![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ripples in a pond
Oct. 19th, 2004 01:13 pmA year or more ago the US government raided a non-profit Muslim aid agency, shut them down, and seized their assets. The charge was funding terrorists, not directly but indirectly. Organizations that they had given money too had given money to organizations that may have funded terrorists. I don't know the merits of the case and don't think I could find out even if I tried. The seizure got extensive coverage in the US press, an amazing feat considering it didn't involve sports or a celebrity's sex life.
Fast forward to today, the ACLU announced it was declining $1.5 million in funding from the Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation.
You see as soon as the press started carrying that seizure story large non-profit donors started hearing a warning. They could be shut down, their assets seized, if anyone they gave money to ever gave money to anyone who ever was linked with terrorists. The directors of these non-profits have a fiduciary duty not to let that happen. They are legally and morally obligated to prevent it if they possibly can. So they drew up requirements for funding that would protect them. It's their duty to make sure their non-profit continues to fulfill its mission.
The ACLU as it's core mission defends those who don't have another defense. They stand up for the person no one else is standing up for. They are working to make sure the prisoners in Guantanamo are being given legal representation and a fair hearing. They can't say they won't help people accused of terrorism, it's just not compatible with their charter.
I bet large non-profits institutions across the US are adopting the same kind of policies. They have to in order to make sure they fulfill their mission. So through threatened action, the government has managed to reduce the funding to groups like the ACLU and thereby stifle dissent. We lost the war for our freedom and there was never a shot fired.
If you have a dollar, or a pound, or a euro the ACLU could probably use a little help.
Fast forward to today, the ACLU announced it was declining $1.5 million in funding from the Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation.
You see as soon as the press started carrying that seizure story large non-profit donors started hearing a warning. They could be shut down, their assets seized, if anyone they gave money to ever gave money to anyone who ever was linked with terrorists. The directors of these non-profits have a fiduciary duty not to let that happen. They are legally and morally obligated to prevent it if they possibly can. So they drew up requirements for funding that would protect them. It's their duty to make sure their non-profit continues to fulfill its mission.
The ACLU as it's core mission defends those who don't have another defense. They stand up for the person no one else is standing up for. They are working to make sure the prisoners in Guantanamo are being given legal representation and a fair hearing. They can't say they won't help people accused of terrorism, it's just not compatible with their charter.
I bet large non-profits institutions across the US are adopting the same kind of policies. They have to in order to make sure they fulfill their mission. So through threatened action, the government has managed to reduce the funding to groups like the ACLU and thereby stifle dissent. We lost the war for our freedom and there was never a shot fired.
If you have a dollar, or a pound, or a euro the ACLU could probably use a little help.
