Core Of Corruption Part 1 of 15
http://www.CoreOfCorruption.com go to the website to buy the DVD now http://www.CoreOfCorruption.com Core of Corruption is a documentary film series which details a comprehensive investigation into clandestine intelligence operations and conspiracies. The project is surfacing exclusive whistleblowers, insiders and critical evidence for the very first time. Over 2,000 hours of credible network news clips have been surfaced for this ground breaking event, most of which have never been seen since they aired and have never been available on the internet. Some of the video news segments for this project, when requested from the networks, were denied access to and corporate representatives would say that the information sought does not exist or has been misplaced. Someone doesnt want the public to see these stories, that when put together, establish a conspiracy of the magnitude that could change the way one views the world. Countless millions of people are being manipulated and lied to by a network of individuals within government that work on behalf of private interests. The individuals were involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Many of those same figures are are connected to historical events that have shaped our understanding of government crime. For instance, the Iran Contra affair involved many figures that showed up in the 9/11 attacks. Drug running, terrorism, money laundering and arms trading are carried out in concert with this network. They manipulate the worlds response to these issues on behalf of very high profile figures in some of the most influential think tanks and political interest groups. Figures include well known politicians as well as established businesses on Wall Street. This project, started more than five years ago, is going to break ground in mapping and identifying the most important and credible evidence as well as establish why these networks operate with impunity. DVD’s will ship on the release date: March 27, 2009
Duration : 0:10:0
HR1955 Thought Crimes-New World OrderHow Corruption Erodes Public Trust – Lawrence Lessig
Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/10/08/Lawrence_Lessig_on_Institutional_Corruption
Lawrence Lessig argues that regardless of how money actually affects policy, the mere perception of impropriety is damaging to our political system. “More people supported the British Crown at the time of the Revolution than support our Congress today,” he jokes.
—–
Larry Lessig introduces the Safra lecture series with a discussion on institutional corruption.
He explores the prevalence of this form of corruption in fields ranging from politics to medicine to journalism, and describes his plan to study and contain this problem. – Safra Foundation Center for Ethics at Harvard University
Lawrence Lessig is a professor of law at Stanford Law School and founder of the school’s Center for Internet and Society. He teaches and writes in the areas of constitutional law, contracts, and the law of cyberspace. Prior to joining the Stanford faculty, he was Berkman Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and a professor at the University of Chicago.
He clerked for Judge Richard Posner on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals and for Justice Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. For much of his career, he has focused on law and technology, especially as it affects copyright.
Recognized for arguing against interpretations of copyright that could stifle innovation and discourse online, he is CEO of the Creative Commons project, and he has been a columnist for Wired, Red Herring, and The Industry Standard.
Duration : 0:2:51
Method to Ethically Eliminate All Political Corruption
Our Political System was a revelation in 1776, before
Hidden Microphones & Cameras,
Big Business,
Indoor Plumbing and Toilet Paper,
before Ethics was understood,
and
before the National Security Agency (NSA).
The actions of our political Representatives like George Washington were shaped by the ethics of honor instilled by the educational system and social awareness of that time. Ethics plays no large part in our present educational systems. Ethics should be a formal part of every class from pre-school to doctoral presentation. Instilled formally, the people would better understand how to predict consequences from any proposed action. The corrupt would die out with time and attrition.
Since the Declaration of Independence (and the first fights against taxation without representation), technology has allowed Special Interest groups (to include Terrorist Groups, souless Corporations, and corrupt politicians) to use the innate weaknesses of our political structure to undermine the basis for our Constitution; a modern form of racketeering and organized crime, jeopardizing national security.
The Citizens of the United States
require implementation of
State representation, including ALL states,
by a large and diverse Ethical Oversight Committee
to ensure the security of peoples Freedoms,
to manage National Security Agency (NSA) operations,
and
to determine how the information collected and derived by
the NSA shall best be used
as it relates to our Freedoms and Security,
and to “absolutely” restrict this information
from any other purpose.
Who are the ghosts behind the faces of our government, who continues to manipulate the world into a continuous chain of wars. A chain that has killed many millions of people, and that deters development? This is only one relationship the NSA should be informing the public about.
The NSA is soley controlled by the office of the President of the United States and only needs a single judge to obtain a warrant to covertly monitor any person or corporation (wire tapping, covertly breaking in to copy documents, copy by any means computer information, record in detail the habits and personal relationships of anyone, …).
Recently, President Bush took control away from that judge and even though the judge was ineffectual, the President now has absolute control over the NSA.
The President is a puppet of the same organization that controls the Federal Reserve. Therefore they control the United States, not the President, not the People, and certainly not ethics. The Fed encourages war to promote special interest prosperity. Loans with interest to both sides of every war. Interest paid on every dollar produced for the United States. Who benefits from the interest paid?
Current NSA warrants are meaningless and effectively allows the NSA to collect information without public scrutiny, while Presidential directives prevent the NSA from monitoring special interest group corrupt practices and disclosing those actions to the public
Under our current system a single judge would have to oversee thousands of covert transactions nationwide to adequately monitor national security issues, and to follow up to ensure those requests were legitimate. Further, since information collected by the NSA can be arbitrarily “classified”, the NSA can arbitrarily prevent the judge from monitoring the kinds of data collected.
The current system is not practical and therefore unethical, there is no reasonable way the judge would know what the NSA does with the information collected; and since the judge is controlled by the President, this is highly susceptible to corrupt practices. The current system allows for shielding corruption while promoting unscrupulous special interest activities.
The “Protect America Act” is unconstitutional. But a “simple change” to provide “REPRESENTATION by all States” in the covert collection and processing of data would make the Act Constitutionally sound.
The NSA must be managed by doctors of science (one parallel position for each State elected political representative; but with no affiliation) to evaluate all data collected and eliminate the useless requirement of warrant by a judge (presently coerced into signing off on any NSA warrant presented before them); and to require the NSA to monitor for corrupt political practices (terrorist activities, criminal activities, political practices that endanger National Security, …), with the mandate to notify the offending parties quietly to correct their unethical behavior, only then after they have failed to correct their actions adequately, their actions are publish on a NSA publicly available website.
We the people would then boycott corrupt representatives and their supporting corporations. The associated District Attorney would be notified, and be given the details to substantiate investigation. The District Attorney would then fully investigate and prosecute in accordance with the law. The NSA would at no time directly intervene, thereby limiting their power to nudging our political system away from corrupt activities.
