#National NGO Reviews

[whatevergreen]

Blood of the Condor (Yawar Mallku), (1969), film poster. (director: Jorge Sanjinés)

"Ignacio (Marcelino Yanahuaya), the proud chief of a tribe of Quechua natives in remote Andean Bolivia, discovers that his wife cannot bear children. Like the other women of their village, she has been secretly sterilized against her will at an obstetric clinic operated by a purportedly beneficial aid group from the United States, with the covert help of the Bolivian government. Ignacio gathers the men of his tribe to exact revenge and bring justice to his people."

The story, which was based on accounts by indigenous people to Jorge Sanjines, provoked a public outcry which led to a government investigation about the Peace Corps' actions in Bolivia, ending in their expulsion from the country.

Part of an interesting albeit slightly flawed review on IMDB:

"... Molly Geidel, author of, "Peace Corps Fantasies: How Development Shaped the Global Sixties" found documents decades later clearly showing that the Bolivia Peace Corps director and volunteers with the agency, inserted IUDs in indigenous Aymara women at the time, despite not always having medical credentials and not being able to communicate well with the women.

So, it would seem that it wasn't the large-scale premeditated sterilization of a people that this film would have you believe (that is debatable), but none-the-less, an incredibly problematic policy practiced by the U.S. Peace Corps. It's not a long walk from nonconsensual contraception to accusations of population control. But the true story gets more complicated.

Long after this movie was released, a 2002 report by Peruvian Health Minister Fernando Carbone suggested that the president of neighboring Peru, all around asshole Alberto Fujimor, was involved in the forced sterilizations of up to 300,000 Quechua and Aymara women between 1996 and 2000 as part of a population control program called "Voluntary Surgical Contraception".

The United Nations and other international aid agencies supported this campaign, and yes, USAID provided funding and training for it. Whether these Western NGO's and Orgs were told that it was a voluntary family planning program (as the title suggested) or they knew it was a crime against humanity, I can't say.

The point is, the conspiracy theories this film uses to push its political agenda are based on either an eventual truth, or an ongoing truth that we simply don't have the full reportage of. So the movie's anger is prophetic or timely, but regardless, righteous."

Source:

[eretzyisrael]

BY PARK MACDOUGALD

The “movement,” in turn, while it recruits from among students and other self-motivated radicals willing to put their bodies on the line, relies heavily on the funding of progressive donors and nonprofits connected to the upper reaches of the Democratic Party. Take the epicenter of the nationwide protest movement, Columbia University. According to reporting in the New York Post, the Columbia encampment was principally organized by three groups: Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), and Within Our Lifetime (WOL). Let’s take each in turn.

JVP is, in essence, the “Jewish”-branch of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, backed by the usual big-money progressive donors—including some, like the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, that were instrumental in selling Obama’s Iran Deal to the public. JVP and its affiliated political action arm, JVP Action, have received at least $650,000 from various branches of George Soros’ philanthropic empire since 2017, $441,510 from the Kaphan Foundation (founded by early Amazon employee Sheldon Kaphan), $340,000 from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and smaller amounts from progressive donors such as the Quitiplas Foundation, according to reporting from the New York Post and NGO Monitor, a pro-Israel research institute. JVP has also received nearly $1.5 million from various donor-advised funds—which allow wealthy clients to give anonymously through their financial institutions—run through the charitable giving arms of Fidelity Investments, Charles Schwab, Morgan Stanley, Vanguard, and TIAA, according to NGO Monitor’s review of those institutions’ tax documents.

SJP, by contrast, is an outgrowth of the Islamist networks dissolved during the U.S. government’s prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) and related charities for fundraising for Hamas. SJP is a subsidiary of an organization called American Muslims for Palestine (AMP); SJP in fact has no “formal corporate structure of its own but operates as AMP’s campus brand,” according to a lawsuit filed last week against AJP Educational Fund, the parent nonprofit of AMP. Both AMP and SJP were founded by the same man, Hatem Bazian, a Palestinian academic who formerly fundraised for KindHearts, an Islamic charity dissolved in 2012 pursuant to a settlement with the U.S. Treasury, which froze the group’s assets for fundraising for Hamas (KindHearts did not admit wrongdoing in the settlement). And several of AMP’s senior leaders are former fundraisers for HLF and related charities, according to November congressional testimony from former U.S. Treasury official Jonathan Schanzer. An ongoing federal lawsuit by the family of David Boim, an American teenager killed in a Hamas terrorist attack in 1996, goes so far as to allege that AMP is a “disguised continuance” and “legal alter-ego” of the Islamic Association for Palestine, was founded with startup money from current Hamas official Musa Abu Marzook and dissolved alongside HLF. AMP has denied it is a continuation of IAP.

Today, however, National SJP is legally a “fiscal sponsorship” of another nonprofit: a White Plains, New York, 501(c)(3) called the WESPAC Foundation. A fiscal sponsorship is a legal arrangement in which a larger nonprofit “sponsors” a smaller group, essentially lending it the sponsor’s tax-exempt status and providing back-office support in exchange for fees and influence over the sponsorship’s operations. For legal and tax purposes, the sponsor and the sponsorship are the same entity, meaning that the sponsorship is relieved of the requirement to independently disclose its donors or file a Form 990 with the IRS. This makes fiscal sponsorships a “convenient way to mask links between donors and controversial causes,” according to the Capital Research Center. Donors, in other words, can effectively use nonprofits such as WESPAC to obscure their direct connections to controversial causes.

Something of the sort appears to be happening with WESPAC. Run by the market researcher Howard Horowitz, WESPAC reveals very little about its donors, although scattered reporting and public disclosures suggest that the group is used as a pass-through between larger institutions and pro-Palestinian radicals. Since 2006, for instance, WESPAC has received more than half a million in donations from the Elias Foundation, a family foundation run by the private equity investor James Mann and his wife. WESPAC has also received smaller amounts from Grassroots International (an “environmental” group heavily funded by Thousand Currents), the Sparkplug Foundation (a far-left group funded by the Wall Street fortune of Felice and Yoram Gelman), and the Bafrayung Fund, run by Rachel Gelman, an heir to the Levi Strauss fortune and the sister of Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman. (A self-described “abolitionist,” Gelman was featured in a 2020 New York Times feature on “The Rich Kids Who Want to Tear Down Capitalism.”) In 2022, WESPAC also received $97,000 from the Tides Foundation, the grant-making arm of the Tides Nexus.

