Amnesty International's Ultimatum to Russia

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

US State Department-run Amnesty International demands Russia allow US & NATO to commence the ruination and plundering of Syria.  

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.

Ugandans React Angrily To Kony 2012 Propaganda Film

Source: Infowars
Paul Joseph Watson

Transparent ploy to legitimize US military invasion of Africa

The viral Kony 2012 propaganda film has stoked anger amongst those it was ostensibly designed to help – Ugandan citizens – who see through the movie as a transparent ploy to legitimize a US military invasion of Africa.

During a screening of the documentary in northern Uganda, the area that was worst affected by Joseph Kony’s LRA, crowds reacted with confusion, anger and eventually violence, throwing rocks at the screen in protest against the underhanded motive behind the film.

“There are some kinds of people, some kind of NGO who are trying to mobilize funds using the atrocities committed in northern Uganda,” said one Ugandan.

Another expressed the opinion that Kony 2012 was a bunch of white Americans exploiting the suffering of black people on a different continent for their own ends.

As the rocks begin to be pelted at the screen, the Al Jazeera reporter notes that the film “clearly doesn’t resonate with many of the people it claims it’s meant to help.”

Ugandans also expressed disgust at the notion that the face of Kony was being used to adorn t-shirts, a display that they feel belittles their suffering. Of course, the fact that the Invisible Children organization behind the Kony 2012 film is a business empire posing as a charity that spends the majority of its expenses on lining the pockets of its owners explains why the merchandise is just as important as the message.

Egypt Leads Fight Against NGO Agitators

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

A real revolution may be about to follow.
 
Neo-Conservative Max Boot is a certified warmonger, an elitist policy wonk sitting on the Fortune 500-funded Council on Foreign Relations, has signed his name to letters that called for sidestepping both national and international law to militarily intervene further in Libya, as well as call for troops on the ground even after Tripoli fell last year. He is a man you would least expect to champion NGOs and their liberal-progressive agendas.

However NGOs are not "liberal-progressive." They are the system administrators of modern empire, an empire being forged by the wars and covert operations Boot is a chief proponent of. The absence of NGOs in any given nation, means a nation free from the influence of Wall Street & London's networks and meddling. That is why Boot feverishly penned, "Obama’s Egyptian Hostage Crisis," in an attempt to spur a more vigorous response to what would seem like a very minor event in the context of greater global conflicts. Egypt's arrest and trying of 19 Americans, all of whom are directly involved in Wall Street's network of National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded NGOs, including the head of the International Republican Institute (IRI) office in Egypt, signifies a potential turning point not just in Egypt, but around the world.


Image: The Serbian Otpor fist... in Egypt? The same US organizations that trained & funded Serbians to overthrow their government in 2000, were behind the April 6 Movement and the Egyptian "Arab Spring." Sun Tzu in the Art of War said, "all warfare is deception." In fourth generation warfare, no deceit is greater than convincing people they are "liberating" themselves when in reality they are dividing and destroying their nation so that Wall Street & London's network of already in place NGOs can take over, while a suitable proxy is put in office as PM or president. In Egypt, these NGOs would already have a new constitution drafted and ready before the fall of Hosni Mubarak.

....

While Tunisia celebrates it's 1 year anniversary of Wall Street domination with a US NED-funded president in office, and Libya celebrates their February 17th uprising with militants carrying out nation-wide murder sprees, the Egyptians seems to have ground the foreign-funded destabilization effort to a halt and are finishing it off with a "revolution" of their own.

Empire's Double Edged Sword: Global Military + NGOs

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

Tearing down sovereign nations & replacing them with global system administrators. 

Part 1: Imperialism is Alive and Well

The British Empire didn't just have a fleet that projected its hegemonic will across the planet, it possessed financial networks to consolidate global economic power, and system administrators to ensure the endless efficient flow of resources from distant lands back to London and into the pockets of England's monied elite. It was a well oiled machine, refined by centuries of experience.

While every schoolchild learns about the British Empire, it seems a common modern-day political malady for adults to believe that reality is organized as their history books were in school - in neat well defined chapters. This leads to the common misconception that the age of imperialism is somehow a closed-chapter in human history. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth. Imperialism did not go extinct. It simply evolved.

