How can we take it back? | Page 73 | INFJ Forum

How can we take it back?


Racist fuck.

Extended Interview:
Jorge Ramos Talks Race with Jared Taylor



Jared Taylor of American Renaissance explains the importance of white racial consciousness to Jorge Ramos,
anchor of Spanish-language television network, Univision.

Mr. Taylor asks why American whites deserve a homeland, just as much as Mexicans do?
Part of the interview was in the Univision documentary "Hate Rising."​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Littlelissa and the


Hate Rising
with Jorge Ramos


From the Ku Klux Klan to the so called alt-right movement, white supremacist groups are growing in numbers and influence.
In “Hate Rising,” Jorge Ramos shows us how their ideas, usually confined to private and secretive gatherings, are becoming mainstream thanks in part to the rhetoric on the campaign trail this election cycle.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Littlelissa



U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders — US Senator for Vermont
Yesterday at 3:11pm ·

Congratulations, Mr. Schwarzman, on your 70th birthday and your ability to spend $20 million on your party.
I hope you had a good time.

You will certainly make a fitting member of the Trump administration, which includes the wealthiest cabinet in the history of the country.

While billionaires like Schwarzman get richer, the middle class continues to shrink and 43 million people live in poverty.
And to add insult to injury, the Trump administration will be working hard to make life more difficult for the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and killing the Affordable Care Act.

Once again, Mr. Schwarzman, I hope you enjoyed your $20 million birthday party.

A Billionaire’s Party Is a Lens on Wealth in the Trump Era

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/13/...-beach-party-trump.html?mtrref=undefined&_r=0
 
European parliament passes EU-Canada free trade deal amid protests
Controversial Ceta deal aims to eliminate 98% of tariffs on exported goods but critics say it will lead to privatisation of public sector



Protesters march during a demonstration against the Ceta trade deal outside the European parliament on Wednesday. Photograph: Jean-Francois Badias/AP
Daniel Boffey in Brussels

Wednesday 15 February 2017 16.50 GMT Last modified on Wednesday 15 February 2017 17.04 GMT

The European parliament has passed the controversial EU-Canada free trade deal, while protesters staged a sit-in at the gates of the building in Strasbourg, France.

The agreement was celebrated by some as a victory for global free trade in the face of growing US protectionism under the government of Donald Trump. The agreement aims to eliminate 98% of tariffs on exported goods, making it the EU’s most comprehensive trade deal to date.

Trade between the two sides amounts to more than 60bn euros (C$83bn) a year, and the EU expects the so-called Ceta deal (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement) to boost this by 20% by removing almost all tariffs.

Supporters claim the pact will be worth £1.3bn (C$2.1bn, $1.6bn) a year to Britain alone, in the period before the UK withdraws from the EU.

The EU commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, called it “an important milestone” and said “EU companies and citizens will start to reap the benefits the agreement offers as soon as possible”.

Guy Verhofstadt, the leader of the ALDE liberal group, said: “President Trump has given us another good reason to intensify our links with Canada. While Trump introduces tariffs, we are not only tearing them down but also setting the highest progressive standards.”

Also included in the deal, however, are provisions allowing companies greater access to public contracts and sustainable development clauses, prompting some MEPs in the green and socialist political groups in the European parliament to claim it will lead to the wholescale privatisation of the public sector.

Unlike classic trade deals, Ceta harmonises regulations on matters such as health and the environment.

[...]

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ade-deal-canada-eu-passed-european-parliament


This is not a good thing. CETA will not improve the economic situation for the average citizen. We have to make multinational companies pay taxes first, everything else is 837th priority.
 
Wikileaks Exposes CIA Involvement In French 2012 Presidential Election

by Tyler Durden
Feb 16, 2017 3:18 PM


In a move that is sure to unleash a fresh firestorm of accusations that Russia is interfering in the upcoming French elections, Wikileaks has has released three classified CIA "tasking orders" revealing details of a seven-month long spying campaign and involvement by the agency ahead of the 2012 French presidential election.



