August 15, 2006, - 2:08 pm

Don’t Fund Red Cross: Comittee Aided Hezbollah; Would Aid Al-Qaeda, Too

Our friend and top Israeli investigative reporter, Michael Freund, has an incredible article in today’s Jerusalem Post that tells you why you should NOT give to the Red Cross.
The organization not only healed Hezbollah fighters, but it helped them cross the Litani Bridge.
Here are more details:

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) provided medical care to Hizbullah terrorists wounded while fighting against Israel, the Jerusalem Post has learned.

Donating to American Red Cross Means Donating To Hezbollah

“The moment a Hizbullah fighter is injured, he is considered a non-combatant, so we must take care of him,” ICRC spokeswoman Carla Haddad told The Jerusalem Post by phone from Geneva. . . .
Haddad confirmed that ICRC personnel in southern Lebanon, working together with members of the Lebanese Red Cross, had offered medical assistance and other unspecified forms of relief to Hizbullah members hurt on the battlefield.
The Post contacted the ICRC after a photograph appeared in Thursday’s New York Times depicting Red Cross workers assisting wounded members of Hizbullah to cross a makeshift bridge over the Litani River. . . .
Asked if the ICRC would assist wounded Hizbullah fighters even if it meant they would then be able to return immediately to the battle or continue firing rockets at Israel, Haddad replied, “There is nothing wrong with assisting the war wounded.”
Pressed to clarify if the organization would also provide aid to al-Qaida members wounded in clashes with US troops in Afghanistan, she momentarily hesitated before saying, “Yes, of course. We would assist non-combatants on both sides.”

So, why does this have to do with aid to the American Red Cross? A LOT. As Michael Freund points out:

The American Red Cross, Miller said, has thus far sent $500,000 to the ICRC for relief activities in Lebanon and an additional $80,000 has been raised.

Don’t give to the Red Cross, unless you want to give to Hezbollah.
And don’t forget how the International Red Cross treated true non-combatants–concentration camp inmates under the Nazis, including millions of Jews. So nice, that concentration camp victims weren’t worthy of this “neutral” organization’s help (and cooked in the ovens, instead), but Islamic terrorists are worthy by the ICRC’s warped standards. Some neutrality. And it’s hardly neutral the way ICRC treated Israel over the years.
Nice work, Michael. Read Michael’s excellent blog.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

11 Responses

Thank you for all you work!
Did you see the press conference from congressman Darrellezbolah “get your gun” Issa on c-span? He is calling for a massive tax payer funded program in lebanon, but no word about reconstruction in Israel. Typical.

Mike Simon on August 15, 2006 at 2:42 pm

I am not a big fan of the Red Cross due to their general perception of incompentence but also because of their desire to have lifted the restrictions on accepting blood donations from gay men. They are doing this because they resell the blood for big profits. Their justification is that testing procedures assure virtual 100% safety. Baloney. HIV and hepC came along after similar assurances years ago. Gay men are incubators for the next plague virus and we don’t need to play russian roulette with our blood supply again.

J-Lin on August 15, 2006 at 2:49 pm

The International Committee of the Red Cross [le Comite International de la Croix Rouge] is in fact a Swiss government agency. Deb, you were soft on the ICRC. During the Holocaust, the ICRC sent Swiss physicians to treat German troops on the Eastern front where most of the atrocities took place [kind of like in Lebanon]. In fact, it was through these doctors that news of the Holocaust was published in the Swiss press at an early stage. However, the ICRC refused to publicly announce to the world what they knew about the massacres of Jews. Those Committee members [25 persons at that time] who voted with the majority, claimed that international law forbid them to release such information. Of course, this harmed potential victims in various ways. After the Holocaust, the ICRC hired one Francois Genoud, a notorious Swiss Nazi, to work for ICRC in Belgium. The ICRC rep in Israel during the War of Independence [Jacques Regnier-spelling??], invented atrocity tales about what happened at Deir Yasin that even the Arabs had not invented. So whatever ICRC does now is only to be expected. Maybe people should boycott Switzerland even more than the American red cross.

Eliyahu on August 15, 2006 at 5:35 pm

Where to start?
First, the ICRC is *not* an arm of the Swiss government, or any other government, for that matter. It is an independent, volunteer organization headquartered in Geneva. It has, in fact, no more “official” status that a group of adults playing baseball in the park, except the respect that it is accorded under international law (such as the Geneva Conventions).
Secondly, it should come as no surprise that it provided medical assistance to Hezbollah fighters after they were wounded. That is why the Red Cross movement was founded. In 1859 the residents near the town of Solferino, Italy, were so horrified by the thousands of untreated casualties in the day-long battle (around 40,000, of whom more than half were wounded) that they petitioned the commanders to be allowed safe passage on the field to provide comfort and medical aid. This was the impetus for the founding of the ICRC.
The entire purpose of the ICRC in war is to minimize suffering by those who are properly hors-de-combat (literally, out of battle) such as prisoners, wounded, shipwrecked and civilians.
Thirdly, it is odd to read American condemnation of this. In WWII, for example, the Japanese Empire was rightly excoriated for its treatment of prisoners and wounded. One of their violations of Third Geneva Convention was their refusal to allow the Red Cross to monitor the condition of prisoners. No nation was louder in this condemnation that the US.
But, of course, there is a school of thought that the Geneva Conventions are “quaint,” and no longer applicable. This school of thought is exclusively populated by those who have never been in danger of needing the Red Cross’s assistance and protection on a battlefield. In fact, one might say that the distinguishing characteristic of its proponents is that they have never been on a battlefield at all.

jimjim401 on August 15, 2006 at 6:16 pm

I’m also finding out that the Red Cross has connection to Skull and Bones, you know, the group John Kerry is from?

