Why Do We Trust NGOs?

by The Global Journal May 18, 2012

The Credibility of Transnational NGOs: When Virtue is Not Enough, by Peter Gourevitch, David Lake, Janice Gross Stein, €24.39, $32.99.

We live in a world where NGOs are not only multiplying in number, but are increasingly entrusted with a role as the de facto guardians of the common interests of humanity. Major international – or ‘transnational’ NGOs in particular, have assumed a unique position in global governance processes. These institutional heavyweights are able both to mobilize substantial funds, as well as shape global norms – and therefore social change – in a way that has no precedent in history. Yet, as the editors of this volume ask, why do we trust transnational NGOs? Though The Credibility of Transnational NGOs is a collection of theoretically framed political science researches, this central theme has more than scholarly interest. Many of the activities in which NGOs engage – from humanitarian relief to human rights monitoring, microcredit lending to ethical certification – are premised on their position as impartial, principled actors. Credibility is a ‘valuable asset’ that NGOs strive to acquire and protect. Through a series of in-depth case studies covering organizations as diverse as Rugmark, Amnesty International, Islamic Relief and Kiva, the authors featured in The Credibility of Transnational NGOs investigate the sources of NGO credibility, as well as the strategies NGOs employ to augment their reputations and further their ‘brand’. While many of the findings would appear self-evident – the importance of common values, for example – the very fact that scholars are turning their rigorous gaze towards an under-researched sector is nonetheless a step in the right direction.

Using NGOs to Coerce Nations

by Sandhya Jain

Source: The Pioneer

May 8, 2012

Western nations fund NGOs operating in developing countries to influence policy and subvert institutions. India does not need foreign-funded NGOs.

NATO’s Slow Genocide in Libya: Syria is Next

What the world has to look forward to if NATO and the UN gets its way in Syria

April 19, 2012

by Tony Cartalucci| Land Destroyer

Global Civilians For Peace In Libya

Image: The people of Tawargha are Libyans and have been Libyan for generations, settling there from sub-Saharan Africa. They have been brutally persecuted by the NATO-armed terrorists now running Libya. In Syria, expect these to be Alawite, Christian, and secular faces.

….

One group of Libyans hit hardest are the people of Tawargha – who were either exterminated or exiled from their city of 10,000-30,000 during the NATO-led destruction of Libya last year. Since then, their refugee camps have been raided, and survivors who have not yet fled Libya are being systematically imprisoned, tortured, and murdered.

Now, the very network of corporate-funded and directed NGOs charged with “human rights advocacy,” who assisted the Libyan rebels in willfully lying to the world over violations of “human rights” in the lead up to NATO’s military intervention, are finally reporting the widespread atrocities being carried out by the rebels themselves. In fact, organizations like Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International, both funded by convicted criminal and Wall Street speculator, George Soros, began reporting such atrocities back in 2011, but only long after NATO bombs were already falling on Libya and the process of “regime change” was already irreversible. And, at critical junctures, such as the sieges of Bani Walid and Sirte, where NATO itself was committing systematic war crimes by air in tandem with terrorist forces on the ground – organizations like HRW and Amnesty International were altogether mute. →

NGOs Promote Wars for Profit

Well-known NGO’s are profiteers earning big money

opednews.com

by Stephen Lendman 

CSI challenges interventionist notions. Exponents believe “military violence” should enforce international law.

“These claims stand in contrast to” non-interventionist principles. UN Charter provisions and other international law enunciate them. CSI challenges current practice. Its new report discussed Libya.

It explains how lies promote war. It asked if “the case for R2P (responsibility to protect was) based on fraud.” It wasn’t on truth and international law. Its rage to fight spurned them.

The UN Charter’s Chapter VI calls for resolving conflicts peacefully. Humanitarian intervention prohibits military force or other hostile acts.

Chapter VII permits justifiable boycotts, embargoes, blockades, and severed diplomatic ties. It prohibits war, except in self-defense until the Security Council acts. It has final say.

