Posts tagged "Corporations"

Corporations + La Raza = Open Borders: Video News Blog (12 min)

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) July 24, 2006

In a twelve minute Video News Blog, the Full Disclosure Network™ presents “the news behind the news” covering the last day of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) convention in Los Angeles on July 11, 2006. Available FREE, 24/7, on demand at this URL: http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlogs/VideoBlog32.php This video reveals the common goals of the multi-national Corporate sponsors and the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), Hispanic advocacy organization.

Common Goals?

So what do multi-national Corporations have in common with the National Council of La Raza (non-profit social,activist groups)? Full Disclosure™ discovered what may be the answer to that question when participants at the NCLR convention described the exciting prospect of nurturing, cultivating and encouraging the populous Hispanic forces in America to push for the following:

*Merging the United States, Mexico and Canada into an economic union, Open Borders.

*Free flow of capital, goods, labor, and services.

*North American Economic Union aka “a common market economy.”

*Compete with the European Common Market.

The News Behind the News:

You judge for yourself by watching Full Disclosure Network’s™ alternative news coverage of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) Convention. http://www.fulldisclosure.net/flash/VideoBlogs/VideoBlog32.php This video contains excerpts of presentations the mainstream media failed to cover. Included in the video are:

*Corporate sponsors pitching to the Hispanic audience, included Bank of America pitch for money transfers to Mexico. Also includes Wall Mart, Shell Oil Corporation, E-Trade, Sodexho, Toyota, Johnson & Johnson, Miller Brewing to name a few.

*Excerpts from Karl Rove, White House strategist on the Administration’s Immigration reform policy, touts temporary worker program.

*Reactions to Rove from a sampling of attendees *representing Latino and migrant rights organizations.

*Video clips from interviews with Nativo Lopez, president of MAPA, retired Sergeant Richard Valdemar a gang/drug expert who served 33 years in the L. A. County Sheriff’s Department.

About Full Disclosure Network™

Known as “the news behind the news” the Full Disclosure Network™ is featured on 43 cable television systems and video streamed on the Internet at http://www.fulldisclosure.net/ . In 2002 the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences presented host Leslie Dutton with an Emmy for the 2001 public affairs series entitled “L.A.’s War Against Terrorism.” In 2000, the first Full Disclosure Forum was held in Washington D.C. entitled “The Prosecutor & The Presidency” featuring former U. S. Attorneys General and Special and Independent Prosecutors on how America investigates the Presidency.

###

Related Alternative News Press Releases

Alex Jones: Corporations, US government run news media

Several huge corporations own networks and newspapers in the US. How much of the content do they control? Radio Host Alex Jones says the old media is too close to not only corporations, but the government too. Many Americans are turning to alternative online sources for the truth, but Google, which Jones alleges was created by the NSA, will soon start to censor alternative news outlets.
Video Rating: 0 / 5

Requiem for the New World Order

Filmed September 2010 outside St. Paul’s Cathedral in the London finance district.
camera work by Silkie Carlo

Duration : 0:11:45

Read more…

CrossTalk on Corruption: World Cancer?

On this edition of Peter Lavelle’s CrossTalk, he asks his guests whether the term and concept “corruption” is being used inappropriately – after all, massive corruption exists under different names in the rich West, particularly in the US.

Duration : 0:24:25

Read more…

It’s All About People, Process, and Technology. Technology is Dead Last in the Order of Importance When it Comes to Security

The recent and explosive growth of the Internet and technology has brought many good things such as e-commerce, collaborative computing, online markets and new avenues of sharing and distributing information. But each side has its counterpart, and with the technological advances came hackers. With this dark side and the many security breaches that are associated with it, companies, governments and individuals are afraid of hackers breaking into their servers or networks, stealing valuable data, collecting passwords and intercepting financial and credit card information.

And many times this can become reality. Recently, there has been a flurry of security breaches among large organizations such as Western Union, that reported a security breach on their Web site that let loose the credit-and debit-card information for 15,700 customers. Another recent hacker case is a 16-year-old youth, who admitted hacking into military and NASA computer networks. His activities caused a three-week shutdown of NASA’s systems and a security breach of a military computer network which protects against conventional, biological, chemical and nuclear-weapon attacks. That’s just a small sampling of actual hacks. Most industry watchers agree that only a handful of security breaches are ever reported.

