Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for August 2016

Agenda 21 Lawsuit AGAINST| FISCAL AGENTS |The Strange Case of Edward Charles Foundation (Inc. 2009 in California as a Delaware Org.) | Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (Inc. December 2011 in California; First Revenues ($1.4M) not acknowledged until 2013)

leave a comment »

See also preceding post, published yesterday 8/22/2016, “What is an NGO?  Is the International Institute for Peace, that UNESCO affiliate at Rutgers an “NGO”?  In fact, What is Rutgers? (See State of NJ’s–and Rutgers’ — CAFRs)”  I am in the process of moving the pipeline of in-production posts into public view.  This information intersects both at UNESCO and Rutgers and through the question — why that fiscal agent (Edward Charles Foundation) to process contributions, and why, as it turns out, that registered agent, too?  

Shortlink to THIS post:  Agenda 21 Lawsuit AGAINST| FISCAL AGENTS |The Strange Case of Edward Charles Foundation (Inc. 2009 in California as a Delaware Org.) | Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (Inc. December 2011 in California; First Revenues ($1.4M) not acknowledged until 2013)

See also shortlink to next post (being published 8/24/2016) “Case in Point, NEVER skip the Business 501(c)3  Entity Lookups, and Watch the “Fiscal Agent” organizations! (Edward Charles Foundation, Fiscal Agent to “FreedomAdvocates” and, apparently, the Stars (post begun 7/3/2016)” <==<== This post looks more at Edward Charles Foundation and at Freedom Advocates tax returns, and shows a different name used by the latter for the IRS filing than at the State level, as well as that Freedom Advocates only filed in 2006 and 2008, that I can see.  ECF is how I found out about the Whitaker Initiative for short, in part looking for its contributions to “Peace Foundation” business entity, not found).  Meanwhile, the original incarnation (name) for the Whitaker Institute showed a website “peacearth.org” (no longer valid), while a Form 990-N, which has a blank for “website” in 2012 showed “none.” Odd, for an organization talking about the media campaigns it is running overseas and as part of original articles of incorporation statement of intended activities.


Forest Whitaker as an Academy-award-winning actor, I don’t think anyone could speak against it being deserved.  He’s got the body of work over time in film after film.  If I had a choice to see a film between, say,  Tom Cruise or Forest Whitaker, I’d pick the latter every time, because the film — not just the acting — would be worth seeing.  He seems to have real heart, to pick meaningful topics, and is obviously a great communicator, in many ways an actor for these times.

So I have had a little trouble coming out with the information on these posts, but — to be honest — the information is relevant.  Promoting world peace and engaging in convoluted financial arrangements between multiple name- AND address-changing nonprofits and for-profits just does not add up.  What’s peaceful or sustainable about engaging in inappropriate fiscal behavior at home, that is in these US-registered entities?  The backlighting on this one casts some shadows, in my opinion, on the credibility of the up-front declarations of what is really intended here.  Also, as pointed out, what is the point of raising money in So Cal under these conditions and sending it to a New Jersey State University (Rutgers) and for an “Institute” which doesn’t seem to have its own fiscal identity, and where the cash flow accountability would, most likely, get lost in transit.


At UN, Forest Whitaker calls on leaders to ensure benefits of global goals ‘touch everyone’ (Breaking News — April 21, 2016 — from UN News Service):

I have some objections to how the Sustainable Goals Agenda is being pursued by an organization bearing his name, let alone the concept of one-world government as determined by the United Nations and these goals.   This post documents some of that “HOW” with my basic, volunteer toolkit (time and access to a computer and the internet, and some very basic public databases).