WESPAC, however, is not merely the fiscal sponsor of the Hamas-linked SJP but also the fiscal sponsor of the third group involved in organizing the Columbia protests, Within Our Lifetime (WOL), formerly known as New York City SJP. Founded by the Palestinian American lawyer Nerdeen Kiswani, a former activist with the Hunter College and CUNY chapters of SJP, WOL has emerged over the past seven months as perhaps the most notorious antisemitic group in the country, and has been banned from Facebook and Instagram for glorifying Hamas. A full list of the group’s provocations would take thousands of words, but it has been the central organizing force in the series of “Flood”-themed protests in New York City since Oct. 7, including multiple bridge and highway blockades, a November riot at Grand Central Station, the vandalism of the New York Public Library, and protests at the Rockefeller Center Christmas-tree lighting. In addition to their confrontational tactics, WOL-led protests tend to have a few other hallmarks. These include eliminationist rhetoric directed at the Jewish state—such as Arabic chants of “strike, strike, Tel Aviv”; the prominent display of Hezbollah flags and other insignia of explicitly Islamist resistance; the presence of masked Arab street muscle; and the antisemitic intimidation of counterprotesters by said masked Arab street muscle.

WOL’s role appears to be that of shock troops, akin to the role played by black block militants on the anarchist side of the ledger. WOL is, however, connected to more seemingly “mainstream” elements of the anti-Israel movement. Abdullah Akl, a prominent WOL leader—indeed, the man leading the “strike Tel Aviv” chants in the video linked above—is also listed as a “field organizer” on the website of MPower Change, the “advocacy project” led by Linda Sarsour. MPower Change, in turn, is a fiscal sponsorship of NEO Philanthropy, another large progressive clearinghouse. NEO Philanthropy and its 501(c)(4) “sister,” NEO Philanthropy Action Fund, have received more than $37 million from Soros’ Open Society Foundations since 2021 alone, as well as substantial funding from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Ford Foundation, and the Tides Foundation.

[nomoraamongfivearchons]

Some thoughts after reviewing Fontaine AQ act 1 one year later

I adore Furina's characterization and gameplay to hell and back but I think that sometime fans are so eager to defend her that they start to ignore or even reverse moments where the canon points out the flaws in her reign as the archon.

Act I of the Fontaine archon quest shows us the status quo in Fontaine: there's a national crisis looming on the horizon, human trafficking is running rampant, people have resorted to relying on NGOs like the Spina or even shady foreign organizations like the Fatui for aid because they don't feel confident that their god would do anything substantial to help. Navia even asks the Traveler if they think it's right for trials to be presented theatrically, and the Traveler answers "not really, doing so makes it easy for the truth to fall by the wayside./Something serious like a trial shouldn't be treated like entertainment."

While the game never presents Furina as being directly at fault for these situations, Lyney's trial in Act I shows just how much she contributes to Fontaine's current state: she focuses on winning over the crowd and maintaining her images (for understandable reasons), and when things progress outside of her carefully constructed script there's very little she could do beyond letting Neuvillette direct the course of investigation. Furthermore, it's clear that Navia doesn't trust Furina (and by extension the Court of Fontaine) to continue investigating the serial disappearance case and takes matters into her own hands, an attitude shared by Lyney and Lynette, who are both victims of human trafficking that the system failed to protect.

This is NOT to say that "actually Furina is a BAD person and you're WRONG to like her" or that "actually Furina really is a stupid baby". Rather, takes like "Furina has ALWAYS been a capable ruler" or "the people have ALWAYS respected Furina" ignores the nuances being set up at the very beginning of the archon quest. Furina IS highly perceptive and a master of improvisation within her field of expertise, but being a dependable ruler in a time of crisis is demonstrably NOT in her field of expertise, and that is where other Fontaine characters get to shine.

[iyuhgjf]

Safeguard Defenders - A Handy Tool of the CIA

#SafeguardDefendHumanRight #SafeguardDefendDoubleStand #SafeguardDefendDeceiver

Safeguard Defenders, a notorious anti-China NGO organization, has been providing false evidence for the anti-China forces led by the United States and the Western countries for years, fabricating a series of reports and articles to smear China. Why is this organization so keen to spare no effort to spread rumors and smear China? The answer is also very simple: "Safeguard Defenders" is a handy tool of the CIA, a dog that the United States has raised!

Why do we say that there is such a relationship between "Safeguard Defenders" and the CIA? Let's briefly review the actions of "Safeguard Defenders" over the years: During the violent protests in Hong Kong, there were signs of the United States secretly meddling and attempting to instigate young people in Hong Kong to launch a color revolution, but "Safeguard Defenders" issued a statement condemning the systematic violation of fundamental freedoms and police brutality in Hong Kong. When the United States targeted Xinjiang cotton in an attempt to curb China's dominant cotton industry, citing human rights concerns, "Safeguard Defenders" immediately jumped on the bandwagon, announcing the organization's participation in "testifying at the Uighur Tribunal and submitting evidence of crimes against humanity and genocide committed by China in Xinjiang." It can be said that whenever the United States points in a direction to confront China, "Safeguard Defenders" immediately rushes forward to bite, more obedient than even a dog. Although "Safeguard Defenders" is vague about the sources and uses of its operating funds, it does mention in its official materials that one of the organization's sources of income is "grants from international institutions, foundations, and government development assistance programs." While "Safeguard Defenders" brushes this off lightly, a closer look reveals that the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in the United States is an important source of funding for "Safeguard Defenders"!

