Apr 13
20120
Human Rights Watch, Humanitarian Agencies, Imperialist Wars/Occupations, The International Campaign to Destabilize Syria
http://youtu.be/lD5jWS6_sBE
Apr 06
20120
Avaaz, Humanitarian Agencies, MoveOn.org, Non-Profit Industrial Complex
Africa Avaaz Center For American Progress Darfur MoveOn NED | National Endowment for Democracy OSI R2P Racism
Within the lecture, Snow discusses the psyops/propaganda strategically orchestrated behind the “Save Darfur” campaigns/movements which, in 2004, began to saturate the populace. At the helm of this “movement” was “The Center for American Progress”.
The Center for American Progress, is closely connected with the same players that founded and financed Avaaz. Today, with Avaaz at the forefront, the non-profit industrial complex has been appointed trusted messenger of a grotesque and disturbing ideology; nothing less than a complete reflection and validation of the U.S. administration’s rhetoric intended to justify the annihilation and occupation of sovereign states under the false pretense of “humanitarian intervention” and “responsibility to protect”. →
Apr 06
20120
Avaaz, Humanitarian Agencies, MoveOn.org, Non-Profit Industrial Complex
Africa Avaaz Center For American Progress Darfur DarfurGenocide.org Imperialism MoveOn NED | National Endowment for Democracy OSI Propaganda Racism
Within the lecture, Snow discusses the psyops/propaganda strategically orchestrated behind the “Save Darfur” campaigns/movements which, in 2004, began to saturate the populace. At the helm of this “movement” was “The Center for American Progress”.
The Center for American Progress, is closely connected with the same players that founded and financed Avaaz. Today, with Avaaz at the forefront, the non-profit industrial complex has been appointed trusted messenger of a grotesque and disturbing ideology; nothing less than a complete reflection and validation of the U.S. administration’s rhetoric intended to justify the annihilation and occupation of sovereign states under the false pretense of “humanitarian intervention” and “responsibility to protect”. →
Apr 01
20120
Humanitarian Agencies, Imperialist Wars/Occupations, Non-Profit Industrial Complex, The International Campaign to Destabilize Syria, The War on Libya - There Was No Evidence
James Corbett Libya Non-profit Industrial Complex R2P Syria “Responsibility to Protect”
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
If the last three years have taught us anything, it is that the so-called anti-war liberal left can be made to become cheerleaders for the same war agenda that they pretended to deride during the Bush Administration. How was this accomplished? A developing doctrine of international law called “Responsibility to Protect.” Join us this week as we expose the liberal “war is peace” agenda and ponder how best to disarm it.For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode. →
Mar 29
20123
Avaaz, Humanitarian Agencies, Non-Profit Industrial Complex
Avaaz Capitalism Center For American Progress Darfur DarfurGenocide.org Darfurian Voices Kony Politics of Genocide Res Publica U.N. White Supremacy Ideology
Within the lecture (14:05 in) independent journalist Keith Harmon Snow discusses the psyops/propaganda strategically orchestrated behind the “Save Darfur” campaigns/movements which, in 2004, began to saturate the populace. At the helm of this “movement” was “The Center for American Progress“.
The Center for American Progress, is closely connected with the same players that founded/funded Avaaz. Today, with Avaaz at the forefront, the non-profit industrial complex has been appointed trusted messenger of a grotesque and disturbing ideology; nothing less than a complete reflection and validation of the U.S. administration’s rhetoric intended to justify the annihilation and occupation of sovereign states under the false pretense of “humanitarian intervention” and “responsibility to protect”.
December 29, 2004: “Over two days in early December approximately three-dozen religious activists met at the Washington office of the Center for American Progress, a recently formed think tank headed by former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta. The Res Publica-driven agenda for the closed-door gathering included sessions on “building the movement infrastructure” and “objectives, strategies and core issues.”
Res Publica was founded by Tom Perriello, Ricken Patel and Tom Pravda.
Avaaz was founded by Res Publica, MoveOn.org, Executive Director Ricken Patel, Tom Perriello, Tom Pravda, Eli Pariser (MoveOn Executive Director), Andrea Woodhouse (consultant to the World Bank) Jeremy Heimans (co-founder of GetUp! and Purpose), and Australian entrepreneur David Madden (co-founder of GetUp and Purpose).
Avaaz co-founder Tom Perriello is now President and CEO of Center for American Progress.
Perriello and Patel also co-founded and co-directed DarfurGenocide.org which officially launched in 2004. “DarfurGenocide.org is a project of Res Publica, a group of public sector professionals dedicated to promoting good governance and virtuous civic cultures.” Today, this organization is now known as “Darfurian Voices”: “Darfurian Voices is a project of 24 Hours for Darfur.” The U.S. Department of State and the Open Society Institute were just two of the organizations funders and collaborating partners. Other Darfurian Voices partners include Avaaz, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), International Centre for Transitional Justice, Darfur Rehabilitation Project, Humanity United, Darfur People’s Association of New York, Genocide Intervention, Witness, Yale Law School, The Sigrid Rausing Trust and the Bridgeway Foundation.