For a long time, most computer network crackers hacked a system for the same reason: “Because it’s there.” But that’s no longer the only reason or even the dominant one. More hackers now do it because “It’s where the money is.” In the past decade, hackers have changed from script kiddies who hacked websites and spread worms to professionals sponsored by foreign governments and organized crime. Modern hackers want more than infamy. They exploit new technologies to crack systems or hack into computer systems and hold data for ransom. Hackers today commit real crimes, sometimes for significant financial gain.

To safeguard themselves from the modern hackers, most companies and government agencies that want to uncover network and system security vulnerabilities have two choices: they can hire a team of penetration experts to scan and probe their systems and uncover their vulnerabilities, or they can wait for a malicious hacker to come by and exploit them. Unfortunately, many times it is the latter. A security analysis or penetration test, performed by a security consultant, would produce a report or security posture assessment, detailing all vulnerabilities found and the actions needed to remedy them and minimize the risk of being the victim of a successful hack attack.

The security consultant or penetration expert can be a “white hacker”, someone who uses ethical hacking to discover vulnerabilities within a network or a reformed “black hacker”, who once was an active part of the dark side and used to exploit the identified security holes. The subject of whether it is ethical to use former hackers to evaluate a network’s security is a topic that is often hotly debated – and for many reasons.

Ethical hackers or security consultants typically have very strong programming and computer networking skills and have been in the computer and networking business for several years. Their base knowledge and expertise is augmented with detailed knowledge of the hardware and software, project management skills and methodology which are necessary for the actual vulnerability testing, as well as when reporting after the test was performed. In addition to that, ethical hacking seminars, courses and certifications are being offered to IT professional to broaden their horizon and skills in these fields. But many times these hacking courses and seminars only provide a very limited insight, outdated hacking or only basic hacking techniques. Their main purpose is to educate professionals but not to create a new generation of hackers. The goal is to fill security holes, not exploit them.

A disadvantage that white hackers or security consultants have over hackers is the real world experience and the insight knowledge. There are many things that cannot be taught in a seminar or learned from a book. The most obvious advantage former hackers have, is the real world hacking experience. As each network system differs based on various network defenses and configurations, the hack approach will be unique and only someone with plenty of real world hacking experience can efficiently go from using one technique to another as required by the present situation.

Another positive aspect of hiring reformed hackers as security consultants is that staying up on the latest security exploits, vulnerabilities and countermeasures is part of their job. A good hacker has a level of security knowledge that goes far beyond that of most other IT professionals. Keeping up with the latest exploits and countermeasures is a full time job and although the IT professional has an acceptable level of security knowledge, they must focus most of their attention on the day to day responsibilities of keeping the network up and running. To make up these “deficiencies” many white hackers and security consultants rely on automated and commercial vulnerability and penetration software, that can provide needed security reports, but their functions are limited. The huge differences can be seen when comparing the results from an automated scan and a hacker assessment or professional penetration test.

But before a company makes the decision to hire a reformed hacker, one needs to evaluate the negative sides. Certainly there are several types of hackers that can be found. One kind oft them are the “gray hats” – the unpaid tinkerers who find flaws to improve security for everyone. They are the best hackers, because their passion for tinkering drives their excellence and they do not break the laws. The black hat hackers – the criminals – break the law and feel justified doing it. They are the kind of hackers who seek to increase their fame in the hacker community, while others want to prove at any cost that their targets’ security is vulnerable. Black hats wreak havoc not only by their own actions but also by drawing attention to weaknesses that they and cybercriminals can exploit. The last and worst kinds of hackers are the cybercriminals, who perpetrate the worst crimes. They are paid to use existing tools and techniques to steal confidential personal, government or industry information, and particularly financial data. Cybercriminals usually work for foreign governments, organized crime or independently.

