Human Rights Watch

Human Rights Watch is a group that claims to be fighting to protect people whose rights are being violated. It is one of those groups that looks like a benevolent organization when we take it at face value, but reveals it's true colors when we investigate it.

First off, is it there to benefit those who have their human rights being violated or is it there to benefit those who create wars? When Human Rights Watch 'exposes' what they perceive to be a human rights violation and the country they point the finger at is invaded by US 'peacekeeping' forces who rape/kill civilians, who is benefiting? The people of that country or the warhawks in control of the US?

Is Human Rights Watch on the side of people whose rights are being violated or is it a front for the Global Domination Project? Think about it. After the US declares that another country is violating the human rights of their citizens, they make an effort to restructure that society and inject US values and a US system. They usually throw in a puppet government as well. For a perfect example of this, see the 'Liberation' of Iraq.

So, what kind of connections does Human Rights Watch have? This page claims that the CIA and George Soros run Human Rights Watch. The chair of Human Rights Watch Europe is Peter Osnos, who is George Soros' publisher. George Soros is a member of the "Global Elite" and a former director of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR is the American Branch of the London-based RIIA and is one of the main 'think tanks' involved in the agenda.

So, the Chair of Human Rights Watch Europe is George Soros' publisher. What about the Vice Chair? The Vice Chair, Alice Henkin, is a member of the CFR and a director at the Aspen Institute, another very nefarious organization that is involved in the global agenda.

Considering who it benefits and who it's connected to, it would appear that Human Rights Watch is just another front.

The Jesuits in Rome have taken over the United States. They intend on using it's power to carry out their crusades. Using Human Rights Watch, they are able to create pretexts for these crusades. Back in the old days, all you needed to tell people was that your enemies were 'enemies of God' and they'd be behind you with torches and pitchforks. The Vatican destroyed their enemies by using people's 'fear of God' to rally them. In these days, you need to effect people's emotions. What better way to do that than to claim a country you want to hit with a crusade is a violator of human rights? An example? The "Incubator Babies" lie was used to manipulate the emotions of America's sheeple to get them behind the first war in Iraq.

So who will be the next beneficiary of HRW's concern?

Iran,Somalia,Pakistan,Syria?

So, to me it sounds like this 'group' is just a tool, for providing the propaganda needed, to start these highly-profitable wars we have come to know.

Reminds me of how Americans vote. If the name of a bill sounds like it 'saves' children, or it sounds heroic, we vote it in!

'Patriot' Act comes to mind. Along with many others that have screwed us over.

I mean, what a NOBLE cause, a group called 'Human Rights Watch'

Originally posted by marsha law
So who will be the next beneficiary of HRW's concern?

Iran,Somalia,Pakistan,Syria?

The Military-Intel crew already have Pakistan covered. The CIA/ISI and the American/Pakistani military are staging a number of black operations in Pakistan in order to destabilize it. This destabilization will serve as a pretext for US incursions into Pakistan. This is why Benazir Bhutto was killed. Bhutto worked for them. She was a Harvard-educated member of the elite. They double-crossed her, though, and groomed her for assassination. See, she had become an inspiration to many people in Pakistan. What better way to destabilize Pakistan than arranging for her to be killed just after her celebrated return? Condoleezza Rice sealed the deal and had her going back to Pakistan to meet her death. A professional MilIntel sniper shot her dead and used a patsy firing a handgun as his/her cover.

The "Destabilize Pakistan" Agenda was also seen with the failed bombing of Marriott Hotel. The hotel was not the original target. It was a meeting of civilian/military officials in Pakistan that was planned to take place nearby. Had they bombed that meeting, Pakistan would have lost countless authorities and the US would have a perfect reason to deploy more troops for a permanent US presence in Pakistan. The meeting, however, was changed at the last minute, forcing the CIA/ISI/Military goons to switch to Plan B, which was the Marriott Hotel. Because it was a rushed backup plan, they ended up ramming a truck full of military explosives into a security barrier. The truck exploded, killing far less people than they intended to kill. It was a failure.

I think HRW and the warhawks are going to go after Somalia/Africa. They already tried to destabilize Somalia by arranging the failed 2006 attempt on the Somalian president's life (A sloppy CIA job).

reply to post by LordCarpainter


It might help to read this page, as it cites its sources, and disagrees with the majority of what you are claiming.

I don't like HRW at all, and I don't care for Soros' politics and activism. Both of them are so convinced that fascism can only come from the right, and so they are helping the extreme left.

But I don't get the connection between Soros and the Jesuits.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by LordCarpainter

 

It might help to read this page, as it cites its sources, and disagrees with the majority of what you are claiming.

Human Rights Watch's wiki page. That sure sounds like a credible source, especially since Wikipedia is frequently edited by the CIA, as hackers have discovered (I think it's run by the CIA and other deceptive agencies). The CIA is alleged to run Human Rights Watch. If that's true, a website that is edited by the CIA is not very credible.

How'a'bout this? Point out all of the things that I got wrong and then cite the sources to prove it.