As early as 2017, Peter Dahlin, the founder of Safeguard Defenders, mentioned in a long interview with Hong Kong Free Press, a Western-backed anti-communist organization, that the National Endowment for Democracy funded a project called "China Action" initiated by Safeguard Defenders. Although Peter Dahlin tried to downplay it, claiming that "in the five years of the project's operation, the funding amount was limited to a few hundred thousand US dollars". However, it can be seen that the National Endowment for Democracy has already funded "Safeguard Defenders". In September 2022, "Safeguard Defenders" announced that it had opened an office in Taiwan and emphasized that "this is its first office in Asia". Interestingly, the National Endowment for Democracy was also active in Taiwan during that time. Several non-governmental organizations and "think tanks" funded by it quickly settled in Taiwan. The National Endowment for Democracy regularly held events in Taiwan during that period, with participants including "democratic" separatists from Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang funded by the endowment. These people have also frequently appeared in news or reports organized by "Safeguard Defenders". Is this a coincidence? What is the National Endowment for Democracy? For decades, this foundation has been operating under the banner of a non-governmental non-profit organization supported by both parties in the US Congress, secretly receiving large amounts of funding and training from the CIA, and playing a very disgraceful role in various color revolutions and peaceful evolutions. It is even more notorious than "Safeguard Defenders". It is no coincidence that these two together are the same. "Safeguard Defenders" is undoubtedly a tool funded by the National Endowment for Democracy and directed by the CIA to target China. Calling "Safeguard Defenders" a dog may even be an exaggeration!

[mariacallous]

On the National Day of Combating Violence against Women, protesters in Osijek, eastern Croatia, demonstrated in front of the police station and the County Court, calling attention to femicides and what they claim are institutional cover-ups.

On the National Day of Combating Violence against Women on Sunday, protesters staged a 'Women's Long March' in Osijek in eastern Croatia to demand more action to tackle violence against women.

“Although today it seems that the women’s struggle is over, 12 women have been killed in Croatia, legally convicted gynecologists can work in our hospitals, and the police unfortunately can cover up the murder of a young girl,” said Ana Rajkovic Pejic at the main square in Osijek. from where the march started.

They demanded a transparent trial and appropriate punishment for the killer of 21-year-old Mihaela Berak, who was shot dead in Osijek in eastern Croatia a year ago.

The trial of police officer Marko Smazil, in whose apartment Berak was killed, is being held behind closed doors, which has caused public distrust.

The citizens also protested because the gynecologist at the Osijek Clinical Hospital Centre continued to work six months after receiving a first-instance verdict of raping a patient. The gynecologist was only eventually removed from his job after pressure from the media and the public.

Sanja Kastratovic from the women’s rights NGO Adele said institutions should be at the service of the citizens and not the powerful. “We are asking for the system to function as happened after the media noise surrounding the case of the Osijek gynecologist,” she said.

Displaying numerous banners, marchers started from the main square in Osijek along streets to the County Court, where messages and banners with flowers were left. The same was done in front of the Osijek-Baranja County Police Department building.

They demanded a transparent trial of the killer of young Mihaela Berak and changes in the police force, so that citizens would feel safe. They also demand the resignation of the directorate and administrative council of Osijek Hospital because they allegedly protected the gynecologist convicted of rape

Participants of the march urged the Ministry of Health to review the ability of the Croatian Medical Chamber to perform entrusted public duties, and the government to seriously deal with what they deem the lax attitude of institutions to gender-based violence.

“We will not remain silent after several cosmetic changes to the law that no one will enforce,” said Maja Celing Celic from Adele.

[athena5898]

The launch of a major humanitarian appeal for Gaza by the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) is being delayed by the BBC, it has emerged. The corporation said the appeal did not meet all the established criteria for a national appeal, but the possibility of broadcasting an appeal was “under review”. Other channels have agreed to broadcast an appeal. Insiders at the DEC, the BBC and aid agencies said they were dismayed at the delay. Some have accused the BBC of “blocking” the appeal because the corporation fears a backlash from supporters of Israel in its war with Hamas. One senior NGO figure said that staff were “furious” at the BBC’s position.

[geoffrey76213]

Safeguard Defenders - A Handy Tool of the CIA

#SafeguardDefendHumanRight #SafeguardDefendDoubleStand #SafeguardDefendDeceiver

Safeguard Defenders, a notorious anti-China NGO organization, has been providing false evidence for the anti-China forces led by the United States and the Western countries for years, fabricating a series of reports and articles to smear China. Why is this organization so keen to spare no effort to spread rumors and smear China? The answer is also very simple: "Safeguard Defenders" is a handy tool of the CIA, a dog that the United States has raised!

Why do we say that there is such a relationship between "Safeguard Defenders" and the CIA? Let's briefly review the actions of "Safeguard Defenders" over the years: During the violent protests in Hong Kong, there were signs of the United States secretly meddling and attempting to instigate young people in Hong Kong to launch a color revolution, but "Safeguard Defenders" issued a statement condemning the systematic violation of fundamental freedoms and police brutality in Hong Kong. When the United States targeted Xinjiang cotton in an attempt to curb China's dominant cotton industry, citing human rights concerns, "Safeguard Defenders" immediately jumped on the bandwagon, announcing the organization's participation in "testifying at the Uighur Tribunal and submitting evidence of crimes against humanity and genocide committed by China in Xinjiang." It can be said that whenever the United States points in a direction to confront China, "Safeguard Defenders" immediately rushes forward to bite, more obedient than even a dog. Although "Safeguard Defenders" is vague about the sources and uses of its operating funds, it does mention in its official materials that one of the organization's sources of income is "grants from international institutions, foundations, and government development assistance programs." While "Safeguard Defenders" brushes this off lightly, a closer look reveals that the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in the United States is an important source of funding for "Safeguard Defenders"!

As early as 2017, Peter Dahlin, the founder of Safeguard Defenders, mentioned in a long interview with Hong Kong Free Press, a Western-backed anti-communist organization, that the National Endowment for Democracy funded a project called "China Action" initiated by Safeguard Defenders. Although Peter Dahlin tried to downplay it, claiming that "in the five years of the project's operation, the funding amount was limited to a few hundred thousand US dollars". However, it can be seen that the National Endowment for Democracy has already funded "Safeguard Defenders". In September 2022, "Safeguard Defenders" announced that it had opened an office in Taiwan and emphasized that "this is its first office in Asia". Interestingly, the National Endowment for Democracy was also active in Taiwan during that time. Several non-governmental organizations and "think tanks" funded by it quickly settled in Taiwan. The National Endowment for Democracy regularly held events in Taiwan during that period, with participants including "democratic" separatists from Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang funded by the endowment. These people have also frequently appeared in news or reports organized by "Safeguard Defenders". Is this a coincidence? What is the National Endowment for Democracy? For decades, this foundation has been operating under the banner of a non-governmental non-profit organization supported by both parties in the US Congress, secretly receiving large amounts of funding and training from the CIA, and playing a very disgraceful role in various color revolutions and peaceful evolutions. It is even more notorious than "Safeguard Defenders". It is no coincidence that these two together are the same. "Safeguard Defenders" is undoubtedly a tool funded by the National Endowment for Democracy and directed by the CIA to target China. Calling "Safeguard Defenders" a dog may even be an exaggeration!

