by Tony Cartalucci
March 16, 2012 - As Libya splinters into infighting factions, with racist genocidal death squads scouring "undesirables" across the nation, entire regions of the country peeling off as semi-autonomous terror-emirates and with a BP, Shell, and Total-funded Petroleum Institute chairman installed as "Prime Minister," one can clearly see the tens of thousands of deaths brought about by the UN sanctioned US-lead NATO campaign against the North African nation was an absolute failure. That is, if preserving innocent life was indeed its goal.
However, if the goal was to fracture the nation into ineffectual, infighting micro-states, while installing a proxy government in Tripoli to green-light contracts with Western corporations to plunder the nation's national wealth, it was a resounding success.
However, clearly the world was deceived by the United Nations, the International Criminal Court, the United States government, the British and French governments, and of course NATO in the execution of their "responsibility to protect" mission. To allow a repeat of the vast criminality that has irreparably ravaged Libya would be unconscionable. Yet that is exactly what Amnesty International is demanding of the Russian Federation.
Image: Amnesty International using the same "activism 2.0" gags employed by their junior partners at Invisible Children, the perpetrators of the Kony 2012 scam. Note the "Donate Now: Fight bad guys with every dollar," and how like Invisible Children, Amnesty addresses its audience as if they are children. Ironically, Amnesty and Invisible Children also both so happen to cultivate a myriad of connections with the US State Department and corporate interests.
Titled "Russia: No More Excuses, Stand Up Against Bloodshed in Syria," Amnesty perversely attempts to twist around violence and unrest clearly fomented by the West inside Syria as somehow the result of Russia's refusal to capitulate in the face of another NATO intervention. An intervention, it must be added, that is sure to create widespread violence, ethnic divisions and bloodletting across Syria, as well as the plundering by Western corporations eager to fill the void left when Syria's nationalist establishment is violently excised as it was in Libya.
The Amnesty report cites the fabricated death toll produced by the UN based solely on Syrian opposition claims, before bemoaning the positioning of Syrian troops and equipment in and around the city of Homs, which was until recently admittedly the base of operations of heavily armed militants. Amnesty then rhetorically asks, "how many more victims must suffer before Russia takes a decisive stance against crimes against humanity in Syria?" One could easily ask in response, how many more victims must suffer before the world takes a decisive stance against Wall Street and London in their global murder spree stretching from Libya to Syria, into Iran, across Iraq, and in the mountains and villages of Afghanistan?
Amnesty concludes their ultimatum by demanding Russia end its arms sales to Syria, even as Western governments through NATO and its Arab client states steadily supply arms, funds, and even foreign fighters to their proxy opposition movement.
Amnesty is funded & run by the US State Department & big business.
One might wonder why Amnesty International is clearly working in contradiction to their own mission statement to "protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied." Our first clue comes from who currently runs Amnesty International - Suzanne Nossel, Executive Director.
Nossel had just finished a stint as Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Organizations at the U.S. Department of State before being appointed as head of Amnesty. She was also vice-president of strategy and operations for the Wall Street Journal and a media and entertainment consultant at McKinsey & Company (a Council on Foreign Relations "founding" corporate member). Clearly manipulating public perception is a specialty of hers, one certainly being put into good use now regarding Syria.
Video: Nossel, while at the State Department, speaks about the US-engineered "Arab Spring" and the US' role in supporting opposition groups. She is speaking at the National Iranian American Council, and specifically cites the Brookings Institution to make her case about human rights abuses in Iran. One wonders if Nossel also thumbed through Brookings' "Which Path to Persia?" report which openly conspires to overthrow Iran via covertly backed "color revolutions," arming listed terrorist groups (as the US is now doing in Syria), and provoking Iran into a war it does not want. Nossel is obviously continuing her work of undermining sovereign nations by leveraging the cause of human rights at Amnesty International.
How Amnesty International can be considered impartial when it is run by a woman who is clearly a representative of American foreign interests, both in government and across its corporate-financier establishment, is astounding. What's worse is that Amnesty International is also indeed funded by government and big business. Amnesty International receives funding from Wall Street speculator George Soros' Open Society Institute (annual report page 8) as well as the UK Department for International Development (page 8), the European Commission and other corporate-funded foundations.
