Some questions about NED...with links and names and goals.

I have a few questions about NED, the National Endowment for Democracy. I have been perusing their website, not sure what I am looking at. Are they saying we need to promote Democracy everywhere? Is that the goal now of our country? I guess I very much fear we can not even take care of ourselves now, so why are so worried about making people have democracies?

I see from the Right Web site that they were formed by the Reagan administration. I notice below they keep referring to NGO's, but they receive all but 3% of their money from the government .
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/ned.php



Here are the present officers and directors:
http://www.ned.org/about/who.html

Some of the ones listed who stand out that I recognize are
General Wesley K. Clark, Paul S. Sarbanes, Gregory W. Meeks, Evan Bayh, Richard A. Gephardt, Richard C. Holbrooke. These are the names I connect with Democrats. The GOP's Bill Frist is there, too, but I don't recognize many of the others.

I did find 3 paragraphs that really concern me on a page at the site of the group.
They are on a page entitled "At the session on Supporting Regime Change: Democratic Assistance or Intervention".



There is also this section there called the World Movement for Democracy.
http://www.wmd.org/


Also from the Right Web site above we get a list of those connected to this group. Many of the names and groups concern me. So I decided to see if anyone had a better handle on this bunch that I do.

Individuals

Elliott Abrams
William Bennett
Frank Carlucci
Christopher Cox
Paula Dobriansky
Thomas Donahue
Julie Finley
Francis Fukuyama
Carl Gershman
Newt Gingrich
Rachelle Horowitz
Fred C. Iklé
Penn Kemble
Jack Kemp
Irving Kristol
John Kyl
Michael Novak
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz

Organizations
American Enterprise Institute
Bradley Foundation
Center for Democracy
Coalition for a Democratic Majority
Committee for the Liberation of Iraq
Committee on the Present Danger
Empower America
Ethics and Public Policy Center
Free Trade Union Institute
International Republican Institute
Project for the New American Century
Social Democrats/USA

I wonder how many other organizations blending the two parties towards a new world order will we find, hmm?

http://www.ned.org/about/board_bios/graham.html
Bob Graham was on the NED Board

As you pointed out, NED always has SEVERAL Democrats on its board some of whom were or are presently in Congress, including: Sen. Bob Graham(Fla), Gen. Wesley Clark, Ret, Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), Howard Wolpe(Michigan), Lee Hamilton(Indiana), Matthew McHugh (NY), Evan Bayh (Indiana).

There are also Labor Representatives: Thomas Donahue (AFL-CIO) and Leon Lynch (United Steel of A)

The reason there are both White and Black hats is because the NED is BI-PARTISAN non profit organization funded by Congress (after 1994 it accepts contributions from private sector).

The NED's mission is to "help strengthen Democratric Instititutions around the world". Like all government organizations it has been used towards both good and BAD ends... as the Left and Right BOTH get to direct where funds go. The funds are dispursed through the following four organizations (two are Democratic/Labor & two are Republican).

"The NED funnels its money overseas either through direct grants to foreign organizations or through four NED core institutes: the American Center for International Labor Solidarity (ACILS), the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), the International Republican Institute (IRI), and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI)." (snip)

Some of the Good Stuff done by fellows who got grants from the NED (which has gotten good words from Amnesty International):

Chaihark Hahm, (November 2001 - August 2002)
Constitutionalism and Democracy in South Korea
Dr. Hahm's project focuses on constitutional review and democracy in South Korea. He examines the role of the Korean Constitutional Court in building democracy in South Korea, using a comparative framework that considers the influence of political culture and cultural traditions

Charlie James Hughes, (May 2002 - August 2002)
A Practitioner's Handbook on Civic Education Initiatives
Charlie Hughes is the director and "driving force" behind the Forum for Democratic Initiatives (FORDI) in Sierra Leone. His project focuses on civic education initiatives in the United States which can be applied in
Sierra Leone

Ramin Jahanbegloo, (October 2001 - August 2002 )
Intellectuals and Democracy in Iran
Dr. Jahanbegloo's project focuses on the role of Iranian intellectuals in promoting Iranian democracy, including the attitudes of youth and young professionals in Iran today

Yuriy Krynytskyy, (April - August 2002)
Political Technologies and the Promotion of Democracy in Ukraine
Mr. Krynytskyy is a young activist from Kharkiv, Ukraine, who serves as press secretary and head of a district division of the "Rukh" party (People's Movement of Ukraine).