Imperialism is alive & well.

There are several pertinent examples illustrating how imperialism is still alive and well, and only cleverly disguised with updated nomenclatures. What we know today as "free trade" actually derives its origins from economic concessions the British frequently extorted from nations under its "gunboat diplomacy" strategy - that is, anchoring gunboats off the coast of a foreign capital, and threatening bombardment and military conquest if certain demands were not met.   

In the mid-1800's, Thailand, then the Kingdom of Siam, was surrounded on all sides by colonized nations and in turn was made to concede to the British 1855 Bowring Treaty. See how many of these "gunboat policy" imposed concessions sound like today's "economic liberalization:"

Soros Big-Business Accountability Project Funded by Big-Business

Source: Land Destroyer Report

Corporate-fascist feel-good scam seeks to crush competition & establish global monopoly

Called "Revenue Watch" it claims to be "a non-profit policy institute and grantmaking organization that promotes the effective, transparent and accountable management of oil, gas and mineral resources for the public good. Through capacity building, technical assistance, research and advocacy, we help countries realize the development benefits of their natural resource wealth."



In reality, it is a Wall Street-London centric front of monolithic proportions that ensures foreign competitors, including nationalized companies, are prevented from exploiting in many cases their own national resources, so that they may be reserved instead for the West's corporate giants to plunder them. In many cases, this includes funding and organizing opposition groups to take to the streets and physically stop ongoing projects under humanitarian and environmental pretenses.

A look at Revenue Watch's "partners" page reveals what at only a superficial glance appears to be well-intentioned, noble civil endeavors. However, upon closer examination, a different story is told.

Who's Partnered With Soros' Revenue Watch?

What the "partners" page represents is an interconnected, incestuous network leading each time back to George Soros' Open Society Network, the OCED, USAID, British DIFD, Australia Aid, and the UN Development Program, all of which are directly partnered with the largest banking, big oil, defense contractors, and consumer multinationals on earth.

The very first "partner" on Revenue Watch's list, Democratic Republic of Congo's Action Contre l’Impunité pour les Droits Humains (ACIDH), is entirely funded by George Soros' Open Society, OCED Watch, and the European Commission. Other organizations listed, such as "RAID" and Cee Bank Watch Network (itself a Revenue Watch partner), are in turn Soros, Ford Foundation, Sigrid Rausing Trust, Freedom House, Heinrich Boell Foundation, and European Commission-funded fronts.

Egypt: US-funded Agitators on Trial

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

February 12, 2012 - AP reported that US General Martin Dempsey has met directly with the military leaders of Egypt to discuss an Egyptian "crackdown on Western-funded pro-democracy groups." Threatened with a cut-off from US aid, the Egyptian military is expected to abandon their campaign against US "NGOs."

As usual, AP attempts to diminish the veracity of Egypt's concerns with deceptive language and innuendos such as, "Egypt, which regularly blames anti-military protests on foreign meddling," and "in an indication that authorities will continue to push the line that foreigners are stirring up trouble." Of course it is not a "line" that the Egyptian government is pushing, it is a well documented fact.

Images: From Tunis and Tahrir Square to the Oval Office shaking hands with the US President and receiving the NED 2011 "Democracy Award," the forces behind the "Arab Spring" not only weren't spontaneous nor indigenous, but they most certainly were orchestrated, funded, directed, and finally celebrated and well-rewarded by the US State Department through their National Endowment for Democracy. Egypt's crackdown on these disingenuous NGOs is long overdue and an example for all nations to follow.

....

AP goes on to explain the plight of the International Republican Institute (IRI) Egypt office-head, Sam LaHood, son of US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who is now on trail amongst 16 American "civil society employees." They are charged with using US State Department funds to fuel unrest throughout Egypt.

