Global Maidan conference held in New York to recruit and co-opt young people

This conference was held November 15, 2014

People who presented included

  • Katie Halper – outreach director for a Naomi Klein film and co-producer for a Tim Robbins film
  • Jonathan Schienberg – associate producer for “60 Minutes”
  • Jenny Halper – director of production and development for Maven Pictures, Trudie Styler and Celine Rattray’s production company. Trudie Styler is married to Sting.
  • Alex Leo – founding editor of HuffPostComedy, editor-at-large for Newsweek; previously head of product for Reuters, senior editor of Huffington Post, and associate producer at ABC
  • Meredith Scardino – writer for Colbert Report
  • Sara Taksler – senior producer for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart

This is a heady and frightening array of talent to seduce young people to join U.S. funded, neo-Nazi, ultra-right movements. It is also very educational to understand the influential and connected positions these people occupy in the entertainment and news media world in the United States.

From the article below:

The Global Maidan conference is an attempt to make imperialism, fascism, and terrorism attractive to young people. The conference will feature classes on filmmaking, comedy writing, and other skills young “hipsters” aspire to acquire. It is an attempt to make young people who want to change the world and halt oppression into tools – to direct their anger not at those responsible for the rising low-wage police state in the US, but at Wall Street’s enemies abroad.

The conference promo states:

Global Maidan was organized to honor the one-year anniversary of EuroMaidan, the pro-democracy revolution in Ukraine that began in November 2013

Global Maidan is a conference for civic activists to learn from experts in journalism, comedy, filmmaking, fundraising, and social media, and for those experts to share their insights and help civic activists change the world.

…Ukraine needs this attention right now as it enters its second year of the crisis and faces a frozen conflict with Russia.

http://journal-neo.org/2014/11/12/stewart-colbert-and-the-upcoming-nazi-terrorist-conference-in-new-york-city/

Stewart, Colbert, and The Upcoming Nazi Terrorist Conference in New York City
By Caleb Maupin, November 12,2014

Volydymyr Parasiuk is no peace-loving freedom fighter. He is a 26-year-old armed fascist thug, who has commanded a battalion of Ukrainian “volunteers” to slaughter their own country folk. Parasiuk admits he was a member of the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists, a group of Neo-Nazis who trained him in their paramilitary camp.  The Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists is known for its Nazism and its stated desire to carry out genocide. Its leader proclaimed in 2007: “Our time has come, and the Dnieper will soon be red with the blood of kikes (slur for Jews) and moskals (slur for Russians).”

Parasiuk openly brags about his close coordination with the Right Sector, another neo-Nazi organization, as well as his use of outright violence and terrorism to further his extreme aims.

On the floor of the Ukrainian parliament, he has given speeches denouncing any plan for peace with the people of East Ukraine. He wants all negotiations to be suspended. He wants martial law.  He dismissed all who do not accept the government imposed on them by the EU and US as “homeless, alcoholics, drug addicts” as well as “grannies who see Stalin waving at them from the world beyond.”

A Nazi Conference in New York City

Parasiuk’s career as a promoter and perpetrator of fascism and violence is not limited to Ukraine. It has been announced that on Nov. 15th, he is coming to New York City for a “Global Maidan” Conference.

At the conference to take place on the lower east side of Manhattan, US supporters of Ukrainian fascism will join with terrorists seeking to overthrow the governments of Venezuela, Iran, Syria, and other countries. Together, with funding from Pentagon-linked NGOs, they will attempt to coordinate their activities and recruit young New Yorkers to their project.

The Global Maidan conference, where Parasiuk will be given a platform and treated as a hero, will also feature “Daily Show” segment producer Sara Taksler, as well as “Colbert Report” writer Meredith Scardino.

A few years back, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert held a “Rally To Restore Sanity” in Washington, DC. At the rally they bemoaned, with sarcasm and humor, the “shrillness” of political discourse. Is fascist monster Parasiuk a representative of the kind of “moderation” they and their production teams support?

Wall Street Fights Russia With Fascism

Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovich, who was democratically elected, was not willing to bring his country under the complete dominion of NATO and the European Union. He was not willing to cripple the country with IMF debt. He was more interested in developing a financial relationship with Russia than with the United States.

To overthrow the elected government in Ukraine, the US government poured billions of dollars into the creation of a violent, fascist movement.  After riots that would make even the most violent explosions in the US during the 1960s look like a playground scuffle in comparison, the elected government was removed. A rightwing-led movement — filled with self-proclaimed “ultra-nationalists” who consider Hitler to be a “liberator” and “hero” — seized control of the government.

The people of East Ukraine are fighting in the hopes of keeping their language and culture legal, and not being subjected to genocide (“the Dnieper will soon be red with the blood of kikes (slur for Jews) and moskals (slur for Russians)”).

In an attempt to keep Russia out of the rising global markets, the US has aligned itself with fascists. Ukraine was a peaceful country, but is now the site of massive civil war with political repression and ethnic violence now a common occurrence.

The Global Maidan conference is an attempt to make imperialism, fascism, and terrorism attractive to young people. The conference will feature classes on filmmaking, comedy writing, and other skills young “hipsters” aspire to acquire. It is an attempt to make young people who want to change the world and halt oppression into tools – to direct their anger not at those responsible for the rising low-wage police state in the US, but at Wall Street’s enemies abroad.

Will This Be Tolerated?

Six months ago, 43 people were burned alive by Parasiuk’s ilk in the Odessa House of Trade Unions, some of them finished off with baseball bats after jumping from the burning building. For the sake of their memory and their families, city officials, community members and people of basic human decency should make all efforts to prevent this terrorist conference from taking place.

US Federal Law forbids “conspiracy to commit terrorism,” something that accurately describes exactly what this conference would entail. If the NYPD were interested in “serving and protecting” the innocent, they would shut down this gathering of Ukrainian mass murderers instead of investigating people peacefully praying at mosques.

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, who purport to be “liberals” and advocates of “sanity” in political discourse, should end their association with this kind of ugly extremist terrorism. Scardino and Taksler should apologize for promoting Nazism, or be removed in order to maintain the integrity of the TV program.

Hundreds of New Yorkers died fighting Nazis in the Second World War. Why should this city host these modern-day fascist monsters decades later — just because they are helping Wall Street make a buck and compete with Russia?