Ndubisi Obiorah, (June - August 2002)
Corruption and Democracy in Africa: A Comparative Perspective
Mr. Obiorah is a Nigerian human rights lawyer who has worked for HURILAWS, the Human Rights Law Service in Lagos


Adotei Akwei, Ghana
Governance, Repression, and Human Rights in Africa
Visiting Fellow, July - December 2003
Mr. Akwei is Senior Advocacy Director for Africa at Amnesty International USA, serving as his organization's chief spokesperson, strategist, and liaison with the U.S. government, media, and the general public on
African human rights issues and U.S. foreign policy toward Africa

Ladan Boroumand, Iran
Promoting Democracy and Human Rights in Iran
Visiting Fellow, October 2002 - September 2003
Dr. Ladan Boroumand is director of the Abdorrahman Boroumand Foundation for the Promotion of Human Rights and Democracy in Iran. She earned her doctorate in history from the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en
Sciences Sociales in Paris, where she published La guerre des principes (1999), a book exploring the tensions during the French Revolution between the rights of man and the sovereignty of the nation. Her
project examines the prospects for democracy in Iran from a historical perspective.
---------------
Wes Clark had proposed a substitute for NED activities by replacing them with a DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AID (similar to Kecinich's Dept. of Peace, but as an International dept/not so much domestic) to replace it:

Clark Wants More Foreign Aid, New Department to Handle It
Book Faults Bush for Pursuing Notion of American 'Empire'

By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 29, 2003; Page A05
A new book by Wesley K. Clark, the retired Army general running for president, calls for a major expansion in U.S. foreign assistance programs and establishment of a Department of International Assistance to manage the initiative.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14400-20...

------------
At the same time, conservative critics bring up the issue of proportion among the four main recipients: the AFL CIO receives approximately 40 percent of available funding, while each of the other groups receives around 10 percent. That imbalance has prompted speculation that NED is in the hands of the neo-Trotskyite Social Democrats/USA, whose membership includes both NED president Carl Gershman and a number of AFL-CIO officials involved with the endowment.(5) Such political rancor is inevitable when an organization is authorized to pursue partisan agendas abroad at taxpayers' expense."
http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027.html
------------------

NED is bipartisan, and one can paint it as many things, depending. It has a history of both good and bad.

NED was originally credited for assisting in bringing down the Old Soviet Union, as it worked with the late Pope, Poland, Funded Lech Walesa's Solarity Labor Organization party there...
http://www.lbjjournal.org/PrintLBJArchives/2004/Fall2004/09siedlecki_fa2004.pdf

But there are so many of these types of organization....and yeah, I would prefer a Dept of Peace and a true Dept. of International Foreign Aid....

But more than anything, I would prefer Bush out of office replaced by those who want the best for this country and the world.....for the people....in particular the weakest among us.
----

Clark and Graham at NED, Edwards and Warner at Bildegberg, etc., etc., etc., etc.....

I prefer to look at those participating individually and what they have actually done in an organization, etc.

The guilt by association technique is kinda of convenient for some, but in the end, I feel that it is broad and simplistic via a pointed finger.

When I saw Rachele Horowitz on that list, I assumed she was David Horowitz's wife. But no, she's the wife of Thomas Donahue: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/ind/horowitz/horowitz.php Donahue was Kirkland's hand-picked successor to head the AFL-CIO. But in the Federation's first ever (relatively) open election, John Sweeney won. Here's Donahue: http://www.aflcio.org/aboutus/history/history/donahue.cfm (I'm assuming it's the same Donahue; almost a dead certainty).

The Social Democrats/USA can no longer claim to be a "right-wing" spin-off from the Socialist Party USA". They're now completely anti-socialist. They not only Drink The Kool-Aid, but they're one of the chief bottlers of it.

pnorman
On edit: It's been a while since I gave this close attention, and I MIGHT have been too sweeping in my characterization of the SD/USA. Apparently, many still regard themselves to be the "heirs of Debs": http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.05.23/news12.html (Plenty of stuff here to debate).

