Africa

Trump Hysteria, Left Hypocrisy and the Four Drivers of the Deep-State / Overworld Part III

By M.K. Styllinski

clinton-fnd

© infrakshun

Setting aside the possibility that Trump was “allowed in” at the eleventh hour once Killary was found to be a liability and hot on the heels of DNC vote rigging, [1]  there can be no doubt that he had a substantial platform of ordinary support. [2 ]Regardless of the complexities of the path Trump must now follow, in order to understand why so many voted for the man we have to a) understand the international and domestic background to his popularity b) whether or not he is going to be a significant impediment to the shadow government.

The intense dissatisfaction with government in both the United States and Europe was sourced from a decades long bubbling resentment against the Powers that Be and their corrupt, criminal enterprise we call the White House, Congress, its federal agencies and the European Union’s endless unelected bodies of Eurocratic corruption. Both perpetuate a neo-liberal economic monster the likes of which culminated in the sub prime housing crisis in the states encouraging a form of financial warfare between banks and corporations all due to a huge popping of a financial bubble the shock waves of which had serious repercussions in Europe. Hello austerity measures. Thanks very much said the banking cartels. It was to result in the further consolidation and centralisation of this economic model and a return to business as usual on a higher and more risky turn of socio-economic resource extraction (people being the ultimate resource).

This led to a massive financial bonanza for the rich whilst the poor and middle classes shouldered the cost producing a sharp rise in mental illness, poverty and hardship. Americans, who were already reeling from the Bush-Cheney era, unnecessary foreign wars and the commensurate rise of the police state bore the brunt of this cynical exercise in propping up a dying banking system. Most importantly, such obvious criminality gave rise to complete disillusionment, anger and fury against the Establishment and politics.  A large proportion of the American public saw through the veil and responded to Trump as a relative outsider who appeared to speak their language, appealed to traditional right wing America as well as Libertarians and those in between.

In one sense, the reasons why Trump found himself as president is not the point. Trumphobia is a side show and a distraction. What the new president elect is up against – indeed everyone who truly has a conscience set afire by our brother and sister’s suffering – are the engines or drivers of psychopathic infection which create our present Official Culture, its pathological enculturation and adjustment to a false normality. Moreover, these drivers encourage us to fuel our institutions, governments, military, and socio-economic infrastructures largely by default and with an alien perception of the psychopath and narcissist, spreading like a psycho-virus from the trusted but entirely broken model of statism – a belief in the state as both provider/enforcer and from which all our ills are created.

(more…)

Osama and Al-Qaeda I

By M.K. Styllinski

“The idea which is critical to the FBI¹s prosecution that bin Laden ran a coherent organisation with operatives and cells all around the world of which you could be a member is a myth. There is no Al Qaeda organisation. There is no international network with a leader, with cadres who will unquestioningly obey orders, with tentacles that stretch out to sleeper cells in America, in Africa, in Europe. That idea of a coherent, structured terrorist network with an organised capability simply does not exist.”

Jason Burke, author, quoted in The Power of Nightmares, documentary


The key to understanding some of the key reasons for the September 11th attacks lies in the history of bin Laden and the creation of Al-Qaeda. The problem is still perpetuated by a common public misconception that there is still a case of “us and them” between government forces and Al-Qaeda terrorism. The American public and some within the 911 Truth Movement and MSM are pressing for culpability for members of the Bush Administration and their part in allowing Al-Qaeda to launch attacks on the United States. So called politicians turned whistleblowers are largely criticising failure of intelligence or incompetence without seeing the root causes which lies at the heart the War on Terror as a piece of large-scale propaganda of which Edward Bernays would have been proud. As author and economist Professor Michel Chossudovsky mentions: “… in a bitter irony, the very process of revealing these lies and expressing public outrage has contributed to reinforcing the 9/11 cover-up. ‘Revealing the lies’ serves to present Al-Qaeda as the genuine threat, as an ‘outside enemy’, which threatens the security of America, when in fact Al-Qaeda is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus.” [1]

Al-Qaeda is more of a mercenary tool of global intelligence than a real terrorist threat. Regime change and resource exploitation are some of its goals. This necessarily incorporates radicalised individuals who serve as patsies and agents furthering the overall geo-strategy. They are a common form of collateral and cannon fodder. There is a wealth of evidence  for the interested researcher confirming the myth of Al-Qaeda from the mouths of whistleblowers, ex-Intel operatives, politicians, statesmen, authors and academics.

Leonid Shebarshin ex-chief of the Soviet Foreign Intelligence Service, who heads the Russian National Economic Security Service consulting company, said in an interview for the Vremya Novostei newspaper, that Al-Qaeda was an “all-mighty ubiquitous myth deliberately linked to Islam” in order to target “… the oil-rich Muslim regions.” He further commented: “The U.S. has usurped the right to attack any part of the globe on the pretext of fighting the terrorist threat…” and with military bases in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, Shebarshin said, “the United States has already established control over the Caspian region — one of the world’s largest oil reservoirs.” [2]

938px-Flag_of_Jihad.svg

The Shahada – the Flag of Jihad often seen flying with Al-Qaeda, Taliban and ISIL (Source: wikipedia)

It is here that the Three Establishment Model (3EM) interests converge. They do so from the seemingly innocuous beginnings of the Safari Club which had its relatively humble beginnings in homage to the colonial hunters of the British Elite, Cecil Rhodes and the Round Table.

Russell E. Train (cousin of John Train, the Pilgrims Society member and former financial advisor to CIA-ally John Hay Whitney) was a co-founder of the African Wildlife Foundation set up since 1961. According to Train’s biography his foundation had drifted away from the Safari Club which was in existence before 1958 and coyly described by him as “a newly formed organization set up by a local group of businessmen who had gone on a hunt together in Mozambique.” [3] Although certainly a white man’s big-game hunting troupe for Pan-European and Anglo-American big-wigs, one of these businessmen and founders was Kermit Roosevelt Jr. who had set up the club as an anti-communist outpost, the evolution of which was given the seal of approval by Henry Kissinger several years later. Among other states, Saudi Arabia had a large hand in financing operations in Morocco, Egypt and Iran, with a view to countering Soviet operations in the Middle East and Africa. [4]

The other important founder was Count Alexandre de Marenches, the director of French intelligence services representing Pan-European Synarchism in the region. It would thus represent the next phase in Anglo-American dominance in Africa. The WWF and the 1001 club were involved in its formation via Train, Arthur Windsor Arundel and Sue Erpf van de Bovenkamp [5]

With Nixon booted out over the Watergate Scandal 1974, this saw the arrival of a new breed of psychopaths in power who would preside over criminal rule just as they did on 9/11: Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld; Chief of Staff, Dick Cheney; Vice president Nelson Rockefeller (brother of David) and George H.W. Bush as CIA Director, who joined the Ford Administration and the Kissinger cabal. Under this motley crew, 1976 would see the consolidation of a coalition of intelligence agencies that would begin the comprehensive carving up of Africa. The Safari Club would become the central hub for American intelligence financing; the organisation of an international network of terrorists; the CIA’s role in the global drug trade; the emergence of the Taliban and the origins of Al-Qaeda.

The Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) formerly a small Pakistani merchant bank was transformed into an ISI/CIA front for the biggest world-wide money laundering enterprise in history. Its job was to accrue a network of banks to finance intelligence in Africa and other nations. Under Bush, the intelligence groups in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran worked closely with the CIA who found could out-source their Intel operations through these nations which otherwise have been logistically difficult not least because French intelligence was still at the helm of the Safari Club.

1977 was the year that the Trilateral Commission were able to exercise their power more actively through Jimmy Carter’s administration, though in truth, the real power was sourced from Zbigniew Brzezinski as National Security Advisor, just one of many Trilaterals which infested the government at that time. Foreign policy would be steered towards Trilateral objectives which saw the colonisation of Eurasia as vital in eroding the power of the Soviet Union, seen as a continuing threat to US supremacy and resource scarcity. Iran would become the fulcrum of revolution which would lead to the destabilisation of Russia and her interests. “There was this idea that the Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, [that] there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets. It was a Brzezinski concept.” [6] The same old patterns of interference ensued.

Brzezinski_1977

Zibigniew Brzezinski 1977 (wikipedia)

In 1953, the United States’ CIA initiated a coup in Iran under the codename of Operation AJAX, which sought to remove the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. Almost thirty years later the Royal Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the dictator of Iran was suddenly no longer useful and Anglo-American allegiances now supported the fundamentalist Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini in favour of containment regarding Russia and access to oil. The media propaganda went into full swing for Revolution as preparations for a military coup inside Iran. In 1979, a coup proved unnecessary and Ayatollah Khomeini was smoothly installed as the Ayatollah of an Islamic Republic of Iran.

Much like the kinds of US-NATO-led incursions we saw in Libya and Syria in the last few years, human rights abuses, real and imagined, were floated excessively in the media. As social tensions rose in Iran the Shah’s secret police the notorious SAVAK were encouraged by US diplomats to embark on a campaign: “of ever more brutal repression, in a manner calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah.”

True to form, the Shah fell into the trap laid by Zbigniew Brzezinski who had advised him: “… to be firm” in the face of demonstrations. [7]

After assisting the installation of fundamentalist Islam and just prior to the Iran-Iraq war Brzezinski met with Saddam Hussein and gave his support for the war ensuring that arms would be secured with the support of Arab oil-producing nations such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. [8] Though this war provided a bonanza for weapons manufacturers in the US, Britain and Russia it also served the American interests in fermenting continuing radicalism in the region so that pockets of conflict and the background of war would serve as cover for securing economic interests.

Meanwhile, as Islamic fundamentalism had been seeded and watered in Iran, Osama bin Laden had left Saudi Arabia to train the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan which the US government were training, arming, and funding to the tune of $3 billion thanks again to Brzezinski transplanting the Islamic foreign policy over to the “holy War.” Very soon, as the late Robert I. Freidman describes in The CIA’s Jihad: “… young Muslim men from across the Arab world, as well as from the U.S., flocked to Mujahedeen base camps outside Peshawar, Pakistan, where they were instructed in everything from making car bombs to shooting down Russian MiGs with U.S.-made Stinger missiles. Most of these recruits were fanatical Islamic fundamentalists who despised America just as much as they hated the Communist occupiers, but the CIA was willing to overlook that.” [9]

Osama bin Laden’s leadership in Afghanistan was vital in driving out Russia. The pretext used on this occasion was that the incumbent Afghan government was communist, which it wasn’t. The enormous investment handled by the CIA meant the creation and consolidation of bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda terrorist network with the blessing of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – and American tax-payers’ money. [10]  Brzezinski’s strategy to lay a trap for Russia whereby the Mujahedeen’s guerrilla war would embroil the Soviet Union in their own Vietnam was supremely successful, leading to its withdrawal and eventual collapse. [11]

october_87-muja

Afghan Mujahedeen,October 1987. By Erwin Lux (Wikipedia)

Now that the Safari Club had managed to send out word through its extensive network of intelligence, numerous new recruits were harvested for the glorious jihad and holy war taking place in Afghanistan. Ahmed Rashid writing in Foreign Affairs explained: “With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad.” [12] Islamic fundamentalism provided ample opportunity for martyrdom with a fantasy paradise of umpteen virgins waiting for their courageous warriors should they take up arms against the Russian infidels.

Bcci_logoBy the time the Reagan Administration took over Vice President George H.W. Bush made sure the BCCI banking funds were on hand for an expansion of operations in Afghanistan and other regions primed for divide and conquer tactics. Journalist Seymour Hersh termed the Safari Club a “private intelligence group [which was] one of George H. W. Bush’s many end-runs around congressional oversight of the American intelligence establishment and the locus of many of the worst features of the mammoth BCCI scandal.” [13]

Australian journalist John Pilger also placed the onus firmly on the Anglo-American intelligence structure: “More than 100,000 Islamic militants were trained in Pakistan between 1986 and 1992, in camps overseen by CIA and MI6, with the SAS [British Special Forces] training future al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in bomb-making and other black arts. Their leaders were trained at a CIA camp in Virginia. This was called Operation Cyclone and continued long after the Soviets had withdrawn in 1989.” [14]

taliban

Taliban fighters

In the early 1980’s Osama bin Laden already had firmly established ties between Saudi intelligence agency (GIP) their favourite Afghan warlord Abdul Rasul Sayyaf and the Intel chief, and possible middle man for the Mujahedeen groups – Prince Turki al-Faisal, bin Laden’s friend. Though bin Laden “… did have a substantial relationship with Saudi intelligence,” as journalist Steve Coll stated, he was likely not an agent. The CIA and the Safari Club were both working through al-Faisal and “ISI stooge and creation” war-lord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in Afghanistan as well as the Pakistani ISI which had now become a powerful adjunct to the CIA thanks to General (later President) Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq’s military coup of 1977 who assumed the presidency in 1978. [15] It was no coincidence that Haq passed pro-Islamic legislation, created Islamic banking systems, and Islamic courts and introduced a new religious tax for the creation of tens of thousands of madrassas, or religious boarding schools. This was an offshoot of US policy to build radical Islam, via education that would indoctrinate generations of future Islamic militants for decades to come. This extended to the Pakistani military where “Radical Islamist ideology began to permeate the military and the influence of the most extreme groups crept into the army…” [16]

In 1984, bin Laden moved to Peshawar, a Pakistani town on the border of Afghanistan, so that he could help set up and run Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) (meaning “Services Office” in English). This was a front organisation for the Mujahideen which funnelled weapons, money, and willing Jihad fighters from all over the burgeoning militant Islamic network straight into the increasingly ferocious Afghan war. [17] Meantime, Pakistan’s General Akhtar Abdul-Rahman met bin Laden on a regular basis in the city for Intel and financial dealings related to drug profits from the opium fields which by then were totalling around $100 million. By 1985, bin Laden and the ISI – effectively the CIA – were splitting the proceeds. [18]

202_george_bush_sr

George H. W. Bush and BCCI

Rahman was a close friend of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who by now, was a CIA asset and recognised as an international drug trafficker at Interpol. A top US official said that Haq “was our man … everybody knew that Haq was also running the drug trade” and that “BCCI was completely involved.” [19] Then CIA Director William Casey and Vice President George H. W. Bush were fully aware of the connection and while meeting Haq in Pakistan allowed him to move his drug money through the BCCI in return for his role in the program which was to provide Intel, keep the radical Islamic factions at fever pitch and finance the war on terror network. On one such secret visit to training camps near the Afghan border in 1984, the CIA director spoke of a strategy to “… take the Afghan war into enemy territory—into the Soviet Union itself. Casey wanted to ship subversive propaganda through Afghanistan to the Soviet Union’s predominantly Muslim southern republics.” [20] It proved easy to do so. However, it would only be 3 years later that the two Generals Rahman and Haq would both be killed in a plane crash in 1988, widely believed to have been sabotage conducted by the MOSSAD who were concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation instigated by Haq. [21]

Zia_ul-Haq

Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq circa 1977

In 1990, the blind Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman was travelling to the United States in style – and on a CIA-supported, one-year visa as a reward for his propagandizing lectures in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Much to the confusion and consternation of many intelligence agents he was also on a State Department terrorism watch list that should have barred him from the country. Hand-picked as a spellbinder in order to whip up disaffected Arab immigrants for the required Holy War and in turn, to stir the support for Muslim rebels needed to topple the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan, Rahman was proving an extremely useful part of a burgeoning Islamist network of agents. There were “Jihad offices” in Atlanta, Jersey City, and Dallas, the most important being the “Al-Kedah” (meaning “struggle”) set up in Brooklyn, New York, as the Al-Kedah Refugee Centre which served as fertile ground for Rahman and others’ spellbinding skills.

However, the winds of “blowback” were beginning to whistle through the ranks of Arab-CIA assets, most of whom gave lectures at Al-Kedah which would eventually be implicated in the World Trade Centre Bombings in 1993. Over $600 million was funnelled to this precursor organisation to Al-Qaeda and from several smaller outfits benefiting from CIA funds along with rich Pakistani and Saudi Arabian donors. [22] It would continue to be the main financial hub for CIA chaperoned, Al-Qaeda terrorists so that they could form the so-called network of cells within the United States, heavily monitored and managed by the FBI and CIA. In the words of private Washington attorney and former investigative counsel for the Senate Foreign Relation, Jack Blum: “We steered and encouraged these people. Then we dropped them. Now we’ve got a disposal problem. When you motivate people to fight for a cause – jihad – the problem is, how do you shut them off?” [23]

wtc1993

World Trade Centre Bombings 1993 – Another FBI entrapment set up?

But it was much more than simply forgetting to switch off a tap. This was adapted to a much larger, long-term objective where Al-Qaeda would come home to roost and serve as the bogeyman for a highly ambitious attack on American soil. The object of the CIA exercise was to keep other US agencies and even certain team members from looking too closely into the various issues related to assassinations and terrorist attacks on the homeland. As a growing number of FBI and CIA whistleblowers have proven – not always an easy thing to accomplish.

Another CIA asset rubbing shoulders with bin Laden was Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, a Palestinian preacher/spellbinder recruited from a small village Jenin, ostensibly as a diplomatic tool for uniting squabbling rebel factions in Pakistan. He became bin-Laden’s mentor persuading him to join the Jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Azzam was asset gold due to his connections the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi intelligence, and the Muslim World League and the Islamic Coordination Council in Peshawar, which supervised the military activities of the Arab Mujahedeen. Meantime, he could sip martinis and chat with the air stewardesses as he travelled for his frequent lectures in New York, at Al-Kifah and the Al-Farooq Mosque in Brooklyn and the Al-Salam Mosque in Jersey City calling for the “spark” of revolution “… that may one day burn Western interests all over the world.” As Freidman wryly mentions, a fact which drew so many of the CIA assets: “Azzam then asked his audience for donations, made out to his personal account at the Independent Savings Bank.” [24]

Having got too big for his Keffiyeh, Azzam was eventually murdered in a car bomb after accruing many enemies, including Osama bin Laden. No one really knew who had pressed the button but most were glad someone had. As with all allegations of foreknowledge and duplicity the CIA always plays dumb. As a New York investigator observed: “Left with the choice between pleading stupidity or else admitting deceit, the CIA went with stupidity.” [25]

From 1984 onwards, the CIA’s ability to twist itself into a spaghetti junction of lies became tragi-comic. As covert importation of Al-Qaeda terrorist and Islamic militants continued via MAK, one Ali Mohammed came to the attention of the media. A  major in the Egyptian army and a US operative he was tasked with training Islamic militants within the US. As yet another visitor to the Al-Kifah Centre and part of the army unit that was responsible for the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat he was involved in a special training program for foreign officers at the US Army Special Forces School at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as far back as 1981. Mohammed was apparently purged from the Egyptian Army after the assassination and joined the Green Berets, reportedly travelling to Afghanistan in 1992 to aid the Mujahedeen.

In 1984, US officials told the media that they were forced to remove Mohammed due to his religious beliefs which were considered too extreme. Mohamed found his way to the CIA in Egypt and asked to join as a spy. (It’s as easy as that). CIA subsequently decided that he couldn’t be trusted on account of his associations with Hezbollah. He found himself on a terrorist watch list order to prevent him from coming to the US. However, Mohamed turned up with a brand new visa and moved to America sailing through customs without any problems, with the US State Department choosing not to explain to a thoroughly confused media. [26] Like so many of these stories, they are quickly forgotten.

In 1995, it was revealed at the trial of terrorist Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, that Mohammed had been admitted to the US under a special visa program controlled by the CIA’s clandestine service. A subsequent search of his New Jersey home turned up forty boxes of evidence which had the D.A.’s office and the FBI looked at it more carefully, would have revealed an active terrorist conspiracy about to boil over in New York. In addition to discovering thousands of rounds of ammunition and hit lists with the names of New York judges and prosecutors, investigators found amongst the evidence classified U.S. military-training manuals. They also found a video made at Fort Bragg featuring the Green Beret Ali Mohammed lecturing U.S. officers and officials on the politics of Jihad. On the video, Ali Mohammed sounds oddly like a radical fundamentalist himself, declaring that the Muslim world will never accept the existence of Israel.

The CIA was lying again and not quite getting away with it. Nonetheless, no action was taken and before long, Mohammed had found himself a wife and had settled into the American dream.

***

cook_robinRobin Cook

The late Robin Cook as UK Foreign Secretary, was outspoken in his resistance to the Iraq war and the lies of the then Prime Minister Tony Blair. Cook was one of the very few who resigned over the issue to become an ordinary back-bencher, stating: “I can’t accept collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support.” Cook also wanted to stop the export of aerospace jet fighters to General Suharto’s repressive regime in Indonesia. As he told the Guardian: “we will not permit the sale of arms to regimes that might use them for internal repression or international aggression. We shall spread the values of human rights, civil liberties and democracy which we demand for ourselves”. He was to be a vehement opponent and thorn in the side of the Blair government before his untimely death.

Many insiders believed that Cook was destined for a senior Cabinet post under the Brown premiership but this would have been problematic for the British Establishment who was set on Middle Eastern conquest. As Foreign Secretary, Cook would have had plenty of access to intelligence reports and related operations abroad. He is known to have considerably ruffled some feathers by breaking the official secrets act and discussing policy and future proposals. He was to do this in spectacular fashion by courageously speaking the truth regarding the War on Terror and the nature of Al-Qaeda which was “literally ‘the database’, and in Cook’s words: “… originally the computer file of the thousands of Mujahedeen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.” [27] The Guardian article appeared just after the 7/7 bombings and the incendiary speeches by Cook. Whatever ball the respected politician had started to roll it was not to last.

Robin Cook’s legacy in standing for truth was corroborated by a former French Intelligence agent Pierre-Henri Bunel, who wrote an article for the World Affairs journal based in New Dehli in 2004 where he repeated so many top level analysts’ conclusions: “The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.[28]

This is where global drugs market comes in …

 


Notes

[1] ‘“Revealing the Lies” on 9/11 Perpetuates the “Big Lie”’ by Michel Chossudovsky – Text of Michel Chossudovsky’s keynote presentation at the opening plenary session (27 May 2004) to The International Citizens Inquiry Into 9/11, Toronto, 25-30 May 2004. http://www.globalresearch.ca 27 May 2004.
[2] ‘Russian Intelligence Chief Says Al-Qaeda A Myth,’ MosNews| March 21, 2005.
[3] p.39; Politics, Pollution, and Pandas: An Environmental Memoir By Russell E. Train, Published by Island Press 2003.
[4] Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War and the roots of Terror by Mahmood Mamdani, Published by Three Leaves Publishing; Reprint edition, 2005. ISBN-10: 0385515375. (p.84)
[5] ‘World Wildlife Fund: The 1001 Club Mafia dons, intelligence agents, and raw materials executives striving for a sustainable future’ http://www.whale.to
[6] p.67; Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America by Peter Dale-Scott, Published by University of California Press, 2008. ISBN-10: 0520258711.
[7] Ibid. (p.81)
[8] The eight year Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) is remembered as one of the most shockingly harrowing conflicts of the 20th century. It was reminiscent of the First World War in terms of sheer numbers of dead; territory shifting back and forth between the two sides like bone-dry seas, heavy with the burden of teenage corpses and the endless pain of grieving families. It was a lucrative time for the US, Russia, and various European nations eager to extend this barbarism in order to squeeze out the highest profits from a whole generation of beleaguered youths. Meanwhile, the rest of the Middle East looked on, until the final combined casualty list total reached one million. The combined profit from these arms deals however, is unknown, but we can guess at the obscene sums of money accrued. To further compound the misery and the arrogance of its leaders, nightmarish monuments were erected on the backs of an already broken people: the fountain of blood in Teheran, the soldier statuaries in Basrah and two giant crossed swords clasped by equally giant arms modelled on Hussein himself. They were also cast in a British foundry. It is testament to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s skill as a geo-political tactician and strategist as it is his cold absence of conscience.
[9] ‘The CIA’s Jihad’ By Robert I. Friedman, June 30, 2002. Current View Point -www.currentviewpoint.com
[10] ‘Who is Osama Bin Laden? BBC News, 18 September, 2001.
[11] ‘The Soviets’ Vietnam’. Richard Cohen Washington Post. April 22, 1988.
[12] ‘The Taliban: Exporting Extremism’, by Ahmed Rashid, Foreign Affairs, Issue November-December 1999.
[13] ‘Seymour Hersh and the men who want him committed’, Salon.com by Matthew Phelan, February 28 2011.
[14] ‘Why Good Friends left behind.” By John Pilger, The Guardian, September 20, 2003.
[15] ‘It ain’t over till it’s over’ By Marc Erikson Asia Times November 15 2001.
[16] I Is for Infidel: From Holy War to Holy Terror: 18 Years Inside Afghanistan by Kathy Gannon, Published by Public Affairs, 2005. |ISBN-10: 1586483129. | (pp.138-142)
[17] ‘The Real Bin Laden’ by Mary Jane Weaver, The New Yorker, 2000.
[18] p. 29; Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11. By Gerald Posner, Published by Random House, 2003.| ISBN-10: 0375508791.
[19] op. cit. Dale-Scott, (pp. 73-75).
[20] ‘Anatomy of a Victory, the CIA’s Covert Afghan War’ by Steve Coll Washington Post, July 19 1992.
[21] ‘Editorial:Another clue into General Zia’s death’ Daily Times Pakistan, December 2005. […] “former US ambassador to India, John Gunther Dean, suspects that General Zia ul Haq was killed by the Israelis. This is interesting enough but perhaps would not have made it beyond the slew of conspiracy theories that have been cropping up since Zia was killed in a C-130 plane crash if the US State Department had not chosen to ignore Mr Dean and later cashier him on grounds of being mentally imbalanced.
According to Ms Crossette’s account under the title ‘Reflections — Who Killed Zia?’, Mr Dean suspects that General Zia, his top commanders, the US ambassador to Pakistan, Arnold Raphael, and a US brigadier-general were killed by the Israeli secret agency Mossad because Tel Aviv was concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions following a statement by General Zia in 1987 that Pakistan was a “screwdriver’s turn away from the bomb”.But when Mr Dean expressed his views to the State Department at the time and insisted that the US must thoroughly investigate the Israeli-Indian axis, the Department accused him of mental imbalance and relieved him of his duties; this, despite that fact that Mr Dean was a distinguished diplomat who had garnered more ambassadorships than most envoys. Ms Crossette says that Mr Dean, now 80, wants the stigma of mental imbalance removed and is collecting his papers and is ready to share his thoughts. He lost his medical and security clearance because of his views and was forced to seek retirement in 1988.”[…]
[22] pp. 279-280; Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam by Robert Dreyfuss (American Empire Project) Published by Metropolitan Books; 2005 | ISBN-10: 0805076522.
[23] op. cit. Freidman.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] ‘The Masking of a Militant’ By Benjamin Weiser and James Risen – A Soldier’s Shadowy Trail In U.S. and in the Mideast The New York Times, December 1, 1998.
[27] ‘The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means – The G8 must seize the opportunity to address the wider issues at the root of such atrocities’ By Robin Cook, The Guardian, July 8, 2005.
[28] ‘Al Qaeda: The Database’ By Pierre-Henri Bunel, Global Research, May 12, 2011 | Wayne Madsen Report 20 November, 2005.

Dark Green V: Elephants & Tigers

By M.K. Styllinski

“… all two hundred delegates signed ‘Enemies of Conservation’” with one indigenous delegate rising to state that ‘… extractive industries, while still a serious threat to their welfare and cultural integrity, were no longer the main antagonist of indigenous cultures. Their new and biggest enemy, she said, was ‘conservation.’ ”

– Mark Dowie, Conservation Refugees:The Hundred-Year Conflict between Global Conservation and Native Peoples


The same process of land ethic revivalism so favoured by the Nazis is alive and well under the Prince. WWF in partnership with Heineken Breweries and other environmental affiliates have paid for studies which conclude that a balkanisation of Europe and a dramatic increase in the creation of nature reserves, conservation areas and game parks all over Western Europe. [1]The Heineken study, sponsored by Board Chairman A.H. Heineken, “… calls for redrawing the map of Europe into 75 mini-states, with populations of 10 million people at the most. Each mini-state would be ruled by a member of one of the existing European Royal Houses.” John Loudon, International President of WWF from 1977-1981 and ex-chairman of the board of Royal Dutch Shell was a member of the Heineken board. [2]

Heineken8

“For a Fresher World” 2011 advertising artwork for Heineken brand

A long-time supporter of WWF, Heineken is one of the greenest businesses existing today with stakeholder activities focusing on sustainability, green commerce and a host of other ecologically sound initiatives. The 1994 IUCN study called “Parks for Life: Action for Protected Areas in Europe,” followed the same pattern, namely the four-fold increase in setting aside land in Western Europe. All industrialisation would cease including any new infrastructure projects from water to rail links so that millions of hectares of land for parks could be allowed to flourish. [3] Wealthy landowners, families and 1001 Club members have been busily buying up land previously designated as parks and protected areas.

Author Mark Dowie believes this policy was the result of a concept as old as the colonial forefathers called “fortress conservation,” and which is present in almost every large-scale Anglo-American environmental initiative from Agenda 21 to the Wild lands Network: expressly no humans allowed access within these hallowed conservation zones. Even though WWF does not advocate forced relocation it nevertheless firmly believes in the concept of conservation areas off limits to humans. So, how does it get around the fact that there will undoubtedly be families who do not want to leave? [4]

Dowie draws our attention to the November 2004 Third Congress of the World Conservation Union in Bangkok, Thailand, convened to explore new ways to halt the loss of global diversity. In the audience was the only black person in sea of white faces comprising of environmentalists, conservationists and eco-bureaucrats. Martin Saning’o, the Maassai leader from Tanzania was next in line. When it was his turn to comment he described: “… how nomadic pastoralists once protected the vast range in eastern Africa that they have lost over the past century to conservation projects,” and further:

“‘Our ways of farming pollinated diverse seed species and maintained corridors between ecosystems,” he explains to an audience he knows to be schooled in Western ecological sciences. Yet, in the interest of a relatively new vogue in conservation called “biodiversity,”1 he tells them, more than one hundred thousand Maasai pastoralists have been displaced from their traditional homeland, which once ranged from what is now northern Kenya to the savannah grasslands of the Serengeti plains in northern Tanzania. They called it Maasailand. ‘We were the original conservationists,’ Saning’o tells the room full of shocked white faces. ‘Now you have made us enemies of conservation.’” [5]

As Dowie understates, drily, not exactly “… what six thousand wildlife biologists and conservation activists from over one hundred countries had traveled to Bangkok to hear.”