Caleb Maupin is a political analyst and activist based in New York. He studied political science at Baldwin-Wallace College and was inspired and involved in the Occupy Wall Street movement, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2014/11/12/stewart-colbert-and-the-upcoming-nazi-terrorist-conference-in-new-york-city/

 

Advertisements

China a Military Threat? No Wonder China is Nervous as Obama Pivots

http://www.globalresearch.ca/no-wonder-china-is-nervous-as-obama-pivots/5312523

By F. William Engdahl, November 21, 2012
Posted on Global Research

To read the mainstream Western media, one would conclude that China has become an economic giant now intent on flexing its military muscle and making a massive arms buildup to do so. China’s designated new President, Xi Jinping, has just won both the top Communist party post from predecessor Hu Jintao as well as the head of the powerful Central Military Commission, giving Xi a full takeover of party and armed forces.

A recent BBC analysis, in an article titled “China extending military reach,” is typical of Western media coverage of China’s military program: “China‘s first aircraft carrier will begin sea trials later this year. Late last year, the first pictures were leaked of the prototype of Beijing‘s new “stealth” fighter. And US military experts believe that China has begun to deploy the world’s first long-range ballistic missile capable of hitting a moving ship at sea.[1]

In Japan, nationalist politicians like politically ambitious Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara and Toru Hashimoto, the mayor of Osaka, are gaining popularity with anti-China rhetoric and by claiming Japan must develop capacities to oppose Chinese military ascendency. In May the authoritative New York Times ran an alarming story to the effect that China announced a “double-digit increase” in military spending. In the actual text of the article they report an 11% increase over the previous budget, far less than even the rate of inflation.

However, when we examine in detail the actual redeployment and military moves of US Armed Forces in the Asia region following President Obama’s announcement of a new “Asia Pivot” refocus of US military capacities from Western Europe to the Asia region, it becomes clear China is re-acting, in order to attempt to deal with quite real threats to its future sovereignty rather than acting in an aggressive posture.

The mere fact that a standing President, Obama, during nationally televised Presidential debates labeled China as an “adversary” is indicative of the US military posture change. The depth and nature of the US pivot to China is crystal clear when one takes a closer look at the recent developments in an Asian US Missile Defense deployment, clearly aimed at China and no other.

China officially spent barely 10% of what the US does on its defense, some $90 billion, or if certain defense-related arms import and other costs are included, perhaps $111 billion a year. Even if the Chinese authorities do not publish complete data on such sensitive areas, it’s clear China spends a mere fraction of the USA and is starting from a military-technology base far behind the USA.

The US defense budget is not just by far the world’s largest. It dominates everyone else, completely independent of any perceived threat. In the nineteenth century, the British Royal Navy built the size of its fleet according to the fleets of Britain’s two most powerful potential enemies; America’s defense budget strategists declare it will be “doomsday” if the United States builds its navy to anything less than five times that of China and Russia combined.[2]

If we include the spending by Russia, China’s strongest ally within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, their combined total annual defense spending is barely $142 billion. The world’s ten top defense spending nations in addition to the USA as largest, and China as second largest, include the UK, France, Japan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Indiaand Brazil. In 2011 the military spending of the United States totaled a staggering 46% of total spending by the world’s 171 governments and territories, almost half the entire world. [3]

Clearly, for all its rhetoric about peace-keeping missions and “democracy” promotion, the Pentagon is pursuing what its planners refer to as “Full Spectrum Dominance,” the total control of all global air, land, ocean, space, outer-space and now cyberspace.[4] It is clearly determined to use its military might to secure global domination or hegemony. No other interpretation is possible.

China today, because of its dynamic economic growth and its determination to pursue sovereign Chinese national interests, merely because China exists, is becoming the Pentagon new “enemy image,” or adversary, now replacing the no longer useful “enemy image” of Islam used after September 2001 by the Bush-Cheney Administration to justify the Pentagon’s global power pursuit.

After almost two decades of neglect of its interests in East Asia, in 2011, the Obama Administration announced that the US would make “a strategic pivot” in its foreign policy to focus its military and political attention on the Asia-Pacific, particularly Southeast Asia, that is, China. Continue reading

U.S. government lies about Navy dormitory built in the shape of a swastika — San Diego, California

Below is the story of a monstrous lie and cover-up.

Some background first:

A building is not created by magic. There is a long and careful process to make sure the building goes from design stage to the finished project without any errors.

The most fundamental part of a building project is a floor plan. Without a floor plan, there is no building. A floor plan is an overhead view of a building. Consider that as you read the Navy’s claims.

There are detailed drawings of the structure and its various elements. Additional drawings show the building from various angles including how it sits on a site – the elevations. Buildings are depicted in close up and from above.

Anyone who has ever seen blueprints or building plans knows that architects, contractors, and project superintendents leave nothing to chance or guesswork. All those who connected with the building, especially the client, knows exactly how the finished building will look. Exactly.

There is no “kind of”, “sort of”, fuzzy idea. Since the client, in this case the United States Navy, directs the design and approves everything, they know exactly what they’re getting, down to the nails and bolts.

The shape of a building and its footprint on the ground are extremely important and exactly known.

Furthermore, models are often constructed of a building, particularly for expensive projects. And this was an expensive project – over $2 million dollars.

Yet, the Navy claims they didn’t know what the building would look like.

That is simply impossible. I’ll repeat: everyone who was involved with this project knew exactly what the building looked like.

The central questions that must be investigated in a criminal investigation are:

  • Who ordered the design for this building?
  • Who approved the design at every stage?
  • Who ordered the cover-up?

The architect and the contractors all knew the design. But who ordered it?

This isn’t the first time the Navy has engaged in such flagrant and preposterous lying. Unfortunately, it probably won’t be the last, because there are no penalties, there is no accountability in the United States on projects the U.S. government condones or supports. And it appears to support this project.

It is up to Americans to demand accountability and action, including for the reason that their tax dollars funded this monstrosity. Americans have to stop being mesmerized by flag-waving and ask themselves: does this building represent what Americans value? And, what will they do about a branch of the service that engages in this type of activity?

27 million Russians died due to the Nazis. 182,000 American soldiers. How many million people were tortured and killed in the death camps and concentration camps by the Nazis?

