will see that your recent posts in response to mine were unnecessary. And you were not clear on whether DNA sample was presented by the father. At bolded, well if they can identify the men why didnt they already? And why havent they come forward to do DNA tests? Go back and take the time to read, then come back and make a better argument.

~Bluetooth:

i made that comment when the issue of r a p e came up in simple logic,would yous say all the children are a product of an intiamte relationship between the soldiers and their mothers ? if you can establish r a p e case,then i see no reason why they are different from the americans just that the americans are rotting away in jail while nigeria soldiers are free men

Even if ra--pe was the issue that made you post that comment, it was wrong. Cause you are indirectly saying they shouldn't be punished. The difference is if the woman despoiled by the r--apist  rotting away in jail got pregnant by him, she and the American government will know who the father is. There should have been inquiries then but nothing happened. In fact pictures were posted on news papers in the US. The picture showed doesn't look like despoil though to be honest.

9jaganja:

Hahahaha common,  They will match the kid's DNA with that of every American soldier sent on the mission during the time the despoil occurred. If it matches then the kid will get an American passport while they will open another inquiry which some politician will use in their next campaign if you know what I mean. Every American soldier has a DNA record on a computed database and it will be narrowed to the one on the mission in that particular area.

Dude, she was talking about a random person. Talking like they just presented the baby's DNA and they automatically got the American and gave the baby citizenship. She needs to be clearer with her statement. I dont really know about the American soldiers having a DNA database. If you are talking about finger print, then yes. But the DNA database is very questionable. You will have to be able to identify the person. Can you imagine how many mixed breeds are running around in vietnam and japan? lots.

TewMuch:

Nigerian Soldiers have DNA in a system? funny stuff. dream on.

Do you think that the UN/ S.Africa is like careless Nigerians? Have foreign officials in their country without any genetic info on them?


And if you guys are claiming that some of the cases are of mothers not knowing who fathered their babies, shouldnt you all be more upset and worried that they might be  cases of ra- pe? What woman [in a war zone] would just open her legs for a man?

TewMuch:

If you have been reading the previous posts, you will see that your recent posts in response to mine were unnecessary.

sigh! You chose to compare the case to that of Americans and you somehow don't think correcting that is necessary?

TewMuch:
And you were not clear on whether DNA sample was presented by the father.

Americans soldiers are monitored . .  they do not need to be present at the time the woman presents the child for DNA testing to be fingered.

TewMuch:

At bolded, well if they can identify the men why didnt they already? And why havent they come forward to do DNA tests? Go back and take the time to read, then come back and make a better argument.

Umm . . . do you think it is possible that the reason why there is a count of 250K is possibly because they already came out to identify that the father of their kids were Nigerians?  Just a thought is all
Have you asked them to provide DNA for testing then?

TewMuch:

Dude, she was talking about a random person. Talking like they just presented the baby's DNA and they automatically got the American and gave the baby citizenship. She needs to be clearer with her statement. I dont really know about the American soldiers having a DNA database. If you are talking about finger print, then yes. But the DNA database is very questionable. You will have to be able to identify the person. Can you imagine how many mixed breeds are running around in vietnam and japan? lots.

Talking of a Random person? ROFLMAO!!! If you do not understand what is posted, then ask questions of me rather than trying desperately to twist my words. We are on Americans Soldiers . . . I would think anyone who takes it on himself to make BOLD statements such as the one you tried earlier would know that that response there was in the same Context . . .

Kobojunkie:

Talking of a Random person? ROFLMAO!!! If you do not understand what is posted, then ask questions of me rather than trying desperately to twist my words. We are on Americans Soldiers . . . I would think anyone who takes it on himself to make BOLD statements such as the one you tried earlier would know that that response there was in the same Context . . .

Am i now supposed to be a mind reader? you came out of no where giving examples. Try to give clear statements and not vague examples, the burden is on you. You even stated that the woman knew who the man was. Who is to say he did not give the sample willingly to help her?

