Here's Why You Shouldn't Support "Human Rights" NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch
AnonymousAlthough a broken clock is right twice a day, as shown by the latter's scathing report on Israel last year, that doesn’t mean that human rights nongovernmental organizations like Human Rights Watch and/or Amnesty International (as well as many others) should always be trusted. In fact, by shilling them, you may already be supporting criminal (or even terrorist) organizations, acts of state subversion, and in some cases, separatism.
You may have heard about human rights issues. Once light gets shed, it's right all over the news. Some involve brutal killings committed by authorities, while others involve the maltreatment of supposedly marginalized groups. But what if I tell you that said groups or individuals may be violating local laws and regulations, and that America should back off local affairs of other countries? Or that the same people or organization you claim to "represent for" is actually a Langley plant, handpicked to disseminate fake news (in the case of journalists, like Roman Protasevich)? The world is not your playground, Wall Street.
These human rights groups frequently employ or use supposedly "independent" researchers and journalists in order to "track X country's human rights" and other "social issues." Said researchers & journalists will then make a testimony in the form of articles and the like, condemning (X country)'s (practices that violate human rights). If they were given the chance, they may testify before the US Congress or even the United Nations about that human rights issue. Then, what comes next is what you'd always expect from (a) Western nation(s): sanctions, embargoes, boycotts (be it sporting (e.g., Moscow 1980, Beijing 2022), product (e.g., Galwan Valley clash; partly related), and so on). Also notable are protests held in solidarity with said marginalized group (e.g. Free East Turkestan, Free Tibet, #SOSCuba) as well as the countless operations (such as the forming of organizations and advocacy groups) done by the CIA to advance their final goal: that is, to fragmentize a target country or make it bow down to the orders of Washington through regime change (be it due to a coup, "popular protests," an assassination, etc.) or even an outright invasion. We have saw this exact scenario unfold before our eyes leading to the latter through the Nayirah testimony.
If it's not regime change, then it's supporting criminal, radical, ore even terrorist organizations in a country. For example, appropriate measures against the HTI (Hizbut Tahrir - Indonesia) - that is, disbanding it - and that is, to prevent it from being a full-blown neo-Jamaah Islamiyah - were denounced by Amnesty as "violations of freedom of speech and association." This disgusting remark makes me want to scream out loud:
ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED, AMNESTY?! WE WON'T BE EXPERIENCING ANOTHER 10/12/02! BACK OFF!
I'd like to send Amnesty a challenge: that is, to denounce the disbanding of the Azov Batallion or the Sonnenkrieg Division as "violations of human rights!"
This brings us to the next point: these human rights organizations work solely for the interests and profits of the general American 1%, including those tied to the military-industrial complex. Hence their denounciation of the disbanding of a far-right group that the international globalist bourgeoisie has aligned itself with as a proxy. The more far-right the world is, the better they can exploit the masses, while at the same time the better they're going to at seducing the same people they oppress with religion to pacify them - much like a baby's crying being stopped with a pacifier. With this they can maintain the global domination of themselves, rendering the world to be only governable and maintainable by only a select (God-given) few.
This remark can be applied in a same manner to the previous point of invading a country and/or regime-changing an otherwise innocent country that does not like oppression and subjugation by the 1% on behalf of the US government that protects them. This is why Killing Hope exists. America invades other countries solely to reap their natural resources and to further the reach of the capitalist ideology though American hegemony. Washington may present itself initially as a force of good, democracy, freedom, and the like, before becoming full Satan and mistreat the country to the point of ruining and pushing backward all development that has ever done.
And speaking of terrorist groups, America can weaponize the situation to start wars and proceed as previously mentioned - that is, to exploit its resources and people. Also for the sake and benefit of the 1% and its shareholders, and not your average Joe.
Washington has a thousand tricks, but we have a billion solutions.
If an organization have violated laws in a country, expect them to be proceeded according to law, but should they resist, then should they be taken care of, sometimes harshly. Do NOT look down upon them as some sort of nothingburger; instead, SEE IT AS A THREAT TO THE FUNCTIONING OF SAID NATION. It's American intervention right in front of your eyes.
If you want to become a political leader, I'd advise you to BAN ORGANIZATIONS THAT SPORT HUMAN RIGHTS POSITIONS IMMEDIATELY AFTER ELECTION.