Tag: human rights

The Technocrats Want Your Water: UN’s “Global Water Bankruptcy” Exposed

In 2005 the CEO of (WEF partner) Nestlé famously announced that water was not a human right.

Having announced their intentions, the technocrats set about crafting a crisis narrative to take control of this precious resource.

This year—not coincidentally coinciding with the UN/WEF announcements that we were entering a food crisis and must adopt genetically engineered crops—that crisis rhetoric was amped up to 11.

In a January 2026 report, the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH) declared “Global Water Bankruptcy.” Far worse than a mere water crisis, “water bankruptcy” describes a persistent post-crisis state wherein long-term human withdrawals from surface and groundwater exceed inflows, causing “effectively irreversible degradation” of water capital.

The term “bankruptcy” itself telegraphs their intention to seize it all, framing society as insolvent and taking our water into receivership so that technocrats can step in control the resource.

The UNU-INWEH, naturally, was quite thrilled, calling the need for a form of global “bankruptcy management” governance an “opportunity that cannot be overlooked” [PDF, p6] They quite openly salivate at a chance to codify their temporary crisis measures into permanent technocratic oversight of this lasting condition. Specifically, they cite a need for:

  • Transparent [monitoring and] accounting of and enforceable limits on water use,
  • protection of “water-related natural capital,”
  • equity-focused transitions that protect vulnerable groups (smallholders, women, Indigenous communities, low-income populations),
  • and a rebalancing of demand, restructuring of rights, and reorienting of infrastructure, technology, finance, and trade.

Let’s look at each.

Keep reading

The Illusions of Western Virtue: Ursula von der Leyen and Europe’s Moral Bankruptcy

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has every right to condition European relations with any other country or bloc on respect for human rights. That, of course, would hold true if she genuinely cared about such values herself.

In response to the June 19 signing of the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran – intended to bring an end to a destructive war – von der Leyen declared that the European Union does not intend to lift its sanctions on Tehran.

Speaking on June 15, ahead of the G7 summit, she firmly conditioned any diplomatic thawing on domestic changes within the Islamic Republic.

“The principle of sanctions is that we need real change on the ground before we can think about lifting them,” she stated, adding: “As long as there is no behavioral change, you cannot lift the sanctions because of human rights violations.”

Viewed in isolation, the European position might appear principled, even commendable. In its broader geopolitical context, however, it exposes a staggering level of hypocrisy.

On that very same day, the European Union’s duplicity was laid bare. During a Foreign Affairs Council meeting in Luxembourg, Europe effectively refused to take a unified stand on imposing trade sanctions on Israel, despite its ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip and unchecked colonial violence and expansionist policies in the occupied West Bank.

The discussion itself would not have taken place had it not been for the persistent efforts of Spain and Ireland, which have repeatedly urged the bloc to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement over Israel’s flagrant violations of international law. The initiative failed because the EU remains deeply divided, constrained by the requirement of unanimity on foreign policy and repeatedly blocked by pro-Israel governments.

While Europe continues to engage Israel – providing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist coalition with desperately needed political and economic lifelines – the European public has increasingly moved in the opposite direction.

Recent polling across numerous countries has revealed growing opposition to Israel’s war and genocide in Gaza and increasing support for Palestinian rights. Across Europe, mass demonstrations, consumer boycotts, campus mobilizations, and divestment campaigns have reflected a widening gap between public opinion and official policy.

This reality appears entirely irrelevant to von der Leyen, who remains preoccupied with the human rights records of states viewed as Western adversaries. Such concern is not motivated by solidarity with victims, but by the desire to maintain political leverage that can be invoked when convenient and ignored when necessary.

Lest we forget, von der Leyen was among the first Western leaders to visit Israel following the events of October 7, arriving in Tel Aviv on October 13, 2023. Standing alongside Israeli leaders, she offered unconditional backing, declaring that “Europe stands with Israel.” She did so as Palestinians in Gaza were already being subjected to a devastating military assault that would soon claim tens of thousands of lives.