The U.S. Navy planned a building shaped as a swastika to serve as a dormitory for Navy Seals. Think of that: Navy personnel are living and sleeping right now inside a symbol of hatred, racism, genocide, empire. Are there other swastika buildings or buildings shaped in other occult symbols on U.S. military facilities?

What does the U.S. Navy really represent? Who do they really serve?

Is that why the U.S. supports Nazis in Ukraine?

———————————————————–

From the Daily Kos, February 28, 2007

Nazi Symbols in the US Military: “Accidental” Giant US Navy Swastika Building Was No Accident
By Bruce Wilson

We knew what it [the building complex] was going to look like” – Architect John Mock

The story of the US Navy’s giant swastika-shaped barracks, built in the late 1960′s and located at the Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, just South of San Diego, has been all over the news. Rightly so – it’s the biggest government subsidized swastika display on Earth.

Below is a YouTube presentation [1] – a simple silent slide show of clips taken of views, through Google Earth, that zoom in, from space, on the giant NAB swastika complex.

The US media has now deigned to make this story into a major media spectacle. But, media depictions you may have heard in the last 24 hours, on the origin of the giant swastika-barracks which houses Navy SEALS, will probably all amount to evasion, distortions, or even lies.

After Google Earth made the Navy’s giant government-subsidized swastika building complex, located at the Coronado Naval Amphibious Base near San Diego, visible to anyone on Earth, the resultant publicity, outcry, and mounting political pressure has led the US Navy to budget $600,000 to change the swastika shape of the barracks: to unmake the swastika, which according to the US Navy was the result of an embarrassing planning oversight.

CNN below, repeats the United States Navy’s claim that the NAB Swastika complex was accidental. But, that claim has been disproved, as detailed further in this post, by researcher Avrahaum Segol.

 Here’s CNN’s story: [unavailable, withdrawn]

“There are two important questions attendant to this controversy.  The first is now that the issue is again on the front burner, what can or will be done to get rid of the swastika?  The second is how in the hell did a swastika design ever get there in the first place?….

World War II cost the lives of 318,274 U.S. service personnel—182,070 of them in the European theatre. These brave soldiers and sailors died fighting the people whose symbol inexplicably mocks their deaths from the grounds of a U.S. Naval Base.” – Donald H. Harrison, San Diego Jewish Times December 13, 2006

CNN’s  “Oops ! – gosh darn it…. accidental swastika !” explanation, offered as a joking commentary (as if a giant swastika building is funny) is both grotesque and also amounts, at best, to journalistic incompetence.

Thanks to the efforts of Israeli American researcher Avrahaum Segol,  much is known about the origin of the Navy’s enormous swastika shaped barracks complex, and the likelihood that the complex was “accidental” is close to zero. Evidence unearthed by Segol demonstrates, almost certainly, that the building complex was no “accident”…

To get another perspective on the sheer scale of the Coronado NAB swastika barracks, which houses Navy SEALS, let’s look at a Reuters news story:

Reuters did not discuss the building’s possible origin – how could such a thing have happened by ACCIDENT ?! But Reuters is to be commended – the news service did not, as did CNN newscasts, turn the giant swastika building into a joke. Unlike CNN, Reuters simply avoided the question of how the freakish Coronado NAB swastika complex came to be.

What’s the true story ?

***

First of all, you should be aware of a bit of swastika history. The Nazis, of course, did not invent the swastika symbol, which has been used widely around the world for thousands of years.

But, the Nazis did appropriate the swastika symbol to make it their own. Swastika symbols are typically displayed upright, with the symbol resting flatly on one of the swastika arms. In contrast, the Nazi swastika is distinguished, most notably, because it is always rotated at 45% degrees off true North.

The Coronado NAB Amphibious base swastika is oriented at 45% degrees off true North, as a properly displayed Nazi swastika would be, and it rotates in the same direction as did the Nazi swastika.

Here is the US Navy’s official explanation on the origin of the Coronado swastika building complex. The following picture is an excerpt from a reply by Navy public affairs officer Steve Fiebing dated August 17, 2006, in response to a certified letter, sent by Dave vonKleist of The Power Hour, asking about the origin of the complex.

Continue reading

Secretive Neo-Nazi military organization linked to NATO involved in Euromaidan sniper shootings

From Global Research, November 22, 2014
First published in March, 2014
By F. William Engdahl
http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-secretive-neo-nazi-military-organization-involved-in-euromaidan-snyper-shootings/5371611

This article –which recounts the events of the November Euromaidan 2013 Sniper Shootings was first published in March 2014

The events in Ukraine since November 2013 are so astonishing as almost to defy belief.An legitimately-elected (said by all international monitors) Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovich, has been driven from office, forced to flee as a war criminal after more than three months of violent protest and terrorist killings by so-called opposition.

yanukovich-ousted-president-russia

Yanoukovitch, ousted president of Ukraine

His “crime” according to protest leaders was that he rejected an EU offer of a vaguely-defined associate EU membership that offered little to Ukraine in favor of a concrete deal with Russia that gave immediate €15 billion debt relief and a huge reduction in Russian gas import prices. Washington at that point went into high gear and the result today is catastrophe.

A secretive neo-nazi military organization reported linked to NATO played a decisive role in targeted sniper attacks and violence that led to the collapse of the elected government.

But the West is not finished with destroying Ukraine. Now comes the IMF with severe conditionalities as prerequisite to any Western financial help.

After the famous leaked phone call of US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (photo, left) with the US Ambassador in Kiev, where she discussed the details of who she wanted in a new coalition government in Kiev, and where she rejected the EU solutions with her “Fuck the EU” comment,[1] the EU went it alone. Germany’s Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier proposed that he and his French counterpart, Laurent Fabius, fly to Kiev and try to reach a resolution of the violence before escalation. Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski was asked to join. The talks in Kiev included the EU delegation, Yanukovich, the three opposition leaders and a Russian representative. The USA was not invited.[2]

The EU intervention without Washington was extraordinary and reveals the deeping division between the two in recent months. In effect it was the EU saying to the US State Department, “F*** the US,” we will end this ourselves.

After hard talks, all major parties including the majority of protesters, agreed to new presidential elections in December, return to the 2004 Constitution and release of Julia Tymoshenko from prison. The compromise appeared to end the months long chaos and give a way out for all major players.