Despite the carefully crafted language and images that tug at your emotions, such NGOs were created for and exist for one primary purpose – to protect and further American policy and interests, under the guise of philanthropy and humanitarianism. Of all the listed partners of DarfurGenocide.org, with exception of one located in London England, all of the entities involved are American and based on US soil.
http://youtu.be/Yg6kPY7QC3M
Mar 24
20121
Amnesty International, Avaaz, Humanitarian Agencies, The War on Libya - There Was No Evidence
by Richard Nogueira
Global Research, March 15, 2012
updated March 11, 2012+++
+++“Mark Kersten from Justice in Conflict says Uganda’s recently-discovered oil reserves, “may produce between 2.5 billion to 6 billion barrels of oil. This oil is suddenly directly linked to the country’s security”, (cited by RT). Of course we understand that the US has never intervened in a country where there is no economic or military benefit.”
+++Check this out: Top left corner:
Mar 09, 2012
U.S. AFRICOM Public Affairs
FACT SHEET:
U.S. Military Support to African Efforts to Counter the Lord’s Resistance Army
PDF:
“This KONY 2012 youtube frenzy is US State Department propaganda. This is ALL about expanding AFRICOM. YOU ARE BEING MANIPULATED. 2012 scramble for Africa.“
“This “KONY 2012” campaign is asking for MORE US troops to be sent into Africa. Look up AFRICOM and understand what this is part of. Your consent is being manufactured. Wake up!“
“When people are posting groups on this page calling for US troops to be moved from Afghanistan to Africa, then you know consent is being manufactured. This has more to do with attempting to combat the rise of China than arresting anybody. NO TO AFRICOM.“
“[KONY 2012 is] Essentially putting forward a military fist but covering it up with the velvet glove of humanitarianism and development” KONY 2012 = AFRICOM”
March 7, 2012
Samira Musa
Tweet what you will, but I find the sudden interest which sparked the #KONY2012 and #STOPKONY trends on Twitter both extremely suspicious and slightly patronising. The former, because of what this ‘discovery’ of child soldiers implicates for Africa in the long run, in particular, East Africa which has become a region of political importance with Britain planning to intervene in Somalia and the latter because this is not the first case of its kind. It is also rather distressing for me, as an African, to see my continent suddenly become a bandwagon and finally be of relevance after centuries of injustices being born there. Africa has been raped, murdered and pillaged by the West since the slave trade and has continued to be right up until this Kony malarkey so it begs the question – why do the West care? Did they care about Africans when they dragged us on bloody feet and chains and made our ancestors their slaves? Did they care when their companies illegally dumped nuclear waste on Somali shores? Or perhaps they cared deeply about the Coltan rush in the Congo?
I understand that to some, this video may be a shock, but to many it isn’t. It does not make it any less disheartening and disgusting but the message we should be sending is that ALL injustices are wrong, not the few that have the potential of justifying another Scramble for Africa because of its geographical or political relevance in a world that is slowly but surely being knocked down by the West in their plan to destabilise the Global South. And even if they are wrong, it gives no moral justification to any Western involvement because we all know what the outcome of such a mission will be. It will be Iraq, Libya and Syria. And civilians’ blood will be on the hands of all of those who called for this. I also find it astonishing that there is a genuine consensus in this country and in the West in general that *we* are somehow superiorly able to impose *our* military presence and our values on another people. This Western supremacist idea is not only foundationally ignorant and patronising but used as a tool to manufacture the consent of such adventures of governments and this should be challenged constantly.
Of course Kony is a dodgy and evil character, but surely we should have been able to a) know this before it became a trending topic on Twitter and b) been able to accept this WHILST also challenging the stance of groups such as Invisible Children who have been involved in very dubious business from the start. An organisation that has ‘direct military intervention’ as one of its aims is certainly one that should not be fronting this campaign or any other which involves Africa. Awareness is always a positive thing but this issue is way too complex and complicated than simply watching a thirty minute video or using a hashtag on social media. However, it is also simply not enough to sit on a fence and say that raising awareness for THIS particular campaign is your sole purpose without acknowledging the implications of your approval for “just anything to be done to save the poor African children!” (suggesting therefore assenting to Western involvement.) If you really care about Africa I suggest you rewire your brain into understanding how Europe and America actually underdeveloped Africa instead of jumping on bandwagons with no real comprehension of historical relations between the West and Africa. Unfortunately, there are no cleverly put together emotional videos on that which have worldwide attention as of yet.