A 2004, United Nations meeting pushed for the passing of a resolution protecting the territorial and human rights of indigenous peoples. The UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples read in part, “Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation, and where possible, with the option to return.” Later in the year another meeting of the International Forum on Indigenous Mapping, “all two hundred delegates signed ‘Enemies of Conservation’” with one indigenous delegate rising to state that “… extractive industries, while still a serious threat to their welfare and cultural integrity, were no longer the main antagonist of indigenous cultures. Their new and biggest enemy, she said, was ‘conservation.’” [6]

02_wwf-horzWWF’s tasteful advertising campaign on species extinction with a nude black woman and man set against rainforest. I’m sure the Duke of Edinburgh would have got the joke…

Dowie describes other statements becoming increasingly common from the mouths of indigenous populations historically displaced from their homes and lands which now number in Africa alone, 14 million[7] “conservation refugees.” Since the colonial era: “conservation has become the number one threat to indigenous territories;” the “appropriation of common property for conservation,” or even at international and local meetings there was the ignoring “recommendations and interests” of indigenous members along with a general marginalization “… without opportunity to take the floor and express our views.” [8] It is no surprise that delegates have walked out of many conferences when the same neo-colonialism presented itself.

The author goes on to illustrate the experiences of transnational conservation with a wide range of indigenous peoples from the Miwok, Paiute, and Ahwahneechee of Yosemite Valley to the Pygmies of Uganda and Central Africa; the Karen of Thailand to the Adevasi of India; the Kayapo of Brazil and many others. The same story unfolds in each case though differing in response to the colonialism with: “the tendency of conservationists to ignore their basic rights, at times their very existence, in the course of protecting biological diversity.” [9]

As Dowie observes, it is the type of scientific conservationism that harks back to the “scientific technique” of Bertrand Russell and friends that we can see defining the rigid belief that humans cannot co-exist with nature – separation and segregation overseen by an Elite is the only way.

wwftigerSumatran Tiger|wwf.org

Sumatran tigers numbering no more than 500 in 2009 have been part of WWF fund-raising campaigns for many years. Many of the tigers are said to live in the Tesso Nilo, just a few hours from an WWF office. Jens Glüsing and Nils Klawitter of Der Spiegel take up the story:

Sunarto is a biologist who has long worked as a tiger researcher in the Tesso Nilo. But he has never seen a tiger there. ‘Tiger density is very low here, because of human economic activity,’ says Sunarto, who like some Indonesians goes by only one name. He also points out that there are still some woodland clearing concessions within the conservation area. To enable them to track down tigers, the WWF has provided the scientists with high-tech measuring equipment, including GPS devices, DNA analysis methods for tiger dung and 20 photo traps. During the last photography shoot, which lasted several weeks, the traps only photographed five tigers.

The WWF sees its work in Sumatra as an important achievement, arguing that the rainforest in the Tesso Nilo was successfully saved as a result of a ‘fire department approach.’ In reality, the conservation zone has grown while the forest inside has become smaller.

Companies like Asia Pacific Resources International, with which the WWF previously had a cooperative arrangement, cut down the virgin forest, says Sunarto. His colleague Ruswantu takes affluent eco-tourists on tours of the park on the backs of tamed elephants. The area is off-limits for the locals, and anti-poaching units funded by the Germans make sure that they stay out. ‘The WWF is in charge here, and that’s a problem,’ says Bahri, who owns a tiny shop and lives in a village near the entrance to the park. No one knows where the borders are, he says. ‘We used to have small fields of rubber trees, and suddenly we were no longer allowed to go there.’ ” [10]

The Der Spiegel investigation into WWF highlighted what many already knew: the organisation has overseen the dwindling of farms driven out of tribal lands and the decline of the species it appointed itself to protect. As one indigenous interviewee stated in the report, with the partnership between transnational corporations and the WWF, the organisation has helped to transform “… our world into plantations, monoculture and national parks.” [11] This also brings into relief the apparent contradiction between preserving wildlife and the predilection of aristocracy and Establishment for hunting animals. It seems they just can’t help themselves.

Back in 1961, the year that Prince Philip would inaugurate the creation of WWF to protect the endangered species of the world he was on a Royal tour of India with Queen Elizabeth. It was on this tour that the Prince decided he would blow away an Indian Tiger just for fun. Environmentalists, ecologists and just about everyone else didn’t share Prince Philip’s delight in bagging a 10ft tiger and no doubt confirming his manly virility to Lizzie.  Several tigers and a rare Indian rhino (a legacy given by British tea-planters) were killed for the Royal tour all recorded for posterity by the Queen. But Prince Phillip it seems wanted a bit more of the action. He later killed a female rhino which had got caught in the hunting party after many other members of the entourage had actively tried to assist the animal to leave. Her infant calf escaped though it is highly improbable it survived without its mother. With the launch of WWF months away the whole incident was covered up.

Killing for sport has continued to be a pleasure for royalty down through the ages. The only difference is in the past, they were not pretending to protect wildlife and preach on endangered species while taking great delight in blowing them out of the sky, skewering them with spears or hunting them to death. This sporting pleasure is endemic in so called “high society” and intimately tied up with rural traditions, though firmly divorced from anything approaching pest control or crop protection. The WWF finally had to dispense with King Juan Carlos I of Spain as The President of Honour of WWF after his blood-lust became a little too much of a PR problem. The King made no secret of his love affair for hunting big game in Africa and Eastern Europe. More recently, he took part in a hunt in Romania, killing a wolf and nine bears, one of which was pregnant.[12] A Russian official also claimed that a tame bear was plied with honey and vodka before being shot dead by the King. The bear (called Mitrofan) was killed during a private visit to Russia in 2006, though it was never proven that King Juan Carlos had pulled the trigger. [13]

royalhunt

The prelude to the launch of WWF. Prince Phillip (far left) The Queen is standing just behind the ex-tiger while Prince Jagat-Singh Has his foot on the animal’s head. The tiger was over 9ft long before it’s skin was sent to Windsor Castle as a trophy. Today – like so many animals championed by WWF – it is almost extinct.

Much like Prince Philip who is not one to let the hoi-polloi dictate his pleasures, in 2006 the Polish government allowed him to kill a European bison in Bialowieza forest, even when it is an endangered species. In April 2012, the patron of the WWF was still busy hunting elephants in Botswana.

Prince Charles, also deeply involved with environmental concerns and UK head of the WWF has followed in his father’s footsteps developing a love of fox hunting along with frequent bird shoots at Balmoral. His sons have not been spared the grand tradition either. Reports that William killed a young antelope with a 7ft spear on a trip to see the Maasai were unconfirmed but not surprising. William’s cultivated interest in shooting and stalking stopped his mother Diana from becoming president of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, though admittedly, hunting has always been a non-issue for the WWF.

Whether it is buying 250 pheasant, duck and partridge for his brother Harry to shoot at his 27th birthday on Queen Elizabeth’s Sandringham Estate, or boar-hunting on their rural estate in Cordoba, Spain, William is merely embracing normal pastime within the aristocracy, civil list and super-rich. In their last shoot the brothers bagged a staggering 740 partridges on a single day with help from “… Beaters and packs of dogs [who] were brought in to ensure that the princes did not return home without several ‘kills’ to their name.” [14]

Killing animals for sport under the guise of countryside traditions is nothing new and is an activity simultaneously bound up in ancient practices of survival where the animal is either venerated as a source of food or regarded as something to slaughter in a society bereft or meaning. Indigenous cultures – even peasantry in the not so distant past – took the death of their fellow creatures very seriously and afforded them the respect they deserved for providing them with nourishment. Living as we do in mostly urban environments and suburban “countryside” dotted with corporate outlets of factory farming the respect for the cycles of life and death doesn’t play much part in shooting or hunting animals since it is tied to the market place, where weekend shoots act as cathartic exercises in manliness and / or a break from the high-octane pressure of city rat-race. Deals can be done and echoes of the gentry can resurface.

Though dressed up in numerous rationalisations, the idea that hunting and killing animals for fun rather than survival in what we consider to be “civilised” societies seems to be a tradition we can eventually do without. But unless one has grown up in the “country” or is steeped in aristocratic customs one cannot possibly understand this essential “tradition” it seems … However, if we ever return to a full spectrum of true ecological awareness, self-sufficiency, respect for the natural world, a just economy and an inclusive social autonomy with a minimum of government interference, there may be a place in the world for hunting animals as part of a sacred survival, something indigenous peoples understood. Since how we treat animals in any given nation is fairly good reflection of how well we treat humans, then it maybe sometime before the view of animals as playthings or products may change.

Be that as it may, it’s all part of the normal life of so-called Royalty or “nobility” where the residues of feudalism strengthen the explicit understanding that elitism, class divisions and inherited privilege must be supported by the tax payer.

How else are we to keep the vast families and civil list in the manner to which they are accustomed?

bucket of green paint‘Green-washing’ © infrakshun

The issue is not about individual royals, rather it is the notion that we need such a structure of vastly expensive aristocracy when its continued existence only serves to buttress and maintain the status quo and its social divisions. Indeed, this must remain if monarchy, corporatism and Elite privilege is to thrive, tangled up as it is in complex ponerological webs of custom, status and wealth. The idea that we are all still subjects to a ruling King or Queen rather than citizens, has power, even if implicit. Societies at this time, need leaders but leaders with the highest principles which honour tradition as means to free the mind rather than to repeat destructive customs of power privilege and indulgence.

Similarly, organisations and agencies are following a PR image which has little to do with the values a truly progressive society would hope to encourage. WWF does not oppose hunting or situations that pose a threat to animal welfare. “Conservation” is its priority. So much so, that the following statement on the Canadian seal hunt, is illuminating: “As long as the commercial hunt for harp seals off the coast of Canada is of no threat to the population of over 5 million harp seals, there is no reason for WWF Canada to reconsider its current priorities and actively oppose the annual harvest of harp seals.” [15]

Supporting the fur industry is the type of conservation we are talking about here not least the barbarism that seal hunts entail. Clearly, as WWF has stated humane treatment of animals and animal welfare is not its concern. Nor it seems, does it view exploitation as something to be concerned about.

The Sumatran Orangutan in Indonesia, is under intense pressure from Palm oil companies causing massive deforestation. Ian Singleton, Director of the Sumatran Orangutan Conservation Program told journalist Elizabeth Batt that the Sumatran orangutan will be extinct by the end of 2012. WWF being concerned about endangered species would see this as an opportunity to protect this species, right? Wrong. WWF and other eco-groups are involved in a huge green washing deal which operates like this:

“ The global organic food industry agrees to support international agribusiness in clearing as much tropical rainforest as they want for farming. In return, agribusiness agrees to farm the now-deforested land using organic methods, and the organic industry encourages its supporters to buy the resulting timber and food under the newly devised ‘Rainforest Plus” label.’

The ‘world’s biggest wildlife conservation groups have agreed exactly to such a scenario, only in reverse.’ And it’s being led by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Through ‘a series of global bargains with international agribusiness, in exchange for vague promises of habitat protection, sustainability and social justice, these conservation groups are offering to greenwash industrial commodity agriculture.” [16]

Sumatra is home to a rich variety of wildlife some of which only exist in this mountainous paradise. Palm oil is used in biodiesel, toiletries and food products and is in high demand across the world. But the boom in palm oil means environmental degradation with high quantities of pesticides and “slash and burn” deforestation, despite WWF claims of sustainability. Corruption is rife. For example, RSPO stands for “Roundtable on Sustainable palm Oil,” yet as one former Indonesian WWF employee commented:

“Sustainable palm oil, is really non-existent” for the following reasons: “The certificate makes it possible to crank up production while simultaneously placating the consciences of customers. Henkel, the Düsseldorf-based consumer products company, advertises its Terra range of household cleaning products with the claim that it supports ‘the sustainable production of palm and palm kernel oil, together with the WWF.’ ” [17]

But WWF calls all this “market transformation” allowing corporations such as Unilever to process 1.3 million tons of palm oil a year a record that transforms it into the one of the world’s largest palm oil processors along with Wilmar, one of the world’s major palm oil producers. Now that they have completed their “accreditation” and taken into account “social criteria” then, all is well according to WWF. Though virgin forest continues to be cut down and environmental toxicity levels abound.

Charges of profits before principles have dogged WWF since its inception. The Cambodian government was none too pleased with the organisation and its handling of the Irrawaddy Dolphin in the Mekong river systems, listed as critically endangered by WWF since 2004. In June 2009, Touch Seang Tana, chairman of Cambodia’s Commission for Conservation and Development of the Mekong River Dolphins Eco-tourism Zone, accused WWF of misrepresenting the level of extinction danger concerning the Mekong Dolphin in order to increase fundraising. He stated: “The WWF’s report did not implement scientific research,” citing that: “Most dolphins died of fishing net from local fishermen and explosion devices for local people to catch fish. They did not die from pollution, DDT, pesticide or dams.” [18]

Heavy-Pollution-Leads-Mekong-Dolphins-to-Extinction-2

Mekong river Dolphins ‘almost extinct’

Cambodian government estimates between 155 and 175 Irrawaddy dolphins still remain in Cambodia’s stretch of the Mekong River, while WWF last year put the figure at just 85. Since 2012 Cambodia cabinet has agreed to implement a conservation area which will cover a 180-kilometer-long stretch of river from Eastern Kratie province to the border with Laos.

When WWF does do its professed job of protecting endangered species it doesn’t succeed there either, at least according to the 1989 Phillipson Report named after Oxford professor John Phillipson. He did as WWF asked and completed a commissioned internal audit to gauge the organization’s effectiveness. The 252 page report proved the charity had produced a litany of embarrassing failures. Not one endangered species project had been successful. After spending a fortune on “saving the panda” through “scientific breeding” which the fund proclaimed should be applied to all other species, it consequently “relocated” thousands of peasant Chinese so that they were out of the range of the panda’s habitat. In their bid to save the panda from extinction they squandered the millions accrued from donations.

Phillipson states:

“despite a staff of 43 (23 allegedly science-trained), panda breeding has not been a success and research output negligible…. The laboratories, equipped at a cost to WWF of SFr 0.53 million, are essentially non-functional. … A lack of proper advice, inadequately trained staff, and poor direction have resulted in a ‘moribund’ laboratory … The obvious conclusion must be that WWF has not been effective or efficient in safeguarding its massive investment … WWF subscribers would be dismayed to learn that the capital input has been virtually written off.” […]

“It must be accepted that WWF activities in China are largely in disarray … The policy of widening WWF involvement to cover other interests has, in my opinion, been counterproductive and, in view of the virtual cessation of support for all forms of panda research, amounts to an abrogation of responsibility for the much publicized ‘Panda Program.’” [19]

Furthermore, WWF had bribed Chinese officials with donated funds in order to preserve panda habitat but which also allowed the building of hydroelectric dams leading to ever increasing demands for bigger bribes. [20]

After decades of so called expertise in the field of conservation this is surely an odd state of affairs for an environmental institution which is regularly consulted on conservation issues despite having a dubious record on animal welfare and an appalling success rate in protecting species from extinction. Its bank balance is certainly something that could be termed “successful.”

In 2010, WWF proclaimed it the “Year of the Tiger” in keeping with its long tradition of campaigning on behalf of this endangered species. In the early 1970s, it managed to convince the Indian government under then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s Indian government to create some protected areas for the tigers. At the time it said there were roughly 4,000 tigers compared to just 1,700 today. Without WWF perhaps the tiger would be no more? It is hard to say. The issue of resettlement played out in India just as it would in China, with assurances by WWF staff that operations were handled properly. Given the magnitude of resettlement in India resulting 300,000 families being “persuaded” to leave their homes in order to create a conservation zone, it is hard to believe that such a mass displacement was willingly undertaken.

>WWF’s insistence that elephant populations were just fine underscored its preference for culling and hunting through much of the 1960s and 1970s. Though almost every environmental movement and nature conservation expert was saying that the elephant was in danger, WWF continued to support that line that estimates of sharp declines were exaggerated. In fact, from the results of various studies it was found that there were 3 million elephants in Africa in the early 1950s; 1.3 million elephants in the mid-70s when the ivory trade was at its height; 400,000 by 1988. Estimated populations of African elephants have recovered somewhat at between 490,000 or 65o, 000, with Asian elephants at only 60,000. [21]

International WWF chairman Sir Peter Scott also had a reputation for the option of culling animals regardless of whether numbers were dwindling or not. In 1963, in a report to the Ugandan Parks Board, Scott recommended the ‘culling’ of 2,500 elephants and according to EIR report by Allen Douglas “… game hunter Ian Parker, … massacred 4,000 hippos while he was at it.” It seems that the Chairman: “… had recommended the slaughter on the Malthusian premise that ‘overpopulation’ required the killing of many individuals in order to ‘save the species.’ In reality, as it later emerged, Scott wanted to create a valuable mahogany plantation in the forests where the elephants fed, and they were in the way.” [22]  If there was any truth to the notion that WWF was interested in preserving species then it was strongly called into question when it embraced the more lucrative idea of allowing only the privileged to kill endangered wildlife under the cover of that well-known term: “sustainable use”, which means the killing of animals in the most efficient way and which maximizes profits without damaging the long-term viability of the species.

An example of this strategy so common in nature conservation was discovered in 1994 where the Tufts Centre for Animals and Public Policy director Andrew Rowan found: “… a single difference in the responses of zoo and humane representatives to 12 hypothetical ethical problems he posed at the White Oak conference on zoos and animal protection. Most agreed that hunting is both ethically and pragmatically dubious as an alleged tool of wildlife management. Yet, endorsing the WWF view, the zoo people were virtually all willing to tolerate trophy hunting as a way to make wildlife lucrative for poor nations, and presumably therefore worth protecting.” [23]

Trophy-hunting and the neo-colonialism of the rich, white man pervades WWF philosophy and practice. In the context of “Sustainable use” this will actually speed up the likelihood of extinction when artificial practices based on blood sport and killing for pleasure wrapped up in rules and regulations replaces the natural balance of hunting for survival and necessity often sitting alongside a healthy wisdom and understanding of the natural world.  The same applies to the politics of “sustainable use” which have attracted the “change agent” doctrine that is seen in Agenda 21 and across the environmentalism movement. Such advocates within WWF and other groups have the gall to suggest to Africans and Asians living on the poverty line that they should allow rich Europeans and Americans to kill animals for sport as oppose to those who kill to survive and must be reduced to living on the scarcity of hand-outs to compensate. As one commentator reiterated: “ ‘Sustainable users’ argue that giving poor Africans and Asians a collective economic stock in wildlife will lead to the development of a collective ethic, whereby poachers will become pariahs. This ignores the history of collectivism wherever it has been attempted, from the failed USSR to Africa’s own overgrazed grasslands.” [24]

With the failure to save the Black Rhino in the 1960s and 70s as well as the declining populations of the White Rhino, John Phillipson stated:

“The project was ill-conceived and indefensible in conservation terms; the Southern White Rhino has never, at least in historic times, occurred in Kenya: Moreover, there is no evidence that the Northern White Rhino ever roamed the lands which now constitute the 87,044 hectare Meru National Park. The assumption must be that in the mid-1960s WWF was either scientifically incompetent, hungry for publicity, greedy for money, or unduly influenced by scientifically Naïve persons of stature.” […]

“The program came to an abrupt end in November 1988, perhaps mercifully in that it removed a constant source of embarrassment. Insurgent Somali poachers shot all the remaining white rhino in an act of defiance, an unfortunate end for the rhino but no doubt a welcome relief for concerned conservationists. Project 0195 is not a project that WWF should look back on with any pride.” [25]

Funded with 1 million Swiss francs Operation Stronghold was ostensibly conducted to save the Black Rhino in the Zambezi Valley from extinction. It soon became clear that this was something other than just Rhino protection and the transferral to safer regions. Taking a leaf out of the rise in private army outsourcing in countries such as America, Britain and Israel WWF paid Chief Game Ranger Glen Tatham and his men to protect the Rhino it seems at any cost. But was the Rhino really the main objective here?

blk-rhino

Black Rhino, Zambezi Valley

In November 1988, When two of Tatham’s unit were charged with murder after allegedly shooting dead “poachers” in cold blood, more details of their activities began to surface. Notwithstanding that over 145 “poachers” had been killed since 1984 and 1991, many had been targeted from helicopters manned by WWF employees. [26] Yet, according to the Game department’s own figures: “Of the 228 people killed or taken prisoner, only 107 guns were recovered. Given that another 202 individuals were recorded as having fled, some badly injured, some of whom would have lost or been unable to carry away their weapons, this means that Tatham et al., failed to recover weapons from three-quarters of those killed, taken prisoner, or driven away. This raises the question of whether those targeted by the guards were in fact armed poachers at all.”  [27]

Rhinos were in fact, shipped off to countries with privately-owned game reserves not just in Africa but all over the world, an immensely lucrative project for WWF.  Following in the wake of WWF’s sleight of hand, the IMF did what it does best and embarked on a restructuring of Zimbabwe’s economy, which meant placing it in debt and cutting what was left of social services. Dumped into the middle of this Western-imposed chaos was the monoculture business of beef ranching for Europe, slap-bang in the Zambezi Valley, the exact position where the rhino’s once lived. A government and corporate-mandated extermination of wildlife then ensued to provide for the IMF beef factories.

Black Rhinos have made a dramatic comeback after private land use was brought into the picture which also utilised armed guards and private army protection. Ever on the look-out for profit, a Price Waterhouse study commissioned by conservancies and WWF-Zimbabwe/Beit Trust to explore the land-use options available to the conservancies concluded that: “from a financial perspective, wildlife is a more desirable land-use than cattle in these Conservancies.” [28]

WWF’s earliest corporate sponsor was the petrochemical giant Royal Dutch/Shell. In 1961 it gave WWF-UK £10,000 a considerable sum back in 1961. So, before green righteousness goes to far let it be remembered that WWF was actually founded on oil money. But it doesn’t stop there. Corporate sponsorship continues apace some of whom include Canon, Volvo, Nokia and HSBC – the latter having been recently fined more that $1.5 billion for financial corruption, a banking cartel that was found to be laundering money for drug barons and crime lords whilst engaging in the kind  of financial terrorism second only to Barclays Banks. Yet getting into bed with oppressive regimes and finding time to indoctrinate slum kids in Pakistan we shouldn’t be too surprised, especially when we nip back to 1988…

In that year, a large cache of paintings were sold for £700,000 to raise money for the World Wide Fund for Nature. The money was deposited in a Swiss WWF bank account by former head of the WWF, Prince Bernhard. In the following year £500,000 was transferred back to Bernhard by director-general of the WWF, Charles de Haes for what was described as “a private project.” In fact, Prince Bernhard had used the money for Operation Project Lock to hire mercenaries—mostly British to ostensibly fight poachers in nature reserves.[29]In 1990, WWF’s cosseted existence was placed under the media spotlight embroiling the organisation in a very public scandal. A joint operation between WWF and British Special Air Services (SAS) had been tasked with infiltrating “commandos” in a bid to save the Rhino and in the hope of dismantling the illegal ivory trade and Rhino horn trading network. That was the theory hatched in the WWF boardroom. It proved to be colossal failure.

Firstly, £1 million went missing. This may have had something to do with the fact that her Majesty’s respected SAS group had set up shop with Rhino products and gone into business for themselves. Far from stopping the illegal trade, they had muscled in on the action taking over the market and continuing the supply lines. Large numbers of poachers were murdered according to statements made by Nelson Mandela’s National African Congress. Further revelations came to light about the depth of British Intelligence involvement which was fully supported by WWF’s own documents and published in the Africa Confidential Bulletin. MI5 was said to have orchestrated Operation Lock with David Stirling, creator of the SAS.

The history of African National Parks is a history of collusion between park wardens funded and armed by WWF. The “poachers” are often phantoms in that such fabrications cover the truth that they are often the very same park wardens. The SAS unit officially sent in to stop the trade were drawn from the ranks of seasoned military professionals with black operational or “dirty warfare” experience. They were members of a mercenary unit created by Stirling called KAS International and just the ticket it seemed for WWF’s designs.

Though largely downplayed and covered up by the media, the trail of culpability led directly to the door of the British Establishment and most notably Prince Philip, the Queen Mother and author Laurens Van Der Post Prince Charles’ tutor, then first counsellor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on African Affairs. (Incidentally, Van Der Post has been proven to have been a fraud who knew very little about the real Africa). Nevertheless, the Duke of Edinburgh is pleased with the legacy. And WWF’s present day “Market Transformation” team shows no sign of observing a distance between corporations and their cash. “Change agents” are at work where the big dealers and producers of commodities like soybeans, milk, palm oil, wood and meat can see the errors of their ways and be shown the righteousness of a sustainable lifestyle. As a result, Cargill and Monsanto, two of the most heinous polluters and human rights abusers on the planet, donate regularly to WWF and attend many of their meetings. Keeping the green spin turning is essential for such companies which have huge investments in genetically modified soybean.

Jobs for the boys continues in 2013 and not much has changed. Thanks to the European Union millions of pounds are being paid to green campaign groups so that they can effectively lobby themselves. The European Commission Environmental Fund and are giving grants to enable scores of green organisations to influence and promote EU policy. According to the Tax Payers’ Alliance which analyses organisations’ spending this special fund called Life+, has exceeded £90 million over the past fifteen years. Set up in the 1990s to fund non-profit initiatives at the European level but most importantly, it is in the development and implementation of Community policy and legislation where Life+ is designed to be most effective. It would be a stretch to say that this money is being used to protect the environment, rather it seems this is another example of EU policies being routed through the back door of environmentalism without due consultation. Sure enough, the European Policy office of WWF (now based in Brussels) is up at the top of the grant listing having received £7.4 million. According to a Deccember 21st 2013 report from The Telegraph entitled: ‘European Union funding £90m green lobbying con’ By Robert Mendrick and Edward Malnick:

“In its most recent round of grants for 2013, Life+ awarded £7.5 million to 32 groups, including:

  • £290,000 to CEE Bankwatch Network, a Czech-based organisation which campaigns against “the activities of international financial institutions in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region that cause negative environmental and social impacts”;
  • £80,000 to Counter Balance, also based in Prague, which lobbies banks to ensure they “adhere to sustainable development goals, climate change mitigation policy, and the protection of biodiversity, in line with EU goals”;
  • £260,000 to Brussels-based Health Care Without Harm Europe, which campaigns to “address the environmental impact of the health-care sector in Europe … to make the health-care system more ecologically sustainable”;
  • £44,000 to Kyoto Club, based in Rome, whose main actions include “lobbying and advocacy for EU climate change mitigation policies, through policy recommendations and reports, information-sharing and campaigning, participation in EU events and stakeholder meetings, and contacts with relevant MEPs, Council and Commission officials”;
  • £350,000 to the Italian-based Slow Food, a group which campaigns to “reduce the impact of food production and consumption on the environment” and will achieve this by “participating in the international and EU debate about food through EU institution advisory committees, expert working groups and other high-level groups”.

At last, finally some cash is being used to implement a global green policy? Well, by now, it should be obvious that all this money flying about doesn’t actually alter the fundamental socio-economic structure but certainly lines the pockets of new “eco” industries and their bureaucracies. Greenpeace is possibly the only well-known environmental activist group who is acutely aware of green-washing having chosen not to take any EU or government funding. It perhaps the best known environmental campaigning organisation, has refused to take any EU or government funding. It should be commended for realising the nature of such compromise and what this really entails. Independence means it is much less likely to provide and open door to ponerisation. (It’s only a shame they don’t apply the same principles to their stance on climate change).

clip_image002.jpg

WWF “Business partners” 2012

The green charity Friends of the Earth (FoE) is another recipient of Life+ with over £2.1 million in funds in 2012 from: “… at least seven different departments of the European Commission. By contrast, the charity’s arm in Britain said it receives less than one per cent of its budget from the EU, with the vast majority of its funding coming from individuals and trusts.” The report goes on to state: “FoEE used its funding last year to produce a four-minute video to put pressure on the British and German governments to back a new EC directive which set a series of legally binding energy efficiency targets across Europe. The video was co-produced with Climate Action Network Europe, which has received £2.3 million from Life+ to ‘improve existing EU climate and energy policies’.”

In fact, the overwhelming drive to promote and lobby for EU directives under sustainable development alongside SMART society in a European setting. Higher tax bills, zero consultation on environmental policy and the new Eco-technocratic bias which goes with it blankets European perception. In the UK austerity measures, rising debt and a generation of older folk frequently have to ration their food in order to pay the electricity bills which have risen by 150 per cent in the last ten years. The German online newspaper deutschewelle.de. reported the figure of 31, 000 Britons, mostly the retired or on low incomes who died in 2012 as a result of the cold. The social and environmental costs are driving the prices sky high. SMART implementation and serious economic difficulties the funding of activist groups for measures and initiatives without due oversight and accountability is an open door to corruption and misappropriation of funds. Since most eco-activist organisations have little or no awareness of the macro-social objectives of those currently shaping European policy it means funding is generally being absorbed into the already centralised belief system inherent in Establishment support. The compromise arrives over time not necessarily in the short-term acceptance of funds. Rather, it contributes to a slow process of attrition where green policy is gradually contoured into a new socio-economic structure which may not be based on the freedom and independence those organisations and NGOs sincerely believe exists.

Employees within WWF and other organisations believe that allowing corporations to continue their natural state of plunder and exploitation while hoping for a change of face is a practical endeavour. For the multitude of good-hearted persons working in organisations like WWF whose patrons clearly have a different environmental and ideological agenda, they are in danger of becoming agents of a change that lead away from what they would sincerely like to see: the betterment of our environment and the human sphere. This will not come without a very different kind of compromise.