The following details how to update our 200 year old political structure to provide representative governance that promotes the economy, desires of the masses, and ethical government practices; allowing the Government and the people to think as ONE. This same system can be seeded into other governments like Iraq to create an ethical environment for all peoples.
_______________________________________________________
To find & email your specific Congressmen and Senators:
To email Congressman all across the United States:
To talk directly with the staff of your representatives:
- (202) 225-3121 for the House
- (202) 224-3121 for the Senate
—————————————————————————————————
COPY & PASTE THE FOLLOWING to your Representatives
Subject: Create an “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to manage NSA Data Collection, Assessment, and Directives in the United States
As your constituent, I request that you forward the following to all political delegates in every State of the United States, and that a Highly Ethical group of diverse people representing every State and its population be instated to provide ethical oversight and management of all National Security Agency (NSA) data collection, assessments, and directives.
Because this large representative body of individuals will act as a covert, but highly trained publicly elected governing body, this will allow the NSA to continue data collection without warrant. The Senate and Congress will provide “oversight and not direct control” of this new branch in our political structure, thereby providing the needed checks and balances.
The problem with our current political system is that Special Interests (Oil Companies, Defense Contractors, Big Business Corporations, Foreign Interests, …) actively and covertly influence our political representatives. Private research (to include Terrorist involvement with genetic engineering in all its forms, nuclear physics research, economic initiatives, social reform efforts, …) are potentially high risk threats to National Security, yet are largely unmonitored. Corrupt and Neglective influences are not ONLY the fault of our Representatives, they are the fault of our unupdated 200 year old political structure.
To correct this weakness in our Government, in addition to the Senate and Congress, create a new branch of State elected political representatives whose only purpose is to manage the National Security Agency (NSA), which did not exist at the birth of our political structure.
Candidates for these new positions must be doctors of science with proven understanding of ethical evaluation. Doctors of science are necessary because they need to understand and interact with the inner workings of computer software to continuously analyze the large amounts of diverse real world data collected.
Our present political structure does not have an ethical political component to effectively neutralize the criminal aspect of political pandering, coercive control over our Representatives, or Terrorist influences in our Society and in our Government, but we do have the resources to do so.
The National Security Agency (NSA) monitors ALL organizations: CIA, NIS, Air Force, Army, PLO, Al-Qaeda, Defense Contractors, Oil Companies, Greenpeace, ALL of our Politicians, and basically all organizations whether domestic or abroad. Anyone with this information controls the focus of our Nation, along with our Freedoms and Security.
An important point here is that collecting information is necessary and of little negative consequence in an ethical environment, what specifically is done with that information is extraordinarily important, especially in unethical and abusive hands. Currently, Special Interests unethically manipulate our country’s assets, despite “We the Peoples” desires. How many people and soldiers have died supporting a business interest rather than a national interest?
Greater than $12 Billion “lost” in Iraq, destruction of New Orleans, War in Iraq, manipulation of the media, greater than $12 Billion illegally allocated to Halliburton where they subsequently moved outside of our legal system to Dubai (Saudi Arabia), …
As a consequence of Special Interest actions, they erode human rights, leave our country unnecessarily exposed to security threats, and hinder commerce that would flourish were it not for unethical business practices of Special Interests and Large Corporations.
Each “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) delegate represents elected representation by certified highly ethical doctors and non-partisan control over our country’s human rights, freedoms, and security.
Together with Congress and the Senate, ONE delegates provide a tertiary and complementary system of representation, with each representative political faction having unique assets and control mechanisms. The combination of focused representation for business, the people, and ethics makes the system innately representative, well informed, ethical, and stable. Businesses will continue to sponsor individual Senators and Congressmen, however, all money contributed to ONE candidates shall go into a common fund to promote all potential ONE candidates equally within each State.
Because this large representative body of individuals will act as a covert, but highly trained publicly elected governing body, this will allow the NSA to continue data collection without warrant.
No longer will we need to have less Freedom to have more Security, or vice versa.
These highly trained elected personnel provide for independent maximizing of Freedoms and maximizing of Security for all citizens !!! While the Congress and Senate provide oversight and continues to control the military as part of the checks and balances to make this political structure stable.
Presently, special interests make Security and Freedom mutually incompatible. Many countries have the same political structure as we do and yet live in a police state where the individual has no recognized rights; we must prevent a similar situation from happening here in the United States. The current actions of the President’s Office are a prelude of worse things to come.
To take into account all perspectives and actual events to maximize both Freedom and Security for our entire country requires much more raw information than 10,000 people can amass, and assessment that would take these people many lifetimes to be just. But events happen concurrently every day that threaten our Freedoms and Security.
NSA computers process diverse data at great speeds to provide minute by minute evaluation of threats to our national security, and currently as directed by special interests. To stop the unethical use of NSA resources, a large group of persons extensively trained in ethical reasoning needs to create the “computer-based automated keys” (Directives) for unlocking relationships related to promoting BOTH Freedoms and Security.
Directives are computer software analysis functions that sift through real world information. Something like Antivirus programs for protecting your computer. When key relationships are found, a task is generated to cleanup that corrupt system. Ethical care must be taken to ensure good relationships are not disturbed, while corrupt activities are corrected. The concept being: “To do the least necessary to allow unhindered natural social development; while ensuring that repeated corrupt practices of the same types identified do not recur.
As Directives are developed that can be generalized for a particular class of social system, they can be shared amongst similarally structured nations. Thereby helping to reduce the development costs for all countries; and provide international peer review of all Directives developed. At no time will raw data be shared by various National Security Agencies of the different nations.
Computer systems have been used for similar purposes for many years with great success in economics to limit risks and promote investment diversity. By developing automated directives, this helps to provide integrity and consistent behavior of the NSA. The derived results can then be evaluated by this large team of elected Representatives using state of the art ethical evaluation tools; thus ensuring the information collected is used solely to independently promote the Freedoms and Security of ALL citizens.
Please instate a comprehensive “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to manage the National Security Agency (NSA) as outlined below, a system allowing the Government and the people to think as one.
- To maintain equitable representation of all peoples, each State shall publicly elect an Oversight of NSA Ethics (ONE) delegate paralleling each elected Congressman and Senator position; but having no affiliation.
- The Constitution for each State shall act as the basis for the ethical perspective of each delegate.