The probably biggest negative in the decision making process is trust. Which hacker will you hire and how much can you trust them? The main premise of security is deciding who you trust and then locking out everyone else. When hiring a hacker as a security consultant, because of network’s security concerns, paradoxically the trust goes to the criminal. Not only is it the trust factor that plays a major role in the decision making process but also the impact the decision might have on customers and shareholder. How will the customers react, if they knew a former criminal was hired to test the security of a system or database that contains all personal and financial information? Someone with a questionable morale and judgment, is not someone who should have control of a corporate network with sensitive data. In most cases hackers, and that is what makes them hackers, do not appreciate or respect standard business processes and structures. A disgruntled hacker with inside knowledge of a company’s networks could create a nightmare scenario.

Hackers are like adventurers, motivated by intellectual curiosity. “The more secure you make your systems, the more you attract them. The hacker mind-set is like exploring space, except they’re exploring the network. If that essential curiosity on finding out how things work, which is what causes people to be hackers, goes away, then you don’t necessarily want that person as a hacker or security consultant. However, just because a hacker has the desire and capabilities to explore a network, does not necessarily make them prepared to build a secure network and fix identified vulnerabilities. Breaking into things, does not always mean knowing how to fix them. These are two different skill sets. Once security threats have been identified, these need to be communicated including the potential business processes affected by the vulnerability, along with a list of impact assessments and countermeasures. Besides technical knowledge, the hacker will need to have experience in business processes and management, to relay his findings to the company.

Another hey factor to consider before making a decision who to hire as a security consultant, is to know that no computer system is ever completely secure, especially when considering the human factor. Spending astronomical amounts of money pursuing total security, by hiring security consultants and eventually becoming dependent on them, is not going to help. Some corporations in some industries must guard against intrusions from tech-hungry foreign governments – in particular China, France, Israel, Japan, Germany and Russia – that converted their cold-war spy machinery into “economic espionage” units, but that does not apply to all businesses. A realistic set of goals of what to expect from a security consultant need to be set first.

But no matter what the decision is and if the company hires a professional security consultant or a reformed hacker, the real threat will be still there. Any hacker, who wants to exploit a system will always try to use the path of least resistance. This path of least resistance is often through the front door. The front to door can be “identified” as the area over which businesses may have the least control: people. People are the weakest but first link when it comes to security. With good social engineering skills and not very well trained employees, disgruntled workers and ex-employees, a hacker can get enough information to access a system, insert malicious codes that contain keystroke and network sniffers and other means to collect information. The hacker just “exchanged” his keyboard with social engineering. And this is a part of security where a highly educated security consultant or a reformed hacker will not be able to help you.

Dasha Deckwerth
http://www.articlesbase.com/security-articles/its-all-about-people-process-and-technology-technology-is-dead-last-in-the-order-of-importance-when-it-comes-to-security-703665.html

Do you listen to alternative news radio on your computer or on radio?

I personally listen to NPR and Alex Jones and sometimes I watch CNN and Fox News for some laughs. Tell me what radio program you like and how you listen to it or watch it. Thanks

Yeah man.. Alex Jones is a great first point of call. Whether you agree with his outlook or not, you get news on his show that really isn’t being covered by the mainstream news.

The BBC is for those who like corporations to do their thinking for them.

Russia Today is actually much fairer than the BBC. Infact it’s probably better than any TV news we’d get in the UK or the US.

The Corbett Report is a good podcast. Worth checking out.

I also use GlobalResearch.ca

And you can’t beat The Onion..

What are some detailed examples of corruption in the efforrt to pass a health care bill.?

I’ve paid close attention to this. Unfortunately i have not taken notes. I remember a lot but, i am not sure if i would call it corruption. So why not tell me what you consider corruption within this process.

$1.4 million per day from the health insurance industry’s lobbyists directly into the pockets of congressmen and senators from day one of the "debate".

I’d say that plus all of the additional millions that went from the same people to the same people before the current debate began would amount to ample evidence of corruption.

The uninsured and under insured don’t have millions to throw around.

I have to say it angers me to think that giant insurance corporations can use the money they take from us to buy politicians and get them to work against our best interests.