The War to Reign In the Internet Has Begun

Source: Giza Death Star
Dr. Joseph Farrell

Yesterday I blogged about the problems confronting the financial elite seeking to walk the precarious fine line between the breakup of the EU and maintaining it, and implementing middle-class destroying financial policies. The fly in the ointment, of course, is information and its control, i.e., the internet. Once again, The Daily Bell has come forward with a very observant article on this new phase of warfare against the world’s middle class:

Yes, The War for the Internet Has Begun
The problem, as Anthony Wile sees it – and I wholeheartedly concur with his evaluation – is this:

“There is no doubt, in my view, that the elites practiced directed history in the 20th century, setting up wars and economic catastrophes designed to consolidate world government. But in the 21st century, with so many understanding and evaluating the mechanisms of the elites, this is a considerably harder trick to pull off.”

But there is an additional problem for the elite, and I hope you caught it:

FAQ: Why Are Globalist Think-Tank Documents Public?

Source: Land Destroyer Report
Tony Cartalucci

Q. Why are such research documents - Which Path to Persia? or "String of Pearls" - made public on the web? If these are in fact strategic and provide a view into the world of powers that run the show on our globe, why would they allow such "sensitive" information and "plans" to be made public for everyone to read?

Image: Despite producing the vast majority of rules, regulations, laws and policies that dictate the destiny of Western civilization, as well as drawing up plans for war, these corporate-funded, corporate-serving think-tanks are little known amongst the general public. Despite publishing much of their work on publicly accessible websites, most people will never know about it, let alone take the time to read it.

....

A. You can't keep global empire a secret - by necessity you need people to believe in your cause - even if you dress it up and spin it as something other than naked conquest. The global corporate-financier elite manage access to information by marketing different levels of it to different demographics. This has been done throughout all of history. The reasoning done with the aristocracy to keep them in line was more straight-forward and pragmatic than the absolute fantasies used to dupe and manipulate the common man.

It works in layers - papers like "Which Path to Persia?" being toward the top are aimed at people who believe in global governance and globalization - professors, senior editors, CEOs etc. who falsely believe they have a stake in the process - and while it is made public, it is generally inaccessible to the average reader because of its use of academic English, length, and very high minimal requirements in understanding the history, strategy, geopolitics, and human nature necessary to understand the contents.

Building a Pretext to Wage War on Syria: NATO's "Humanitarian Watchdog"

Source: Global Research
Maidhc Ó Cathail

The Pro-Israel NGO behind War on Libya is targeting Syria 


Who Will Watch the Watchdog?

On December 2, the Geneva-based UN Watch welcomed that day’s “strong condemnation” of Syria by a UN Human Rights Council emergency session, and its establishment of a special rapporteur to monitor the situation therefollowing what it called“a global campaign to create the post by a coalition of prominent democracy dissidents and human rights groups” led by UN Watch itself. The non-governmental organization, whose self-appointed mandate is “to monitor the performance of the United Nations by the yardstick of its own Charter,” expressed regret, however, that the UNHRC resolution “paid special deference” to Syria’s “territorial integrity” and “political independence,” decrying the provision as “a clear jab at NATO’s intervention in Libya, and a pre-emptive strike against the principle of the international community’s responsibility to protect civilians under assault.”

On the same day, UN Watch delivered a speech to the Human Rights Council plenary session in which it denounced the UN Security Council’s “shocking silence on Syria’s atrocities,” calling on it to take “urgent action to protect the civilian population before thousands more are beaten, tortured and killed.”It also urged UNESCO to reverse its recent decision to elect Syria to two human rights committees. Submitting that day’s UNHRC resolution to UNESCO’s Executive Board, the NGO demanded that they “expel the Assad government from those panels immediately.”The statement went on to berate the UNHRC for its “longtime policy, and that of the old Commission, of turning a blind eye to Syria’s gross and systematic violations.” Also “wrong and harmful,” in UN Watch’s view, was the UN body’s “policy of supporting Syria’s cynical and transparent ploy each year to condemn Israel for alleged violations of human rights, which should not be repeated this March.”

For those familiar with the NGO’s unmistakable governmental ties, it will come as no surprise that UN Watch could downplay Israel’s extensively documented human rights abuses as “alleged” while at the same time confidently asserting that “the facts are clear” regarding Syria’s “gross and systematic violations of human rights.”As Ian Williams, a former president of theUnited Nations Correspondents Association, wrote in a 2007 Guardian opinion piece, “UN Watch is an organization whose main purpose is to attack the United Nations in general, and its human rights council in particular, for alleged bias against Israel.”