Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite View Article Stats
No comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

ICRC Supports Imperialism for Profit

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 5 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 2   Well Said 2   News 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H2 7/18/12
Become a Fan
  (191 fans)

opednews.com

ICRC Supports Imperialism for Profit

ICRC is a predatory profiteer.

by Stephen Lendman

Progressive News Hour regular James Petras once said most NGOs skim 90% of donations for themselves. They're predators, not humanitarians. They serve political agendas for profit.

They avoid denouncing governmental patrons providing financing. They don't link neoliberal exploitation and human rights violations to imperial agendas. 

They support wrong over right. They prey on the world's vulnerable. They commit flagrant abuses for self-enrichment and close ties to top government officials. ICRC is no exception. More on it below.

On July 18, Security Council members again vote on a Western resolution. Russia and China vetoed two earlier ones. 

They reject one-sided proposals. They advance the ball for war. This one includes UN Charter Chapter VII provisions. They range from economic sanctions to blockades or military intervention if other measures fail.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov rejects Chapter VII authorization. "We will vote against the U.N. Security Council resolution on Syria if it is not based on the Geneva agreements," he said.

Geneva language left much to be desired. It agreed on "facilitat(ing) a Syrian led political process," but overstepped at the same time. 

Contrary to international law, it accepted "agreed guidelines and principles for a political transition that meets the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people."

Syrians had their say earlier. They overwhelmingly adopted a new constitution by national referendum. First time ever parliamentary elections were held. 

Turnout was high. Voting went smoothly. Independent monitors judged the process open, free and fair. Why repeat what's already accomplished? 

Most important is that international law prohibits interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. Doing so in Geneva or elsewhere lacks legitimacy.

On July 18, Security Council roulette resumes. Rejection doesn't derail Washington's agenda. Regime change remains on course. What follows another vetoed resolution remains to be seen. 

Months of externally generated violence continues. It's intensifying. NATO intervention may finish what insurgents began. Parts of Damascus are a war zone. 

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

I was born in 1934, am a retired, progressive small businessman concerned about all the major national and world issues, committed to speak out and write about them.
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The McCain-Lieberman Police State Act

Daniel Estulin's "True Story of the Bilderberg Group" and What They May Be Planning Now

Continuity of Government: Coup d'Etat Authority in America

America Facing Depression and Bankruptcy

Lies, Damn Lies and the Murdoch Empire

Mandatory Swine Flu Vaccine Alert

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
No comments