Not familiar with this "sumate" group. I just found this article from the 15th of September 2005 chiding NED for sending money to

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20050915-1436-venezuela-funds.html

CARACAS, Venezuela – Venezuela Thursday rejected as hypocritical "meddling" a decision by a U.S. Congress-funded group to send more money to Venezuelan opposition activists who face trial after receiving financing to promote a vote against President Hugo Chavez last year. The National Endowment for Democracy, a nongovernmental group that distributes U.S. congressional funds to promote democracy, said this week it had approved another grant for the Sumate association for election and civil rights programs.

Wasn't Carville working with the Chavez opposition groups for a while?

I would say I would call this meddling as well.

"This puts in its place the argument the U.S. government has tried to use against Chavez that he meddles in the affairs of other countries," Venezuela's Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel told reporters.

Behind this aid, is the influence of a foreign government meddling in Venezuela," he said.

Chavez, a populist former army soldier elected in 1998 who supporters say is a champion of the poor, has accused the National Endowment for Democracy of backing U.S. attempts to topple his government. He says Sumate members are traitors."

I don't like this kind of stuff.

Washington fuels the Opposition

While the accuracy of such Chavez misgivings is unclear, it’s not as if the Venezuelan leader is entirely unjustified in feeling somewhat hunted: In the run up to the April 2002 failed coup d’etat against the Chavez regime, the Bush administration funneled US taxpayer money to the anti-Chavez Venezuelan opposition through the National Endowment For Democracy and USAID. As the coup was being carried out, Chavez was taken prisoner by elements within the military. The civilian opposition who helped spring the coup invented the tale over the television networks which it dominated, that Chavez had willingly resigned. As he watched the announcement from inside the military headquarters of Fuerte Tiuna, Chavez thought to himself, “Now they are going to kill me.”
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=46037


And more on Democratic involvement in Venezuela....must be a bi-partisan attack on that country. Call me naive...

NDI and IRI are two out of four core organizations of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a self-described "nonprofit, non-governmental, bipartisan, grant-making organization" the stated purpose of which is "to help strengthen democratic institutions around the world." Created during Ronald Reagan’s first term as president to enhance overseas political influence weakened by Jimmy Carter’s 1977 ban on CIA democracy front groups, NED’s reputation as a promoter of democracy never truly thrived outside the United States.

The organization and its affiliates regularly encounter allegations that they have supported opposition candidates and promoted subversive movements in countries where governments -- some democratically elected -- are seen as threatening to US interests.

"An article in the current edition of Mother Jones specifically ties IRI to the 2002 armed coup that briefly removed populist President Hugo Chavez from power in Venezuela. According to Mother Jones, IRI was also involved in sponsoring parties that led to last January’s violent uprising against democratically elected Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, which itself culminated in Aristide’s exile and the dissolution of his government on February 29. Haiti is currently ruled by the county’s chief Supreme Court Justice, who replaced Aristide. Haiti currently has no functioning parliament and new elections have yet to be held."

The article ties Madelyn Albright, Carter, and John McCain to the two groups.

http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=1311

Your implication alludes to linking Carter and the Democratic party's arm, the NDI to Venezuela or at the least Haiti. However, in the article you posted, I see no reference to the NDI linked to Venezuela. Where did you see that? :shrug: Could you point it out? You words, if read closely don't really say it....but the manner and order in which you posted infer it.

An article in the current edition of Mother Jones specifically ties IRI to the 2002 armed coup that briefly removed populist President Hugo Chavez from power in Venezuela.

According to Mother Jones, IRI was also involved in sponsoring parties that led to last January’s violent uprising against democratically elected Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, which itself culminated in Aristide’s exile and the dissolution of his government on February 29. Haiti is currently ruled by the county’s chief Supreme Court Justice, who replaced Aristide. Haiti currently has no functioning parliament and new elections have yet to be held.
http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&it...

I don't think the NDI involvement is as one-sided as IRI. I think you are assuming that I put real blame where I was just posting info.

This paragraph does say that both are part of NED...so maybe I did not make my point well. It is from my OP.