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:

• Your State’s Congressmen
• Your States’ Senators

To email Congressman all across the United States:

• http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm

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

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

Corruption in Africa: a Cancer That Won’t Go Away

‘Corruption is one of the most formidable challenges to good governance, development and poverty reduction’ in Africa says 2008 Transparency International Report.

It has been said that corruption in Africa is like an advanced cancer or tumour that cannot be treated. Like cancer, corruption has tragically devastated African societies and made millions of people very poor. From South Africa to Egypt the tentacles of corruption reaches every where. Corruption has no boundaries. From the offices of presidents and prime ministers to the smallest administration unit of government corruption is everywhere.    According to the Africa Union (AU) around $148 billion are stolen from the continent by its leaders and civil servants every year. The recent Forbes’ list of most corrupt nations had 9 out of the first 16 countries coming from Africa.

In Africa, very few government officials and civil servants perform services for free. You cannot get your birth certificate or passport unless you grease the palm of officials. You cannot get good education for your kid unless you pay a bribe. You cannot obtain electricity meter for your house unless you pay a bribe. You cannot get your goods out from the harbour unless you pay kickback. Anything involving signing of documents involves paying inducements. In Africa you can hardly find someone who has not paid bribe before either willingly or unwillingly. To receive attention when you are sick you need to grease the palm of hospital officials.

 In Ghana, officials illegally charge 15 and 150 Ghana cedis for a birth certificate and a passport respectively. Again in Ghana Police officers openly ask bus and taxi drivers to pay bribe before they are allowed to cross mounted road blocks. Customs officials adopt all manner of tactics in order to collect money from importers and exporters before their goods are allowed to leave the ports.

Most projects in Africa are carried out by corrupt contractors who collude and connive with public officials to inflate project cost in order to enrich themselves. As a result every project carried out cost three times the usual cost and it is always the tax payers who bear the brunt of it. Due to corruption, project inspectors fail to do their job and allow substandard work to be done at the expense of the people and the nation.

In Africa, it is totally useless to bid for contracts because contracts are awarded to the contractors who are able to pay the biggest bribe. In most countries there are no announcements for tenders rather contracts are awarded to companies who secretly pay large sums of commission to government officials.

For example on 17th September 2002 a Canadian Engineering company called Acres International was convicted by a High Court in Lesotho for paying $260,000 bribe to secure an $8 billion dam contract in the tiny Southern African nation of Lesotho.

 Achair Partners a Swiss company and Progresso an Italian company have been accused of bribing Somali Transition Government officials in order to secure contracts to deposit highly toxic industrial waste in the waters of Somalia.

In 2002 Halliburton a US company was accused of establishing $180m flush fund with the intent of using it to bribe Nigeria officials in order to secure a $10 billion Liquefied Gas Plant contract in the Nigeria. In response to the accusation the company fired Mr. Albert Jack Stanley. Mr. Stanley a former executive of Halliburton (KBR) has pleaded guilty for orchestrating the $180m flush fund. Even though Halliburton denied any knowledge of such a fund a report by the company later named a British called Jeffrey Tesler as the middleman behind the bribery. Such corrupt practices by western companies seeking contracts in Africa are not uncommon.

In Africa contracts are awarded to party faithfuls who in turn make handsome financial contributions to the party in power.  Because of corruption and nepotism anyone can become a contractor in Africa. In Africa, state coffers or the treasury are the personal property of the president/prime minister, his family, his cronies and his political party. In most African countries there is no separation or difference between state and ruling party resources.

Corruption is so endemic in African societies that, political parties have been pledging to combat it with deadly force but when they are elected nothing seem to change.  When former president of Ghana John Kuffour took office he said ‘there will be zero tolerance for corruption’ in his government but his party recently lost power amid accusation that he was unable to tame his corrupt officials.

Despite years of exports of oil, gold, diamond, bauxite, tin, coltan, uranium, manganese timber and several other valuable minerals the continent continue to be ranked as the poorest on earth because most of the revenue from these exports do not get to the people but find its way into the bank accounts of corrupt government officials, civil servants and their allies.