- The requirements for election as a ONE delegate are:
- shall be a certified doctor from a nationally accredited school
- shall have authored and published a paper related to ethics in a nationally distributed professional journal
- shall be a permanent resident of that State
- shall pass uniform but unique tests related to Ethics, Critical Reasoning, probability, and statistics
- shall be free of a felony record
- shall not be strongly biased regarding any special interests
- shall forever be disallowed from ever discussing any information formulated or witnessed while in office; and shall teach ethical evaluation for two years after their term in office
- shall submit themselves for lie detection and questioning periodically to prevent outside influence by any special interest
- The delegates shall be relocated to the surroundings near the NSA and will be furnished Government owned housing while in office. Physical security for the delegates shall consist of NSA surveillance with an armed NSA controlled security force to control any attempt to access or disproportionately influence the delegate or their family.
- Each delegate shall have a two person staff at the NSA and a two person staff in their home State to monitor, collect, and research information.
- Each State shall have one highly trained field agent for each delegate for that State whom shall collectively implement directives from the NSA using legal resources.
- All work surrounding NSA data collection shall be done in a secure facility protected from military threat.
- Absolutely no raw data or interest specific data or interest specific directives shall ever leave the facility under penalty of treason related to all intentionally involved.
- No interest specific data or interest specific directive shall be propagated outside of the confines of the NSA by delegate staff or agents under penalty of racketeering.
- The ONE delegates shall poll their respective communities related to values and perspectives, but polls shall not contain any Special Interest specific information.
- The NSA shall devise and maintain a relational database to allow delegates to productively relate all measure and kind of ethical issue to the vast amounts of information collected by the NSA.
- The delegates shall formulate “Automated Directives” for automatically: flagging potentially destructive relationships, developing priorities, developing issued directives to field agents, monitor metrics to verify results, track long term effects and related relationships, provide for a continuously updated scores related to the qualities related to our freedoms and security at that moment in time, and provide simulations for anticipating the effects of issuing a proposed directive and how it would affect the freedoms and security scores, …
- The creation of directives shall solely be governed by the ONE Committee. The President, Congress, the House, the Military, nor any other special interest group shall ever have any influence over the creation of directives, other than approved ethical channels of communication. Any attempt to do so outside of approved channels shall be considered treason within the confines of the NSA, and racketeering otherwise, and all involved shall share the same fate, regardless of political standing or financial backing.
- Because the positions of the delegates are elected positions. Data would be provided by the NSA which tracks the number of hours each delegate actively performed research, the influence each delegate had on the overall freedom and security qualities, and the core generalized formulas for creating the Automated Directives would be publicly disclosed but would not relate delegate involvement nor the data or type of data that they relate. This is necessary to help ensure high-tech corporations do not fillfully subvert NSA monitored data. Each delegate would be allowed to create public announcements that do not violate that which is outlined above.
- The ONE delegates shall govern themselves regarding inappropriate actions generated by a delegate, with periodic oversight by the Senate and Congress. A delegate that fails to use ethical reasoning in promoting a Directive and which benefits a special interest may be penalized and a State elected alternate may take their place.
- The term of service for each Delegate shall be four years; followed by a two year mandatory position at an accredited University teaching related ethics topics involving analysis and software. The Delegate may then accept nomination for the following election cycle.
- Classes in ethics for learning to create automated Directives shall use independently developed computer models and simulation systems. At no time shall any Directive from the NSA be directly analyzed. The simulated environment would cause errors inconsistent with NSA real world processing. However, relationships discovered can be submitted to the NSA for review through approved ethical channels.
- Collectively, the ONE committee shall determine the information necessary to guide the President, Congress, Senate, and the Military. The President, Congress, Senate, and the Military will have continuous one-way input into the NSA as part of NSA data collection, without warrant, the feedback will be immediate, so there is no need for any political party or military component to have dialog with ONE delegates or the NSA data collection and assessment systems.
- The Congress and Senate shall provide a team trained in ethical evaluation to periodically monitor (not control) the NSA and report back to the Senate and Congress.
- The military remains under the control of the Senate and the Congress; and the NSA shall only be allowed restricted control over a military asset with minute by minute support of the majorities of both the Senate and Congress where time critical relationships exist.
- Every political representative in the United States will be able to send their viewpoints to the NSA by sending an email to a NSA server, with only an automated response. But their views will be collected and processed automatically by the data collection system. The same applies for all citizens. All citizens shall have representation and voice.
- The administrators necessary to manage the NSA regarding operations personnel, supplies, existing field agents, the budget, and all other aspects of the NSA shall answer to the ONE committee and shall provide a continuous and accurate assessment of resource managment to Congress.
- As technology provides greater capabilities in diverse areas such as spy technologies, computer modeling of world economics, …, the NSA shall continue to evolve systems to better represent and anticipate the needs and desires of all citizens.
Under this system, the NSA shall collect and assess all information as practically possible worldwide, without the need for warrant in the United States.
Instate a comprehensive “Oversight of NSA Ethics committee” (ONE) to govern NSA data collection systems as outlined above; a system allowing the Government and the people to think as one.
James Dunn
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/method-to-ethically-eliminate-all-political-corruption-672089.html
Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington releases “Most Corrupt and Dishonorable Mention” List!
C.R.E.W. releases it most corrupt and dishonorable mentions of 2008. The 110th Congress has some good politicians and then theres the scumbags we all come to know about Washington, D.C. Its about the people, right? No, its about perks, trips, affairs, corruption, and your votes.
Question: Why do we still vote for them?
Those who were mentioned in the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington’s list of top corrupt Congressmen and women.
Most corrupted
•Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL) – Won.
•Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) – Won.
•Rep. John T. Doolittle (R-CA) – Retired. Investigation continues. Democrat pick up.
•Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) – Defeated in close race. Democrat pick up.
•Rep. Vito J. Fossella (R-NY) – Retired. Seat gain for Democrats.
•Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-LA) – Defeated in run off. Faces trial in December 2008.
•Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) – Won handily. Face probe into contributions and kickbacks.
•Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) – Won handily. Under investigation.
•Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) – Won.
•Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) – Won barely. Minority Leader continues to hold power.
•Rep. Gary G. Miller (R-CA) – Won
•Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-WV) – Won
•Rep. Timothy F. Murphy (R-PA) – Won
•Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) – Won. Cause controversy after calling some voters in his district “racist” for views on Barack Obama.
•Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) – Retired. Democrat pickup.
•Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) – Won.
•Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ) – Retired. Democrat pickup.
•Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY) – Won
•Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) – Race to close to call. If Stevens pulls off a victory. Republicans could censure him and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can expel the indicted senator from 111th Congress.
•Rep. Don Young (R-AK) – Race to close to call. Under investigation for corruption.
Dishonorable mentions
•Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) – Won.
•Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) – Race too close to call. Under investigation.
•Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA) – Won.
•Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) – Won.
http://www.crewsmostcorrupt.org/
Thanks for viewing. Thank all the supporters of my videos. To all critics and those who blindly trust the media! Turn that television, radio and internet smear machine off. Let real media analysis do the work for you. I am not a fact-checker, journalist or media analysis. I am expressing an honest opinion about whats going on in my community, government and the corrupt mainstream media. And as always, if present any errors in the making of this video, please dont hesitate to send a message and I will correct the record on the next video. For all the critics watching worldwide! Do me a favor by: Proving Me Wrong!
Duration : 0:4:50
A Balanced Strategy: Reprogramming Ngos and Enhancing Their Relevance as Development Partners in Sierra Leone
What should be the defining principle of the Koroma administration National Development Strategy is balance. President Koroma cannot expect to eliminate national development challenges through a unilateral political agenda, to do everything and coordinate everything based on his All People’s Congress (APC) party ideology. His APC party with its “corporate agenda” for Sierra Leone rolled over the incumbent Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) in a run-off that reflected the expectations and desires of a majority of Sierra Leoneans for far-reaching socio-economic change, institutional reform and full inclusion of the mostly youth and indigenous poor. If Koroma is to succeed to reduce Sierra Leone’s grinding poverty and the creation of a more effective, inclusive and just state, however—and he must if his leadership is going to be different from the SLPP administration it replaced—he will need to set priorities and consider trade-offs and show understanding and offer support as he grapples with explosive issues of judicial reforms, corruption and development policy.
The strategy strives for balance in three areas: between trying to prevail in eliminating corruption in his government and preparing for other contingencies; between institutionalizing capabilities such as nongovernmental engagement and supporting the relevance of NGOs as development stakeholders and maintaining NGO’s existing organizational independence and strategic edge in terms of advancing national development objectives through community involvement; and between retaining those cultural traits that have made grassroots involvement in development work possible and discouraging behaviors of NGOs that hamper their ability to do what needs to be done. “In its broadest sense, the term “nongovernment organization” [NGO] refers to organizations (i) not based in government; (ii) not created for financial or material gain; but (iii) created to address concerns such as social and humanitarian issues of development, individual and community welfare and well-being, disadvantage, and poverty, as well as environmental and natural resources protection, management, and improvement” (Asian Development Bank).
Strategic Thinking
The Koroma administration’s ability to deal with performance problems of NGOs will depend on its capacity in handling corruption in government. To be blunt, to fail—or to be seen to fail—in addressing corruption in government would be a disastrous blow to the APC party credibility, both among party supporters and voters and among opposition adversaries. Sierra Leoneans want to see serious effort to address corruption and the injustices of the legal system in the country—and the people of Sierra Leone have lost all patience in this regard. Still, there will continue to be high expectations for Koroma’s zero-tolerance against corruption to be seen to work in Sierra Leone.
Given its endemic nature, corruption, poverty, and the tragic history of violence, Sierra Leone in many ways poses an even more complex and difficult long-term challenge—one that, despite a strong rhetorical effort, will require significant determination and commitment to punish drastically for crimes of corruption for some time. And given the country’s ever changing political game, the resounding victory of Ernest Koroma in the 2007 run-off elections could prove just another wrong turn along the road going nowhere. Sierra Leoneans have already started to question the leadership of Koroma, who in his inauguration in September 2007 announced his zero-tolerance stance against corruption, but “has not had a lot of luck with his cabinet” (The Africa Report). The instances of presumed corruption and shady dealings [the controversial Income Electrix power deal, the suspended Transport Minister Ibrahim Kemoh Sesay 700kg haul of cocaine deal, and the Attorney General Abdul Serry-Kamal Seventy Five Billion Leones Wanza saga] confirm the self-seeking and predatory activities of APC officials, “and that despite the best intentions announced by President Koroma, he [seems to] lack the moral standing and political backbone to implement his ‘zero-tolerance’ policy for corruption and his call for accountability of his cabinet” (The New People Newspaper). Koroma still has to demonstrate he is following a drummer different from that of every Sierra Leonean leader of the past 45 years.
What is dubbed the war on corruption is, in grim reality, a prolonged, nationwide conventional campaign—a struggle between the forces of blatant corruption and those of moderation. Direct ACC engagement will continue to play a role in the long-term effort against corrupt officials in government and the private sector. But over the short term, a determined leadership may have to use draconian rules of engagement to ending corruption in Sierra Leone. Where possible, what the ACC calls prompt service in addressing corruption cases should be subordinated to concrete measures by a strong presidency aimed at definitely promoting better governance, economic programs that spur development, and efforts to address the grievances among the discontented which justified the civil conflict that so badly destroyed the social fabric of Sierra Leone over the years. It will take the active engagement as well of NGOs in a collaborative effort over a long time to educate, rebuild and advance infrastructural development objectives.
Sierra Leone is unlikely to experience another civil war—justifiable by the injustices resulting from bad governance and rampant corruption—anytime soon. But that does not mean it may not face similar challenges in a variety of locales. Where possible, a government strategy is to employ indirect approaches—primarily through building the capacity of partner NGOs and their administrative processes—to prevent festering problems from turning into crises that require costly and controversial direct civil conflict. In this kind of effort, the capabilities of the government’s allies and NGO partners may be as important as its own, and building their capacity is arguably as important as, if not more so than, the partisan bickering the government has to deal with.
The recent past vividly demonstrated the consequences of failing to address adequately the dangers posed by bad governance. Rebel networks found sympathy among Sierra Leoneans and strength within the chaos of social breakdown. The small-arms infested State quickly collapsed into chaos and criminality and the worst of catastrophes befell the Sierra Leone homeland—towns and villages were reduced to rubble by rebel attacks as a result of the failed State. The kinds of capabilities needed to deal with such a historically dismal scenario cannot therefore any longer be played down with political rhetoric. Even the smallest of crimes of corruption should require stringent and uncompromising methods of investigations and punishment to avoid this failed State scenario. As Transparency International chair Huguette Labelle has noted, “Stemming corruption requires strong oversight through parliaments, law enforcement, independent media and a vibrant civil society. When these institutions are weak, corruption spirals out of control with horrendous consequences for ordinary people and for justice and equality in societies more broadly” (NGLS Go Between).
