The UN; sponsored by Google & Hollywood

My name is URL

I posted this in Politics already but nobody seems interested..
________
In the run up to the recent secession poll in southern Sudan, the UN Institute for Training and Research joined forces with Harvard, Google and numerous members of an NGO fronted by numerous Hollywood celebrities. Their aim is to monitor military activity via satellite.

How come the UN/OHCHR couldn't just do the same without the apparent need for third party involvement? Should private orgs and persons be allowed to form conglomerations for such purposes? It seems odd to me.. Clooney has stated that it's the "Antigenocide Paparazzi"!

Anyone else think that the whole thing is rife with propaganda? ie, Clooney labelling the initiative in a way which suggests that genocide is an inevitability..

Torakx

Thats interesting.
I would rather they didnt check the images and reports before releasing them to the public.
Sounds like it would be censored which is kind of like having a global satelite newspaper.After a while there might be a few but then which reporter do you believe!
Better we are all the reporters and all the public can access the images without censorship.
Id be suprised if it was uncensored.

Also it does sound in general like a load of bollox anyway.
There is still genocide going on in Africa and nobody seems to want to do anything about it,so i cant see what difference they plan to make anywhere else.It all depends on politics not satelite images.

Dave!

It sounds a bit less sinister when you read UNITAR's press release. Their aim is to get young people interested in what's happening in Sudan, and to pressure public representatives to take action if the situation deteriorates any further:

MTV Joins with George Clooney, Google, the United Nations and Others to Help Deter War in Sudan
Administrative entity:
UNOSAT / UNITAR Satellite Applications Programme (includes Bergen)
MTV logoNetwork Amplifies Groundbreaking Satellite Sentinel Project, Calls on Young People to Show that the “World is Watching”

New York, USA, 7 January 2011 – MTV and mtvU, MTV’s 24-hour college network, are teaming up with George Clooney and the Satellite Sentinel Project– along with Not on Our Watch [1], the Enough Project [2], Google, the United Nations UNITAR Operational Satellite Applications Programme (UNOSAT) [3], the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative [4], and Trellon, LLC [5]-- by calling on young people to help deter violence in Sudan, and send a loud message: “the world is watching.”

On January 9, 2011, southern Sudan will begin a week-long vote on independence from the rest of the country and analystshave warned that this could plunge the country back into civil war. Starting today, MTV and mtvU will promote the Satellite Sentinel Project across an array of on-air and online properties, encouraging young people to become peace monitors, inform their friends of the latest happenings in Sudan and be prepared to mobilize support should violence emerge. Specific calls to action can be found at Sudan.mtvU.com.

"Satellite Sentinel Project welcomes MTV and its viewers -- who have been standing up for years to end human rights crimes in Darfur and southern Sudan -- to our early warning system team," said George Clooney, who initiated the project. "Frankly, our team of policy wonks and super nerds could use an injection of MTV style."

In order to generate rapid responses to human rights concerns, the Satellite Sentinel Project combines satellite imagery analysis, field reports and crowd-sourced map data from Google Map Maker to prevent violence, and focuses world attention on Sudan. The project uses commercial satellites passing over the border of northern and southern Sudan to capture possible threats to civilians, observe the movement of displaced people, detect bombed and razed villages, or note other evidence of pending mass violence.To become part of the open-source, early warning system for Sudan, young people can follow the Satellite Sentinel Project on Twitter @SudanSentinel. By doing this, they’ll get the latest updates and action alerts, and be ready to help put pressure on public officials to respond, if necessary.

"We know the Millennial generation is fearless, and that they strongly believe in their power to affect change," said Stephen Friedman, General Manager of MTV. "We're proud to act as a megaphone for the Satellite Sentinel Project's efforts, amplifying their message to young people so they can join forces with the world to help maintain peace in Sudan during this potentially volatile moment in history."