"NDI and IRI are two out of four core organizations of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a self-described "nonprofit, non-governmental, bipartisan, grant-making organization" the stated purpose of which is "to help strengthen democratic institutions around the world." Created during Ronald Reagan’s first term as president to enhance overseas political influence weakened by Jimmy Carter’s 1977 ban on CIA democracy front groups, NED’s reputation as a promoter of democracy never truly thrived outside the United States

This paragraph is from 2004 Dec. MoJo

"Haiti is not unique. In Venezuela, Cambodia, and other nations, IRI—unlike other government-funded democratization groups—has increasingly focused on training opposition parties intent on toppling elected governments. The institute is one of several democracy-promotion groups financed by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED); others include the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the AFL-CIO’s international wing. Under their bylaws, the groups are supposed to work with actors across the political spectrum in democracies. In Haiti, for example, NDI, which is controlled by Democrats, worked with members of Aristide’s party as well as opposition parties, and was lauded for its grassroots efforts."

And from my original article:
"Unlike its counterpart, NDI spoke at length with The NewStandard. Insisting that NDI’s advice does not favor any of Iraq’s numerous political parties over any others, Les Campbell, the organization’s regional director for the Middle East and Africa, said, "We work with all the parties, including the big and well-known ones, but we actually … spend special efforts to find, for example, Sunni parties -- ones that might represent the Sunni population."

Campbell estimated that NDI’s contributions are probably disproportionately helpful to the more obscure, less experienced Iraqi parties -- the ones that need assistance at nearly every level. "We have spent special effort trying to find people and parties that might reflect the views of the urban, sort of secular intellectuals," Campbell said, "because we think that they are disadvantaged."

I don't think these attach blame as much to the NDI, and since I am not that knowledgeable, I was not attaching anything.

First there is a bipartisan NED board. You will see many "strange bedfellows" on the board.

The board oversees the granting of money to applicants from foreign countries. Those applications are presented to the board by four institutions that function independently of one another:

• National Democratic Institute for International Affairs/Democratic Party Institute.

• International Republican Institute/Republican Party Institute (IRI) Note: It was the IRI that funded the office in Venzuela.

• American Center for International Labor Solidarity/Labor Note: also involved in Venzuela and found to be innocent dealings in the coup.

• Center for International Private Enterprise/Business, basically a granting arm of the Chamber of Commerce.

more........




An honest misunderstanding of how NED works can be expected, although I have often found that sometimes, people just don't want to understand. The Democratic Party Institute has recently during their "Year of the Women" granted money to women in third world countries with the goal of training to enter politics and hopefully office, through grassroots politics. Also, about a month ago, I came across an article in an Asian paper citing recent continuation of grants to Tibetian groups who oppose the Chinese occupation of their country. That was of course the Democratic Institute, and I proudly approve.

It does not surprise me that republicans (IRI) are anti-democratic assholes. But since each group functions separately, I would never condemn the others as in "guilt by association," as is often done.

I believe that the USA, 22 down the list of countries giving to poor countries, needs to give more not less. And yes, it would be great to get rid of the republicans, but I'm not holding my breath.

Finally, this post from the old CCN:

Donna Z: sculber_Thank you for the note regarding NED on the last thread. The
organization of NED was a complex one for an outside to explain. Many of
General Clark's opponents on the web were using his association with NED to
connect him with a wide variety of crazy goings on especially the Chavez
coup attempt and the promotion of PNAC policies.

sculber: My pleasure -- I'm proud to have worked at the NED, and I can't stand it
when people (on the left and the right) attack it without having the
foggiest clue what it's all about. There are always going to be people
who misconstrue what the NED does, but the simple explanation is this: the
promotion of democracy abroad is a high-risk, low-returns business. The
NED executive board selects projects and groups for funding four times a
year, and goes through between $30-40 million a year. If you measure
"returns on investment", most would say that the NED is throwing money away
since many of the countries targetted have not made significant strides.