In many ways, the country’s national development capabilities are still coping with the consequences of the 1990s, when, with the complicity of the civil war, key instruments of the government of Sierra Leone regulatory mechanisms were reduced or allowed to wither on the corridors of power.
“Sierra Leone has been a major recipient of foreign aid since the end of a devastating 11-year civil war in 2002. But government, donors and citizens are all questioning how effectively this aid is being used. Allegations of misappropriation of donor funds, both by government actors and NGOs, threaten this inflow. One of the government’s principal partners, the British Department for International Development, withheld aid in protest against such anomalies, for most of 2007 and early 2008 (Fofana/IPS, Freetown). Besides, the Government of Sierra Leone has not maintained a constructive relationship with NGOs. However, the global push towards reducing poverty has created a new convergence among development practitioners and policymakers as the means of increasing access to new initiatives that will promote good governance and help reduce poverty. Citizen participation has increasingly been taken seriously to increase opportunity for lower income and other excluded populations whose interest are marginalized in classic representative institutions to influence policymaking processes. The government is beginning to appreciate the relevance of civil society in development—that community development lies at the heart of a strong, association-based civil society.
In this regard, the Koroma administration can assume more of the tasks of fostering effective collaboration with local and international NGOs for peace, security and development. To truly achieve victory as the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness defined it –“to bring new voices into a review of how aid is managed, and to sketch out a course for greater transparency, accountability and ultimately impact on the lives of the world’s poor—to attain a political objective” (Fofana/IPS, Freetown)–the Sierra Leone Government needs an NGO Coordination Unit whose ability to facilitate the diversion of huge donor funds to the NGO community is matched by its ability to use active evaluations and reviews as learning tools for itself and its development partners. “The role of the Sierra Leone Association of NGOs (SLANGO), formed in January 1994, to coordinate NGO activities in order that efforts are not duplicated and resources not wasted” (BNET Business Network) has to be differentiated from what the NGO Unit at MODEP is doing; also to understand SLANGO’s relevance in development work.
Given these realities, the NGO Unit of MODEP has, however, been seen to make some impressive strides in recent years. “The revised National NGO Policy following the wide range of consultations held at national and regional levels with the involvement of all stakeholders especially the NGO Community, Line Ministries and Civil Society in the preparation of the policy [was a laudable effort]. The NGO Unit facilitated several meetings with other ministries particularly the Ministry of Finance, the National Revenue Authority (NRA), the Ministry of Labor and other stakeholders to discuss among other things: Duty Free Concessions, Resident/Work Permits and Taxation etc.” (NGO Unit/MODEP).
It can also be suggested that a New Development Operations Manual for a New National Development Strategy is developed to incorporate the lessons of recent years in NGO service delivery doctrine. “Train and equip” programs will allow for quicker improvements in the development capacity of partner organizations. And various initiatives should be undertaken that will better integrate and coordinate government efforts with civilian society agencies as well as engage the expertise of the private sector, including nongovernmental organizations and academia.
Organizational Problems in Perspective
Even as international NGOs hone and institutionalize new and modern management methods, the Sierra Leone Government still has to contend with the organizational challenges posed by local NGOs. The images of NGOs seen by many local people as corrupt and undeserving of support are a reminder that these Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and their management processes do still matter. NGOs in the country should be seen to improve their and several partners’ documentation of results, including the development of good monitoring indicators.
In addition, there is the potentially toxic mix of inadequate financial management of NGOs and inadequate reporting on budgetary issues to the Government of Sierra Leone’s NGO Unit. What all these problems portend is that the monitoring of development aid continues to be a major challenge for Sierra Leone and that a thorough framework of monitoring both recurrent and development activities must be put in place. The Government of Sierra Leone cannot take these organizational issues of NGOs for granted and needs to invest in the programs, platforms, and personnel that will ensure their relevance as development stakeholders.
But it is also important to keep some perspective. As much as the MODEP’s NGO Unit has come up with revised policy regulations with collated information in respect of funds disbursed by donors to NGOs for the implementation of programs it must be remembered that what is driving MODEP is a desire to exorcise the sloppy performance of NGOs over the years and to make them more relevant as development stakeholders—not an ideologically driven campaign to micro manage NGOs in the country. “Understandably, the logic behind massive NGO presence in Sierra Leone was to create a civic culture, pluralize the political, economic and social arena and bridge the gap between the masses and the State. So NGOs thus act as intermediaries between, what donors call ‘the unorganized masses’ and the State and are expected to represent the people and express their voices in policymaking. In fact, among NGOs is a small sector of voluntary organizations that genuinely monitor regimes, engage in advocacy on behalf of the poor and serves as watchdogs in ensuring that government contractors deliver services”.
It is true that the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) with clear link to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is the main focus of Government and its development partners. “The PRSP calls for pro-poor sustainable growth. However, achieving this means maintaining macro-economic stability IMF-style with low inflation and strict fiscal deficits, despite research by CSOs and development agencies which seriously question the poverty impact of these types of policies” (European Network on Debt and Development). NGOs’ participation was recognized in the process. NGOs could now play an active role in the implementation process by shifting their interventions and assistance from relief/humanitarian programs to sustainable infrastructural development programs. Answerability and transparency, adequate financial management and adequate budgetary reporting are to be the watch words in the new dispensation.
NGOs in Sierra Leone may have their organizational problems, but they can be quite relevant stakeholders in promoting people’s participation in poverty reduction programs. Use of funds has not been cost effective for most NGOs but the thematic areas most of these NGOs focus on (health, education, skills development, micro-finance, skills training, etc.), are relevant for the end users that are often poor and vulnerable children, youth and women. These are priority support areas that are in accordance with Sierra Leone’s development priorities and the PRSP as well international development agencies’ priorities.
Now that the performance bar has to be raised for the government and NGOs following their dismal performance in terms of handling aid money, the Sierra Leone Government must now endeavor to maintain a credible strategic relationship with NGOs through effectively evaluating, reviewing and monitoring their activities. Toward this end, the steps the NGO Unit at MODEP is taking to return excellence and accountability to NGO stewardship are commendable. Presidential and Parliamentary oversight may also be necessary for a more reliable and sustainable NGO Unit coordination effort.
