Even the Ukrainian money has open symbolism from Freemasonry.
.
.
Amnesty International is now left-wing, pro-NWO scum. For a brief period though, one of its offices got it right on Ukraine….
.
By JdN war correspondent
.
Amnesty International are often on the wrong side of history these days.
Although they will claim they are unbiased, the letter they penned to Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland, after the events on January 6 was one of the most egregious examples I have ever seen of a western Human Rights organisation’s attempts to stifle free speech and undermine civilian protest.
.
See the complete letter here:
.
.
In short, Amnesty misattributed the motivation for the January 6 protests to “white supremacy” and Trump’s supposed link to hate groups, intentionally failing to mention the actual justification for the protests — massive vote fraud and a stolen presudential election!
.
Even if the January 6 protesters were wrong (and they weren’t), they are within their rights to protest a result they see as unfair.
.
Black nationalists, the KKK, NAMBLA, and the Rabbis-who -love-boys Association are within their rights to protest, even if the vast majority of the population finds their views reprehensible.
Protesting elections one deems unfair is hardly “reprehensible”, and none of these organisations were anywhere near the protest. January 6 protest’s speech and actions were fully protected under the First and various other Constitutional Amendments.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
.
It doesn’t matter why you are protesting, even if it is because you are a White or Jewish or black supremacist, you are PERMITTED to protest, ESPECIALLY protesting your government at the seat of its power – which in this case was on the steps of the US Capitol.
.
Burning down buildings, as the BLM filth did in 2020, setting cars on fire and killing dozens of people during the summer of 2020 — those things are not protected.
.
What the January 6 protesters did…IS!
.
In the report Amnesty comically attributed (went way out of its way to attribute) the Capitol Police’s “friendly” and “welcoming” demeanour to protestors to shared racial characteristics.
.
Instead of attributing it to, I don’t know,…following orders and INTENTIONAL ENTRAPMENT, Amnesty International intentionally misattributed it to shared white supremacist views.
.
Yes, you read that right,….instead of recognising that the Capitol Police treated the protesters “better than they did BLM protesters” because they WANTED them to enter the Capitol, and perhaps because unlike BLM protesters, the Jan 6 protesters were largely peaceful, and GOOD people.
.
Amnesty made it all about race and used the letter to attack white conservatives.
.
That the leader of the largest group present, the Proud Boys, is a black Hispanic, is an inconvenient truth.
.
The witch-hunt that ensued by the US DOJ has resulted in one of the most egregious attacks on America’s civil liberties since the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794.
.
The Whiskey Rebellion was an uprising that afforded the new U.S. government its first opportunity to establish federal authority by military means within state boundaries, Officials moved into Western Pennsylvania to quell an uprising of settlers rebelling against a new federal liquor tax.
.
But that did not stop Amnesty International from siding with the oppressors over the oppressed and being silent during the abuses which have followed since the jewish Garland’s “investigation.”
.
What has followed since the conclusion of the sham investigation is the systematic arrest and persecution of the peaceful, entrapped January 6 protesters, many of whom are STILL being held in prison almost 4 years later, all this for merely exercising their right to protest and being caught up in the moment.
.
Amnesty has NEVER to this day called for these hostages to be treated humanely. This is who they now are.
.
Amnesty International is now EVIL and cares nothing for human rights.
.
With that said, even a broken clock can be right once a day, and ONE arm of Amnesty International was, on its initial analysis of the Zelensky Regime.
.
On 4 August 2022, during Russia’s “special military operation”/invasion, Amnesty International published a report accusing Kiev of endangering civilians through its army’s combat tactics, stating in particular that Ukraine had set up military bases in residential areas (including schools and hospitals) and launched attacks from populated civilian areas.
.
Using people as human shields is ILLEGAL.
.
Oksana Pokalchuk, leader of Amnesty Ukraine, did her utmost to shut down the investigation, claiming that the report “was compiled by foreign observers, without any assistance from local staff”, resigned from her post and left the organisation following the publication of the report.
.
The Wikipedia entry on Amnesty International discussed Ukraine abuses NO MORE, choosing instead to discuss the aftermath of the blistering report, and ALL the criticisms made against Amnesty for DARING to elucidate crimes perpetrated by the Ukrainian military against the (ethnic Russian) people of Donbass, which includwd constant rtiller shelling of Donbass apartment buildings, villages, and downtown buildings.
.
The report that lists Ukraine’s wrongdoings is in fact very hard to find.
.
A quick Google search on the matter displays literally dozens of stories lambasting Amnesty international for being “anti-Western,” “anti-democratic” and biased AGAINST Ukraine.
.
Comical, I know….
.