The criticisms re: the Venezuela coup essentially come down to this: the
NED funded an organization in DC that funded a civil society organization in
Venezuela to do legitimate projects. The head of that organization in
Venezuela led the uprising, and briefly took power during the 24-hours that
President Chavez was out of office. That's it. I know that there were
Congressional hearings on this (though the decisions on who to fund is
entirely up to the NED board, the NED gets most of its money from Congress),
and to the best of my recollection the NED was entirely cleared.
As for any PNAC allegations, I have to tell you that it's laughable. The
only thing I can think of is that Paul Wolfowitz was on the NED board, but
that was before Wes. It's a very diverse and bi-partisan board (some I
remember were Senator Bob Graham, Senator Lugar, Senator Bayh, Rep. Don
Payne, Esther Dyson, Francis Fukuyama, John Brademus, etc.), and Wolfowitz
was Dean of a graduate school at the time.

Ack, I forgot the most important part about the NED!
Despite the "high-investment, low-returns" nature of promoting democracy
abroad, the NED has had some great successes as well. The NED supported
Solidarity in Poland during the Cold War (along with a ton of other
underground groups in Eastern Europe) as well as OTPOR, the student group
that ultimately led the demonstrations that brought down Milosevic. They
are long-time supporters of Tibetan groups that are fighting for freedom
and the Burmese groups (including Aung Sun Suu Kyi's party) that are
fighting for their lives.

Not long after I started working at the NED, I attended an award ceremony
for the Ambassadors of the Czech Republic and Slovakia to the United
States. Both men had been dissidents during Communist rule in
Czechoslovakia, and both had been members of groups supported by the NED.
They spoke movingly about how much support -- both financial and moral -- of
the NED meant to them and their families during their struggles for freedom,
especially when they were jailed.

Like I said, I'm proud to have worked there

None of them supported the Chavez government.

The poster above from CCN limits his excuse to NED funding before the coup. NED also gave money to the opposition prior to the recall. The head of Sumate is on trial for accepting foreign funding for a political campaign, which is against the law in Venezuela.

Also, that post isn't very reassuring. The guy is admitting that the US invests taxpayer money to influence the outcomes of elections in a partisan manner that isn't accountable to taxpayers and citizens of the US (much less to the citizens in nations they're trying to influence).

Every year the state department ranks priorities for each country around the world so that funds can be allocated. In 98, 99, 2000 the Clinton administration ranked Venezuela a low, priority saying they thought Venezuela was taking care of itself. In 2001, suddenly, with nothing changing, Venezuela moved to the top of the list. NED money to fund "democracy" programs in Venezuela is totally unnecessary (unless it were spent to counter the private media grip on public discourse -- but then again, not even that seemed so urgent because it wasn't working to undermine democracy).

Just because the US funded a few opposition groups to fight communists dictators doesn't justify using taxpayer money to undermine governments everywhere as part of an overall goal to make sure that governments around the world are willing to help the american corporatocracy make as much money as possible.

In other words, it's not so easy to dismiss the fact that NED tried to fund the overthrow of Chavez TWICE in a country where democracy was WORKING! That's not supporting democracy. That's undermining democracy. And nobody should have illusions about why NED wanted to undermine democracy in Venezuela.

(IIRC, I read about NED and the State Department rankings in the book Chavez: the new latin America.)

As opposed to taking your word? Thanks.

Unless you can get a used copy, you're going to have to wait for a paperback edition.

Apparently, she was inteviewed this morning on the radio in California. Perhaps the archive will appear sometime soon here: http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?show=24

one of the stalwarts of neoconservativism?

Isn't this part of our rationale for being in Iraq sans WMD, namely, democracy is good for the region and other Islamic, or Arab, states will follow suit once Iraq succeeds in this?

I understand that this is bipartisan, with a dem and repub wing, but the concept of world democracy is part of the PNAC is it not?

I am not a member of PNAC. I suppose if one only considers small "d" democracy as only resulting from PNAC policies, then it would have to be a "stalwart" of their perverted plans. But democracy imho takes many forms, some of which, including our own as it was once envisioned, PNAC wouldn't touch with Thomas Jefferson's dick.

or constitutional monarchies?

I am asking not to be a smart ass, but because the situation in Iraq has made me wonder if democracies are appropriate for all places?

Also, that may they have to evolve through stages and cannot be a project to be completed and placed on a people externally, that they have to come to that conclusion themselves?