Although her rhetoric became somewhat more cautious as international legal institutions began investigating Israel for genocide and pursuing war crimes cases against its leaders, her fundamental political alignment never truly changed.

Keep reading

US Supreme Court weighs claims Cisco aided Chinese human rights abuses

The U.S. Supreme Court confronted a case on Tuesday with broad implications for human rights litigation in American courts, a long-running lawsuit brought by members of the Falun Gong spiritual movement who have accused Cisco Systems of facilitating religious persecution in China.

The justices heard arguments in Cisco’s appeal of a lower court’s 2023 ruling that breathed new life into the 2011 lawsuit, brought under the Alien Tort Statute of 1789, that accused the company of knowingly developing technology that allowed China’s government to surveil and persecute Falun Gong members.

The court has a 6-3 conservative majority, and some of its conservative justices signaled agreement with the stance taken by Kannon Shanmugam, the lawyer for Cisco, during the arguments.

San Jose, California-based Cisco urged the Supreme Court to further limit the scope of the Alien Tort Statute, which lets non-U.S. citizens seek damages in American courts for violations of international law. The court in a series of decisions since 2013 has restricted the law’s reach, making it more difficult to hold U.S. corporations legally liable for human rights abuses.

President Donald Trump’s administration sided with Cisco in the case.

Paul Hoffman, a lawyer for the Falun Gong plaintiffs, argued strenuously against Cisco’s views.

“Under Cisco’s theory, even the corporate actors who provided the poison gas for Nazi crematoria would not be liable” under the Alien Tort Statute, Hoffman told the justices.

Keep reading

‘Predators’: Amnesty slams Netanyahu, Putin, Trump as human rights decline

The heads of Israel, Russia and the United States are leading the destruction of global human rights, Amnesty International has said, describing them as “voracious predators” intent upon economic and political domination.

“A global environment where primitive ferocity could flourish has been long in the making,” Agnes Callamard, the head of the global rights group, wrote in an annual report on the state of the world’s human rights that was released on Tuesday.

In 2025, “sharp U-turns were taken away from the international order that had been imagined out of the ashes of the Holocaust and the utter destruction of world wars, and constructed slowly and painfully, albeit insufficiently, over these past 80 years,” she said.

In a news conference on Monday in London, Callamard said that most governments tend to appease the “predators” rather than confront them.

“Some even thought to imitate the bullies and the looters,” she said.

Spain, however, which is an outlier in Europe for its criticism of Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and US-Israeli attacks on Iran, “is standing above the double standard that is destroying the international system”, Callamard said.

She argued that Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US President Donald Trump and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, who in 2022 sent his forces into neighbouring Ukraine, have had an “absolutely dramatic” impact on the world.

Their conduct is “emboldening all of those that are tempted by similar behaviours,” said Callamard. “It is allowing for the multiplication of copycats around the world, and therefore what we are confronting now is much more aggressive and ferocious than what we had to confront three or four years ago.”

Keep reading

Iran Appointed to UN Program for Women’s Rights, Disarmament, and Terrorism Prevention

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been nominated to the U.N. Committee for Program and Coordination, which shapes policy on women’s rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention. The nomination was backed by ECOSOC members, including the UK, Spain, Canada, France, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia, Switzerland, Austria, and Finland.

This is part of a broader pattern. In February 2026, an Iranian regime official took her seat as a full member of the UN Human Rights Council’s Advisory Committee, contributing to discussions on gender perspectives and gender-based violence, while Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister addressed the council’s high-level opening session.

Iran was previously removed from a comparable body in 2022, when ECOSOC voted 29 to 8 to remove it from the Commission on the Status of Women following its violent crackdown on protesters after the death of Mahsa Amini. It is now being nominated back onto similar bodies.

Keep reading

How Human Rights Watch Shattered Yugoslavia

On August 25th 2025, this journalist documented how the 1975 Helsinki Accords transformed “human rights” into a highly destructive weapon in the West’s imperial arsenal. At the forefront of this shift were organisations such as Amnesty International, and Helsinki Watch – the forerunner of Human Rights Watch. Supposedly independent reports published by these organisations became devastatingly effective tools for justifying sanctions, destabilisation campaigns, coups, and outright military intervention against purported overseas “rights” abusers. A palpable example of HRW’s utility in this regard is provided by Yugoslavia’s disintegration.