In addition to the Wikipedia entry which ONLY discusses criticisms of the initial report, tnot the report itself, here’s a mountain of articles from the likes of the NY Times and CNN condemning the organisation’s initial, honest and accurate findings.
.
The backlash was so fierce most of the report has been buried and the people who penned it fired or demoted.
.
I did find it, though, and will republish it below, followed by the Wikipedia entry, ATTACKING Amnesty for daring to criticise Ukraine’s government.
.
From the initial Amnesty International report on Ukraine:
.
.***
Ukrainian forces have put civilians in harm’s way by establishing bases and operating weapons systems in populated residential areas, including in schools and hospitalsvas they repelled [sic] the Russian invasion that began in February, Amnesty International said today.
.
Such tactics violate international humanitarian law and endanger civilians, as they turn civilian objects [buildings] into military targets. The ensuing Russian strikes in populated areas have killed civilians and destroyed civilian infrastructure.
.
“We have documented a pattern of Ukrainian forces putting civilians at risk and violating the laws of war when they operate in populated areas,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.
.
“Being in a defensive position does not exempt the Ukrainian military from respecting international humanitarian law.”
.
Between April and July [2022], Amnesty International researchers spent several weeks investigating Russian strikes in the Kharkiv, Donbass and Mykolaiv regions. The organization inspected strike sites; interviewed survivors, witnesses and relatives of victims of attacks; and carried out remote-sensing and weapons analysis.
.
Throughout these investigations, researchers found evidence of Ukrainian forces launching strikes from within populated residential areas as well as basing themselves in civilian buildings in 19 towns and villages in the regions. .
.
The organization’s Crisis Evidence Lab has analyzed satellite imagery to further corroborate some of these incidents.
.
Most residential areas where soldiers located themselves were kilometres away from front lines. Viable alternatives were available that would not endanger civilians – such as military bases or densely wooded areas nearby, or other structures further away from residential areas. In the cases it documented, Amnesty International is not aware that the Ukrainian military, who located themselves in civilian structures in residential areas, asked or assisted civilians to evacuate nearby buildings – a failure to take all feasible precautions to protect civilians.
.
Launching strikes from populated civilian areas
.
Survivors and witnesses of Russian strikes in the Donbass, Kharkiv and Mykolaiv regions told Amnesty International researchers that the Ukrainian military had been operating near their homes around the time of the strikes, exposing the areas to retaliatory fire from Russian forces. Amnesty International researchers witnessed such conduct in numerous locations.
.
International humanitarian law requires all parties to a conflict to avoid locating, to the maximum extent feasible, military objectives within or near densely populated areas.
.
Other obligations to protect civilians from the effects of attacks include removing civilians from the vicinity of military objectives and giving effective warning of attacks that may affect the civilian population.
.
The mother of a 50-year-old man killed in a rocket attack on 10 June in a village south of Mykolaiv told Amnesty International: “The military were staying in a house next to our home and my son often took food to the soldiers. I begged him several times to stay away from there because I was afraid for his safety. That afternoon, when the strike happened, my son was in the courtyard of our home and I was in the house. He was killed on the spot. His body was ripped to shreds. Our home was partially destroyed.”
.
Amnesty International researchers found military equipment and uniforms at the house next door.
.
Mykola, who lives in a tower block in a neighbourhood of Lysychansk (Donbass) that was repeatedly struck by Russian attacks — which killed at least one older man — told Amnesty International:
“I don’t understand why our military is firing from the cities and not from the field.” Another resident, a 50-year-old man, said: “There is definitely military activity in the neighbourhood. When there is outgoing fire, we hear incoming fire afterwards.”
.
Amnesty International researchers witnessed soldiers using a residential building some 20 metres from the entrance of the underground shelter which was used by the residents, and where the older man was killed.
.
In one town in Donbass on 6 May, Russian forces used widely banned and inherently indiscriminate cluster munitions over a neighbourhood of mostly single or two-storey homes where Ukrainian forces were operating artillery. Shrapnel damaged the walls of the house where Anna, 70, lives with her son and 95-year-old mother.
.
Anna said: “Shrapnel flew through the doors. I was inside. The Ukrainian artillery was near my field… The soldiers were behind the field, behind the house… I saw them coming in and out… since the war started… My mother is… paralyzed, so I couldn’t flee.”
.
In early July, a farm worker was injured when Russian forces struck an agricultural warehouse in the Mykolaiv area. Hours after the strike, Amnesty International researchers witnessed the presence of Ukrainian military personnel and vehicles in the grain storage area, and witnesses confirmed that the military had been using the warehouse, located across the road from a farm where civilians are living and working.
.