The 7 pages of documents reveal that all major French political parties "were targeted for infiltration by the CIA's human ("HUMINT") and electronic ("SIGINT") spies in the seven months leading up to France's 2012 presidential election."

RELEASE: CIA espionage orders for the last French presidential electionhttps://t.co/ARd8alUjMS #CIAFrance pic.twitter.com/15Q5ojw4L4

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 16, 2017

The latest set of revelations are contained within three CIA tasking orders published as context for its forthcoming - and cryptic - CIA Vault 7 series.

Named as targets are the French Socialist Party (PS), the National Front (FN) and Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) together with current President Francois Hollande, then President Nicolas Sarkozy, current round one presidential front runner Marine Le Pen, and former presidential candidates Martine Aubry and Dominique Strauss-Khan.

According to Wikileaks, the CIA operation initially ran for 10 months from November 21, 2011, to September 29, 2012, and continued after the April-May 2012 French presidential election and into the formation of the new government.

Specific instructions tasked CIA officers to discover Sarkozy's private deliberations "on the other candidates" as well as how he interacted with his advisors. Sarkozy's earlier self-identification as "Sarkozy the American" did not protect him from US espionage in the 2012 election or during his presidency.

The CIA assessed that President Nicholas Sarkozy's UMP party was not assured re-election and ordered officers to find out Sarkozy's private deliberations "on the other candidates" as well as how he interacted with his advisors, according to the documents. The agency also reportedly outlined orders specific to the UMP (Union for a Popular Movement), including obtaining the party’s “Strategic Election Plans" and gleaning private thoughts within the party on Sarkozy’s campaign strategies.

[...]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...involvement-french-2012-presidential-election


Julian Assange promised new revelations for 2017. Now we have the first news. :mclap:

What was Russia's involvement in the US presidential election? Non-existent probably.
 
Spain Sets Massive Precedent — Charges Its Central Bankers in Court
TOPICS:BankingClaire BernishSpain

February 20, 2017


By Claire Bernish

First, Iceland, and now Spain has taken on the Big Bankers responsible for financial calamity, as the country’s highest national court charged the former head of Spain’s central bank, a market regulator, and five other banking officials over a failed bank leading to the loss of millions of euros for smaller investors.

This, of course, markedly departs from the mammoth taxpayer giveaway — commonly referred to as the bailout — approved by the U.S. government ostensibly to “save” the Big Banks and, albeit unstated, allow the enormous institutions to continue bilking customers without the slightest fear of penalty.

[...]

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/02/spain-sets-massive-precedent-charges-central-bankers-court.html


Things are happening on the banking front. It has been silent for so long. Now, bankers in Spain are risking jail for their piracy. :mclap:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Littlelissa
Standing Rock: DoJ steps up aggression against those still battling the pipeline
Holdouts at the camp see the justice department’s recent round of arrests and warrants as an attempt to kill the movement’s momentum



‘Our brothers and sisters are being snatched right in front of us.’ Photograph: Michael Nigro/Pacific/Barcroft

Aubree Peckham darted through the hallways of the casino, desperate for answers. Word had spread that day in early February that federal agents had arrested the Standing Rock activist James White at the Prairie Knights resort in North Dakota, sending his friends and relatives into a panic.

“Everyone was sobbing, running around from room to room, trying to get better information,” said Peckham, a 32-year-old Mescalero Apache woman who has been fighting the Dakota Access pipeline since last year. “Our brothers and sisters are being snatched right in front of us.”

White, who goes by the name Angry Bird, is one of at least six Native American activists facing serious federal charges tied to the nearly year-long fight against the Dakota Access pipeline.

Demonstrators at the anti-pipeline camps in Cannon Ball, North Dakota, now fear that the US justice department’s recent round of arrests and warrants is the beginning of an aggressive prosecution effort by Donald Trump’s administration.