Since oil was first discovered in Nigeria about 50 years ago, over $400 billion have been realised from its sale but today the whole population continue to live in abject poverty and the country has nothing to show or account for the billions of dollars she has received for years. Those who have benefited from the oil are corrupt politicians, civil servants, a shadow economy, armed bandits, army generals and the big oil corporations such as Shell, Mobil, BP and their American counterparts.  As a result able men and women are battling dangerous seas just to enter Europe and try their luck. Others have resulted to 419 a popular scam used to trick people into given out their money and valuables. In fact Nigeria has consistently featured in the top 1% of the most corrupt nation on the planet.

Between 2005 and 2007 several state governors and their immediate families were arrested by Scotlandyard in London on corruption and money laundering charges.

Among them are James Ibori of oil rich Delta State and his wife Theresa who had their $35m asset frozen by the English court. Mr. Ibori earns about a thousand dollars a month but during his eight years as a state governor he managed to acquire wealth to the tune of $35m and was a key financial contributor to the campaign of the current president of Nigeria. He owns a private jet and a lavish London home. 

Another corrupt governor is Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, governor of oil-rich state of Bayelsa who was also arrested in London for money laundering charges. Mr. Alamieyeseigha broke his bail conditions and evaded capture in Britain by dressing up as a woman. When Police conducted a search in his London home they discovered one million pounds worth of cash in his home.  

Another governor who was arrested in England was Joshua Dariye of Plateau State. He was arrested in a London hotel for stealing money meant for development of his state.

But these thieves have no rank compared to the heavyweights like Abacha, Mobutu, Eyadema, Lansana Conte, Obiang Nguema, Omar Bongo, Mubarak and Arap Moi.

In the 1990s economic hardship, abject poverty and destruction of the environment forced the people of Ogoniland in Nigeria to demand a say in which Shell operates but the military regime led by Gen. Sani Abacha arrested the environmentalists led by Ken Sorowiwa and executed them. You may wonder why Abacha killed his country men instead of protecting and providing for their needs. According to available data Nigeria government Lawyers within the period that Abacha became Head of State i.e. between 1993 and 1998 he stole $4 billion of Nigeria’s oil money and stashed it in several secret bank accounts in Switzerland, Britain, Luxemburg, Jersey Island and Liechtenstein. In April, 2002 these countries agreed to return $1 billion of the stolen money to the people of Nigeria. So far about $2 billion have been returned to the government of Nigeria and the rest of the money is still sitting in bank accounts in Western countries notably Switzerland and Britain.

A visit to the Niger Delta region of Nigeria shows that majority of the people especially the youth are unemployed. Years of oil spills have made the soil unfit for any agricultural activity. Their streams and wells are polluted and the people have no access to basic necessities of life because their leaders have enriched themselves with the money.

 Every effort to get the Nigeria government to develop the oil rich areas fell on death ears until the unemployed youth took up arms against the federal government and oil companies. They kidnapped foreign oil workers and demanded ransom before their victims were released. They disrupted the oil production forcing the oil companies to move several miles offshore for their own safety but they were not safe either. Eventually, the companies had to reduce their output by 25% in 2007-8. These disruptions affected supply of oil in the world market forcing the price to skyrocket to $140 a barrel in the summer of 2008.

 If Abacha could steal $4 billion within 5 years then you can tell how much the leaders who have ruled for decades have stolen. For example Gaddafi of Libya has been in power for 39 years now. Omar Bongo of Gabon 31 years, Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea 28 years, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe 28 years, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt 27 years, Paul Biya of Cameroon 26 years, Yoweri Museveni of Uganda 22 years, Omar Al Bashir of Sudan 19 years, Iddriss Derby of Chad 17 years, Yahya Jammeh of Gambia 14 years.

I think you have now got the picture and understand why the African Union says $148 billion leave the continent every year.

The late Lansana Conte ruled Guinea for 24 years from 1984 to 2008. Sometimes having a leader maintaining stability in a country could translate into economic prosperity but this is not the case for Guinea. Even though Guinea is the world’s biggest exporter of bauxite, there is little very the country can show for it. Apart from bauxite, Guinea also have large deposits of gold diamond, iron, nickel and uranium yet poverty is so severe that the country was ranked among the top 1% of most corrupt countries in Africa. In fact according to a report by UN, Guinea ranks 160th out of 177 in the UN’s Development scale.