9jaganja:

Even if ra--pe was the issue that made you post that comment, it was wrong. Cause you are indirectly saying they shouldn't be punished. The difference is if the woman despoiled by the r--apist  rotting away in jail got pregnant by him, she and the American government will know who the father is. There should have been inquiries then but nothing happened. In fact pictures were posted on news papers in the US. The picture showed doesn't look like despoil though to be honest.

where did you see me saying that they shouldn't be punished ? what i said was that since our law do not readily protect r a p e victims,most r a p i s t go unpunished

Kobojunkie:

Free and Boasting about it too!! Not just the rapists but the murderers in our midst. Those who partake in slaughtering people on ethnic or religious grounds and then go back to their daily lives as if nothing changed.

if culprits are sanctioned appropriately immediately after commiting crime,i think the problem will reduce drastically.many people would have been long dead for their numerous atrocities.honestly, sometimes i like the chinese approach to crime.

TewMuch:

Dude, she was talking about a random person. Talking like they just presented the baby's DNA and they automatically got the American and gave the baby citizenship. She needs to be clearer with her statement. I dont really know about the American soldiers having a DNA database. If you are talking about finger print, then yes. But the DNA database is very questionable. You will have to be able to identify the person. Can you imagine how many mixed breeds are running around in vietnam and japan? lots.

Yea lots of mix breed running around Vietnam and Japan because of the time the issue happened. Do you also know how many American soldiers were jailed? Yes Americans have DNA database of all soldiers so in case they get blown to bits, they can be identified by DNA.

~Bluetooth:

where did you see me saying that they shouldn't be punished ? what i said was that since our law do not readily protect r a p e victims,most r a p i s t go unpunished ;Dif culprits are sanctioned appropriately immediately after commiting crime,i think the problem will reduce drastically.[b]many people would have been long dead for their numerous atrocities.[/b]honestly, sometimes i like the chinese approach to crime.

I prefer that to me living in fear of my neighbour and stuff. The thought is scary. You never know how much blood the next man has on his hands. I remember a particular guy who a friend of mine accused of despoiling her. She was threatened with expulsion and so kept quiet about it. She even started living in shame, over the incident. But this man went on to boast about USELESSING THE GALS back when he was in college, a couple of years later. I wonder if this gal who was rap-ed will ever know justice. Na that kind of case I dey sanction JUNGLE JUSTICE for.

Ileke-IdI:

Do you think that the UN/ S.Africa is like careless Nigerians? Have foreign officials in their country without any genetic info on them?


And if you guys are claiming that some of the cases are of mothers not knowing who fathered their babies, shouldnt you all be more upset and worried that they might be  cases of ra- pe? What woman [in a war zone] would just open her legs for a man?

If you read my previous posts you will see that i said if they can prove it by DNA or had the Nigerian parent sign their birth certificate (supported by DNA tests); then they are Nigerians. Now if they cant? Then they are Liberians. Also i doubt the UN has DNA samples from all the African soldiers that go on peace keeping missions. All i know is finger print, to identify them as soldiers and in times of death.

9jaganja:

Yea lots of mix breed running around Vietnam and Japan because of the time the issue happened. Do you also know how many American soldiers were jailed? Yes Americans have DNA database of all soldiers so in case they get blown to bits, they can be identified by DNA.

All i know is the special forces, probably. But i dont know about the regular soldiers, i will have to ask to confirm that. Maybe medical records but DNA, that one i will have to ask.

~Bluetooth:

where did you see me saying that they shouldn't be punished ? what i said was that since our law do not readily protect r a p e victims,most r a p i s t go unpunished ;Dif culprits are sanctioned appropriately immediately after commiting crime,i think the problem will reduce drastically.many people would have been long dead for their numerous atrocities.honestly, sometimes i like the chinese approach to crime.

forget  it dude but when issues like these come up don't refer people who have nothing to do with the situation.

TewMuch:

If you read my previous posts you will see that i said if they can prove it by DNA or had the Nigerian parent sign their birth certificate (supported by DNA tests); then they are Nigerians. Now if they cant? Then they are Liberians. Also i doubt the UN has DNA samples from all the African soldiers that go on peace keeping missions. All i know is finger print, to identify them as soldiers and in times of death.

They would. They're going to war for gosh sakes. Their DNA, blood type and their medical info would be on files. We've had situations where soldiers need blood transfusions etc, without their medical info, immediate action cannot be performed. Infos like these are stored not only because they might later suspect the soldiers for criminal intents, but also for the safety of the soldiers and civilians under their protection.