**

See also: Greenpeace Helps Corporations Destroy the Planet

 


Notes

[1] Ibid.
[2] Ibid.
[3] ‘Parks for life: Action for protected areas in Europe’ IUCN Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas, Federation of Nature and National Parks of Europe. 1994.
[4]
Dowie, Mark; Conservation Refugees:The Hundred-Year Conflict between Global Conservation and Native Peoples Published by MIT Press, 2009. ISBN-10:0-262-01261-8.
[5] Ibid. (p.xvi intro.)
[6] Ibid.
[7] op. cit. Glüsing and Klawitter.
[8] op. cit. Dowie (p.xix)
[9] op. cit. (p. xx)
[10] op. cit. Glüsing, Klawitter.
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘Romania: Elite Hunting Spree Sparks Calls For Better Animal’, rferl.org/ September 12, 2012.
[13] ‘Royal row over Russian bear fate’ BBC News, October 2006.
[14] ‘William and Harry fly to Spain to hunt wild boar to celebrate the end of Harry’s helicopter training’ By Rebecca English, Royal Correspondent, 17 January 2012.
[15] Op-Ed: King Juan Carlos not the only questionable association for WWF’ By Elizabeth Batt, http://www.digitaljournal.com April 2012.
[16] ‘Way Beyond Greenwashing: Have Corporations Captured Big Conservation?” by J. Latham, Independent Science News.org.
[17] op. cit. Glüsing, Klawitter.
[18] ‘Cambodia Rejects CNN, WWF Reports about Mekong Dolphin’ June 24 2009. CRI English, Xinhua.
[19] op.cit. La Rouche et al.
[20] Ibid.
[21] IUCN’s African Elephant Status Report 2007 | ‘Asian Elephant distribution’. EleAid. 2007.
[22] ‘The oligarchs’ real game is killing animals and killing people’ by Allen Douglas, EIR.1994.
[23] ‘What’s Wrong with “Sustainable Use”?’ June 1994 Animal People http://www.animalpeople.org
[24] Ibid.
[25] op. cit. Phillipson.
[26]‘Can Mercenary Management stop poaching in Africa?’ Animal People, April 1999. http://www.animalpeople.org
[27] op. cit. Douglas.
[28] Private Conservation Case Study: Private Conservation and Black Rhinos in Zimbabwe: The Savé Valley and Bubiana Conservancies, by Michael De Alessi January 2000.
[29] “Pretoria inquiry confirms secret battle for the rhino”. The Independent. 18 January 1996.

 

Dark Green IV: 1001 Club, WWF & Green-Washing

By M.K. Styllinski

“I have never been noticeably reticent about talking on subjects about which I know nothing.”

– Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, Meeting of Industrialists 1961


WWFJust as there are many environmental organisations and advocacy groups who do extraordinary work for the planet’s environment and wildlife, there are also those that have their roots in eco-fascism and technocratic social engineering. For the sake of brevity and to remain on topic, we shall single out the WWF as an example of this “green mask” as well as its relationship to Prince Philip and corporate sponsorship.

The Nature Conservancy was founded by Royal Charter in 1949 and one of the four official research organisations under the British royalty’s Privy Council. It allowed for the legal protection of National Nature Reserves and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). After writing the legislation for the body, Edward Max Nicholson became its head in 1952 deeming it important enough to leave his government post as permanent secretary to the deputy Prime Minister. Though he stepped down as Director-General in 1966 he remained a powerful influence over conservation and the environmental movement as a whole, formulating strategy, tactics and direction for several decades. (Nicholson’s 1970 book title: The Environmental Revolution: A Guide for the New Masters of the World should give an idea where his sentiments lay…) Like his friend Julian Huxley, he was an advocate of eugenics and racial purification.

In 1931, the British policy think tank, Political and Economic Planning (PEP) took to the elite eco state with pressure from Huxley, the financier Sir Basil Blackett, the agronomist Leonard Elmhirst, the director of Marks & Spencer Israel Sieff among many others. Nicholson became chairman in 1953. [1]Being a non-governmental planning organisation financed by corporations it was perfectly suited as a pool from which members could be networked and managed to organise other initiatives and projects. [2]

Partially affiliated to the United Nations and with a constitution written by the British Foreign Office, the Swiss-based International Union for the Conservation of Nature (ICUN) was founded in 1948 by Sir Julian Huxley, bringing together 77 nations, 114 government agencies, and 640 non-governmental organizations and over 10,000 scientists, lawyers, educators, and corporate executives from 181 countries. The ICUN’s mission is: “to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to assure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.” [3]

To say that ecology is more important than any concept of human need would be to vastly underestimate the ICUN’s precepts. Working closely with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) it was this body that launched the “Global Biodiversity Strategy,” which now guides the conservancy and sustainability initiatives of many countries. The preservation of biodiversity is its primary goal. Back in 1948 however, it needed funds to survive.  The idea for a financial fund for the IUCN initially came from businessman Victor Stolan who passed his suggestion onto to Huxley who in turn, put Stolan in contact with Max Nicholson who had the intelligentsia and corporate elite at his fingertips. In 1961, with Stolan, Sir Peter Scott and Guy Mountfort, Nicholson formed the committee that would found the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) (now the World Wide Fund for Nature) officially launching the organization on April 29, with none other than Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands as its official chairman in the following year. The first staff was assembled by more Rockefeller minions, this time in the guise of Godfrey A. Rockefeller and WWF offices opened on September 11th in Morges, Switzerland.[4] Though business as usual, a cat was let out of the bag and Prince Bernhard was embroiled in the Lockheed-Martin weapons scandals in the mid-1970s where he was found guilty of accepting bribes to sell aeroplanes. Prince Philip would eventually replace Bernhard to become WWF chairman from 1981 – 1996 and continues to hold the title of President Emeritus. Princess Alexandra, first cousin to the Queen was chosen to replace him.

The WWF is a meeting point and clearing house for some of the leading European eco-oligarchical families. It is the most powerful environmental organisation in the world, active in over 100 countries. It has frequently been accused of benefiting industry more than the environment and acting as a neo-colonial tool for British interests.  Anti-pollution, endangered species and encouraging renewable energies and sustainable practice form the policy objectives of WWF. To that end, conservation areas, parks and reserves have been set up usually outside the influence of the governments within those nations. According to Executive intelligence Review many of these “ecological reserves” are used “as training grounds and safe-havens for British-backed terrorist organizations” such as the “… national parks in Africa, [which] train and protect all the “liberation fronts” under British control.” [5]

The vast wealth, social, cultural and political influence of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh should not be underestimated in this context. He is patron, chair, trustee and shareholder for many corporations, committees, bodies, boards, panels, commissions and military ranks, which, as one biography mentions: “… cover sixty-six close typed pages in his Patronage Book at Buckingham Palace.” [6]The WWF was and remains dear to his heart. Remember that the handlers behind Sir Julian Huxley and his ideas for getting the general public and lower tier power brokers to “think the unthinkable” was to engage in a form of eco-Intelpro, where environmentalism would act as a mask for eugenics and other World State applications. For Prince Philip and his ilk, environmentalism, neo-feudalism and eugenics are inextricably linked. As author Walter William Kay observes: “During a 1960 tour of Africa, on the eve of the launching of the WWF, Huxley openly boasted that the ecology movement would be the principal weapon used by the British oligarchy to impose a Malthusian world order over the dead body of the nation-state system, and, most importantly, the United States.” [7]

By the time WWF had entered the 1970s and the waning influence and disappointment of the counter-culture, Philip, Bernhard and their associates were creating a funding base not just for the WWF, but for the hundreds of new environmental and ecology-based organisations appearing all over the world. There was a new generation to hijack and deploy “… as the storm-troopers of the new ‘green’ fascism.” This fund was named the “1001: A Nature Trust” or the “1001 Club” among its members. It was so called because Philip wanted to hand pick 1001 members of the crème de la crème of corporate elite. It was in reality a green Bilderberg Group  packed with the same brand of European corporatists and Synarchists. By far the greatest number of members were drawn from the heads of the banking cartels and with an initial fee of £10,000 members could enter the inner sanctum of ecological visions.

Prince_Philip__Duke_of_EdinburghPrince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, 1961 Meeting of Industrialists 1961

Maj. Louis Mortimer Bloomfield was a 1001 Club charter member, and a motley crew of known criminals such as arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi and former Zairian dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, Robert Vesco, Edmond Safra and Sheikh Ali Ahmed, also happened to be on board and who became more widely known for their connection to Prince Bernhard when they were exposed by the Financial Times at the time of the Lockheed Scandal. Eco-guru Maurice Strong, also a member of the 1001 Club did his part in placing WWF at the centre of public awareness and the Establishment by sponsoring Earth Day, closely followed by the UN sponsored Stockholm conference which birthed the UNEP and Strong’s future eco-vehicle for the most potent global warming and sustainable development/SMART society propaganda.

In Executive Intelligence Review’s ground-breaking report “The Coming Fall of the House of Windsor” evidence is presented that is very hard to deny yet still largely ignored in the MSM. Prince Philip and the House of Windsor is charged with heading the “Club of Isles” which is made up of green NGOs, organisations, corporations and councils, with Queen Elizabeth as the “chief executive officer.” The Club brings together the political and financial power base of intermarried European Royals and dynasty families which extends from Scandinavia to Greece. What this means is that there is eco-fascism at work which employs the same monopolistic methods of both the early Round Table Movement, its corporate cousin the Round Table of Industrialists and other power brokers to accomplish the same ends. Once again, as the global Red Shield Masters of financial directives, the House of Rothschild lie behind its inception as founding members of this interlocking membership of eco-fascists. Accordingly, we have:

“… a new British imperial revival, modeled on the eighteenth and nineteenth century British East India Company, with its private armies, and its corporate sovereignty over large tracts of land, ripped from the hands of nation-states. Today, relics of the heyday of the British Empire, such as Crown Associates and the Corps of Commissionaires, are directly running the affairs of state for such London puppets as [ ] Museveni, and are deploying private armies made up of “former” British SAS officers, now employed by companies such as Executive Outcomes, Defense Systems, Ltd., KAS, KMS, etc. Under the new imperial mandate, the agenda is now explicitly the depopulation of the globe. [8]

WWF and its sister organisation the IUCN has dedicated themselves to reducing the world’s population and controlling the world’s resources so that they stay in the clutches of an updated and modernized British and Anglo-Dutch Empire and their  ties to globalist groups. True to form, the push for a world government is a tacit requirement for its continuance, something which the WWF have dutifully advocated. [9]  Cecil Rhode’s Round Table with Rothschild money; Fabian cross-overs and much of the Anglo-American and Anglo-Dutch Elite lie firmly under the auspices of the Club of Isles, which draws its ideology from the British East India Company and its freemasonic roots in the late sixteenth century, the personification of British Empire’s early corporatism as conquest. Once the company had its royal charter from the Crown then the fortunes of British Aristocracy and elite families was secure.

Where and how does the Queen obtain her wealth? She is the richest woman in the world after all, with a tidy sum of at least $13 billion to her name. Being exempt from disclosing her innumerable holdings it is likely that the fortune is much, much greater. Some of these corporations and holdings operating in Africa are infused with British political directives partially or wholly owned by the Crown:

  • Anglo-American Corp. of South Africa, Ltd – the largest mining company in the world built from the Diamond trade of the Oppenhiemer family with financial support from JP Morgan and The Rothschilds;
  • RTZ Corp. PLC. The second-largest mining company in the world.
  • De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd. Set up by Cecil Rhodes with Rothschilds’ support to monopolise world diamond production.
  • Barclays PLC. The primary banking cartel in Africa and Europe and membership of the 1001 Club and helped to co-found WWF.
  • Shell Trading & Transport PLC and Shell U.K. Ltd. – World’s largest petrochemical producer.
  • N.M. Rothschild & Sons Ltd. – One of the original families from the Hapsburg Empire and groomed and financed Cecil Rhodes’ exploitation of Africa’s gold and diamonds.
  • Imperial Chemical Industries PLC. (ICI) – Formed in 1926 by Lord Melchett. The present Lord Melchett, grandson of ICI’s founder, is head of Greenpeace, United Kingdom.
  • Unilever – Owns vast plantations in Africa and the continent’s largest trading company (United Africa Co.); key part of the world food cartel, particularly in fats and edible oils. Formed by 1930s strategic merger of English Lever Brothers firm, which owned the West African heirs to the Royal Niger Co, with a Dutch company. [10]

club of isleClub of Isles connections (revamped from ‘The Coming Fall of the House of Windsor’ By Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. November 1994)

The only way such plunder can be continued is similar to the geo-political strategy favoured by her Majesty’s MI6, the MOSSAD and the CIA when they wish to claim a country for their own – create chaos and as much misery, violence and death that is proportionate to the prize.

This brings us back to one of a handful of pioneers on behalf of the British Crown: Cecil Rhodes and the British South Africa Company. It is exactly this perception of the world that informed the direction and policies of the WWF at the board level. The WWF-IUCN marriage is continuing what their 19th Century forerunners started though under an almost impenetrable cover of environmentalism and conservation. Africa has been violated, raped and plundered by the British Elite for two hundred years and is only increasing its activities as we enter the 21st century competing with American, Russian and particularly Chinese interests in the continent.

Neo-colonialism in Africa has been financed by a conglomerate of companies tasked with securing and expanding the fortunes of the Queen and the Crown Corporation of London and its bankers. Keeping civil wars and genocide intermittently turning over is essential to both land grabbing, resource catchment and long term destruction of “inferior races”. The new drive to conquer Africa has multiple benefits and it is perhaps for this reason that WWF has been so closely associated with corporate “green-washing.” The WWF claims that partnering with companies such as Coca-Cola, HSBC and Nokia will reduce their impact on the environment is both false and disingenuous. [11]With over €56 million (US $80 million) from transnational businesses in 2010 (an 8 percent increase from 2009) this is not small coinage we are talking about here. [12]  The organisation has an impressive stream of revenue from a long list of corporate, governmental, private and public sources. Millions of people donate their money around the world, contributing to its annual income of ½ billion euros a year. From just one source, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) WWF has received a total of $120 million over the last several years. [13]  So, how is it being invested?

Rwanda is an instructive example. While WWF’s national park gave refuge to the endangered species of Mountain Gorilla it also offered a safe haven for guerrillas of the Ugandan and British backed insurgency group Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) who at the time, were fighting a bloody war against Rwanda’s government and people. Much to the delight of her Majesty’s ruling elite, they have since become the ruling political party of Rwanda, led by President Paul Kagame.

eastern_lowland_gorilla_wallpaper_pc-horz

Silver-backed Mountain Gorilla (left)  Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) flag (right)

The sheer size of these parks is astounding. South Africa’s Kruger National Park is bigger than Ireland or Israel, while the Central Kalahari Game Reserve covers 51,800 square km and is larger than either Denmark and Switzerland. There are more than 1,100 national parks and related reserves in sub-Saharan Africa, of which 36 are designated World Heritage Sites. Since 1970, total protected-area coverage in Africa has increased nearly two-fold, and now encompasses 3.06 million km2 of terrestrial and marine habitats. Protected areas currently cover 15.9 percent and 10.1 percent of total land surface in the East/Southern African and West/Central African regions, respectively. [14]

It is also true that many reserves suffer from what is called “reserve isolation” ironically caused by habitat loss, fences and roads, overhunting, and disease being the most important factors. Ecologist William D. Newmark writing in Frontiers in Ecology describes:

“The ultimate drivers of protected-area isolation in Africa,” which are: “… rapid population growth, economic expansion, social and environmental human displacement, and poverty.” He continues: “Between 1975 and 2001, the human population in sub-Saharan Africa doubled, and it is expected to double again by 2034. Additionally, 42 percent of people living in the region subsist on less than one US dollar per day.” [15]

In fact, the parks have destabilised and disrupted the economic and ecosystems in Africa by: “decreasing the total energy throughput in the entire ecological system” and thus providing an open door to parasites and new strains of disease. The case of the tsetse fly seems to prove this point:

African tribesmen had long kept the tsetse fly – which carries the deadly disease Trypanosomiasis, or sleeping sickness – in check through extensive cultivation and bush clearance. The tribesmen understood that the fly lived off wild game, particularly antelope. For this reason, many tribal chiefs opposed the creation of the parks, and the related ban on hunting, as a threat to their herds. […]

Today, according to the admissions of Lee and Gerry Durrell, writing for the Conservation Monitoring Centre at Cambridge, England, an entity financed by Prince Philip’s WWF, ‘blood-sucking tsetse flies inhabit 10 million square kilometers of tropical Africa, in a wide band across the continent that takes in 34 countries.’ The authors bemoan modern-day spraying methods which have rendered new areas tsetse-free. In fact, ‘ the tsetse-free areas are growing so fast that … there is a real possibility that the spread of livestock onto marginal land will become a threat to wildlife …’ The eradication of the tsetse fly may be Africa’s misfortune.”  [16]

And it precisely the same interference in African affairs which has given rise to the serious economic situations in the continent with its inhabitants never having the chance to prepare for the future before the next Western-backed coup, land grab, manipulated famine or large-scale nature reserve to send both the social and ecological balance into chaos. Subsisting on one US dollar a day and coupled with Western foreign policy to exploit Africa any which way it can, may be linked to the rise in population growth.

When the mostly white, corporate and international banking fraternity sitting on the boards of WWF-INCU take massive swathes of African land out of circulation, this has economic consequences. The land often has resources lying beneath which can be covertly mined, harvested or extracted much to the frequent outrage of WWF subscribed members but with the sage approval of the hierarchy. The current theme we see over and over is a restricted area for humans where flora and fauna take precedence.

Harking back to Medieval England where lands and forests were sequestered for exclusive hunting by the King and his officers, this has continued first under the guise of the 19th and 20th Century colonial Elite and their obsession with hunting game and the often brutal eviction of local natives. Many early laws, conventions and colonial decrees dating from 1900-1933 paved the way for national parks which gradually drove indigenous tribes away from their homes while restricting their ability to hunt. Their naturally ecologically sound practice was overtaken by mass hunting where the European rich began to commercialise and consolidate nature in Africa. These internal frontiers within the African colonies decreed  the native population were prohibited from hunting or even walking on what was once their own land. It was to be a form of trespass under the pretext of protecting wildlife which continues to the present day, even though colonial rule appears to have long gone.

1024px-Kruger_Zebra

Two Burchell’s zebra in the central Kruger National Park, South Africa  Photo: Nithin bolar k | Location of Kruger National Park Photo: Htonl  (wikipedia)

The Kruger Park was created and named after South African President Paul Kruger in 1889 and lies along the border with the Portuguese colony of Mozambique. After the Boer War between the British and the Afrikaaners and the ecological destruction visited on the park and region by Lord Kitchener, it was re-established by Round Table member Lord Alfred Milner a close  colleague of Cecil Rhodes who was already busy stripping gold from Africa for his Rothschilds handlers. In 1902, he instructed the park’s first warden Maj. James Stevenson-Hamilton fresh from service in the Boer War to rid the park of indigenous black people. Under the banner of “anti-poaching” this took over 45 years with more than 11,000 miles of countryside ethnically cleansed. Locked out of their own parlour, black Africans were forced to find work in cities and mines following a pattern of slave labour which has continued today under corporate rule. As it was then, so it is today.

Where once tribal hunters used the animals they killed for good of the family and tribe, many are often forced to poach because history has shown that to have faith in governments that purport to protect wildlife is a false economy indeed. Corrupt governments with the help of organisations like the WWF sell animals to the highest bidder and make profits from both culling and hunting so “poachers” see no reason why they should not hunt these animals and take the profits before others do.

From the outset, destabilising the African continent was the avowed mission of British Empire agents with Rhodes and Milner two of the most well-known. The only way to secure power for the Empire was to break the spirit and land of the people. For example, from 1952 to 1960, the atrocities of the Mau Mau, an alleged secret society within the Kikuyu tribe was nothing more than a British plot to cut off the head of a Kenyan revolution against British colonial rule. Mass resettlement and severe ecological destruction ensued with many forests burnt to the ground by the British military. Kikuyu factions and tribal warfare was stimulated and encouraged by early British PSYOPS to encourage and perpetrate genocide. By exacerbating ethnic rivalries and historic enmities it reverse-engineered the revolution that was initially against the British so that it became focused on the tribes resulting in a conflagration against native peoples in the region. [17]  Most Mau Mau guerrilla units were an example of synthetic terror led by British military personnel and would serve as valuable knowledge for subsequent operations in present day warfare most notably in the genocides of Rwanda, the invasions of Iraq, Libya and the contemporary US-NATO and MOSSAD backed insurgents of the Syrian civil war. [18]

The British park system provided both cover and training for past and future operations and with the imposed tribal warfare doctrine it would define Africa for the next 100 years and beyond. By the 1960s, the British Empire was winding down from its more overt colonialism but the parks system remained a trenchant outpost of colonial rule while independence sprouted all around. Although still run by a largely British contingent the parks were now being outsourced to NGOs, shareholders and trustees unaccountable to African governments. As a consequence, the National Parks of Africa are mostly privately managed from trustees abroad.

The guerrilla war against the white minority rule of Rhodesia led by the Zimbabwe Peoples Union (ZAPU), and later the rival Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) had both groupings trained by the KGB and Chinese instructors at the Queen Elizabeth park, Gorilla Park in Uganda and the Serengeti and Ruana national parks of Tanzania.[19]The Rhodesian government deployed the Mozambique National Resistance (Renamo) a former guerrilla unit created by Rhodesian intelligence against Zimbabwe and trained in South African regional parks in Natal, and nearby Kangwane.[20] The bloody civil war to originally overthrow Portuguese colonial rule was started in the 1950s by the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) and in the 1960s its rival, the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) which lasted over 25 years. The West Zambezi Game Reserve, The Mupa National parks both played host to these warring factions.

Rwanda is a small country and much of the savannah area of the Akagera National park was re-settled by former refugees returning after the end of the Rwandan Civil War in the 1990s. In 1997 the western boundary was re-gazetted due to these land shortages and more land allocated as farms to returning refugees. The park was reduced in size from over 2,500km² to 1,200km² much to the chagrin of environmental groups. Organisations like WWF are using paramilitaries to fight poachers and to hold onto the land come what may. Whether this is strictly for the good of the parks and reserves or to maintain land for strategic and resource purposes is still a moot point. Many of the parks straddle the borders of neighbouring countries and despite being administered by UN agencies they are still effectively “militarised zones.” As journalist Linda La Hoyos describes: “Prince Philip’s WWF was administering the gorilla program in the Virunga Park, while the RPF was using the Virunga to maraud Rwanda.”

She goes on to write:

“In fact, RPF-sponsor Uganda has been profiting from the dislocation of the gorillas caused by the RPF operations. According to Africa Analysis, the RPF invasion had sent Rwanda’s gorillas running to Uganda, giving Museveni the opportunity to launch his own ‘eco-tourism program.’ Without the safe havens, provided by the royal family’s park system, the protracted civil and border wars afflicting Africa since the 1970s would have been impossible.” [21]

There are many ways to fleece a continent, but none prove more fruitful than the through the camouflage of charitable aid.

While conservation groups have been sounding the alarm on the plight of the elephant and calling for a ban on the sale of ivory, the WWF maintained nothing was wrong with the elephant population. When they eventually and grudgingly launched a campaign to assist the elephants in Uganda they set up a camp on the Rwandan border curiously more than 1,000 miles away from the main elephant colony in Murchison National Park. But it was from this exact location that the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) would invade Rwanda not long after and the events set in motion that would lead to genocide and human “culling.” Coincidence or forethought?

The game plan at the time and which has since been successful was to: “… destroy Rwanda and Burundi, turning the remains into satellites of Ugandan (British) domination; destroy Kenya by overthrowing [the government] and instigating tribal warfare; and seize mineral-rich eastern Zaire.”  [22]

Did WWF covertly assist in this neo-colonial warfare?

 


Notes

[1] p.210; Memories By J.S. Huxley, Published by Allen & Unwin, 1970 | ISBN 0-04-925006-X | British Archives at http://www.aim25.ac.uk/ archive reference code: GB 0097 PEP/PSI.
[2] ‘WWF in the 60’s’. wwf.panda.org.
[3] http://www.iucn.org/
[4] In Memoriam: Godfrey A. Rockefeller, Kerry Zobor (World Wildlife Fund). January 29, 2010.
[5] ‘How The Green Fascist Movement Was Created’ by Marcia Merry and Joseph Brewda, Executive Intelligence Review, July 18, 1997.
[6] ‘The English Environmental Elite, Global Warming,and The Anglican Church’ by William Walter Kay, 2000. http://www.ecofascism.com
[7] Ibid.
[8] ‘Tinny Blair Blares For Prince Philip’s Global Eco-Fascism’ by Jeffrey Steinberg Executive Intelligence Review, July, 1997
[9] Eco-logic papers ‘global governance’ Sep/October 1997. http://www.freedom.org/el-97/sep97/tocSep97-97.htm
[10x] ‘The Coming of the Fall of the House of Windsor.’ By Lyndon La Rouche, JosephBrewda, Mark Burdman, Carlos CotaMeza, Linda de Hoyos, Allen Douglas, William Engdahl, Manuel Hidalgo, Ken Kronberg, Hugo Lopez Ochoa, Rogelio Maduro, Marcia Merry, Silvia Palacios, Ana Maria Phau, David Ramonet, Raynald Rouleau, Michael Sharp, John Sigerson, Dennis Small, Gretchen Small, Jeffrey Steinberg, Geraldo Teran, Scott Thompson, Charles Tuttle, and Anthony Wikrent. Other collaborators contributed information from Asia, Africa, and Ibero-America. The project editor was Susan Welsh., Executive Intelligence Review. November 1994.
[11] http://www.wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/how_we_work/businesses/
[12] ‘Panda-ing to the Soya Barons?’ Corporate Watch, September 30, 2009 | ‘Ikea – you can’t build a green reputation with a flatpack DIY manual’ by Fred Pearce, The Guardian, April 2, 2009.
[13] ‘Green Veneer WWF Helps Industry More than Environment’ By Jens Glüsing and Nils Klawitter issue 22/2012 (26 May 12) of Der Spiegel.
[14] ‘Isolation of African protected areas’ by William D Newmark, Front Ecol Environ 2008; 6(6): 321–328, doi:10.1890/070003.
[15] Ibid.
[16] ‘World Wide Fund for Nature commits genocide in Africa’ by Linda de Hoyos, “The True Story Behind the Fall of the House of Windsor,” Executive Intelligence Review, Special Report, September 1997.
[17] Gangs and Counter Gangs by Col. Frank Kitson, Published by Barrie & Rockcliff, 1960 | ASIN: B0000CKJUV
[18] ‘NATO Death Squads Attempt to Ethnically Divide Syria’ – Refugees fleeing NATO’s “Free Syrian Army,” not government troops. By Tony Cartalucci, Global Research, July 23, 2012. | ‘British intelligence enabled Syrian rebels to launch devastating attacks on President Assad’s regime, official says – Disclosure is first indication of Britain playing a covert role in the civil war Intelligence from Cyprus ‘being passed through Turkey to the rebels’ Daily Mail, By Leon Watson, 19 August 2012.
[19] ‘The African parks were created as a cover for destabilization’ By Joseph Brewda, Executive Intelligence Review, 1994.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22] op.cit. Brewda.

See also: WWF International accused of ‘selling its soul’ to corporations

“Geneva-based WWF International has received millions of dollars from its links with governments and business. Global corporations such as Coca-Cola, Shell, Monsanto, HSBC, Cargill, BP, Alcoa and Marine Harvest have all benefited from the group’s green image only to carry on their businesses as usual.”

World State Policies IX: Food as a Weapon and GM Crops Unleashed

“If you control oil, you control nations. If you control food, you control people.”

– Henry Kissinger


henrykissinger“Food is power! We use it to change behaviour. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize.” So said past Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, Catherine Bertini.

One can imagine that humility may be very low down on the list of qualities for a person voted “the most powerful woman in the world” by The Times of London newspaper in 1996. And by a spooky quirk of fate, Bertini is also a member of the Advisory Council at Rockefeller College on Public Affairs and Policy, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations and a Senior Fellow of the Rockefeller supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation. If her Elite membership doesn’t tell you all you need to know from the outset then her mentor Henry Kissinger will place her remarks in context.

One of a number of Elite pensioners who seem to live forever while avoiding any kind of accountability for their crimes, Kissinger is one of the most reviled and revered elder Statesman who has never left the political game. CEO of Kissinger Associates, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and a long-time Bilderberger, he is the public face of those who prefer to remain out of the spotlight. He has strong ties to the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), JP Morgan Chase Bank, the Rockefeller Foundation and is international advisor to the Hollinger Group. He has held many public office positions including Head of the State Department and National Security Council under Nixon in the late 1960s and early 70s. He received the Noble Peace Prize in 1973 despite being instrumental in creating the Vietnam and Yom Kippur war between Egypt / Syria and Israel.

henry_kissinger

Kissinger 1971 (wikipedia)

Kissinger’s presence has been around like a persistent stain on the carpet of US geo-politics since the 1950s and no matter what truth rises to the surface, the old man still appears on T.V. shows and gives authoritative interviews despite volumes of evidence for his crimes including conspiracy to commit murder, kidnap, alleged child rape and torture. He encouraged the Kurds to take up arms against Saddam Hussein in 1972-75 and then abandoned them to a slow death; his participation in the promotion of South African apartheid; the destabilisation of Angola; the whitewashing of Central American death-squads; political protection for the Pahlavi dynasty in Iran and its system of torture and repression; the genocide of civilian populations in Indochina; the planning of the coup in Chile and the assassination of democratically elected President Salvador Allende and many other crimes extending to Bangladesh, Cyprus, East Timor, and Washington, D.C.