When thinking about the range of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of non-governmental organizations as development partners in Sierra Leone it is reasonable to understand that NGOs come in many shapes and sizes. Data used in the SWOT analysis stem from multiple sources including statistical reports, literature review, regulations and policies, and research articles by NGO professionals. These findings should provide a valuable reference for the Government and the international development community who are interested in developing excellence in the civil society organization which interestingly can provide some feed back into the effectiveness aspects of the development analysis.
Strengths
Grassroots (local) NGOs
- Have a positive presence on the ground.
- Demonstrate ability to seek common ground and commitment to poor and marginalized grassroots populations.
- Enjoy confidence and trust of local populations.
- Have experience-based knowledge of cultural, political and socio-economic conditions of indigenous populations.
- Understand vulnerabilities unique to local beneficiaries.
- Can achieve extreme flexibility with fewer resources and lower costs.
- Possess valuable experience, content and fundamental working knowledge about local trade issues and business contacts in their field.
International NGOs
- Have global appeal and have developed industry-wide reputation for positive work.
- Good at generating and mobilizing resources and core competencies for their operations.
- Ability to resolve issues of legitimacy and to address political and policy constraints.
- Ability to harness expert opinion to influence public opinion and policy-makers.
- Have paid core staff to ensure the quality of project work.
- Possess valuable experience, content and fundamental working knowledge about international trade issues and the labor market and business contacts in their field.
Weaknesses
Grassroots (local) NGOs
- May have limited financial and expert resources to support end-user development.
- May have limited strategic perspectives and weak linkages with other actors in development.
- May have limited managerial and organizational capacities.
- May sometimes miss the big picture on macro perspectives on capital markets, economy and geopolitics vis-à-vis community development.
- Indigenous NGO operators may be prone to corruption.
- Because of their voluntary nature, there may be questions regarding their accountability and credibility.
- May have difficulty managing operations on financially sustainable basis.
- Are not sustainable on membership fees alone.
International NGOs
- Some advocacy NGOs working to influence the policies and practices of governments, development institutions have limited implementation capacity.
- Questions sometimes arise concerning their motivations and objectives, and the degree of accountability they accept for the ultimate impact of policies and positions they advocate. Sometimes accused of “selling out” when they work with government or corporations.
- May find it hard to placate or manipulate special interests.
- Suffer fluctuations in maintaining non-profit donations revenue streams.
- May have limited experience with poor populations and operations may not reflect the needs of communities.
Opportunities
Grassroots NGOs
- Can effectively work with community partners to assess local problems and opportunities and to promote export development programs.
- Ability to implement successful training programs and advance participatory development.
- Ability to integrate their local expertise and experience in health and education initiatives in community development programs.
- Can be clearing-houses for local trade information.
International NGOs
- Ability to work out credible partnerships with government and private corporations to mobilize public opinion to increase influence on poverty reduction programs and trade issues.
- Effective at bringing the voice of efficient organizational practices into NGO work in developing countries.
- Ability to contribute sector-specific expertise to help producers add value, improve quality and find new export markets.
- Quite familiar with political and social accountability mechanisms that complement their interventions and advocacy work.
Threats
Grassroots NGOs
- Isolated and poorly coordinated efforts may have negative program outcomes.
- Lackluster relationship with trade and export development corporations causing unsustainable initiatives and lack of trade development solutions.
- Lacks technical capacity to connect poor people with trade and export opportunities.I
International NGOs
- Tendency to ignore the voices of the poor represented by the experience and professional input of local agencies when defining the dialogue and public understanding of trade and development issues.
- Inclination to compete by lobbying against one another thereby distracting policy-makers on major issues.
- Often accused of hijacking the macroeconomic policy making dominated by technocrats and external consultants in the process.
Overall, by sorting the SWOT issues of grassroots (local) and international NGOs into planning categories one can obtain a system which presents a practical way of assimilating the internal and external information about NGO work in Sierra Leone, delineating short and long term priorities, and defining and developing coordinated, goal-directed actions, and allowing an easy way to build management teams which can achieve the objectives of development growth and the essence of civil society. In reality, as the philosopher Michael Ignatieff has noted “without civil society, democracy remains an empty shell”. One can expect to see the efficacy of Civil Society Organizations to influence members of the wider public that adhere to their values and beliefs to engage in development programs at State and community levels.
Therefore, notwithstanding local NGO’s relatively dismal record they are still clearly quite relevant to the development equation. NGOs strengths can be harnessed with well coordinated capacity building programs. Conversely, international NGOs can develop a partner strategy of supporting and working through strong professional local partners as an effective tool for having a greater development impact than being a self-implementing agency. NGOs can also be very effective as learning organizations by providing important support to build their own staff’s and partners’ capacities, through individual training activities, annual partner meetings and conferences, learning exchange between partners, and partner self-assessments of training needs. Moreover, NGOs can also be very effective with regular active evaluations and reviews as learning tools for themselves and their partners.
Just as one can expect learning should be at the heart of these organizations, so too, should the Government of Sierra Leone seek a better balance in the portfolio of capabilities it has—the types of programs against corruption in government fielded, the punishment in place for crimes of corruption, the training done.
Moreover, given the development challenges Sierra Leone is struggling with—and given, for example, the struggles to field up hospitals and clinics, schools and colleges, maintenance of urban and rural roads, and the HIV threats to the society—the time has come to think hard about how to institutionalize the capabilities of NGOs and get them adequately fielded quickly. The NGO policy modernization programs of the NGO Unit at MODEP should seek a 99 percent solution to the organizational limitations of NGOs in the country and to build the kind of innovative thinking and flexibility capable of supporting rigid development processes.
Sustaining Organizational Performance
The ability to fight corruption in government and empower NGOs sometimes simultaneously fits squarely within the finest traditions of good governance, more so because adequate financial management, including adequate reporting on budgetary issues is key to sustained organizational performance of NGOs. For most NGOs in Sierra Leone, unsatisfactory practices with regard to vehicle and fuel use, procurement procedures and weak financial reporting and accounting are weaknesses which are also typical issues in bad government. Improving documentation of results, including the development of good monitoring indicators is also essential for sustaining organizational performance. The non performance of NGOs is coming at a frightful human, financial, and political cost. There has to be organizational improvements in government so that NGOs can be more resourceful and relevant to the development equation.