Libyan interventionists claimed doing so protected civilian areas from attack. In 2005, the General Assembly World Summit Outcome Document adopted the responsibility to protect (R2P).

Paragraph 138 states each nation must “protect (its) population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.”Paragraph 139 grants the UN responsibility “to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from” these crimes.

Military force is excluded. UN Charter provisions prohibit it for humanitarian intervention. Justifying it under R2P is illegal. War crimes follow. So does profiteering. War is big business. NGOs like corporate predators cash in.

The web site ngo.org defines them as follows:

“A non-governmental organization (NGO) is any non-profit, voluntary citizens’ group which is organized on a local, national or international level.”

“Task-oriented and driven by people with a common interest, NGOs perform a variety of service and humanitarian policies and encourage political participation through provision of information.”

“Some are organized around specific issues, such as human rights, environment or health. They provide analysis and expertise, serve as early warning mechanisms and help monitor and implement international agreements.”

“Their relationship with offices and agencies of the United Nations system differs depending on their goals, their venue and the mandate of a particular institution.”

Other definitions call them non-political groups, advancing social/humanitarian objectives. In fact, most profiteer largely for themselves. They’re ideologically biased predators, not humanitarians.

Nearly all have entrenched bureaucracies. Their officials are highly paid. Their operating rules are secret. Their financing sources and amounts are undisclosed. They mostly come from domestic or foreign nations whose interests they serve. As agents, they perform PR, intelligence, and population control. Most don’t provide humanitarian services.

They all claim non-profit status, yet operate unethically. They collude with governments or business interests. Their profiteer handsomely, own unrelated businesses, and exploit people they claim to serve.

In many countries, they’re the preferred choice for Western aid and emergency relief. They provide cover for imperial intervention. They cash in handsomely from wars, floods, famines, earthquakes, and other disasters. “Non-profiteering” is big business.

Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

In 2006, General Assembly Resolution 60-251 established the Human Rights Council (HRC) and authorized UPR. Three adopted “mechanisms” were decisive for Libya:

(1) Paragraph 1 established HRC.

(2) Paragraph 8 opened HRC membership to all UN Member States based on their contribution to promoting and protecting human rights. The General Assembly, by a two-thirds vote, may suspend member rights based on gross, systematic violations.

(3) Paragraph 10 authorized regular HRC annual sessions, including special ones when needed on request from one member supported by one-third of the Council.

UPR periodically examines the human rights record of all Member States. In 2009, the Non-Aligned Movement stated:

HRC “should not be used as a tool to interfere in the internal affairs of States or to question their political, economic, and social systems, their sovereign rights, and their national, religious and cultural particularities.”

In October 2005, the General Assembly adopted the responsibility to protect (R2P) principle. On February 26 and March 17, 2011, the Security Council adopted two Libya resolutions.

Even though Tripoli wasn’t an International Criminal Court (ICC) member, the first gave the body jurisdiction over ongoing events. The second authorized “all necessary measures” to “protect civilians,” as well as no-fly zone cover. Doing so was an act of war. It followed almost immediately.

“The Libyan case is a very good example of (lawlessly) interfer(ing) in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.”

Armed insurgents were supported and legitimized. Libya had no say. Claims made before HRC about massacres and other atrocities were falsified. Nonetheless, UN resolutions followed. So did war, mass slaughter and vast destruction.

“NGOs and others invoke (R2P). But what responsibility do these bodies, and the states which use military force, have for the consequences of their acts?”

In May 2010, the NGOs Freedom House and UN Watch campaigned against electing Libya but lost. Both organizations serve Western and Israeli interests. Former American Jewish Committee (AJC) honorary president, Morris Abram, founded UN Watch. AJC is a pro-Israeli front group

UN Watch wanted Libya expelled from HRC. On March 1, 2011, the General Assembly supported its campaign based on lies. HRC’s January 4, 2011 UPR was ignored.

