Showing posts with label NGOs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NGOs. Show all posts

Oslo Freedom Forum: US Proxies Train and Plan for the Next "Ukraine"

June 5, 2022 (The New Atlas) - The Oslo Freedom Forum serves as the latest iteration of the US State Department's training ground for subversion around the globe - following in line US-sponsored unrest in Ukraine in 2014 and the so-called "Arab Spring" in 2011. 


Who is attending the Oslo Freedom Forum, what takes place there, and what is expected of attendees once they return to their respective nations?

Human Rights Watch, Amnesty Cover Up Human Rights Abuses

November 11, 2020 (Brian Berletic - LD) - Organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International regularly work in a one-sided manner to advance a political agenda, not uphold human rights advocacy. 



I explain why, how these organizations actually enable human rights abuses rather than defend against them, and why it is important to remove them from a society’s civil society space and replace them with actual organizations that defend human rights.

References:


Thaiger - 52 year old Russian head-butted by Thai protest leader in Pattaya: 

https://thethaiger.com/hot-news/protests/52-year-old-russian-head-butted-by-thai-protest-leader-in-pattaya

Human Rights Watch - George Soros to Give $100 million to Human Rights Watch: 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2010/09/07/george-soros-give-100-million-human-rights-watch

Amnesty International Funding: 

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/40000/fin400122010en.pdf

US National Endowment for Democracy - Thailand 2019: 

https://www.ned.org/region/asia/thailand-2019/

Why Taking US NED Money is Wrong

The National Endowment for Democracy has as much to do with promoting "democracy" as the illegal US invasion of Iraq - code name "Operation Iraqi Freedom" had to do with bringing "freedom" to the Iraqi people. And as it turns out the same circle of regime change promoters are/were involved in both. 

November 5, 2020 (Brian Berletic - LD) - I cover the US National Endowment for Democracy’s (NED) board of directors - pointing out how many of them have been involved in some of the worst crimes against humanity of the 21st century including promoting and even participating in the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. 


I also explain why taking US NED money poses a danger to national security - and specifically why Thai agitators taking the money pose a danger to Thailand’s peace, stability, and future.



References: 


NED funding - THAILAND 2019: https://www.ned.org/region/asia/thailand-2019/

NED Board of Directors: https://www.ned.org/about/board-of-directors/

CBS News - Elliott Abrams, convicted of lying about Iran-Contra, named special representative for Iran: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elliott-abrams-iran-contra-named-special-representative-iran/

London Guardian - US diplomat convicted over Iran-Contra appointed special envoy for Venezuela: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/26/elliott-abrams-venezuela-us-special-envoy

NED BoD - Ambassador Victoria Nuland: https://www.ned.org/experts/victoria-nuland/

CNAS Supporters: https://www.cnas.org/support-cnas/cnas-supporters

Reuters - Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape/leaked-audio-reveals-embarrassing-u-s-exchange-on-ukraine-eu-idUSBREA1601G20140207

NED BoD  - George Weigel: https://www.ned.org/experts/george-weigel/

American Magazine - The Just War Case for War: https://www.americamagazine.org/issue/428/article/just-war-case-war

NED BoD - Scott Carpenter: https://www.ned.org/experts/scott-carpenter/

NED BoD - Senator Tim Kaine: https://www.ned.org/experts/senator-tim-kaine/Tim Kaine - Kaine Statement On Withdrawal Of U.S. Troops From Northern Syria: https://www.kaine.senate.gov/press-releases/kaine-statement-on-withdrawal-of-us-troops-from-northern-syria


US-funded Thai Protests: iLaw

 November 4, 2020 (Brian Berletic - LD) - iLaw is a US government-funded front petitioning the Thai government to have the entire Thai constitution rewritten and rewritten in such a way as to make it easier for US-backed opposition parties to get into power. 

I cover iLaw's US government funding and why it seeks to change Thailand's constitution and how it threatens Thai-Chinese relations and ultimately Thailand's economic future.


References: 

Bangkok Post - Three parties want to rewrite charter: https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/politics/1485300/three-parties-want-to-rewrite-charter

Thai PBS - Thanathorn vows to bring people onto streets after rally in downtown Bangkok: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/thanathorn-vows-to-bring-people-onto-streets-after-rally-in-downtown-bangkok/

Bangkok Post - Protesters reiterate 3 key demands: https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/politics/1998947/protesters-reiterate-3-key-demands

Nation Thailand - iLaw launches petition for charter rewrite: https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30392491

iLaw - About Us: https://ilaw.or.th/about

Bloomberg - Thailand Needs Hyperloop, Not China-Built High-Speed Rail, Junta Critic Says: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-01/junta-critic-says-thailand-needs-hyperloop-not-china-built-rail

Bangkok Post - Chinese embassy condemns Thai politician's meeting with Hong Kong activist: https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1769959/chinese-embassy-condemns-thai-politicians-meeting-with-hong-kong-activist


Thai Protests are Anti-Chinese, Not "Pro-Democracy"

September 30, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Ongoing protests in Thailand appearing very similar to those recently seen in Hong Kong are no coincidence.