So, it was fitting that Kissinger would continue his crimes undetected by coming up with the policy to use food as a weapon. [1]

On Dec. 10, 1974, a 200 page classified study (later de-classified in the 1990s) was completed by the US National Security Council called: “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” Overseen by Kissinger, it landed on his desk for review and then on to President General Ford to be adopted as official policy in 1975.  The basic thrust of the study followed the same Malthusian line that population growth in developing countries was a threat to US National Security and therefore had to be curbed by overt and covert means. The former was to be birth control and the latter, the creation of war and famine. It just happened to neatly coincide with political and strategic interests which were underway in countries that were chosen for depopulation. These included: India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Turkey, Nigeria, Egypt, Mexico, Brazil and Colombia. The power status of each of these countries could not be allowed to exceed the level that would put US interests at risk. The report stated: “Already the most populous country on the continent, with an estimated 55 million people in 1970, Nigeria’s population by the end of this century is projected to number 135 million. This suggests a growing political and strategic role for Nigeria, at least in Africa.” [2] Which certainly wouldn’t do since America had grand plans for an unimpeded resource grab. US economic dominance and population control strategies converge in the following paragraph:

The U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries [see National Commission on Materials Policy, Towards a National Materials Policy: Basic Data and Issues, April 1972]. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States [3] [Emphasis mine]

Many, if not most of the problems now experienced in the developing world are a direct result of Western economic policy. Rockefeller Foundation, Planned Parenthood International and others were still busy in India pushing through birth control policies under threat of economic sanctions just as Kissinger was suggesting to withhold food supplies unless mass birth control became standard practice:

“There is also some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements by AID [U.S. Agency for International Development] and consultative groups. Since population growth is a major determinant of increases in food demand, allocation of scarce PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relations, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion.” [4]

Spoken like a true Machiavellian. He continued:

“Mandatory programs may be needed and we should be considering these possibilities now,” adding: “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? … Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?” [5]

It was only in the late 1980’s that the Brazilian Ministry of Health began investigating reports of systematic sterilisation of Brazilian women and was amazed to find that: “… an estimated 44 percent of all Brazilian women aged between 14 and 55 had been permanently sterilized,” while older women had been sterilized fourteen years before at the start of the program. As they pursued their investigations various American and some Brazilian organisations and agencies were found to be involved including the US Pathfinder Fund, International Planned Parenthood Federation, the Association for Voluntary Surgical Contraception, Family Health International – all under the guiding hand of the US Agency for International Development (USAID). [6]

The NSSM 200 study allowed what was essentially a eugenics-based National Security policy for depopulation to secretly develop in third world countries enhancing and expanding the work already carried out by Rockefeller minions twenty years before. Using euphemisms such as “family planning” and “population explosion” the propaganda of imminent population growth tied to the availability of strategic minerals could advance world Establishment designs in a way that had not been possible before the Nixon-Kissinger double act.

Author on geopolitics F. William Engdahl wrote from his 2007 book Seeds of Destruction:

While arguing for reducing global population growth by 500 million people by the year 2000, Kissinger noted elsewhere in his report that the population problem was already causing 10 million deaths yearly. In short he advocated doubling the death rate to at least 20 million, in the name of addressing the problem of deaths due to lack of sufficient food. The public would be led to believe that the new policy, at least what would be made public, was a positive one. In the strict definition of the UN Convention of 1948, it was genocide. […]

Kissinger was, in effect, a hired hand within the Government, but not hired by a mere President of the United States. He was hired to act and negotiate on behalf of the most powerful family within the post-war US establishment at the time — the Rockefellers. [7]

The Rockefeller Foundation had already established itself as part of the factions behind post war Washington policy where oil, defence and global agriculture were all integral to the expansion of American hegemony. Or in Kissinger’s words: “If you control oil, you control nations. If you control food, you control people.” [8]

Food as a weapon is nothing new but the consolidation of this tactic has reached a degree of technological sophistication not seen for hundreds of years. By 1974, the biggest six companies controlling 95 percent of world food were (and still are) Cargill, Continental, Louis Dreyfus, Bunge, André, and Archer Daniels, Midland / Töpfer all of whom are spawned from an Anglo-Dutch-Swiss food cartel, though all based in the US.

Under the rationale of “efficiency” and “maximizing profit ratios” US agriculture policy drove hundreds of thousands of family farmers into bankruptcy in order to pave the way for the monolithic machine of agribusiness, where the remaining farmers would exist only as serfs to trans-national corporations’ production methods. William Pearce, Cargill’s vice-president of Public Affairs was instrumental in this domination. He was on President Nixon’s 1974 Committee for Economic Development and made sure that US trade policy would leave a clear run for American agrichemical business to monopolize the world market in seeds, pesticides and most importantly, genetically modified plants. From that moment on, corporations like Cargill and Archer Daniels would not only reorganize farming policy but work to create a new one.

cargill

Cargill food giant logo

All legislation regarding family farm protections were phased out in favour of a rapidly deregulated “free market.” Just like the 2008 financial warfare perpetrated by Goldman Sacs et al and the federally mandated use of billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money in bailouts, so too Nixon’s farming policy was to change the face of America and the very nature of food. Wall St. only saw dollar signs as the social fabric of farming was torn apart.

The net result of such a systematic grab for power meant that Third World countries were especially vulnerable to these predator corporations who wanted to divert all self-sufficient and sustainable operations into a long-distance relationship of dependency where only fruits, sugar, coffee and vegetables would feature. US grains and other products were offered in return for payment by exporting their fruit and vegetables. This was to be the open door to massive worker exploitation and the loss of domestic food production. It was to signal the arrival of huge fields with cheaper yields dependent on a host of chemical products while the local and often ancient farming practices either instantly died or were absorbed into mechanised and synthetic “efficiency.”

Rather than ensuring that local farmers could provide for their communities by planting high-protein/high calorie crops and even sell the excess abroad at competitive prices, corporations oversaw the rise of a New World of poverty and its underclass, comprehensively denying them the assistance and ability to become self-sufficient in a monopoly that was both ecologically damaging as it was extraordinarily myopic. Cheap imports devalued their economies whilst access to their land was denied. Ensuring healthy, local economies could prosper was never the objective of American agri-business. Exploitation and ruthless stripping of the land, culture and people was the only way forward to ensure maximum profits divorced from limitations, morals and values.

The infamous General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) underwent several incarnations before finally being replaced with the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1993, fully operational by 1995. During President Richard Nixon’s tenure and through the auspices of the GATT Toyko round he was able to give carte blanche to the new global agribusiness export agenda while ensuring that developing countries would never gain their own independent food production. Nixon proposed to Congress a new way of managing trade negotiations which were termed “fast track”, for which Congress had to vote “yes” or “no” on a particular trade agreement. All changes to U.S. law had to conform to its terms – without any amendments. This was typical of the Kissinger-Nixon tag team. Under fast track, not only had Congress to conduct a vote within a brief 60 to 90 days of the President’s submission of the agreement, but the subsequent debate had to be limited to 20 hours.

As Congress was effectively removed from the negotiation process this opened the way for Nixon’s idea for a system of advisory groups and think-tanks drawn from the private sector. These appointed groups have enormous power and influence. Closed to public scrutiny, the documents are confidential with security clearances in operation for representatives. Indeed, the documents themselves are virtually unreadable to any but the initiated. Independent presidential candidate and social activist Ralph Nader wrote: “Once the agreements are completed – or on those rare occasions when a draft of the agreements is “liberated” – any person who wants to figure out what the agreements say faces a Herculean task. The agreements are very complex and written in arcane, almost impenetrable technical jargon that bears only a passing resemblance to the English language.” [9]

richard-nixon-and-henry-kissinger-1972

Puppets & players on a mission: Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger 1972

This obfuscation is intentional. The last thing the high priests of unfettered corporatism want is for the public, media or any democratic body casting a curious eye over agreements which are inherently anti-human. The big transnational food corporations intend to keep the public ignorant of trade agreements and excluded from the approval process as they know full well that if they were cross-examined the practices would be seen for what they are – a product of unrestrained, cartel capitalism.

What is perhaps the most dangerous development is the use of genetically modified foodstuffs under the pretext of feeding the world’s poor which were made poor by the very same entities and for that very same purpose.

The success of the WTO was mainly down to the Cargill Corporation’s aggressive lobbying of Congress (otherwise known as mass-bribing) through the auspices of the influential Business Round Table group (An off-shoot of the Round Table of European Industrialists) which is an alliance of corporatists pushing for total deregulation of trade. In other words, limitless exploitation of the world’s resources without national borders or bureaucracy. This lobbying took the form of a WTO paper entitled: “The WTO Agreement on Agriculture” which was penned by a gaggle of corporate plunderers such as Cargill, Monsanto, DuPont, Nestlé, Unilever, and others. [10]Most of these companies had many thousands of patents on new trans-genic plants. It was to be a perfect platform for GMO companies like Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences, and Syngenta to merge their monocultures towards the 4Cs: commercialisation, consolidation and centralisation leading to absolute control of the world’s food and its destiny.

The WTO’s remit was to be primarily a global free trade enforcer, a supranational entity fuelled by the insatiable drive of agribusiness and therefore answerable only to private agribusiness companies. Lip-service was paid to the plaintive cries for accountability because it had real power compared to the less efficient GATT agreements of the past. That usually means if the socio-economic and GMO order is not adhered to, the WTO can levy financial penalties to keep countries in line with the agribusiness agenda. For that reason, the WTO was designed to be above the laws of nations, answerable to no public body beyond its own walls. As we shall see presently, this organisation was to be used as the primary means by which genetically modified food and crops would become dominant in the world agriculture market.

By the time the 1986 Uruguay round of GATT talks had arrived and after a successful dismantling of public health and safety provisions in the US and the onset of rapid financial deregulation care of the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, agribusiness was primed to road test its new WTO toy. World cereals and grain supplies, meat, dairy, edible oils and fats, sugar, fruits and vegetables and all forms of spices are controlled by these corporations which operate as a food cartel working in tandem with the various principles of World State visionaries. They can apply enormous pressure to the West and developing countries. In combination with financial warfare and the “shock doctrine”of the World Bank and IMF, infrastructure support and capital goods are routinely denied and so too the possibility for self-reliance and self-sufficiency if a country doesn’t wish to play the game of cartel economics.

Thanks to historic monopolies forged in the dim and distant past these corporations have had a progressively ruthless stranglehold on much of the third world. Most countries don’t have any choice but to import from the food cartel’s export regions or see their populations starve. The shocking disappearance of thousands of global farmers is testament to the power of the food cartel and the crucial part they play in the 4Cs.  $90 million in grants for molecular biology and genetic research were dispensed by the Rockefeller Foundation between 1932 -1957, excited at the prospect of seeing their passion for social engineering bolstered by these new fields of science. For the Rockefellers, eugenics was about to become turbo-charged with much greater advances in manipulating the human mind and body.

GMOslabelling

10 Scientific Studies Proving GMOs Can Be Harmful To Human Health

With the Rockefeller Foundation’s well-established web of micro-biologists and bio-technicians spanning the globe the next war against natural food and human health of the most vulnerable was to proceed. On December 9, 1959, with some extra support from the Ford Foundation and the Philippines government, the Rockefeller’s International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) was established. The Institute’s research headquarters are located on the University of the Philippines campus in Los Baos, south of the Philippine capital, Manila, the largest non-profit agricultural research centre in Asia. With offices in 11 other countries, agricultural research institutes, international development agencies, and philanthropic organisations recently celebrated its 50th anniversary with much back slapping and congratulations by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation who have continued to support its work with hefty donations.

With close ties to business, government and biotech industries in the Philippines, the Manila bulletin gushes about the influence of the Institute and lays out the philanthropic Rockefeller script we’ve come to know so well: “In the 50 years of IRRI, the institute’s work has helped feed much of the world’s population, reduce poverty and hunger, improve the health of rice farmers and consumers, and ensure that rice production is environmentally sustainable. IRRI’s high-yielding rice varieties have helped significantly increase world rice production, especially in Asia, saving millions from famine while protecting the environment and training thousands of researchers.” [11]

In fact, the above quote is a woeful misrepresentation of the big picture riding on the assumption that global monoculture farming methods have been a grand success for all concerned, rather than the obvious ecological and social disaster they truly are. Yet, still the Rockefeller Foundation and its enormous corporate and civil society connections thrives on its perceived innovation and philanthropy. The IRRI is major player in the corporate take-over of Asia and its food. Sustainability and assisting sections of the population living in poverty is just another cynical ruse, though many of those employed by these companies no doubt want to believe the fantasy.

Over several decades IRRI has genetically modified over 300 High Yielding Varieties (HYVs) and as Dr Richard Hindmarsh of the University of Queensland points out, prior to such attempts to improve on nature over 100,000 different rice varieties thrived in farmers’ fields. [12] Yet once agribusiness technology tore into natural crop diversity and the ecological balance which existed then it was not long before the natural varieties became extinct, often without seed documentation or collection. Once a monoculture dominates, their genetic uniformity is inherently weaker with increasing vulnerability to disease, pest invasions, biological stress and weed proliferation due to intensive fertiliser use. Intensive farming becomes a false economy since it cannot exist without the inflow of high quantities of pesticides, herbicides and the deployment of massive irrigation projects, all of which destroy communities and eventually the land.

riceRegarding the PR of high yields of rice, with expanding irrigated land and large-scale chemical fertiliser use, IRRI claims that there was significant increase from 2.3 percent per annum before 1964 to 4.5 percent between 1965 and 1980. However, as the Food Security Fact Sheet states, IRRI rice yields at their research farm actually decreased: “… at a rate of 1.25 percent per year from 1966 to 1987, a decline of 27.5 percent in 21 years. From 1966 to 1980, the yield from a variety named IR8 fell from 9.5 tons per hectare to about 2 tons per hectare while still receiving 120 kilograms of pure nitrogen fertilizer per hectare. Yet by 1990, IR8 and similar varieties were planted on about 80 percent of Philippine rice crop area.” [13]

Foundations and NGOs lay the groundwork for a new colonisation under the mantle of philanthropy, which is why IRRI’s annual reports from 1963-1982 show grants from a multitude of US and European chemical corporations from such as Monsanto, Shell Chemical, Union Carbide Asia, Bayer Philippines, Eli Lilly, Occidental Chemical, Ciba Geigy (later part of Novartis Seeds / Syngenta), Chevron Chemical, Upjohn, Hoechst, and Cyanamid Far East. [14] With bio-safety and regulatory frameworks still to be implemented or reinstated, this new form of monopoly is set to continue regardless of the consequences to ordinary people on the ground. Even IRRI’s host country the Philippines, has been importing increasing amounts of rice every year despite following IRRI’s programs with religious conviction. This is in part caused by geography and climate but the heavy use of insecticide and the resultant poor soil content also caused financial and health-related health problems for farmers, the effects of which were inevitably passed onto consumers.

Marketed and promoted by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations and their bid to gain control over the world’s rice supply and replace it with GM varieties, the IRRI was a big player in riding the mythological wave of this “Green Revolution” and the tag-line of “solving the world’s hunger problem.” A concentrated effort to neglect indigenous rice varieties with a proven high yield was put into action as the start of a multi-pronged campaign to push the developing world into the palm of biotechnology. [15] The IRRI; the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation; UN development Program; the World Bank and several other environmental and agribusiness organisations formed a global steering Group on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR) established in 1972. The much vaunted “success” of this Green Revolution was given a major thumb’s down by Philippines’ famers during a CGIAR Annual General Meeting in 2002 near the offices of IRRI. Demonstrations and street protests called for both institutions to be dismantled with statements decrying the record of the IRRI and CGIAR believing them to be “failed research institutions.” Farmers made it clear that they believed: “… a genuine, farmer-centred research institution should develop technologies that shall liberate farmers from dependence on any agro-chemical TNC [Trans-National Corp.] promote sustainable agriculture, conserve the environment, and protect the health of farmers.” [16]

One of the world’s leading experts on rice science Dr. R.H. Richaria, has been warning of the real nature of the “Green Revolution” since the 1980s. His concern over the severe disturbance of the agro-ecological balance has led to: “… intensive use of inputs such as genetically uniform seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, and water and energy, [which] certainly resulted in major environmental degradation, including salinity, soil erosion, desertification, chemical pollution of land and waterways, die-back, loss of crop diversity, and the turning of renewable resources, such as soil and water, into non-renewable resources.” [17]

gmoratios

Source: Issues Surrounding Genetically Modified (GM) Products’ by Subhuti Dharmananda, Ph.D., Director, Institute for Traditional Medicine, Portland, Oregon

The global farming revolution was part of an ambitious strategy to steer the world from agriculture towards agribusiness, with an exclusively GM-centred production line. A global concentration of hybrid seed patents would be in the hands of just a few seed companies. The in-built sell-by-date of these GM seeds meant that farmers were forced into a modern-day form of bonded labour from which it is almost impossible to escape.

The creation of vast tracts of land for the planting GM crops displaced many peasant families and communities who wound up in in the poorest parts of cities and therefore vulnerable to exploitation by those same companies who were always on the look-out for cheap labour. Moreover, developing nations were forced into debt to pay for the expensive technology that produced initially high yields only to rapidly fade in the middle to long-term thus becoming the hook to purchase more and more “add-ons” to sustain the fertility of soil and crops. Those who could not afford it had to borrow the money but with interest rates so high many peasant farmers lost their farms (and generations of farming history) to larger land-owners sponsored by trans-national companies. World Bank loans were easily extended while the banking cartels quite literally, had a field day.

The main task of CGIAR was to achieve excellence in the field of agronomy and agricultural science in general and to apply monoculture production back in the US and the developing world. From that blitzkrieg it laid the foundation for the “Green Revolution” which was in fact the pretext for the “Gene Revolution” and the distribution of GMO-based farming, riding on the wave of a deregulated free market. It followed the same 4Cs formula as John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil where the once the seed was planted and in the right way, it was just a matter of time before the planter could monopolise the whole garden and control the parameters of production so that they serve multiple objectives benefiting only the “Master.” Once families like the Rockefellers controlled the food supply they were able to extend their reach over a hundreds of companies and their subsidiaries in the supply line, from petroleum and agrichemicals to irrigation projects and food aid.

Behind this façade of helping the world’s poor quite apart from the obvious ecological and health dangers Rockefellers’ remit is to introduce the science of eugenics (social biology, Planned Parenthood etc.) through as many of societies’ domains as it can. Genetic modification of food is one such important spoke in the wheel. The food chain would be under corporate control matching the aspirations underpinning the human genome program.

Using the banner of a Green Revolution, the agri-chemical business has expanded into Africa courtesy of the Rockefellers and Bill & Melinda Gates foundation’s innocently named ‘The Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa’ (AGRA). Its advisory board of directors is riddled with Rockefeller go-betweens such as Strive Masiyiwa, Board Chair (Rockefeller Foundation) Jeff Raikes, Co-Chair, Programs and Policy Committee, (Rockefeller Foundation); Judith Rodin, Co-Chair, Programs and Policy Committee (Rockefeller foundation); Akinwumi Adesina, Associate Director, (Rockefeller Foundation) Pamela K. Anderson, Director of the Agricultural Development Program, (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation) [18]

Different name, same story.

Looking at the website you would be forgiven for thinking that so many happy, smiling faces denotes an agricultural future where all such agendas and drawbacks are fantasies of the pessimistic and deranged. Africans will be saved from their poverty by the goodness of a corporate West and their utopian world of hybrid seeds and high yields. That is, if you forget that a chemically saturated Africa and the diminishing returns of GM foods will mean that the long-term health and prosperity of Africa and its people is under question.

Amid the UN sex trafficking and abuse scandals Kofi Annan is no stranger to being used as an Establishment tool should the salary be sufficient. Annan’s job as Board Chair Emeritus of AGRA is to penetrate GM crops deep into the African heartland. Along with the geo-political shenanigans of AFRICOM, AGRA represents the same resource grabbing goals dressed up as agricultural emancipation. With the help of the World Bank, USAID, Monsanto, CGIAR member Syngenta AG of Switzerland, handsomely paid African scientists awash with sweeteners, incentives, sponsorships and initiatives, Africa’s governments are being seduced into accepting a New African Order of biotechnology.

logo

The GM crop leaders are presently the United States, Canada, India, Argentina, Brazil, and China. 1996 – 2006 saw the biggest leap in the production of genetically modified foodstuffs and crops with new countries signing up including South Africa, Paraguay, Uruguay and Australia. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) has stated that the world’s farmers planted 148m hectares of genetically modified crops in 29 countries in 2009. The USA is the leader in GM cultivation at 66.8m hectares over 2 million more than the previous year. [19]

Brazil’s economic boom (and inevitable bust sometime in the future) has meant that Genetically Modified Organisms have been included in the ascent with some 10m hectares planted since 2008 overtaking Argentina as the second-biggest grower in 2010. By 2011, that had reached 303,000 km2. [20] 50 percent of GM crops grown worldwide were grown in developing countries, with the largest increase in Brazil in the same year. There has also been rapid and continuing expansion of GM cotton varieties in India since 2002 (Cotton is a major source of vegetable cooking oil and animal feed) with 106,000 km2 of GM cotton harvested in India in 2011.

By 2004, global GM crop acreage had hit the 167 million mark. By 2010, Latin America had been breached with Mexico, Chile, Colombia, Honduras and Costa Rica all yielding an average of 0.1 million hectares. Negligible but present nonetheless. Asia and Latin America are providing many hectares set aside for GM crops and associated biotechnology. The rise in GM farming is likely to increase year by year on these continents and in the developing world.

Agri-business makes the idea of choice a pipe dream. Soyabean crops have wreaked ecological destruction on much of Latin America producing huge profits for invested companies. Soya and herbicide resistant crops remain the most popular products that farmers ending up needing once stuck on the monoculture system. GM crop production is still not popular with Europeans due to an ethical and environmental reasoning which has expressed itself through an organised activist movement at local and national levels. Europe is also subject to clear restrictions on growing GM crops. Nevertheless, creeping acreage is appearing with GM maize production having taken place in Spain, Portugal, Germany and France and more recently in the Czech Republic, Sweden, Poland, Slovakia and Romania, all with an average of 0.1 million hectares. [21]

As Africa is invaded by Chinese, European and American corporations, so too the potential for GMOs to hitch a ride. Burkino Faso and Egypt are the latest victims (or innovators depending on your position) with Pakistan, the newly and conveniently “liberated” Myanmar and the Philippines following closely behind. [22] Iran climbed aboard in 2005.

See also:

Redesigning Nature

Update: Big Biotech’s big lie: National sciences group concludes GMOs do not increase crop production

 


Notes

[1] ‘The Case Against Henry Kissinger Part One The making of a war criminal’ by Christopher Hitchens
Harpers magazine, March 2001. | http://harpers.org/archive/2001/02/the-case-against-henry-kissinger-2/
[2] National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM200) 1974.
[3] Ibid.
[4] ‘Kissinger’s 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide,’ by Joseph Brewda, December 8, 1995 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
[5] Ibid.
[6] op. cit. Engdahl (p.53)
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid. (p.41)
[9] ‘The Globalisation Agenda – Grave New World – The Democracy Grab’ by Ralph Nader and Lori Wallach from The Case Against the Global Economy and For a Turn Towards the Local by E. Goldsmith and Jerry Mander – Sierra Club Books, 1991.
[10] http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/14-ag_01_e.htm
[11] ‘International Rice Research Institute celebrates its 50th Anniversary’ December 9, 2009, Manilla Bulletin.
[12] http://www.panap.net/docs/analysis/gerice.pdf
[13] Rice, Trade and Biotechnology in the Philippines by Steve Suppan Food Security Fact Sheet No. 5, September 1996.
[14] ‘Laying the Molecular Foundations of GM Rice Across Asia’
[15] IRRI powerbase.info.
[16] ‘Richaria’s study proves deliberate neglect of indigenous varieties’ by Bharat Dogra Leisa India Supplement December 1999.
[17] IRRI powerbase.info. dismantal IRRI / CGIAR.
[18] http://www.agra-alliance.org/
[19] Ibid.
[20] ‘The adoption of genetically modified crops – Growth areas’ Feb 23rd 2011, The Economist online.| ‘ISAAA Brief 43, Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011’ By James C (2011). ISAAA Briefs. Ithaca, New York: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA).
[21] Op. cit. The Economist
[22] Ibid.

World State Policies VIII: Depopulation

“A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95 percent decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine.


georgia-guidestonesThe Georgia Guide Stones

In Elbert County, Georgia, United States in a secluded field lies a 19 foot, granite monument called “The Georgia Stones” or sometimes known as the “American Stonehenge” erected by “philanthropists” with a strangely familiar ideology. A message comprising ten inscribed propositions in eight modern languages, and a shorter message at the top of the structure in four ancient language scripts: Babylonian, Classical Greek, Sanskrit, and Egyptian hieroglyphs. Ostensibly, it is nothing more than a plea for humanity to live in harmony with Mother Earth. However, the inscription also reads: “Maintain humanity under 500,000, in perpetual balance with nature.” Delightful. Except that is, if you are not listed as one of those granted access to the penthouse suites of the lucky 1/2 a million. Needless to say that the benefactor behind these stones, one R.C. Christian doesn’t say how he would like to eliminate the pesky populations of the world.

The rest of the messages are as follows:

  • Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
  • Unite humanity with a living new language.
  • Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
  • Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
  • Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
  • Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
  • Balance personal rights with social duties.
  • Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
  • Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature.

At the centre of each slab is a small circle, containing a letter representing the respective compass direction (N, S, E and W). And at the top centre of the tablet is written: “The Georgia Guidestones, Center cluster erected March 22, 1980.” Underneath this inscription is a square inside of which is written: “Let these be guide stones to an Age of Reason.” This looks suspiciously like a message from a collection of the usual suspects from the Eugenics or Fabian Society; a gaggle of population control advocates, a dash of Illuminism and a sop to balance, harmony and ecological respect, to round it all off. [1]  (A further small square inscribed with “2014” was also in place in the same year, presumably placed their by the same patrons.  Clearly, 2014 is a pivotal year for someone…)

The average number of children per woman has been declining rapidly for decades. According to official UN data, [2]the average number of children per woman worldwide for the period 1965 to 1970 was 4.85. Yet 40 years later, for the period of 2005 to 2010, that number dropped nearly 50 percent to 2.52. This trend has nothing to do with the interference of families like the Rockefellers, but everything to do with a natural self-regulating decrease. These facts however, have little impression on depopulationist beliefs. That is not to say that there are unsustainable levels of population in various countries around the globe but this has everything to do with socio-economic and ecological  factors which, if addressed would significantly alleviate the problem.

English scholar Thomas R. Malthus’ theories on population growth have been greatly influential on the minds of world controllers. His Essay on the Principles of Population published between 1798 and 1826 maintained that populations were chaotic and unprincipled without any constraints on their growth so that eventually famine and poverty would naturally arrive and cull the populations down to size. Like Nature, they had to be tamed and regulated. He predicted that the population growth rate would exceed the growth of the food supply. These flawed ideas concerning population dynamics inevitably fed into the desire for conquest and land acquisition. The leaders of any invasion are always looking for pretexts. Land grabs to support an expanding population that would inevitably spill over its borders became justification enough.

Naturalists and biologists Alfred Russell Wallace and Charles Darwin both acknowledged their debt to Malthus whom they saw as an inspiration in the development of their own ideas, Darwin wrote: “In October 1838 … I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population … it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result of this would be the formation of new species.”[3]

Followers of Malthus, like acolytes of Freud, reduced everything down to the sexual drive and its spiritual vacuum that would place the 19th and 20th century in a stranglehold of determinism. It was to be a convenient belief for building, colonialism and state domination. The ordinary man became the experiment and the target of Elite subjugation and their self-protection. There would be no room for complex, non-linear set of variables we now know to exist in the formation and maintenance of living systems of ecology.

As we saw with psychoanalysis, the narrow definitions that force beliefs into the category of science are woefully premature. However, it proved very appealing indeed to those stuck in the paradigm of superiority and the potential of a Master Race. Like so many collectivists like  John Ruskin and Bertrand Russell, Malthus was an idealist stuck on the idea of a socialist Utopia. Science had little to do with his theories, however logical they seemed. The Darwinist belief-train was already hurtling at full speed towards shaping a future society by synthesizing Malthusian and Darwinist schools producing Social Darwinism. This fed straight into the fertile ground of Elitism already looking around for a scientific validation for their lofty place on the ladder of evolution.

As we have seen, Thomas Huxley, president of the Royal Society, and Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton were instrumental in the development and academic progression of eugenic and population control and their legacy remains strong in the fields of ecology and politics. Yet, in reality, most population experts agree that global population will level out by about 2100 at 10 billion with further decreases following. Global population growth has been steadily declining for decades and it has nothing to do with dramatic attempts to halt it based on hysterical and ideological drives. According to official UN data, the average number of children per woman worldwide for the period 1965 to 1970 was 4.85. From 2005 to 2010, that number dropped nearly 50% to 2.52. That is eminently supportable, especially if we are able to change direction away from the reins of elite psychopaths who created so many of these iniquitous conditions in the first place. [4]

populationcontrol

Professor of global health at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute, Dr. Hans Rosling’s work focuses on dispelling common myths about the so-called developing world and presents convincing evidence that global populations are decreasing as a natural cycle stating: “The number of children is not growing any longer in the world. We are still debating peak oil, but we have definitely reached peak child.”  The professor is one of many academics discarding the accepted belief in extreme population reduction policies. [5]

This brings us to Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population by Matthew Connelly, an associate professor of history at Columbia University. The author does an extraordinary job in tracking the truth of the movement and its current incarnations in some of the most influential institutions of the 21st century. He explores the vast scope of the population control movement and the pressure it brought to bear on any institution, organization and government which could be used to expand the population control agenda and its directives. Foreign aid, feminism, environmentalism, corporatism and non-governmental organisations were merged into a cohesive global propaganda exercise so pernicious and pervasive that it is seen as quite normal today, even though the science is more than suspect. (The applied formula can be likened to the tactics of human-influenced global warming hysteria that we see being employed to great affect). [6]

After World War II and throughout the 1950s there was a population explosion across the world, most notably in the United States and Europe. Causes for this stemmed from an improvement in public health, reduced infant mortality, the development of antibiotics, certain vaccines, pesticides and the invention of DDT and programs to wipe out malaria-causing mosquitoes. It was at the International Congress on Population and World Resources in Relation to the Family held in Cheltenham, UK, in 1948, where the population control planners produced some of the groups and organisations we have explored so far. Julian Huxley and his colleague Joseph Needham head of UNESCO science had their chance to hob-knob with Rockefeller representatives who had already chosen Japan as their first target for experimentation and were at the conference to finalise directives.