The diplomatic compromise lasted less than twelve hours. Then all hell broke loose.

Snipers began shooting into the crowd on February 22 in Maidan or Independence Square. Panic ensued and riot police retreated in panic according to eyewitnesses. The opposition leader Vitali Klitschko withdrew from the deal, no reason given. Yanukovich fled Kiev.[3]

The question unanswered until now is who deployed the snipers? According to veteran US intelligence sources, the snipers came from an ultra-right-wing military organization known as Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian People’s Self-Defense (UNA-UNSO).


IMAGE: Members of UNA-UNSO marching in Lviv.

Strange Ukraine ‘Nationalists’

The leader of UNA-UNSO, Andriy Shkil, ten years ago became an adviser to Julia Tymoshenko. UNA-UNSO, during the US-instigated 2003-2004 “Orange Revolution”, backed pro-NATO candidate Viktor Yushchenko against his pro-Russian opponent, Yanukovich. UNA-UNSO members provided security for the supporters of Yushchenko and Julia Tymoshenko on Independence Square in Kiev in 2003-4.[4]

UNA-UNSO is also reported to have close ties to the German National Democratic Party (NDP). [5]

Ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 the crack-para-military UNA-UNSO members have been behind every revolt against Russian influence. The one connecting thread in their violent campaigns is always anti-Russia. The organization, according to veteran US intelligence sources, is part of a secret NATO “GLADIO” organization, and not a Ukraine nationalist group as portrayed in western media. [6]

According to these sources, UNA-UNSO have been involved (confirmed officially) in the Lithuanian events in the Winter of 1991, the Soviet Coup d’etat in Summer 1991, the war for the Pridnister Republic 1992, the anti-Moscow Abkhazia War 1993, the Chechen War, the US-organized Kosovo Campaign Against the Serbs, and the August 8 2008 war in Georgia. According to these reports, UNA-UNSO para-military have been involved in every NATO dirty war in the post-cold war period, always fighting on behalf of NATO. “These people are the dangerous mercenaries used all over the world to fight NATO’s dirty war, and to frame Russia because this group pretends to be Russian special forces. THESE ARE THE BAD GUYS, forget about the window dressing nationalists, these are the men behind the sniper rifles,” these sources insist. [7]

If true that UNA-UNSO is not “Ukrainian” opposition, but rather a highly secret NATO force using Ukraine as base, it would suggest that the EU peace compromise with the moderates was likely sabotaged by the one major player excluded from the Kiev 21 February diplomatic talks—Victoria Nuland’s State Department.[8] Both Nuland and right-wing Republican US Senator John McCain have had contact with the leader of the Ukrainian opposition Svoboda Party, whose leader is openly anti-semitic and defends the deeds of a World War II Ukrainian SS-Galicia Division head.[9] The party was registered in 1995, initially calling itself the “Social National Party of Ukraine” and using a swastika style logo. Svoboda is the electoral front for neo-nazi organizations in Ukraine such as UNA-UNSO.[10]

One further indication that Nuland’s hand is shaping latest Ukraine events is the fact that the new Ukrainian Parliament is expected to nominate Nuland’s choice, Arseny Yatsenyuk, from Tymoshenko’s party, to be interim head of the new Cabinet.

Whatever the final truth, clear is that Washington has prepared a new economic rape of Ukraine using its control over the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

IMF plunder of Ukraine Crown Jewels

Now that the “opposition” has driven a duly-elected president into exile somewhere unknown, and dissolved the national riot police, Berkut, Washington has demanded that Ukraine submit to onerous IMF conditionalities.

In negotiations last October, the IMF demanded that Ukraine double prices for gas and electricity to industry and homes, that they lift a ban on private sale of Ukraine’s rich agriculture lands, make a major overhaul of their economic holdings, devalue the currency, slash state funds for school children and the elderly to “balance the budget.” In return Ukraine would get a paltry $4 billion.

Before the ouster of the Moscow-leaning Yanukovich government last week, Moscow was prepared to buy some $15 billion of Ukraine debt and to slash its gas prices by fully one-third. Now, understandably, Russia is unlikely to give that support. The economic cooperation between Ukraine and Moscow was something Washington was determined to sabotage at all costs.

This drama is far from over. The stakes involve the very future of Russia, the EU-Russian relations, and the global power of Washington, or at least that faction in Washington that sees further wars as the prime instrument of policy.

Writer F. William Engdahl is a geopolitical analyst and the author of “Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order”.

Notes

[1] F. William Engdahl, US-Außenministerium in flagranti über Regimewechsel in der Ukraine ertappt, Kopp Online.de, February 8, 2014, accessed in http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/enthuellungen/f-william-engdahl/us-aussenministerium-in-flagranti-ueber-regimewechsel-in-der-ukraine-ertappt.html

[2] Bertrand Benoit, Laurence Norman and Stephen Fidler , European Ministers Brokered Ukraine Political Compromise: German, French, Polish Foreign Ministers Flew to Kiev, The Wall Street Journal, February 21, 2014, accessed in http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303636404579397351862903542?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303636404579397351862903542.html

[3] Jessica Best, Ukraine protests Snipers firing live rounds at demonstrators as fresh violence erupts despite truce, The Mirror UK, February 20, 2014, accessed in http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/ukraine-protests-snipers-firing-live-3164828

[4] Aleksandar Vasovic , Far right group flexes during Ukraine revolution, Associated Press, January 3, 2005, Accessed in http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20050103&slug=ukraine03

[5] Wikipedia, Ukrainian National Assembly Ukrainian National Self Defence, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_National_Assembly_%E2%80%93_Ukrainian_National_Self_Defence

[6] Source report, Who Has Ukraine Weapons, February 27, 2014, private to author.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Max Blumenthal, Is the US backing neo-Nazis in Ukraine?, AlterNet February 25, 2014, accessed in

http://www.salon.com/2014/02/25/is_the_us_backing_neo_nazis_in_ukraine_partner/

[9] Channel 4 News, Far right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator, 16 December 2013, accessed in

http://www.channel4.com/news/ukraine-mccain-far-right-svoboda-anti-semitic-protests

Evidence: Malaysian Airlines MH17 was downed by Ukrainian military aircraft

From Global Research, November 15, 2015:

Malaysian Airlines MH17 Downed by Ukrainian Military Aircraft. Kiev Regime False Flag; Selected Articles
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

At the APEC Summit in Beijing,  Australia’s Prime Minister Tony Abbott who is hosting this week’s G20 meetings in Brisbane, intimated in no uncertain terms, during a 15 minute encounter with Russian President Vladimir Putin, that Moscow was responsible for the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 over Ukraine. 