Through mtvU, MTV has a history of partnering with its audience to generate awareness and take action on issues affecting Sudan. In 2006, as part of mtvU’s Sudan campaign to empower college students with tools to fight genocide in Darfur, the network launched “Darfur is Dying.” In this narrative-based simulation, the user, from the perspective of a displaced Darfurian, negotiates forces that threaten the survival of his or her refugee camp. To date, the game has beenplayed more than 3.9 million times by over 2 million players, and led to over 50,000 actions taken, including emailing the president, petitioning local representatives for legislation supporting Darfur, and learning how to start a divestment movement on campus.

The Satellite Sentinel Project marks the first sustained, public effort to systematically monitor and report on potential hotspots and threats to security along a border, in near real-time (within 24-36 hours), with the aim of heading off humanitarian disaster and human rights crimes before they occur. The Satellite Sentinel Project is available at www.satsentinel.org [6]. The project's funder, Not On Our Watch -- co-founded by Don Cheadle, George Clooney, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt, David Pressman, and Jerry Weintraub -- focuses global attention and resources toward putting an end to mass atrocities around the world.

For more information or ways to take action, please head to Sudan.mtvU.com or www.satsentinel.org [6].

Sounds like a rather noble initiative to me.

My name is URL

Dave! wrote: »

It sounds a bit less sinister when you read UNITAR's press release. Their aim is to get young people interested in what's happening in Sudan, and to pressure public representatives to take action if the situation deteriorates any further:



Sounds like a rather noble initiative to me.

UNITAR's involvement is fair enough, they are a branch of the UN. My point is about them joining forces with private corporations and individuals in order to push it into public view. Look at how many times the US have been guilty of human rights abuses, and at how many times the UN have caved into pressure from the US (through veto) to not bring in resolutions where human rights violations are taking place.

encouraging young people to become peace monitors

What a crock of shite.. I doubt MTV or Google et al will be backed by the UN the next time the US are questioned over any violations.

uprising2

Yeah, it sure seems like a crock of sh1te alright, isn't clooney in the funny handshake club?.

Here's George at that other club well known for taking care of humanity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pmuai9HrCo

Brown Bomber

Dave! wrote: »

Sounds like a rather noble initiative to me.

So nothing to do with this then you reckon?

Torakx

*Slaps head* i had totally forgotten about the oil! haha

Einhard

Yeah, 'cos everyone knows Geroge Clooney is the world's 4th biggest consumer of oil...

Genocide has been an unfortunate fact of life in many parts of Africa over many decades. In Sudan itself, the central government waged devestating proxy wars against the populations of Darfur, and before that, the people of South Sudan. Bashir has stated that he will accept the result of the referendum, but in recent weeks has moved troops nearer the demarcation line between north and south. This, coupled with Bashir's past actions, is enough to raise reasonable concerns that Khartoum might fail to respect the wishes of the people of the south. In many parts of Africa, various forces, governmental, rebel, or otherwise, murder, pillage, and rape with impunity because there is nobody there to monitor them. This is what happened in Darfur until the world began to pay attention. And this is exactly what Clooney and his partners are attempting to prevent. I fail to see how anyone can see anything negative in using satellites to track the movement of armed men, and make such information available to the world. At the very least, it would make Bashir pause for thought should he contemplate unleashing his forces againstt eh democratic will of the people of south Sudan. But no, you people don't really care about any of that. What price lives and democracy when one can sit at home in safety whilst pontificating and denouncing the actions of those who bother to do something positive.

Einhard

My name is URL wrote: »

My point is about them joining forces with private corporations and individuals in order to push it into public view. Look at how many times the US have been guilty of human rights abuses, and at how many times the UN have caved into pressure from the US (through veto) to not bring in resolutions where human rights violations are taking place.



What a crock of shite.. I doubt MTV or Google et al will be backed by the UN the next time the US are questioned over any violations.

So the UN should cease every and all programmes that might lead to some good, because they have previously caved in to US pressure on other issues? Eh, right. Ok. Incidentally, the veto is a legal mechanism, and if used, doesn't represent a backing down by the UN. They have no choice but to respect it, as per the UN charter. It's a system in serious need of reform, but the use of the veto does not equate to a backdown by the UN.