Margaret Sanger would immediately form Planned Parenthood after consultations with others in the movement, while the sociologist, economist and eventual noble laureate Gunnar Myrdal also attended on behalf of Sweden. It would be his wife politician and diplomat Alva Myrdal who would become director of social sciences at UNESCO in 1952. Feminism and a high degree of propaganda as proposed by Huxley was thought by Myrdal to be crucial in developing a comprehensive “family Planning” and “family reduction” offensive while also providing for women’s rights.

By 1955, though Russia was among only a very few countries who resisted UN-based population control programs the vast majority of nations in the developing world proved to be easy prey. International Planned Parenthood Federation, United Nations agencies, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, and the major American and European drug companies flocked to vulnerable continents of Asia and India. They began by funding local population studies discovering that population growth rates were increasing in many Third World countries. Connelly’s research shows similar comprehensive Rockefeller-funded studies were carried out on birth control, frequency of sexual intercourse, women’s menstrual cycles, miscarriages, births, and contraceptive use. In the end, India proved extremely resistant to this interference due in part, to the complexities of data gathering that were founded on assumptions and simplistic cultural evaluations which were eventually highlighted by subsequent anomalies and paradoxes. For instance, one village and one region differed so dramatically that it proved difficult to formulate a working blueprint for the programs. Understandably, Indian people did not like interlopers placing them in a sexual laboratory. The sponsored programs were a failure. So much so, that the foundations decided to go about their business in a far more “discreet” way. Population control was about to enter new ground as the revolutionary 1960s moved into view.

Fear-mongering on behalf of the eugenicists’ pet project of controlling the population had a huge boost from over 100 scientists and 39 Nobel Prize winners who signed a petition to the UN urging the organization to take action to protect the world’s resources and achieve a balanced population. The petition predicted dire, even apocalyptic consequences for all if the plea fell on deaf ears: “… there is in prospect a Dark Age of human misery, famine, under-education and unrest which would generate panic, exploding into wars fought to appropriate the dwindling means of survival.” [7] This seems to be a fair assessment of what has happened since, the only difference being it has been perpetrated by legions of corporations, and private armies sanctioned by an Anglo-American, geo-strategic alliance. Population control has proven useful as a justification for all kinds of corruption and misguided thinking, nowhere more so than on the African continent.

It was during the 1960s push that the appeals for funds began to pluck the heartstrings of the well-intentioned. This was especially curious because Africa at that time had both a low birth rate and healthy rate of exports with Africans consuming a very small portion of the world’s resources.
Connelly observes:

“[Africa] featured some of the lowest rates of growth in the world. It is also odd that even sophisticated analysts continued to assume that starvation would represent the first constraint on continued population increases. A broader view of the earth’s “carrying capacity” might have noted declines in commodity prices as well as the fact that poor countries consumed relatively little and their share had actually been shrinking.” [8]

Catch phrases such as “human tidal wave” that would “explode out of national boundaries” and “the decline of civilization” that would follow as a consequence of all these inconveniently coloured poor people who would be labelled both a threat and a victim – “family planning” was the only solution. Where the initial Rockefeller mission failed in India, by 1963, Ford Foundation funding had achieved success in creating programs to distribute IUDs and conduct sterilization programs with further IUD programs promoted by the Foundation in Pakistan, Korea and Taiwan. The success of the Intrauterine Device (IUD) was another matter.

Planned Parenthood President Alan Guttmacher whom we met previously, came up with the idea to use the long discredited product en masse, despite being fraught with a multitude of risks including a high percentage of expulsions, infections, bleeding and pain. At the outset, it seemed that no one but the (male) inventor believed it could work – and of course, Alan Guttmacher. This may have been in part because of the 1962 Population Council convened to assess how the World (de)population programs were fairing country by country.

Bending the ear of Guttmacher at the conference was Mr. J. Robert Willson, Chair of Obstretrics and Gynaecology at Temple University who agreed with the Doctor stating a common perception in medical and academic circles: “We have to stop thinking like doctors … Now obviously we are going to use these devices, they are occasionally going to be put in the wrong patient. Again, if we look at this from an overall, long-range view – these are the things I have never said out loud before and I don’t know how it is going to sound – perhaps the individual patient is expendable in the scheme of things, particularly if the infection the patient acquires is sterilizing but not lethal.” [9]

Eminently logical – unless that is, you happen to be the expendable statistic which rapidly grew from the “individual” to the many.

Foreign aid and the economic framework were tied closely to population control and the multi-million profits that could be made from bogus science and racist ideology. If India did didn’t wish to play ball then all US President Lyndon Johnson had to do was to threaten to withhold U.S. grain supplies and encourage the spectre of starvation. India was boxed in to aid that was inseparable from controlled performance. USAID (with some members often acting as part of a CIA front) would soon have millions more to play with as the lobbyists began to do their work in Congress. New countries were sought so that the family planning model could be introduced. Massive public funding meant massive propaganda and the subsequent ill-informed but greedy exodus of consultants, educationalists, public health officials, activists and scholars eager to cash in, while believing their conscience clean.

The justification for this great leap forward was that every birth prevented was a boon to society. From this calculus emerged the doctrine that having children was anti-social and not having children promoted social good. People naturally began to have fewer children as economic growth accelerated. This had nothing to do with population control programs. Fertility rates had been declining since the end of the 1950s with a peak at in 1957 with 123 births per thousand women. By 1976, there were 76 births per thousand women.

Despite this, the darling of the social biologist Establishment Professor Paul Ehrlich and his 1968 book The Population Bomb was highly influential. Ehrlich presented a hypothesis that had eugenicists and depopulationists clapping in the audience: unless population growth was reduced to zero in America – by compulsory methods if necessary – it would the end of the world as we knew it. Here, we see the China template once again. For Ehrlich: “Population control is the conscious regulation of the number of human beings to meet the needs not just of individual families, but of society as a whole.” Society, always society. And it is people like this esteemed biologist who think that it is up to them to decide: “… how to give societies the number of children they need,” otherwise: “…people would still be multiplying like rabbits.” It seems we must all toe the line and: “… hopefully through changes in our value system, but by compulsion if voluntary methods fail.” [10]

The control of the American populace is the first step in a wider set of measures, the message of which, for Ehrlich is: “… based on ‘do as we do’ – not ‘do as we say.’” Obviously, the concept of values and ethics take on epic proportions of flexibility in Ehrlich’s mind. Sure enough, indoctrination of population control and the related methods of sex education should begin before junior school. The UN should administer a global program, along with financial coercion and incentives. But Dr. Ehrlich goes further:

“If we could, somehow, get a program underway in which the ODCs made a genuine attempt to aid the UDCs [underdeveloped countries], what form might that program take? The specific requirements of the program would vary from area to area. Possibly the first step in all areas would be to set up relay stations and distribute small transistorized TV sets to villages for communal viewing of satellite-transmitted programs… TV programs would explain the rehabilitation plan for each area. These programs would have to be produced with the combined skills of people with great expertise in the subject to be presented and intimate knowledge of the target population. The programs could be presented both “straight” and as “entertainment.”… The programs would use the prospect of increased affluence as a major incentive for gaining cooperation. It seems unlikely that the threat of future starvation would have much impact. If necessary, however, the TV channel could be used to make it clear that the continuance of food supplies depends on the cooperation of the people in the area…” [11]

Ehrlich has either read Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s Brave New World for inspiration or he was just born that way. He pushes his grand authoritarian vision into the info-tainment arena with Big Brother healthcare making a 24hr appearance: “Obviously, such measures should be coordinated by a powerful governmental agency,” he says, “A federal Bureau of Population and Environment [BPE] should be set up to determine the optimum population size for the US and devise measures to establish it.”

The Population BombJulian Huxley, Bertrand Russell, a host of Fabian socialists and Rockefeller agents of change all agree that the best pathway for their propaganda to take seed is through the education system. Ehrlich is no different when he states: “It is now imperative that we restrict the reproductive function of sex while producing a minimum of disruption in the others.” The professor then conforms to the plan of conjoining the New World of emasculation and gender confusion along seemingly benign lines of female emancipation. In one fell swoop he manages to disparage and denigrate traditional gender roles, the institution of family and thereby community. What he is referring to has nothing to do with true freedom for men and women but a socialised conformity. Motherhood is marginalized and trivialized in favour of a ill-defined “gender equality”:

With a rational atmosphere mankind should be able to work out the problems of deemphasizing the reproductive role of sex. These problems include finding substitutes for the satisfaction and rewards that women derive from childbearing and for the ego satisfaction that often accompanies excessive fatherhood. Implicit attitudes and social pressures within our society toward parenthood, especially motherhood, add up to an even more powerful prenatal policy than our legal system represents. Equal opportunities and salaries for women in business and the professions, which are now being sought by the women’s liberation movement, would strongly encourage them to seek other outlets for their energy and talents besides motherhood. Society would greatly benefit both from the resulting lowered fertility and the productive contributions of women.[12] [Emphasis mine]

Who would argue against the right for women to seek other ways of fulfillment besides motherhood? Yet, in this context that is not the desired objective. After trashing marriage as a licence for sex and accidental births, he offers the solution to society’s population problem (which is really the wish to get rid of “undesirables”) by offering a greater availability of contraceptives and abortion. Dr. Ehrlich suggests halting foreign aid for countries that are “beyond help,” while suggesting the development of mass sterilization agents.

When The Population Crisis Committee decided that juvenile delinquents, drug addicts, and idle welfare recipients were a potential population threat you can see clearly that underlying eugenics meme of “desirables contaminating the gene pool” was resurfacing once again. Listen folks, if you leave it up to us to decide who gets to live and die (with concurrent penalties should people resist) then we could reduce crime and save lots of cash for federal government and welfare programs… What could be more ethical?

Thankfully, some scientists were not taken in by the politics of population control. Much like the issues of global warming, as science began to dig deeper, factual inconsistencies flew in the face of population control advocates. One example from demographic research showing that high fertility was not closely correlated with poverty. Several scientists offered thorough rebuttals of Ehrlich’s “science” to the extent he was roundly discredited. Yet the population control myth persists.

In the 1970s The UN Fund for Population Activities increased funding and so too the propensity for corruption and competition from both UN agencies and foreign governments and their bureaucrats. As increased funding hit record levels and a problem that characterizes so many governmental agencies was how to spend the money fast enough to justify an increased allocation for next year. When research universities and pharmaceutical companies started to get involved in the easy money network, then UN bureaucrats began to invent methods to deflect criticism and keep the media and public away from any snooping. After all, the UN agencies were working to reduce population levels to protect the planet and future generations, what could there be to criticize?

In 1973, some were beginning to question these intentions behind PC, not least the science upon which their ideas were based. The Rockefeller foundation, The Brain Trust and other philanthropic, UN agency minions, could not prove the causal links to justify further fertility programs and therefore the basis for advising governments how to control population growth was somewhat shaky. Yet it was onwards and upwards for the over 900 world-wide projects in operation.

By the end of the 1970s there were accusations of neo-Malthusian agendas from Africa and from some quarters in Europe yet massive propaganda initiatives and programs continued in India. The 1980s saw international sterilization programs being funded to the tune of $35 million worldwide. [13] In the end, a widespread revolt against the population controllers’ directives erupted from the developing world. Matthew Connelly highlights the economic segment of the PC pie-chart where leaders wanted to marry PC and economic development under free trade. The US delegates tried to sell the idea that to push down world fertility made plain economic sense. If not, food riots and revolutions would ensue placing the stability of foreign markets and US investment in a New Economic Order at risk. However, the nepotistic, cosy relationships that existed at the UN for many officials were also beginning to cause opposition.

In 1974, at the World Population Conference in Bucharest, feminists were ironically allowed to assume a population control mandate as representative of women’s collective desire when prominent feminists attacked advocates for conspiring to have an all-male cast. They were so roundly accused of imperialism and colonialism by various delegate groups that International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and speaker David Rockefeller had to hastily backtrack with substantial amounts of egg on their faces. A rethink was in order.

As Indira Gandhi was fighting a rear-guard action of corruption charges and arresting her many accusers causing all kinds of chaos, the population controllers saw their chance to act: Parents who had three children and did not accept sterilization were now jailed. Indian bureaucrats elevated a ‘right to progress’ as superseding individual rights. The new program raised incentive payments for sterilization as well as the age of marriage and women’s literacy. Then things became nasty. In scenes reminiscent of Nazi Germany Indira Gandhi’s State of emergency saw neighbourhoods demolished, human rights trampled on and many people killed in the riots that followed, all for resisting sterilization programs. The World Bank’s response was to provide another $26 million in aid for India based on a precondition that they commit to a sterilization programs. That plan was to take the India and China model world-wide.

The problem of global fertility rates falling and the dire prediction of global famine absent did not help the legitimacy of the world-wide expansion of these programs. Economic development was touted as justification of their continuance but as the Population Council floundered and the IPPF was investigated by Congress after denying that any sterilizations were forced, profits and progress began to wane. 80, ooo sterilizations that took place in 1976 were certainly forced and Congress in a rare state of clarity had evidence to prove it. [14]

populationindiaSource: ‘Population alarmists disregard human feelings’ Canberra Times,

A huge backlash against the depopulationists was beginning and by 1977 the hidden agenda was truly out in the open courtesy of Rimert Ravenholt, head of USAID Office of Population, during an interview with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Ravenholt said that 25 percent of all the fertile women in the world must be sterilised in order to meet the U.S. goals of population control and to maintain “the normal operation of U.S. commercial interests around the world.” According to Ravenholt, these measures were required to contain the “population explosion” which, if left unchecked, would so reduce living standards abroad that revolutions would break out “against the strong U.S. commercial presence.” [15]

The Rockefeller Foundation and The United Nation’s World Health Organization have worked together since 1972 working their birth control “magic” on developing nations parallel to GM crop research. In the 1990s Mexico, Nicaragua and the Philippines were under the cross- hairs of population reduction from vaccination campaigns, ostensibly against tetanus. On the rare occasions that independent bodies have tested certain vaccines they have tended to harbour less than innocent ingredients, the tetanus vaccine was no exception. Strangely enough, none of these vaccines were offered to men and boys – only women and girls of child-bearing age from 15-45. The Roman Catholic organisation Comité Pro Vida de Mexico, had the vaccine tested and found it contained Chorionic Gonadotrophin, or hCG, a hormone necessary for the maintenance of pregnancy. What was it doing in a vaccine destined to combat tetanus?

When hCG is combined with a tetanus toxid carrier, antibodies are produced against hCG actually reversing the role of the hormone and making pregnancy impossible. None of the women were told that this was effectively an abortion vaccine. Studies in Nicaragua and the Philippines also found the vaccine to contain hCG hormones. In 1995 the discovery of hidden sterilization programs under cover of vaccine initiatives did not go down well with the public and lay clergy in the Philippines. Catholic Women`s League of the Philippines took on UNICEF’s anti-tetanus program and won a court order halting it’s tracks due to the inclusion of undisclosed B-hCG in the vials. “The Supreme Court of the Philippines found the surreptitious sterilization program had already vaccinated three million women, aged 12 to 45. B-hCG-laced vaccine was also found in at least four other developing countries.” This Recombinant birth control vaccine still has a functioning patent. The debate rages on as to whether this was mere Catholic propaganda or a genuine “well-intentioned” subterfuge by our global managers. [16] [17]

Screen-shot from: Paradise Stolen – The Myth of Overpopulation by Stephen Verstappen

The science behind the scare-mongering of a “population bomb” has been comprehensively rebutted and debunked for many years. It is another important example of social engineering designed to provide excuses for systematic depopulation and macro-managment of societies. That’s the goal when you strip it all down to the bare essentials. The simple facts are that the rate of population growth was already long since declining when Ehrlich penned his doomsday scenario. It was also a deeply unoriginal idea having been culled from the warnings of an earlier eugenicist William Vogt and his highly influential book Road to Survival (1948), the biggest environmental best-seller of all time until the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring. Vogt, like so many other Malthusian-ecologists placed all the world’s problems on the population explosion, the weak and the poor being the culprits who had to be stopped from breeding uncontrollably otherwise everyone’s future would be in jeopardy. But the data simply didn’t add up. Evidence actually showed that people who had a comfortable standard of living had fewer children despite access to a healthier and more abundant food supply, the latter being a most important point to remember.

According to Vogt and Ehrlich and other Neo-Malthusians and eugenicists, industrialisation equalled an increasing birth rate. In fact, this could be observed only in the early stages of the process, followed by a clear and steady decrease. Around the world there is also a large decrease in the number of children women are having as well as a decline in the size of families generally. As one commentator recently penned: “The big story is that rich or poor, socialist or capitalist, Muslim or Catholic, secular or devout, with tough government birth-control policies or none, most countries tell the same story: Small families are the new norm.” [18]

The many other invasive methods to poison and sterilise the world’s population is a mix of faulty science, the well-intentioned and covert psychopathy. The macabre irony is that resource scarcity, economic disparity and crippling debt all contribute to the unnatural rise in populations directly attributed to cartel capitalism. Thus the methods of population control implemented by neo-liberalist visions or the “globalist Elite” are a direct consequence of their own misunderstandings of the human and natural world; a result of their imposition of materialist agenda of the 4C’s and the inevitable effects it produced. Ultimately, for the psychopath, this is about reducing the numbers of normal people in the global population by using direct and indirect methods of depopulation policies on a global scale.

Author and philosopher Stephan Verstappen makes the entirely valid point that if we had not had psychopaths holding the reins of power the trillions upon trillions spent on the weapons industry (and wasteful economic debt slavery) each and every American could each have had a small house and plot of land through which to be self-sufficient. Verstappen highlights a common argument that there isn’t enough room to provide decent homes in similarly decent communities. As he makes clear, this is simply more lies and propaganda where we have been made to believe that everyone must live shoulder to shoulder in high-density dwellings. And of course, the SMART technocrats and eco-Intelpro agents would love to continue this argument under the guise of protecting the planet and social welfare. Let’s quote Mr. Verstappen from his recent video: The Myth of Overpopulation:

“If we assume and average of 3 people per family – or one home for every three people – that would mean about 750 people live there [in an average communiity] Including parks and playgrounds, the whole community sits on 12 acres of land. Now let’s take the U.S. population of 320 million and divide them into communities of 750 people each, which gives us: 426, 666 villages. Each village sits on 12 acres so multiply that by 12 which equals 5, 119, 992 acres. Convert acres to square miles and we have just under 8,000 square miles. That means we could fit everyone in America, in a one-storey home, with a front yard and a back yard, with plenty of parks and playgrounds and waterways for every 750 people and it would all fit easily on the available land mass of the state of New Hampshire, and still have a thousand square miles to spare. That could leave the entire rest of the country, including Alaska, without a single person living there. See now how ridiculous it is to think the entire land mass of the U.S. cannot provide the needs and resources for a low density population taking up less room than New Hampshire.”

Logically, Verstappen takes this further:

overpopulation2

Screen-shot from: Paradise Stolen – The Myth of Overpopulation by Stephen Verstappen

“…That means we could fit everyone in the world … in a one storey home, with a front yard and a back yard with plenty of parks and playgrounds and waterways for every 750 people; and the entire world population would all fit easily on less than 75% of the available land mass …. of the State of Texas and still have 80,000 sq. miles of Texas to spare.”


Overpopulation? Maybe, but let’s be honest about the root causes and the clear solutions available. Moreover, we must see exactly how this is being used to corral populations into accepting policies which will make life considerably worse with no prospect of escape.

 


Note: For more data on depopulation please read Kevin Magur Galalae’s Killing us Softly: Causes and Consequences of the Global Depopulation Policy (2013). Prior to reading a warning must be attached to the book in that after a detailed analysis of the historical methods of GPC the author advocates much the same methods though with the caveat of transparency which does not automatically mean a correct path. As such, he acts as a supporter of population control methods and buys into the myth. These problems will not be solved by adopting the same methods, however “transparent.” Transparency laid over a gullible populace does not equate to accountability. A whole new perception across all societal domains is necessary. The data in the book is often erroneously interpreted and filtered through his own beliefs in order to support what he perceives as a benevolent set of policies to save humanity from itself. He even manages to tie in global warming and cognitive dissonance of the public in misunderstanding the issue of population growth. This is gross naiveté or intentional deception on the part of the author. But this does not discount the research if viewed with a discerning eye. The e-book can be found available online through any search engine.

 


Notes

[1] Some have suggested that the messages listed and the themes therein refer to the secret society of Rosicrucians, a parallel branch of Illuminism, long thought to have been spearheaded by Sir Francis Bacon who then became the medium for a new Baconian philosophy of reason or scientific materialism. Whether this is true or not is impossible to say, though Bacon’s book The New Atlantis portrays a land ruled by Rosicrucians. pp.61–68; The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, By Frances Yates, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 2001 | ISBN-10: 0415254094
[2] United Nations Population Division Depart of Economic and Social Affairs: World Population Prospect 2010 revision / April 2011. http://www.esa.un.org/
[3] p.120; The autobiography of Charles Darwin. By Nora Barlow, 1958. New edition 1993 | ISBN-10: 0393310698
[4] For further news on the Population expansion myth see UN data studies here: esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Excel-Data/DB01_Period_Indicators/WPP2010_DB1_F01_TOTAL_FERTILITY.XLS | Global Population projections from: ‘Seven billion and counting’ By Jeff Tollefson, 19 October 2011, Nature 478, 300 (2011) doi:10.1038/478300a.
[5] See also Has Rosling’s TED Talks at http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.html
[6] Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population by Matthew Connelly, Published by Harvard University Press, 2008 | ISBN-10: 0674024230.
[7] op. cit. Connelly (p.190)
[8] Ibid.
[9] op. cit. Connelly (pp.202-203)
[10] p.79; The Population Bomb By Paul Erhlich. Buccaneer Books Inc; 1968. Reprint edition Dec 1995 | ISBN-10: 1568495870.
[11] op. cit. Erhlich (p.150)
[12] Ibid. (p.139)
[13] op. cit. Connelly (p.129)
[14] ‘Relying on Hard and Soft Sells India Pushes Sterilization,’ New York Times, June 22, 2011.
[15] The New Atlantis: Society and Technology ‘The Population Control Holocaust’ by Robert Zubrin. Number 35, Spring 2012.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Recombinant birth control vaccine United States Patent 5733553: Talwar, Gursaran Prasad (c/o National Institute of Immunology, Shadid Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi, IN) Srinivasan, Jay (Dept. of Biology, Washington University Campus, Box No:1137, One Brookings, St. Louis, MO, 63130-4899) Chakrabarti, Sekhar (c/o The National Institutes of Health, (Room 237, Building 4), Bethesda, MD, 20892) Application Number: 08/263483 Publication Date: 03/31/1998 Filing Date: 06/21/1994 freepatentsonline.com
[18] ‘On World Population Day, take note: population isn’t the problem’ By Fred Pearce, grist.com, Jully 11 2010.


For a more esoteric overview of depopulation and eugenics see: Mark Passio – The Unholy Feminine – Neo-Feminism & The Satanic Epi-Eugenics Agenda

Save

The Z Factor VI: MAFIYA (1)

By M.K. Styllinski

“The state of Israel is a major factor in the rise and power of the Jewish mafia. Jewish drug dealers, child porn pushers and slave traders are free from prosecution in Israel.”

Red Mafiya: by Robert I. Friedman


According to the UN Development Fund for Women, trafficking in women for prostitution is one of the fastest-growing organised criminal activities in the world, and follows, in frequency, only the trade in narcotics and weapons. The sex trade brings in $7-12 billion annually rising every year. While Israel is far from the only country to profit from this trade it remains one of the primary destination and transfer points from Russia and the Middle East with the US State Department listing this little country on the second tier of human trafficking around the world. Tel Aviv’s lucrative sex trade industry made over $1 billion in 2005, profits of which are largely supported by a constant flow of trafficked women from Ukraine, Moldova, Uzbekistan and Russia with many smuggled in across the Egyptian border. [1]

This has continued to increase over the intervening years. The women, many of whom are young girls, are routinely subjected to violence, sexual abuse and rape which often ends in murder. There are hundreds of legal brothels in Israel with predominantly Slavic girls who sell for about $10,000 to $15,000 apiece. They are bought and sold by Russian-Jewish mafia figures and sent to Israel, America and Britain to work. No substantial effort from Tel Aviv has sought to stem this tide. Smuggling, fraudulent documents, and the collaboration between police and brothel owners is still commonplace. While progress has been made it has been painfully slow and Israeli law and protection for prostitutes and vulnerable women remains weak and ineffective. [2] So much so that even Israel’s own women are now being sold abroad. [3]

Over two thousand women each year are trafficked to Israel. Indeed, during the last decade, hundreds of thousands of women from Russia, Ukraine, Moldova and Romania in particular have been sold into slavery as prostitutes. Israel is one of the key centres for human trafficking where a hasty and inadequate law was passed only in July 2000 to make trafficking in women illegal. Before this date the buying and selling of women was not considered legal or even worth discussing. The law was only passed due to a paper by Amnesty International which strongly criticised Israeli authorities for allowing widespread trafficking of women to continue unabated.

photo-02-Israel%20brothel

Information poster on Ukranian Prostitutes in Israel: The poster reads: “Unlike Drugs a woman’s body can be sold over and over. Owners of Israeli brothels like this one in Tel Aviv can buy young women from Moldova or Ukraine for around $4,000 each. With ten prostitutes to service customers , even a small operation can make a million dollars a year. Traffickers posing as employment agents find victims in poor Eastern European towns and lure them abroad with the promise of good jobs. When the women arrive – in Israel, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, the U.S. – they’re delivered to buyers who typically beat, rape, or terrorize them into compliance.”

With the breakdown of the Soviet Union in the late eighties, former soldiers, disenfranchised industrial workers and large numbers of prisoners released from penitentiaries contributed to a massive rise in crime. The ascendency of Russian-Jewish oligarchs living in the West, the Russian mafia has infused the global underworld, with special attention to Israel. Reports from over fifteen years ago show that this consolidation is complete with various Russian mafia groupings comprehensively controlling prostitution, arms, drugs and human trafficking. As emigration policies were relaxed in the 1990s, over half the population of Russian Jews left the country heading primarily for Israel, along with the United States, Germany, Canada, and Australia. However, the largest populations of Jewish peoples still reside in the nations of Russia.

Professor Ethan S. Burger, Senior Lecturer Centre for Transnational Crime Prevention at the University of Wollongong made a useful study of the Russian Mafia groups presented at the 2010 International Serious Organized Crime Conference in Melbourne, Australia. While he revealed just how little we know about the subject, what is certain is that the emergence of mafia states and “deep politics” – where the criminal underworld becomes the “Overworld” – is virtually complete.  Government, commerce and corporations are effectively filtered through criminal networks which means that there are now factions inside federal departments and intelligence agencies who are involved in turf wars directly related to organised crime, terrorism and political extremism. Quite a heady brew. These are signs that ponerological influences are reaching their apotheosis with consequences for for us all.

In his study, Burger highlights the possibility that Russia has inevitably become a “criminal state” with the dividing line between government and mafia groupings “not readily discernable.” Russian, Chechen, Armenian, Georgian and Azerbaijani criminal groups are separate but work together under the direction of the Solntsevskaya Bratva, the most powerful Jewish and Slavic grouping closely associated with Jewish mobster Semion Mogilevich. It is this group that sits at the top of a loosely defined hierarchy. In much the same way as Bolshevism was a predominately Jewish phenomenon * so too the present day Russian mafia and their the top leaders Ludwig Fainberg, Marat Balagula, Monya Elson, Vyacheslav Ivankov Vladimir Ginsberg, and of course, Mogilevich – are all Jewish. That isn’t designed to set the anti-Semites nodding happily, it is simply relying a fact.

Since we are exploring the background of Russian mafia and Zionist connections it is also important to point out that ethnic divisions are not a problem when it comes to creating empires of crime. However, the most powerful mafia groupings and oligarchs seem to be predominantly Jewish and/or Zionist since this is the most effective way extending reach, both culturally, economically and as a consequence of an historically nomadic and opportunistic tribal imperative.

As waves of anti-Jewish pogroms and expulsions from the countries of Western Europe marked the last centuries of the Middle Ages, a sizable portion of the Jewish populations moved to the more tolerant countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and the Middle East. Many settled in Poland and Hungary which then led to Jews from Poland migrating in large numbers to the lightly populated areas of Ukraine and Lithuania.

Late in the 19th and early 20th centuries, Jews dominated and controlled the trade in white slavery or prostitution, running brothels in Shanghai, India, Turkey, Argentina, Brazil and New York City. It steadily increased in scope and complexity, with brothels serving the primary means of financial gain, as is still the case today. This formed an extensive network based in Eastern and Central Europe, trafficking women to all corners of the globe including all parts of North and South Africa, to India, China, Japan, Philippine Island, North and South America, and many European countries. Primary cities acting as transfer points included Bulgaria, Bosnia, Greece, Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique. Although mainly non-Jewish women were the victims, the Jewish criminal underworld procured young women from their own communities who were often poor and with considerable societal pressure to either accept prostitution or succumb to the the extreme poverty existing at the time.