It praised Gaddafi’s Jamahiriya governance. It said it protected “not only political rights, but also economic, educational, social and cultural rights.” It also lauded his treatment of religious minorities, and “human rights training” given his security forces.

On February 21, 2011, the Libyan League for Human Rights got 70 other NGOs to petition Obama, E.U. High Representative Catherine Ashton, and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

They demanded international action against Libya. They cited R2P. Of the 71 petitioners, only 25 were human right groups. Others included UN Watch, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), B’nai B’rith, and other anti-democratic organizations.

They demanded an emergency HRC Special Session “to address situations of gross and systematic violations of human rights.” They called for the General Assembly to suspend Libya’s Council membership.

On February 25, 2011, a Special Session was held. Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR) head Sliman Bouchuiguir called for international community action against Gaddafi. LLHR is a member of the French-based International Federal of Human Rights (FIDH). It’s closely tied to NED.

Its claims later proved to be false. No documentation existed. The puppet National Transitional Council (NTC) provided them. They said Gaddafi slaughtered thousands, and mercenaries comprised 80% of his military.

Nonetheless, based on falsified NGO claims, Libya was expelled from HRC. At the same time, other nations supported its Jamahiriya government. Brazil cited its economic and social progress.

It acknowledged its promotion of rights for disabled persons, free health care, and high primary education enrollment. It also noted its cooperation with international organizations in areas of migrant rights, judicial reform, and curbing corruption.

Malta and Tunisia also expressed support. They acknowledged Jamahiriya Green Charter freedoms and achievements.

On March 14, 2012, when it was too late to matter, HRC adopted its report praising Gaddafi’s Jamahiriya government. UN Watch protested. It demanded it be rescinded. It said “Libya’s long-suffering victims deserve no less.” It ignored generous benefits NATO destroyed.

Amnesty International (AI) also called HRC’s decision “abhorrent.” Its head, Suzanne Nossel, served as Obama’s Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations. She’s also a former Human Rights Watch (HRW) CEO.

Like AI, HRW’s record is notoriously tainted. Both supported NATO’s Libya’s campaign. It turned peace and stability into charnel house disaster. These organizations and others like them often back oppressors, not victims.

Media Complicity with Political and NGO Lies

On February 21, 2011, the government controlled French International News Network (France 24) broadcast a Libya special. It falsely claimed Gaddafi’s planes bombed civilian areas. At a later French parliament session, Sarkozy’s Tripoli ambassador refuted the account.

At the same time, falsified claims about “African mercenaries” comprising 80% of Gaddafi’s military were made. AI’s Genevieve Garrigos supported what she later said was based solely on unsubstantiated rumors.

Ashur Shamis is a National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL) founding member. He was wanted by Interpol and Libyan police for years. He also was an NED Libyan Human and Political Development Forum director. He actively participated in regime change conferences.

Aly Abuzaakouk is another NFSL member with close NED ties. Like Shamis, he’s a wanted man. Among other anti-Gaddafi guests, Al Jazeera featured him during NATO’s campaign. Broadcasting falsified managed news, it shamelessly serves imperial interests.

In 2011, London-based Chatham House, a pro-corporate think tank, discussed NATO plans for attacking Libya.

A Final Comment

Libya was targeted based on falsified, undocumented NGO claims, as well as similar ones by NED and other pro-Western organizations.

“The lack of investigation, and the non-existence of any process to question (NGO assertions) inside the Council (became) one of the main causes for the events which cost the lives of thousands of Libyans” killed during NATO’s campaign.”Non-interventionism….is a way to guarantee Peace, Democracy and Freedom.”

“The Libyan case shows the reality behind” R2P.  The doctrine destroyed peace. Thousands died. Vast destruction was caused. Libyan sovereignty was lost.

NATO committed war crimes. HRC betrayed its mandate. So did the Security Council, General Assembly and ICC. R2P is “an instrument of domination.” International bodies are imperial tools.

Stronger states crush weaker ones. International law’s a non-starter. “Russia’s recent position on Syria is a step in the right direction.” It bought “breathing space” to slow another march to war. Stopping it’s another matter.