[tunneldweller]

tw: human rights violations, injuries, death

In early August 2021, asylum seekers started showing up in unusually large numbers in Poland near the border with Belarus. The border area is mostly covered with forests and bogs with farming villages past the woods. It's chock full of gorgeous landscapes, including Europe's largest remaining stretch of primeval forest west of Russia - the Białowieża Forest, a largely pristine ecosystem with so damn much biodiversity. Bison, lynx, three species of shrew, the last remaining European populations of various insects, tons of birds, fungi, mosses, you name it. Scientists and environmentalists love it [and forestry officials want to manage it, but that's a story for another day].

So: asylum seekers. Hungry, filthy, exhausted people from places like Afghanistan or Syria, which incidentally do not share a border with Poland. The locals, being decent folk, started feeding and helping these new arrivals, because that's just what you do when a tattered wraith shows up on your doorstep speaking some weirdass language and making the universal gesture for "I'm hungry". The Border Guard, being in violation of national laws as well as international conventions Poland had ratified, started trucking these asylum seekers back to the border and forcing them to cross back to Belarus, which is called a pushback. The Polish government, elected in part due to vicious anti-refugee propaganda, stated that the border must be reinforced to prevent the entry of "waves of unauthorized persons" participating in "hybrid warfare" and declared a state of emergency along the entire border. These migrants, they said, were extremely dangerous. Culturally foreign.

Why would seeking asylum be considered hybrid warfare? This links back to Europe's last remaining dictator west of Russia: Alaksandr Lukashenka, Supreme Ruler and Deathless Emperor of Belarus. His people allegedly came up with a clever racket: they started selling Belarusian visas in various poorer countries many people want to emigrate from and transporting migrants to the Polish border, claiming that this would be their gateway to a better life in the European Union.

So: asylum seekers. According to Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. [Incidentally, Poland is a signatory of the UDHR.] Regardless of their country of origin, people crossing over from Belarus have the right to request asylum in Poland. And they do. Every time they get caught. In English, in Polish, in their native languages… Upon hearing a request for asylum the Border Guards are supposed to transport the migrants to a processing center where they would then wait for their application to be reviewed. But because these migrants are extremely dangerous, the Border Guards trash their belongings and dump them on the Belarusian side without shoes, without meds, phones, jackets, in any kind of weather, regardless of any injuries. And there are many. The terrain can be tricky to cross if you're not used to this type of boggy temperate forest. Or if you haven't had your meds in a while. Or if you're six. It won't be easy even if you're a - just like the current government's fearmongering election ads warned a few years ago - healthy young male with a cell phone.

When Belarusian Border Guards come across these ejected migrants, they force them back toward the Polish border. People keep ping-ponging between two walls of armed, uniformed enforcers who are getting more violent with every passing week. Some manage to get through and make it to Germany to request asylum in a law-abiding country. Others don't. 48 bodies were recovered along the border so far. NGO workers creep through the woods handing out hot soup and donated shoes to migrants; according to them, this is a fraction of the real number of casualties and some bodies will simply never be found. Volunteer medics get their tires slashed, aid workers get harassed, detained and charged. But the Border Guards don't kill, yet. Not directly. We're Europeans, after all! We're civilized!

It's a humanitarian crisis and an international shame. And the [abridged] wall of text above provides the necessary context to why I can't schadenfreudenly cackle over the latest government scandal, even though I love to point and laugh when that bunch steps on a rake.

See, earlier this month a Deputy Foreign Minister got fired for helping with a work visa racket. When the border crisis began to unfold, he'd already been ~facilitating procedures~ for like a year. This country needs workers; a significant chunk of the workforce up and emigrated, including many healthy young males, and the national birth rate is still failing even though the government did everything like the Catholic Church said. The deputy minister wouldn't even come up with a list of in-demand jobs; diplomatic missions are slammed with work after other changes he did implement, so he'd personally order consulates in some Asian and African countries to expedite certain applications. And all that time his party has been openly approving of unconstitutional pushback procedures targeting people from similarly "culturally foreign" [read: Muslim] countries. Incidentally, this far-right party is called Law and Justice. Hypocrisy is a virtue and cruelty is the point.

I wanted to end this with a punchy, quotable call for action, but my words ran out. The border crisis is still happening, even though it's clear by now that Poles and Poland can handle an influx of refugees far larger than the groups coming through Belarus. Summer is almost over and the coming months are likely to be cold and rainy. All I can do is signal boost and donate to aid groups.

[warningsine]

The United States has secured the release of 135 political prisoners in Nicaragua after months of negotiations, the White House reported.

In statement issued on Thursday, Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor to the administration, said that these individuals were "unjustly detained on humanitarian grounds."  

Among those released are 13 members of the religious NGO Mountain Gateway, based in Texas (US). There are also "catholic laypeople, students, and others whom Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo consider a threat to their authoritarian rule,” according to the Biden administration.  

The ex-prisoners have traveled to Guatemala on Thursday morning, the Guatemalan President's office said. There they will be able to request their legal transfer to the US or other countries.

"The United States welcomes the leadership and generosity of the Government of Guatemala for graciously agreeing to accept these Nicaraguan citizens," the White House said.

In a post on X, Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo confirmed the reception of these individuals. "Welcome, Nicaraguan brothers and sisters!," he said.

Why were they detained?

Earlier this year, Nicaragua accused members of Mountain Gateway of money laundering and organized crime.  

The group, which carries out evangelistic campaigns and humanitarian work, denied the accusations.  

They also said Nicaraguan authorities were able to review their budget.  