Poland became a major focus for bonded prostitution as early as 1899 with the city of Warsaw acting as the primary location. According to Edward Bristow one of the acknowledged 20th century experts in white slavery:

In 1905 the respectable part of the Jewish Warsaw community rioted against the brothels; 40 whorehouses — legal and illegal — were reported destroyed, 8 persons killed, and 100 injured). […] In Minsk, Jews ran all four legitimate houses of ill repute. In the Russian province of Kherson (which includes the city of Odessa) 30 of 36 licensed brothels were Jewish-owned. The American Consul in Odessa wrote in 1908 that the “whole ‘business’ of prostitution is almost exclusively in the hands of the Jews.” […] In Vienna, authorities knew of about 50 Jewish prostitution traffickers based in Czernowitz, “and they were a very inbred lot extending over two generations.” The most publicized ‘white slavery’ trial occurred in 1892, in Lemberg (once also called Lvov, then a Polish provincial capital, today called Lviv in Ukraine), where 27 traffickers — all Jews — were prosecuted for ensnaring women to go to Constantinople, Egypt, and India. Some of the women recruits understood their tasks, but others “were maids, others fieldworkers, one a butcher’s helper, all apparently promised honest jobs. [4]

Bristow confirms that this method of entrapment has not changed at all in over one hundred and fifty years. From Europe to Latin America, the Jewish Mafia was expanding their operations and by 1909 they owned half of the two-hundred brothels licensed in Buenos Aires, Argentina. With the financial help from the United Jewish Philanthropies of Germany, Austria, France and Britain, and even after the persecution from the Russian and Polish pale the mafia were on hand to turn refugees into profitable commodities. This included Jewish ties in Cuba who established a trade route for prostitutes from Poland and the Balkans.

Russia and Eastern Europe had become an increasingly hostile place for Jews. Several 19th-century Russian writers, among them Dostoyevski and Gogol, have described the crime-wave from the Jewish underworld and destructive effects on Slavic peasant society as well as the perpetual condition of mutual hostility which existed between the Jews and the Slavs. The Mafia, and crime syndicates within Jewish communities knew how to exploit the suffering, including that of their own people.

25760

New York: Lower East side’s Russian-Jewish “ghetto” of 1908

According to Dr. Mordechai Zalkin, senior lecturer in the Department of the History of the Jewish People at Ben-Gurion University, until World War II, the underworld in Warsaw, Vilna, Odessa and other large cities was controlled largely by Jewish syndicates. Zalkin believes that the late 19th and early 20th century were bad years, in which the Jews of Eastern Europe did their best simply to survive. Between 1888 and the outbreak of World War I, in 1914, two million Jews from Eastern Europe moved to America. Perhaps mass poverty on such a scale produces methods of survival where those who can adapt in a strictly Darwinian sense do so. And they thrive. This was the hard won roots of the Jewish mafia where thrive they certainly did, with a particular ruthlessness borne from intense hardship:

“… The major catalyst for the consolidation of the Jewish criminal organizations was poverty, poverty so profound that there was no chance to break out of it. The Jews had it even harder, because they were a minority within a majority that placed restrictions on them. […] Jews could be found at almost all levels of underworld activity, from the individual thief to gangs that numbered more than 100 members. The large organizations operated in the cities, which they divided into sectors among themselves. Each organization had a charter, a clear hierarchy and internal courts, and its work was divided according to different areas, such as theft, protection money, prostitution, pick-pocketing and murder. The art of crime was treated seriously, as it was a major source of livelihood for many people. Between the world wars the idea was even raised of establishing a school for thieves in Vilna. [in Lithuania] It’s not known if the idea was put into practice.” [5]

However, although poverty was certainly the cause of widespread crime and prostitution Bristow argued that the 1914 League of Nations survey of 25 Jewish prostitutes in Buenos Aires showed that only 4 of them claimed to be poor before their new trade. Nine, however, stated that their family lives had been “immoral or abusive in some way.”

Similarly, Prof. Robert Rockaway, from the department of Jewish history at Tel Aviv University notes that Detroit’s Jewish Purple Gang members “were not products of crushing poverty, broken homes, or widespread economic despair. Most of them had been raised in lower middle class households where the father had a steady, if not well-paying, job.” (Interestingly, the centre of the Jewish trade in Polish girls was in a little town called Oswiecim or – “Auschwitz.”)

Essentially, the oppressive period of communism was also a time for the Jewish Bolsheviks to exercise their control within Russia, the Ukraine and the Slavic countries, coming down hard on the growing capitalism which included their Jewish compatriots in human trafficking. Enter the historical period of slave labour camps where many Russian and Ukrainian nationalists perished and for whom the Jewish identity and its underworld had become synonymous. Many enemies of the Jews died in these camps enabling in part, the Russian/Jewish underworld to gain a lasting ascendance. It was here that the roots of Russian crime – well established within Soviet bureaucracy – began to fuse with the extensive underworld and Zionist global connections. With the collapse of communism and the Soviet Union, the Jewish Networks and the Russian Mafia became one. As the late Russian-Jewish magnate and fervant Zionist Boris Berezovsky declared in 1996, and a candid response to his critics at the height of his obligarchal control: “Every Jew, regardless of where he is born or lives, is de facto a citizen of Israel,” …“The fact that I have annulled my Israeli citizenship today in no way changes the fact that I am a Jew and can again become a citizen of Israel whenever I choose. Let there be no illusions about it, ‘every Jew in Russia is a dual citizen’ ”.

Young students and those from poor backgrounds in Russia, Ukraine and the Slavic countries are still being lured by promises of big money and/or paid blue collar work only to find themselves working in brothels with no way out until their debt for the travel costs are paid back in full. Even then, the chances are that freedom will mean transportation to a new region and a new brothel to begin it all over again. One could see why Hitler and his twisted form of Gnostic fascism ostensibly chose the underworld Jewish mafia of the time as a caricature of the Jewish people as a whole and the pariah and projection of all the German peoples’ ills and frustrations. Obviously, many Jewish peoples wanted nothing to do with such crime and its Zionist roots, as is the case today. As Bristow mentions: “Jews were already blamed in central Europe for a financial crash in 1873 and economic competition between Jews and non-Jews was heightening. In Chicago, by 1907 Rabbi Emil Hirsch declared that 75 per cent of the “white slavery” in his city was controlled by Jews.

It was no accident that The Jewish Kehillah in New York City was formed together with the American Jewish Committee. The delegates at the first open meeting in 1906 represented 222 Jewish societies – religious, political, industrial and communal. Just over a year later the number of Jewish organizations under the jurisdiction of the Kehillah reached 688, and by 1921 over 1,000. An aggressive program from the Kehillah was implemented to make New York “a Jewish city”, and through New York to make the United States a Jewish country. In the 1920s the United States of America had fielded a vast exodus of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe which brought with it an extensive network of mafia links which laid the foundations for a new form of crime organisation. They were by no means the only crime network, but they were certainly the most powerful.

1917 saw the Balfour Declaration and a home grown Zionist dream of a State of Israel was the beginning of a long cherished plan from a host of diverse parties all with their respective goals. The Protestants in Britain and forerunners of the Christian Zionists of today implemented the declaration itself, identifying themselves as the inheritors of the Israelites or the lost ten tribes. This support grew for restoration of the Jews as the rightful owners of “the Holy Land.” The movement was given succour by many that were that were distinctly unfriendly in their intentions. As we have noted, some branches of Protestantism posit that the Second Coming of Christ would only come only after the Jews were re-established in their land. Then there was the rising anti-Semitic backlash made up of individuals who saw the established Jewish homeland as a perfect solution to ridding the Europe of Jews. The British Empire also hoped that a Jewish Palestine would be an excuse for a British protectorate there, and would establish a power base in the Middle East that would ensure geo-political leverage well into the future. Once Israel was firmly established as a thriving hub of allegiance between crime networks in America, Israel’s “business” began to flourish and diversify from the HQ of a “promised” homeland.

Professor Rockaway believes that those coming straight from the survivalist rigours of their former homeland knew full well that economic advancement was not going to be an option. The underworld ties still in place abroad and the particular brand of US capitalism which was busy sharpening its teeth, offered a seamless homogenization and extension of Jewish crime organizations which had first been seeded in Russia and Eastern Europe. Zionist gangsters were among the frontline of organized crime during the start of the twentieth century. For an example, among many, Rockaway states: “Arnold Rothstein, was the head of the New York underworld in the 1920s. He created the largest gambling empire the U.S. had ever seen until then. He controlled most of the gangs in New York, including drugs and liquor. Rothstein was the first entrepreneur in the U.S. who created a well-oiled organization to smuggle liquor during Prohibition.” [6]

Criminals such as Abner Zwillman, Joseph Reinfeld, Bugsy Seigel and later Julius Berstein were at the forefront of US crimes including everything from extortion, contraband, gambling and the still rising profits of prostitution. Jewish-American gangsters such as the notorious Meyer Lansky who underpinned much of the outgrowth of Jewish crime had strong links to Israel and its development. His life-long associate Joe Stacher (the first official Israeli mobster) also helped in the struggle for Israel’s creation during the 1940s, by providing shipments of weapons and military hardware to the pre-state Haganah defense organization, the forerunner of the Israel Defense Forces. According to Rockaway, tens of thousands of dollars from other Jewish underworld figures helped in the establishment of the new Zionist settlements. World War II only increased the cover of the Zionist movement as a whole.

article-2106691-11EB8699000005DC-117_468x286-horz

(left) Meyer Lansky (right) Bugsy Siegel

1221821306-horz

(Left) Arnold Rothstein (right) Julius Bernstein

It was around the 1960s that leading figures in the Irgun Jewish terrorist group by suggestion or by their own volition, decided to bring key players within Jewish organized crime from the West into the heart of Israel, most notably Tel Aviv. This was due to the fact that key movers within the Irgun or “The Organization” were active in the underworld and fascist at their roots. They obviously abhorred anti-Semitism but aligned themselves with elements of the Mussolini doctrine. Arms, drug running and money laundering grew to staggering proportions, the latter being particularly notorious amongst Russian/Jewish banks within Israel and Wall Street.

Back in 1968, Israeli Finance Minister Pinchas Sapir, the creator of Israel’s “offshore” banking system, sponsored the first of many “millionaires conferences” in Jerusalem. All in attendance were in one way or another connected to the Israeli intelligence apparatus responsible for the weapons and money that helped create Israel in 1948. Among them were: Louis Boyar and Sam Rothberg, Max Fisher, Philip Klutznik, Henry Crown, Raphael Recanati, Ray Wolfe and Shaul Eisenberg. (If we remember from a previous post Eisenberg’s Israel Corporation had it’s beginnings in this secret meeting and which led to the Banque du Credit International money laundering scandal set up by Tibor Rosenbaum). The injection of capital into the designs of Israel is on-going and underworld crime naturally benefits. Indeed, if it is correct that 50 per cent of Russian wealth is owned by Russian Jews then it’s only logical that the capital – political and otherwise – is increasingly a factor in Israel’s ideological designs; not forgetting since 1973, Israel has cost the United States alone about $1.6 trillion. If divided by today’s population, that is more than $5,700 per person.

The Club of Isles (which allegedly has one time friend of Eisenberg and “philanthropist” Jewish George Soros as an active member) the Carlyle Group, Bilderberg Grp., The Club of Rome, or the Trilateral Commission and other glorified Old Boys’ Clubs all have members of a Zionist Elite. Not forgetting the ever present and hugely influential House of Rothschild dynasty …

Once again, our mixed up and fluid reality ensures that objectivity regarding the Jewish role is a veritable mine-field of beliefs and emotional reactions. This goes a long way in explaining its ascendency and continuing hold on most of the world’s future, let alone the lives of Palestinians. Israel and the Russian underworld are brothers in arms, trafficking and narcotics all of which merge into the intelligence apparatus.

G22025

Robert I. Friedman

Robert I. Friedman, the late Jewish, Ukrainian-American investigative journalist and expert on the Russian “Mafiya” – and who was murdered by poisoning in 2002 [7] was told by US State Department crime expert Jonathan Winer that: “There is not a major Russian organized crime figure whom we are tracking who does not also carry an Israeli passport.” He believed – and authorities concur – that Israel and Russia are the “principle residences of most Russian crime bosses…” and further: “Of all the nations where the Russian mob has established a presence, none has been more deeply compromised than the State of Israel,” which has led to the Russian mafia becoming: “… a grave threat to the stability of Israel.” [8] In fact, Friedman’s research confirms that: “… all 75 of the top Russian and Ukrainian crime kingpins the U.S. government was tracking worldwide at the end of the 1990s were citizens of Israel.” (More from Friedman in the next post)

Rather like Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, US Federal law enforcement’s efforts to investigate Russian Mafia leaders have been continually thwarted by high level officials in the US government or the tried and tested pretense of the anti-Semitism meme. Friedman believed that within the stocks, insurance, Medicare and credit card industries some of the biggest frauds in US history have been carried out by these Mafia groups and their respectable – often Jewish – fronts. The author explains how their dealings branch into counterfeit currencies, money laundering, narcotics and weapons trafficking, gambling and protection rackets, prostitution rackets and sex slave industries, and the appropriation of gasoline and other fuels. In fact, just about anything which can be criminalised the profit extracted as quickly as possible then the Russian Mafia have either cornered, stolen or created the market. To that end, the author states: “Ukrainian Jewish mafia kingpins also reportedly laundered about $9 billion through the Bank of New York during Russia’s financial meltdown in 1998, and are believed to be fixing games in the National Hockey League. Outside the United States, these crime syndicates are supplying weapons to insurgents, paramilitaries and drug traffickers in Colombia, Brazil and the Andean region.” [9]

If it wasn’t present at its inception, Zionism has now clearly merged with underworld financing with money laundering, sex slavery and narcotics as a few of the primary activities of Israeli crime syndicates. [10]

 


* The late Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Two volume work Two Hundred Years Together published in 2001-2002 provides the definitive open and shut case for Bolshevism and its Jewish roots in both belief and the eventual revolution itself. Yet, of course, Zionists and academic Jews had to come down hard on the Nobel Laureate and accuse him very quickly of anti-Semitism. Thankfully, most people were not convinced. In a recent guardian article Solzhenitsyn states:

“My book was directed to empathise with the thoughts, feelings and the psychology of the Jews – their spiritual component,” he said. “I have never made general conclusions about a people. I will always differentiate between layers of Jews. One layer rushed headfirst to the revolution. Another, to the contrary, was trying to stand back. The Jewish subject for a long time was considered prohibited. Zhabotinsky [a Jewish writer] once said that the best service our Russian friends give to us is never to speak aloud about us.”

‘Solzhenitsyn breaks last taboo of the revolution’ The Guardian, Nick Paton Walsh, January 2003.

And so it is with the Russian-Jewish mafia.


Notes

[1] ‘Human trafficking in Israel rakes in more than USD billion a year, findings in annual parliamentary survey show’ Miri Hasson, Israel News, March 23, 2005.
[2] Amnesty International 2000 report: “Israel’s Sex Industry”.
[3] ‘Israeli women being trafficked abroad’ The Jerusalem Post. March 13 2007.
[4] Prostitution and Prejudice: the Jewish Fight against White Slavery – 1870-1939, Edward J. Bristow.
[5] ‘World of our (god)fathers’ Basing his conclusions on carefully culled scraps of evidence, historian Mordechai Zalkin states that until World War II, the underworld in Warsaw, Vilna, Odessa and other large cities was controlled largely by Jewish syndicates. By ‘our’ people. By Coby Ben-Simhon Haaretz, Oct. 21, 2004. | http://www.haaretz.com/world-of-our-god-fathers-1.137987
[6] ‘Segodnya’ Today, Nov. 14, 1996.
[7] But He Was Good to His Mother: The Lives and Crimes of Jewish Gangsters by Prof. Robert Rockaway, Department of Jewish history, Aviv University, Gefen Publishing House, 2000.
[8] “The investigative stories of Robert I. Friedman (1951-2002) appeared from the early 1980s. Allegedly, he died of a tropical blood disease. But many had their doubts and believed he was poisoned. The daring Jewish journalist made headlines exposing politicians, bankers and mobsters who preyed on the powerless. The ADL maligned him, death threats poured in, and he was badly beaten by West Bank thugs. Friedman warned the FBI of the threat posed by the first World Trade Center bombers and delivered vital reports on the long arms of the Russian Jewish mafia, which offered $100,000 to have him killed.” – Y M. Raphael Johnson, PH.D
[9] p. 65; Red Mafiya: How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America by Robert I. Friedman, published by Little, Brown and Company; 1st edition, 2000 | ISBN-10: 0316294748
[10] ‘Russian Ukrainian Crime Groups Set to Corner Global Drug Market,’ Strategic Forecasting, April 8, 2002.

 

Outsourcing Abuse I

By M.K. Styllinski

[NATO soldiers, UN police, and Western aid workers] “operated with near impunity in exploiting the victims of the sex traffickers.”

– Amnesty International


un

In 2003, Kenneth Cain joined forces with former UN officials Heidi Postlewaite and Andrew Thomson, to write a book called Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Matters [1] which hit the shops in June of 2004. The book detailed widespread sexual abuse within the UN and its peace missions. It received significant exposure on many a Neo-Conservative website and newspaper and was gleefully pounced on by ardent anti-UN detractors. Mr. Cain, a Harvard law-school graduate and full time writer paints an unrelenting picture of decadence and corruption where drugs, alcohol and sex are the mainstay of some nations’ peace keeping forces. Dr. Thomson, a U.N. physician was equally unflattering about the world organization describing his missions in Haiti and the Dominican Republic as a “frustrating exercise in futility.”

An uncharacteristically vehement Kofi Annan tried to have the publication banned and then heavily censored, threatening the employees with redundancy if they did not reconsider. According to the UN they “violated staff rules” though in truth, the book is merely a distillation of widespread reports which began to gather pace long before the controversial book went to print. In 2001, about a half-dozen investigators from the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight Services in New York and investigators from the Office of the Inspector-General of the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees finally examined the allegations. Despite the deluge of referrals and submitted cases surrounding the inquiry the book gave substantial weight to the criticism levelled at the organisation for being far too slow in its general investigations. Dileep Nair, U.N. Undersecretary General and Chief of OIOS said: “We can barely cope with the cases that are being referred to us” with over 400 cases were demanding attention. [2]

Bearing in mind that these are only the recorded cases, the findings that the UN consistently ignored claims of abuse and refused to take action, dating back as far as the late eighties parallels the same methods of denial of the Catholic Church and other institutions. Aid workers for Non-Governmental Organisations such as Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders) and Save the Children UK were also implicated. A full copy of the joint study sponsored by the UNHCR and SC-UK noted the following: “Agency workers from the international and local NGOs as well as U.N. agencies were ranked as among the worst sex exploiters of children, often using the very humanitarian aid and services intended to benefit the refugee population as a tool of exploitation.” The findings further revealed: “In order for a refugee to make a report, they would have to go through the same persons who themselves are perpetrators of sexual exploitation. Most staff appear to connive to hide the actions of other staff.” [3]

Note the ponerisation of not only UN staff but affiliated NGO agencies. This made it easy for UN officials to keep it  quiet, narrow down the scope of investigations and cover-up the abuse. Interestingly enough, the investigator himself, Dileep Nair was investigated after the UN Staff Council, the equivalent of a union, alerted Secretary-General Kofi Annan about alleged “violations of appointments and promotions rules in OIOS, as well as allegations of corrupt practices in the Office and “other misconduct” by Mr. Nair.”[4] However, no “credible” evidence of wrongdoing was found. Whether a smear campaign was enacted against Nair in order to deflect further investigations by discrediting his probe or that the allegations had some grain of truth was never established.

No place to HideNo Place to Hide (2013)

“They took us to a small house. Then they tore the clothes from our bodies and raped us. I was just 17 and still a virgin!” Joari and her friend were raped by men thought to be their saviours: UN peacekeepers. Since 1999, the United Nations has maintained a peace keeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It aims to bring stability to the region and protect the civilian population from attacks and sexual violence of the warring parties. But many of the 20,000 peacekeepers become perpetrators, exploiting the extreme distress and poverty of women and girls.In addition to showing victims of UN soldiers’ sexual attacks for the first time, the film also proves that the issue of sexual violence by peacekeepers has long been known at UN headquarters in New York. For years, the UN has been trying to combat the abuse by increasing staff training and introducing a zero-tolerance policy. Officials claim that the number of incidents has been drastically reduced. At local level however, UN insiders tell us, these measures have no effect at all.”

Over four million people have been killed by war and preventable diseases in the Democratic Republic of Congo during the past eight years, or as one UN humanitarian chief mentioned: “…the equivalent of six Rwandan genocides”, where the ‘Military and civilian authorities are still virtually unaccountable for crimes against civilians…’” [5] The institutionalised abuse by UN personnel is a large part of that desperate picture. Didier Bourguet, a U.N. senior logistics officer was charged with running an internet paedophile ring in the region, where he established a sophisticated porn studio for the procurement of young boys and girls in a multi-media operation. Videos were freely available to buy. According to Human Rights Watch, some of the female victims were as young as eleven years old.

While Bourguet had engaged in similar activity in a previous UN posting in the Central African Republic, he was not alone in his endeavours. Claude Deboosere-Lepidi, Bourguet’s lawyer, said his client admitted he assaulted minors and that his sex crime spree included other U.N. officials. He was insistent in his belief that the UN as a whole was partly to blame for tolerating the continued attacks on Congolese women and young girls. The UN has since confirmed this belief admitting that its peacekeepers regularly raped, abused and prostituted children in their care. A range of sexual abuses from UN troops and aid workers were catalogued including: “Reported rapes of young Congolese girls by blue-helmeted U.N. troops as well as aid workers; a colonel from South Africa accused of molesting his teenage male translators; hundreds of under-age girls having babies fathered by U.N. soldiers who have been able to simply leave their children and their crimes behind. Despite the UN’s official policy of “zero-tolerance” there were 68 allegations of misconduct in the town of Bunia alone. Another case included a 14-year-old girl who had told UN investigators that “she had sex with a UN peacekeeper in exchange for two eggs. Her family was starving.” [6]

A sex trade flourished in Monuc where scores of local women and girls had been made pregnant by Moroccan and Uruguayan peace keeping soldiers as well as two UN officials. One Ukrainian and a Canadian were obliged to leave the country after getting local women pregnant and two Russian pilots based in Mbandaka paid young girls with jars of mayonnaise and jam in order to have sex with them. [7] It appears that a virtual industry has grown up, including the production and selling of pornography and bartering goods for sex.

The lack of screening of UN peace keeping soldiers provided a new opportunity for rebuilding more than just infrastructure and aid. It can hardly be surprising if sexual exploitation infiltrates institutions on the ground, regardless of their humanitarian intentions. It is the proverbial honey-pot for those who have no conscience, or as a Times report so aptly quoted: ‘Never forget this is Heart of Darkness country. People do things here just because they can,” one female UN employee said, in a reference to Joseph Conrad’s novel about the abuses of the former Belgian Congo.” [8]

With UN officials accused and suspended after scores of abuses, one would have thought that it may have dawned on Kofi Annan that these crimes had been occurring for a number of years. Annan was previously head of the UN’s peacekeeping force and acknowledged that “acts of gross misconduct have taken place”. Asked whether he could have, given his experience, done more to prevent abuse in Congo, he said: “You never know when you send that many people out. There may be one or two bad apples.” [9]

Annan is being a little disingenuous to say the least. There is no question that this was a systematic manifestation of variable abuse which the UN consistently hushed up for many years. As such, he is ultimately responsible and should have resigned. Instead, after 150 reported claims of abuse, many of them involving minors, he continued the tradition of secrecy and suppression further damaging what remains of the UN’s standing. A hotline set up to receive complaints about past and future abuse was a case of too little too late.

th_kofi_annan

Kofi Annan

In March of 2006 another report, this time on the military arm of the UN, concluded: “deeply flawed and recommends withholding salaries of the guilty and requiring nations to pursue legal action against perpetrators.” It also included a host of other recommendations to be fully implemented by 2007. However, as a recent report in May from the Associated Press shows, far from coming down hard on such crimes, the activities actually doubled in 2004. Though this may in part, be due to the heightened awareness of such activities, the vast majority of allegations were still levelled at UN peace keepers. In 2002, the UN was beginning to form its defence against shocking abuse allegations in the Congo. It would finally send an investigation team in 2004 after a seemingly “outraged” Annan decided enough was enough. Whether this was due to media pressure or concerns about his own image, is far from clear.

In any event, within the same year, an exact same pattern of abuse surfaced in Sierra Leone where the UN and NGOs were running programmes to reintegrate former child soldiers from the bloody civil war between the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels and the Civil Defence Force (CDF) a pro-government militia known as the Kamajors. Both committed atrocities that are astonishing for their ferocity. Child protection agencies estimated that the warlords abducted as many as 6,000 children, out of which about 3,500 actually fought in the war. The rest were used for sex and for carrying weapons. Sierra Leone was plagued by the slow deployment of UN troops and the apathetic defence of civilians habitually caught in the cross-fire between the warring sides. One NGO chief executive described the reality: “These atrocities are taking place practically under the noses of government and international troops …Innocent civilians are suffering, and it’s the responsibility of these troops to protect them. They should do their job.”[10]

These atrocities included systematic rape of women and girls, some as young as ten, and the murder of whole families. Infants and children were thrown into burning houses, the hands of toddlers as young as two were severed with machetes and girls as young as eight were sexually assaulted. A newspaper reporter in Sierra Leone told Human Rights Watch: “There was rampant raping. I saw a fifteen-year-old girl raped right before me. They left her, but they captured others, and among them was a seven-year-old girl.” [11]

Amputation of limbs came to be the most prominent horror of the ten year old war but sexual abuse was actually more common. As discussed in Rape: Corporate Camouflage and Across the Gender Divide  the practice of rape as a strategic weapon is no longer rare. By forcing members of families to rape each other and to watch the atrocity, the belief was that this would reduce the likelihood of support for military operations. Even worse was the evidence of sexual atrocities being committed by troops from the regional intervention force, Ecomog, and the UN peacekeeping mission: “Women were used by all sides as chattels, kidnapped from their homes often in rural areas and forced to act as sex slaves for the troops as well as domestic maids responsible for cooking and household chores.” [12]

In 2004 The UN’s UNICEF reported that Sierra Leone, led the world in child mortality with one in four children dying before the age 5, while in Iraq, one in 10 do not make it to their fifth birthday. The UN has within its ranks those that were willing and able to mop up what was left of the shells that were once children. Yet despite the UN “Personnel Conduct Officers” representing system-wide focal points designed to deal with charges of gender-based violence and abuse, the United Nations is facing new allegations of sexual misconduct by U.N. personnel in Burundi, Haiti, and Liberia. This is probably due to the familiar buffering of the fact that such measures alert patterns of abuse but do not address the key issues as to why they arise. Even if this is known, it represents a flow that is hard to stem.

This is exacerbated by the rhetoric of Annan’s earnest bulletin setting out directives for UN personnel yet excluding military troops who are only answerable to their own national military authorities. This amounts to more tinkering at the edges of the cause. With sex workers appearing en masse at the borders needing to feed their families and with thousands of peace keeping soldiers present, the market and so will extensive forms of abuse. Reports of these abuses continued to surface though this was not limited to UN military deployments and operations.

One case in many includes the presence of a weapons inspector who led several sado-masochistic sex rings. “Harvey ‘Jack’ McGeorge, a former US Marine and Secret Service agent, [was] a founding officer of ‘Leather Leadership Conference Inc.’” and recommended by the US State Department.[13] Another report showed UN personnel who were involved in bringing girls from Thailand to East Timor as prostitutes. As abuse allegations have increased, so too the variable unsuitability of those employed by the UN. [14]

NATO forces, UN peace-keepers and the local mafia have all been implicated in sex slavery in Kosovo. UN personnel exploited the victims of sex traffickers for their own ends, adding to the already dire situation in the Balkans since NATO troops and UN administrators took over the province in 1999. The question of why patients at United Nations mental institutions in Kosovo were raped and physically attacked under the eyes of UN staff, also suggests that this was more than an isolated incident but part of a well formed network. [15]

And what of the progress being made to stem this tide? Well, UN soldiers forcing young women and minors to have sex in exchange for material aid still appears to be occurring more than ten years after these initial reports. A UN report interviewed over 200 Haitian women—a third of whom were minors and collated enough data to suggest this was systematic and organised. [16]

While the spectre of sexual abuse is being tackled by UN officials, disturbing questions still remain about the overall functioning of an institution that is seen by many to be dangerously flawed, contributing to chaos rather than the betterment of nations and their peoples. What are we to make of the United Nations that cries out to be a beacon for the world’s poor and oppressed when the reality sees it failing those who are most need of its protection and support? Is this rot from within a mere blip or a peek behind the curtain?

 


Notes


[1] Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Matters – A true Story from Hell on Earth’ By Kenneth Cain, Heidi Postlewait, Andrew Thomson 2004 published by Miramax books/Hyperion ISBN 140135201-4
[2] ‘U.N. Finally Forced to Probe Its Paedophilia Scandal’ NewsMax.com Wires and NewsMax.com, Tuesday, May 7, 2002.
[3] Ibid.
[4] ‘Thorough probe finds no evidence of wrongdoing by UN official’ 16 UN News Centre, November 2004, http://www.un.org/
[5] UN calls rape ‘a cancer’ in DRC, BBC News, 15 September 2006.
[6] Ibid.
[7] ‘UN moves to answer child sex allegations’ Sydney Morning Herald, February 18 2005.
[8] ‘Sex scandal in Congo threatens to engulf UN’s peacekeepers’ The Times, December 23, 2004
[9] ‘Secretary-General ‘absolutely outraged’ by gross misconduct by peacekeeping personnel in Democratic Republic of Congo UN Press Release, 19/11/2004. http://www.un.org/
[10] Peter Takirambudde, Executive Director of the Africa division of Human Rights Watch, quoted from Focus on Human Rights: ‘Civil War in Sierra Leone Rebel Abuses Near Sierra Leone Capital’ United Nations Should Act, Says Rights Group, (New York, March 3, 2000.www.hrw.org/
[11] Human Rights Watch, ‘Getting Away with Murder, Mutilation, and Rape: New Testimony from Sierra Leone’ (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1999), p. 50.
[12] ‘UN troops accused of ‘systematic’ rape in Sierra Leone’ by Tim Butcher, The Daily Telegraph, January 17, 2003.
[13] ‘UN weapons inspector is leader of S&M sex ring’, The Washington Post, November 30, 2002.
[14] ‘UN ship ‘carried child prostitutes’ August 21, 2003 http://www.news.com.au.
[15] ‘UN ‘ignored’ abuse at Kosovo mental homes,’ The Guardian, August 8, 2002.
[16] ‘UN peacekeepers sexually abused hundreds of Haitian women & girls – report’. RT, June 10, 2015.