They are part of an admitted "Pan-Asian Alliance" that - while claiming to be "pro-democracy" are in reality created by the US government and aimed directly at Beijing.


Thailand has tilted too close to Beijing for Washington's liking and as a response, has scheduled Thailand for destabilization and if possible, regime change.

Thailand Tilting "Too Close" To China
 
dChina is Thailand's largest and most important trading partner, its largest foreign direct investor, and its largest source of tourism with more Chinese tourists coming to Thailand each year than all Western nations combined.

Thailand is also hosting one of the key routes of China's One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative with construction already ongoing for high-speed rail that will connect China, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, and eventually Singapore.


Finally and perhaps most upsetting for the US is that Thailand has begun replacing its aging US military hardware through a series of major Thai-Chinese arms deals including the purchasing of main battle tanks, other armored vehicles, naval vessels including up to 3 submarines, and jointly-developed arms programs like the DTI-1 multiple rocket launcher system.


Thailand has also recently replaced some of its US-built Blackhawk helicopters with Russian Mi-17V-5's.

To counter this, the US has mobilized opposition groups and NGOs it has funded in Thailand for years to now demand the current government step down and the nation's constitution be rewritten, paving the way for US-backed billionaire-led opposition parties of Thaksin Shinawatra and Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit into power. These are opposition parties that have long served US interests in the past and have explicitly promised to roll back Thai-Chinese relations should they take power again.

US NED Was Behind Hong Kong's Unrest, and are Behind Thailand's Now 

The US was indisputably behind the protests in Hong Kong with the political opposition and protest leaders confirmed to be recipients of US government cash via notorious regime change arm, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Many of the protest leaders literally flew to Washington DC or visited the US consulate in Hong Kong to receive aid, directives, and other forms of support.


In Thailand too, virtually every aspect of the protests are funded by the US government.

Worse still is that the US is attempting to stitch these various movements together to form a regional front against Beijing with Thai protest leaders regularly traveling to meet their US-funded counterparts in Hong Kong and Taiwan and vice versa while creating an online army with the help of US-based social media giants to stack public narratives in their favor.

It will be a front that if regime change in any or all of the nations currently targeted by Washington in Asia is successful, will transform the region from a rising global economic power to a dysfunctional warzone not entirely unlike the Middle East.

US Funds Thai Protest Leaders 

The core leadership of Thailand's protests includes Anon Nampa of the US NED-funded "Thai Lawyers for Human Rights" (TLHR). Anon Nampa leads every major rally, taking the stage and delivering the opposition's demands to the current government including demands for regime change.


TLHR's founder had in the past admitted that the organization "receives all its funding from international donors," in an interview given to the English-language newspaper, Bangkok Post.

Fake Rights Group "Amnesty International" Openly Meddles in Thailand

A front used by the West to advance regime change and even promote wars around the globe under the guise of "humanitarian concern" rushes to aid of US-funded agitators in Thailand. 

September 4, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - ATN) - Amnesty International has openly interfered in Thailand's internal affairs - demanding that US-funded agitators arrested after blatantly violating their bail conditions to have all charges withdrawn.



The Bangkok Post would report in its article, "Amnesty International presses for dropping of charges against activists," that:
Amnesty International has called for the government to withdraw charges against anti-government protesters and asked its own supporters to send letters backing the demand to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha.  

The statement said the charges, which included sedition, should be immediately dropped.
The protesters include middle-aged lawyer Anon Nampa of the US government-funded front "Thai Lawyers for Human Rights" (TLHR). TLHR was funded under their full name by the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in 2014 - archived here - and continue to receive money through the Union for Civil Liberty - as seen on the US NED's own official website.
Amnesty International's involvement in Thailand's internal affairs and its rush to defend US-funded agitators is simply another set of foreign fingerprints left on the protests themselves. 
Anon Nampa and his organization are among ongoing anti-government protests' core leadership with the US-funded front providing legal aid, promoting protests, and providing other forms of material support.

READ MORE: The Complete Guide: US Government Role in Thailand's "Student Protests"

In other words - Anon Nampa - a foreign-funded agitator - is literally engaged in sedition - sedition that would not be tolerated in the US or UK from which Amnesty International is primarily based and from which it derives the majority of its funding and political backing.

Yet Amnesty - a foreign front - is directly interfering in Thailand's internal affairs in defense of agitators likewise funded by foreign interests - and demanding those engaged in sedition be granted impunity from the rule of law.

If this seems like advocating for criminality merely dressed up as "human rights advocacy," that's because it is.

Amnesty International Enables Crimes Against Humanity - Not Prevents Them 

Amnesty International is funded and directed by the worst human rights violators of the 21st century including the US and UK governments - who with the 2003 invasion of Iraq alone, based on lies that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction" - killed a million people, displaced millions more, and have created chaos across the entire Middle East as a result.

Image: Iraq after the 2003 US-led invasion. The West is guilty of the worst crimes against humanity of the 21st century. That Amnesty is based in the West and funded by their governments and corporate interests is the first clue that they merely hide behind human rights advocacy, rather than advance it. 
Amnesty International - taking funding from and helping enable the crimes of these Western governments - is merely a front advancing the policies of Western special interests under the guise of advocating for human rights.

