Monday, December 19, 2011

Global Financial Integrity Bullshit

I am happy that those rabid Pakatanis are going gaga over the recent GFI report having Malaysia make the top ten list. I can even visualise them sipping champagne and passing round cigars celebrating another Malaysian shame.

I will share their joy by shoving a little bit of information up their arses.

Global Financial Integrity background,
Global Financial Integrity was launched in September 2006 following the publication of Capitalism’s Achilles Heel: Dirty Money and How to Renew the Free-Market System, (John Wiley & Sons 2005), written by Center for International Policy Senior Fellow Raymond Baker.
The first and most prominent piece of information on the GFI cover is, the Ford Foundation.
"Global Financial Integrity Wishes to thank The Ford Foundation for supporting this Project."
Supporting means whatever it means. Found Foundation funds the GFI report. Unless of course GFI just fancies the Ford Foundation logo for decorative purposes.

This is the Ford Foundation,
"She also does a fine job in recounting the intriguing story of how the CIA worked with existing institutions, such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, and established numerous "bogus" foundations to "hide" its funding of the Congress for Cultural Freedom and its other covert activities. Everything came a cropper in 1967, however, as a result of press articles, especially revelations in the long-gone Ramparts magazine."
Fuck lah. Not another conspiracy theory, you might say.

The link that quote comes from of a book review and that article in the concluding para,
"As should be clear, I do not share Frances Saunders's opinion about the "morality" of CIA's activities and do not accept her notion that CIA undermined "intellectual freedom" in Western Europe. I highly enjoyed and strongly recommend her book, however. Consider it to be similar to your favorite TV broadcast: enjoy the program and ignore the commercials."
The author of the article on the CIA website does not deny, discredit nor dismiss the authenticity of a book, Intelligence in Recent Public Literature.

Fuck lah. That was the 50s and 60s you will say.

James Petras in 2001,"The Ford Foundation and the CIA: A documented case of philanthropic collaboration with the Secret Police" wrote,
"As in the 1950s and 60s the Ford Foundation today selectively funds anti-leftist human rights groups which focus on attacking human rights violations of U.S. adversaries, and distancing themselves from anti-imperialist human rights organizations and leaders. The FF has developed a sophisticated strategy of funding human rights groups (HRG) that appeal to Washington to change its policy while denouncing U.S. adversaries their “systematic” violations. The FF supports HRG which equate massive state terror by the U.S. with individual excesses of anti-imperialist adversaries. The FF finances HRG which do not participate in anti-globalization and anti-neoliberal mass actions and which defend the Ford Foundation as a legitimate and generous “non-governmental organization”.

History and contemporary experience tells us a different story. At a time when over government funding of cultural activities by Washington is suspect, the FF fulfills a very important role in projecting U.S. cultural policies as an apparently “private” non-political philanthropic organization. The ties between the top officials of the FF and the U.S. government are explicit and continuing. A review of recently funded projects reveals that the FF has never funded any major project that contravenes U.S. policy.

In the current period of a major U.S. military-political offensive, Washington has posed the issue as “terrorism or democracy,” just as during the Cold War it posed the question as “Communism or Democracy.” In both instances the Empire recruited and funded “front organizations, intellectuals and journalists to attack its anti-imperialist adversaries and neutralize its democratic critics. The Ford Foundation is well situated to replay its role as collaborate a cover for the New Cultural Cold War."
Among the funders for the Center for International Policy is also, the Ford Foundation.

Fuck lah. Still conspiracy theories. You still hold steadfast.

How about some logic?

A burning question.

For all it's blustering methodology this way and that in arriving at the "Illicit Financial Flows from Developing Countries Over the Decade Ending 2009", can the Global Financial Integrity put it's integrity on the line by having an "Illicit Financial Flows from Developed Countries?

Now, that would be more fun reading.

I know nuts about economics but for me economists are a dime a dozen or millions per personality depending on the body or medium the economist plies his trade.

No matter how good or bad, prized or pissed, how do you explain economies of the greatest world democracy like the USA and it's allies in Europe going down the toilet?

They will have the very best economists to steer their economies, no? The most highly paid, no? They are paid the moon, the sun and the universe for their expertise, no? And when the economy get flushed down the toilet, the same economists are paid the moon, the sun and the universe, to revive the economy. Fuck, paid even more. Who knows. Throw in a new planet as bonus.

Please explain. Anyone?

That being the case, how the fuck can a Global Financial Integrity or any other economic orientated organisation report be credible? Or even be taken seriously, I mean seriously.

While I am no economics whizz, accounting basic, we in Malaysia say, boleh tahan lah.

Debit and credit. What comes in must be balanced by what goes out.

Balancing the books.

Since GFI provides provides for "Illicit Financial Flows from", can the GFI also provide the countries that "Illicit Financial Flows to"?

This question, just asking only. Ok?

For integrity sake.


Unrelated Ford Foundation Wikileak,
Dr. Mutunga said the Ford Foundation is reviewing potential funding mechanisms for the protection of gay rights defenders in Uganda.


Anonymous said...

yeah for malaysia we know who

Freddie Kevin said...

Anon 16.20,

Yes indeed.

Thanks for the comment.

Snuze said...

Heh. What you said.

*points above*