During the meeting, Mr Abbott is reported to have stated that “Russia had armed the rebels who shot down the aircraft and killed 38 Australians.”  Mr Abbott said that  “MH17 was destroyed by a missile from a launcher that had come out of Russia, was fired from inside Eastern Ukraine and then returned to Russia… [and that this] was a very serious matter.”

Prime Minister Tony Abbott meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. Pic: A

Prime Minister Tony Abbott meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. Pic: AFP

Global Research has from the outset provided extensive coverage of the downing of MH17. The evidence and analysis not only dispels Prime Minister Abbott’s accusations, it points unequivocally to a false flag attack instigated by the US-NATO supported Kiev regime, as well as a coverup by the Australian and Dutch investigators.

Lest we forget, the downing of MH17 was used as a pretext by Washington to impose economic sanctions on the Russian Federation.

The Western media and governments have gone to arms length to suppress and distort the evidence which points to the downing of MH17 not by a Buk missile but by a Ukrainian military aircraft.

Spanish Air Traffic Controller’s Twitter Report [translated from Spanish]

One of the first reports (in real time) pointing to the presence of two Ukrainian military aircraft  was revealed by the Spanish air traffic controller’s twitter messages on the day of the attacks. (emphasis added)

11:48 – 17 de jul. de 2014

The B777 plane flew escorted by Ukraine jet fighter until 2 minutes before disappearing from the radar,

11:54 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“If kiev authorities want to tell the truth, It´s gathered, 2 jet fighters flew very close minutes before, wasn’t downed by a fighter”

12:00 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“Malaysia Airlines B777 plane just disappeared and Kiev military authority informed us of the downing, How they knew?”

12:00 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“7:00 minutes after [plane disappeared], the downing was notified, later our tower was taken with foreigner staff, they still here ”

12:01 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“all this is gathered in radars, to the unbelieving, shot down by kiev, here we know it and military air traffic control also”

13:15 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“Here the military commanders are in control and admit that the military could be following other orders , but no, the pro-Russian”

13:29 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“Interior Minister knew what the fighters were doing in the area, the defense minister didn’t.”

13:31 – 17 de jul. de 2014

“Military confirm It was Ukraine, but still does not know where the order came from”

The Spanish air-controller’s Twitter account was closed down by Twitter. This report from Kiev’s air traffic control was  dismissed by the mainstream media as “a conspiracy theory”. The audio records of communication between air traffic control and the plane were not made public.

Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing MH#17 bBy Global Research News, July 18, 2014

The Report of German Pilot Peter Haisenko

German pilot Peter Haisenko in a path-breaking analysis pointed to bullet like holes which could not have been triggered by a buk missile:

The cockpit shows traces of shelling! You can see the entry and exit holes. The edge of a portion of the holes is bent inwards. These are the smaller holes, round and clean, showing the entry points most likely that of a 30 millimeter caliber projectile.

Revelations of German Pilot: Shocking Analysis of the “Shooting Down” of Malaysian MH17. “Aircraft Was Not Hit by a Missile” By Peter Haisenko, September 09, 2014

The Suppressed BBC Report on Eyewitness Testimonies

The BBC  in an early report from Eastern Ukraine (which was subsequently suppressed) provided testimonies that MH17 was shot down by a military aircraft.  The BBC has censored its own news reporting. That BBC report including the video was removed by the BBC:

The inhabitants of the nearby villages are certain that they saw military aircraft in the sky shortly prior to the catastrophe. According to them, it actually was the jet fighters that brought down the Boeing.

The Ukrainian government rejects this version of events. They believe that the Boeing was shot down using a missile from a “BUK” complex that came in from Russia.

BBC reporter Olga Ivshina and producer Oksana Vozhdayeva decided to find the place from which the missile was allegedly launched.

Eyewitness #2: … And there was another aircraft, a military one, beside it. Everybody saw it.

Eyewitness #1: Yes, yes. It was flying under it, because it could be seen. It was proceeding underneath, below the civilian one.

Original BBC Video Report: Preserved by Google Web-cache

[both the original BCC video as well as the web cache BBC report on Google has also been suppressed]

Below is the same BBC Russian Services report which was reposted on the internet

Original source http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/malaysia… – OSCE monitor Michael Bociurkiw mentions bullet holes in #MH17, not able to find any missile so far.

The Kiev Regime’s Official Report on the Downing of MH17 

It is worth noting that one week after Michael Bociukiw’s statement, the Kiev regime released its official report (August 7) on the downing of  MH17  drafted by Ukraine’s intelligence bureau, The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU). This report, which borders on the absurd, has barely been acknowledged by the mainstream media.

According to the SBU report entitled Terrorists and Militants planned cynical terrorist attack at Aeroflot civil aircraft , the Donetsk militia (with the support of Moscow) was aiming at a Russian Aeroflot passenger plane and shot down the Malaysian MH17 airliner by mistake. That’s the official Ukraine government story which has not been reported by the MSM, nor mentioned “officially” by Western governments.

According to the Kiev regime, the Donetsk militia did not intend to shoot down Malaysian airlines MH17. What the “pro-Russian rebels” were aiming at was a Russian Aeroflot passenger plane. 

The MH17 was shot down “by mistake” according to an official statement by the head of Ukraine’s Secret Service, Valentine Nalyvaichenko (Ukraine News Service, August 7, 2014).

According to SBU Chief Nalyvaichenko who casually accuses the Russian government of planning to shoot down a Russian Aeroflot flight:

“Ukraine’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies have established during the investigation into a terrorist attack on the Boeing… that on that day, July 17, and at that time military mercenaries and terrorists from the Russian Federation planned to carry out a terrorist attack against a passenger aircraft of Aeroflot en route from Moscow to Larnaca… as a pretext for the further invasion by Russia,”

“This cynical terrorist attack was planned for the day when the [Malaysia Airlines] plane happened to fly by, planned by war criminals as a pretext for the further military invasion by the Russian Federation, that is, there would be a casus belli,” he added.