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Advocate Forest Whitaker, addresses the General Assembly High-level Thematic Debate on Achieving the SDGs. UN Photo/Loey Felipe (quote, below):

I also believe that if Mr. Whitaker is truly concerned about the “Sustainable Development” goals including gender equality for everyone, that is, including women, then he ought to speak up here at home (the USA) against the misogynist social services policy targeting low-income black males in urban communities and involving them in   or using them as subject matter for social science R&D in the myriad HHS-funded court-connected nonprofits which are unmonitored, basically unregulated, ongoing, and under-reported, affecting our family court systems with a view towards privatization of services and removing children from, or reducing children’s time with, nonviolent, competent mothers who are not staying married or living with the fathers of these children.  (Title IV-D and Title IV-A programming involves partial, grammatical propaganda reducing the use of the word “mother” or “motherhood” as a positive value regarding children except in federally-approved family structures.  At their essence and in their origins, these programs were BOTh racist and sexist (and elitist), as per the 1965 Moynihan Report, still popular today.

He talks about “Peace and Reconciliation” but I am still not reconciled to federally-funded quasi-religion in the form of fatherhood.gov or, more recently, ‘FRPN.org“!

At UN, Forest Whitaker calls on leaders to ensure benefits of global goals ‘touch everyone’

21 April 2016 – Peacebuilding advocate and Academy Award-winning actor Forest Whitaker addressed world leaders today at the United Nations, asking them to ensure that the benefits of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can touch everyone worldwide.

Last September, UN Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development which features the 17 global goals to wipe out poverty, fight inequality and tackle climate change over the next 15 years.

As Special Envoy for Peace and Reconciliation for the UN’s Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as well as one of 17 SDG advocates appointed by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in January, Forest Whitaker took to the podium of the UN General Assembly at the opening of a High Level Thematic Debate on achieving the goals.

The Agenda deals with hunger, eliminate it, eliminating poverty, educating our people, allowing women to have complete gender rights along with everyone.“[I wanted to get leaders] to, in an inclusive way, have the people themselves help to push forward these SDGs, to give the individuals this concept that they need to have of empowerment to know that they actually can make a difference and make a change in some of these motions,” Mr. Whitaker said at a press conference.

 

File the Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (“WPDI”), along with my related post which starts telling of this UN/UNESCO-affiliated story through the tax return of its fiscal agent organization the “Edward Charles Foundation”, under apparently Noble, Worthy, “Who could Protest That?” or at least UN-by-way-of-UNESCO-Sustainable Development-Endorsed, Causes to the tune of Weird Supporting Foundation Fiscal Behavior)  


Before a look at the website’s self-descriptions under “Our Leaders” and “Our Work,” ….

Image from “WPDI.org,” main subject of this post.

http://wpdi.org/our-leadership Whitaker Peace & Development Initiative, Inc.

Weird choice of registered agent too.  The light-blue background section at top, shows the evidence and in simple terms, how I came across it today, August, 23, 2016.  The rest of the post was written July 2, 2016, almost two months ago.

Don’t miss also two tables at the very bottom of this post; I rarely do this, but have in my own efforts to keep the related organizations and timeline straight, posted ALL available links from the California Registry of Charitable Trusts on this organization, showing the “from Zero to $1.4M” revenues in a single year (2013)* — and not showing revenues received, probably, before that from the Edward J. Charles Foundation as its fiscal agent.  [*Year and amount corrected post-publication to reflect 2013, not 2014 amounts as first showing on California Charitable Trusts Registry, below; I had written Zero to $1M in 2014].

And (discovered only late-August 2016, on further scrutiny of founding document names and addresses, as well as a simple look-up of the current registered agent for WPDI) Strange Choice of Registered Agents in Brandon Chapnick.

In a previous post (published 8/22/2016) I brought up the street address of this entity, 1000 N. Alameda Street #140, Los Angeles, as shown below, and connected it with “Centers for Healthy Communities” (or similar name) and The California Endowment (a $3.5B+ assets tax-exempt foundation which files a Form 990-PF).

Today — and it didn’t take much more than an hour –I looked up the registered agent street address after discovering from CorpWiki that Mr. Whitaker had filed another, probably for-profit corporation, “Significant New Media, Inc.” just months before this one. From my reading of the Articles of Incorporation, it became clear how important the internet aspect of this initiative would be, and forming a for-profit media company, right before the foundation, was interesting timing…

And that Mr. Chapnick, Mr. Sukler, and Chapnick, Sukler & Chapnick have just been sued by the FTC and stipulated to a judgment for operating a consumer scam involving nutritional products, and multiple filings from at least two different states (Nevada and California) all out of the same street address, which judgment references consumer damages of $105 Million — and they have ordered them to pay the FTC back.   Several companies one source says is also associated with Mr. Whitaker are also showing out of that same street address. (see next section).