In December 2017, HRW published a self-laudatory essay boasting how its publication of “real-time field reporting of war crimes” during the Bosnian civil war’s early stages in 1992, and the organisation’s independent lobbying for a legal mechanism “to punish military and political leaders responsible for atrocities” committed in the conflict, contributed to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia’s establishment. Documents held by Columbia University “reveal the fundamental role of HRW” in the ICTY’s May 1993 founding.

These files moreover detail HRW’s “cooperation in various criminal investigations” against former Yugoslav officials by the ICTY, “through mutual exchange of information.” The organisation is keen to promote its intimate, historic ties with the Tribunal, and how the ICTY’s work spurred the International Criminal Court’s creation. Yet, absent from these hagiographic accounts is any reference to HRW’s pivotal contribution to manufacturing public and political consent for Yugoslavia’s breakup, which produced the very atrocities the organisation helped document and prosecute.

In November 1990, HRW founding member Jeri Laber authored a tendentiously-titled op-ed for The New York Times, “Why Keep Yugoslavia One Country?”. Inspired by a recent trip to Kosovo, Laber described how her team’s experience on-the-ground in the Serbian province had led HRW to harbour “serious doubts about whether the US government should continue to bolster the national unity of Yugoslavia.” Instead, she proposed actively facilitating the country’s destruction, and laid out a precise roadmap by which Washington could achieve this goal.

Keep reading

Trump State Dept. declares abortions, euthanasia, transgender surgeries ‘human rights violations’

Federal officials will recognize the intentional destruction of innocent preborn babies as well as the surgical and chemical mutilation of children as human rights violations, according to the State Department.

Spokesperson Tommy Pigott told The Daily Signal that countries receiving foreign aid will be required to include “the mutilation of children” in their annual reporting to the United States.

“In recent years, new destructive ideologies have given safe harbor to human rights violations,” Pigott said. “The Trump administration will not allow these human rights violations, such as the mutilation of children, laws that infringe on free speech, and racially discriminatory employment practices, to go unchecked. We are saying enough is enough.”

“Racially discriminatory” practices include favoring non-white applicants for jobs or other benefits, a practice sometimes called “affirmative action.”

The human rights reports are a standard requirement for countries receiving taxpayer dollars.

“The State Department submits Human Rights Reports on all countries receiving assistance and all United Nations member states to Congress in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Trade Act of 1974,” The Daily Signal explained.

Other human rights violations that must be tracked include sanctions for so-called “hate speech,” supporting mass migration into other countries, “attempts to coerce individuals into engaging in euthanasia,” “violations of religious freedom, including antisemitic violence and harassment,” and support for “forced testing, forced organ harvesting, and eugenic gene-editing practices on human embryos.”

A medical reform group that opposes transgender drugs and surgeries for minors thanked the Trump administration for “setting a clear moral standard” on this issue, as well as others, such as DEI.

“Do No Harm commends the Trump administration for highlighting toxic ideologies around the globe as the first step to eliminating them,” Executive Director Kristina Rasmussen told LifeSiteNews via a media statement.

“Engaging in racial discrimination or pushing irreversible gender medicalization on children is unacceptable – whether here at home or abroad,” Rasmussen said. “The State Department is leading the way in protecting the vulnerable and setting a clear moral standard for the world.”

Keep reading

State Department Investigates Mass Migration as Potential Human Rights Violation

Denouncing mass migration as “an existential threat to Western civilization,” the State Department on Friday said it will be blowing the whistle on nations that make catering to migrants more important than the welfare of their own citizens.

The State Department will look into diversity, equity, and inclusion policies of other nations as possible human rights violations, according to the BBC. Nations that fund abortions or assist in mass migration could find themselves labeled as violators of human rights.

A senior State Department official said the new fight against mass migration is “a tool to change the behavior of governments.”

“The United States remains committed to the Declaration of Independence’s recognition that all men are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable rights.”