Thus, according Nalyvaichenko, the terrorists downed the Malaysian airliner by mistake.” (Ukraine Interfax News, August 8, 2014)

Nalyvaichenko said that the Kiev government reached this conclusion “in the course of its own investigation into the downing of MH17″.

According to Britain’s foremost news tabloid, The Mail on Sunday, quoting the head of Ukraine intelligence, the insidious design of the pro-Russian rebels (supported by Moscow) was to shoot down a Russian commercial airline plane, with a view to blaming the Ukrainian government. The objective of this alleged “false flag” covert op was to create a justifiable and credible pretext for Vladimir Putin to declare war on Ukraine.

Desperate MH17 “Intelligence” Spin. Ukraine Secret Service Contends that “Pro-Russian Rebels had Targeted a Russian Passenger Plane”. “But Shot Down Flight MH17 by Mistake”By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 06, 2014

SELECTED ARTICLES

Below is a selection of key articles which dispels the media lies and official government fabrications to the  effect that the Donbass militia supported by Moscow was behind the attack on Malaysian airlines MH17. 

At no juncture during the Ukrainian crisis could the downing of flight MH17 have been more convenient for NATO and its proxy regime in Kiev. Kiev’s forces in eastern Ukraine are being repealed. NATO’s attempts to bait Russia into moving into Ukrainian territory have failed.

Dutch MH17 Investigation Omits US “Intel”. Fabrications and Omissions Supportive of US-NATO Agenda Directed against Russia By Tony Cartalucci, September 19, 2014

MH17 Verdict: Real Evidence Points to US-Kiev Cover-up of Failed “False Flag” By 21st Century Wire, September 14, 201

Report by Dutch Investigators of MH17 Crash Dispels Notion about Missile Attack. Michel Chossudovsky By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 11, 2014

Spanish Air Controller @ Kiev Borispol Airport: Ukraine Military Shot Down Boeing MH#17 By Global Research News, July 18, 2014

Dutch Safety Board (DSB) Report: Malaysian MH17 was Brought Down by “A Large Number of High Energy Objects”, Contradicts US Claims that it Was Shot Down by a “Russian Missile” By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Julie Lévesque, September 09, 2014

“Support MH17 Truth”: OSCE Monitors Identify “Shrapnel and Machine Gun-Like Holes” indicating Shelling. No Evidence of a Missile Attack. Shot Down by a Military Aircraft? By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 09, 2014

Camouflage and Coverup: The Dutch Commission Report on the Malaysian MH17 Crash is “Not Worth the Paper it’s Written On”By Peter Haisenko, September 11, 2014

Major war is about to break out in Ukraine — NATO’s “final offensive”

Please distribute this information, contact your elected officials, network with peace advocates, speak at public meetings, organize protests (even one person with a sign or with flyers can educate and make a difference), and educate your communities, especially if you live in the U.S., Canada or the UK. Time is of the essence.

From Global Research, November 21, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/all-out-war-in-ukraine-natos-final-offensive/5415354
by Professor James Petras

There are clear signs that a major war is about to break out in Ukraine:  A war actively promoted by the NATO regimes and supported by their allies and clients in Asia (Japan) and the Middle East (Saudi Arabia).  The war over Ukraine will essentially run along the lines of a full-scale military offensive against the southeast Donbas region, targeting the breakaway ethnic Ukraine- Russian Peoples Republic of Donetsk and Lugansk, with the intention of deposing the democratically elected government, disarming the popular militias, killing the guerrilla resistance partisans and their mass base, dismantling the popular representative organizations and engaging in ethnic cleansing of millions of bilingual Ukraino-Russian citizens.  NATO’s forthcoming military seizure of the Donbas region is a continuation and extension of its original violent putsch in Kiev, which overthrew an elected Ukrainian government in February 2014.

The Kiev junta and its newly ‘elected’ client rulers, and its NATO sponsors are intent on a major purge to consolidate the puppet Poroshenko’s dictatorial rule.  The recent NATO-sponsored elections excluded several major political parties that had traditionally supported the country’s large ethnic minority populations, and was boycotted in the Donbas region.  This sham election in Kiev set the tone for NATO’s next move toward converting Ukraine into one gigantic US multi-purpose military base aimed at the Russian heartland and into a neo-colony for German capital, supplying Berlin with grain and raw materials while serving as a captive market for German manufactured goods.

An intensifying war fever is sweeping the West; the consequences of this madness appear graver by the hour.

War Signs:  The Propaganda and Sanctions Campaign, the G20 Summit and the Military Build Up

The official drum- beat for a widening conflict in Ukraine, spearheaded by the Kiev junta and its fascist militias, echoes in every Western mass media outlet, every day.  Major mass media propaganda mills and government ‘spokesmen and women’ publish or announce new trumped-up accounts of growing Russian military threats to its neighbors and cross-border invasions into Ukraine.  New Russian incursions are ‘reported’ from the Nordic borders and Baltic states to the Caucuses.  The Swedish regime creates a new level of hysteria over a mysterious “Russian” submarine off the coast of Stockholm, which it never identifies or locates – let alone confirms the ‘sighting’.  Estonia and Latvia claim Russian warplanes violated their air space without confirmation.  Poland expels Russian “spies” without proof or witnesses.  Provocative full-scale joint NATO-client state military exercises are taking place along Russia’s frontiers in the Baltic States, Poland, Romania and Ukraine.

NATO is sending vast arms shipments to the Kiev junta, along with “Special Forces” advisers and counter-insurgency experts in anticipation of a full-scale attack against the rebels in the Donbas.

The Kiev regime has never abided by the Minsk cease fire. According to the UN Human Rights office 13 people on average –mostly civilians –have been killed each day since the September cease fire. In eight weeks, the UN reports that 957 people have killed –overwhelmingly by Kiev’s armed forces.

The Kiev regime, in turn, has cut all basic social and public services to the Peoples’ Republics’, including electricity, fuel, civil service salaries, pensions, medical supplies, salaries for teachers and medical workers, municipal workers wages; banking and transport have been blockaded.

The strategy is to further strangle the economy, destroy the infrastructure, force an even greater mass exodus of destitute refugees from the densely populated cities across the border into Russia and then to launch massive air, missile, artillery and ground assaults on urban centers as well as rebel bases.