According to available documents 70% of revenue from of all mineral exports every year finds its way in the bank accounts of Lansana Conte and his cronies. Today the people lack portable water and electricity. Roads, rail lines, telecommunication, schools, hospitals are in severe deplorable conditions while money meant for their repair and maintenance sit in Europe and America being protected by banking secrecy laws. According to Aljazeera a credible and popular news broadcaster, corruption is so woven in Guinean society that school girls need not study as their promotion to next class is always assured by their male teachers who solicit sex from them. According to the students, those who refuse to sleep with their teachers are made to repeat a year in class. Female teachers on the other hand demand money to be paid in exchange for higher marks.

Why won’t the people be poor when their livelihoods have been taken away from them? Why?

On Friday 31, 2007 the Guardian newspaper in Britain reported a corruption scandal perpetrated by former president of Kenya Daniel Arap Moi and his family. According to the Guardian a 110 page report prepared by international risk consultancy firm Kroll exposed Arap Moi and his family and accused them of banking £1 billion in 28 countries including Britain. The report went further to say that the family used Shell Oil Company, secret trusts, front men and his entourage to siphon the money away.

Apart from the money, the Moi family also bought several multimillion pound properties in London, New York, South Africa including 10,000-hectare ranch in Australia and bank accounts containing hundreds of millions of pounds. It is on record that Mr. Moi’s sons Philip and Gideon are wealth £384m and £550m respectively. While majority of Kenyans live in rural areas, and live in mud/thatched houses with bamboo/raffia leaves as roofing sheet the Moi family live in a £4m home in Surrey and £2m flat in Knightsbridge. Arap Moi’s 24 year rule was largely corrupt and contributed to endemic poverty seen in Kenya today.

How do you expect the continent to develop when monies meant for her development are stolen by her leaders and kept by countries who praise themselves as civilised, cultured, loving and democratic?

In South Africa, Jacob Zuma is still battling it out with the court for his part in the multi-billion arms deal in South Africa in 2001. He was forced to resign as Deputy President of South Africa a clear embarrassment to the ANC government of former president Mbeki.

In 2006 former president of Malawi Bakili Muluzi was arrested for pocketing $12m donated to his poor country by foreign governments. Again former Zambia president Frederick Chiluba was arrested together with two business men Aaron Chungu and Faustin Kabwe and charged with 11 counts of stealing money meant for the Zambia’s development.

In Equatorial Guinea where oil export has earned the country billions of dollars, the 600,000 people living in the country continue to live in poverty while Teodoro Obiang Nguema and his cronies continue to siphon the oil revenue with no accountability.

Gabon and Angola both Oil exporting countries are no different. In fact, the governments in Gabon and Equatorial Guinea can best be described as Kleptocracy that is government by thieves. In countries such as Nigeria, Egypt, Cameroon, The Gambia, Sudan, Uganda, Libya, Tunisia a Kleptocracy class of people have replaced anything democracy. In these countries very few people continue to remain in power and the people have no say in the way their country is govern or run. For example Gaddafi of Libya has been in power for 39 years now. Omar Bongo of Gabon 31 years, Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea 28 years, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe 28 years, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt 27 years and the list is unending.

How do you expect a person to rule for 30 years without being corrupt?

What is clear is that these unelected leaders continue to amass wealth at the expense of their poor countries and continue to mismanage whatever remains of their corrupt activities. Because most of the leaders are former military officers or former rebels with no grasp of economics and management, they are unable to formulate any good economic policies that will transform and grow their economies hence poverty has become a part of the people but their leaders know not what poverty is.

In DR Congo it is estimated that gold and diamond deposits alone could fetch the country 23 trillion dollars not to mention the abundance of timber and other several minerals that are found in large quantities such as columbo-tantalite (coltan) and cassiterite (tin ore) yet years of corruption, mismanagement, conflicts and foreign involvement have made this resource rich nation one of the poorest in the world.