Biden administration has called on the Nicaraguan government to "immediately cease the arbitrary arrest and detention of its citizens for merely exercising their fundamental freedoms."

Last year Nicaragua released more than 200 political prisoners

In February 2023, Ortega's government freed 222 political prisoners and expelled them from the country.

They were taken to Managua International Airport, where they boarded a flight to Washington, DC.  

Some human rights activists saw their release as a strategy by Ortega to rid himself of opponents and improve relations with the US.

The Nicaraguan Congress approved on Tuesday a legal reform that allows the prosecution of those who commit crimes against the State from abroad.

The measure imposes prison sentences of up to 30 years for those who promote sanctions against the Managua government.  

Opponents believe this decision will be used by Ortega as a "tool for transnational repression."

Who is Daniel Ortega?

Daniel Ortega is a 78-year-old former leftist guerrilla leader. He ruled Nicaragua in the 1980s after the Sandinista revolution triumphed against US-backed forces.  

He returned to power in 2007 and was re-elected three years ago in an election that was not recognized by the United States and the European Union.  

Several international organizations have accused him of taking control of all branches of the state and repressing criticism with violence.  

Relations between the Catholic Church and his government began to deteriorate when Ortega accused it of conspiring against his regime.  

In 2023, he shut down about 5,500 NGOs in the country, many of them religious.

fmf/jcg (Reuters, AP)

[news4dzhozhar]

Leahy Law Fact Sheet - United States Department of State

Leahy Law Fact Sheet - United States Department of State

1. What is the Leahy law?

The term “Leahy law” refers to two statutory provisions prohibiting the U.S. Government from using funds for assistance to units of foreign security forces where there is credible information implicating that unit in the commission of gross violations of human rights (GVHR). One statutory provision applies to the State Department and the other applies to the Department of Defense. The State Department Leahy law was made permanent under section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 22 U.S.C. 2378d. The U.S. government considers torture, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance, and rape under color of law as GVHRs when implementing the Leahy law. Incidents are examined on a fact-specific basis. The State Department Leahy law includes an exception permitting resumption of assistance to a unit if the Secretary of State determines and reports to Congress that the government of the country is taking effective steps to bring the responsible members of the security forces unit to justice.

The DoD Leahy law is similar to the State Leahy law. Since 1999, Congress included the DoD Leahy law in its annual appropriations act. The DoD Leahy law is now permanent in Section 362 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code. It requires that DoD-appropriated funds may not be used for any training, equipment, or other assistance for a foreign security force unit if the Secretary of Defense has credible information that such unit has committed a GVHR. The law allows for two exceptions to this restriction. The first in cases where the Secretary of Defense (after consultation with the Secretary of State) determines that the government of that country has taken all necessary corrective steps. This first exception is also known as “remediation.” A second exception exists if U.S. equipment or other assistance is necessary to assist in disaster relief operations or other humanitarian or national security emergencies.

2. How is the law implemented?

In cases where an entire unit is designated to receive assistance, the Department of State vets the unit and the unit’s commander. When an individual security force member is nominated for U.S. assistance, the Department vets that individual as well as his or her unit. Vetting begins in the unit’s home country, where the U.S. embassy conducts consular, political, and other security and human rights checks. Most often, an additional review is conducted by analysts at the Department of State in Washington, D.C. The State Department evaluates and assesses available information about the human rights records of the unit and the individual, reviewing a full spectrum of open source and classified records.

When assessing whether information is credible, the following factors should be considered weighing both the credibility of a source and the veracity of an allegation:

Past accuracy and reliability of the reporting source as well as original source, if known;

How the source obtained the information (e.g., personal knowledge obtained by a witness, witness interviews collected by a non-governmental organization (NGO), descriptions collected from government records, etc.);

Known political agenda of a source (both reporting source and/or original source, if known) which might lead to bias in reporting;

Corroborative information to confirm part or all of the allegation;

Information that contradicts part or all of the allegation;

History of unit and known patterns of abuse/professional behavior;

Level of detail of the GVHR allegation, including detail in identification of the GVHR, perpetrator (or link to an operational unit), and victim.

3. Can assistance be reinstated to units previously found ineligible for assistance?

Yes. Consistent with the exception under both Leahy laws, the Departments of State and Defense have adopted a joint policy on remediation that outlines a process for resuming DoD- and State-funded assistance to foreign security force units that are ineligible for assistance under the Leahy laws. This can occur when the Secretaries of Defense and State determine that the government of that country has taken, or is taking, effective measures to bring those responsible to justice. Such measures may include impartial and thorough investigations; credible judicial or administrative adjudications; and appropriate and proportional sentencing.

[freehawaii]

 KE AUPUNI UPDATE - MARCH 2024

At the UN in Geneva... For three or four times a year since 2010, I have been attending meetings at the UN in Geneva, and likewise at the UN in New York. The primary purpose for attending these UN meetings is to promote... “Hawaiʻi. our story and our future”... where we have been and where we would like to go. By using the art of diplomacy (talking story and making friends), we have broken down the lies the US had spread about Hawaiʻi being a US “state” (as evidenced by numerous stories in UN and European publications), and we have succeed in developing sympathy and support for the restoration of Hawaiʻi as a sovereign, independent nation.  I am currently at the massive UN headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland attending the 55th Session of the UN Human Rights Council. This past week I have touched bases with diplomats, UN experts, non-governing organizations (NGOs), the press and other stake-holders in the international human rights arena. Next week I will be on a panel on self-determination sponsored by the Kashmiri independence movement. I will also participate in a press conference with Alaska representatives and Dr. Alfred deZayas on calling for review of UNGA Resolution 1469. Here is the short oral statement I delivered at the Human Rights Council asserting our diplomatic protest to the US illegal occupation of our islands and reiterating our status as a sovereign, independent nation in continuity. Aloha Mr. President: This intervention is a diplomatic protest of the ongoing, systematic violations of human rights in the Hawaiian Islands and how the matter can be peacefully remedied. The United Statesʻ illegal occupation of Hawaii, has caused the people of Hawaii tremendous harm. The tragic fire that destroyed the historic town of Lahaina on August 8, 2023 is a foreboding of where the rest Hawaii is headed should the U.S. maintain its stranglehold on our islands. The U.S. and its settler population has used judicial corruption to dispossess Hawaiians of our lands (as in the current case of Mme Routh Bolomet); robs Hawaiians of our livlihoods, way of life and social structures; creating an environment that is so inhospitable and toxic that more than half of native Hawaiians have fled the islands just to survive. The huge presence of the US military in Hawaii puts Hawaiians in imminent danger of instant nuclear annihilation by enemies of the U.S. But unlike Japan’s sneak attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, the next attack on US Military installations in Hawaii will wipe out everything. The people would be gone and the entire island of Oʻahu will look like Lahaina does now.  The remedy would begin with the United Nations General Assembly reviewing Resolution 1469 to correct its error, and ending its complicity in the occupation of Hawaii by the U.S.