IF UN does not have that info, Nigeria SHOULD. And those infos can easily be transferred to UN upon request.

Anywaz, I'm (+) that UN does have those infos on files

Sexual abuse of children by UN Peacekeepers

Marian Houk
Middle East Times, January 4, 2007

GENEVA -- The accusations are sickening - so why did it take the London newspaper, Daily Telegraph, six months to publish them? Were they waiting for Kofi Annan to leave? Were they making sure their own investigative reporting was complete and correct?

The accusations were published in the article, "UN staff accused of raping children in Sudan," written by Kate Holt in Juba, southern Sudan and Sarah Hughes. The Daily Telegraph reports that: "The abuse allegedly began two years ago when the UN mission in southern Sudan (UNMIS) moved in to help rebuild the region after a 23-year civil war. The UN has up to 10,000 military personnel in the region, of all nationalities and the allegations involve peacekeepers, military police, and civilian staff. The first indications of sexual exploitation emerged within months of the UN force's arrival and the Daily Telegraph has seen a draft of an internal report compiled by the UN children's agency UNICEF in July 2005 detailing the problem. In a six-month investigation, Kate Holt gathered more than 20 victims' accounts claiming that peacekeeping and civilian staff based in the town are regularly picking up young children in their UN vehicles and forcing them to have sex. It is thought that hundreds of children may have been abused."

What? UNICEF has known about it for a year and a half?

Hang on for a minute, and let's go back to the UN itself.

The Daily Telegraph says, "Responding to the report, Jane Holl Lute, the UN assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping, said: 'There could be truth. These environments are ones in which it is difficult to ascertain the truth , I do not believe these are new allegations. Nevertheless, we will treat them as seriously as we treat all other allegations,' she told the Associated Press in New York. She said she had spoken to the force commander and chief of staff in the UN mission in southern Sudan 'and I know they are very well briefed on what UN policy is and have taken steps to implement that policy across the board in that mission , But we don't have the facts yet in this case, and we need to ascertain the facts and follow it through to appropriate resolution and take action if necessary. We won't be complacent and there will be no impunity to the full extent of the UN's authority'."

Of course, that is a pretty big qualification - the UN actually says it has little or no authority over its peacekeeping troops, because they are not, technically, UN staff members. Peacekeepers are provided by their own national governments and are not subject to UN disciplinary procedures, nor, by agreements (yes, worked out by the UN) with the countries in which the troops are deployed, are they subject to prosecution in the "host countries." The UN says all it can do is to send any miscreants home, and hope they will be punished there. Until now, that has not really happened.

The UN, however, could threaten to send back a whole national contingent, if its members were accused of sexual abuse, couldn't it? Countries are dependent on the UN allowances, paid by special assessments to Member States, to governments which contribute troops and other force participants to a UN peacekeeping operation. They might respond to a threat to cut off their allowances (deployment, daily, repatriation, and more, )

UN Watch, an NGO established by a former US Ambassador in Geneva in 1993 with the primary purpose of watching out for what the UN does regarding Israel, has called on Ban Ki-Moon and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour to establish an international independent panel of inquiry into the allegations reported by the Daily Telegraph.:

"UN Watch has been one of the leading non-governmental organizations urging the Human Rights Council to take action against Sudan's atrocities in Darfur. We represented the largest NGO coalition at the recent special Council session on Darfur and played a similar leading role in other UN human rights forums. It was UN Watch's intervention that led the UN Working Group on Minorities to hold Sudan to account in its report last year , We were shocked to read of the allegations - detailed in a 2005 internal UNICEF report and corroborated by evidence gathered by the Daily Telegraph and NGOs in the region - that, since they were deployed two years ago, UN peacekeepers in southern Sudan have regularly been sexually abusing children who already have suffered so much in the recent civil war.

"In our advocacy, we have consistently argued for UN intervention to protect civilians in Darfur from the horror of mass rapes, killings and displacement. We continue to believe that an international force in the western region of Sudan will bring far more help than harm to that region's victims. But unless the UN takes immediate, firm, and sustained action against the reported abuses by its personnel in other regions of Sudan - and indeed around the world - we fear that today's allegations will pose a setback to this effort."