Again, if you cannot see this timely campaign as a ploy and tactic to further destabilise Africa in order to pursue and maintain their interests as an imperial and colonial entity as well as to excuse and defend another Scramble for Africa then you, my friend, are very silly and probably shouldn’t be reading this. We never seem to learn from history and are constantly looking to the future for questions that have already been answered. The ‘poor little black kids’ don’t really need you to save them, as without you, they probably could have saved themselves.
Human Rights Watch was integral in opening the door to the Imperialist, NATO-led invasion on Libya. Watch:”LIBYA Humanitarian War: The Role Of NED-Linked NGOs Using Fake Evidence For War Now Targeting Syria”: Video
On September 29, for example, about 15 LRA combatants suspected to be in the same group as LRA leader Joseph Kony attacked the village of Lingou, near Derbissaka, in CAR, killing the village chief and abducting three men. Four nearby villages were abandoned after the attack, as people fled in fear. Civilians in this remote region have no protection from LRA attacks, and often no means of communicating with others to call for help.
Improved collaboration and information sharing among the different actors and the local communities in the affected region is critical. Early warning systems have been put in place in many of our communities. We ask you to ensure they are everywhere they need to be. In particular, we ask you to help ensure that telephone networks are set up in the areas affected by the LRA and that efforts are made to improve the road infrastructure in our regions.
Supporting Well-Disciplined, Responsible National Armies
Our national armies are also in need of support. We would like to recognize the positive impact of the training the US has already provided to one Congolese army battalion operating in the LRA-affected area, and we hope you can provide training for additional units, and commanding officers, of the regional armies that will take part in counter-LRA operations, as well as additional logistical support.
Too often, the soldiers of our national armies have resorted to killing, raping, and looting civilians, making them a threat to the populations they’re supposed to be protecting. Lacking communications, transport, and ammunition, our soldiers are often forced to flee with the population when the LRA attacks. We hope you can help ensure that our national armies send only well-trained, well-equipped, and disciplined forces and commanding officers to protect civilians in the LRA-affected areas. Those responsible for abuses should be held to account.
Demobilization and Rehabilitation
We also urge you to support efforts to expand LRA sensitization and demobilization efforts throughout the affected region, especially in CAR, and long-term rehabilitation assistance to returnees and ex-combatants.
Please help regional governments and communities ensure that recovery programs similar to those instituted in northern Uganda are also introduced in the three currently affected countries.Existing rehabilitation centers in Yambio, South Sudan, and a new pilot center in Dungu, Congo, should be strengthened, and a similar rehabilitation center should be established in CAR. Local associations in more remote villages should be trained and supported to conduct long-term follow-up with returnees after they return to their homes, including psychosocial support, family mediation, education support, and economic reinsertion into their communities.
We also urge you to work with other actors to help ensure that children who escape from the LRA make it back to their home communities as quickly as possible. Lastly, we hope you can support community funds to rebuild towns or villages attacked by the LRA, such as repairing schools, hospitals and other infrastructure which may have been destroyed.
Of all that we ask of you, what we want the most is an end to these LRA atrocities. Our communities are traumatized, and we have never before in our region experienced such levels of fear, loss, and suffering. We want to end the LRA problem so we can finally return to our normal lives.
Your Excellency, we know that your intervention can help to bring an end to the LRA insurgency, since Joseph Kony and his brutalities, especially against children, are an affront to all of humanity. We thank you again for the support you have already shown us, and we urge you to remain with us until the LRA threat and its devastating consequences are resolved once and for all.