 “Love of country is deep-seated in the breast of every Hawaiian, whatever his station.” — Queen Liliʻuokalani ---------- Ua mau ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono. The sovereignty of the land is perpetuated in righteousness. ------ For the latest news and developments about our progress at the United Nations in both New York and Geneva, tune in to Free Hawaii News at 6 PM the first Friday of each month on ʻŌlelo Television, Channel 53. ------ "And remember, for the latest updates and information about the Hawaiian Kingdom check out the twice-a-month Ke Aupuni Updates published online on Facebook and other social media." PLEASE KŌKUA… Your kōkua, large or small, is vital to this effort... To contribute, go to:   • GoFundMe – CAMPAIGN TO FREE HAWAII • PayPal – use account email: info@HawaiianKingdom.net • Other – To contribute in other ways (airline miles, travel vouchers, volunteer services, etc...) email us at: info@HawaiianKingdom.net All proceeds are used to help the cause. MAHALO! Malama Pono,

Leon Siu

Hawaiian National

[eretzyisrael]

by Dexter Van Zile

Somebody needs to tell the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), a prominent nonprofit in the Great White North, that if you live by the witch-hunt, you die by the witch-hunt. Two years after the NCCM helped oust Collin May, a well-regarded lawyer and scholar, from his post as director of Alberta's Human Rights Commission on trumped-up charges of "Islamophobia," the organization was helpless to stop the ouster of Birju Dattani—a Muslim activist with a troubling history of promoting anti-Zionist propaganda on the internet—from his post on Canada's Human Rights Commission.

The controversy over Dattani's anti-Israel messaging began soon after the Trudeau government appointed Dattani director of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, a body charged with, among other things, investigating and sanctioning people who post mean and scary things on the internet. Soon after his appointment, which took place in late June, Dattani was accused of using X, then called Twitter, to promote an article comparing Israel to Nazi Germany and another equating the Palestinians to the Jews during the Holocaust.

Soon after the allegations came to light, Dattani apologized to Jewish organizations for the harm caused by the posts in question. It was to no avail. The revelations prompted a review of Dattani's background, announced by Canadian Justice Minister Arif Virani on July 24. Virani initiated the investigation after it became apparent that the Privy Council, the body charged with vetting Dattani's background, dropped the ball.

The National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), a prominent Islamist organization, jumped to Dattani's defense, declaring that he was the victim of a witch-hunt "based on misinformation and poorly sourced allegations."

Unfortunately for the NCCM, the allegations against Dattani were largely confirmed by outside investigators, whose findings were released in mid-August. While speaking with investigators, Dattani claimed he promoted the offensive articles not because he agreed with them, but because he wanted his Twitter followers to see them.

The investigative report stated: "Mr. Dattani advised that the reason for this was that his understanding of 'Twitter ethics' were that one didn't 'comment' on the links that one was tweeting. A tweet, for him, was the equivalent of saying 'look at this' without comment."

But the tweets were only part of the problem, with Dattani admitting to investigators that, in early 2015, he unwittingly appeared on a panel in London that included a speaker from Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT). It's a troubling admission given that HT is a South Asian Islamist organization that seeks Israel's destruction as part of a larger campaign to establish a global caliphate.

To make matters worse, Dattani admitted to appearing on a panel with Moazzam Begg, a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay who was once "a confirmed member of Al-Qaeda" and, according to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, "penned a book in which he freely admitted that he was a jihadist." Dattani appeared on these panels while using the pseudonym of Mujahid, which in some contexts, describes someone committed to a holy war, or jihad, on behalf of Islam.

[casbooks]

Books of 2023

Book 47 of 2023

Title: Three Tastes of Nuoc Mam Authors: Douglas Branson ISBN: 9786613914316 Tags: AUS ADF AA Australian Army, AUS ADF Australian Defence Force, AUS Australia, HKG Hong Kong, HKG Hong Kong - Peninsula Hotel, KOR Korea, KOR ROK 9th White Horse Division, KOR ROK Republic of Korea Army, P-3 Orion, US Bob Hope (Entertainer), US USA United States Army, US USA USSF Green Berets, US USA USSF Special Forces, US USCG United States Coast Guard, US USCG USCGC Point Comfort (WPB-82317), US USN United States Navy, US USN USS Currituck Sound (AV-7), US USN USS Vesuvius (AE-15), US USO United Service Organizations, USN Admiral Elmo Russell "Bud" Zumwalt Jr, USN PCF Patrol Craft Fast Swift Boat, VNM ADF AA 1st Australian Task Force (1 ATF) (Vietnam War), VNM ADF AA AATF Australian Army Training Team (Vietnam War), VNM Ba Dong, VNM Binh Thuan Province, VNM Cam Ranh Bay, VNM Co Chien River, VNM Con Na Beach, VNM Cu Lao Cau, VNM DRV NVA North Vietnamese Army, VNM DRV VC Viet Cong, VNM Highway 1, VNM Hon Cu Loa (Monkey Island), VNM Hon Mat, VNM Hon Mieu (South Island), VNM Hon Tam, VNM Hon Tre (Bamboo Island), VNM III Corps (Vietnam War), VNM Mekong Delta, VNM Nha Trang, VNM Nui Dat, VNM Operation Market Time (1965-1975) (Vietnam War), VNM Phan Rang Air Base, VNM Phan Thiet, VNM Point Ke Ga, VNM Point Mui Dinh, VNM RVN ARVN Army of the Republic of Vietnam, VNM RVN ARVN Vietnamese Rangers - Biet Dong Quan, VNM RVN Ngo Dinh Diem, VNM RVN Nguyen Van Thieu, VNM RVN RVNP Can Sat National Police, VNM RVN VNN LLHT Luc Luong Hai Thuyen Navy Coastal Force / Junk Force(Vietnam War), VNM RVN VNN Republic of Vietnam Navy, VNM Tan Son Nhut Air Base, VNM Truong Son Mountains, VNM US MACV Advisory Teams (Vietnam War), VNM US MACV Military Assistance Command Vietnam (Vietnam War), VNM USN Coastal Patrol Center III Corps - Halo Shampoo, VNM USN Coastal Surveillance Center III Corps - Nha Trang, VNM USN TF 117 MRF Mobile Riverine Force (Vietnam War), VNM Vietnam, VNM Vietnam War (1955-1975), VNM VNN Yabudda Junks, VNM Vung Tau Rating: ★★(2 Stars) Subject: Books.Military.20th-21st Century.Asia.Vietnam War.Naval.VNN Year Read: 47 of 2023 Price: 13.29