The same NGOs behind Libya’s war want another on Syria. Their earlier pattern’s repeated. It features undocumented allegations, spurning dialogue, and enlisting UN support.

“How can such interference and lack of rigor bring peace to international relations? How can these ideas claim to” support humanitarianism? How can UN bodies go along? How can they contemptuously dismiss their inviolable mandate to support peace?

These and other questions deserve answers. Complicit Member States and NGOs provide none. One war leads to another. Syria’s turn is next. Like Gaddafi, Saddam, and other Washington targets, vilifying Assad’s based on lies.

How long before bombs away repeats? How many more deaths will follow? How much more can be tolerated? When will most Member States say no more? When will peacemakers triumph? Humanity wants to know. Time’s running out for answers.

WATCH: NGO Your Enemy: Bogus Reports Fuel Intervention Industry

NGO’S PUSHING FOR “HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION” IN SYRIA

http://youtu.be/BUmSaueB2b8

Did NGOs Help Overthrow Gaddafi? (The Answer Is Yes)

http://youtu.be/WrWC7KDpM5E

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL TARGETS RUSSIA AND SYRIA

“Trusted Messengers” (Avaaz) and “Humanitarian Groups” (Amnesty International) Target Russia and China, Endorse the US-NATO Mandate

by Richard Nogueira

Global Research, March 15, 2012

Amnesty and the NATO Cover-Up of War Crimes in Libya

20.03.2012

By Christof Lehmann – nsnbc

The “human rights organization” that is branding itself as “watchdog”  is obviously attempting to make even well intended humanitarian minded members of the worlds public belief, that NATO`s Operation Unified Protector, authorized by UNSC Resolution 1973 has resulted in 55 documented cases of named civilians, including 16 children and 14 women that were killed in air strikes in the capital Tripoli and the towns of Zliten, Majer, Sirte, and Brega. The amnesty narrative must make the heart of every NATO propaganda expert jump faster. Possibly, Amnesty is positioning itself for a Nobel Peace Price, where it would be in perfect company with Barak Hussein Obama, Henry Kissinger and other humanitarian avatars. After all, Amnesty International USA has Suzanne Nossel at the helm. A Hilary Clinton aide for International Organizations Affairs.

Reality Amnesty-Style is depended on the all important methodology. With the correct methodology it is possible to reduce a genocide to 55 documented cases – and viola  an amazed misinformed public donates to Amnesty`s pacers, pads them on their back asking them to “keep up the good work“.

For those who would like to leave the Orwellian Matrix one may remember the following.

The NATO led assault on Tripoli started with the firing of over 100 Cruise Missiles into the densely populated Tripoli alone. Now imagine 100 Cruise Missiles fired into the city of Paris, London, New York and the carnage they would unleash.Can anyone in his right mind imagine that 100 Cruise Missiles dropped on Paris would result in 55 death, including 16 children and 14 women ? Or was it more likely that there was something terribly flawed with Amnesty`s methodology. Having the habit of answering rhetorical questions I would say yes, something is terribly flawed about Amnesty`s methodology, and nobody will make me belief that a well financed, well staffed, international organization as Amnesty International is not aware of the fact. So why, Amnesty ? Why, Suzanne Nozzel ?

Right – it`s all about methodology. Those who are to intimidated to “report” the murder on their families to Al Qaeda mercenaries who roam the streets, raping, plundering and murdering don`t exist. And where you don`t look you can`t find anything. Statistic is a great tool – and Amnesty is apt at using it. The problem is, Amnesty has so good ties to the US Department of State and Main Stream Media that nobody who is asking all the right questions will get any air time or columns. Thus, tens of thousands disappear, and NATO can rejoice happily in it`s little public embarrassment about those 55 documented cases.