After Trump ordered expedited approvals of the $3.7bn pipeline in late January, the oil corporation was able to resume drilling across the Missouri river and has said its pipeline could be operational within 30 days. Hundreds of activists, known as “water protectors”, have vowed to keeping fighting the project on the ground, but state officials have said they would soon be evicting the camps.

[...]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...rock-activists-justice-department-new-arrests


That is worrisome. Why is Trump running the errands of the oil companies? :m190:
 
Racist fuck.

Extended Interview:
Jorge Ramos Talks Race with Jared Taylor



Jared Taylor of American Renaissance explains the importance of white racial consciousness to Jorge Ramos,
anchor of Spanish-language television network, Univision.

Mr. Taylor asks why American whites deserve a homeland, just as much as Mexicans do?
Part of the interview was in the Univision documentary "Hate Rising."​
Very interesting. Side note: what's with the trans Atlantic accent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
Standing Rock: DoJ steps up aggression against those still battling the pipeline
Holdouts at the camp see the justice department’s recent round of arrests and warrants as an attempt to kill the movement’s momentum



‘Our brothers and sisters are being snatched right in front of us.’ Photograph: Michael Nigro/Pacific/Barcroft

Aubree Peckham darted through the hallways of the casino, desperate for answers. Word had spread that day in early February that federal agents had arrested the Standing Rock activist James White at the Prairie Knights resort in North Dakota, sending his friends and relatives into a panic.

“Everyone was sobbing, running around from room to room, trying to get better information,” said Peckham, a 32-year-old Mescalero Apache woman who has been fighting the Dakota Access pipeline since last year. “Our brothers and sisters are being snatched right in front of us.”

White, who goes by the name Angry Bird, is one of at least six Native American activists facing serious federal charges tied to the nearly year-long fight against the Dakota Access pipeline.

Demonstrators at the anti-pipeline camps in Cannon Ball, North Dakota, now fear that the US justice department’s recent round of arrests and warrants is the beginning of an aggressive prosecution effort by Donald Trump’s administration.

After Trump ordered expedited approvals of the $3.7bn pipeline in late January, the oil corporation was able to resume drilling across the Missouri river and has said its pipeline could be operational within 30 days. Hundreds of activists, known as “water protectors”, have vowed to keeping fighting the project on the ground, but state officials have said they would soon be evicting the camps.

[...]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...rock-activists-justice-department-new-arrests


That is worrisome. Why is Trump running the errands of the oil companies? :m190:
"That is worrisome. Why is Trump running the errands of the oil companies?”

Because that is who financed his election.
Look at his EPA pick...not to mention Rex fucking Tillerson.
Any more questions?
 
Very interesting. Side note: what's with the trans Atlantic accent?

A sociopathic attempt to seem more cultured perhaps...modeling?
Still a racist dick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soulfire
A sociopathic attempt to seem more cultured perhaps...modeling?
Still a racist dick.

I thought he had a legitimate argument though. Im not sure he was really racist either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
I thought he had a legitimate argument though. Im not sure he was really racist either.

Which part was legit?
 
Which part was legit?

He brought out a lot of things such as the interviewer is not American, he is Mexican-American. Why not just American? There is something subtle going on that he will not explain.

About how whites are brow beaten and hypnotized to never admit to racism.

How other nations do not have diversity policies in the way that Americans are taught to embrace diversity. That being many colors = successful country. The interviewer cited that it is because of Americas history, but it doesn't sit well with me. This is around the 6 minute mark. I agree that the interviewer is saying that America is up for grabs.

How white people looking out for whites is generally seen as wrong, but not for any minority.

Power dynamics, everyone is not equal, etc. etc. etc.

He is asking a lot of questions which are typically not addressed beyond getting labeled as racist and shutting down the conversation.
 
He brought out a lot of things such as the interviewer is not American, he is Mexican-American. Why not just American? There is something subtle going on that he will not explain.

It’s the same story that has been going on for decades, just with a new class or nationality to blame...once it was a Jews, or the Irish, or the Polish.
Imho it’s how he has been defined by our culture not the other way around.


About how whites are brow beaten and hypnotized to never admit to racism.