One of the enduring issues the NGO Unit at MODEP’s struggles with is whether personnel and organizational systems designed to coordinate the work of NGOs in the country will be able to reflect the importance of advising, training, and equipping NGOs in Sierra Leone—something still not considered a career-enhancing path for the best and brightest organizational development experts. Another is whether the revised policy regulations can be adapted well enough and fast enough to empower NGOs—or, more significant, to build the capacity of local NGOs to make them more resourceful.
One can make the argument in favor of institutionalizing NGO skills and the ability to conduct stability and support operations. This has to be done and is necessary for maintaining the current advantage of the relevance of NGOs as development partners. Apart from recent revisions of NGO policy regulations there has been no strong, deeply rooted constituency inside MODEP or elsewhere for institutionalizing the capabilities necessary to support NGO work in Sierra Leone—and to quickly meet the important needs of civil society organizations engaged in development work in Sierra Leone.
Think of the important work of NGOs in Sierra Leone. NGOs often make the impossible possible by doing what governments cannot or will not do especially when new challenges crowd the national agenda. Increasingly, NGOs operate outside existing formal frameworks, moving independently to meet their goals and establishing new standards that governments, institutions, and corporations are themselves compelled to follow through force of public opinion.
Some humanitarian and development NGOs, for instance, have a natural advantage because of their perceived neutrality and experience. Amnesty International – Sierra Leone Section, for example, (as listed on the webpage directory of NGOs maintained by UNDP Sierra Leone promotes and protects human rights through advocacy and human rights education—maintaining documentation on human rights abuses and violations carried out during the ten year rebel war in Sierra Leone which proved helpful to the TRC in Sierra Leone. Other groups such as the Campaign for Good Governance (CGG) is a democracy-supporting NGO in Sierra Leone which promotes the building of democratic institutions, transparency and accountability in government, active citizen participation in the political process, voter education, human rights, and the rule of law. The Catholic Youth Organization (CYO) organizes religious, educational, social and cultural programs to meet the spiritual, mental and recreational needs of members. The Centre for Coordination of Youth Activities provides training in leadership, peace building, skills development, and community development. The Kailahun District Development Foundation (KADDF), a district-wide non-governmental organization offers viable solutions to the pervasive problems of poverty and serves as a clearinghouse for outside agencies interested in carrying out programs in the Kailahun district. The Sierra Leone Adult Education Association (SLADEA) helps to reduce the high rate of illiteracy among adults in the non-formal sector; to enlist the co-operation and support of other NGOs with a view to motivating various forms of people’s participation especially women and youth in national development; to achieve public recognition and support for non-formal education sector. FORUT’s thematic areas (health, education, skills development, micro-finance, skills training, etc.), are relevant for the end users that are often poor and vulnerable children, youth and women. Action Aid is one of the largest NGOs operating in Sierra Leone promoting food security through agricultural programs to ensure seeds are available and crop production continues.
There is no doubt, therefore, that modernization programs will continue to have, and deserve, strong institutional and parliamentary support. There has to be the enabling environment needed to make sure that the capabilities needed for the complex organizational issues of NGOs also has strong and sustained institutional support over the long term. The need for an NGO Unit establishment that can make and implement decisions quickly in support of NGOs working in Sierra Leone is necessary.
In the end, the NGO capabilities needed cannot be separated from the cultural traits and the management structure of the institutions the Sierra Leone Government has: the signals sent by how funds are managed, what projects are funded, what skills are used to implement projects and how personnel are trained. As Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy has said, “Clearly, one can no longer relegate NGOs to simple advisory or advocacy roles. . . . They are now part of the way decisions have to be made.”
As Yale professor Steve Charnovitz has observed, NGO involvement seems to depend on two factors: the needs of government and the capabilities of NGOs. A good democracy encompasses all NGOs which strive to create formal but flexible systems fostering dynamism and self-adjustment. NGOs ought to be a part of the alternative development paradigm, because the State, its institutions, and public policy, are unable to address a host of issues of underdevelopment all alone.
Evidently, there are many NGOs today in Sierra Leone in different shapes and forms with substantial amounts of donor and individual funds being diverted through them for developmental purposes. These NGOs are thought to be participatory, community-oriented, democratic, cost effective, and better at targeting the poorest of the poor, although in recent years, the nimbus of righteousness around NGOs has almost disappeared, and there is wide acknowledgement of their inability to deliver what is expected from them. Many lessons, however, about NGOs in Sierra Leone present themselves. Two of the most important are an understanding of organizational challenges and a sense of determination to change. The determination and national reach of NGOs has been an indispensable contributor to national peace and stability. The NGO Unit at MODEP should be clear about what effective organizational management by competent operators of NGOs can accomplish. No matter what their aims, all organizations share two things in common: They are made up of people, and certain individuals are in charge of these people. NGOs therefore need strong managers to lead its staff toward accomplishing development goals. And these managers are more than just leaders—they are problem solvers, cheerleaders, and planners as well.
Think of the intricacies of management, for instance. No matter what type of organization they work in, NGO executives are generally responsible for a group of individuals’ performance. As leaders, they must expect their fellow workers to work earnestly to reach common NGO goals. As the management guru Peter Drucker said, “Executives owe it to the organization and to their fellow workers not to tolerate nonperforming individuals in important jobs.”
In national affairs, “aid can work where there is good governance,” the United States Congressional Representative Lee H. Hamilton wrote in his book on – A Legacy of Honor: The Congressional Papers of Lee H. Hamilton, U.S. House of Representative 1965-1998 Indiana Ninth District, “… and usually fails where governments are unable or unwilling to commit aid to improve the lives of their people.” It is thus believed any responsible National Development Strategy for Sierra Leone should provide a balanced approach to enhancing responsibilities and preserving the relevance of NGOs as development partners.
Kenday S. Kamara
http://www.articlesbase.com/non-profit-organizations-articles/a-balanced-strategy-reprogramming-ngos-and-enhancing-their-relevance-as-development-partners-in-sierra-leone-741482.html
Police State?
Is the U.S. turning more into a Nazi-like police state? The Patriot Act and some of the newer acts passed by Congress (the War Commisions Act, I believe) have seriously taken away many freedoms that we have. How long will it be before people lose the rest of the freedoms that we have and the U.S. turns into a totalitarian regime similar to that of the vision of Orwell?