Amerikan Beauty II: Civilised Slavery

“Slavery is a weed that grows on every soil.
 .
– Edmund Burke
 .

IJzeren_voetring_voor_gevangenen_transparent_background

We have discussed the networks of Establishment led child abuse. But what of other streams of exploitation which inevitably provide a steady supply of victims of cross-cultural victims with home grown pathologies adapting and shifting to the demands of globalisation? Rapid transformation from the underworld of crime into an overworld of deep politics fusing with mafia-led supply and demand. It is this criminal psychopathy which is determining the trajectory of the vulnerable and dispossessed, assisted by the Structural Adjustment Team, world state policies and trans-national corporations.

Commensurate with this change is the lucrative slaved trade which is back with a vengeance. In fact it never went away, it adapted to the rapid global changes that have swept the globe in the last few decades resulting in more then 35. 8 million adults and children classed as slaves worldwide. [1] Human trafficking, immigration, narcotics, bonded labour, prostitution, money laundering, the weapons industry – all interconnect and weave in and out of each respective well of misery  since they are all rooted in the same toxic dance of perennial exploitation. As the disasters of Shock Doctrine economic plunder reverberate around the world we are seeing the tangible results come home to roost. Be it the mass exodus of displaced populations in Africa and the Middle East from the West’s manipulated wars, or the destruction of social welfare in countries of Europe, the steady rise of human trafficking and its brutal slavery is rising up through the tattered cloth of Western cultures in ways which will not be ignored for much longer.

With the disappearance of border controls in Europe and and new countries keen to join the European Union there is effectively nothing to stop the commensurate trade in humans feeding this demand. Deregulated capitalism as given a green light to organised crime. Many young men and women desperate to leave their homelands due to high unemployment and poverty the American Dream is an alluring prospect. However, this idealism can become a literal death trap for the vulnerable, most of whom have no idea of the realities of exploitation. Nor is this restricted to those without income or struggling to survive, and where visions of “the grass is always greener” often determine choices made.

Author Victor Malarek described it in the following terms:

“Crime syndicates use a variety of methods to capture young women. A girl walking down a road in Moldova is forced into a car. An overflowing Romanian orphanage receives a visit from ‘social workers’ offering ‘apprentice programs’ for adolescent girls. A young Ukrainian woman desperate to help her starving parents responds to a newspaper advertisement for au pairs to work in Germany. An ambitious young graduate signs up with what appears to be a legitimate foreign corporation at a job fair at a Russian university.” [2]

The vulnerable are the new commodity in the 21st century. According to the U.S. Department of Justice human trafficking is the second fastest growing criminal industry – just behind drug trafficking – with children accounting for roughly half of all victims. Of the 2,515 cases under investigation in the U.S. in 2010, more than 1,000 involved children. [2] For an industry now worth at least $32-billion worldwide and surpassing the sale of arms, it is the new source of shadow employment set to engage law and justice authorities well into the future – that is, if they are not partaking in the dividends themselves.

The United States has another form of slavery which is perhaps more Orwellian/Huxleyian than overt slavery. But the two authoritarian mindsets are inextricably linked.

 79072591_global_slavery_20141711_624v4Global Slavery Index 2014


1280px-Map3.3Trafficking_compressedWomen’s Stats project (wikipedia)


Modern_incidence_of_slaveryWalk Free Foundation (2013) Wikipedia


A March 2002 report from The Coalition against Trafficking in Women found that trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation is a national problem, and one that is increasing in scope and magnitude. The U.S. government estimates that 50,000 women and children are trafficked each year into the United States, primarily from “Latin America, countries of the former Soviet Union and Southeast Asia.” Their report was the first of its kind drawn from national and international data along with interviews with prostitutes themselves. However, NGO’s and charities put the total number of women and children trafficked into the US as 100,000 with speculation that this is another conservative estimate. Six years later up to 2.5 million people trafficked were from 127 different countries into 137 countries around the world. [3]  By 2013, the number of UK-born children trafficked for sexual exploitation had doubled in 2013 – a rise of 155% according to the National Crime Agency.

If there is a problem with obtaining accurate statistics for any issue then human trafficking will be found at the top of such a list. This is due to both confusion between the terms “trafficking” which uses forms of transport and coercion and “smuggling” which implies voluntary acts and financial remuneration. Trafficking itself is also a highly dynamic process interconnected with a host of other entities which oil the wheels of its progress. Corrupt governments, outsourced agencies and other lesser-known financial intermediaries ensure that trafficking and other crimes necessarily intersect making real statistical analyses of the problem fraught with difficult. Where does it end and begin?

It is also true that figures tend to be inflated in much the same way as the Climate Change industry – if there is money to be made from erecting a vast subset of anti-trafficking NGOs and related bureaucracies then money tends to flow in greater quantities when figures are high. Even by 2009, The Global Report on Trafficking in Persons admitted that the exact scope of international trafficking is still “one of the key unanswered questions.” [4]


 “[S]ex trafficking and mass rape should no more be seen as women’s issues than slavery was a black issue or the Holocaust was a Jewish issue. These are all humanitarian concerns, transcending any one race, gender, or creed.”


Mexico and South America as a whole has historically been a place of exploitation for the North America. With sex trafficking businesses burgeoning in Colombia and Venezuela and with Curacao or Aruba within sight of the Caribbean Islands “Spotters,” can be paid to watch for women on vacation as potential sex slaves. Guiding them into situations which leave them drugged and transported to a waiting car and boat for transportation to the mainland or island brothels is a relatively easy enterprise. Yet this is simply mirroring the developing trade within the US itself.

Back in 1997 one San Francisco resident, 36 year-old Catalina Suarez, testified before the United Nations about her ordeal as a sex slave. She told the San Francisco Examiner how she was 9 years old when “… a grandfatherly neighbour lured her with a gift, kidnapped her and kept her chained her to a bed in a rural Puerto Rico shack, forcing the child to have brutal sex with a succession of men.” There are hundreds of similar accounts. Federal and State officials told the San Francisco Examiner that: “The multimillion-dollar sex-slave trafficking stretches from Thailand to San Francisco, from Russia to New York City. The U.S. Justice Department in Washington, D.C., is conducting a nationwide investigation of the prostitution slavery of Thai women and girls.” [5]

This report is over ten years old and since that time, the market has steadily and significantly increased.

US Human rights groups, immigration attorneys and former workers have revealed that thousands of domestic servants are being brought into the United States from impoverished countries and then severely exploited by foreign employers, many of whom work for embassies and international organisations, particularly in the Washington area. [6] There have been a number of prosecutions involving the trafficking and/or forced prostitution of children. For example:

  • two defendants in Maryland who brought a 14-year-old girl from Cameroon and, with threats and sexual and physical assaults, forced her to be their domestic servant.
  • A businessman in California trafficked numerous young girls into the United States to work in prostitution and a group of defendants recruited approximately 40 girls aged 12-17 from Georgia for prostitution, threatening them with violence if they tried to leave.
  • A wealthy landlord from Berkley, California was charged with buying two teenage girls in India and bringing them to the United States for forced labour.
  • A couple in Eastern New York State pleaded guilty to a variety of charges related to smuggling Peruvians into the United States with the same intention.

These cases have resulted in jail sentences for the defendants and orders that restitution be paid to the victims. Such examples are typical.

Washington State is reported to be a hotbed of trafficking in brides, sex workers, domestic workers and children. The director of the US State Department, John Miller was forced to confront the issue that slavery was “still alive”: ‘I’m reading about how they lured these girls from Asian nations, promised them restaurant jobs, modelling jobs, … seized their passports, beat them, raped them, moved them from brothel to brothel,’ he said. This was not happening in some distant Third World nation, however. ‘There it was in civil Seattle …’ [7]

The US government would have us believe that forced prostitution and trafficking is predominantly an external problem. This is far from the truth. The international trade in women and children is fast becoming more prevalent in the US than many other destination and transit countries. Jody Raphael, of the Women and Girls Prostitution Project at the Centre for Impact Policy Research, based in Chicago, believes that this control extends across all levels of the industry:

“‘For example, police who pick women up from the ‘stroll’ on Halsted and North/Clybourn (west of downtown Chicago) say a lot of the girls are from Milwaukee or Tennessee. They’re being moved around. It helps them avoid detection and gives the customers a variety of new girls. From our grassroots studies, I’m learning to no longer make such a distinction between local and international trafficking.’ […]

‘Men will go to recruit girls at shopping malls, places like that, they’ll find girls who have run away from home,’ explains Raphael. ‘They’ll say you can earn a lot of money, it will be really glamorous, they’ll tell a girl she’s beautiful and does she want to be in a movie or make a music video. Then they’ll drive her to Chicago and not let her leave. She’ll be watched day and night by these goons. This happens with more frequency than people want to admit.’ [8]

Women and children within the United States of America and abroad who are locked into poverty are far more likely to become victims of exploitation, most particularly trafficking. This inevitably  leads to a catch-22 of long-lasting physical and psychological trauma; disease (including HIV/AIDS), violence/abuse; drug addiction; unwanted pregnancy; malnutrition; social ostracism; and in many cases, death. All this is exacerbated and prolonged by the growing market in sex tourism from both the United States and Europe. [9]

One journalist described sex trafficking as “systemic rape for profit” the likes of which hasn’t stopped the profit-making prison business cashing in.  One would think that victims of trafficking would receive counselling in government sponsored facility but this is not the case. Trafficked children inside the US are frequently arrested on prostitution charges, incarcerated and treated like criminals despite being minors. Juvenile detention is the next port of call where more stress and trauma is overlaid on already deep wounds.

According to The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking America’s Prostituted Children: “… they typically are given a quota by their trafficker/pimp of 10 to 15 buyers per night. Utilizing a conservative estimate, a domestic minor sex-trafficking victim would be raped by 6,000 buyers during the course of her victimization through prostitution.” [10]  Change is coming albeit slowly. In 2008, “New York established a Safe Harbor Law to decriminalize underage victims of sexual exploitation. Since then, 9 states have followed suit, but in the remaining states, children who are bought and sold for sex are still sent to jail.” [11]

map_

Visit covenanthouse.org and help to stop sexual exploitation of children


chart-image-822097305760-site_display_607-race-and-human-traffickingimage credit: Natalie Lubsen | Sources: victimsofcrime.org


Perhaps one of the most shocking stories to finally receive some public attention in recent years are the child rape camps of San Diego County, California, involving hundreds of Mexican girls between 7 and 18 that were kidnapped or subjected to entrapment by organised criminal sex trafficking gangs.

According to libertadlatina.org (now defunct) who have tried to campaign for this information to be given a mainstream hearing, the victims: “were brought to San Diego County, California. Over a 10 year period these girls were raped by hundreds of men per day in more than 2 dozen home based and agricultural camp based brothels.” [12] The girls were sold to farm workers – between 100 and 300 at a time – in small “caves” made of reeds in the fields. Many of the girls had babies, who were used as hostages with death threats against them, so their mothers would not try to escape. It was only in January of 2003 when the Mexican paper El Universal published a three part series on the trafficking and brothel camps that interest began to take place further afield.

The cover-up was evident not just for the zero coverage from the MSM but for another reason: A Latina medical doctor employed by a U.S. federal agency provided condoms to the victims for years, and was told by her supervisors not to speak out and organise efforts to rescue the victims. This doctor was ordered under threat of legal action to keep quiet about the mass victimization of children in “rape camps.”  Numbers of murdered immigrant teen girls are still being found in San Diego, possibly linked to trafficking rings. Despite a programme filmed by a local T.V. station and occasional arrests of supposed ring leaders who only receive minor jail terms – the camps continue to exist.

With crime networks emerging as the channels for the new and strengthened forms of trafficking, narcotics and arms we can see parallel increase in the commercial sector – the seemingly “presentable” face of exploitation. In the United States research has revealed that between 244,000 and 325,000 American children are at risk of being victimized by commercial sexual exploitation each year.

Dr. Melissa Farley of Prostitution Research and Education, and Dr. Richard Estes of the University of Pennsylvania have provided the American public with a snapshot of the commercial sex trade in the US today. Dr. Farley’s interviews with 130 people working as prostitutes in the San Francisco area revealed that:

  • 83 percent have been threatened with a weapon;
  • 82 percent have been physically assaulted
  • 68 percent have been raped (59 percent of these have been raped four or more times)
  • 84 percent reported past or current homelessness.
  • 49 percent reported that pornography was made of them in prostitution
  • 75 percent have a drug abuse problem
  • 50 percent now have a physical health problem
  • 88 percent want to leave prostitution
  • 57 percent were sexually abused as children. [13]

This latter figure confirms a correlation with the sexual abuse in society and its connections to other forms of non-familial systems of exploitation.

If the US government’s “ownership society” is allowed to continue, where the richest 1 percent of households already owns more wealth than the bottom 90 percent combined; one out of six Americans has no health insurance and one out of eight Americans live below the official poverty line, then exploitation can only increase still further. (This equally applies to Europe, the Latin American and African continents).

We should not be surprised that The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services program Rescue & Restore Victims of Human Trafficking, remains terminally under-funded. [14] Indeed, the Bush Administration’s feckless attempts to prove their credentials regarding the slave trade went the way of most of their legislative promises by waiving any financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia. Up until to this year, the Saudis were one of the closest Arab allies in the phony “War on Terrorism so it made perfect sense for the Neo-Cons and why ”The Saudi government has consistently failed to do enough to stop the modern-day slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced labourers. [15] Despite falling out with its oil-hungry allies it remains one of the most repressive regimes on the planet.

prop-35

© infrakshun

Ten years later and President Obama has at least taken the step to address this particular issue (if nothing else) stating in a recent speech for the Clinton Global Initiative: “For the first time, at Hillary’s direction, our annual trafficking report now includes the United States, because we can’t ask other nations to do what we are not doing ourselves.” (Once this is extended to almost every foreign and domestic policy in the US there may well be the kind of hope and change we can all believe in.)

Perhaps the most contentious response to human trafficking in the US is California’s recently passed Proposition 35 which has dropped like a large stone into a very complex set of influences that make up pornography, sex workers and human trafficking. The law exacts harsher sentences on human traffickers, requiring them to register as sex offenders and disclose internet activities and identities. The maximum sentence for traffickers is now 12 years with crimes involving children extended to a life sentence. For a first time offence the fines have increased from $100,000 to $1.5 million. [16]

Aside from the possibility that such huge sums would “wipe out traffickers’ assets and prevent victims from suing for restitution” Prop 35 also expands the trafficking definition to include the distribution of child pornography. If the reader recalls the difficulties and corruption associated with anti-sexuality and child pornography operations discussed previously we can see the same misunderstanding of the issues appearing in this legislation which probably does very little to either address the issues as to why trafficking is present in societies and on the increase. Although marketed as a bill targeting human traffickers it is actually targeting those most vulnerable and operating at the margins of society. Confusion stems from US states which have their own trafficking laws which blur the lines between existing laws covering child labour and prostitution. Much of the advocacy is concerned with purely increasing penalties and allocating more resources for Federal authorities to enforce these emerging laws. Relying on greater power for law enforcement to place more traffickers in prison amounts to bailing out a boat which fills up with water day and day out – the faster you do it the more water comes seeping in. Since Prop 35 is founded on the erroneous premise that tougher sentencing prevents crime it is destined to fail.

In response to the primary campaigner of Prop 35, John Vanek, a retired lieutenant from the San Jose Police Department’s human trafficking task force asked: “how has higher sentencing worked for our war on drugs on California? It may cut down on recidivism when that person is in custody, but it doesn’t prevent crime. That thinking is flawed…” [17]

Author and journalist Melissa Gira Grant’s excellent article on Prop 35 goes to the heart of the matter and reveals why US laws so often fail to address serious social problems due to ignorant, though well-intentioned wishes coupled with the inevitable politicization it attracts.

Backed by millions from Chief Privacy Officer of Facebook Chris Kelly and Daphne Phung, executive director of the new non-profit Californians Against Slavery who had no previous experience working on trafficking and no legal qualifications it follows the same pattern  of community (or celebrity) reaction against issues which need both the expertise and financial support of civic society not the Rule of Law as advocated by law enforcement and government who are more often than not taking a slice of the pie themselves aside from the legislative issues which give rise to the problems in the first place.

Rather than protecting Californians, Grant’s research has shown that “… it will expose their communities to increased police surveillance, arrest, and the possibility of being labeled a ‘sex offender’ for the rest of their lives.” What the anti-trafficking advocates are trying to legislate for in many states is a standard law along the lines of Prop 35 which is part of an emerging “war on trafficking.” If there is one thing that anyone worth their salt knows in law, justice and social work is that a “war” on anything never works – it only exacerbates the problem.

prostitution© infrakshun

Melissa Gira Grant explains that under the current Under Prop 35 legislation “… anyone involved in the sex trade could potentially be viewed as being involved in trafficking, and could face all of the criminal penalties associated with this redefinition of who is involved in ‘trafficking,’ which include fines of between $500,000 and $1 million and prison sentences ranging from five years to life.” Grant reminds us that this is quite apart from the mandatory registering as a sex offender which will mean the person accused will have to: “… surrender to lifelong internet monitoring: that is, turning over all of one’s ‘internet identifiers,’ which includes ‘any electronic mail address, user name, screen name, or similar identifier used for the purpose of Internet forum discussions, Internet chat room discussion, instant messaging, social networking, or similar Internet communication.’ ” [18]

The end result is that the conflation of the sex trade which will endanger sex workers and prove counterproductive for survivors of trafficking, where the merging of very different crimes that merit very different charges will inevitably produce many miscarriages of justice. Grant underlines the fact that retroactive charges will be enforced under the law which means: “… anyone in California convicted of some prostitution-related offenses as far back as 1944 to also register as a sex offender and submit to lifelong internet monitoring.” [19]

She relates the example of Naomi Akers, the Executive Director of St. James Infirmary, an occupational health and safety clinic run by and for sex workers in San Francisco, who [came] out hard against the bill. In a Facebook image that spread quickly through sex worker communities online, Akers wrote: “I have a previous conviction for 647a” – that is, lewd conduct, one of several common charges brought by California law enforcement against sex workers – “when I was a prostitute on the streets and if Prop 35 passes, I will be required to register as a sex offender.” [20]

The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California were also against the Prop 35 precisely because: “the measure requires that registrants provide online screen names and information about their Internet service providers to law enforcement – even if their convictions are very old and have nothing to do with the Internet or children.” [21]

Finally, Grant summarizes the problem of moral panic in addressing societal issues which can so easily be used for the opposite of their intended purpose. She states: “Historically and to this day, these charges have been used disproportionately against women in sex work (cisgender and transgender), transgender women whether or not they are sex workers, and women of color, as well as gay men and gender non-conforming people. This is a misguided and dangerous overreach in a bill ostensibly aimed at protecting many of these same people.” [22]

And as one sex trade survivor worker commented on the nature of these laws: “It’s frightening. There’s a sense of emotional reaction, married to this really strong anti-sex worker rights agenda. And it’s playing on the public’s emotions.” [23]

This is exactly why it is so easy to keep the public and political change permanently ring-fenced from real transformation.

 

See also: Modern-Day Child Slavery: Sex Trafficking of Underage Girls in the US

 


Notes

[1]The Natashas: The New Global Sex Trade by Victor Malarek, Arcade Publishing 2004.|ISBN: 1904132545.
[2] ‘Human trafficking a growing crime in the U.S.’ By Tresa Baldas, Detroit Free Press January 22, 2012.
[3] ‘UN-backed container exhibit spotlights plight of sex trafficking victims’. Un.org. February 6, 2008.
[4] ‘Dark Numbers: Challenges in measuring human trafficking’ By Erin O’Brien 2010 | http://www.polsis.uq.edu.au/dialogue/articleerin2.pdf
[5] ‘Global Sex Slavery’ by Seth Rosenreid, San Francisco Examiner, 6 April 1997.
[6]  Hidden Slaves: Forced Labour in the United States. A 2004 report from the Human Rights Center at University of California – Berkeley and the Free the Slaves organization, concerning contemporary trafficking and slavery in the United States.
[7] ‘The Abolitionist’ by Anne Morse, World Magazine, October 2004.
[8] ‘Women and Children First: The Economics of Sex Trafficking’ by Kari Lydersen, Women and Girls Prostitution Project, Center for Impact Policy Research, April 15, 2002.
[9] A largely Western influx of men are fuelling the demand for sex tourism. Many find their victims via the internet. An extract from one of these websites follows: “This web site is an interactive discussion and archive database dedicated to providing information about prostitution, escort services and sex tourism. Here you will find articles both past and present providing information about escorts throughout the world. This is not a porno site that boasts millions of “hardcore” images. Rather, it is a place where fellow hobbyists gather to share information with one another through real time discussion boards on a variety of topics that deal with prostitution, escort services and sex tourism.” Upon viewing some of the topics and “exploits” I found the first-hand accounts detail how and where to pick up often underage prostitutes by city and country.
[10] The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking (2009) By: Linda A. Smith, Samantha Healy Vardaman and Melissa A. Snow for Shared Hope International | http://www.centerforchildwelfare2.fmhi.usf.edu/kb/humantraf/SHI_National_Report_on_DMST_2009%5B1%5D.pdf
[11] ‘Selling American Girls: The Truth About Domestic Minor Sex-Trafficking’ By Brooke Axtell Contributor, Forbes.com March 12, 2012.
[12] Latino Women and Children at risk: ‘The San Diego Child Sex Trafficking Scandal’ updated article: November 2005 by libertadlatina.org
[13] Statement of Joseph Mettimano Child Protection Policy Advisor, World Vision Before the Subcommittee on the Constitutional, Civil Rights and Property Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate July 7, 2004.
[14] ‘Anti-Sex-Slave Trafficking Program Underfunded’ newsday.com, January 2006.
[15]  ‘Bush Waives Saudi Trafficking Sanctions’, Associated Press, September 21, 2005.
[16] ‘Prop 35 Passes: California Voters Approve Harsher Sentencing For Human Traffickers’ The Huffington Post, By Anna Almendrala, November 7, 2012.
[17] ‘Proposition 35 All Sex is now called Human Trafficking’ By Melissa Gira Grant, Truth Out republished from RH Reality Check, a progressive online publication covering global reproductive and sexual health news and information.
[18] Ibid.a
[19] Ibid.b
[20] Ibid.c
[21] Ibid.d
[22] Ibid.e
[23] Ibid.f

Save

Rape: Corporate Camouflage and Across the Gender Divide

By M.K. Styllinski

“When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town.  But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder.  You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.”

– Deuteronomy 20:10-14


As the above Bible quotation illustrates, whether a psychopathic God, tribal leader or armchair geo-politician such as Henry Kissinger, rape and plunder can be used as powerful political tool.

To step down the implications of ponerology we can use the standard definition of rape where a male forces a female or another male to submit to sexual intercourse against his or her will. We can see that the act of rape is both a literal and metaphorical expression of the ponerisation of social systems. Definitions of rape, rates of reporting, collection of data, prosecution and conviction has led to rape being the most contested of all crime-related statistics. It is also considered the most under-reported crime due to socio-cultural stigmas; the individual’s distrust of the authorities (as well as their culture of denial) the prospect of facing the attacker in court and his or her own sense of shame.

According to a 2001-2002 United Nations report where government statistical data was compiled from over 65 countries 250,000 cases of male-female rape or attempted rape were recorded by police annually. [1]  The rate of rape may still be conservative when we consider that in cases where women whose husbands or boyfriends force them to have sex they are unlikely to say “yes” when asked whether or not rape has occurred. To make things worse, male-female rape is the only kind reported in some countries.

Award-winning journalist and human rights activist Jan Goodwin described the horrors in the Democratic Republic of Congo over ten years ago. Her article illustrates how so called “globalisation” is largely nothing more than an excuse to export more systems of neo-imperialistic exploitation. The myth of neo-liberal democracy continues to feed on the rest of the world, most notably in the war-weary continent of Africa where rape plays a strategic role in the fortunes of tribal warfare, governments and corporations.

Goodwin writes:

Last May, 6-year-old Shashir was playing outside her home near Goma, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), when armed militia appeared. The terrified child was carried kicking and screaming into the bush. There, she was pinned down and gang-raped. Sexually savaged and bleeding from multiple wounds, she lay there after the attack, how long no one knows, but she was close to starving when finally found. Her attackers, who’d disappeared back into the bush, wiped out her village as effectively as a biblical plague of locusts.

‘This little girl couldn’t walk, couldn’t talk when she arrived here. Shashir had to be surgically repaired. I don’t know if she can be mentally repaired,’ says Faida Veronique, a 47-year-old cook at Doctors on Call for Service (DOCS), a tented hospital in the eastern city of Goma, who took in the brutalized child.

‘Why do they rape a child?’ asks Marie-Madeleine Kisoni, a Congolese counselor who works with raped women and children. “We don’t understand. There’s a spirit of bestiality here now. I’ve seen 2- and 3-year-olds raped. The rebels want to kill us, but it’s more painful to kill the spirit instead.’ [2]

And “killing the spirit” is the part of the armoury of corporate psychopathy, fostered and encouraged.

In the Eastern regions of the Congo gang rape still continues with the relatively new phenomena of “fistulas” caused by the introduction of objects such as sticks, pipes or gun barrels into the vagina, usually after repeated raping. These acts cause serious internal damage leading to the rupturing of the walls that separate the vagina and bladder or rectum. Instances of carefully shooting the victim in the vagina so that the woman or girl remains alive are increasing. Dr. Denis Mukwege, medical director of Panzi Hospital:  “The perpetrators are trying to make the damage as bad as they can, to use it as a kind of weapon of war, a kind of terrorism. Instead of just killing the woman, she goes back to her village permanently and obviously marked. ‘I think it’s a strategy put in place by these groups to disrupt society, to make husbands flee, to terrorize.” [3]

The age old, colonial formula came under some rare scrutiny by a UN Security Council panel which cited: “… eighty-five multinational corporations, including some of the largest US companies in their fields, for their involvement in the illegal exploitation of natural resources from the Democratic Republic of Congo. The commerce in these ‘blood’ minerals…drives the conflict. The brutality of the militias – the sexual slavery, transmission of HIV/AIDS through rape, cannibalism, slaughter and starvation, forced recruitment of child soldiers – has routinely been employed to secure access to mining sites or insure a supply of captive labor.” [4]

congovideowarchild.org

(click on the image above to watch the documentary)

4a9fd4d86

“A mother carries her children in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Forcibly displaced women face grave threats and abuse in the volatile region.” – ‘ Source: The Congolese rape victims a UNHCR officer will never forget’ By Francesca Fontanini in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo | Telling the Human Story, 3 September 2009.


UNICEF works with the same multinationals, which patronize and donate to many other leading NGOs and charities. Rape has always been a weapon of war, but now it has been recognised as an intentional tool rather than a by-product of conflict. As the author states, this is an international problem where the yolk of conscience that has long since seeped away.

As of 2013, this ponerological disease has begun to spread into the social infrastructure where reports of some teachers and senior officials raping school children in their care. According to a July 6th 2013 report by the Association Africaine de Défense des Droits de l’Homme (ASADHO)  “Young girls are regularly raped in schools” in Kinshasa with local police providing statistics for the town of Matadi. As the report outlined, the abuse is met: “… with authorities and the justice system remaining silent.”

Despite these horrors, there are dedicated people on the ground achieving minor and sometimes major successes. What acts as a constant brick-wall to progress is the governmental bureaucracy and corporate complicity which handicaps the long-term effectiveness of these breakthroughs. Successful prosecutions for these crimes are pitifully small and will remain so when human rights violations serve the corporate and banking interests. Ancient tribal divisions are purposely exacerbated and brought into sharp relief in order to monopolise the rich resources available in the African continent. This is now common knowledge and easily verified. Yet, at the time of the Rwanda genocide for instance, the media sought fit to paint such a human disaster as simple blood-lust fuelled by tribal racism that simply surfaced “out of the blue”. These deep insecurities and fears were brought to boiling point and unleashed on a nation precisely because vested interests knew where to apply the pressure so that corporate plunder could continue while Africa’s citizens were fully embroiled in killing each other. The divide and rule formula is nothing new, though the effects of lighting the tinder-box and the required atrocities can burn way out of control.

In 2012 the number of rapes rose dramatically due to various rebel militia groups upping the ante. The presence of Western corporations in DRC and their indirect funding of groups and militias to intentionally keep this resource-rich country destabilized is now a matter of record and has continued despite many commentators drawing our attention to the blatant hypocrisy on show. Unfortunately, until our socio-political system changes and changes radically, we can only expect the results of this neo-colonialism and its horrific effects to continue.

Across the Gender Divide

Though as much a reality as female rape, male rape is barely acknowledged as a problem, let alone an endemic one. In East Africa, where male rape is high, bringing the issue to light is hindered by the fact that homosexuality is still seen as a crime in 38 of the 53 African nations.

In a recent Observer article journalist Will Storr reported on male rape in Africa notably from victims in and around the Congo. Storr interviewed Eunice Owiny who is employed by Makerere University’s Refugee Law Project (RLP) in Kampala, Kenya “… to help displaced people from all over Africa work through their traumas.”  The situation, while horrific for women and children is all the more harrowing for men because no one wants to know. “They will probably be ostracised by friends, rejected by family and turned away by the UN and the myriad international NGOs that are equipped, trained and ready to help women. They are wounded, isolated and in danger. In the words of Owiny: ‘They are despised.’” [5]

Slowly victims are hearing of the services offered by RLP and attendance is rising rapidly. Storr met several young men out of more than 150 who had been raped and assaulted during conflict. He recounted the tale of one Jean-Paul, a student at university in Congo, who had been studying electronic engineering when his father – a wealthy businessman – was accused by the army of aiding the enemy and shot dead. Jean Paul fled in January 2009, only to be abducted by rebels. Along with six other men and six women he was marched to a forest in the Virunga National Park. Once captured Jean-Paul was taken deep into the jungle with the other women. While they were told to make coffee and fetch water, the rebels set up camp and then turned their attention to their new captives:

 ‘You are all spies,’ the commander said. ‘I will show you how we punish spies.’ He pointed to Jean Paul. “Remove your clothes and take a position like a Muslim man.”