Yours sincerely,
1. Association africaine de défense des droits de l’homme (ASADHO), Kinshasa, RDC
2. Association des victimes de la LRA, Obo, RCA
3. Association Zereda, Obo, RCA
4. Commission Diocésaine pour la Justice et la Paix (CDJP), Dungu, Haut Uélé, RDC
5. Commission Diocésaine pour la Justice et la Paix (CDJP), Duru, Haut Uélé, RDC
6. Commission Diocésaine pour la Justice et la Paix (CDJP), Ngilima, Haut Uélé, RDC
7. Commission Paroissiale pour la Justice et la Paix (CPJP), Bangadi, RDC
8. Communauté des Églises Évangéliques en Centrafrique (CEEC), Zemio, RCA
9. ECS Nzara Diocese, Yambio, South Sudan
10. Justice and Peace Commission, Catholic Diocese of Tombura-Yambio, South Sudan
11. Société civile d’Ango (SOCIDA), Bas Uélé, RDC
12. Société civile de Doruma, Haut Uélé, RDC
13. Société civile de Faradje, Haut Uélé, RDC
14. Société civile de la Chefferie Mopoy (SOCICOMO), Banda, Bas Uélé, RDC
15. Société civile de Poko (SOCIPO), Bas Uélé, RDC
16. Solidarité et Assistance Intégrale aux Personnes Démunies (SAIPED), Dungu, RDC
17. Traumatisme blessure du Cœur, Zemio, RCA
18. Union des Jeunes de Doruma pour le Loisirs (UJDL), Doruma, Haut Uélé, RDC
19. Union of Journalists of South Sudan, Yambio, South Sudan
20. Unity Is Strength, Yambio, South Sudan
On 14 October, President Barack Obama announced he was sending United States special forces troops to Uganda to join the civil war there. In the next few months, US combat troops will be sent to South Sudan, Congo and Central African Republic. They will only “engage” for “self-defence”, says Obama, satirically. With Libya secured, an American invasion of the African continent is under way. …
In Africa, says Obama, the “humanitarian mission” is to assist the government of Uganda defeat the Lord’s resistance Army (LRA), which “has murdered, raped and kidnapped tens of thousands of men, women and children in central Africa”. This is an accurate description of the LRA, evoking multiple atrocities administered by the United States, such as the bloodbath in the 1960s following the CIA-arranged murder of Patrice Lumumba, the Congolese independence leader and first legally elected prime minister, and the CIA coup that installed Mobutu Sese Seko, regarded as Africa’s most venal tyrant.
Obama’s other justification also invites satire. This is the “national security of the United States”. The LRA has been doing its nasty work for 24 years, of minimal interest to the United States. Today, it has few than 400 fighters and has never been weaker. However, US “national security” usually means buying a corrupt and thuggish regime that has something Washington wants. Uganda’s “president-for-life” Yoweri Museveni already receives the larger part of $45 million in US military “aid” – including Obama’s favourite drones. This is his bribe to fight a proxy war against America’s latest phantom Islamic enemy, the rag-tag al Shabaab group based in Somalia. The RTA will play a public relations role, distracting western journalists with its perennial horror stories. …
The de facto conquest of Libya by the US and its imperial partners heralds a modern version of the “scramble for Africa” at the end of the 19th century.
Like the “victory” in Iraq, journalists have played a critical role in dividing Libyans into worthy and unworthy victims. A recent Guardian front page carried a photograph of a terrified “pro-Gaddafi” fighter and his wild-eyed captors who, says the caption, “celebrate”. According to General Petraeus, there is now a war “of perception… conducted continuously through the news media”.
For more than a decade the US has tried to establish a command on the continent of Africa, AFRICOM, but has been rebuffed by governments, fearful of the regional tensions this would cause. Libya, and now Uganda, South Sudan and Congo, provide the main chance. As WikiLeaks cables and the US National Strategy for Counter-terrorism reveal, American plans for Africa are part of a global design in which 60,000 special forces, including death squads, already operate in 75 countries, soon to be 120. As Dick Cheney pointed out in his 1990s “defence strategy” plan, America simply wishes to rule the world.
That this is now the gift of Barack Obama, the “Son of Africa”, is supremely ironic. Or is it? As Frantz Fanon explained in ‘Black Skin, White Masks’, what matters is not so much the colour of your skin as the power you serve and the millions you betray.
Read the full article here.
For more information on the Kony 2012 campaign, Libya and Syria, and the scramble for Africa, follow Libya360
LIBYA Humanitarian War: The Role Of NED-Linked NGOs Using Fake Evidence For War Now Targeting Syria:
http://youtu.be/JIRM4j63_0M
Background Information on Kony 2012
RESIST AFRICOM
“A core elite of Democratic Party foreign policy wonks, many sheep-dipped through Soros-funded and – influenced non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the Clinton administration. In addition to Power and Rice, a major player behind MARO and U.S. “humanitarian” interventionism is Sarah Sewall, who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peace Operations in the Clinton administration. She now heads a MARO team at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations-heavy Kennedy School at Harvard.”
28.11.2011 | 00:00
Wayne MADSEN
Strategic-Culture.org
The Obama administration, in yet another display of the use of Orwellian language, has embarked on a military doctrine called “Mass Atrocity Prevention” (MAP), the Pentagon operational plan to implement the White House’s “R2P” or “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. Essentially, the Pentagon doctrine is crafted to militarily support the intervention of regional and worldwide international forces operating under the umbrella of NATO, UN, the African Union, the Organization of American States (OAS), the Arab League, and other organizations in the name of “humanitarian” intervention to prevent widespread massacres. The doctrine’s first major test case was in Libya, where NATO forces, in support of Western- and Saudi/Gulf potentate-backed rebel forces, ousted the 42 year-old regime of Muammar Qaddafi.