Preparing to publish this post, I reviewed the Founding Articles link (bottom of this post), and again noticed the address 9000 W. Sunset Boulevard #709, West Hollywood, California and original registered agent Paul Papile plus original Incorporator — Kent E. Seton.
  Kent E. Seton also an incorporator (or was it agent?) for that Edward Charles Foundation… From “kepler.sos.ca.gov” (Calif. Bus Entities search)
Entity Name: EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION
Entity Number: C3191148
Date Filed: 03/05/2009
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: DELAWARE
Entity Address: 269 S BEVERLY DRIVE STE 338
Entity City, State, Zip: BEVERLY HILLS CA 90212
Agent for Service of Process: KENT E SETON
Agent Address: 269 S BEVERLY DRIVE STE 338
Agent City, State, Zip: BEVERLY HILLS CA 90212

During my searches I noticed that over the years (1987-2011) five different entities in California had been formed involving Forest Whitaker (per CorporationWiki).  That alone is not unusual, and certainly not illegal, but I specifically noticed that “Significant New Media, Inc.” was formed just 8 months before the IIP, in April, 2011. At this point, I went looking up each business entity address.  See next image and link:

CorpWiki lists 5 still-Active Entities assoc with Forest Whitaker=Adagio Productns (1987) Spirit Dance Inc (1996) Salako Inc (1998) Significant New Media Inc (2011) International Institute for Peace Foundation (2011) -- %22President%22 for all CorpWiki lists 5 still-Active Entities assoc with Forest Whitaker=Adagio Productns (1987) Spirit Dance Inc (1996) Salako Inc (1998) Significant New Media Inc (2011) International Institute for Peace Foundation (2011) — %22President%22 for all

 

This is how I noticed the registered agent “Brandon Chapnick” and its associated address (see below) and found about the FTC prosecution started in Oct., 2014** (“HealthFormulasComplaint” says part of the URL) and with a Stip and Order in US Court, Nevada District, dated February, 2016 (quoted below).

**In 2014, the Federal Trade Commission sued (filed a complaint against) Brandon Chapnick, Keith Sukler,  individually and in their capacity as officers and/or managers of (several health companies in California AND Nevada, out of the same address apparently), as well as and Chapnick Sukler and Chapnick, Inc. FTC sued under sections of the FTC act, of the EFTA (Electronic Funds Transfer Act), Section 5 of ROSCA (Restore Online Shoppers Confidence Act), and of the “Telemarketing” Act (Telemarketing Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act) !

 The seriousness of this is shown in the Stipulation which included payment of $105,000,000 to the FTC and indications it was not dischargeable in bankruptcy.  Some of the details, below my reminder that Chapnick is still showing as the registered agent for the Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative.  See the three addresses at bottom of image with map, above.

Both Freedom Advocates and International Institute for Peace Foundation (now Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative, Inc.) used the same fiscal agent — Edward Charles Foundation.
> > > > So, just as I ask why a group (“Freedom Advocates”) protesting and having filed a lawsuit protesting “Agenda 21” (which is a UN goal) in Northern California but uses a name-changing (in addition to their own unexplained name-changing EIN#) foundation which clearly supports Agenda 21 and UN-identified goals, out of Southern California …. I have to ask why a famous actor with noble, global intentions would choose a registered agent who has been under FTC investigation for deceptive on-line sales practices towards consumers, since it seems about 2014.   < < < < < < 

Read the rest of this entry »

If You Won’t Responsibly Notice, Detail and Come to any Conclusion on DOMESTIC Govt-Funded NGOs (Here, DAIP, BWJP in MN) and Databases (here, TAGGS.HHS.GOV, a 990-finder, and IRS Pub. 78 EOS Search), How Will You Stand Up for ANYONE’s Rights (incl. yours) under GLOBAL Govt-funded NGO Control?

leave a comment »

Another Sequence of Three (or Four) Posts on Similar Topics

For now, I’m publishing this without the tags, 8/9/2016.