It is often said that western nations cannot maintain their current level of lifestyle without Congo and most corporations in the west can easily go bust without Congo. The question is if Congo is the blood line of the west and the west is rich because of Congo then why is Congo so poor?

And where are the billions of dollars from the sale of these minerals? The answer lies in the history of the nation which is endemic corruption, colonialism, armed conflicts and foreign involvements. Mobutu in his 32 year reign is believed to have taken several billions of dollars from the treasury and deposited it in his numerous Swiss bank accounts. When President Kabila requested the Swiss for the money to be returned he was told Mobutu had just $7.6m. President Kabila frustrated and disappointment with the Swiss announcement said he had expected the Swiss to announce something like $1 billion or more.

But unconfirmed report indicate that the Swiss decided not to give the billions of dollars to the Congo government for fear that it would be stolen again by Kabila and his regime who are also deadly corrupt. Mobutu have several villas and mansions in France and Switzerland bought with money stolen from the Congo people. In 2001, items auctioned in his luxurious home in Switzerland fetched $100,000. The billions of dollars taken away from the country have made Congo one of the poorest in Africa. In Congo today there are no schools, hospitals, roads, telecommunication, rail, electricity and potable water. The only means of transport is through River Congo.

Everyday in Walikale about 16 aircraft fly out of the city with loads of minerals bound for Rwanda. These stolen minerals further find their way in the western mineral markets in London and Switzerland. The proceeds are shared by the Generals, politicians, western companies the businessmen in Rwanda, the warlords in Congo who use part of their share to acquire weapons that are used to terrorise the people and prolong the war.  Watch the video below about Congo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io8c81xHLmw

Conclusion

Western governments are quick to preach good governance to Africa but they fail to preach the same message to their banks who act as save havens for these corrupt leaders. The western governments have forgotten that the existence of bank secrecy laws in Switzerland, Jersey Island, Britain, Liechtenstein, Luxemburg, Austria have encouraged these corrupt leaders to bank away monies meant for their countries’ development.

The name of Switzerland, Britain, France, Jersey Island, Liechtenstein and Luxemburg came up several times throughout this study of corruption in Africa as I try to establish where most of the stolen monies go. Even though these countries like to portray themselves as civilised and cultured with hearts of angels, they have failed to recognise that keeping monies that were dishonestly obtained from the poor people on earth taint whatever reputation they might have. In the case of Switzerland and her allies who keep these stolen monies it is so pathetic that they know they are receiving stolen monies yet due to greed they have done nothing to stop it.

The next time you are looking for stolen money from your country ask the Swiss government and the Swiss banks they always have a clue about it where about.

Africa is poor today because of colluding and connivance of Swiss and other western banks and the kleptocrats who rule Africa. Corruption is rife on the continent because those who steal the money never lack a place to hide them.

Fighting corruption should not be left to the poor countries alone.

Western media who always portray Africa as underdeveloped and backward must expose the banks in their countries who serve as save havens. The media should put pressure on politicians in Europe and America to reform the banking secrecy laws and make it punishable offence to receive monies from these corrupt leaders. Again the western media must campaign vigorously for all looted monies to be returned to their rightful owners in Africa. The western media must team up with civil organisations to expose western companies who pay bribes to secure contracts in Africa like Acres International, Halliburton, Trafigura, Achair Partners and Progresso.

Western countries have a duty to stop their nations being used as save havens for stolen monies from the African continent. Western countries should reform their banking laws. They should return all looted money put there by corrupt African leaders to the African people. There must be an international coalition dedicated to tracking all stolen monies on the face of the earth with Africa given to priority.

Africans should establish well funded independent Corruption watchdogs to investigate, prosecute and severely punish corrupt officials who engage in corrupt practices. The Africans must demand transparency and accountability in government. Laws must be enacted in Africa to protect whistle blowers who take the risk to expose corrupt practices.

 It is by uniting to fight corruption that Africa can ever dream of parting with poverty.

Lord Aikins Adusei
http://www.articlesbase.com/economics-articles/corruption-in-africa-a-cancer-that-wont-go-away-738350.html