And in yet another display of oxymoronic Orwellian “Newspeak,” the main Defense Department activity for developing “Mass Atrocity Response Operations” or “MARO” is the Army’s Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI) at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
The new American justification for military intervention arises from Presidential Study Directive 10/PSD-10, a memorandum issued by the White House on August 4, 2011, which created an Interagency Atrocities Prevention Board and interagency review to bring administration policy in line with a new presidential policy that deems “preventing mass atrocities and genocide” a “core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States.”
The new American foreign policy initiative was justified by the 2008 report of the Genocide Prevention Task Force co-chaired by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen. The task force was heavily influenced by the neoconservative and federally-funded U.S. Institute of Peace, as well as George Soros-funded think tanks like the Center for American Progress and pro-Israeli organizations like the US Holocaust Memorial Museum.
PSD-10 was largely the brain child of National Security Council staff member Samantha Power, who is married to Obama’s “propaganda czar” Cass Sunstein, and Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN. The White House press briefing on Obama’s Mass Atrocity Prevention doctrine specifically mentioned Syria, Libya, Sudan, Cote d’Ivoire, and Kyrgyzstan as examples of when U.S. diplomatic and stronger intervention was required. The announcement cited the Holocaust in Europe and the genocide in Rwanda as reasons for the new U.S. policy but curiously omitted the U.S.-supported Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia and the CIA-supported post-1965 coup genocide in Indonesia, the latter involving President Obama’s Indonesian step-father, a lieutenant colonel in the Indonesian army.
A core elite of Democratic Party foreign policy wonks, many sheep-dipped through Soros-funded and – influenced non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the Clinton administration. In addition to Power and Rice, a major player behind MARO and U.S. “humanitarian” interventionism is Sarah Sewall, who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Peace Operations in the Clinton administration. She now heads a MARO team at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations-heavy Kennedy School at Harvard. Sewall’s MARO project director is Sally Chin, formerly with the U.S. Institute of Peace-funded Search for Common Ground (SFCG), which has also received support from Soros, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Saudi billionaire Prince Al Waleed bin Talal. SFCG target countries include Sudan, Pakistan, Kosovo, Kenya, Indonesia, Cote d’Ivoire, Burundi, Liberia, Lebanon, Zimbabwe, and the city of Jerusalem.
Funding for Sewall’s foreign policy-laundering operation for the Obama administration comes from PKSOI and Humanity United, an NGO having interlocking management links with many other George Soros-funded operations, including Human Rights Watch (HRW), the Tides Center, and the International Crisis Group (ICG). In addition Humanity United is linked to the U.S. intelligence and Pentagon military operations planning contractor, the RAND Corporation; CIA-linked World Vision; and the William J. Clinton Foundation, headed up by the husband of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has also embraced the MARO doctrine.
Current targets for meddling by MARO and the Soros NGO network are Syria, Somalia, Philippines, Kenya, post-Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC) Colombia, Guatemala, Pakistan, Uganda (targeting the Lord’s Resistance Army), and North and South Yemen. Past target nations that saw major “humanitarian” destabilization efforts by Obama’s new doctrine were Haiti, Kosovo, South Sudan, Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya.
The concept of R2P arose from a December 2001 report from another Orwellian “Newspeak”-named entity, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), the brainchild of then-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. The commission is defunct but its role in pushing R2P was assumed by the Global Center for Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P), which has been championed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. GCR2P was founded by the same cast of Soros-influenced NGOs that helped to develop the MARO doctrine for the Obama administration: ICG and HRW, the founding partners of GCR2P. Among the major donors to GCR2P is Soros’s Open Society Institute (OSI). GCR2P’s target countries match those of other NGOs involved in advancing the MARO doctrine: Syria, Libya, Uganda, Sudan, and Democratic Republic of Congo.
The MARO doctrine and R2P are currently being used to justify covert and proposed overt NATO and U.S. military operations to topple the government of President Bashar Assad in Syria, the same “humanitarian” intervention template used to justify NATO’s and the Gulf Cooperation Council’s (GCC) military intervention in Libya on behalf of the Transitional National Council, which plunged Libya into a worse human rights situation under rebel rule than anything ever experienced under the Qaddafi regime, including the massacre of Libyan civilians and foreign black African guest workers; summary executions of Qaddafi, members of his family, and his supporters; and detention of children.
One of the MARO principles, establishing “safe areas” for internally-displaced persons, is now at the heart of proposed NATO intervention in Syria. Another MARO military principle being proposed for Syria is the establishment of an “oil spot,” systematically securing limited areas with a “clear-hold-build” approach. Yet another MARO principle, containment through blockades and no-fly zones, was used to justify NATO intervention in Libya and is being proposed for Syria and Iran.