It blatantly lies on its website claiming (emphasis added):
We neither seek nor accept any funds for human rights research from governments or political parties and we accept support only from businesses that have been carefully vetted.
By way of ethical fundraising leading to donations from individuals, we are able to stand firm and unwavering in our defence of universal and indivisible human rights. 
Yet throughout its various financial disclosures buried deep on its website, it is admittedly funded by both governments and political groups including corporate foundations run by convicted criminals.

In a 2010 disclosure (PDF) it admits (emphasis added):
The Directors are pleased to acknowledge the support of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Oak Foundation, Open Society Georgia Foundation, the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Programme, Mauro Tunes and American Jewish World Service. The UK Department for International Development (Governance and Transparency Fund) continued to fund a four year human rights education project in Africa. The European Commission (EuropeAid) generously awarded a multi-year grant towards Amnesty International’s human rights education work in Europe.
Open Society is founded by convicted financial criminal George Soros - who while attempting to appeal his conviction, used "human rights" as his defense for what was blatant insider trading.


The New York Times would admit in its article, "French court upholds Soros conviction," that: 
Ron Soffer, a lawyer for Soros, said the appeal would be to the Cour de Cassation, the highest French court. If that appeal fails, he said, Soros would go to the European Court of Justice, where he could argue that his rights to a speedy trial were violated because he was not charged until 2000, long after the trading in question.
Accepting money from a convicted criminal who openly attempted to use "human rights" to escape justice for blatant criminality is hardly "ethical fundraising." 

The UK Department for International Development and the European Commission both constitute government funding - meaning Amnesty International is further lying to the public about the nature of its funding. 

Amnesty International's leadership is also a story of corruption and conflicts of interest. 

What is the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED)?

Who sits on the current NED board of directors and how do such people get away with claiming to promote democracy abroad when they are directly involved in circumventing it at home? 

August 14, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - When US-backed regime change begins in a targeted nation, many - particularly those supporting protests - will deny the US is involved.


When US involvement is no longer deniable - many will finally admit it - but backpedal and claim there is nothing wrong with the US supporting "freedom" and "democracy" abroad.

With virtually every aspect of ongoing protests in Thailand funded by the US - from the leaders like Anon Nampa of the US government-funded "Thai Lawyers for Human Rights," to fronts like US government-funded iLaw petitioning to rewrite the Thai constitution, to media fronts like US government-funded Prachatai attempting to control the narrative regarding the protests - this process of denial and backpedaling has already begun.

The protests in Thailand are mainly funded through the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED) with all of this funding appearing on the US NED's official website as well as in admissions from these groups themselves during previous interviews, and occasionally featured on their own websites when and if they make financial disclosures.

The NED and the fronts they are funding all claim to be promoting democracy. Others attempting to expose this funding claim it represents political interference and is a bad thing.

But what is the NED and how could the US promoting democracy be a bad thing?

It is Bad - Because the US NED Isn't Really Promoting Democracy 

The US has openly invaded nations, murdered sitting governments, killed hundreds of thousands of people in the process, before hand-picking favorable client regimes. The US NED is simply a subtler way of achieving regime change - but often also helps pave the way for destabilization leading to direct US military intervention as was the case during the 2011 "Arab Spring."
In fact, many of the people sitting on the US NED board of directors have signed their names to documents, op-eds, and essays calling for the invasion and regime change by force of other nations including Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003, Libya and Syria in 2011, and Ukraine in 2013-2014.

Some of them even participated directly.


This includes Neo-Conservatives like Elliot Abrams who is currently the US envoy to Iran after openly attempting to overthrow the government of Venezuela.


Western "Rights Advocates" Rush to Chechen "Activist's" Aid

April 7, 2019 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - Human Rights Watch (HRW) executive director Kenneth Roth recently decried legal proceedings against the alleged "leading human rights defender in Chechnya," Oyub Titiyev.



But as with much of what HRW decries, Titiyev has less to do with actually defending human rights, and more to do with ongoing US-subversion in Russia's southern Chechen Republic.

Roth, in a social media post, would claim:
The Russian government's "case" against the leading human rights defender in Chechnya, Oyub Titiyev, is farcical--as many holes as Swiss cheese--but authorities have still locked him up for 14 months and are threatening a four-year sentence.
The article Roth's post would include, leads to an opinion piece in The Moscow Times (written by fellow HRW regional director, Rachel Denber) who insists Titiyev is innocent of drug charges based entirely on Titiyev and his lawyer's own claims.

Whether Titiyev is guilty or not is for Russia's courts to decide. However, the entire process of mobilizing supposed human rights advocacy organizations like HRW to rush to Titiyev's aid illustrates how "rights advocacy" is transparently used to advance politically-motivated agendas, not to actually advance human rights.

No matter what the evidence against Titiyev, HRW and others would claim the charges against him were politically motivated. It is an example of foreign-funded organizations attempting to assert themselves over a nation's sovereign right to manage its own internal affairs, including by overriding local law enforcement and judicial processes.

But there is much more to consider regarding Titiyev's case than this.