Keep reading

US State Department Designates “DEI” As A Violation Of Human Rights

There is no way for a government to enforce Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies without also discriminating against certain groups of people.  DEI, by its very nature, is anti-merit, anti-success and pro-privilege.  Of course, the groups that are most commonly discriminated against under DEI quotas are mostly white, male and straight.  The assumption being that white dudes are widely considered “fair game” by the rest of society. 

This dynamic creates a never-ending cycle of people clamoring for oppression status rather than personal integrity and accomplishment.  To win in life, you must figure out a way to catch the government’s favor and attain that coveted prize; to rise to the top of the diversity totem pole.

This ideology has infected societies throughout most first world countries and even some developing nations.  Woke activism seems rampant in the US, but that’s because DEI faces American opposition.  The color revolution is louder because their power is failing.  For the rest of the west, however, DEI in government is an absolute.  This is a problem because it requires Americans to reconsider which countries they view as “allies.” 

The Trump Administration is adjusting to this ideological conflict quickly, and part of this change requires that the US starts openly calling out far-left governments for their destructive behaviors.

Countries enforcing DEI policies will now be at risk of the Trump Administration deeming them as human rights abusers, which upends the status quo when it comes to diplomatic relations.  The State Department is issuing new rules to all US embassies and consulates involved in compiling its annual report on global human rights violations.  

Other policies by foreign governments which US embassies will be told to categorize as human rights infringements include:     

Subsidising abortions, “as well as the total estimated number of annual abortions”     

Gender-transition surgery for children, defined by the state department as “operations involving chemical or surgical mutilation… to modify their sex.”     

Facilitating mass or illegal migration “across a country’s territory into other countries.”     

Arrests or “official investigations or warnings for speech” – a reference to the Trump administration’s opposition to internet safety laws adopted by some European countries to deter online “hate speech” (any speech which is critical of woke ideology no matter rational).  

Keep reading

China Deploys ‘Growing Army’ Of Pro-Beijing NGOs To UN To Target Critics: Report

The Chinese regime is increasingly sending groups that pose as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to the United Nations in an effort to suppress criticism of its human rights record, according to a report published by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) on April 28.

The 10-month investigation, a partnership between the ICIJ and 42 media organizations, examined China’s transnational repression under Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Part of the report focused on the communist regime’s subversion campaign against the U.N. Human Rights Council through “a growing army of Chinese NGOs.”

“Since Xi’s reelection as Communist Party general secretary in 2017 and president the following year, China has sought greater influence within the U.N. human rights system and become more aggressive in silencing dissent,” the report reads.

ICIJ found that the number of Chinese NGOs holding consultative status with the U.N. has nearly doubled since 2018.

NGOs can participate in U.N. meetings, make oral statements, and submit written statements before U.N. sessions after obtaining consultative status, which is granted by the U.N. Economic and Social Council.

An ICIJ analysis of 106 NGOs from China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan found that 59 are not independent but are “closely connected” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The ICIJ referred to these Beijing-backed NGOs as “GONGOs” or “government-organized nongovernmental organizations.”

Ten of these GONGOs receive more than 50 percent of their funding from Beijing, the ICIJ noted.

In at least 46 of these groups, directors, secretaries, vice presidents, or other high-ranking staff also hold positions in the Chinese regime’s departments or within the CCP.

Additionally, 53 of these NGOs pledge loyalty to the CCP on their websites or in other official documents. Among them, 12 agree to defer their decision-making to the Party, such as leadership appointments.

“In 2024, 33 Chinese NGOs showed up about 300 times on the lists of speakers at Human Rights Council sessions. There were only three of them in 2018. None criticized China,” the report reads.

Rana Siu Inboden, senior fellow at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas at Austin, was quoted in the report as saying that Beijing “is clearly using NGOs as a tool.”

“They are encouraging them, helping them, guiding them, coaching them through how to get this [consultative] status,” Inboden said. “And then once they’re [at the U.N.], you can see how their statements, whether it’s in the Human Rights Council or elsewhere, serve the government.”

Keep reading