The Kiev junta has launched an all-out military mobilization in the Western regions, accompanied by rabid anti-Russian, anti-Eastern Orthodox indoctrination campaigns designed to attract the most violent far right chauvinist thugs and to incorporate the Nazi-style military brigades into the frontline shock troops.  The cynical use of irregular fascist militias will ‘free’ NATO and Germany from any responsibility for the inevitable terror and atrocities in their campaign.  This system of ‘plausible deniability’ mirrors the tactics of the German Nazis whose hordes of fascist Ukrainians and Ustashi Croats were notorious in their epoch of ethnic cleansing.

G20-plus-NATO: Support of the Kiev Blitz

To isolate and weaken resistance in the Donbas and guarantee the victory of the impending Kiev blitz, the EU and the US are intensifying their economic, military and diplomatic pressure on Russia to abandon the nascent peoples’ democracy in the south-east region of Ukraine, their principle ally.

Each and every escalation of economic sanctions against Russia is designed to weaken the capacity of the Donbas resistance fighters to defend their homes, towns and cities.  Each and every Russian shipment of essential medical supplies and food to the besieged population evokes a new and more hysterical outburst – because it counters Kiev-NATO strategy of starving the partisans and their mass base into submission or provoking their flight to safety across the Russian border.

After suffering a series of defeats, the Kiev regime and its NATO strategists decided to sign a ‘peace protocol’, the so-called Minsk agreement, to halt the advance of the Donbas resistance into the southern regions and to protect its Kiev’s soldiers and militias holed-up in isolated pockets in the East.  The Minsk agreement was designed to allow the Kiev junta to build up its military, re-organize its command and incorporate the disparate Nazi militias into its overall military forces in preparation for a ‘final offensive’.  Kiev’s military build-up on the inside and NATO’s escalation of sanctions against Russia on the outside would be two sides of the same strategy:  the success of a frontal attack on the democratic resistance of the Donbas basin depends on minimizing Russian military support through international sanctions.

NATO’s virulent hostility to Russian President Putin was on full display at the G20 meeting in Australia: NATO-linked presidents and prime ministers, especially Merkel, Obama, Cameron, Abbott, and Harper’s political threats and overt personal insults paralleled Kiev’s growing starvation blockade of the besieged rebels and population centers in the south-east.  Both the G20’s economic threats against Russia and the diplomatic isolation of Putin and Kiev’s economic blockade are preludes to NATO’s Final Solution – the physical annihilation of all vestiges of Donbas resistance, popular democracy and cultural-economic ties with Russia.

Kiev depends on its NATO mentors to impose a new round of severe sanctions against Russia, especially if its planned invasion encounters a well armed and robust mass resistance bolstered by Russian support.  NATO is counting on Kiev’s restored and newly supplied military capacity to effectively destroy the southeast centers of resistance.

NATO has decided on an ‘all-or-nothing campaign’:  to seize all of Ukraine or, failing that, destroy the restive southeast, obliterate its population and productive capacity and engage in an all-out economic (and possibly shooting) war with Russia.  Chancellor Angela Merkel is on board with this plan despite the complaints of German industrialists over their huge loss of export sales to Russia.  President Hollande of France has signed on dismissing the complaints of trade unionists over the loss of thousands French jobs in the shipyards.  Prime Minister David Cameron is eager for an economic war against Moscow, suggesting the bankers of the City of London find new channels to launder the illicit earnings of Russian oligarchs.

The Russian Response

Russian diplomats are desperate to find a compromise, which allows Ukraine’s ethnic Ukraine- Russian population in the southeast to retain some autonomy under a federation plan and regain influence within the ‘new’ post-putsch Ukraine.  Russian military strategists have provided logistical and military aid to the resistance in order to avoid a repeat of the Odessa massacre of ethnic Russians by Ukrainian fascists on a massive scale. Above all, Russia cannot afford to have NATO-Nazi-Kiev military bases along its southern ‘underbelly’, imposing a blockade of the Crimea and forcing a mass exodus of ethnic Russians from the Donbas.  Under Putin, the Russian government has tried to propose compromises allowing Western economic supremacy over Ukraine but without NATO military expansion and absorption by Kiev.

That policy of conciliation has repeatedly failed.

The democratically elected ‘compromise regime’ in Kiev was overthrown in February 2014 in a violent putsch, which installed a pro-NATO junta.

Kiev violated the Minsk agreement with impunity and encouragement from the NATO powers and Germany.

The recent G20 meeting in Australia featured a rabble-rousing chorus against President Putin.  The crucial four-hour private meeting between Putin and Merkel turned into a fiasco when Germany parroted the NATO chorus.

Putin finally responded by expanding Russia’s air and ground troop preparedness along its borders while accelerating Moscow’s economic pivot to Asia.

Most important, President Putin has announced that Russia cannot stand by and allow the massacre of a whole people in the Donbas region.

Is Poroshenko’s forthcoming blitz against the people of southeast Ukraine designed to provoke a Russian response – to the humanitarian crisis?  Will Russia confront the NATO-directed Kiev offensive and risk a total break with the West?

James Petras latest book is THE POLITICS OF IMPERIALISM:THE US, ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE EAST (CLARITY PRESS:ATLANTA)

 

Tony Blair, against all logic, wins “Global Legacy” award from Save the Children; sign the petition

As Great Britain’s actions abroad have resulted in the death and suffering of millions of children, and its actions at home have resulted in child rape, torture, trafficking, and murder at the top, by the Windsor family, Church of England officials, and government officials (www.itccs.org, [1]), down to the sexual abuse in their school system, the award given to Tony Blair is the starkest reminder of the Orwellian situation we are now in.

He represents the leaders of the West. Everyday people are needed to speak out and confront the madness, the lies, and the crimes sweeping out from the West. Fraudulent non-profit organizations such as Save the Children that perpetuate this misery must also be exposed.

Silence is consent. To take no action is to participate in these horrible crimes.

We must save the children indeed.

Please sign petition demanding that Save the Children revoke this award given to Tony Blair.
https://www.change.org/p/save-the-children-revoke-the-global-legacy-award-given-to-tony-blair

From Interventions Watch, November 20, 2014:

Tony Blair wins Save The Children’s ‘Global Legacy’ award.

 Tony Blair was last night recognised for his humanitarian work at a glamorous gala to raise funds for a global children’s charity – in front of guests including Lassie the dog.