Terrorism as Washington's Sword, "Rights Advocacy" as its Shield

Russia's Chechen Republic had previously seen two wars as armed separatists attempted to carve out an independent region from Russian territory. From 1994-1996 and again from 1999-2009 militants waged both open war and an armed insurgency against Russian forces until eventually Moscow prevailed.

Today, attempts to rekindle divisions, upheaval and even violence have been the primary goal of both US-funded and directed "rights advocates" like HRW and US-backed militants, though admittedly Russia now has the upper hand.

As the United States has been revealed to have done elsewhere, the Russian government has accused it of lending direct aid to Chechen militants.

A 2015 BBC article titled, "Russia's Putin: US agents gave direct help to Chechens," would note:
Vladimir Putin has accused US agents of directly aiding rebel fighters in the second Chechen war.   
In order for fighters to have contested Russian control over Chechnya, they would require equal or greater financial and military support than that committed by Moscow. State sponsorship would be the only way of achieving this and the list of potential states both capable and motivated to back Chechen militants is exceedingly short.


The ICC and NGOs: Modern Day Manifestations of "The White Man's Burden"

March 23, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The International Criminal Court (ICC) is not international nor a legitimate court, but is most certainly criminal.


It is an institutionalized tool - one of many - used by Western corporate-financier interests to coerce and control nations across the developing world.

In a recent charade aimed to boost its otherwise nonexistent credibility, the ICC has claimed it seeks to investigate the United States for war crimes regarding Afghanistan. It also claims it is investigating the United Kingdom regarding Iraq.

However, the ICC has - since its first case in 2003 - been used primarily against targets of Western interests - with a particular emphasis on Africa and Eastern Europe. Not a single Western government or individual has been prosecuted by the ICC despite having committed the worst war crimes of the 21st century.

Looked Good on Paper...  

On paper, the International Criminal Court seems like a good idea. This is probably why many nations signed and ratified the statute giving it its supposed mandate. However, as with many good ideas in theory, in practice the ICC falls tragically short.

Unsurprisingly, the ICC's shortcomings stem from its little-discussed but very lopsided funding and the obvious resulting conflicts of interest.



An African Business article titled, "Who Pays For the ICC?" would explain it best, noting (emphasis added):
The maximum amount a single country can pay in any year is limited to 22% of the Court’s budget. The ICC spent €80.5m in 2007. The Assembly of States Parties approved a budget of €90.38m for 2008 and €101.23m for 2009. By April 2009, the ICC employed 743 people. 

 There are two points of immediate concern regarding the ICC budget. The first that while the Court theoretically sets a cap on funding at 22% of its budget from any one country, considerably more than 50% of its 2009 budget funding came from EU member countries. Thus, the contributions to the ICC’s 2009 budget clearly illustrated the continuing European hold on the Court’s funding.
The article would also explain (emphasis added):
The EU, through its member states, paid 60% of the 2009 budget of €94.17m. If one includes – as the EU does in its statements regarding the ICC – those other European states which it says are candidate or potential candidate members of the EU and those other European nations that associate themselves with the EU position, the European contribution comes to a cool 63%. The EU, therefore, clearly, and probably unconstitutionally, financially dominates the ICC.
A look at the ICC's finances in the form of a chart further highlights the disparity in funding and reveals the ICC not as an "international" court, but a political tool of Western Europe and in particular - the European Union. When three of the "Five Eyes" nations are included and considering Japan's geopolitical subordination to Washington - the disparity is even more obvious.

If these nations collectively wage war and commit war crimes together, why would they not also abuse the ICC's mandate to redirect the court's efforts away from them, and toward yet other targets of their own self-serving interests?

The disparity, conflicts of interest, and demonstrable impropriety resulting from this lopsided funding has prompted nations to leave the ICC - with many more remaining, but demanding reform.


How the West Weaponizes Refugees it Creates

January 28, 2019 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - The only thing more sinister than intentionally creating refugees, is weaponizing them as leverage to further coerce nations and advance hegemonic ambitions.


The United States and its allies have done both extensively - from exploiting the flow of refugees fleeing US-led wars in Libya and Syria - to the cynical exploitation of high-profile cases like Rahaf al-Qunun of Saudi Arabia and Hakeem al-Araibi of Bahrain - both of whom are fleeing autocratic regimes armed and propped up exclusively by the West.

In addition to creating the conditions ensuring a steady stream of refugees - the West has assembled an army of faux-rights advocates - most notably Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International to shift blame from those responsible for the creation of refugees to those saddled with growing numbers of people seeking refuge within their borders.

Weaponizing Refugees in Libya and Syria 

After the US-led NATO destruction of Libya, a predictable tidal wave of refugees flooded out of North Africa into Europe. At the same time, the US-led proxy war in Syria was ramping up likewise causing a steady stream of refugees fleeing the conflict.

As refugees began arriving in Europe - the result of US wars eagerly aided and abetted by many of Europe's NATO members as well as Canada and Australia - the socioeconomic pressure they created - real or imagined - was immediately leveraged to call for bolder and more direct military intervention against Syria by the West.