Other MARO operations include fomenting labor strikes in targeted nations; saturating large areas in target nations with sufficient military forces; creating buffer or demilitarized zones between perpetrator forces and victims; partner enabling by supplying advisors, equipment, and special support to host nations, coalition partners, and “victim groups” (more Orwellian “Newspeak” for rebel and secessionist forces – MARO doctrine, thus, incorporates decades of U.S. military doctrine on counter-insurgency – COIN – operations, which brought the world such “humanitarian” achievements as the My Lai massacre in South Vietnam, and other U.S. massacres of civilians in Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Nicaragua, Iraq, and Afghanistan); and militarily defeating “perpetrator” leadership and their capabilities.
MARO and R2P, especially the training and special assistance to coalition partners, are being used by the Pentagon and CIA to beef up the U.S. military and intelligence presence at bases in east Africa and the Horn of Africa, ostensibly to protect Somalis from Al Shabab Islamist guerrillas. In fact, a virtual invading force of U.S. Special Operations forces, CIA operatives, and private military contractors have descended on the region, under the aegis of the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), to prop up local armies in order to secure a developing western oil and natural as production infrastructure, including pipelines and oil sea terminals in the area. Drone, intelligence collection, and U.S. special forces and training bases have been established at Camp Lemonier in Djibouti; Victoria, Seychelles; Manda Bay, Kenya; Bujumbura, Burundi; Entebbe, Uganda; Mogadishu, Somalia; and Arba Minch, Ethiopia.
Beyond Africa, the Obama administration is building five new military bases in Australia, including a Marine base in Darwin. The U.S. military presence is also being expanded in the Philippines and Vietnam. It is well-known that beyond the Middle East and Africa, MARO doctrine is being used to eventually challenge the governments of China and Russia. In the world of Obama’s Orwellian “Newspeak,” mass atrocity prevention could result in a situation where billions die as a result of global thermonuclear warfare because a few oligarchs like Soros, Obama, and neo-conservative “New American Century” advocates decide that Western imperialism cannot be satisfied until “problem” regimes in Tehran and Pyongyang and, eventually, powerful governments in Beijing and Moscow are replaced by vassal regimes. In the world of the globalists, vulture capitalists and bankers, and militarists, the R2P promoters are now leading the initial military charge up the hill.
Source: Strategic Culture Foundation on-line journal www.strategic-culture.org.
Feb 23
20129
Avaaz, Humanitarian Agencies, Imperialist Wars/Occupations, The International Campaign to Destabilize Syria
Avaaz Corporate Media Complex Danny Daye Destabilization Libya Syria Venezuela
http://youtu.be/R0m3QJokx48
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/smuggle_hope_into_syria_q/
Just one of many Avaaz petitions calling for foreign intervention against Syria: http://www.avaaz.org/en/arab_league_save_syria_3/
Just one of many Avaaz peitions calling for foreign intervention against Libya: http://www.avaaz.org/en/libya_no_fly_zone_3/. What Avaaz, the non-profit industrial complex and the corporate-media complex did not share with the world: The July 1, 2011 pro-Gaddafi mass-rally in Tripoli, Libya protest where 1.7 million people (approx. 1/3 of Libya’s entire population) rallied against foreign intervention. Their voices went unheard.
VIDEO BELOW: Syria: coup engineers used the same sniper tactic to incite Venezuelans in 2002: “It’s unfortunate to see so many decent people duped into legitimizing disinformation and front organizations that exist solely to destabilize Syria and that benefit the 1% elite while destroying the lives of ordinary Syrians and Libyans. Out of all the writing on the wall, some of the most explicit is the fingerprint left by the cruel strategy being employed to overthrow sovereign regimes.”
Thanks Avaaz (French subtitles)
http://youtu.be/Zto2pL2fx0Y
22 Feb 2012
The truth about western media’s favourite Syrian “activist”…
By Kevork Elmassian, Hiba Kelanee, Feeda Kardous and Zoubaida al Kadri
BBC interview September 7 2011
1. (At 00.08) Danny’s answer to the first question summed the intended message all up: “Yes, I’ve seen EVERYTHING”.
2. (At 00.35 ) He shows a video that proves absolutely nothing
3. (At 01.48) He claims that: “three quarters of the shots are aimed and one quarter is just to scare people”. If this was true, tens of thousands of Syrian protesters would have lost their lives, rather than the reported, but unsubstantiated figure of 6000 provided by the western and GCC media.
4. (At 02.34) He tells Newsnight anchor Jeremy Paxman that a car stopped two meters behind him, and someone inside shot him. Yet, the bullet managed to “come right in his waist and out of his back”?
5. (At 03.08) Danny tells Jeremy that he was shot by a SINGLE bullet that went through his body and presumably left two scars.
This Sky News report, clearly shows a single scar in the middle of Danny’s back.
In this al Hiwar interview (at 13.50) (7) he tangles himself in even more knots when he shows the presenter TWO dressed wounds to the sides of his back.