While Amnesty International researchers were examining damage to residential and adjacent public buildings in Kharkiv and in villages in Donbass and east of Mykolaiv, they heard outgoing fire from Ukrainian military positions nearby.
.
In Bakhmut, several residents told Amnesty International that the Ukrainian military had been using a building barely 20 metres across the street from a residential high-rise building. On 18 May, a Russian missile struck the front of the building, partly destroying five apartments and damaging nearby buildings. Kateryna, a resident who survived the strike, said:
.
“I didn’t understand what happened. [There were] broken windows and a lot of dust in my home… I stayed here because my mother didn’t want to leave. She has health problems.”
.
Three residents told Amnesty International that before the strike, Ukrainian forces had been using a building across the street from the bombed building, and that two military trucks were parked in front of another house that was damaged when the missile hit. Amnesty International researchers found signs of military presence in and outside the building, including sandbags and black plastic sheeting covering the windows, as well as new US-made trauma first-aid equipment.
“We have no say in what the military does, but we pay the price,” a resident whose home was also damaged in the strike, told Amnesty International.
Military bases in hospitals
.
Amnesty International researchers witnessed Ukrainian forces using hospitals as de facto military bases in five locations. In two towns, dozens of soldiers were resting, milling about, and eating meals in hospitals. In another town, soldiers were firing from near the hospital.
.
A Russian air strike on 28 April injured two employees at a medical laboratory in a suburb of Kharkiv after Ukrainian forces had set up a base in the compound.
.
Using hospitals for military purposes is a clear violation of international humanitarian law.
.
Military bases in schools
.
The Ukrainian military has routinely set up bases in schools in towns and villages in Donbass and in the Mykolaiv area. Schools have been temporarily closed to students since the conflict began, but in most cases the buildings were located close to populated civilian neighbourhoods
.
At 22 out of 29 schools visited, Amnesty International researchers either found soldiers using the premises or found evidence of current or prior military activity – including the presence of military fatigues, discarded munitions, army ration packets and military vehicles.
.
Russian forces struck many of the schools used by Ukrainian forces. In at least three towns, after Russian bombardment of the schools, Ukrainian soldiers moved to other schools nearby, putting the surrounding neighbourhoods at risk of similar attacks.
.
In a town east of Odessa, Amnesty International witnessed a broad pattern of Ukrainian soldiers using civilian areas for lodging and as staging areas, including basing armoured vehicles under trees in purely residential neighbourhoods, and using two schools located in densely populated residential areas. Russian strikes near the schools killed and injured several civilians between April and late June – including a child and an older woman killed in a rocket attack on their home on 28 June.
.
In Bakhmut, Ukrainian forces were using a university building as a base when a Russian strike hit on 21 May, reportedly killing seven soldiers. The university is adjacent to a high-rise residential building which was damaged in the strike, alongside other civilian homes roughly 50 metres away. Amnesty International researchers found the remains of a military vehicle in the courtyard of the bombed university building.
.
International humanitarian law does not specifically ban parties to a conflict from basing themselves in schools that are not in session. However, militaries have an obligation to avoid using schools that are near houses or apartment buildings full of civilians, putting these lives at risk, unless there is a compelling military need.
.
If they do so, they should warn civilians and, if necessary, help them evacuate. This did not appear to have happened in the cases examined by Amnesty International.
.
Armed conflicts seriously hamper children’s right to education, and military use of schools can result in destruction that further deprives children of this right once the war ends.
.
Ukraine is one of 114 countries that have endorsed the Safe Schools Declaration, an agreement to protect education amid armed conflict, which allows parties to make use of abandoned or evacuated schools only where there is no viable alternative.
.
***
.
Pretty damning stuff.
.
Again, NONE of this is found in Amnesty’s Wikipedia entry. Literally, there is only one short paragraph discussing the allegation against Ukraine.
.
The remainder of the section on “controversies” is used to criticise the [accurate and shocking] findings.
.
This is how one shuts down dissent.
.
Propaganda never shows the actual evidence for an opposing position, and in this case even discusses the position itself. It only hammers home the criticism by citing experts, labelling all dissenters as “Nazis” and “Putin apologists,” attacking people who hold the alternate position with insults, and attributing their position to “misinformation” etc.
.
In essence, they just tell you the opposing position is wrong, without telling you why the position was expressed in the first place, or why it is wron, and that the people positing it are bad, and if you dare to look at why they do, you are bad too.
.
Have a conversation with any liberal about why Trump is good for America and look at the manner in which they tell you he isn’t. It will inevitably be light on facts, heavy on abuse.
.
Below, I have republished the remainder of the entirety of the Wikipedia entry on the matter, which is about 95% criticism and pro-Western propaganda.