This post (<=that’s a shortlink) comes from “CVE | BAMF | GIRDS | Hayak and reading Form 990s too?  C’mon, Let’s Get Honest, Whaddaya Want?

From the bowels of this one, the Show and Tell on how yes, I do expect a certain public learning curve among us commoners, even if it means some CHANGE and a short vocabulary list with even some drills on usage, I felt it helpful to better explore the UN-related word “NGO,” how we’re supposed to classify such organizations, and how (to the contrary, and why) I look at them.  Called: “What’s an NGO?  What’s a UNESCO-affiliate NGO at Rutgers?  In fact, What’s Rutgers (A look at the State of NJ CAFR)”  The NGO topic is introduced, briefly, here but a closer look at the CAFR really does communicate the range, power and types of holdings any State might hold.  I look at component units, assets, investments and parts of that financial statement which simply tells about the operating structures (Authorities, Public Universities, etc.) any state might be operating.  NJ’s position makes it real interesting — consider “the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey” (Address:  4 World Trade Center, NYC)

Why: The example of NGO came up with the recently posted “Institute for International Peace at Rutgers” which simultaneously (and right after formation somewhere in 2011) became a “UNESCO-affiliated” Institute, with partners, even.  I am still curious how a state-supported university in the US allows an international organization to simply set up shop and label it part of “UNESCO” with its clear UN affiliation.  I went looking for traces of the IIP as a fiscal event — or fund — or ANYthing referenced in the very large entity that comprises Rutgers.

PREVIEW – LINKS

DATABASE and ORG.WEBSITES


If  or when most people cannot or will not look at the local nonprofit organizations and connect the financial dots between federal/state relationships well enough to make sound judgments about the same (about key organizations being funded, and from there, about key social policies being enacted), what about when the NGOs:  <> span different continents; <> are not even run from the USA;  and (but still) <> involve the US Department of Justice – – –  THEN what?

Post Title:

If You Won’t Responsibly Notice, Detail and Come to any Conclusion on DOMESTIC Govt-Funded NGOs (Here, DAIP, BWJP in MN) and Databases (here, TAGGS.HHS.GOV, a 990-finder, and IRS Pub. 78 EOS Search), How Will You Stand Up for ANYONE’s Rights (incl. yours) under GLOBAL Govt-funded NGO Control?

Below this next section: Regarding My use of “NGO” vs. not “Nonprofit” or “501©3”…. look for two sections labeled:

Databases referenced in this this post.  Call these “The Tools.”    

AND, FOLLOWING SOME DISCUSSION AND EXHIBITS, THEN:

WEBSITES referenced on this post (the main ones).  Call these “The Topics.”

That was how I first organized this post.  As about to be published today, 8/9/2016, I could drill-down deeper on the data (as put into this Show and Tell).  I already have, personally, but at this point, am leaving it up as the tools and the databases.  An intelligent persistent person could discover the same material, with time.  Some of the deeper level I noticed this time was on the “Participation with BWJP” page of NCDBW (National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women) and the history page of the same, which (at date about 2006) relates how they were asked to participate in the HHS grants series (Family Violence Prevention and Service Act) around 1993, which by association connects this NCDBW to the Pennsylvania “PCADV” (Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence) with which Barbara Hart has been associated or was, for years.  PCADV is also a “Special Issue Resource Center” grantee.