Police state? This country is turning into a communist state thanks to all the hogwash being spewed by the media!
Why do Democrats still dodge questions about their astonishing corruption by accusing the GOP?
Blaming the GOP does not make Democrat corruption go away.
Democrat corruption is real, and it must be addressed. This is by far the most outrageously corrupt government I have ever seen in my entire life.
It’s time for rank and file Democrats to stop dodging the question, and face the reality of how corrupt their party has become.
We really are on the brink of tyranny. Democrats need to stop giggling and taunting and pointing fingers, and face the reality of where our nation is really headed right now.
Have Democrats ever heard that the buck stops here? Guess not.
Talk about your tired Democrat play book … the Democrat Party, according to Talking Points Memo plans to call the Republicans the party of GWB and continue the blame Bush game.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/2010-campaign-preview-democrats-to-say-gop-still-party-of-bush.php?ref=fpb
This strategy will go over as well as Obama’s policies have since he has become President. There is a reason why Obama’s and Democrat poll numbers have sunk. One year into the Obama Presidency and it is no longer about GWB. Certainly by 2010 no one wants to hear the blame game.
No matter how the Democrats want to spin this, the 2010 midterms are going to be a referendum on Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. We the People will take care of matters in 2010 and create some real CHANGE the likes that has not been seen in years.
The Obama administration is desperate to pass this health care legislation and I believe that all Americans are now aware of this. But what has happened to the morals and character of this great nation that the people and the media seem to be OK with “how” Obama is getting this bill passed? What has happened to any sense of decency in our Congress and from our elected officials?
Obama knows that he just needs 60 votes to get this bill passed through Congress – and most of these Congressional imbeciles will readily do whatever Obama wants – even if it means selling out the taxpayers. But there are a few “holdouts” who just weren’t sure as to whether they would vote “yes” or “no”. So what does Obama do? He openly and without shame bribes them! Blatantly and un-constitutionally doling out millions of taxpayer dollars to be used in the payoffs!
Senator Ben Nelson, Nebraska – Took a $100 Million bribe to change his vote to “yes”. He was against the federal government paying for abortions – he was adamantly against abortion – that is until Obama gave him $100 Million. How much would you require to sell out the American people? Would you sell your soul and that of the American people for $100 Million? Nelson did.
http://www.examiner.com/x-26212-Long-Island-Democrat-Examiner~y2009m12d19-Harry-Reids-Senator-Ben-Nelson-60th-Healthcare-vote-purchase-The-49-state-tax-payer-funded-bribe
Senator Mary Landrieu, Louisiana – She was adamantly against the health care bill – that is until Obama doled out $300 Million to her and her state. Voila! She changed her vote to “yes”. So, Nebraska and Louisiana are all set. Do you want to pay extra for Louisiana and Nebraska? Well, Obama wants you to – he doesn’t care – he is forcing you to pay more to these states – how do you like that?
http://www.examiner.com/x-19160-Bucks-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d21-Healthcare–Money-talks-Arrogance-walks
The reason Obama is life or death with this bill is because this bill fundamentally changes the way the American government operates. It gives the federal government massive amounts of additional power and control – just what the Marxist obama wants.
This is what Obama promised during his campaign and it is what he wants to deliver – “fundamentally changing America”. He wants to change how our government operates solely so that he may REDISTRIBUTE the wealth of this country. o_O
Would the only way to stop government corruption in Democracies be to completely wipe out whole branches?
at random every 10 to 15 years no matter who’s been elected. Just a random flush down the toilet of everyone in office so that it keeps underhanded deals from forming (at least long term)?
Intel and big companies with branches in developing countries do this to keep their employees from making these connections and cheating the company. Every 5 years you must move on. If you wish to stay in that country, you have to leave the company, no option.
Wouldn’t these kinds of purges help minimize government corruption?
Fire ALL of congress – term limits! That’s the way to get rid of the corruption!
You sure like long winded question, dude.
Alex Jones-9/11 Road To Tyranny Part 1 of 15
The mainstream media is whitewashing and lying about what really happened on Sept 11th. 911: The Road to Tyranny is shaking the foundations of Washington, DC as the definitive film on what really happened on Sept. 11th and who stands to gain. The dark forces of Global Government are funding, training and protecting terrorist groups worldwide. In this blockbuster which has gained worldwide prestige you will learn the origins and the true story behind 9/11.
THE ROAD TO TYRANNY EXPOSES: *HOW DOZENS OF FBI AND DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENTS WERE THREATENED WITH ARREST BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IF THEY GOT IN THE WAY OF AL-QAEDA OPERATIONS *HOW THE CIA TRAINED, FUNDED AND PROTECTED BIN LADEN *THAT IMPEACHMENT LAWYER DAVID SCHIPPERS WARNED CONGRESS AND THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF THE IMPENDING TERRORISTS ATTACKS . (THE FILM INCLUDES AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH SCHIPPERS ON THE ALEX JONES SHOW JUST 2 WEEKS AFTER THE ATTACKS. SCHIPPERS HAS SINCE BEEN THREATENED WITH ARREST IF HE CONTINUES TO SPEAK OUT, AND IS BEGGING THE MEDIA AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO GET THIS STORY OUT) * HOW THE RECENTLY DECLASSIFIED TOP-SECRET NORTHWOODS DOCUMENT WRITTEN BY THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF LAID OUT PLANS TO BOMB WASHINGTON AND TO HIJACK AIRPLANES AS A PRETEXT FOR WAR *BILL CLINTON’S INVOLVEMENT IN THE OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING AND HOW IT WAS CARRIED OUT BY INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES TO BE BLAMED ON THE RIGHT-WING *HOW THE FBI ORDERED THEIR INFORMANTS TO COOK THE BOMB AND TRAIN THE DRIVERS IN THE FIRST WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK IN 1993 *FBI TRAINING MANUALS THAT ARE BEING GIVEN TO POLICE DEPARTMENTS THAT STATE THAT CHRISTIANS, GUN OWNERS, AND “THOSE WHO MAKE FREQUENT REFERENCES TO THE US CONSTITUTION” ARE TERRORISTS …..THIS IS ONE FILM YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO IGNORE. THE FUTURE OF FREE PEOPLE EVERYWHERE IS AT STAKE.
Duration : 0:10:0