Interview 1169 - Patrick Henningsen Exposes the Human Rights - Industrial Complex

05/02/20164 Comments

Patrick Henningsen of 21st Century Wire joins us today to discuss his recent article on "Smart Power & The Human Rights Industrial Complex." Topics discussed include the NGO/State Dept/Pentagon/NATO nexus, the use of human rights as a perception management tool to demonise NATO enemies, and the complicity of the media in reporting these stories uncritically.

21st Century Wire

Sunday Wire radio program

Smart Power & The Human Rights Industrial Complex

"Smart Power" by Suzanne Nossel

R2P or: How the Left Learned to Stop Worrying and Embrace Wars of Imperial Aggression

Raed Saleh of the White Helmets denied entry into the US

The Syria White Helmets Exposed as US UK Agents Embedded with Al Nusra and ISIS

Filed in: Interviews
Tagged with:

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. VoltaicDude says:

    Great interview – important story – difficult to convey in all its scope – covered a lot in a short span.

    The average citizen is regularly targeted by disinformation from NGO’s like HRW – look-up HRW’s board members: banksters and oilsters. In contrast its researchers and writers are mostly, as Henningsen describes, earnestly involved with good intentions.

    Avaaz is a fresh face on the offender list. Politically active people are even higher-valued targets and are “saturation-bombed” with the disinformation that these NGO’s generate.

    How do these disinformation campaigns work? They rely on general effect and so can paradoxically include “good info” which acts as camouflage to what’s actually going on. In fact they MUST include “good info” to remain effective and believable.

    Email campaigns, like any other media, are designed around how the public interacts with the communication. An email subject-line is like the front page of a newspaper. Once you get into an email with a list of articles, as is usual in HRW emails, the farther down the list, the less impact.

    Newspaper analogy: you print some disinformation on your front page including a picture; then “the story” is discredited and damage control must be implemented, so you print a retraction on a page buried in the middle of the paper with no picture; the damage is done and not really remediated. In general the meme has effectively been set amongst your readers, and your reputation is like Teflon.

    For years HRW emails generally highlighted the-“monstrous”-Assad-regime-must-change agenda in sync with the State Department’s agenda, never even correcting its Sarin gas accusations against Assad.

    Meanwhile there is a plethora of evidence that this egregious affront to humanity was actually perpetrated (once again) by U.S.-NATO forces through their terrorist proxies in the region – big news, but where’s HRW’s coverage?

    More recently HRW email campaigns have shifted their bias, pulling back a bit from the Assad-must-go meme in sync with the State Department backing off. (But continue to watch them regarding the “refuge crisis.”)

    It’s not that HRW never researches, writes or publishes (relatively mild) anti-U.S.-NATO stories, but that’s not the general effect of their work. But U.S.-NATO is consistently the worst aggressor around the world, running coups and propping up violent regimes to help capture globalist exploitation markets, always utilizing the deceptions of disinformation campaigns.

    And yes, duping people out of their money is one of the saddest functions of all this.

    Other orgs also contribute in surprising ways. Heavily funded arts and cultural institutions are no exceptions:


    B’DWAY? (!)
    Jackson was a pig, but all the public controversy revolves around the flip (arguably?) attitude towards genocide – nothing to be dismissive about for sure. Where is the insight into Jackson’s stand against the illuminati banking system? (Inoculation technique.)
    Lots of social issues (poor -“great” – Hamilton), but again where’s the important info about his alliance with the illuminati banking system?

  2. The term smart power is also attributed to former Assistant Secretary of Defense under the Clinton Administration Joseph Nye, who wrote a book called “Soft Power.” Interesting to note here that Hillary Clinton has numerous times identified herself as being a proponent of Smart Power.

  3. bladtheimpailer says:

    A superb interview that I’ll be sure to pass around as so many are unaware of the stealth use of well meaning people working in or supporting NGOs with their connections to the state and its owners. This arrangement of NGOs, the media both MS and alternative, and the forces of imperialism are but one front of hybrid warfare. The Saker just published an article by Rostislav Ishchenko which ties in nicely with this important interview. Ishchenko puts together the escalating phases of hybrid war in the short article, which we can see currently happening in these different phases in many sovereign locations around the world…Brazil, Venezuela, Syria, again in Libya etcetera

  4. dave.butler65 says:

    Thanks for another insightful, well researched interview.

    A key thing to me is how the concept of Rights has been inverted.

    The American Bill of Rights, lists “negative” rights; delimiting the power of every man made authority. “Congress shall make no law…” etc. It resorts to The Creator as the provider of these rights.
    Atheism, removes any authority above man. (Frequently substituting the scientific priest class!)

    In contrast, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, enumerates “positive” rights. The provision of such rights, provides the pretext for the unlimited power of any institution that claims to be championing them. The essence of this list of Rights is to justify the UN’s existence and expansion.

    This dichotomy is proven by how starkly the old sentiment of government shall claim no powers that they have not been expressly allowed, with UDHR Article 29.3…

    “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

    Or in the words of George Carlin “You don’t have rights, you have temporary privileges”

    The term “Rights” is used as a trump card, to claim altruistic, moral justification for action; even when such action includes bombing families.

    I’ve always found positive rights a weird concept. If you’re dumped in the middle of a desert, there’s not much point shouting “As a human being, I have a right to clean water!”

    To me the only legitimate reason to acquiesce to any collective convention, is to champion mutual survival. The requirements for such things are temporary and locally specific, and therefore, must be initiated and directed by local people.

    Instituting monstrous, lumbering forces such as NATO and the UN to further such things is like asking a short-sighted troll, to use her club to remove a fine cactus thorn from your baby’s little toe.



Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top