Articles like a 2016 Guardian piece titled, "Refugees are becoming Russia's weapon of choice in Syria," would even attempt to claim Russia's air campaign against Western-sponsored terrorists in Syria was aimed at intentionally creating a flow of refugees into Turkey and Europe to "divide the transatlantic alliance and undermine the European project."

The article would admit that this flow of refugees served as a pretext for a proposed "no-fly zone" in northern Syria - a stated goal of US policymakers since as early as 2012 published in a Brookings Institution memo titled, "Saving Syria: Assessing Options for Regime Change" (PDF) which called for:
...the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power.3 This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts. 
It is clear now - as the Syrian government regains control of the nation's territory and refugees begin returning home almost exclusively to territory controlled by Damascus - just how cynical the West's refugee pretext actually was.

Propping Up Dictatorships, Leveraging Their Victims 

In early January, 18 year old Saudi national Rahaf al-Qunun was detained at Bangkok's international airport. She had claimed she was fleeing Saudi Arabia to escape both her abusive family and a despotic government.

Faux-rights groups including HRW and Amnesty International immediately seized upon the opportunity to accuse the Thai government of wrongfully detaining Qunun and preparing to send her back to Saudi Arabia.


The West's human rights racket has systematically targeted the current Thai government in an attempt to undermine it ahead of elections the US hopes returns their favored proxies to power.

In reality, it became clear that Qunun was travelling on an Australian visa which was revoked mid-flight - stranding her in Bangkok, the Guardian would eventually admit.

Thai officials worked the entire day to ascertain the details of her case and find a favorable outcome for the stranded teen. Despite having the opportunity to place her on an early morning flight to Kuwait where she'd then be sent back to Saudi Arabia - Thai officials instead continued working on her case long before Western interests began exploiting the incident.

And despite Bangkok arranging a meeting between Qunun and representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) by evening, the Western media, several Western embassies, faux rights groups - particularly HRW - and local fronts posing as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) funded by the West - had already spent the entire day smearing the Thai government.

At one point, Canadian ambassador to Thailand, Donica Pottie, attempted to post a "Save Rahaf" hashtag on social media. When it was pointed out that Canada sells billions of dollars in arms to the very Saudi regime Rahaf al-Qunun was fleeing from - she promptly deleted the post.

Canada would move to offer Qunun asylum - posing as the ultimate hero of the incident. Qunun herself would indeed thank Canada - but also the Thai government - smeared by the West including Canada - for Thailand's role in helping her after being stranded by Australia's visa cancellation.

Creating the Monster Rahaf al-Qunun Was Fleeing 

The autocratic regime ruling Saudi Arabia receives weapons, political support, and military protection from not only Canada, but also the US. Germany, France, and the United Kingdom also help arm the regime in Riyadh.


How Modern Empire Uses "Awards" to Keep Servants Loyal

November 21, 2017 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - Nineteenth century French military and political leader Napoléon Bonaparte once said, "a soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of coloured ribbon," recognising a fundamental aspect of human nature he readily exploited to bolster his now famous campaigns of European conquest.



Human beings value recognition. Today, it drives the addictive nature of social media platforms. Facebook co-founder Sean Parker recently admitted that the ubiquitous social network platform was designed intentionally to exploit this and become "addictive."

In the Guardian's report titled, "Ex-Facebook president Sean Parker: site made to exploit human 'vulnerability'," Sean Parker would describe what he called a "social-validation feedback loop," explaining that:
“How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?” It was this mindset that led to the creation of features such as the “like” button that would give users “a little dopamine hit” to encourage them to upload more content. 

“It’s a social-validation feedback loop … exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology.”

This social-validation feedback loop utilising the "like" button is merely the most recent innovation in social engineering, and the latest iteration of Bonaparte's "bit of coloured ribbon." 

Keeping Servants Eager and Loyal 

Combining traditional methods and modern innovations in social engineering, modern day empires extend their influence through media, activist, political and business circles around the globe. In addition to boosting modern social media accounts of their handpicked proxies, facilitators and agents, they also maintain an impressive network of organisations that both manage and direct "soft power" efforts as well as reward eager and loyal functionaries.


Amnesty's Abuse of Rights Advocacy

March 11, 2017 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - Alleged human rights advocacy organisation, Amnesty International, has had several of its recent reports called into question regarding the very real possibility that its "advocacy" work is nothing more than politically-motivated attacks on nations targeted by its Western sponsors.


One report published under the titled, "Syria: Human Slaughterhouse: Mass Hangings and Extermination at Saydnaya Prison, Syria," has been revealed to consist of nothing more than opposition accusations and fabricated evidence created on computers in the United Kingdom.

Despite Amnesty International's report concluding that the Syrian government committed "crimes against humanity," the report admits it lacked any sort of physical evidence, including access to the facility in which Amnesty claims between "5,000-13,000" people were systematically tortured and executed.

 Amnesty International, a long-established and internationally recognised rights advocacy organisation, must certainly know better than to draw such conclusions and levelling such serious accusations against another nation without any actual evidence.

