How to Stop Evil Competitions between Aid Organizations?, page 1

Having read Dead Aid about two years ago, I’m now reading “War Games The Story of War and Aid in Modern Times”

It’s full of examples that aren’t supposed to make you laugh, but have made it my most hysterical, non-fiction, for example…

“Aid as an Instrument of War” Chapter 5 page 94-95…
"The things local officials weigh up are: will they get access to imported aid supplies, training, study trips, per diems and people needing to rent houses and vehicles? Will an aid project put them in a position to hand out jobs to brothers and cousins? If the answer is no, it may take a very long time to get the necessary permits."

A story I'd just told him about a wheelchair project in Liberia had made him feel even more dispirited. Medical NGOs had arranged for a batch of wheelchairs to be flown in, to ease the sufferings of war invalids. The chairs turned up in the streets of Monrovia modified into ice-cream carts and mobile shops. Vendors who had nothing wrong with their legs were using the chairs, while amputees went on dragging themselves on their hands and knees through the filthy streets. Local government workers had distributed the wheelchairs among their own kith and kin, who in turn had rented them out to small-time entrepreneurs

A policy to combat theft and abuse could be implemented only if one INGO held a monopoly in a given district, village or country, With their own business interests in mind, however, aid organizations do all they in their power to prevent exactly that outcome. MSF and Action contre la Faim saw no reason to refuse an invitation from the RUF, the Sierra Leonean rebel organization, to provide relief in RUF territory. Other INGO’s were not welcome there, since they banded together to try to do something about the theft of aid by the RUF.”

In Other Words: Many heads of charities deserve to be convicted for assisting war crimes, just as much as the soldiers commanded upon threat of death to e.g. shoot up a refugee camp. And that’s because (unlike a soldier who at least costs human rights abuses money) these “aid” organizations not only deliberately waste huge sums own their luxurious own costs, but will typically let around (literally) 75% of whatever aid does get through to be stolen, and furthermore to then disguise this fact from the media –who might otherwise explain to the public what is really happening to their donation money.

In Addition…
Most of today’s poverty comes from poor people having too many children (often in anti-contraception Catholic & Muslim countries).
In 1960 world population was 3 billion, today it’s just reached 7 billion and by 2020 will a little under 8 billion
www.futuretimeline.net...

It’s not that African poverty is an African poverty (because I said so) it’s that aid is an African problem because their governments really are both the cause and real reason for a lack of progress. But the African governments are only a consequence of the tribalism within African people.

Ultimately…
If e.g. London suffered Africa’s poverty we British wouldn’t be too bothered if our government money went to North, East, South, West, London ect –just providing it reached the poorest people first. The cultures of Europe and Northern America have identical prioritization.
But in Africa it isn’t like that. In Africa, whether aid goes to your tribe, or another tribe is a big deal, because ultimately the view is anything going to non-allied tribal regions, is even aid worse than wasted. Tribal countries are countries with scores to settle –even if they often are centuries old.

This is (partly) why the 49.5 billion of aid confiscated (without much polling support from Americans), why the £12 billion pounds a year taken away by from the British by the British government (also with at least the vast majority of public polled opposing it www.taxpayersalliance.com...) would be better spent pioneering technology that would help all mankind e.g. cheaper sea-water desalination technology, better recycling methods (so there is less pressure on world metal prices) more investment in safer nuclear, or more cost-effective wind & solar power.

Technology, combined with less trade barriers against poorer country’s (wanting trade with us) would be a far better way of relieving poverty –that and figuring out a way to replace the Pope & Muslim’s with leaders not opposed to condom’s!

But Of Course…
I take the cynical view which is: Aid plus the fact Britain & America being the biggest munitions exporters to that e.g. homosexual murdering, crucifixion practising Saudi Arabia www.theguardian.com... are fully compatible, because ultimately the bulk of foreign aid has nothing to do with helping the world’s poorest people (what a ridiculous marketing idea?) rather aid is all about assisting Western foreign policy –something that’s been evil for about as long as there’s been paper in history. Even when it comes to private charity it’s interesting to ask why you here about country Y (let’s pretend to call them Syria) and not country X (let’s call them Democratic Republic of Congo –incidentally the world’s poorest place!).

Here is a list of the world’s poorest countries
www.therichest.com...

You don’t hear about many of them on Oxfam adverts, instead it always just so happens to be the epicentre of foreign policy appearing on TV, oh and (by coincidence or not) our government just so happens to be most interested in giving these same organizations “aid”! Of course no one is suggesting there’s some kind of deal… our politicians would lose too many tears! (SMILES).