So when the Minnesota-based DAIP calls grants to NCBDW (and a few others) its “Battered Women’s Justice Project” and its tax returns show this to be, up to a certain point, THE main focus of Minnesota-based DAIP, at which point (including after founder Ellen Pence died, true, in 2012), the BWJP with similar personnel in charge (Denise Gamache, whose name was on those million-dollar DAIP grants from HHS over the years) suddenly shows up — or rather, a normal IRS Form 990 does NOT show up, but in three years since its formation, a single Form 990EZ (has less information) and two postcards (Form 990-Ns saying, we didn’t receive any funds over $50,000), I have to ask whether the federal bucket ran dry, or whether BWJP (new spin-off organization, new street address, similar personnel) doesn’t want to openly show its operations.  FYI, the BWJP is also involved in “FCEP” (Family Court Enhancement Project”) One pilot site chosen, “coincidentally” was Hennepin County, MN, as Technical Consultant or Trainer.  The term “BWJP” has been used for eyars in AFCC presentations, when in fact that was not the name of the organization.  Hmm…

If you refuse, however, to “drill down, and note the details” at ALL on these topics, and only listen to the rhetoric, you could be properly classified as “clueless” though since this has been up and continued being posted on-line at LEAST since I started doing it, that doesn’t mean with a solid alibi for the cluelessness, unless conditioning or being brainwashed counts.

And that’s a LOT of the population right now, from what I can see on the blogging protesting treatment of DV victims in the family courts.  Many of them simply do not want, I guess, to grow up and look it up.   Oh well…..

This next section is for clarification of why my focus on NGOs differs from the standard focus.  Again, it’s called;

Regarding My use of “NGO” vs. not “Nonprofit” or “501©3”

[This topic introduced here, but discussed more in a subsequent post which references the Institute for International Peace at Rutgers, and “CANVAS” (an “international non-government, nonprofit network”) claimed as that IIP’s partner, and then takes us looking for ANY fiscal or accounting mention of this institute, first through a State of New Jersey CAFR, and briefly also through Rutgers’ own CAFR (which as a public university, one of 11 in the state, and a Land Grant College dating back to Colonial times, is a “Component Unit” of “The State of New Jersey”)

Regarding the term “NGO” — I don’t normally use it, preferring to say “nonprofit” or (if it applies, and of course this is a reference to the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and so applies exclusively (??) to the United States of America, the term “501©3 (or “4” or “6” etc.) referring to parts of that code defining who does NOT pay “income tax.”  Or, I’ll refer to tax-exempt entity // foundation etc.  My focus, while looking at categories of causes certain tax-exempt entities are taking up, or how they operate collectively on certain favored causes across-state (or country) jurisdictions, is typically on the Revenues to Expenses (and public vs. private sources of the revenues), Assets to Liabilities (and where assets are being invested or held), related organizations (and what type of entity).

That focus requires me to be more specific on individual groups or organizations than the label “NGO.” My overall concern is for balance of power between individual citizens — of the USA — and governments — of the USA or the states and territories which comprise this country.

At the bottom of the last post which itself came as a show-and-tell example on looking up domestic nonprofits, the post “CVE | BAMF | “Whaddaya Want, Let’s Get Honest?” {{just published 8/9/2016 evening}}

This concern comes from both person experience as a battered wife and mother and in the family court system, wrongly assuming I would be allowed to leave the violent relationship without having to pay all but the ultimate sacrifices upon the altar of “this is America, I thought we had due process; this is the 21st century:  women can both vote, and work, and raise children and are there are criminal laws against domestic violence causing serious injury, stalking, child-stealing, child-abandonment, and other protections in place actually available to women, EVEN IF they are also mothers….”

Eventually I found out there were federal incentives grants, and professional nonprofit trade associations driving this court system, profiting the professionals and harming half or more of the people.  So on hearing of this money, following its course from federal to state, through subgrantees, of course was a major concern, and taking all the talk at face value any longer, not so much….

Read the rest of this entry »

CVE | BAMF |GIRDS | Hayat and Reading IRS Form 990s Too? C’mon!!, Let’s Get Honest, Whaddaya Want?

leave a comment »

After this August 1 post:  Family Counseling for De-Radicalization Programs/Home Base, Germany?  Daniel Koehler (Princeton/Free University Berlin) has a Grreat new Market Niche and References, courtesy 2015-formed “Center for Cyber and Homeland Security” (post published 8-1-2016) which came after events this summer involving “Munich” while I was writing on something else.   What I found exploring Munich and Strong Cities Network was disturbing enough to blog, at “Munich,” and the Strong Cities Network [ISIL/ISIS aren’t the only ones who want to control the World]. (Begun 7/22/2016).