Yes they are.
I agree with that.


How other nations do not have diversity policies in the way that Americans are taught to embrace diversity. That being many colors = successful country. The interviewer cited that it is because of Americas history, but it doesn't sit well with me. This is around the 6 minute mark. I agree that the interviewer is saying that America is up for grabs.

Oh, I wouldn’t say that...there are a lot of diverse countries around the world...we are definitely the largest of the diverse, but I don’t think I was ever taught that being super diverse would make for a better society...it was more of a recognition that we all come from somewhere and we can feel whatever kind of pride or patriotism you wish to express.
It just so happens that some awfully well to do white folks are whiny bitches.


How white people looking out for whites is generally seen as wrong, but not for any minority.

Well...when it comes to our criminal justice system, there is a huge racial divide.
There is such a thing as white privilege in this instance and in hiring for jobs...and that doesn’t mean you have to go around apologizing for being white, but white people should at least be aware that there are many racially motivated injustices in the US.


Power dynamics, everyone is not equal, etc. etc. etc.

He is asking a lot of questions which are typically not addressed beyond getting labeled as racist and shutting down the conversation.

It was an interesting conversation anyhow.
I still think he’s a racist fuck.

;)
 
He brought out a lot of things such as the interviewer is not American, he is Mexican-American. Why not just American? There is something subtle going on that he will not explain.

It’s the same story that has been going on for decades, just with a new class or nationality to blame...once it was a Jews, or the Irish, or the Polish.
Imho it’s how he has been defined by our culture not the other way around.


About how whites are brow beaten and hypnotized to never admit to racism.

Yes they are.
I agree with that.


How other nations do not have diversity policies in the way that Americans are taught to embrace diversity. That being many colors = successful country. The interviewer cited that it is because of Americas history, but it doesn't sit well with me. This is around the 6 minute mark. I agree that the interviewer is saying that America is up for grabs.

Oh, I wouldn’t say that...there are a lot of diverse countries around the world...we are definitely the largest of the diverse, but I don’t think I was ever taught that being super diverse would make for a better society...it was more of a recognition that we all come from somewhere and we can feel whatever kind of pride or patriotism you wish to express.
It just so happens that some awfully well to do white folks are whiny bitches.


How white people looking out for whites is generally seen as wrong, but not for any minority.

Well...when it comes to our criminal justice system, there is a huge racial divide.
There is such a thing as white privilege in this instance and in hiring for jobs...and that doesn’t mean you have to go around apologizing for being white, but white people should at least be aware that there are many racially motivated injustices in the US.


Power dynamics, everyone is not equal, etc. etc. etc.

He is asking a lot of questions which are typically not addressed beyond getting labeled as racist and shutting down the conversation.

It was an interesting conversation anyhow.
I still think he’s a racist fuck.

;)

It was and thanks for sharing.

What if he isnt racist and he is just a fuck. Why is he a fuck? What would make him a fuck?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
It was and thanks for sharing.

What if he isnt racist and he is just a fuck. Why is he a fuck? What would make him a fuck?

Arrogance.
Lack of empathy.
Lack of perspective.
Inability to see everyone as a human instead of grouping them into this or that category which he has made clear is not weighed equally in his eyes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Littlelissa
Arrogance.
Lack of empathy.
Lack of perspective.
Inability to see everyone as a human instead of grouping them into this or that category which he has made clear is not weighed equally in his eyes.
Seems applicable to both parties
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
  • Like
Reactions: Littlelissa
I posted this in the (censored) Donald Trump thread.
So I thought I would post it here as well since certain people drive normally sane people away from an honest discussion.
The annual State of Human Rights specifically names Trump amongst other leaders who have actively bred more discontent, hatred, and fear-mongering around the globe.
Have a read of the report in the link at the bottom.
And the next post is what to expect those deniers of such information to say and behave in regards to this report.
Enjoy!


