Posted on 06/14/2005 5:53:51 AM PDT by OESY
A new study conducted for Republican senators alleges that the International Committee for the Red Cross has "lost its way" by abandoning its guiding principle of impartiality and is now working in "direct opposition to the advancement of U.S. interests."
The stinging report, issued yesterday by the Republican Policy Committee, also urges Congress to launch an investigation into the finances of the international humanitarian organization, which has been sharply critical of the treatment of prisoners at American-run detention centers in Guantanamo Bay and in Iraq. The American government is the largest donor to the International Red Cross, contributing $1.5 billion over the past 15 years, the study says.
The report attributes the international organization's recent actions to "a conscious decision by its current leadership to move the ICRC away from its founding principles of neutrality and impartiality." The study panel asserts that the International Red Cross is gradually becoming an advocacy group, intent on reinterpreting international law and crusading against land mines, cluster bombs, and tear gas.
"During recent years, the ICRC has undergone a significant and accelerating change whereby it has become more responsive to the preferences of the liberal and frequently anti-American international nongovernmental organization community," the report says. "The ICRC effectively no longer serves as the guardian of obligations that have been accepted under a ratified treaty or treaties. Rather, it has become an aggressive advocate - like Amnesty International - for enforcing a broader set of obligations."...
"The ICRC decided to breach its confidentiality clause by publicly talking about - and deliberately revealing - the contents of documents and opinions it sent to the U.S. government," the study for the senators says. "The United States should demand that the ICRC change its behavior and adhere to its 'impartiality' principle."...
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
I stopped giving to the Red Cross in 2001 after I heard comments made by their representatives on the national level that were patently leftist. I'd much rather give to the Salvation Army.
I have NEVER given to the red cross. My mother's family house burned down when she was 5 and the RC refused to give them any help, whereas the Salvation Army gave them clothes and found them a place to stay until they could get back on their feet. This was 1941. The RC was arrogant even then.
Oh geez...ya think so? < /sarcasm> Maybe we should suggest one of these studies for the ACLU.
bookmark
In muslim countries they are "The Red Crescent".
That would suggest that the ACLU has guiding principles to violate.
I stopped donating to the Red Cross and United Way in 1986 when I learned that they are anti-Semitic hatemongers who support the banning of private ownership of firearms.
Here's a
"It's about freakin' time some Pubbie finally said something"
PING!
If I understand correctly, the ICRC was founded to monitor compliance with the Geneva Conventions.The Geneva Conventions exist to give states incentives for humane treatment of civilians and POWs during wars against other states, whether declared or not. But those conventions apply to civilians who are not combatants, or to combatants who are not civilians. The "War on Terror" is a struggle against combatants who pose as civilians and wage war on civilians as if they were combatants. IOW, the "war" on terror is conducted by military combatants on our side, but the opposition are not "combatants" under the Geneva accords but criminals - and the conventions do not protect criminals.
But the ICRC is obeying "Sullivan's First Law," which states that an organization which is not conservative in its explicit purpose always becomes liberal over time. That "law" is true because liberalism is cowardice, and courage is not "moderation." So an organization which does not have courageous conservatism as its mission will gradually be coopted - if in fact it wasn't "liberal" to begin with.
I also NEVER give to the Red Cross. When I was in the Air Force and trying to get home from overseas on emergency leave, the RC representative not only didn't help me, she tried to stop me from leaving. My First Sgt called my mother directly and dictated how to reword the message to the RC. EVEN THEN they refused to help me. Finally my Commander approved my emergency leave, without the RC message. By that point I'd missed a C5 flight would would have gotten me there sooner and more comfortably. At it was, I finally caught a C141 cargo configuration flight. Had to sit with cargo for 10 hours. Didn't might that so much as I was heading home finally. However, when I got to the states, it was 2 days before Christmas and I couldn't get a flight from Charleston. Again, the RC wouldn't help me get a regular flight. Finally a ticket agent took pity and after seeing my emergency leave orders, got me on a flight. To make an already long story short, I got home in 3 days, when if the RC had helped me, I could have gotten there in 1.
NEVER NEVER NEVER give to the Red Cross. I even refuse to give to Combined Charities at work because part of it goes to RC. My managers always complain to me about it because it goes to their numbers. However, I explain to them and usually they understand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.