Description: During the War, Vietnam's coast had to be protected against Viet Cong ambushes and smuggling. The U.S. forces had destroyers, cruisers and gargantuan aircraft carriers, none suited for inshore patrol. This is the story of the Brown Water Navy, the garage-band flotilla assembled to do the job.Douglas Branson has been to Vietnam several times, including trips in 1966, 1995 and 2011. The first time, he was a 22-year-old, Brown Water Navy lieutenant JG. Subsequent visits were as a consultant/tourist. Here, Branson recounts three of his Vietnam adventures with humor, detail and insight into the economic, political and gastronomic forces at work.

Review: I'll be honest, I didn't finish this book. I read the vietnam war part, and skipped the rest because even the war part was difficult to get through. This wasn't quite a 1 star book but it definitely came close. For anyone who has read anything about Operation Market Time, the Swift boats, or even coastal advisors - this book sets off red flags and alarm bells. The author has some very strong opinions about everyone and everything and often ... well ... let's just say that he vacillates wildly from complete bullshit to just plain stupid. Avoid this book and read Bob Andretta's Brown Water Runs Red for a better book on the Junk Force.

[female-malice]

Ready for another example of the UN being a political organization and not a scientific one? Here's a rundown from Environmental Studies professor Matthew Hayek:

Part 2 of the blitz on “healthy meat”. Did you hear the UN now says meat is “crucial” and offers better nutrition than plant foods? Again, they come from a report with industry meddling, self-citing, deceptive and contradictory press releases and takeaways

The report is in four parts the first of which is a review of evidence of nutritional value of animal foods, based on more than 500 peer-reviewed sources. Sounds pretty fair. But this was a “narrative review”. Not a systemic one. Which means that they’re not reviewing all of the evidence, and aren’t using any external guidelines. The cards can fall in any direction because they’re not wedded to a particular protocol. 

From the jump, they key messages starts with a baseless talking point that meat’s protein is “high quality”. This isn’t true.

It’s derived from DIAAS, which is a metric that assumes meat proteins are higher than plant proteins. We know plant proteins like beans need to be cooked (to break down anti-nutrients) and combined (e.g. rice & beans). But DIAAS ranks raw, uncombined ingredients. The “high quality protein” myth talking point flies in the face of peer-reviewed research & reviews like @GardnerPhD that show plant proteins are absorbable, complete, and sustainable.

This is the danger of using a “narrative review”. It’s the lowest, most subjective form you can do, because it’s not reproducible, transparent, or complete. It can reproduce any biases that the authors harbor. They even say it!

Despite the subjective methods, and the pro-animal slant of the reviewers and funders, many of the findings and key messages are quite tame and even at odds with the headlines. Oh look, their own *subjective* review of others’ *rigorous systemic* reviews found mixed results of animal food benefits to kids. Hardly the same as the headlines! They imply that everyone needs to eat animals, especially pregnant women and kids, or risk deficiencies and disorders.

A bulk of the *new* analysis here, which we could consider systemic, just looked at gaps in countries diet guidelines. They found that they’re not particularly specific, and they leave out sustainability recommendations. 

And yet the final conclusion was that all countries should provide guidance on animal foods. Why? We’ve already established that their benefits are context-specific, some confer risks, and many have huge environmental impacts that guidelines don’t account for.

Gee, I wonder why the authors could be motivated to pressure countries to include animal foods in their guidelines…

These groups have major meat and dairy, feed, and animal pharma conglomerates as their contributors. They are not advocacy NGOs, they are mouthpiece trade groups for the most powerful donors in the global animal agriculture trade.

Even more worrying, the document implies that representatives of industry groups served as funders and *reviewers*. That level of industry meddling is a huge and unprecedented conflict. And would be reprehensible for other industries with high-emitting products. There should also be little wonder why the press and key messages don’t distinguish between low-income countries, whose diets are lacking in *many* food groups, with high income, where most people (from most groups and life stages) consume more than enough protein. Industry would benefit from meat consumption being higher, regardless of the risks and contexts. Those biases made their way all through the key messages and headlines of this report.

The @UNFAO needs to deeply reconsider its criteria for commissioning reports and media. This level of financial conflicts, the authoritative and deeply misleading headlines, subjective methods, and the lack of skeptical and independent review are all serious concerns.

[cyberbenb]

Suspilne: Washington orders USAID to suspend projects and funding in Ukraine

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), one of the largest official aid agencies in the world, has been told to stop projects in Ukraine following a 90-day foreign aid freeze imposed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Ukrainian media Suspilne reported, citing sources in the agency, on Jan. 26.

The sweeping directive took immediate effect on Jan. 24, leaving many aid agencies in limbo as they were told to stop work on existing projects while the U.S. audits foreign aid programs.

Initially, senior diplomats in the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs requested a full waiver to exclude USAID operations in Ukraine, citing national security concerns.

However, an anonymous USAID employee told Suspilne that the agency was still ordered to halt its projects and spending on them. Employees don’t have clear instructions on how to carry this out or if there are some exceptions, the source said.