Amnesty International is compromised by a staggering conflict of interest where its organization is disproportionately funded and run by representatives of Wall Street and London. It is clear that not only is Amnesty International compromised, they are also disingenuously leveraging the noble cause of human rights to carry out a self-serving political agenda, which in Syria's case consists of regime change in favor of creating a Western client state.
The unrest in Syria is US-backed and has been long planned.
Syria has been slated for regime change since as early as 1991. In 2002, then US Under Secretary of State John Bolton added Syria to the growing "Axis of Evil." It would be later revealed that Bolton's threats against Syria manifested themselves as covert funding and support for opposition groups inside of Syria spanning both the Bush and Obama administrations.
In an April 2011 CNN article, acting State Department spokesman Mark Toner stated, "We're not working to undermine that [Syrian] government. What we are trying to do in Syria, through our civil society support, is to build the kind of democratic institutions, frankly, that we're trying to do in countries around the globe. What's different, I think, in this situation is that the Syrian government perceives this kind of assistance as a threat to its control over the Syrian people."
Toner's remarks came after the Washington Post released cables indicating the US has been funding Syrian opposition groups since at least 2005 and continued until today.
In an April 2011 AFP report, Michael Posner, the assistant US Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor, stated that the "US government has budgeted $50 million in the last two years to develop new technologies to help activists protect themselves from arrest and prosecution by authoritarian governments."
The report went on to explain that the US "organized training sessions for 5,000 activists in different parts of the world. A session held in the Middle East about six weeks ago gathered activists from Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon who returned to their countries with the aim of training their colleagues there," (emphasis added). Posner would add, "They went back and there's a ripple effect." That ripple effect of course is the "Arab Spring," and in Syria's case, the impetus for the current unrest threatening to unhinge the nation and invite in foreign intervention."
More recently, revelations that Syrian militants are in fact being armed, trained, funded, and even joined on the battlefield by Libya's Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), a US State Department-listed foreign terrorist organization (#27) only further highlights the necessity of Syria's government under President Assad to attempt to restore order at all costs. The Telegraph would report in November 2011 that LIFG leader, Abdul Belhaj met with senior leaders of the "Free Syrian Army" on the Turkish-Syrian border. It was reported that Belhaj was pledging weapons and money (both of which he receives from NATO) as well as sending LIFG fighters to train and fight alongside Syrian militants.
VoltaireNet.org would confirm Belhaj and his LIFG's role in not just assisting Syrian militants but in fact leading them in NATO's armed destabilization of Syria.
Judging by the last 10 years of global war waged by the United States in the name of fighting "terrorists" one would wonder why they and Amnesty International are protesting and not applauding Russia's attempts to bolster Assad's position against verified foreign terrorists destabilizing a secular nation. Again, like in Libya, it appears the world is being deceived by what is increasingly a compromised, illegitimate geopolitical circus centered around Wall Street and London.
Amnesty speaks for Wall Street & London, not human rights.
Who will sign Amnesty's petition to support their demands toward Russia? Could it possibly be the same impressionable people lured into the now imploding Kony 2012 scam? Ironically enough, Amnesty International had long settled in upon that sinking ship, with their petition addressed to President Obama titled, "End the use of child soldiers," which in part states, "I commend the U.S. Government for assisting efforts to apprehend Joseph Kony. I urge you to also send a strong message other armed groups and governments in the region so that they understand that the recruitment and use of children in armed conflict will not be tolerated."
Amnesty took Invisible Children's war propaganda flick and ran with it, not just giving AFRICOM an excuse to establish a presence in Uganda, but warning that all armed groups "in the region" stand the chance of being used to justify AFRICOM's expansion across the continent.
There is no reason why Russia should heed the words of Amnesty International, which has simply repackaged the demands and desires of Wall Street and London's corporate-financiers, under the guise of disingenuous "humanitarian concerns."