Are we to understand from this that UN Watch knew about, or has been aware of, the UNICEF internal report on this situation, prepared in 2005?

[Editor’s Note: In fact, we had no such advance knowledge and nothing in our letter implied so. Click for more.]

This story has another dimension, however, and it is alluded to in the letter from UN Watch - the government of Sudan is being pressured to accept large UN participation in a "hybrid" force with African Union forces in Darfur, though the government is apparently still reluctant to go through with the deal.

The Daily Telegraph reports, in its story of sexual abuse in southern Sudan, that "the UN is pushing to be allowed to launch a new peacekeeping mission there to help end the humanitarian crisis that has spiraled in recent years. The Telegraph understands that the Sudanese government, which is deeply opposed to the deployment of UN troops to Darfur, has also gathered evidence, including video footage of Bangladeshi UN workers having sex with three young girls."

The Daily Telegraph includes some very unbecoming comments made by UN officials "on the ground" - six months back, in May - to their reporter: "The British regional coordinator for UNMIS, James Ellery, has refuted the claims, arguing that there is no substantiating evidence. 'I will refute all claims made on this issue,' he said in an interview last May. 'We investigated all allegations made and no evidence was forthcoming. None of these claims can be substantiated. This is the most backward country in Africa and there are lots of misunderstandings as to the UN's role. Over 90 percent of people here are illiterate and rumors therefore spread very quickly.'

"Mr. Ellery insisted that his organization was following correct codes of conduct. 'We provide regular briefings on the UN code of conduct. Nobody employed by the UN is meant to have sexual contact at all with any local person,' he said. He did, however, appear to acknowledge that the organization might not be able to ensure that all its staff behave according to standards. 'We are applying a standard of morality that is very, very high but we cannot expect that soldiers when they go abroad are going to behave themselves as we think they should. There are a wide range of countries being represented in the UN forces and among these there is always going to be a bad apple'."

The local government does not look too good, either, in this report: "The Daily Telegraph has learned that a number of complaints have been made about the behavior of UN personnel stationed in Juba. Yet those accused have not been tracked down nor has there been any attempt by the UN or local officials to interview those making the accusations. The fledging government of southern Sudan is believed to be too concerned to maintain good relations with the UN to challenge the organization , Juba's county court judge, Ali Said, said that the region had seen an increase in child prostitution since the UN arrived. 'The majority of people working for the UN and NGOs are men and need to be entertained. But no cases have come to court,' he said.

Coming back to UNICEF, the report goes on to say that "An unfinished copy of the internal UNICEF report, seen by the Daily Telegraph, shows that the UN has been aware of the problem for more than a year. 'Evidence suggests that UNMIS staff may already be involved in sexual exploitation,' the report says. 'UN cars have been staying into the early hours of the morning, as late as 6am, at a restaurant/disco called Kololo in Juba , adult informants reported seeing a UNMIS car stop along a main road in Juba to pick up three young girls'."

UNICEF is part of the UN system, but it is also a separate agency, funded not by the UN budget but by its own solicited contributions from individuals and donor countries (remember the UNICEF greeting cards? And the Halloween trick-or-treat collections?) Because of its dependence on donations, which in turn depend to a large extent on publicity, generated by news stories, UNICEF is often seen by other organizations as rather aggressively elbowing competitors aside to take credit for this or that success, in many humanitarian operations. So, why did it sit on these accusations, when it could have trumpeted its efforts to protect mothers and children? Perhaps to protect its position in a UN-led operation?

Unfortunately, the UN's record is all-too-poor on such matters. Instead of offending the troop contributing countries - over which the UN says it has no power [blame the Member States, not the Organization -- a constant refrain of the UN Secretariat], they will punish the UN staff. Of course, if a UN staff member has sexually abused anyone, he or she should be punished. But that's not how the UN operates, unfortunately.

One proposal now under consideration, courtesy of Prince Zayed Al Hassan, Jordan's outgoing UN ambassador, who was also Kofi Annan's Special Adviser on Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in UN Peacekeeping Operations (Jordan is a major troop-contributing country), is to collect DNA samples from men and women (these are not troops, but civilians) being sent on peacekeeping. The DNA samples are to be returned to these personnel once they return from the field! [It should also be noted that the UN rarely sends experienced core staff on these missions - their supervisors often resist sending them. The result is that persons with little or no experience with or knowledge of the UN are sent to remote and difficult locations with inadequate or non-existent administrative and other support from headquarters, are being sent on the most critical peacekeeping missions.