‘Politics of demonization’ breeding division and fear
22 February 2017, 00:01 UTC​
  • Amnesty International releases its Annual Report for 2016 to 2017
  • Risk of domino effect as powerful states backtrack on human rights commitments
  • Salil Shetty, head of the global movement, warns that “never again” has become meaningless as states fail to react to mass atrocities
Politicians wielding a toxic, dehumanizing “us vs them” rhetoric are creating a more divided and dangerous world, warned Amnesty International today as it launched its annual assessment of human rights around the world.

The report, The State of the World’s Human Rights, delivers the most comprehensive analysis of the state of human rights around the world, covering 159 countries. It warns that the consequences of “us vs them” rhetoric setting the agenda in Europe, the United States and elsewhere is fuelling a global pushback against human rights and leaving the global response to mass atrocities perilously weak.

“2016 was the year when the cynical use of ‘us vs them’ narratives of blame, hate and fear took on a global prominence to a level not seen since the 1930s. Too many politicians are answering legitimate economic and security fears with a poisonous and divisive manipulation of identity politics in an attempt to win votes,” said Salil Shetty, Secretary General of Amnesty International.

“Divisive fear-mongering has become a dangerous force in world affairs. Whether it is Trump, Orban, Erdoğan or Duterte, more and more politicians calling themselves anti-establishment are wielding a toxic agenda that hounds, scapegoats and dehumanizes entire groups of people.

“Today’s politics of demonization shamelessly peddles a dangerous idea that some people are less human than others, stripping away the humanity of entire groups of people. This threatens to unleash the darkest aspects of human nature.”

Politics of demonization drives global pushback on human rights
Seismic political shifts in 2016 exposed the potential of hateful rhetoric to unleash the dark side of human nature. The global trend of angrier and more divisive politics was exemplified by Donald Trump’s poisonous campaign rhetoric, but political leaders in various parts of the world also wagered their future power on narratives of fear, blame and division.

This rhetoric is having an increasingly pervasive impact on policy and action. In 2016, governments turned a blind eye to war crimes, pushed through deals that undermine the right to claim asylum, passed laws that violate free expression, incited murder of people simply because they are accused of using drugs, justified torture and mass surveillance, and extended draconian police powers.

Governments also turned on refugees and migrants; often an easy target for scapegoating. Amnesty International’s Annual Report documents how 36 countries violated international law by unlawfully sending refugees back to a country where their rights were at risk.

Most recently, President Trump put his hateful xenophobic pre-election rhetoric into action by signing an executive order in an attempt to prevent refugees from seeking resettlement in the USA; blocking people fleeing conflict and persecution from war-torn countries such as Syria from seeking safe haven in the country.

Meanwhile, Australia purposefully inflicts terrible suffering by trapping refugees on Nauru and Manus Island, the EU made an illegal and reckless deal with Turkey to send refugees back there, even though it is not safe for them, and Mexico and the USA continue to deport people fleeing rampant violence in Central America.

Elsewhere, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Thailand and Turkey carried out massive crackdowns. While other countries pursued intrusive security measures, such as prolonged emergency powers in France and unprecedented catastrophic surveillance laws in the UK. Another feature of “strongman” politics was a rise in anti-feminist and -LGBTI rhetoric, such as efforts to roll back women’s rights in Poland, which were met with massive protests.

“Instead of fighting for people’s rights, too many leaders have adopted a dehumanizing agenda for political expediency. Many are violating rights of scapegoated groups to score political points, or to distract from their own failures to ensure economic and social rights,” said Salil Shetty.

“In 2016, these most toxic forms of dehumanization became a dominant force in mainstream global politics. The limits of what is acceptable have shifted. Politicians are shamelessly and actively legitimizing all sorts of hateful rhetoric and policies based on people’s identity: misogyny, racism and homophobia.

“The first target has been refugees and, if this continues in 2017, others will be in the cross-hairs. The reverberations will lead to more attacks on the basis of race, gender, nationality and religion. When we cease to see each other as human beings with the same rights, we move closer to the abyss.”