The controversial former Prime Minister received the Global Legacy Award at the Save the Children Illumination Gala 2014, which was held at The Plaza in New York City.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/tony-blair-honoured-with-save-the-childrens-global-legacy-award-at-charity-gala-attended-by-ben-affleck-and-lassie-9873596.html

And this isn’t some sick, satirical joke. The man who was to a huge extent responsible for killing, injuring, displacing and immiserating several hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children (among his many other crimes and misdemeanours) has been recognised ‘for his humanitarian work’ by one the ‘Western’ world’s foremost child welfare NGOs.

And me saying that he ‘is to huge extent responsible for the killing, injuring, displacement and immiseration of several hundreds of thousands of children in Iraq’ is not just rhetoric.

To that end, it’s worth looking in a bit more depth at the scale of the catastrophe inflicted on Iraq’s children by the war that Tony Blair launched and continues to defend.

In March 2013, the charity War Child released a report entitled ‘Mission Unaccomplished’. This report documented how:

  • ’51% of 12-17 year olds do not attend secondary school’
  • ‘One in four children has stunted physical and intellectual development due to under-nutrition’.
  • ‘In 2011 a survey found up to 1 million children have lost one or both parents in the conflict’.
  • ‘In 2010, 7 years after the conflict began, it was estimated that over a quarter of Iraqi children, or 3 million, suffered varying degrees of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder’.
  • ‘Between December 2012 and April 2013, ‘An estimated 692 children and young people have been killed’ in conflict related violence, and more ‘than 1,976 children and young people have been injured’. These figures are almost certainly underestimates’.

http://cdn.warchild.org.uk/sites/default/files/Mission_Unaccomplished_%20Iraq_1_May_2013.pdf

The report also points out that the numbers presented above  ‘come to life when you realise the pain, trauma and suffering behind them.  Every number in the statistics above has a story to tell and a life attached to it’.

Going back further, the Iraqi Red Crescent had documented in 2008 how ‘children under 12 made up 58.7 percent of’ Internally Displaced Persons in the country.

The U.N. had documented how only 40% of Iraqi children had access to clean drinking water due to the effects of the war, and how they in general lacked ‘access to the most basic services and manifest a wide range of psychological symptoms from the violence in their everyday lives’.

While in 2003, The Guardian reported on how:

British and American forces were accused yesterday of breaking international rules of war after admitting that they were using cluster bombs against targets in Iraq.

The report went to explain how:

Alex Renton, overseeing Oxfam’s aid work from Jordan, said the cluster shells could cause “unnecessary harm”. The UN children’s fund, Unicef, expressed concern that Iraqi children might confuse the yellow food packets being handed out by American forces with the bomblets, which had identical colouring.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/apr/04/uk.iraq1

That Tony Blair’s policies helped to inflict immense and ongoing hardship on the children of Iraq is beyond question. While he may not have personally been firing the cannons and dropping the bombs, as one of the architects of the aggression against Iraq he is ultimately responsible for the ‘accumulated evil of the whole’, as per the Nuremberg judgements.

What, then, could possibly explain Save The Children’s decision to give a man who is widely reviled as an amoral war criminal, and rightly so, such an award?

Personally, I think one reason could be that their Chief Executive is a fellow named Justin Forsyth. According to his biography on the Save The Children website, Forsyth was in 2004:

  . . . recruited to Number 10 by Tony Blair where he led efforts on poverty and climate change . . . He was to stay on under Gordon Brown, becoming his Strategic Communications and Campaigns Director.

http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/about-us/people/executive-directors

So Forsyth was actually an underling of Tony Blair (and then Gordon Brown) at precisely the time they were ravaging Iraq.

I’d hazard that he shares broadly the same pro-Establishment values and ideological assumptions as Blair, and has taken those pro-Establishment values and assumptions with him to Save The Children. And when you think of just how rotten the British Establishment is, that can’t be a good thing.

This isn’t the first time that Save The Children have demonstrated that they are unhealthily close to the British and U.S. Establishments, either.

In 2013, for example, they appointed Samantha Cameron, the partner of British Prime Minister David Cameron, as their ambassador to Syria.

It’s worth remembering that David Cameron’s government were (and still are) arming and training elements within the rebel opposition, and thus constituted one side in the conflict, at the very time Samantha Cameron was appointed.

And as a little thought experiment, what might the reaction have been had they instead appointed Lyudmila Putin, the partner of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, as their ambassador to Syria? I very much doubt that it would have gone almost totally unremarked upon, as Samantha Cameron’s appointment did.

To take another example, The Guardian had reported in 2003 on how Save The Children had been:

ordered to end criticism of military action in Iraq by its powerful US wing to avoid jeopardising financial support from Washington and corporate donors

And then how:

Senior figures at Save the Children US . . . demanded the withdrawal of the criticism and an effective veto on any future statements blaming the invasion for the plight of Iraqi civilians suffering malnourishment and shortages of medical supplies.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2003/nov/28/charities.usnews

A affair which surely needs no further commentary.

I’ve often thought that the bigger and more established humanitarian and human rights NGOs don’t come in for anywhere near as much scrutiny from the liberal-left as they should. They kop an awful lot of criticism from the right, but it seems to me that for a section of the liberal-left,  their research carries an air of unimpeachable neutrality and unquestionable moral probity.

And I’m not saying they don’t do some good work. But at the very least, their output helps to shape popular attitudes towards matters of war, peace and governance in general, and should be engaged with more critically for that reason.

I’ve also often thought that an analytical model similar to – if distinct from in some important respects – the one Noam Chomsky and Ed Herman applied to corporate media performance might be useful in assessing NGO performance. What role, if any, does funding, ideology, sourcing, management/ownership and flak play in shaping their output?

For a start, it might help to explain why former officials of the U.S. and U.K. government keep on ending up in positions of power in these organisations.

It would take a bigger brain than mine to undertake such a project – although activists like Keane Bhatt are doing great work in this area – but last night’s utter travesty shows why it would be useful.

——————————————–

[1] http://itccs.org/2014/11/18/censored-evidence-of-vancouver-based-child-trafficking-murder-ring-now-available/

http://itccs.org/2014/11/15/the-evidence-that-forced-pope-benedict-to-resign-is-now-available/