We may recall that the land assault on Tripoli – right, that one where Al Jazeera and other GCC and Western Media aired pictures of celebrating crowds on Tripoli`s Green Square, which later were proven to having been recorded in Doha, Qatar (1) – let`s recall that NATO`s bombing was strictly coordinated with the so called rebels, who committed atrocities from random arrests and summary executions to rape and systematic ethnic cleansing (2) – let`s recall that that assault was initiated from the sea side, from NATO vessels, and that NATO`s Apache Helicopter Gunships and Jets were strifing the streets with heavy machine gun fire and Hellfire Missiles to pave the way for the advancing heroes of the Libyan Revolution. First among those heroes, the NATO / MI6 Asset, known terrorist, and commander of the Al Qaeda associated Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. (3) Yes – the one Belhadj who is now commanding 18.000 Al Qaeda / NATO mercenaries to liberate Syrians to death.

We may recall the fact that even the Colonial Lap Dog of the E.U., the African Union`s Fact Finding Mission and subsequently the Pan African Parliament complained not only about the AU`s failures, but about the wide spread massacres and killings of black African Libyans and migrant workers, and the fact that entire villages and towns were ethnically cleansed.(4) In Tawergha alone some 15.000 black Libyans are expected to having been massacred and the town that was previously populated by 20.000 people has literally ceased to exist.(5)

We may recall the NATO cluster bombs and Fuel Gas Explosion Bombs that NATO used against the citizens of Bani Walid.(6) Personally I personally recall a phone conversation with a Libyan medical doctor at the hospital in Sirte, reporting about hundreds of dead after just one NATO bombing raid and over 1000 dead within the last week.(7) NATO`s UN mandate according to UNSC resolution 1973 permitted one and only one military action, the enforcement of a so called “No Fly Zone” which was already sufficient to be a gross violation of the UN Charter and International Law. The enforcement of a no fly zone is always implemented by the bombing of a sovereign nations air force, radar and other military installations. NATO would not have had to have command responsibility for the murder of over 100.000 Libyans for having committed a gross violation of international law. Fact however is, that by deploying Special Forces who led the Libyan Al Qaeda Mercenaries under Belhadj, by importing foreign fighters from Mazar E-Sharif in Afghanistan (8), by coordinating NATO Special Forces operations with illegally deployed Qatari and Saudi troops who together with NATO attempted to bring some military raison into the headless assaults of the few Libyan fighters who actually fought at times other than for Al Jazeera appearances, NATO, and it`s political as well as military leadership took command responsibility upon them selves.  I could go on, but belief that I have made the point.

There is one word that is almost as terrifying for war criminals as the word “nationalize” is for globalist cartels. It is the word “command responsibility“, and according to international law, NATO and it`s political and military leadership has direct command responsibility for the murder of over 100.000 Libyans.

Who then, could be a better friend of NATO`s war criminals then, than a humanitarian “Watch Dog” who is telling the world about NATO`s horrendous crimes in 55 documented cases. 16 of them Children! 14 of them Women! How horrific, and someone should get a little slap over his little finger.

Methodology makes it possible.  You see, with the right methodology used, You don`t exist and if you don`t exist, you can be murdered with impunity.The root cause for the problem is systemic. There is in fact no organization that documents war crimes in a prosecutable manner, and especially civilians are, de facto, in a state of legal limbo. We the People can at best fool ourselves to having at least “some” sense of justice by arranging International War Crimes Tribunals with no other than Moral Authority. Now imagine a psychopathic murderer and tell him that you have just sentenced him for mass homicide, and that you morally condemn him. He`ll laugh you straight into your face, if you are lucky, murder you next if you are not so lucky, and that is exactly the effect of such war crimes tribunals. All respect for His Excellency Dr. Tun Mahatir Muhammad, but this is not the way to deal with war criminals. To make matters worse, even though Dr. Tun Mahatir Mohammad`s Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal was established with the best of intentions, such Tribunals are counter productive due to the fact that they give the public the impression that there exists at least “some” kind of Justice which in fact is utterly illusory.