World turns its back on mass atrocities

Amnesty International is warning that 2017 will see ongoing crises exacerbated by a debilitating absence of human rights leadership on a chaotic world stage. The politics of “us vs them” is also taking shape at the international level, replacing multilateralism with a more aggressive, confrontational world order.

“With world leaders lacking political will to put pressure on other states violating human rights, basic principles from accountability for mass atrocities to the right to asylum are at stake,” said Salil Shetty.

“Even states that once claimed to champion rights abroad are now too busy rolling back human rights at home to hold others to account. The more countries backtrack on fundamental human rights commitments, the more we risk a domino effect of leaders emboldened to knock back established human rights protections.”

The world faces a long list of crises with little political will to address them: including Syria, Yemen, Libya, Afghanistan, Central America, Central African Republic, Burundi, Iraq, South Sudan and Sudan. Amnesty International’s Annual Report documented war crimes committed in at least 23 countries in 2016.

Despite these challenges, international indifference to war crimes has become an entrenched normality as the UN Security Council remains paralyzed by rivalries between permanent member states.

“The beginning of 2017 finds many of the world’s most powerful states pursuing narrower national interests at the expense of international cooperation. This risks taking us towards a more chaotic, dangerous world,” said Salil Shetty.

“A new world order where human rights are portrayed as a barrier to national interests makes the ability to tackle mass atrocities dangerously low, leaving the door open to abuses reminiscent of the darkest times of human history.

“The international community has already responded with deafening silence after countless atrocities in 2016: a live stream of horror from Aleppo, thousands of people killed by the police in the Philippines’ ‘war on drugs’, use of chemical weapons and hundreds of villages burned in Darfur. The big question in 2017 will be how far the world lets atrocities go before doing something about them.”

Who is going to stand up for human rights?

Amnesty International is calling on people around the world to resist cynical efforts to roll back long-established human rights in exchange for the distant promise of prosperity and security.

The report warns that global solidarity and public mobilization will be particularly important to defend individuals who stand up to those in power and defend human rights, who are often cast by governments as a threat to economic development, security or other priorities.

Amnesty International’s annual report documents people killed for peacefully standing up for human rights in 22 countries in 2016. They include those targeted for challenging entrenched economic interests, defending minorities and small communities or opposing traditional barriers to women’s and LGBTI rights. The killing of the high-profile Indigenous leader and human rights defender Berta Cáceres in Honduras on 2 March 2016 sent a chilling message to activists but nobody was brought to justice.

“We cannot passively rely on governments to stand up for human rights, we the people have to take action. With politicians increasingly willing to demonize entire groups of people, the need for all of us to stand up for the basic values of human dignity and equality everywhere has seldom been clearer,” said Salil Shetty.

“Every person must ask their government to use whatever power and influence they have to call out human rights abusers. In dark times, individuals have made a difference when they took a stand, be they civil rights activists in the USA, anti-apartheid activists in South Africa, or women’s rights and LGBTI movements around the world. We must all rise to that challenge now.”

Background

Amnesty International has documented grave violations of human rights in 2016 in 159 countries. Examples of the rise and impact of poisonous rhetoric, national crackdowns on activism and freedom of expression highlighted by Amnesty International in its Annual Report include, but are by no means limited, to:

Bangladesh: Instead of providing protection for or investigating the killings of activists, reporters and bloggers, authorities have pursued trials against media and the opposition for, among other things, Facebook posts.

China: Ongoing crackdown against lawyers and activists continued, including incommunicado detention, televised confessions and harassments of family members.

DRC: Pro-democracy activists subjected to arbitrary arrests and, in some cases, prolonged incommunicado detention.

Egypt: Authorities used travel bans, financial restrictions and asset freezes to undermine, smear and silence civil society groups.

Ethiopia: A government increasingly intolerant of dissenting voices used anti-terror laws and a state of emergency to crack down on journalists, human rights defenders, the political opposition and, in particular, protesters who have been met with excessive and lethal force.

France: Heavy-handed security measures under the prolonged state of emergency have included thousands of house searches, as well as travel bans and detentions.