Torakx

Sorry Einhard but we are a skeptical lot over here.
When we see the UN, hollywood and the google corp getting together it doesnt give many feelings of confidance.
Since we are soskeptical and seeking to look behind whats at the front these kinds of theories tend to pop up be they true or false.
This is a CT forum so it must be expected, otherwise it would be in another forum and the thread locked because it doesnt fit with the mainstream view,which is whatever is in the western news at the time over here and in sudan whatever is in their news at that time.
So i hope you can forgive us for our casual attitude and open speculation and pessimism.
I believe its well founded...but thats debateable here too and covers many other topics

Einhard

Torakx wrote: »

Sorry Einhard but we are a skeptical lot over here.
When we see the UN, hollywood and the google corp getting together it doesnt give many feelings of confidance.
Since we are soskeptical and seeking to look behind whats at the front these kinds of theories tend to pop up be they true or false.
This is a CT forum so it must be expected, otherwise it would be in another forum and the thread locked because it doesnt fit with the mainstream view,which is whatever is in the western news at the time over here and in sudan whatever is in their news at that time.
So i hope you can forgive us for our casual attitude and open speculation and pessimism.
I believe its well founded...but thats debateable here too and covers many other topics

Well, apologies for the tone if it came across as confontational. But I really can't see how anyone could reasonably object to a project designed to track, in a transparent manner, the movements of Sudanese troops and other militia, in an attempt, through publicising it, to forestall any potential state backed violence. What's so nefarious about that? And what exactly does it have to do with oil?

uprising2

Einhard wrote: »

Well, apologies for the tone if it came across as confontational. But I really can't see how anyone could reasonably object to a project designed to track, in a transparent manner, the movements of Sudanese troops and other militia, in an attempt, through publicising it, to forestall any potential state backed violence. What's so nefarious about that? And what exactly does it have to do with oil?

While I agree any means necessary to block human suffering should be a good and welcome step in the right direction, you need to look at where the oil is.

Oil-Rich South Sudan Votes to Secede.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/01/oil-rich_south_sudan_votes_to.html

Now if South Sudan wasn't sitting on top of black gold do you think anybody would give a sh!t about the human suffering on the surface?

Surely these satellites could photograph a whole lot more human rights violations as they orbit the earth?

As shown above China is the main importer of sudanese crude oil, now the "peacemakers" have rode into town to save the south from the tyrants of the north, I suspect it's nothing more than a publicity stunt and a little bit down the road the peacemakers will come to negotiate a nice juicy slice of the oil pie.

This has nothing to do with preventing human suffering and a lot to do with US and european oil companies getting in on the oil action.


Oil and southern Sudan
Oil was discovered in Sudan in the 1970's, but it has only recently become a significant part of the country's economy. A pipeline connecting the Heglig oil fields with Port Sudan was completed and began operation in 1999, and in 2000 Sudan became an oil exporter.
http://southsudanfriends.org/issues/oil.html


U.S. must help stop Sudan's slow-motion war
By George Clooney and John Prendergast
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-09-column09_ST1_N.htm

Einhard

uprising2 wrote: »

While I agree any means necessary to block human suffering should be a good and welcome step in the right direction, you need to look at where the oil is.

Oil-Rich South Sudan Votes to Secede.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/01/oil-rich_south_sudan_votes_to.html

Now if South Sudan wasn't sitting on top of black gold do you think anybody would give a sh!t about the human suffering on the surface?

Surely these satellites could photograph a whole lot more human rights violations as they orbit the earth?

As shown above China is the main importer of sudanese crude oil, now the "peacemakers" have rode into town to save the south from the tyrants of the north, I suspect it's nothing more than a publicity stunt and a little bit down the road the peacemakers will come to negotiate a nice juicy slice of the oil pie.

This has nothing to do with preventing human suffering and a lot to do with US and european oil companies getting in on the oil action.