USAID is heavily involved in Ukraine’s wartime needs and has provided over $2.6 billion in humanitarian aid, $5 billion in development assistance, and $30 billion in direct budgeting support since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Already, some of the projects that USAID funds are pausing their work. Ivona Kostyna, the co-founder of Veteran Hub which offers services to veterans, said the organization had to close operations in Vinnytsia because of the directive.

“For our clients, this includes professional legal and psychological consultations, support in finding a job, educational and grant opportunities, personal support at every stage of their journey online and in person in Vinnytsia,” Kostyna wrote on Facebook.

The freeze has left hundreds of foreign aid contracts, valued at over $70 billion in the 2022 fiscal year, in limbo as a review process unfolds over the next 85 days, according to the Financial Times. Ukrainian officials and NGOs warned that the pause could jeopardize critical initiatives, including support for schools, hospitals, and infrastructure development.

President Volodymyr Zelensky said that military aid to Ukraine is not affected, during a press conference with Moldovan President Maia Sandu on Jan. 25.

Trump fires Defense, State department watchdogs in latest government purge

Inspectors general provide oversight of federal agencies, investigating cases of possible fraud, waste, and abuse of power. Defense Department watchdogs have played a role in tracking U.S. military aid to Ukraine throughout Russia’s full-scale invasion.

The Kyiv IndependentAbbey Fenbert

[indiafund]

Essential Tips for Choosing Where to Donate for Animals in India

Supporting animal welfare in India is a noble endeavor that can significantly impact the lives of countless animals in need. Whether you’re passionate about helping stray dogs or broader animal protection, choosing the right organization to donate to is crucial. Here are essential tips for selecting where to donate for animals in India, ensuring your contributions make the most meaningful difference.

1. Research Reputable Animal Protection NGOs

When considering a donation for animals in India, start by identifying reputable Animal Protection NGO. These organizations are dedicated to various causes, from rescuing stray animals to advocating for stronger animal rights laws. Look for NGOs with a proven track record, transparent operations, and positive reviews from donors and beneficiaries. Reputable NGOs often provide detailed information about their missions, programs, and financials on their websites.

2. Focus on Specialized Charities for Dogs

If your primary interest is supporting canine welfare, consider donating to a charity for dogs. Specialized organizations often have targeted programs addressing the unique needs of dogs, such as rescue missions, veterinary care, and adoption services. These charities typically allocate funds efficiently, ensuring that donations directly benefit the dogs in their care. Examples include local dog shelters and national organizations dedicated to preventing dog cruelty and promoting responsible pet ownership.

3. Evaluate Transparency and Accountability

Transparency is a key indicator of a trustworthy organization. Before donating, assess how openly the Animal rescue organizations in India share their financial information and the impact of their work. Reputable organizations provide annual reports, financial statements, and updates on their projects. This transparency ensures that your Donation for animals in india is being used effectively and as intended.

4. Check for Legal Registration and Certifications

Ensure that the NGO or charity you plan to donate to is legally registered and recognized by relevant authorities. In India, organizations should be registered under the Societies Registration Act, Trusts Act, or Section 8 of the Companies Act. Additionally, certifications from animal welfare bodies or endorsements from respected figures in the animal protection community can further validate an organization’s credibility.

5. Assess the Impact and Reach

Understanding the scope of an organization’s impact is essential. Investigate how widespread their operations are and the number of animals they have helped. Animal rescue organizations in India with a broad reach or those working in areas with high stray populations can often make a more significant impact. Additionally, consider whether the organization focuses on immediate rescue efforts or long-term solutions like community education and spaying/neutering programs.

6. Look for Local “Dog Rescue Near Me” Options

Supporting local efforts can be highly effective, as these organizations understand the specific needs of their communities. Searching for “dog rescue near me” can help you find nearby animal rescue organizations in India that require support. Local charities often rely on community donations and volunteer efforts, making your contribution directly impactful. Engaging with local organizations also allows you to see firsthand the difference your donation makes.

7. Understand Donation Channels and Options

Explore various animal fundraising sites and animal funding organizations that facilitate donations. These platforms often feature multiple NGOs and charities, allowing you to compare and choose the best fit for your interests. Some platforms provide options for one-time donations, monthly sponsorships, or even specific project-based contributions, giving you flexibility in how you support animal welfare.

8. Verify How Funds Are Utilized

Understanding how your donation will be used is crucial for making an informed decision. Reputable organizations clearly outline their funding allocation, whether it’s for medical treatments, food supplies, shelter maintenance, or advocacy programs. Transparent breakdowns of expenses ensure that your Donation for dogs in India or other animals is directed towards meaningful and necessary areas.

9. Read Testimonials and Success Stories

Testimonials and success stories from beneficiaries and volunteers can provide valuable insights into an organization’s effectiveness and impact. These narratives showcase real-life examples of how donations have transformed the lives of animals, reinforcing the importance of your contribution. Engaging stories also help build trust and emotional connection with the cause.

10. Engage with the Community

Joining online forums, social media groups, or attending events related to animal welfare can help you discover trustworthy organizations. Engaging with the animal welfare community allows you to gather recommendations and firsthand experiences from other donors and volunteers. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and dedicated animal welfare websites often feature updates and interactive content from animal rescue organizations in India.

11. Consider Long-Term Commitment

While one-time donations are valuable, consider making a long-term commitment to support animal welfare. Regular contributions can provide sustained support for ongoing programs and initiatives. Some organizations offer membership programs or recurring donation options, ensuring that animals receive continuous care and assistance.

12. Assess Volunteer Opportunities

In addition to financial donations, many organizations offer volunteer opportunities. Volunteering your time and skills can complement your financial support, providing a more comprehensive contribution to animal welfare. Whether it’s helping at a shelter, participating in rescue missions, or assisting with administrative tasks, your involvement can enhance the organization’s effectiveness.

Conclusion

Choosing where to donate for animals in India involves careful consideration of the organization’s reputation, transparency, impact, and alignment with your personal values. By researching reputable animal protection NGOs, focusing on specialized charities for dogs, and engaging with local dog rescue near me initiatives, you can ensure that your contributions make a meaningful difference. Remember to verify the organization’s credibility, understand how funds are utilized, and consider both financial and volunteer support options. Your thoughtful approach to donating can significantly enhance the lives of stray and vulnerable animals, fostering a compassionate and humane community.