Honduras: Berta Cáceres and seven other human rights activists were killed.

Hungary: Government rhetoric championed a divisive brand of identity politics and a dark vision of “Fortress Europe”, which translated into a policy of systematic crackdown on refugee and migrants rights.

India: Authorities used repressive laws to curb freedom of expression and silence critical voices. Human rights defenders and organizations continued to face harassment and intimidation. Oppressive laws have been used to try to silence student activists, academics, journalists and human rights defenders.

Iran: Heavy suppression of freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly and religious beliefs. Peaceful critics jailed after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts, including journalists, lawyers, bloggers, students, women’s rights activists, filmmakers and even musicians.

Myanmar: Tens of thousands of Rohingya people - who remain deprived of a nationality - displaced by “clearance operations” amid reports of unlawful killings, indiscriminate firing on civilians, rape and arbitrary arrests. Meanwhile, state media published opinion articles containing alarmingly dehumanizing language.

Philippines: A wave of extrajudicial executions ensued after President Duterte promised to kill tens of thousands of people suspected of being involved in the drug trade.

Russia: At home the government noose tightened around national NGOs, with increasing propaganda labelling critics as “undesirable” or “foreign agents”, and the first prosecution of NGOs under a “foreign agents” law. Meanwhile, dozens of independent NGOs receiving foreign funding were added to the list of “foreign agents”. Abroad there was a complete disregard for international humanitarian law in Syria.

Saudi Arabia: Critics, human rights defenders and minority rights activists have been detained and jailed on vaguely worded charges such as “insulting the state”. Coalition forces led by Saudi Arabia committed serious violations of international law, including alleged war crimes, in Yemen. Coalition forces bombed schools, hospitals, markets and mosques, killing and injuring thousands of civilians using arms supplied by the US and UK governments, including internationally banned cluster bombs.

South Sudan: Ongoing fighting continued to have devastating humanitarian consequences for civilian populations, with violations and abuses of international human rights and humanitarian law.

Sudan: Evidence pointed strongly to the use of chemical weapons by government forces in Darfur. Elsewhere, suspected opponents and critics of the government subjected to arbitrary arrests and detentions. Excessive use of force by the authorities in dispersing gatherings led to numerous casualties.

Syria: Impunity for war crimes and gross human rights abuses continued, including indiscriminate attacks and direct attacks on civilians and lengthy sieges that trapped civilians. The human rights community has been almost completely crushed, with activists either imprisoned, tortured, disappeared, or forced to flee the country.

Thailand: Emergency powers, defamation and sedition laws used to restrict freedom of expression.

Turkey: Tens of thousands locked up after failed coup, with hundreds of NGOs , a massive media crackdown, and the continuing onslaught in Kurdish areas.

UK: A spike in hate crimes followed the referendum on European Union membership. A new surveillance law granted significantly increased powers to intelligence and other agencies to invade people’s privacy on a massive scale.

USA: An election campaign marked by discriminatory, misogynist and xenophobic rhetoric raised serious concerns about the strength of future US commitments to human rights domestically and globally.

Venezuela: Backlash against outspoken human rights defenders who raised the alarm about the humanitarian crisis caused by the government’s failure to meet the economic and social rights of the population.



Link to Full Report (Choose your preferred language) -
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/4800/2017/en/


 
  • Like
Reactions: Littlelissa
The human rights violators’ playbook: how to respond to an Amnesty International report
22 February 2017, 10:16 UTC

By Anna Neistat, Amnesty International's Senior Director of Research

When Amnesty International (Amnesty) released a report documenting the mass hanging of thousands of prisoners in Syria’s Saydnaya Prison, the Syrian government was put on the back foot. President Bashar al-Assad himself responded, calling our report “childish” and “biased”, and even laughed as he said he didn’t know what went on in Saydnaya as he was "in the Presidential Palace”.

The Syrian government is not the first to have its cage rattled by our research.