Oil and southern Sudan
Oil was discovered in Sudan in the 1970's, but it has only recently become a significant part of the country's economy. A pipeline connecting the Heglig oil fields with Port Sudan was completed and began operation in 1999, and in 2000 Sudan became an oil exporter.
http://southsudanfriends.org/issues/oil.html


U.S. must help stop Sudan's slow-motion war
By George Clooney and John Prendergast
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-06-09-column09_ST1_N.htm

Actually, the "peacemakers" as you so dismissively refer to them, haven't just rode into town. Clooney and the likes of Farah Fawcett have long been involved in highlighting what's going on in Darfur. It is, in part, down to their efforts that the situation there has recieved so much attention. And Darfur isn't oil rich, so that somewhat punctures your grand unifying theory.

And you really believe that George Clooney is orchestrating all of this so he can can some of the oil there? Or acting as a frontman for Big Oil? I'm all for differing opinions, and I have issues with some celebrity advocacy, but Clooney and others have done trojan work to improve the situation in Sudan, and it really sucks when people impugn the good work of others in such a baseless manner.

Torakx

Well i am highly skeptical and time will tell.
The other wars in Iraq,Afghanistan,nearly/maybe Iran were supposedly a war on terrorism where the Americans for the most part with some allies bombed and killed hundreds of civilians and took over the area.Probably gaining many contracts and alot of oil along the way.
So when attention is brought to another oil rich area again the first thing i will be wondering is when are the yanks going to turn up with the guns and bombs with some weak excuse to take it for themselves or through a puppet dictator.
There most likely is a case to be had about this upcoming potential war i have no doubt.
But from all the wars in history i must conclude there will be more to it than is on the surface and from what i have seen The UN will sit back and allow years and years of torture and murder of civilians in middle eastern countries because of political issues not humanitarian issues.
Politics and bussiness appear to come before people who dont have either of those to use as a weapon or defence.
Most likely there is a war coming and the UN or whoever will possibly jump in.But it probably will be at a price Or maybe even instigated by American spies/agents or whoever doesnt want China to get the oil.Europe could well be just as much involved on the sly for all i know.

If it turns out this satelite system really works i will expect it to go to work elsewhere aswell where there isnt as much profit to be made.

As for George Clooney i havent much idea about his involvement.He might be genuine.But he is hanging around in my view with some shadey characters also.
Kind of hints of live aid with bonno and whats his face.But i could be way off.George Clooney probably would write and sing better

My name is URL

Einhard wrote: »

So the UN should cease every and all programmes that might lead to some good, because they have previously caved in to US pressure on other issues? Eh, right. Ok. Incidentally, the veto is a legal mechanism, and if used, doesn't represent a backing down by the UN. They have no choice but to respect it, as per the UN charter. It's a system in serious need of reform, but the use of the veto does not equate to a backdown by the UN.

The UN seems increasingly like a mechanism to help the US fulfil its own agenda.. You say that the use of veto does not represent a backing down.. well what does it represent, have there been any steps taken to ensure that it isn't used with impunity and have the UN put pressure on the US to cease using it resolutions regarding Palestine in particular? Surely you can see why I am cynical of all of this?

And fwiw, this is not about Clooney.. I'm sure his intentions are sincere and well meaning.. it's about the UN and the conscious decision they have made to back what is a media driven initiative (not a humanitarian one, which is what it's being dressed up as.. the OHCHR could have taken that role on without the need for any third party, populist involvement). If a group of private individuals took it upon themselves to use a satellite to monitor US troops in Iraq or any military in a nation backed by the US, would it be viewed in the same light as this? Would MTV, Google or the UN be prepared to shine light on the atrocities carried out with the blessing of America? I doubt it, and that's my point in all of this. If the UN are going to use its powers to stop human rights abuses then it should act unilaterally in doing so, and not only in cases where it suits some member states.

Monty Burnz

uprising2 wrote: »

Yeah, it sure seems like a crock of sh1te alright, isn't clooney in the funny handshake club?.

Uprising, is there somewhere where we can find a complete list of all those that you believe to be masons? Or, if it's shorter, a list of those who are not?

Otherwise membership of the 'funny handshake club' can basically be used as a shorthand to ascribe dodgy motives to the actions of any public figure.