There is one constant that is valid for all citizens, all over the world. It is that war criminals can murder, plunder and rape them, You, with absolute impunity unless “some” nation finds it “opportune” to take on their case; and, even if one is so luck to be instrumentalized in politicized tribunals non of them has any “right” to compensation of any kind, ever, unless the majority of the people world wide “demand” that laws and institutions are established that provide factual rights and factual protection. Such demands can only be enforced by an informed public that is aware of the fact that every single one of them can be murdered and raped with utter impunity. An informed public that organizes itself to the point of critical mass, making use of their best weapon – their money and their will to right and justice. Tribunals that give psychopathic murderers a slap over their little fingers in moral sentences are in fact almost as counter productive as highly politicized kangaroo courts and victors justice at the ICC . Some of the systemic problems are:

The International Criminal Court is a U.N. body. The United Nations was in the case of Libya a waring party due to the fact that it passed UNSC resolution 1973-2011 on Libya, authorizing NATO to act on it`s behalf. Any subsequent war crime investigation about any war crimes committed in Libya would make the ICC not impartial and impeachable. Some nations, like Spain, have implemented International Jurisdiction with respect to the most serious crimes recognized by mankind, including crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, the crime of genocide, ethnic cleansing and other. Now imagine a citizen of Bani Walid or Brega, whose family has been decimated by NATO Cluster Bombs, whose house and business was devastated and ruined gather sufficient resources to plead to the State Prosecutor of Spain to take on his case.

The naked and saddening fact is, that You, I, and every citizen of this world is in fact without actual protection against war crimes by any law, or by any legal body, unless some nation is willing to take on the case; and, even if one should be so lucky to find the “mercy” of the one nation, NGO, or the other, who doubtlessly have their own motivations to engage in your case other than the fact that a crime has been committed, it is highly questionable that we will witness not politically biased kangaroo courts.  The Milosevic trial being but one prime example.

For the sake of humanity it would be high time to consider how to remedy the fact that all those who fall through the mesh of Amnesia International Style war crimes investigations can be murdered with impunity.

At closing, I wonder if Amnesty ever investigated how many Libyans were murdered alone during the one cluster bomb attack on the citizens of Brega shown on the video below. You tube continued deleting and removing it. Amnesia International has most likely forgotten that it ever existed. Methodology makes it possible.

NATO deploys Cluster Bombs over Densely Populated area of Brega / Libya

Christof Lehmann

20.03.2012 – nsnbc

1) Arabian Summer or NATO`s Fall. Christof Lehmann (2011) nsnbc. http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/arabian-summer-or-nato%C2%B4s-fall/

2) The awful Truth of Libya. Christof Lehmann (2011) nsnbc. http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/the-awfull-truth-of-libya/

3) Abdelhakim Belhadj, The Mask Behind the Many Men. Christof Lehmann (2011) nsnbc. http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/abdelhakim-belhadj-the-mask-behind-the-many-men/

4) PAP blasts AU over Libya, covering it`s own Failures. Christof Lehmann (2011) nsnbc. http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/10/29/pap-blasts-au-over-libya-covering-it%C2%B4s-own-failures/

5) Ethnic Cleansing, Genocide, and the Tawergha. Human Rights Investigations (2011) http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/10/23/ethnic-cleansing-genocide-and-the-tawergha/

6) International Military Support for Libya results in TNC withdrawals. Christof Lehmann (2011) nsnbc. http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/international-military-support-for-libya-results-in-tnc-withdrawals/ NB.: The link to the video documenting cluster bombs has since been removed from YouTube. The video is shown above as part of the present article.

7) New Attack on Sirte at Closing of NATO Summit. Christof Lehmann (2011) nsnbc. http://nsnbc.wordpress.com/2011/10/06/new-attack-on-sirte-at-closing-of-nato-summit/

8) CIA recruits 1500 from Mazar-eSharif to fight in Libya. The Nation (2011) http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/31-Aug-2011/CIA-recruits-1500-from-MazareSharif-to-fight-in-Libya

NGOs: The Missionaries of Empire

by Devon DB

Global Research | March 3, 2012