To coincide with the launch of our 2016/17 Annual Report, let’s look at five tactics for responding to an Amnesty report, tried and tested in the past year by human rights violators from around the world:
  1. Question our impartiality
Hungarian Government Spokesperson Zoltán Kovács responded to an Amnesty opinion piece about the plight of the Roma in Hungary by accusing us of bias against the government’s immigration policy:

“As a strident critic of this government’s firm stance against illegal immigration, Amnesty International is not interested in a balanced discussion.”

In response to Amnesty’s report documenting the use of chemical weapons in Darfur by the Sudanese government, Sudan's ambassador to the UK Mohamed Eltom said:

"We don't think [Amnesty] is a credible organization", and accused us of having fabricated other stories about Sudan. Eltom accused us of having an “agenda” - but was unable to explain what it was. Sudan’s envoy to the UN also said that the report was “concocted mainly by a reckless adventurous staffer”.
  1. Deny – no need to say why
Some of the authorities implicated in our reports opt for flat-out denial. Asked if treatment of refugees forcibly sent to the remote Pacific island of Nauru amounted to torture, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull replied:

“Well, I reject that claim totally, it is ... absolutely false...That allegation, that accusation, is rejected by the government.” He did not elaborate.

In September 2016 we delivered a petition to the government of the Dominican Republic, urging them to end the statelessness crisis facing thousands of people of Haitian descent in the country. President Danilo Medina’s response to journalists was: “I don’t know, I don’t know, I don’t know what their basis to say that are. They lack information.”

Accusing Amnesty of lying is a good way of slamming the door on the conversation. See the Myanmar Foreign Ministry's response to a report on Myanmar's appalling treatment of its Muslim Rohingya minority:

"It is most sad and unfortunate that […] Amnesty International has also based their report on unsubstantiated allegations, made up photos and made up captions".
  1. Whataboutery
One of the oldest tricks in the book. President Assad’s first response to questions about Saydnaya was to deflect attention elsewhere. When the US interviewer suggested that human rights violations might hamper chances for cooperating between the US and Syria, Assad tried to shift the focus to the relationship between the USA and Saudi Arabia: "I will ask you, how could you have this close, very close relation and team relation with Saudi Arabia?"

Assad’s sleight of hand was quickly called out by the interviewer, who pointed out that human rights violations by Saudi Arabia were not the question at hand.
  1. Just attack Amnesty
Going a step further than accusing Amnesty of bias, the Nigerian military chose to respond to our reports that it had shot unarmed Biafran independence protesters with elaborate insults:

"For umpteenth times, the Nigerian Army has informed the public about the heinous intent of this Non-Governmental Organization which is never relenting in dabbling into our national security in manners that obliterate objectivity, fairness and simple logic."

Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Maria Zackarova responded to our recent Saydnaya report with wild conjecture about Amnesty's aims, accusing us of "purposeful provocation, which aims to add fuel to the fire of the subsiding intra-Syrian conflict… and make the Syrians hate each other more."

Meanwhile Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte called Amnesty International "so naive and so stupid"when we highlighted thousands of extrajudicial killings that have taken place under his administration, and "idiot" when we urged him to stop encouraging violence after he claimed to have personally murdered 3 people while Mayor of Davao City.
  1. Shut us down:
If all else fails, outright censorship could do the trick.

In September 2016, Thai officials threatened to arrest Amnesty staff who were preparing to launch a report highlighting the routine use of torture and other ill-treatment by state authorities.

A press conference to mark the launch was canceled after Ministry of Labor officials said the business visas AI staff had did not accord them public speaking privileges, and threatened to charge them should they speak. The attempt to silence us was unsuccessful, only serving to demonstrate the Thai authorities’ contempt for freedom of expression.

For every government who slams our reports with denials, conjecture and conspiracy theories, there are millions of people around the world who speak out in our defense. For more than five decades, Amnesty’s principled and impartial approach to human rights research has spoken for itself and continues to be a key agent of change when it comes to protecting the powerless against some of the worst abuses on the planet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: acd