Assuming Amnesty knew better, it then appears that the organisation deliberately used its reputation and credibility, along with techniques designed to prey on the emotions of the public, to create a politically hostile climate toward the Damascus government on behalf of the US-European and Persian Gulf state coalition aimed at its removal from power.

While Amnesty's report on Syria is perhaps the most transparent and egregious abuse of human rights advocacy, Amnesty has produced other reports recently exhibiting a similar pattern of deception and lies of omission, preying on public ignorance and emotions, often at the cost of human rights advocacy rather than in defence of it.

Thailand's Turn 

Despite claims that America is posed to pursue a different tack regarding policy in Asia Pacific, the organisations and agencies arrayed by Wall Street and Washington against the region remain in place and very active.

Assisting these networks are organisations precisely like Amnesty International.

In their report titled, "Thailand: "They Cannot Keep Us Quiet": The Criminalization of Activists, Human Rights Defenders, And Others in Thailand," attempts to paint a picture of a draconian dictatorship silencing defenders of democracy and human rights.


Regime Change and Continuity of Agenda: Trump Adviser Now Chairs NED

March 1, 2017 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - While supporters of recently elected US President Donald Trump believe steadfastly that among other things, his administration will role back what has been essentially a century of American expansionism worldwide through overt wars and more "covert" methods toward achieving "regime change," by all metrics it appears such methods will only expand.

Image: Dr. Judy Shelton, now Chairperson of the NED and Trump adviser, presides over an award ceremony in 2010 for US CIA asset, the Dali Lama, a decades-long integral component of American policy to encircle, contain and divide China.

Not only do observers note continued subversive activities coordinated through local US embassies around the world since Trump's presidency began, including across Southeast Asia as part of America's continued attempts to isolate and contain China, but also movement within US agencies charged with organising and financing this subversion, such as the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Recently, NED announced its new chairperson, Dr. Judy Shelton. The announcement, published on NED's website includes the following background information on Dr. Shelton:
 Dr. Judy Shelton was elected the new Chairman of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) by NED’s Board of Directors at its January 10, 2017 meeting. An economist who has written widely on issues of international finance and monetary policy, she has also been consulted on international economic and financial issues by the Congress, the White House, and the Pentagon. Shelton previously served on the NED Board from 2005-2014, and was Vice Chairman from 2010-2014.
In other words, not only is Dr. Shelton now the new chairperson of NED, she has been directly involved with NED since at least 2005, long before, and all during NED's role in training, funding and backing the armies of regime change that swept the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) beginning in 2011. She also served on NED's board during the US-backed coup in Ukraine between 2013-2014.

Before that, between 2009-2010, NED-backed mobs took to the streets in Bangkok, Thailand in attempts to overthrow both the sitting government at the time, and also the Thai military and Thailand's head of state.

While these events have been assigned to the Obama administration for political convenience and compartmentalisation, it is actually organisations like NED that serve as the working mechanics that make such events possible.

In other words, Dr. Judy Shelton has been directly involved in NED through the entirety of America's most recent chapters of expansionism and regime change worldwide. She has also served on the board of directors for Hilton Hotels and Atlantic Coast Airlines, providing another example within NED of corporate and financial special interests driving the organisation's agenda rather than actual "democracy promotion."

An example of Dr. Shelton's activities within NED can be gleamed from a 2012 NED news letter under a headline titled, "Democracy Service Medal Presented in Cuba," in which it claims:
NED Vice-Chair Judy Shelton (second from right) presented it in person to Berta Soler, the leader of the Damas de Blanco movement founded by Laura Pollán; Héctor Maseda Guitiérrez, Pollán's widower and a journalist who spent eight years imprisoned by the Cuban government; and Laura Labrada Pollán, Pollán's daughter and a member of the Damas de Blanco.
Here, Dr. Shelton is directly involved in lending legitimacy to US-backed subversion in Cuba as part of a decades-long attempt to overthrow the government in Havana and expand US hegemony over the Caribbean.


Human Rights Watch Cites Al Qaeda and Collaborators in Latest Syria Report

February 26, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - On the heels of Amnesty International's admittedly and entirely fabricated report regarding Syria's Saydnaya prison, Human Rights Watch (HRW) has published its own baseless report on Syria - this one regarding alleged chlorine bomb attacks in Aleppo during the city's liberation late last year.


In a post on HRW's website titled, "Syria: Coordinated Chemical Attacks on Aleppo," it claims:
Syrian government forces conducted coordinated chemical attacks in opposition-controlled parts of Aleppo during the final month of the battle for the city, Human Rights Watch said today.
However, when qualifying HRW's accusations, it admits:
Through phone and in-person interviews with witnesses and analysis of video footage, photographs, and posts on social media, Human Rights Watch documented government helicopters dropping chlorine in residential areas on at least eight occasions between November 17 and December 13, 2016. The attacks, some of which included multiple munitions, killed at least nine civilians, including four children, and injured around 200.
Watching the videos and viewing the photographs reveals that none of them actually link any of the alleged "chlorine attacks" to Syrian forces, or even to chlorine itself.