Before then, I was minding my own business, writing about Social Science PolicySpeak and such things as “CFFPP” (the Center for Family and Public Practice, Illinois, then Wisconsin organization with backing by “JustGive” which just-so-happened to have recently blended operations with “JustGiving.org” — out of the UK.  Off-shoring, lightening-fast startups, while concealing the trail in hard-to-read IRS forms and/or sticking it all in one large Donor-Advised Fund (“DAF”) which all donors must “sign off on” to acknowledge they are relinquishing control once funds are received.  Meanwhile, the same organization (JustGive), as I recall, then claims it doesn’t monitor grants because they are “donor-advised.”

Clearly someone is “advising,” but the question is, who is monitoring, and after that, after any monitoring — who has the power to put, or will put any breaks onto illicit operations among nonprofits whose paperwork is impossible to track, or who simply start up in the US then move operations “offshore” and continue taking millions of dollars of funds which go to influence USA Social Policy on matters affecting our Department of Justice, Department of Health and Human Services, our prison populations, our custody and divorce matters, and the safety of children and their mothers in “Fatherhood 4.0, USA” which is about where it’s at currently.

I am again about three or four posts deep in draft on one basic topic. This one, started August 3, will be published today, August 9, and so I hope will the next one, which poses a good question:


If You Won’t Responsibly Notice, Detail and Come to any Conclusion on DOMESTIC Govt-Funded NGOs (Here, DAIP, BWJP in MN) and Databases (here, TAGGS.HHS.GOV, a 990-finder, and IRS Pub. 78 EOS Search), How Will You Stand Up for ANYONE’s Rights (incl. yours) under GLOBAL Govt-funded NGO Control?   {Being a Show and Tell post on what some digging for details unearths, and how disconcerting that is from “the experts” in the field.  It also shows a major, and consistently present, flaw on TAGG.HHS.GOV in which running a straight (basic) recipient search only revealed about ⅓ of the grants a search of the same organization’s name — but under “Advanced” — and the first result was around $8M.}

To be followed by one on the NGOs, is required reading when we have “Strong Cities Networks” and somehow an institute in “The State College of New Jersey” (Rutgers — and it’s one of 11 in the statewide network) sets up an institute one year, and the next year it’s suddenly an UNESCO affiliate with a funding partner on the opposite coast, and running programming in Mexico, Africa, and South Central Los Angeles, with a view towards standardization of how to do “peace and development” — focusing of course on youth.

What is an NGO?  Is the International Institute for Peace, that UNESCO affiliate at Rutgers an “NGO”?  In fact, What is Rutgers? (See State of NJ’s CAFR; in fact see Rutgers’ CAFR too) (Post status:  “imminent,” link will work once it’s published, not before.)

and from THAT one (may not be published today — or it may be), one on Soap, Exploitation, Colonization and what that’s got to do with (and how hypocritical considering the backing) when it comes to setting up in 2015 an International Institute on Inequalities at the London School of Economics.

I can easily connect that one, again, through financial backer government entities (a “nonpublic government body” was the term) with the Rockefeller Foundation’s early efforts to prioritize Social Science and formal study (with attached experts) of “Economics” for this country — and others.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

August 9, 2016 at 7:19 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Family Counseling for De-Radicalization Programs/Home Base, Germany? Daniel Koehler (Princeton/Free University Berlin) has a Grreat new Market Niche and References, courtesy 2015-formed “Center for Cyber and Homeland Security” (post published 8-1-2016)

leave a comment »

This post goes with my recent “Munich /  Strong Cities Network” which, after the “PREVIEW” stating some of my main concerns and reasons for posting, starts with some articles  and maps on the Syrian migration crisis and Germany’s leadership response to it.  (“Munich” as symbolic for recent terrorist events in Germany AND France).

 

In which a young man like this….
has a program to save (de-radicalize) young men like this…It’s too late for the one with the beard — this young Canadian-born Muslim convert man died fighting for Isis.