I gather the PNAC is no longer a proponent of Jeffersonian democracy?

if religion was kept out of it.

Monarchy are never good

Republics ain't turning out so well either....at the moment!

...may not be our "perfect union." Said by a wise man.

I have no difficulty with what you have written and am reminded that political change must come from the human heart and not from the barrel of a gun. Nevertheless, whatever government forms, self-determination must be part of the mix, because without it, the voice of the people boils underneath the surface. Kennedy (JFK) remarked that if you didn't provide for a means of non-violent change, then you will insure a movement of violent change.

PNAC: If you haven't, read Lewis Laptham's "Gag Rule," where he describes in detail the AEI's attitude about our Constitution, which they consider "out dated" for an empire. Krugman makes the same point in "The Great Unraveling." No, they do not believe in little "d" democracy.

One issue open for discussion is how to transition to democracy effectively. Certainly, you don't want to do it in a way that just entrenches the corporatocracy (which is what we're becoming in the US -- and you can imagine what you need to prevent that, say, campaign finance reform, a free, independent press, progressive taxation, well-regulated marketplaces, decentralized political power and decentralized markets...).

Amartya Sen's book Development as Freedom argues that freedom should be both the means and ends of development. He says that no country that has a democracy (ie, that isn't a military dictatorship, that actually has an elected leader) -- even Zimbabwe -- as of 1999 (when the book went to press) has ever had a famine. He says famines are very easy to stop. Countries that had dictatorships or were colonies would have famines one year, and then, on becoming democracies, never had a famine again.

However, Sen also compares India and China -- two countries which both are transitioning to market economies (with decentralized control). He says China has had much more success than India in moving to a market economy (raising standards of living and quality of life) because China had many social structures in place earlier. While a controlled economy, China educated just about everyone and gave health care to everyone. India had a 50% literacy rate at the end of the colonial era and isn't much better today. The british left behind a legacy of social hierarchy and division that, today, leaves many without education and health care and that is holding back India relative to China.

Sen's conclusion isn't that China is doing better BECAUSE they don't have elections. He notes that China had one of the worst famines the world ever saw in the 50s and 60s and has many other problems that stem from not having political freedoms. Sen argues that countries should provide people with the freedoms that come from literacy and good health in addition to the freedoms that come from democracy and that would be the best possible world.

Of course, once the corporatocracy takes over a democracy and starts to dismantle the education and health care systems, then you move back wards. If they take away your political freedoms too (think Gore v Bush, USSC 2000) then things can get really bad.

that you would provide some sources besides your memory would be greatly advised, however. Thanks!

Development as Freedom (Knopf, 1999).

Why the condencesion? Why isn't it enough just to ask me (to repeat?) the title of the book?

thesis- that democracies don't start wars? Ergo, we want world wide democracy for stability.

There are many reasons to prefer democracies, and I suppose that theh prospect for peace is one of those reasons, but, so far, it's not a focus of Sen's book.

Incidentally, guess when the UK saw the greatest decrease in morbidity in the 20th century?

It was during WW1 and WW2. Once you excluded morbidity caused in battle, the UK had very large decreases in death. It was due to, as Sen's book argues, the rationing program. Everyone got something and death from malnutrition almost completely disappeared. Even though there was less food than before the wars, there was enough for everyone to survive. Interesting, huh?

They think the money they'll make from oil (and US contracts) in Iraq will be the source of the power that suppresses real democracy.

it is a Republic. They get sooo tired of Democrats calling the USA a Democracy....

Used:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/959090307X/103-0913486-6351016?v=glance

or pre-order the paperback edition:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1567513484/qid=1127227515/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-0913486-6351016?v=glance&s=books


By tomorrow, there should be a podcast of a radio interview with her (tha is airing today) at this website: http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?show=24

that I believe....but, those links don't say so.

We were discussing the various arms of this government organization, and how this governmental federal agency operates.

Looks like without providing any links that actually provides any information on the subject at hand, although you are citing some books that you've read (?), you've put us back where we started......without an understanding of how NED truly work.

Did John Edwards vote for the funding of NED when he was a senator?
Do you know?