The body of evidence presented by HRW also reveals that the interviews they conducted with alleged "witnesses" included almost exclusively opposition forces. Among them were the US-UK funded White Helmets - referred to disingenuously as "Syria Civil Defense" in HRW's report - who served as designated terrorist organization Jabhat Al Nusra auxiliaries, often found on the battlefield shoulder-to-shoulder with armed militants.

Image: "Syria Civil Defense," interviewed by Human Rights Watch, hoisting Al Qaeda's flag amid a gang of  heavily armed terrorists.

United Arab Emirate-based Al Nusra propaganda platform "Orient News" was also cited, as were other notorious anti-government propaganda networks including the Aleppo Media Center.

Not only are these clearly compromised sources of information based on their admitted political alignments, but also because of their respective, systematic fabrications throughout the Syrian conflict. It is telling of HRW's systematic bias that it would base an entire report on compromised sources drawn from the opposition, but not even a single report based on government claims.

In reality, a truly reputable rights advocacy organization would only report what physical evidence was verified. Human Rights Watch has deliberately avoided doing so not only in Syria, but amid virtually ever conflict it involves itself in.

Citing Terrorists and Verified Liars

From conflating the number of civilians "trapped" in eastern Aleppo, to attempts to downplay or dismiss the role designated terrorist organizations played in the occupation of Aleppo, the groups and individuals cited by Human Rights have practiced deliberate deceit throughout the battle for Aleppo, and the Syrian conflict at large.

The Problem with Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index

February 13, 2017 (Joseph Thomas - NEO) - Transparency International puts out what it calls the "Corruption Perceptions Index." It is an annual index it claims "has been widely credited with putting the issue of corruption on the international policy agenda."



These carefully selected words, taken at face value appear benign, even progressive. But upon digging deeper into this organisation's background it becomes clear that these "perceptions" are politically motivated, and the "international policy agenda" clearly favours a very specific region of the globe, particularly that region occupied by Washington, London and Brussels.

Transparency International claims upon its "Who We Are" page of its website that (our emphasis):
From villages in rural India to the corridors of power in Brussels, Transparency International gives voice to the victims and witnesses of corruption. We work together with governments, businesses and citizens to stop the abuse of power, bribery and secret deals. As a global movement with one vision, we want a world free of corruption. Through chapters in more than 100 countries and an international secretariat in Berlin, we are leading the fight against corruption to turn this vision into reality.
 Before moving onto the organisation's funding and financials, one would assume that above and beyond any other organisation in the world, Transparency International would carefully and diligently avoid any perceptions of conflicts of interest on its own part. Yet, not surprisingly, that isn't the case.

An Anti-Corruption Org Swimming in Conflicts of Interest 

Upon their page, "Who Supports Us," Transparency International admits that it receives funding from government agencies including:

  • The United Kingdom's Department for International Development (DFID);
  • Federal Foreign Office, Germany and;
  • The US State Department.  
Transparency International not only receives funding from the very governments it is tasked to investigate, hold accountable and "index" annually, constituting a major conflict of interest, it also receives money from the following:
  • The National Endowment for Democracy;
  • Open Society Institute Foundation and;
  • Shell Oil.
Other troubling sponsors dot Transparency International's funding disclosure, but the inclusion of immense corporate interests like energy giant Shell, is particularly troubling. 


So is the inclusion of the National Endowment for Democracy whose board of directors is chaired by representatives from other large corporations and financial institutions as well as partisan political figures involved heavily in not only influencing politics in their own respective nations, but who use the National Endowment for Democracy itself as a means to influence other nations.

While these interests are transparently self-serving, the use of the National Endowment for Democracy allows them to predicate their involvement in the political affairs and elections of foreign nations upon "democracy promotion." This seems to be the very essence of corruption, "abuse of power" and "secret deals," yet they are funding Transparency International's very existence. 


US Cooks Up New Syrian Atrocities Amid Syrian Talks

February 10, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Amnesty International is inextricably compromised in its stated duty to hold nations accountable for human rights violations through its direct connections with Western political interests and their use of the organization as a tool of geopolitical influence and coercion.

Image: The closest Amnesty International got to the prison they wrote a 48 page report on is illustrated by this photo taken from outer space.
As such, reports like its most recent titled, "Syria: Human Slaughterhouse: Mass Hangings and Extermination at Saydnaya Prison, Syria," begs belief. The report begs belief not just because of the systematic campaign of disinformation and war propaganda Amnesty International has been engaged in against Syria specifically, or the many fallacious reports it has published targeting Washington, London, and Brussels' political enemies elsewhere, but particularly because of the report's own admitted methodology.