Jean Paul thought he was joking. He shook his head and said: ‘I cannot do these things.’

The commander called a rebel over. Jean Paul could see that he was only about nine years old. He was told, “Beat this man and remove this clothes.’ The boy attacked him with his gun butt. Eventually, Jean Paul begged: ‘Okay, okay. I will take off my clothes.’ Once naked, two rebels held him in a kneeling position with his head pushed towards the earth.

At this point, Jean Paul breaks off. The shaking in his lip more pronounced than ever, he lowers his head a little further and says: “I am sorry for the things I am going to say now.” The commander put his left hand on the back of his skull and used his right to beat him on the backside “like a horse”. Singing a witch doctor song, and with everybody watching, the commander then began. The moment he started, Jean Paul vomited.

Eleven rebels waited in a queue and raped Jean Paul in turn. When he was too exhausted to hold himself up, the next attacker would wrap his arm under Jean Paul’s hips and lift him by the stomach. He bled freely: ‘Many, many, many bleeding,” he says, ‘I could feel it like water.’ Each of the male prisoners was raped 11 times that night and every night that followed. […]

It is for this reason that both perpetrator and victim enter a conspiracy of silence and why male survivors often find, once their story is discovered, that they lose the support and comfort of those around them. In the patriarchal societies found in many developing countries, gender roles are strictly defined. [6]

The most shocking aspect was revealed to Storr when he discovered that not only is “male sexual violence a component of wars all over the world” but that international aid organisations are failing victims. He quotes Lara Stemple’s study from the University of California which cites a review of 4,076 NGOs that have addressed wartime sexual violence. “Only 3 percent of them mentioned the experience of men in their literature. “Typically … ‘as a passing reference.’” [7]

RLP director Chris Dolan was not surprised: “The organisations working on sexual and gender-based violence don’t talk about it,” he says. “It’s systematically silenced. If you’re very, very lucky they’ll give it a tangential mention at the end of a report. You might get five seconds of: ‘Oh and men can also be the victims of sexual violence.’ But there’s no data, no discussion.” [8]

The reason that there is no discussion supports the data in this blog/book that there is gender bias that is now equal if not greater towards men than women in a variety of social and cultural domains, especially within charity and non-governmental organisations or as Dolan wryly points out: “There’s a fear among them that this is a zero-sum game; that there’s a pre-defined cake and if you start talking about men, you’re going to somehow eat a chunk of this cake that’s taken them a long time to bake.”

4d6bd2826© unknown


“There are no detailed statistics, but sexual violence against men and boys is increasingly being recognized as a protection concern in conflict and forced displacement situations.”

UNHCR issues guidelines on protection of male rape victims


Dolan also mentions a November 2006 UN report that followed an international conference on sexual violence in this area of East Africa where the authors insisted that the definition of rape was restricted to women, where even:  “… one of the RLP’s donors, Dutch Oxfam, refused to provide any more funding unless he’d promise that 70 percent of his client base was female. Another serious case of male rape was referred to the UN’s refugee agency, the UNHCR who told him: “We have a programme for vulnerable women, but not men.” (Happily, things are slowly beginning to improve.  For the first time, guidelines for UNHCR staff and other aid workers were issued in 2012 on: “… how to identify and support male victims of rape and other sexual violence in conflict and displacement situations.”)

Storr is reminded of a scene described by Eunice Owiny: “‘There is a married couple,’ she said. “The man has been raped, the woman has been raped. Disclosure is easy for the woman. She gets the medical treatment, she gets the attention, she’s supported by so many organisations. But the man is inside, dying.” Dolan agrees: “Part of the activism around women’s rights is: ‘Let’s prove that women are as good as men.’ But the other side is you should look at the fact that men can be weak and vulnerable.’ ” [9]

This gender bias and overt discrimination against men is a concurrent theme and represents a serious problem in organisations tasked to help all those suffering from human rights abuses.  It will need not just a radical change in the law to change such aberrations, but equally dramatic change in the very notion of economics and the unfettered powers of international banking. This is the form of globalisation which underpins almost all of our social ills and the eventual atrocities which inevitably occur. Unless the core issues are addressed humanitarian professionals who struggle daily to cope with these iniquities will be forever submerged in the tide of trans-national profits divorced from values and any accountability for their crimes.

It would also be a mistake to see the exploitation of ancient tribal feuds as an exclusively African problem. The same atrocities were witnessed in the former Yugoslavia where the primary drive for was the control of oil, weapons sales and the creation of a geo-strategic arena called Kosovo. This was also under the guise of an humanitarian effort.

Among countries which report these statistics, the United States has the highest rape rate, 4 times higher than that of Germany, and 20 times higher than that of Japan and 13 times higher than that of England, though the latter country’s rates are increasing with 5,000 children under sixteen raped every year. [10]  In 1991 alone there were estimated to be 700,000 rapes of adult women,[11] while 1 in 3 sexual assault victims are under the age of 12. [12] The figure for reported child rapes for the same year is 1.4 million. The first comprehensive report on the financial cost of rape has the highest annual victim costs at $127 billion per year with child abuse at $56 billion. [13] Unsurprisingly perhaps: “compared to their non-crime victim counterparts, three times more likely to develop major depression; 4.1 times more likely to have seriously contemplated suicide and 13 times more likely to have actually made a suicide attempt.” [14]

By 2008, the statistical counts and rates * of rape in each country has continued to rise with the US, taking the lead, followed by United Kingdom, France, Korea, Germany, the Russian Federation and Sweden representing some of the highest counts of rape. While Belgium, New Zealand, United States, Lesotho, Trinidad and Tobago and Sweden are reaching the highest rates of rape per year. However, even the United Nations report is far from definitive when we realise that there are differences between recording and reporting as well as difficulties in bringing to trial or being convicted as well. We must also include the disparity of definitions for rape around the world and the significant amounts of data still missing. Finally, even when reports of cases making it to court can be counted, less than half of those arrested for rape are convicted.[15]

High profile cases of false rape accusations by women and the oft quoted spectre of “date rape” in Western Europe have tarnished and distorted the acute problem of rape in society fuelling the idea that all rape is merely in the imagination of the female concerned. Such fraudulent claims only do harm to objective investigation to sexual assault overall and most certainly to those accused, often ruining lives in the process. Even if those accused are subsequently cleared, the damage is done, leading to stigmatization from colleagues and friends and in some cases resulting in suicide. According to UK Home Office research, between “…3 percent and 9 percent of all reports of rape are found to be false … with 16 and 25 making up both the largest group of victims and the accused.” [16]

Given the rise in narcissism within our societies – and women in particular – this may be, in some way connected. The law is also very different in the United Kingdom and the United States. In one case the British Court of Appeal dismissed a claim by a former nurse who was jailed for two years after falsely accusing a man she had met online. The presiding judge said that false allegations damage conviction rates of genuine rapes and are “terrifying” for innocent victims where: “False complaints of rape necessarily impact upon the minds of jurors trying rape cases.” [17]

In the US no appeals can take place because no such law exists for false rape claims. Of the 90,427 forcible rapes reported in 2007, 40 percent were cleared by arrest or “exceptional means.”  This translates as those suspects whom have died before an arrest can be made (not very common) the accusation of rape has been retracted (common) the suspect is held in another state with jurisdiction and extradition has been denied or evidence for a rape is non-existent. A percentage of rape complaints have been classified as “unfounded” by the police for decades and excluded from the FBI’s statistics. [18] Not exactly a scientific way of producing definitive data on such an important issue.

An article by Bruce Gross in the Forensic examiner described this anomaly in the following terms: “…there are no formal negative consequences for the person who files a false report of rape. Not only did the false allegation serve a purpose for the accusers, they actually never have to fully admit to themselves, their family, or their friends that the report was a lie. Although there are grounds for bringing legal action against the accuser, it is virtually never done. Even should a charge be filed, in most jurisdictions filing a false report is only a misdemeanor.” [19]

Present day figures on rape have increased. According to the UK Government’s Action Plan on Violence Against Women and Girls, 80,000 women are raped a year, and 400,000 women are sexually assaulted in the UK alone. [20] In 2012, thousands of women in India took to the streets to protest “endemic and unchecked violence against women” sparked by the death of a woman named Damini who had been gang-raped, dying of her injuries a few weeks later. An article in the UK Independent highlighted the fact that it is comforting to think that this is a strictly Indian or African problem when in fact, it is a convenient myth designed to brush what is a global problem, under the cultural carpet. One example from the developed nations of Europe came from France in 1999, where: “… two then-teenagers – named only as Nina and Stephanie – were raped almost every day for six months. Young men would queue up to rape them, patiently waiting for their friends to finish in secluded basements. After a three-week trial this year, 10 of the 14 accused left the courtroom as free men; the other four were granted lenient sentences of one year at most.” [21]

As we can see, the fluctuations of gender bias manifests in many different ways.

 


* “Counts” are raw numbers; the “rate” is the statistical average from that data.


Notes
[1] ‘The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems’ (2001–2002) – Table 02.08 Total recorded rapes.
[2] ‘Silence = Rape’ By Jan Goodwin, The Nation, 2004.
[3] “More Vicious Than Rape” by Rod Nordland, Newsweek, November 13 2006.
[4] Ibid.
[5] ‘The rape of men ’By Will Storr, The Observer, July 2011.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] ‘Revealed: the horror of the 5,000 children under 16 raped every year’ by Denis Campbell, The Observer, May 14, 2006.
[11] ‘Minnesota Sex Offense Screening Tool – Revised’ by D. Epperson (2000) presented at Sinclair Seminars Sex Offenders Re-Offense Risk Prediction, Madison Sq. Wisconsin.
[12] The impact of violence on children. The Future of Children: 33-49.Snyder, H., Sickmund, M. Juvenile offenders and victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
[13] In February 1996, the National Institute of Justice released the first comprehensive report on the cost of victimization. Data was gathered from criminal justice agencies, medical professionals, hospitals, insurance companies, mental health professionals, crime victim compensation programs, and crime victims, significant information is available about the immediate, short-term and long-term financial impact of victimization.
[14] US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Victims Assistance Academy 1996. Chapter 1. The Scope of Violent Crime and Victimization, Statistical overview.
[15] The Response to Rape : detours on the road to equal justice : by United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. Congressional Sales Office, 1993. ISBN: 0160417872.
[16] ‘Forever Accused’ BBC News, February 12, 2008.
[17] ‘Prison ‘inevitable’ for false rape claims’ by Tom Whitehead, The Telegraph, October 30, 2009.
[18] Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (2008d). Percent of crimes cleared by arrest or exceptional means, 2007. (Clearance Figure). Uniform Crime Report: Crime in the United States, 2007. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/offense/ clearances/index.html#figure.
[19] ‘False Rape Allegations: An Assault on Justice’ By Bruce Gross, PhD, JD, MBA, The Forensic Examiner, September 15, 2009.
[20] ‘Sexual violence is not a cultural phenomenon in India – it is endemic everywhere’ The Independent December 30, 2012. |/www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/sexual-violence-is-not-a-cultural-phenomenon-in-india.
[21] Ibid.

Good Intentions II: Feed The World

“… every seasoned aid worker knew then, and knows now, that there is no necessary connection between raising money for a good cause and that money being well spent, just as there is no necessary connection between caring about the suffering of others and understanding the nature or cause of that suffering.”

– Foreign Aid expert


230px-Live8Logo

Live 8 Promotional poster

Author and Professor of Engineering at Oakland University Barbara Oakley PhD names the entrenched idea of changing the world before changing oneself as a kind of “hyper-altruism” that has had a recent resurgence among the minds of mega-philanthropists such as Warren Buffet, George Soros, and Belinda and Bill Gates. They have donated billions to the needy in Africa and the sub-continent and have encouraged their fellow filthy rich friends to do the same. She quotes The Economist’s Matthew Bishop and Michael Green who termed this new phenomenon as “philanthrocapitalism” which continues to pump huge amounts of money into the foreign aid industry.

So, why are the same problems showing little signs of being affected by such massive financial contributions and in fact are largely getting worse?

According to Oakley:

“Financial altruism detached from strategic and objective thinking has been shown time and again to have detrimental consequences at exorbitant costs. […] Not all aid is bad but debate has continued regarding the efficacy of foreign aid and whether massive investments are of any use.” She makes the further and vital point: “Staring at pictures of starving children can in some sense, hijack analytical portions of the brain. Perhaps it is this that results in some of the ineffectual and pathologically altruistic behaviour that characterizes many foreign aid policies and programs.” [1]

Oakley then discusses the advances in neuroscience that strongly suggest:

“… developing dispassion – the ability to displace ourselves emotionally from a situation that arouses our primal, emote control responses – is vital in being able to help others. In a related vein, developing our ability to use our rational brain to feel compassion for others – without mirroring their emotions – is important for preventing compassion fatigue or burn out often seen in those who care for the suffering.” [2]

We know we need to cultivate objectivity as well as our more intuitive feelings modes so that they work in unison. However, there is something more here than the dynamics of how our rational brains are so easily bypassed by images which elicit the required response. Pathological altruism is exacerbated and encouraged by psychopathy at institutional levels and which requires a total subversion of nobler thoughts that lead to altruistic action. This merely results in the creation of further multi-layered problems rather than the needed long-term amelioration.

It is the reflex of empathy and its altruistic actions which can and do cause harm based as they are on a) guilt that we do not do enough for our fellow-man and b) a lack of knowledge as to how this selfless giving may actually manifest in the world. Rather than facilitate the easing of suffering it can compound the problems, adding insult to injury as this passage from Oakley quoting the Time’s Nancy Gibbs illustrates:

After the 2004 tsunami, aid poured in from all over the world. But included tons of out-dated or unneeded medicines that Indonesian officials had to throw out. People sent Viagra or Santa suits, high-heeled shoes and evening gowns. A year later after an earthquake in Pakistani, so much unusable clothing arrived that people burned it to stay warm. It may make us feel good to put together children’s care packages with cards and teddy bears – but whose needs are we trying to meet? It may not feel glorious but often the greatest need is accomplished quietly, invisibly. Either way, the same principle holds in helping as in healing: First, do no harm.  [3]

And if such a simple, genuine outpouring of good intentions can be so easily go astray, what does this say about the more complex dynamics of our global institutions and foreign aid organisations enmeshed in a world that is by nature operating on a model that is exploitative?

The role of celebrities as entertainers, image makers and icons is ready to be made use of should opportunities arise. When necessary, the good-will and compassion of the people with disposable income and an awakening conscience can move mountains. This show of “people power” is, however, consistently diverted by a financial system that is grossly and purposefully unjust. The role of the media and the celebrity-fest surrounding the Live Aid world-wide concert in 1984 and the Live 8 concert which followed in 2005 is a case in point. Coinciding with the latter concert was the annual G8 Summit hosted by the UK. The G8 is composed of the world’s leading industrialised nations (Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United States and Russia).

On the Live 8 website we read:

These concerts are the start point for The Long Walk To Justice, the one way we can all make our voices heard in unison. This is without doubt a moment in history where ordinary people can grasp the chance to achieve something truly monumental and demand from the 8 world leaders at G8 an end to poverty. The G8 leaders have it within their power to alter history. They will only have the will to do so if tens of thousands of people show them that enough is enough. By doubling aid, fully cancelling debt, and delivering trade justice for Africa, the G8 could change the future for millions of men, women and children.[4]

Despite having no rules governing its own operations, no formal or legal powers and no mechanisms of accountability, the G8 wields huge economic, military and diplomatic power in the institutions of global governance. These institutions include the UN Security Council, World Trade Organisation (WTO), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. They are products of a system that is the antithesis of decentralisation, the driving force being to achieve new market access for their members. As one aid expert stated regarding Geldof’s initial Live Aid: “… every seasoned aid worker knew then, and knows now, that there is no necessary connection between raising money for a good cause and that money being well spent, just as there is no necessary connection between caring about the suffering of others and understanding the nature or cause of that suffering.” [5]

This applies as much to ourselves as it does to the world at large. “Understanding the true nature and cause of that suffering.” The unpalatable truth is that G8 leaders and those above seem to have neither the inclination nor the desire to alter history unless it benefits their own particular requirements.

These concerts illustrated the well-spring of genuine empathy and compassion which was allowed to be cynically used and exploited via the egos – however well-intentioned – of a collection of celebrities. It was a perfect opportunity for politicians to get in on the act and smile for the cameras while the feckless media sung along. The facts are rather different to the sophistry and rhetoric heard so often from the likes of Bono and Geldof. Their own positions of influence are conveniently used to promote an agenda diametrically opposed to their own wishes to cancel debt and end poverty in Africa.

One has to ask why eleven years later, did we need another Live Aid?

Why did all those in the G8 for whom the suffering of millions have never made the slightest impression, suddenly grow a conscience?

They doffed their hats to Sir Bob because it dove-tailed into their agenda.

Bush, Geldof and Bono

The seemingly inspiring and very well-intentioned Live 8 event served as an actual and symbolic rendering of how our subjectivity is used against us all, directly mirroring the issues in exploitation. In this instance, it is a more intangible but cynical twisting of a potential mass altruism and the devaluing of an innate desire to assist, since we are encouraged to be drawn into the sensation of compassion without due attention to cause or effect or where these emotions are taking us. The very same participants within a system who created that tangible suffering in the first place are also those taking full advantage of directionless conscience. It is a circular feedback that benefits only the status quo based as it is, on the ignorance of the mechanism of politics and bureaucracy and our wishful thinking that we can “change the world,” in this context.

Not one month after the famous Live 8 concert, a much touted headline read: “$55bn Africa debt deal ‘a victory for millions’ which was splashed across the front page of the Observer in June 12 2005 with Sir Bob Geldof’s rhetoric reaching epic proportions stating: “Tomorrow 280 million Africans will wake up for the first time in their lives without owing you or me a penny…”

Firstly, the G8 proposals for HIPC debt cancellation were already inadequate based on debt relief that will be granted to poor countries “… only if they are shown to be “adjusting their gross assistance flows by the amount given.” In other words, their aid will be reduced by the same amount as the debt relief, thus gaining nothing. Paragraph two states that “it is essential” that poor countries “boost private sector development” and ensure “the elimination of impediments to private investment, both domestic and foreign”.[6]

So, there we see the real reasons for the winks and smiles.

Let us not forget that debt payments rose in 2006 and have doubled in 2015. This alone dilutes the aforementioned “victory”. It is also the height of hypocrisy that while Bono, Geldof and other entertainers were wooing G8 leaders, British arms sales to Africa had reached £1bn a month before the concert and show no signs of slowing.[7]  This underlined the hollow nature of the event and the truth behind African poverty and debt.  (The hypocrisy is also underscored by Bono’s penchant for shifting his assets to offshore tax havens and investing in the very corporate franchises that he is telling us have to be reformed).[8]

The foundation of Africa’s wealth and resources are largely in the hands of trans-national corporations some of whom are directly or indirectly under the direction of G8 membership. The men in suits and soppy grins are the brokers and beneficiaries of this appalling suffering which continues under the euphemism of an “African Union.” This was signed into effect on July 11, 2000, by 54 nations of Africa. Like the European Union, it has only one peacekeeping force, one Central Bank, one Court of Justice, one currency, and so forth. Essentially, it is a blueprint for control that affords very little rights to Africans by promoting civil war and corruption from which the West can profit. They do this by keeping a cap on any independent development that might eclipse western interests.

Immediately after the Gleneagles meeting had wound down and G8 leaders had been chauffeured away to their sumptuous hotels the Belgian government was already hatching plans to give lenders greater control over poor countries and reneging on agreements to write off 100 percent of their debt. Belgian IMF representative Willy Kierkens is quoted in a document leaked to the activist group Jubilee Debt Campaign to an address to the IMF executive board that “rather than giving full, irrevocable and unconditional debt relief… countries would receive grants.” [9]

The then UK Prime Minister Tony Blair stated that the agreed upon total of $48bn a year of aid by 2010 would also include a 100 percent cancellation of multilateral debts of the most indebted countries. Yet Gordon Brown brazenly claimed in a Treasury Committee that this aid increase includes money put aside for debt relief. Blair lied yet again and G8 member countries showed that their signatures symbolised nothing more than a temporary appeasement. [10]

Logo_of_the_African_UnionAfrican Union logo

From Making Poverty History a key working group, one activist argued that there existed the same old spin doctors doing what Alistair Campbell did so ruthlessly when covering up for Blair’s lies in the Downing Street Memos: “‘Our real demands on trade, aid and debt, and our criticisms of UK government policy in developing countries have been consistently swallowed up by white bands, celebrity “luvvies” and praise upon praise for Blair and Brown.” [11] [12]

Yet Make Poverty History is not the only one to be absorbed by the new politics masquerading as New Labour – the new evangelism of the US. It is this New Wave that is shackling African Countries into the false economy of the African Union and the realization that any allotted money can only be accessed if they sign up to World Bank and IMF economic policy conditions.

While Blair, a born opportunist, was busy jumping aboard the Make Poverty History train, he knew all along that the emotional fuel would run out. Why else would he be secretly cutting the government’s Africa desk officers and staff at the same time that the Department for International Development was forcing the privatisation of water supply in Ghana for the benefit of British corporations? [13]

Amelioration of poverty, disease and significant successes do take place. And Geldof is right when he said that there was a global change in attitude. But this has never been the problem. Most normal human beings are immensely keen to help those suffering and in need. But the outpouring of emotion is not enough unless it is supported by effective frameworks (untarnished by political pathologies) through which change can flow. Overall, while temporarily more children were able to go to school and less were hungry the dependency and cycle of that debt remains. The “support” addresses symptoms which, although worthy, amount to sops and buffers around the primary fences of poverty, prolonged and exacerbated by Western exploitation. This includes massive bias towards privatization which comprises one half of the World Bank expenditure on what it considers worthwhile projects. Worthwhile that is, to its own coffers.

More and more conditions have been added to the initial agreements which were already piecemeal and ineffective. There were no real high level negotiations between Bush and Blair other than how best they could capitalize on naivety and gullibility of nations. For this duo it was merely an exercise in extracting the juice of image and hype to buttress their plummeting support on a range of issues. The overriding stipulation surrounding the whole sham of debt relief and the Make Poverty History movement was that it be conditional and tied to the original economic structures that created the problems in the first place.

Throw as much money as you like at these problems it will not alter the cycle of debt and poverty until the structure is re-evaluated and radically reformed.

We can only do that by becoming aware of what we are dealing with and immunizing ourselves against this psychological pathogen in our midst. We do that by learning everything is to know about how such people think and act.  Meantime, compassionate peoples are played by seasoned psychopaths for whom getting fat on power and profit at the expense of others is easy. The fact that 7,000 Africans die every day means nothing. They rely on it to secure their spoils.

There are ample reasons to conclude that Live Aid in 1984 was harmful as well as positive in limited terms. Yet what exactly did all this achieve? A compassion that lends wings to long-term action based on objectively evaluated pragmatic solutions, or a deadly compassion that serves to play into the hands of global leaders? “The fact is that Ethiopia remains one of Africa’s poorest countries, and the whole of sub-Saharan Africa is, if anything, worse off today than it was after Live Aid. Geldof himself has been of two minds. He says that Live Aid “created something permanent and self-sustaining” but has also asked why Africa is getting poorer.” [14]

As well he might.

Yes, just as the Ethiopian famine was a hideous reality, the final results of this great resettlement served the G8 powers admirably. As journalist David Rieff stated, the: “… resettlement policy – of moving 600,000 people from the north while enforcing the “villagisation” of three million others – was at least in part a military campaign, masquerading as a humanitarian effort. And it was assisted by Western aid money…” In effect, UN institutions and donor governments helped a totalitarian project kill thousands of people under the pretext of humanitarian assistance, where “…aid to victims was unwittingly transformed into support to their executioners.” [15]  According to French NGO Medecin Sans Frontieres [16] the death total from deportation and raids came to as many as the lives that were saved. The result was good PR for G8 leaders and more misery for the poverty-stricken.

So, do nothing? Isn’t the “the positivity of the action better than the pessimism of the thought?” As we have seen, it is a little more complex than that. Geldof has to be commended for his seemingly genuine intent and ability to cut through apathy and despair. Yet his passionate comments in a recent report to answer his critics summarises so many whose dynamism and emotional drive are used against them:

‘Behind all of this bitter carping is the corrosively cynical view that none of this works. That because they, as critics, do nothing, nobody else should even try. Well, they’re wrong. You can alter policy. The individual is not powerless in the face of either political indifference or monstrous human tragedy. Let me say it embarrassedly, cornily, almost guiltily. Let me try to say it without sounding like some pious twat. You can change the world. And millions upon millions of you did that this year. This stuff works. Sometimes. [17]

He goes on to discuss the dying baby Birhan Woldu the “little scrap of humanity” now a grown women who was saved by the original Live Aid concert 20 years ago… “all of it was worth it for just her. For that single life.”

It is hard to disagree isn’t it?

In one very real sense he is absolutely right and nothing should prevent such a call to action. But how are we to confront the deeper issues behind this call that is “in the box” of a wider control system that demands the cycles of endless Live Aids? That for one life saved, millions of dead will follow due to a subjective activism that plays into the hands of those several steps ahead. Live Aid camouflages the core issues and thus leads to a perpetuating cycles of the same.

Perhaps what we are facing in the 21st century is not a call to end third world debt or to demonstrate against any one particular political atrocity, of which there are many. It is to raise our awareness to the fact that the very core actions of our world are purposely and intentionally created by a minority of psychologically deviant persons. Until we grasp that fact, which includes an in depth knowledge of the mechanisms of political psychopathy, Geldof’s well meaning, but ultimately naive mission will be co-opted with mathematical precision.

Contrary to what the musician states, this stuff does not work. It never has. As clinical psychologist Andrew Łobaczewski  states: “even normal people, who condemn this kind of [Pathocracy] along with its ideologies, feel hurt and deprived of something constituting part of their own romanticism, their way of perceiving reality, when a widely idealized group is exposed as little more than a gang of criminals.” [18]

And we are still duped by such a gang who know crowd psychology very well indeed.

 


Notes

[1]  (pp.239 -241) Pathological Altruism By Barbra Oakley http://www.amazon.com/Pathological-Altruism-Barbara-Oakley/dp/0199738572
[2] Ibid. (p.242)
[3] Ibid. (p.243)
[5] “Cruel to be kind?” by David Rieff, The Guardian, June 24, 2005 – “Live Aid forced the world to confront the Ethiopian famine and raised more than £50m. But as Bob Geldof prepares his Live 8 reprise, aid expert David Rieff argues that guilt-stricken donations helped fund a brutal resettlement programme that may have killed up to 100,000.”
[6] “John Pilger isn’t celebrating victory -‘The illusion of an anti-establishment crusade led by pop stars” Daily Mirror, June 26, 2005.
[7 ‘UK arms sales to Africa reach £1 billion mark’ The Guardian, Antony Barnett, June 12, 2005.
[8] ‘U2 Under Fire For Tax Move’ Irish Examiner, August 9, 2006.
[9] ‘G8 debt deal under threat at IMF’ By Steve Schifferes BBC News, 15 July, 2005
[10] ‘How the G8 lied to the world on aid’ The truth about Gleneagles puts a cloud over the New York summit by Mark Curtis, The Guardian, August 23, 2005: “Russia’s increase in ‘aid’ will consist entirely of write-offs. A third of France’s aid budget consists of money for debt relief; much of this will be simply a book-keeping exercise worth nothing on the ground since many debts are not being serviced. […] … the deal applies initially to only 18 countries, which will save just $1bn a year in debt-service payments. The 62 countries that need full debt cancellation to reach UN poverty targets are paying 10 times more in debt service. And recently leaked World Bank documents show that the G8 agreed only three years’ worth of debt relief for these 18 countries. They state that “countries will have no benefit from the initiative” unless there is ‘full donor financing’.The deal also involves debts only to the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the African Development Bank, whereas many countries have debts to other organisations. It is a kick in the teeth for the African Union, whose recent summit called for “full debt cancellation for all African nations”.
[11] http://www.downingstreetmemo.com. “The Downing Street ‘Memo’ is actually meeting minutes transcribed during the British Prime Minister’s meeting on July 23, 2002. Published by The Sunday Times on May 1, 2005 it was the first hard evidence from within the UK or US governments that exposed the truth behind how the Iraq war began.  This site is intended to provide information about the Downing Street Memo and how it fits in with numerous other documents and events that relate to the Bush administration’s march to war.”
[12] ‘Make the G8 history’ By Stuart Hodkinson, Red Pepper, July 2005.
[13] If one visits the newly created Dept. of International Development (DFID) and the G8 websites one would be forgiven for thinking that everything is on track and the world is save in their hands. Toss in some rhetoric, statistics and self-effacing explanations of how hard it is to accomplish significant gains on the Millennium Development goals (yet drive to do all you can for the Department’s “Business Partnership Unit” which reveals the real intentions behind the Department as a whole) and there you have another quango headed by cabinet minister Hilary Benn MP with the inevitable cracks of impartiality will begin to appear if not intentionally created. Set up to filter direct action and further apply bureaucratic obstacles, political manipulation takes the place of clear, unambiguous directives. The case studies, and funding alone, although with merit, indicate a symptomatic and piecemeal approach that once again does not incorporate an overall strategy. that ensures a free-for-all competitive dash where the structure of suffering is allowed to be brushed under the global carpet.
[14] ‘Cruel to be kind?’ by David Rieff, The Guardian, Friday June 24, 2005.
[15] Ibid.
[16]www.doctorswithoutborders.org.
[17] ‘Geldof’s Year’ The Guardian, December 28, 2005.
[18] p.166; Political Ponerology – A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes By Andrew Lobaczewski.