It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


American Foreign Aid To Dictators - Possible Link to Illegal Immigration - Where does the money go?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 12:06 PM
To my surprise i've noticed that many here believe that U.S. foreign aid goes to the people. I didn't know that people here on ATS actually thought so.

I don't know, seems like more informed people are in the breaking alternative section vs. general conspiracy.

Anyhow, let's discuss the steps involved in "influence".

Here's how it can be broken down:
This is a general break down as i'm sure there are many variants of it.

1) CIA covert ops creates some form of covert coup in a country, brings the leaders down and install puppet govt.s in that country.

2) Those puppet govt.s either become dictators or passive puppets.

3) Every so often millions and billions of U.S. taxpayer money that either exists or doesn't exist(printed out of thin air by FED) is labelled as foreign aid when in fact over 90% of it or so goes to these puppet govt.s/dictators.

4) This then has a ripple effect. Citizens of that country become hungry and oppressed and either become vigilantes or terroists or try to get out and become an illegal immigrant in another country.

they have toppled down govt.s like in chile, haiti

as they also tried here:
and then install puppet govt.s there and all the money labelled as foreign aid goes to them, or at least almost all.

They have overthrown leaders in Haiti , Surinam, Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Bolivia, Grenada, El Salvador, Cuba, Brazil, Honduras, Dominican Republic, and Ecuador in the last 50 years.

Just go look at what they have done to latin america.
Here's some examples:

So why are so few nations even nominally capitalist? Largely because of America's biggest welfare program: Aid to Dependent Dictators. Since World War II, US foreign aid has systematically subsidized parasitic governing "elites," from the nomenclatura of the Warsaw Pact to the kleptocrats of Africa; even the rulers of the "Axis of Evil."

Of course, "tiny" expenditures on foreign dictators add up. Unfortunately, no one can tell you exactly what they add up to, because foreign aid is dispersed and cloaked better than the CIA budget. Official foreign aid is the smallest part of the cost; the majority of foreign Aid today is arranged in back-room deals between money-center banks, dictators, and the Federal Reserve. The "official" foreign aid figures are a lower limit. Even this lower limit is an incredible figure. At an absolute minimum, since WWII more than a trillion dollars has been transferred from US taxpayers to unfree regimes. What would this trillion dollars have become, if left in the private sector? How many trillions of private wealth? And how much of this private wealth would have been invested in the more-free parts of the Third World, providing real jobs and real pride to people who now live in hopeless dependence? Of course, we will never know. Perhaps we would have seen a cancer cure by now, perhaps Mars would have been terraformed, perhaps Washington DC would have had a legitimate baseball stadium instead of a tax-financed atrocity. A multi-trillion-dollar hole in the world economy is too big to visualize.

The real dollar cost of foreign aid is the sum of all official aid, plus all US military commitments not related to US security, plus all bank "loans" to Third World and communist governments. The majority of these anti-capitalist regimes will never be able to, or be interested in, repaying any of this money. The Warsaw Pact alone was estimated to have owed about two hundred billion dollars to Western banks at the time the Berlin Wall fell. Since then, of course, the pace of "loans" to parasite governments has increased dramatically. Counting our continuing defense subsidy to the wealthy nations of Europe and the Pacific Rim, and counterproductive military commitments to puppet regimes in Iraq and elsewhere, US foreign aid must be well over two hundred billion dollars per year.

Parade magazine recently ranked the twenty worst dictators currently in power. Many names are familiar—Fidel Castro, Muammar Qaddafi, Kim Jong-Il, Robert Mugabe and others. They are all guilty of human rights violations and in some cases have committed outright genocide. But there’s another trait common to all twenty leaders—every single one has received foreign aid from wealthy Western countries.

Parade ranked the Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir as the world’s worst dictator. During his reign OECD countries gave his regime more than $6 billion in non-military aid. The U.S. accounted for more than $1 billion of that aid. Kim Jong-Il was ranked as the second worst dictator and received a little over $1 billion in aid, with more than half of it coming from the U.S. Than Shwe of Myanmar, Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, and Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan round out the top five dictators on the list. The U.S. contributed $32 million to Myanmar, $1.1 billion to Zimbabwe, and $385 million to Uzbekistan.

Overall, OECD countries contributed aid to every one of Parade’s 20 worst dictators. Combined, these leaders received nearly $55 billion in aid. The U.S. contributed to 19 of the 20 worst dictators; King Abdulla of Saudi Arabia was somehow left off of the U.S. gravy train. In total, the U.S. contributed more than $7 billion in aid to these leaders. In North Korea, Belarus, Ethiopia, Swaziland, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan the U.S. contributed more than 20 percent of the total aid these countries received from OECD countries.

Government-sponsored aid has failed to promote economic growth in the third world. From 1970 to 2000, more than $400 billion poured into poor African countries with no development to show for it. Parade’s list of dictators makes our foreign aid record even more disturbing. Not only has it failed to promote development, in many cases our aid has supported oppressive dictatorships.

Indeed, the United States currently provides economic aid and security assistance to such repressive African regimes as Swaziland, Congo, Cameroun, Togo, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, Rwanda, Gabon, Egypt, and Tunisia. None of these countries holds free elections, and all have severely suppressed their political opposition.

Among the worst of these African tyrannies has been the regime of Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo of Equatorial Guinea. Obiang has been in power even longer than the 28-year reign of Mugabe and, according to a recent article in the British newspaper The Independent, makes the Zimbabwean dictator “seem stable and benign” by comparison.

During his most recent visit to Washington in 2006, Obiang was warmly received by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who praised the dictator as “a good friend” of the United States.

Equatorial Guinea receives U.S. government funding and training through the International Military Education and Training Program (IMET). In addition, the private U.S. firm Military Professional Resources Incorporated – founded by former senior Pentagon officials who cite the regime’s friendliness to U.S. strategic and economic interests – plays a key role in the country’s internal security apparatus. Furthermore, as a result of Obiang’s understandable lack of trust in his own people, soldiers from Morocco – one of America’s closest African allies – have served for decades in a number of important security functions, including the role of presidential guards.

Let's discuss where you believe the money goes, and your thoughts on it's implication in illegal immigration and perhaps even terror attacks.

[edit on 23-2-2009 by ModernAcademia]

[edit on 23-2-2009 by ModernAcademia]

posted on Feb, 23 2009 @ 01:13 PM

Morales said, referring to Philip Goldberg.
"USAID, with funds that come American tax payers, who think they are helping the Bolivian people, is using the money in a dirty campaign against my government and especially against me."

Morales also accused USAID, which provides $85 million a year in aid to Bolivia, of attempting to stir up political opposition to him.

"The mayor of a city, who recently visited me, told me he was offered money by the US AID agency to run as an opposition congressman. They even offered to pay for his campaign.

"And the mayor told me that the people who work for the US agency go from house to house telling people that if they get rid of Evo Morales, they will have more money."

WASHINGTON — A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday on charges of working for an alleged terrorist fundraising ring that sent more than $130,000 to an Al Qaeda supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.

The 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for the lobbying -- money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

The charges paint "a troubling picture of an American charity organization that engaged in transactions for the benefit of terrorists and conspired with a former United States congressman to convert stolen federal funds into payments for his advocacy," Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein said.

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 06:19 AM
this is an interesting 20/20


log in