KOAJaps on August 15, 2006 at 9:20 pm

Israel joined this anti-semitic organization back in July AFTER Israel agreed to give up the use of the Magen David. After this report, you have to wonder if the “honor” of joining the Red Cross on such degrading terms was really worth it. Israel should have said we won’t and will never join the Red Cross as long as as our religious identity isn’t respected. But they settled for a Red Diamond! Jews lack pride and self-respect. No wonder anti-semites can ridicule them so easily.
Israelis should follow suit by not giving a shekel to the Magen David Adom until it leaves the Red Cross for good.

NormanF on August 15, 2006 at 10:28 pm

Three generations of Bushes were/are members of Skull and Bones: Prescott, George HW and George W. You would be surprised at all of the well-connected people. Here’s a Wikipedia site with a partial list:
Please no conspiracy theories–there’s a lot of that going around. These people were chosen to be members because they come from rich and powerful families or becuase they were thought to have potential to be leaders. So yes, a lot of rich and powerful people are members.
Most people at Yale consider this to be a bit of joke, actually.

mark on August 16, 2006 at 12:49 am

This is way, way off topic. Debbie if you think it’s inappropriate, please delete it.
jimjim, I don’t mean to direct any of this at you at all.
After thinking about my previous post I just reminded myself how repulsed I am by conspiracy theories and wanted to add a couple of additional thoughts. These theories seem to be everywhere today, from the “Da Vinci Code” to Mel and Hutton Gibson’s rants. Often they are harmless, but sometimes less so–for example beliefs that the government intentionally created AIDS or that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated by a group other than Al Queda.
If any of you out there are really into conspiracy theories, perhaps the most notorious are the anti-Semitic ones. Recommended reading is the hoax “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”–which greatly influenced Hitler and continues to have a following among some in the Middle East as well as other parts of the world. You can find this all over the web, however most of these sites are hate groups. One that isn’t is: . Again, this is ugly hateful stuff, but I think we have to confront it to defeat it. If you believe any of this BS, please post here and explain yourself. I’m sure that there are many people, especially Debbie, who will set you straight.
My point in rambling on about alll of this is that the belief that a particular group is secretly controlling society can be a very ugly thing. Again, sorry for being so preachy–this is just something I feel passionately about.

mark on August 16, 2006 at 3:49 am


    Not a comspiracy theory but fact that the Red Cross capituales and gives aid and comfort to them. I find them disgusting capitualtors and I will not ever support them or give them anything or ever ask for or want their help.

    Karen on November 23, 2009 at 12:45 am

jimjim doesn’t like the mean things that I said about the Int’l Committee of the Red Cross. Some of my damning assertions about the ICRC he does not mention or try to refute at all. He totally disregards what I said about the ICRC role during the Holocaust. So we’ll take that as accepted and established. I should add that Switzerland began WW2, as far as I know, as a pro-Nazi neutral. Several studies have been written about Swiss policy from 1938 through 1945. Check them. In particular, check Jean-Claude Favez, The Red Cross and the Holocaust… [translated from French].
Now according to an official, approved history of the Red Cross, La Croix Rouge Internationale, by Henri Coursier [Paris: PUF 1959], p 59, the ICRC is “independent” but all of its members must be Swiss citizens. Coursier claims that this is to ensure that the ICRC is seen as neutral by everyone. Coursier, writing in 1959, also claims that members are chosen by cooptation, at least according to the statutes of the ICRC revised in 1952. Nevertheless, I insist that in practical terms, members of the Committee are appointed by the Swiss govt. and that the Swiss govt. directs ICRC policy. I don’t have Favez’ book in French at hand, but he did report that Committee members during the Holocaust were Swiss govt. appointees. Now, I hope jimjim isn’t going to simplistically claim that members of the Committee [in effect, the 25 directors] are simply coopted by incumbent members just because that’s what their bylaws say. Are we supposed to
believe that the Swiss govt. does not exert influence on ICRC composition and policy? That the govt. has no influence on this very powerful international body? Anyhow, the ICRC has no moral stature as I and other posters here have made clear. It very definitely takes sides in conflicts, which is clear from its history. By the way, I mentioned the ICRC delegate in Israel during the War of Independence, who invented atrocity tales on behalf of the Arabs, because of his own rabid judeophobia. His name is correctly spelled Jacques de Reynier [and not as above]. Can jimjim explain why the Swiss Nazi Francois Genoud worked for the ICRC? Again the ICRC has no moral authority. I would like to expose Swiss governmental policy and guilt during the Holocaust, and maybe boycott Swiss goods and services. Can anyone forget the revelations that came out about ten years ago of how Swiss banks and insurance companies cheated Jewish Holocaust survivors and their heirs? The Swiss image of neutrality is another fake to be exposed.

Eliyahu on August 16, 2006 at 10:32 am

Here’s a quote from Favez’ book that I found in an article by Sarah Honig [a columnist for the Jerusalem Post]. First I translate into English and then give the French.
“The Red Cross first served Swiss policy. Switzerland has benefitted from substantial growth while the Jews were perishing.”
” La Croix Rouge a d’abord servi la politique suisse. La Suisse a bÈnÈficiÈ d’une croissance bien grasse pendant que les Juifs pÈrissaient “.
Honig adds: Already before the Second World War, Switzerland had proposed to the Nazis that they stamp the passports of German Jews with a bright red ‘J’ so that they could be refused asylum in the most expeditious way.
DÈj‡ avant la seconde guerre mondiale, la Suisse avait proposÈ que les nazis tamponnent les passeports des Juifs allemands avec un ‘J’ rouge vif pour qu’on puisse leur refuser l’asile de faÁon plus expÈditive.
jimjim needs to do more research and not be naive about goody-goody institutions like the Red Cross, ICRC.

Eliyahu on August 16, 2006 at 10:48 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field