If you're not going to order Golinger's book:

National Endowment for Democracy On The Offensive in Venezuela
In the same breath, Gershman claimed that in Venezuela, the NED “only finances
... This has been was evidenced through NED-funded projects in Venezuela to ...
www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1316 - 48k - Cached - Similar pages

Letter to NED Chairman Vin Weber from Ambassador Bernardo Alvarez
www.venezuelanalysis.com, Venezuela Analysis, News and Views. Ongoing news and
in-depth analysis about developments in Venezuela.
www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1318 - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

An Unholy Alliance: AFL-CIO and NED in Venezuela
www.venezuelanalysis.com, Venezuela Analysis, News and Views. Ongoing news and
in-depth analysis about developments in Venezuela.
www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1499 - 76k - Cached - Similar pages

Open Letter to President Hugo Chavez, and to the People of Venezuela
In fact, though created and funded by Congress, the NED is considered a "private"
... Indeed, the NED has little to do with promoting fair elections, ...
www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1338 - 50k - Cached - Similar pages

Venezuela: What is the National Endowment for Democracy up to?
Whether NED's ties to Venezuela constituted a breach of its stated protocol is
still a ... Both NED and the National Democratic Institute receive financial ...
www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1169 - 47k - Cached - Similar pages

The Reporters Without Borders Fraud
... www.ned.org/About/About.html (sitio consultado el 27 de abril de 2005). ...
NED Venezuela programs ». www.ned.org/grants/venezuelaFacts.html (sitio ...
venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1448 - Supplemental Result - Similar pages

President of National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to Visit ...
venezuelanalysis.com, Venezuela Analysis, News and Views. English language on-line
newspaper. Ongoing News and in-depth Analysis about developments in ...
ww.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1407 - Supplemental Result - Similar pages

Open Letter to President Hugo Chavez, and to the People of ...
... In fact, though created and funded by Congress, the NED is considered a "private"
organization precisely in order to keep its activities in the shadows, hidden ...
ww.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1338 - 50k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages

Venezuelanalysis.com - News - News and Analysis from Venezuela
www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1407. President of National Endowment
for Democracy (NED) to Visit Venezuela (revised) Friday ...
venezuelanalysis.com/print.php?newsno=1407 - 7k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages

Venezuela: What is the National Endowment for Democracy up to?
... Supporters of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) often praise the group
for its support of democracy-building activities in dozens of countries around ...
ww.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1169 - 47k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages

http://www.google.com/search?q=NED&domains=venezuelanalysis.com&sitesearch=venezuelanalysis.com&Search=Search

If you know how Edwards voted on N.E.D., let us know because I'm curious.

I get that NED was started by Reagan as a way to counter communism during the cold war.

I get that it is an NGO 97% funded by the GO.

That it is bi-partisan and Repugs, Democrats and neocons are all involved.

That there are separate arms for neocon and Democratic activists.

That there is some controversy that this group may do more than just help foster democracy- that they may be involved in things like over throwing a govt ex: Chavez.

Is that correct so far?

But what are you two arguing about with the book titles and links?

I don't get this, and it seems it should be important to this thread - can you break it down a bit?

about development and freedoms, and about how Iraq is a corporatocracy.

However, the points about NED involvement in Venezuela are a separate issue. Golinger writes about them (she used FOIA requests to get thousands of pages of documents which show the lengths NED has gone to undermine democracy in Venezuela).

Because some pro-market Democrats are on the boards of the Democratic NED groups, there seems to be a desire to claim that NED does good and bad things and that Democrats aren't involved in the bad things.

If you look at that post above from the CCN site (in Donna Zen's early post) there seems to be an attempt not to deny that there was NED involvement in Venezuela, but that it just happened that a little money went to someone who later, beyond the control of NED, ended up working with the coup-for-a-day crew.

Golinger's FOIA requests reveled a much deeper involvement (that covered a three year span, both before and after the coup). This involvement had a very clear purpose: to undermine democracy, which is the opposite of their claimed mission.

I think that sums up what's going on in this thread.

the worries from the person who started this thread wondering about what the NED is, has some merit because there is reason to believe that they don't work on behalf of all democracies- and (may) undermine some?