Adding even further confusion to the picture, the Guardian reported that Dayem had five stitches, in the hospital, on EACH wound!
In his latest interview, on al Alarabiya, Danny reverts to the story of the single bullet that went through his waist and out his back.
http://youtu.be/JdTqL6YkyUM
But at 00.15, Danny speaks of his friend throwing him on the floor and then “standing up” in front of him to take three bullets!! We find it hard to imagine anybody who would do such a thing. Standing up in front of a car, two meters away, with “security/ shabeeha” inside it, most probably “aiming” at the two of them.
Back to the Newsnight interview at 02.36 he tells Paxman that a bomb exploded before he was shot. Then in the al Hiwar interview at 10.39 he told the presenter a bomb exploded before he was shot and another bomb exploded after he was shot. During the al Alarabiya interview at 00.50 Dayem adds that one person (from the al Khaznadar family) died, when the bomb exploded – something he did not mention in previous interviews.
At 03.25: There was no explanation offered as to why the mentioned car managed to drive away, although it took a mere five minutes for people to get to Dayem and his friend despite the sound of the shooting and the explosion of the grenade(s) he claimed was thrown at them. This suggests the alleged incident occurred in an isolated area. If those armed men were army or security personnel, what would frighten them in an isolated area after they had injured Dayem and his friend? Why were Dayem and his friend shot at in the first place? Why would they be shot at by security forces?
According to Dayem, protesters were shot at when they went out on the streets, but in his story this was not the case.
At 03.58 if the aim of security/ “shabeeha” is to kill injured protesters who go to hospital for treatment; driving away in an isolated area does not seem like a better option than stopping and killing their victims.
At 04.19: Dayem’s statements seems to change as he recounts his story: “They shoot at night and wait at hospitals in the morning… [and]… actually go at night to the hospitals too”.
During the al Hiwar interview at 20.05: he says that at first he was not asked about his wound, in the airport, and if he was then he would have told them it was a kidney operation. Seconds later, he goes on to say he told them it was an operation and that they let him go without any trouble.
At 05.15 during his interview with Paxman, Dayem claims he told officials at the airport that he had a kidney operation.
At 06.17 he says that the protests can’t stop because, “Bashar al Assad has got videos for every protester that is going out and will catch them one at a time”
If the President and his security have videos of all protesters, how was it so easy for Dayem and his family to leave the country without harassment or hindrance by security?
When Dayem was in London, a conversation happened between him and other Syrian youth on Facebook where he was told: “be careful Danny, the news channels are using you, this is their job, and they search for people like you to make some interviews! I’m telling you this, because I know how things work and I don’t want you to fall in this trap. You are the owner of yourself, don’t let the media plays with you, at the end, this is your country, and we are all Syrians, but the media has their own agendas and they are all pressured and directed by lobbies.” Dayem replied, “Thanks for the advice, but a friend is helping and he’s a lobbier”
Danny describes his “political views” on Facebook as: “I think we should live peacefully like a fish”. However, he is certainly involved in helping and supporting the terrorist militia of the so-called “Free Syrian Amy”, who have conducted many terrorist attacks upon public and private entities including orchestration many explosions of oil pipelines bringing blackouts to large parts of the country, suicide attacks in Damascus and Aleppo and hung and beheaded many supporters of the government who spoke to observers from the Arab League. All of these incidents have been documented by this blog.
Dayem hasn’t hidden his political agenda, and he clearly states that he wants US and Israel to intervene militarily in Syria to overthrow the Syrian regime.
http://lizzie-phelan.blogspot.com/2012/02/truth-about-western-medias-favourite.html
Feb 22
20120
Humanitarian Agencies, Imperialist Wars/Occupations, NED | National Endowment for Democracy, Non-Profit Industrial Complex
Aid Egypt Freedom House India International Republican Institute National Democratic Institute NED | National Endowment for Democracy
Sreeram Chaulia | The Asian Age
Feb 22, 2012
Foreign aid is both a sop to the liberal conscience of the donor state’s domestic society as well as an instrument of indirect control over recipient states. The motivations and effects of aid are frequently ulterior and detrimental, notwithstanding the altruistic rhetoric. These ugly realities were reified recently by two prominent cases, one in post-revolutionary Egypt and the other in economically growing India.Egypt’s military-dominated interim regime is prosecuting 19 American citizens working for “pro-democracy” NGOs linked to the two main US political parties. They are facing charges for taking unauthorised foreign aid and undermining Egyptian sovereignty by funding street protests, which have become ubiquitous since Hosni Mubarak’s downfall in February 2011.
The three American NGOs in the line of fire — the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute and Freedom House — have a reputation of channelling partisan US government aid to alter internal political processes of countries that receive aid. Since they are organisations serving American strategic interests in the name of advancing human rights and civil liberties, the Egyptian authorities have a valid reason in investigating their activities.