This article is the conclusion they came to in 2007. So i guess they expect Nigerians to maintain the DNA samples

TewMuch:

All i know is the special forces, probably. But i dont know about the regular soldiers, i will have to ask to confirm that. Maybe medical records but DNA, that one i will have to ask.

Up till now war criminals are still prosecuted. Medical record won't prove DNA. They take DNA records for recognition purposes.

proof that you guys say a lot of things you do not know. The UN does not require NADA from the peace keeping countries. Only their officials. So Nigerians are not responsible. In CONCLUSION. Will get back on the American soldier one.
Read article below carefully:

http://www.fmreview.org/FMRpdfs/FMR27/11.pdf

Some of these kids are product of rapes and others were products of consenting relationships

TewMuch:

proof that you guys say a lot of things you do not know. The UN does not require NADA from the peace keeping countries. Only their officials. So Nigerians are not responsible. In CONCLUSION. Will get back on the American soldier one.
Read article below carefully:

http://www.fmreview.org/FMRpdfs/FMR27/11.pdf

Who said anything about UN? We were talking about American soldiers. Seriously keep your mind in one context. You knock your self out of context to prove a point to who?

THE USE OF REFERENCE DNA SAMPLES TO ESTABLISH DNA IDENTIFICATION,
CONFIRMATION AND RE-ASSOCIATION OF COMBAT CASUALTIES DURING
OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM AND BEYOND


http://www.promega.com/geneticidproc/ussymp15proc/oralpresentations/foley.pdf


The Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory (AFDIL) supports the Armed Forces
Medical Examiner System by providing DNA analysis on human remains.  DNA testing
may be performed as the primary source of identification; as a means to supplement
other identification methods; and also for re-association of fragmented remains.  
Currently, one scientific method is required, although 2 or more is preferred, to identify a
deceased service member.  Any combination of dental records, fingerprint records
and/or a DNA comparison to a known reference may be used.  Reference bloodstain
card samples are maintained by the Armed Forces Repository of Specimen Samples for
the Identification of Remains (AFRSSIR).  AFRSSIR was established in 1991 for the sole
purpose of providing a direct reference sample for DNA comparisons to autopsy
specimens in order that no military service member casualty should ever go unidentified.  
All military personnel and select civilian employees working for the military are required
to have a DNA specimen on file at the AFRSSIR.

9jaganja:

Who said anything about UN? We were talking about American soldiers. Seriously keep your mind in one context. You knock your self out of context to prove a point to who?

You are really a lunatic. please leave my posts alone. I no get your time. With your unintelligible vague statements. You are irrelevant. What is the topic about? haha. Brain freeze or memory loss? I did say i was going to check the US angle, and i did say i was not sure about that right? Loonie,

UN peacekeepers exempted from war crimes prosecution for another year

12 June[b] 2003 [/b] – The United Nations Security Council today approved a 12-month extension of immunity that effectively shields UN peacekeepers from potential prosecution by the world's first permanent war crimes tribunal.

Currently, members of UN peacekeeping missions from nations that have not ratified the Rome Statute - the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC) - are immune from investigation or prosecution under a Council resolution adopted unanimously a year ago. Today's decision, adopted by a vote of 12 in favour, with France, Germany and Syria abstaining, extends that exemption each 1 July for another 12 months, unless the Council decides otherwise.

The ICC was inaugurated in early March in The Hague with the swearing in of its 18 judges, and will have jurisdiction over the most serious crimes, including war crimes, genocide, mass murder, RA-PE, torture, and, once defined, the crime of aggression. The Rome Statute entered into force 1 July 2002, and the Court's authority will cover only crimes committed after that date. The Statute, signed by nearly 140 States and ratified by 90, gives the court jurisdiction over individuals no matter the nationality of the accused.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=7402&Cr=icc&Cr1=


These are war crimes that will be prosecuted at some point  .  . so regardless of nation, they need to be brought to book!