The report itself states clearly (emphasis added):
The research for this report took place between December 2015 and December 2016. Amnesty International interviewed 31 men who were detained at Saydnaya (also spelt Sednaya) between 2011 and 2015.
The report also admits (emphasis added):
 Amnesty International also interviewed four prison officials or guards who previously worked at Saydnaya; three former judges, one of whom served in the Military Court in the al-Mezzeh neighbourhood of Damascus; three doctors who worked at Tishreen Military Hospital; four Syrian lawyers; 17 international and national experts on detention in Syria, such as investigators, analysts and monitors; and 22 family members of people who were or still are believed to be detained at Saydnaya. The majority of these interviews took place in person in southern Turkey. The remaining interviews were conducted by telephone or through other remote means with interviewees still in Syria, or with individuals based in Lebanon, Jordan, European countries and the USA.
In essence, Amnesty International admits to having no actual, physical evidence. It also is admitting it never stepped foot on Syrian soil, let alone anywhere around or in the prison their 48 page report covers. The report itself admits:
Despite repeated requests by Amnesty International for access to Syria, and specifically for access to detention facilities operated by the Syrian authorities, Amnesty International has been barred by the Syrian authorities from carrying out research in the country and consequently has not had access to areas controlled by the Syrian government since the crisis began in 2011. Other independent human rights monitoring groups have faced similar obstacles.
So distant was Amnesty International from actually obtaining physical evidence, their only images of the prison itself included in their report are satellite photographs taken from outer space. The only other photographs included are of three alleged prisoners, before and after their alleged detention, attempting to illustrate not torture, but weight loss.

Admittedly, Amnesty International interviewed members and organizations of the Syrian opposition, including those operating out of southern Turkey where much of the war was organized and launched against Syria from.


US Concerns Over "Election Interference" May Backfire

January 5, 2017 (Joseph Thomas -NEO) - The United States has recently claimed the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats from US territory as well as additional sanctions against the Russian state are in retaliation for what the Washington Post claims is "2016 election interference."


In the Post's article, "Obama administration announces measures to punish Russia for 2016 election interference," it's stated that:
The response, unveiled just weeks before President Obama leaves office, culminates months of internal debate over how to react to Russia’s election-year provocations. In recent months, the FBI and CIA have concluded that Russia intervened repeatedly in the 2016 election, leaking damaging information in an attempt to undermine the electoral process and help Donald Trump take the White House.
The "damaging information" that was leaked, however, was disseminated by Wikileaks, and likely the result of an internal whistle-blower, not Russian operatives. Questions surrounding the veracity of America's claims are owed to a substantial lack of evidence provided by US departments and agencies involved in both the investigation and the punitive measures applied in its wake.

However, the US' reaction to what it claims is "2016 election interference" could significantly backfire, since the US itself is engaged in very real, overt election interference globally, and for decades. In fact, even as the US berated Russia for allegedly interfering in America's internal politics, its own organisations, including the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), funded by the US government, openly admitted they were leaking information regarding China's internal politics in efforts to undermine Beijing.


In fact, NED and its subsidiaries (including the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the International Republican Institute (IRI) and Freedom House) as well as myriad fronts around the world these organisations fund, support and direct, are openly dedicated to manipulating foreign elections, creating US-friendly opposition movements and even overthrowing governments that impede US interests worldwide.

The New York Times, in fact, would admit in 2011 in an article titled, "U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings," that:
A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region, including the April 6 Youth Movement in Egypt, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and grass-roots activists like Entsar Qadhi, a youth leader in Yemen, received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington, according to interviews in recent weeks and American diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks.
US interference across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) in 2011 would eventually lead to regional war, the complete destruction of Libya and near destruction of Syria as well as regime change in a number of nations including Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen.


Irony Redefined: "Human Rights Champion" Suu Kyi Jails Dissidents

October 28, 2016 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Myanmar's defacto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi of the  National League for Democracy (NDL) political party, has paved her time since coming to power earlier this year with both irony and hypocrisy. She has not only illegally declared herself "leader" of the Southeast Asian state in contravention of its constitution, she has also embarked on an iron-fisted purge of her political opponents identical to the one she fought against as she struggled to seize power to begin with.


During elections earlier this year, Myanmar's constitution prevented Suu Kyi from holding the nation's highest office due to her inordinate amount of time overseas, her status of having been married to a foreign, and her children's dual citizenship. Instead of adhering to the law, her party once in power, simply contrived an entirely new post for her, State Counsellor of Myanmar, which makes her the "defacto leader" of Myanmar.

Canada's The Globe and Mail in an article titled, "Stéphane Dion says Aung San Suu Kyi is the ‘de facto’ leader of Myanmar," would note that Canada's government recognized this legal side-stepping, stating:
Dion called Suu Kyi, now Myanmar’s foreign minister, “the de facto national leader” of her country “because they have a strange rule that if you have married somebody who’s not of the country, you cannot be the leader of the government and of the state.” 
Suu Kyi, the internationally recognized democracy advocate, is barred from becoming president because her late husband was British, as are her two sons. The rule was crafted during Myanmar’s decades of military rule, which Suu Kyi fought against during years of house arrest before finally prevailing last fall.


In essence, she is unelected, and illegally holding power. For a woman who's Western backers - particularly in the United States and United Kingdom - have held her up as a champion for democracy and the rule of law, she and her party's first act upon taking power was trampling both.

The Inhumane Humanitarian  

Another myth built up around Nobel Peace Prize laureate Suu Kyi by the West has been her advocacy for "human rights." Her advocacy for human rights, however, appears only to extend out to protect only as far as her immediate political allies are concerned. For groups beyond this self-serving political protection, and particularly regarding her political opponents, she and her NDL are just as eager to jail, crush, or kill political opponents as they claimed the ruling military government had been.