But what’s interesting here are the shrill cries that emanated from the US Congress in response to Egypt’s filing of legal suits against the NGO employees. Last week, there was an uproar on Capitol Hill exhorting the Barack Obama administration to deny vital military and development aid to Egypt, which is the fifth-largest recipient of American largesse. At stake is $1.6 billion of aid that Washington annually gifts to Cairo and which is now the lifeline for the transitional Egyptian state.
Egyptian civilians, who are disillusioned with the revolution and fear falling under a fourth successive military dictator since the 1950s, know that the US has leverage over Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, head of Egypt’s ruling military council, and his officer ranks owing to their dependence on Washington’s aid. As the anti-military sentiment has risen into a mass fervour on the streets, the fact that the US was not using the aid card to force the Army to hand over power to civilians had, despite the charade, been frustrating activists. But sadly for their cause, not even the NGO arrests have pushed the US executive away from pampering the Egyptian military.
In the last few days, US Senators and representatives who had earlier demanded an end to the harassment of American NGO staffers have toned down their stridency on retaliation for the arrests. The key to this turnaround has to do with Israel’s fears that shutting off the aid tap will push the Egyptian military to abandon its three-decade-old peace treaty with Tel Aviv.
Foreign aid from Washington to successive Egyptian regimes since the days of Anwar Sadat is actually a bribe to perpetuate their entente cordiale with Israel — anger on the streets in Egypt against a sell-out on the Palestinian cause had to be salved through this form of payment from the US to the Egyptian military. Sensing Israel’s fear and the US’ vulnerability, the Muslim Brotherhood, which currently dominates the Egyptian Parliament, has threatened to “review” relations with Israel if the aid stops flowing from Washington. The Brotherhood and Tantawi’s officer corps know that in an election year, Mr Obama would not dare to weaken Israel geopolitically.
The outcome of this sordid game over aid is that the people of Egypt who are desperately striving for civilian supremacy and de-politicisation of the Army, are being cheated by the strategic aid policy of the US, which is nothing but a guarantee for Israel’s security. The NGOs who claim to be helping to democratise Egypt are playing their parts as cogs in this structural vicious circle.
The India-UK row over foreign aid is equally convoluted. Some British MPs, angered by New Delhi’s award of a major fighter jet contract to a French defence manufacturer, pressured the David Cameron government to cancel the £280 million worth of annual development assistance to India. If development aid does not buy lucrative contracts to Britain’s military industrial complex, they argued, Britain should stop its charity pretentions and suspend aid deliveries to India.
Following this muscle-flexing, it emerged from leaked memos that India was anyway not clamouring for British development aid. India’s then foreign secretary, Nirupama Rao, is said to have recommended that Delhi stop accepting British aid due to the “negative publicity of Indian poverty” promoted by UK’s DFID (Department for International Development). India’s finance minister Pranab Mukherjee bluntly remarked in 2011 that Britain’s aid was “peanuts” and was not welcome.
Yet, as in the case of the US and Egypt, the British government has not withdrawn its unsolicited aid to India owing to domestic compulsions. The justification for this puzzling act of unwarranted benevolence is that British ministers had painstakingly sold the policy of foreign aid to their electorates and that pulling the plug now on India would cause “grave political embarrassment”.
In other words, the myth that Britain is still a liberal saviour of suffering people of the world has to be kept up for a domestic audience that is suffering under the weight of a prolonged economic downturn. Aid is, thus, not designed to bring the wretched of the earth out of poverty but to pacify unrest in the donor country’s domestic sphere. This has echoes from colonial times, when workers at home were kept under leash by means of the civilising mission and the “white man’s burden” overseas — the propaganda in Victorian England about the supposed uplifting nature of British colonialism was couched in humanitarian aid terms and was a means to cover up the Dickensian gloom of factory labour exploitation.
Last year, China surpassed the World Bank as the world’s biggest development lender. Apart from the political leverage, market penetration and energy security that Beijing gets in return from Africa and Latin America, Chinese aid investments also serve domestic purposes. Beijing’s “chequebook diplomacy” keeps internal dissent under check by peddling the vision of a benevolent state whose foreign policy is empowering the world’s underdogs.
Charity indeed begins at home, but in a rather murky way. Aid has never pitchforked receiving societies out of poverty, although donor states and their allies routinely benefit from developmental loans and grants thrust upon the wary. Egypt and India would fare better if liberated from foreign aid and its entwining strings.
The writer is vice-dean of the Jindal School of International Affairs and the author of the recent book, International Organizations and Civilian Protection: Power, Ideas and Humanitarian Aid in Conflict Zones
http://www.asianage.com/columnists/politics-charity-832