.
Notice how they say the report was “praised by several Russian and pro-Russian figures, including the Russian Embassy in London.”
.
As if that means it is automatically therefore wrong…..
.
Good luck finding anything about the specific findings of the report we are not allowed to believe could be accurate.
.
Enjoy:
.
Human rights lawyers Wayne Jordash and Anna Mykytenko argued that the 4 August report contained “little to none of the military or humanitarian context essential to any reasoned view of what was (or was not) necessary in the prevailing military context” and that the report was “short on facts and analysis and long on intemperate accusation.”
.
RUSI researcher Jack Watling stated that “you need to balance military necessity with proportionality, so you need to take reasonable measures to protect civilians but that must be balanced with your orders to defend an area”, thus the report’s suggestions that Ukrainian forces should relocate to a nearby field or forest “demonstrated a lack of understanding of military operations and damages the credibility of the research.”
.
RUSI researcher Natia Seskuria called the report “out of touch with current reality” and stated that the Ukrainian army can legitimately house itself n the towns they defend, even if they have civilians nearby, because the Ukrainian authorities constantly call for evacuations from frontline towns, and forced relocations of civilian population would violate international humanitarian law.
.
Marc Garlasco, a United Nations war crimes investigator specializing in civilian harm mitigation, said that “Ukraine can place forces in areas they are defending” and “there is no requirement to stand shoulder to shoulder in a field — this isn’t the 19th century”, and expressed concern that the report could endanger Ukrainian civilians by giving Russian forces an excuse to “expand their targeting of civilian areas”.
.
Journalist Tom Mutch stated that he had participated in and reported on an evacuation of civilians in one of Amnesty’s cases, which he contrasted with Amnesty’s statement that it was “not aware that the Ukrainian military who located themselves in civilian structures in residential areas asked or assisted civilians to evacuate nearby buildings”.[224] The Kyiv Independent editorial team strongly criticized the report, pointing out flaws in reasoning and stating that the “Amnesty [International] could not properly articulate who the main perpetrator of violence in Ukraine was” [ = evil Putie]
.
The report sparked outrage in Ukraine and the West. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused Amnesty of trying to “amnesty the terrorist state [ = Riussia] and shift the responsibility from the aggressor to the victim”, while Ukraine’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dmytro Kuleba, stated that the report creates “a false balance between the oppressor and the victim”. [Victimhood is always the goal in NWO propaganda.]
.
The report was praised by several Russian and pro-Russian figures, including the Russian Embassy in London, causing further criticism against the organisation.
.
On 12 August, Amnesty International [caving in] reported that “the conclusions were not conveyed with the delicacy and accuracy that should be expected from Amnesty”, and said that “this also applies to the subsequent communication and reaction of the International Secretariat to public criticism.”
.
The organisation condemned “the instrumentalization of the press release by the Russian authorities” and promised that the report will be verified by independent experts.
.
The criticism resulted in AI calling an internal review committee composed of independent international humanitarian law (IHL) experts to review the report, whose conclusions were not published by AI but nonetheless obtained by New York Times.
.
The review concluded that while AI was right to include Ukraine in its analysis in general, as IHL [“international humanitarian law”] applies to all sides of a conflict, its conclusions in respect to Ukraine were biased and not sufficiently substantiated by available evidence, and the vague language of the report could leave an impression, even if this was not intended and not supported by evidence, that “Ukrainian forces were primarily or equally to blame for the death of civilians resulting from attacks by Russia”.
.
To the contrary, the review concluded that, on the basis of the evidence that AI had collected, it was “simply impossible to assert that generally civilians died” as result of negligence of Ukrainian army, while “imprudent language” of the report suggested this.
.
.
…….Money decides — JdN
.
We saw only recently Robert Kennedy, Junior’s shameless refusal to condemn Israel’s genocide and “ethnic cleansing” in Gaza, which totally contradicts his normal, liberal stance of defending the oppressed.
.
It is all about the money, and what the New Testament repeatedly calls “the fear of the jews.”
.
Many were floored when Kennedy chose a half-Chinese millionaire woman as his vice-presidential running mate.
.
Simple: She had megabucks, and getting on the ballot in all fifty states is very expensive.
.
America is now a plutocracy, a rule by billionaires, most of them jews.
.
This is the end stage of an increasingly atheistic and materialistic West.
.
What counts is MY job, money, career, and well-being.
.
But this is not a time for more “looking out for Number One.”
.
That is a recipe for disaster. And by disaster I mean I mean a full white genocide and/or WWIII..
.
No, this is a time for heroes.
.
.
.
Leave a Reply