My concern in trying to understand this organization and it's goals is that it sounds like the familiar reasoning from chimpy about the reason why it is good we are in I-wreck.

I guess preznit had started reading and quoting Sharansky.

Here he is giving a speech at NED November 6, 2003 justifying our actions in the name of democracy.

So what is the reality, is this an organization noble in intent and action or another broad based coalition of power brokers who believe the end justify the means and the end being corporatocracy?

http://www.ned.org/events/anniversary/oct1603-Bush.html

>In Iraq, the Coalition Provisional Authority and the Iraqi Governing Council are also working together to build a democracy -- and after three decades of tyranny, this work is not easy. The former dictator ruled by terror and treachery, and left deeply ingrained habits of fear and distrust. Remnants of his regime, joined by foreign terrorists, continue their battle against order and against civilization. Our coalition is responding to recent attacks with precision raids, guided by intelligence provided by the Iraqis, themselves. And we're working closely with Iraqi citizens as they prepare a constitution, as they move toward free elections and take increasing responsibility for their own affairs. As in the defense of Greece in 1947, and later in the Berlin Airlift, the strength and will of free peoples are now being tested before a watching world. And we will meet this test. (Applause.)

Securing democracy in Iraq is the work of many hands. American and coalition forces are sacrificing for the peace of Iraq and for the security of free nations. Aid workers from many countries are facing danger to help the Iraqi people. The National Endowment for Democracy is promoting women's rights, and training Iraqi journalists, and teaching the skills of political participation. Iraqis, themselves -- police and borders guards and local officials -- are joining in the work and they are sharing in the sacrifice. <

is that they're like a stopped clock. They're right twice a day. Their goal is "market freedom", but there are one or two countries every decade where market freedom would be an improvement.

In a worse case scenario, NED is a tool of imperialism cloaked as a democracy movement.

The first link is written by Golinger, so it's a good summary of her book, I assume.

The third contains a summary of NED.

Although it would be nice to pretend the Republican NED branches are good and the Democratic branches are bad, I don't think these articles support that claim. Even the labor element of NED is criticized.

DU'ers who've been quietly studying what _Bush has been doing, following Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and _{Bush I,} are very aware of his use of NED resources in his determined intention to remove Hugo Chavez from his land-slide-elected position.

It's no secret the previous little emperor, Carlos Andres Perez, who ordered government troops to fire into a crowd of Venezuelans who were protesting his severe move to wildly raise the cost of their only transportation, public buses, in the event known as "El Caracazo" massacre, remains a close friend of _{George H. W. Bush,} well after his own impeachment for massive corruption.

The _Bush regime has its own program for handling Chavez, even as Pérez routinely calls for shooting Chavez down "like a dog," and has served as a major voice for the current opposition forces in Venezuela from his homes in New York, Miami, and beyond.

Your references to Eva Golinger were a bright reminder to look her up and read as much of her writing as one can find available. She cares passionately about the future of her country, and has a firm grasp of the facts.

I loved the open letter she wrote to John Kerry on his uninformed position on Venezuela. Unbeatable.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020805/corn

In the weeks before the April 12-13 coup in Venezuela, Asociacion Civil Consorcio Justicia, a legal rights outfit, was planning an April 10 conference to promote democracy in that country. At the time, Venezuela was undergoing severe political strife. Business groups and labor unions were bitterly squaring off against President Hugo Chavez, a democratically elected strongman/populist. Using an $84,000 grant from the Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy, a quasi-governmental foundation funded by Congress, Consorcio Justicia was supposed to bring together political parties, unions, business associations, religious groups and academicians to discuss "protecting fundamental political rights," as an NED document put it. In a proposed agenda Consorcio Justicia listed as one of the main speakers Pedro Carmona, president of Fedecamaras, a leading Venezuelan business group. But when the coup came, Carmona was handpicked by the plotters to head a government established in violation of the Constitution. Then he signed a decree suspending the National Assembly and the Supreme Court. Carmona, it turns out, was hardly interested in safeguarding "fundamental political rights."

Two page article.

Apparently NED was involved. Too many articles say otherwise. I don't call that coincidence. If you choose to be on the board of directors of a company, then you agree with their actions.