 

 

 

 

 

 

I just read, and sometimes when I read, I smell something familiar.  I smelled it on the first read-through of a certain address and bookmarked it mentally (and on wordpress).  The terms were unfamiliar to me, and it took (not too) long to figure out where they fit together — who goes with whom, and WHICH nonprofit was running the training curricular for behavioral modification programming aimed at the family level.

Terms such as BAMF, “GIRDS,” HAYAK, “Mothers for Life” and so forth make more sense when we have located them in geography (GIRDS didn’t make that too easy), type of entity (GIRDS website doesn’t self-identify, but others citing it do — it’s a German nonprofit) and in time, i.e., when was it started — not to mention, and personality / by whom.

Hayak Canada may have been a group, but as their GoFundMe and “Launchpad” didn’t really get off the ground, it looks like the Hayak (Canada) founder is staff on GIRDS.

BAMF — still working on this one — was a government institution also in Germany.

Eventually I came to this Center and underneath it — note, it doesn’t seem to show through cellphone, only from computers, and when viewed on computers, will be tab with a drop-down menu on the top banner, and it is from that drop-down menu that I was able to view “SENIOR FELLOWS.”

(website at GWU)

 

For a few bonus points (information learned), Koehler is a Fellow over at the GWU “Center for Cyber & Homeland Security” — with out of 10 FELLOWS, only 3 women, and only 1 from the USA (as to college).

After writing this and part of the next post, I found that yes there is a connection between Daniel Koehler, the young man to left, above as an expert CVE (Countering Violent Extremism) and the Strong Cities Network.  This was advertised at a Brookings Institution meeting back in November, 2015.  It took quite a bit of hunting to find this documentation — it’s not exactly showing at the front door of the organizations involved:

http://www.brookings.edu/events/2015/11/09-countering-violent-extremism-intervention (This link mentions Daniel Koehler, below, in passing as a family counselor at a German “Hayat” — and while mentioning GWU’s “Program on Violent Extremism” doesn’t really show his US background (Princeton) and involvement with Candians (Christiane Boudreau). This Nov. 2015 predates by about a MONTH the formation of GWU’s “Center for Cyber & Homeland Security” (and under there, “Program on Violent Extremism.” He is currently among 10 “Senior Fellows” there…

Let’s look at what that Nov. 9 “EVENT” link at BROOKINGS actually says:

The Islamic State’s recruitment of foreign fighters has thrust the debate over how to counter violent extremism (CVE) onto the center of domestic and international security agendas. How might nonconventional methods of early intervention such as counseling, education, and community building better prepare governments and communities for the CVE challenge?

I am finding, in my readings, that no matter what the subject matter “PROBLEM” is, certain sectors are going to push the same type of solutions.  The TIMING of this one precedes by one month the creation of GWU’s “CCHS” (see this post) and references featuring Daniel Koehler, who I mentioned in passing in the MUNICH post.  Altthough the Program on Extremism is mentioned, that Daniel Koehler is a “Senior Fellow” there (if he was at the time) or had any connection to it at the time, is NOT mentioned.  See also that “Institute for Strategic Dialogue” ?

That institute is based in London and is from where the Strong Cities Network is basically run — but does this BROOKINGS EVENT (abstract) mention this?  NO!.

On November 9, the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, in conjunction with the George Washington University’s Program on Extremism and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, hosted a panel of experts to discuss the causes and possible solutions to violent extremism. The panel featured Lorsenzo Vidino, director of the GWU’s Program on Extremism, whose work focuses mainly on developing policy solutions to violent extremism in the United States. The panel also featured Daniel Koehler, who has served as a counselor for Hayat, a German intervention program that helps families prevent relatives from engaging in violent extremism; Rashad Ali, who is trained in Islamic theology and jurisprudence, a former member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, and has worked on de-radicalization initiatives in prison, probation, and community settings in the United Kingdom for over five years; and Angela King, deputy director of U.S.-based Life After Hate, and co-founder of its Exit USA program, which supports individuals leaving far-right organizations and educates communities about root causes of violent extremism. Brookings Fellow Will McCants moderated the discussion.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

August 1, 2016 at 9:02 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

%d bloggers like this: