Amnesty International

[Baker]

For years, Amnesty International has worked more on their political agenda instead of actually looking for human rights violations as shown in this article will we ever get human rights watch group that doesn’t judge human rights violations based on their political views?

1] AI suffers from an acute case of the Moynihan Syndrome. According to Moynihan’s law, the amount of violations of human rights in a country is always an INVERSE function of the amount of complaints about human rights violations heard from there. The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country. The reason is obvious. Those countries in which human rights are the most severely violated are also those where no freedom of speech nor press is permitted. This explains the AI reticence and almost total absence of denunciation of human rights abuses in places like North Korea and Cambodia. It also explains why AI apparently had no knowledge of the killing fields in southern Iraq until US and British troops uncovered them in the recent war.



[2] AI makes no distinction between the fighting of wars and the civil procedures of judicial due process. If AI were setting the rules, the Allied troops in World War II would never shoot a German nor a Japanese soldier before first Mirandizing them and making sure they had the right to appeal their being shot in a duly constituted courtroom with public defenders present.

This inability to understand that war is not a law school mock trial nor a schoolyard game is evident in the jihad by AI against countries defending themselves against terrorism. AI has repeated condemned both the US and Israel for violating the “rights” of terrorists, and for use of force against terrorism in which innocent bystanders get hurt. AI has generally NOT condemned terrorists for causing these innocent bystanders getting hurt by hiding amongst them and for opening fire from behind human shields.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8141

[Baker]

The Amnesty report asserts that the United States and the war on terror have had a “deleterious” effect on the world. But surely they must also concede that the war against the Taliban and the war against Saddam had some positive effects on the human rights conditions in both Afghanistan and Iraq, right? Sadly, that isn’t the case. Amnesty instead condemns the U.S. because “more than eighteen months after the war in Afghanistan ended, millions of Afghans, including returning refugees, face an uncertain and insecure future.” And also, in the words of Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International, “There is a very real risk that Iraq will go the way of Afghanistan if no genuine effort is made to heed the call of the Iraqi people for law and order and full respect of human rights.” No mention of the end of torture and rape and political disappearances in either country. Rather Khan spends her time sniping that the recent Iraq war “was fought in Iraq because of the suspected presence of weapons of mass destruction” (emphasis mine). Of course even that statement is hypocritical and contradictory, considering that before the war Amnesty claimed that Saddam had killed Kurds en mass with chemical weapons, which would presume the presence of “weapons of mass destruction.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8231



One more example to go by.

[Cleopatra]

Baker,I am sorry but I dissagree with you on this one.

Criticism is a healthy thing. Of course criticism is healthy when it's fair but we cannot really accuse Amnesty International for unfair criticism.

Amnesty International is severe in its criticism , yes, but tell me that you really don't think that USA is completely innocent when it comes to violations of human rights?

I won't mention here the support of USA to regimes that violate human rights...

[Baker]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Baker,I am sorry but I dissagree with you on this one.

Criticism is a healthy thing. Of course criticism is healthy when it's fair but we cannot really accuse Amnesty International for unfair criticism.

Amnesty International is severe in its criticism , yes, but tell me that you really don't think that USA is completely innocent when it comes to violations of human rights?

I won't mention here the support of USA to regimes that violate human rights...

Well you seemed to miss the whole point of the story judging human rights your political views while ignoring those that don’t is not much of a human rights watch group.

[Cleopatra]

No I don't think I miss the point, I just dissagree with this point :)

Which political agenda do you think that Amnesty International is pulling?

[Baker]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
No I don't think I miss the point, I just dissagree with this point :)

Which political agenda do you think that Amnesty International is pulling?

Have you bothered to read either article it states it quite clear.
It has long been a highly politicized organization that has ties with and identifies with the political agenda of the left.

[Cleopatra]

Baker I have read the article but I was wondering about you, obviously I didn't make myself clear.

Do you, personally believe that Amnesty International is tied to the Left?

[Baker]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Baker I have read the article but I was wondering about you, obviously I didn't make myself clear.

Do you, personally believe that Amnesty International is tied to the Left?

Yes, I do that’s one of the main points of the thread.

[Earthborn]

According to Moynihan’s law, the amount of violations of human rights in a country is always an INVERSE function of the amount of complaints about human rights violations heard from there. The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country.Oh, no! That means that I'm living an one of the worst terror states in the world! We hardly hear about any human right violations from the Netherlands. I'm moving to Denmark... Oh no, they're even worse!

Libya is safe. Syria must be very nice. China often critized for their televised executions must be really a haven of political freedom. :) Come on, Baker, you'll have to admit this kind of logic is pretty whack.

In fact it works against the writers of the article... It would mean that the Iraqis are worse off (because fewer reports of human rights violations) than they were under Saddam! :eek: AI has generally NOT condemned terrorists for causing these innocent bystanders getting hurt by hiding amongst them and for opening fire from behind human shields.Baker, if you are trying to make a point, why not use a source that the lefties won't consider ridiculously biased so they won't be able to dismiss it immediately.

I'll make it easy for you. Here's the website of Amnesty International (http://www.amnesty.org/). Why don't you show us with the articles from there that the US and Israel are disproportionately critized more than other countries...

[Genghis Pwn]

Amnesty International has no credibility with the American public because they are WAY to liberal and political. There needs to be a human rights group that is non-political.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Earthborn

Baker, if you are trying to make a point, why not use a source that the lefties won't consider ridiculously biased so they won't be able to dismiss it immediately.

I'll make it easy for you. Here's the website of Amnesty International (http://www.amnesty.org/). Why don't you show us with the articles from there that the US and Israel are disproportionately critized more than other countries...

Ok here are a few results fill free to add your own this is from Amnesty International’s library showing the amount of complaints against each of these nations

[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 502 USA
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 332 ISRAEL AND THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 302 CHINA
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 252 RUSSIAN FEDERATION
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 166 IRAN
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 156 PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 149 IRAQ
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 149 PAKISTAN
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 139 SAUDI ARABIA
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 101 SUDAN
[1] Showing results 1 - 31 out of 31 LIBYA

http://web.amnesty.org/library/engindex

[Earthborn]

this is from Amnesty International’s library showing the amount of complaints against each of these nationsNo, it is the amount of articles in the website in which these nations play a role. Any role.

Is it surprising that the USA, having a role in almost everything that happens in the world, scores the most hits?
And since Israel is very much in the center of attention of the world, is it surprising that they too score highly?

And to prove to you just how misleading such figures are, let's search by sub-region:
SOUTH AMERICA 996
SOUTH ASIA 837
SOUTH-EAST EUROPE 782
MIDDLE EAST 777
COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES 578
CENTRAL AMERICA 522
NORTH AMERICA 503
CENTRAL AFRICA 468
WEST AFRICA 461
WESTERN EUROPE 453

I think it means Amnesty really hates South Americans and Asians, hey?

[Baker]

Originally posted by Earthborn
No, it is the amount of articles in the website in which these nations play a role. Any role.

Is it surprising that the USA, having a role in almost everything that happens in the world, scores the most hits?
And since Israel is very much in the center of attention of the world, is it surprising that they too score highly?

And to prove to you just how misleading such figures are, let's search by sub-region:
SOUTH AMERICA 996
SOUTH ASIA 837
SOUTH-EAST EUROPE 782
MIDDLE EAST 777
COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES 578
CENTRAL AMERICA 522
NORTH AMERICA 503
CENTRAL AFRICA 468
WEST AFRICA 461
WESTERN EUROPE 453

I think it means Amnesty really hates South Americans and Asians, hey?

Well this is the information you asked for these are not news articles they are complaints against each of the countries look at all of the news coverage that Iraq has received over the years and they have only received 149 complaints where they less violent then Israel?

[Cleopatra]

In war zones violations of human rights must be expected.

USA has interfered in several wars during the last years, Israel is in War for the last 50 years of the 50 years of its existence.

We must be naive to believe that Israelis do not violate the human rights. They do.

Those reports are for the benefit of USA or Israel because Democracies have the potential to improve themselves.

Its citizens must be well informed in order to be able to ask for full protection of Human Rights.

Amnesty International reports are also valuable for the cases of countries with totalitarian regimes.It's our only way to get informed about what happens to those countries.

I refuse to offer as a gift the tremendous work of Amnesty International , a work that even a magazine like the front page aknowledges, to the Left.

The Left is not capable to accomplish such a responsible and important work as AI does. In fact the left, has always been secretive and against of giving such info to the public.

[Earthborn]

these are not news articles they are complaints against each of the countriesNo, they're not and you know it. These are articles by Amnesty International and when the name of a country comes up in one of them they are listed as a hit.

Have you noticed that when you search through 'Israel/Occupied Territories' you also get many of the articles concerning 'Palestinian Authority', and vice versa?look at all of the news coverage that Iraq has received over the years and they have only received 149 complaints where they less violent then Israel?With all the US/UN/Nato intelligence and the no-fly zones and bombings, do you have any proof that they weren't? After the crushing of the Shiite rebellion in 1991, what military action did they carry out?Amnesty International reports are also valuable for the cases of countries with totalitarian regimes.It's our only way to get informed about what happens to those countries.Yes, it's typical that some people say Amnesty International is no good, and at the same time say that the war on Iraq was justified because it was a 'murderous regime'... Well how do they think we know that it was? :)The Left is not capable to accomplish such a responsible and important work as AI does. In fact the left, has always been secretive and against of giving such info to the public.Are you now denying that supporters of AI are predominantly (but not exclusively!) left-wingers? That's a claim that requires evidence.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn
Amnesty International has no credibility with the American public because they are WAY to liberal and political. There needs to be a human rights group that is non-political.

Are you sure your name is not Anakin Skywalker? One day, you shall be Jedi Knight.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Earthborn
Have you noticed that when you search through 'Israel/Occupied Territories' you also get many of the articles concerning 'Palestinian Authority', and vice versa?

Many of the Arab nations should have far more complaints then Israel and the PA combined I think even you should realize that.


With all the US/UN/Nato intelligence and the no-fly zones and bombings, do you have any proof that they weren't? After the crushing of the Shiite rebellion in 1991, what military action did they carry out?

I can't believe you are suggesting there where no human rights done by Saddam after 91 look at the many mass graves being found as well as the many stories you hear by many Iraqis.



Are you now denying that supporters of AI are predominantly (but not exclusively!) left-wingers? That's a claim that requires evidence.

I have been providing evidence however you are not likely ever going to admit it its like trying to tell a Christian that a certain group is pro-Christian and Christian bias their not likely to admit it.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Earthborn
With all the US/UN/Nato intelligence and the no-fly zones and bombings, do you have any proof that they weren't? After the crushing of the Shiite rebellion in 1991, what military action did they carry out?

Try the Marsh Arabs (http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/mena/marsharabs1.pdf).

The assassination of Ayatollah al-Sadr sparked off a series of demonstrations in several towns and cities in southern Iraq, culminating in armed clashes between government security forces and armed opposition activists, notably in the city of Basra in mid-March 1999. Demonstrations in al-Nasiriyya and other cities were violently put down and hundreds of people arrested. During a mission to Syria and Jordan in March and April 2000, Human Rights Watch interviewed scores of Shi’a Muslims who has fled Iraq in the preceding weeks and months. Many had witnessed or participated in those events in al-Najaf, Karbala’, and elsewhere. They described a government campaign of terror, involving the shooting of unarmed civilians, widespread arrests, house-to-house searches in pursuit of suspects, and the torture and lltreatment of suspects’ relatives in order to force them to divulge the whereabouts of those wanted by the authorities.

...

In 1993, Human Rights Watch estimated the rural population of the marshlands to be around 200,000, which took into account the huge numbers of army deserters and political opponents seeking shelter in the region after 1991. Today, there may be as few as 20,000 of the original inhabitants remaining, the rest having fled or migrated to Iran and elsewhere, while an estimated minimum of 100,000 have become internally displaced in Iraq.

Saddam's oppression of his people was ongoing. The illegal no-fly zones slowed it, they didn't stop it.

MattJ

[Earthborn]

Many of the Arab nations should have far more complaints then Israel and the PA combined I think even you should realize that.Very possible. Although there is no way to know for sure because in some countries you simply can't investigate human rights abuses, probably because those governments have something to hide.

Doesn't mean that countries with less human rights abuses should be considered above criticism.I can't believe you are suggesting there where no human rights done by Saddam after 91 look at the many mass graves being found as well as the many stories you hear by many Iraqis.I have not claimed that there were no human rights abuses at all. I talked about large scale ones. I understood that the mass graves were of people killed in the 1991 revolt. If that's wrong and there have been mass graves provably from much later date, then enlighten me.I have been providing evidence however you are not likely ever going to admit it its like trying to tell a Christian that a certain group is pro-Christian and Christian bias their not likely to admit it.That answer was for Cleopatra. Of course you can react to it too, I don't care.

Does this mean that you agree with Cleopatra that there are no left-wingers in Amnesty International?
Do correct me if I'm wrong, but I find that hard to believe. :)Try the Marsh Arabs.Thanks, Aero. I thought 'he' did them in before 1991. Maybe he did, and later did it agian... :(

[Dancing David]

People who trash amenesty need to read thier history a little better and read the Amensty reports a little better. the whole point is that they are against the abuse of political power.

baker have you read thier report on Russia , it is a very interesting read, as are all thier reports.

But hey just jump on the facist bandwagon folks. Don't actually go to the Amensty web site and see what they are about.

I don't agree with all thier views but thats the point.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Dancing David
People who trash amenesty need to read thier history a little better and read the Amensty reports a little better. the whole point is that they are against the abuse of political power.

baker have you read thier report on Russia , it is a very interesting read, as are all thier reports.

But hey just jump on the facist bandwagon folks. Don't actually go to the Amensty web site and see what they are about.

I don't agree with all thier views but thats the point.

Sorry but showing Israel and the US with more complaints then all of the more obvious human rights violating countries as Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Iran is observed.
Even you should realize that.

[EvilYeti]

I started a thread on this six months ago when Amnesty Int. protested a U.S. missile attack on a car carrying several high-ranking AlQueda operatives in Yemen. I found it interesting that A.I. devoted more lines of type to that incident than then they did for the 9/11 attacks.

They recently raised my ire again when a spokesperson critized the American operation in Iraq on the grounds that there were still other totalitarian regimes in the world.

I don't follow this sort of logic. Did the Iraq invasion somehow cause human rights abuses in other countries? Were we expected to invade the other countries as well?

For that matter, what has A.I. done to prevent abuses in Iraq prior to the war? Do they realize they protested the one act that had any chance of actually improving conditions in that part of the world?

[uneasy]

Originally posted by Baker
For years, Amnesty International has worked more on their political agenda instead of actually looking for human rights violations as shown in this article -snip-
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Article...cle.asp?ID=8141


I tried to read that article, but it didn't sound like the AI I know. Maybe that's because I generally just read the AI web page with appeals for action. This lists the top things they are actually asking people to help with (not agendas or manifestos).

http://www.amnesty.org/actnow/appeals.html

A quick glance today shows only 1 of 17 is related to the USA, and none to Israel. That contradicts one point in the article. I don't see many war related issues, which contradicts another point. One appeal is even against Cuba, which is a contradiction of the premise of the article. I think the appeals listed today are the norm. I don't see a political agenda there.

Unless these appeals for action are all just a cover up for the secret AI agenda! Sure, they luring me with a touchy feeling web page about not wanting women tortured, then suck me into their leftist army! ;) That scenario would fit right in with the article's shrill "agenda" tone.

I prefer to judge people by their actions, not their "agendas".

[Baker]

Originally posted by uneasy

I tried to read that article, but it didn't sound like the AI I know. Maybe that's because I generally just read the AI web page with appeals for action. This lists the top things they are actually asking people to help with (not agendas or manifestos).



Ok so you only read the appeals for action page I agree it doesn’t prove an agenda from that page alone however I’m not sure how this page disproves the original article.
There are many more countries I would be asking appeals for that have far worse situations then listed on the page.

[Earthborn]

There are many more countries I would be asking appeals for that have far worse situations then listed on the page.Please tell us what they are, and how you figured out they have far worse human rights situations.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Earthborn
Please tell us what they are, and how you figured out they have far worse human rights situations.

Sudan is on that comes to mine and the rights of women in many Islamic countrys
And Iran
The War on Women
http://hrw.org/editorials/2002/women0822.htm

Slavery and Slave Redemption in the Sudan
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/africa/sudanupdate.htm

Iran
http://hrw.org/wr2k2/mena3.html

[bjornart]

AI is undoubtedly not a perfect organization, such do not exist. But this critisism is so obviously biased it's almost funny.


[1] AI suffers from an acute case of the Moynihan Syndrome.


So what would you have them do? Ignore the reports of human rights abuse from countries with free speech, and go after the ones that _must_ be hiding evidence?

_
[2] AI makes no distinction between the fighting of wars and the civil procedures of judicial due process. If AI were setting the rules, the Allied troops in World War II would never shoot a German nor a Japanese soldier before first Mirandizing them and making sure they had the right to appeal their being shot in a duly constituted courtroom with public defenders present.


This is silly hyperbole. Amnesty's concern is human rights abuse, not protection of soldiers. If you take a look at the material on the latest war in Iraq every issue deals with the protection of civilians, or prisoners of war.


[3] AI has an academic notion of ethical pureness, which it insists must be applied in the dirty business of war and in the battle against terror._ While paying mere lip service to why terror is not nice, AI refuses to draw the obvious conclusion that those battling against terror must use means that sometimes have unpleasant side affects._ If those fighting terror never use violence, terror wins.__ If those fighting terror must never use impure methods that may cause collateral damages, this is the same as saying they give up any struggle against terrorism altogether.
_

This isn't a political agenda, it's a philosophical difference of opinon. I agree with AI that "the obvious conclusion that those battling against terror must use means that sometimes have unpleasant side affects" isn't obvious.


[4] AI routinely goes beyond issuing complaints about violations of human rights to open endorsements of the political aims of anti-American, anti-Israel, Far Left and Third World totalitarian political organizations.


This is just silly. The only example is, as always, Palestine/Israel, and if I'm not mistaken, even the US now sees a Palestinian state as a goal.


[5] AI’s own wesite links to a large number of pro-terrorist, anti-Jewish, pro-violence, extremist organizations.__ The Anti-Defamation League has repeatedly denounced AI for its anti-Jewish bias (http://www.adl.org/Israel/jenin/), although has praised AI efforts on behalf of the imprisoned Iranian Jews who were “convicted” in an Iranian show trial._ AI has participated in anti-Israel political rallies and collaborated with Arab and other anti-Jewish propagandists._

_
AI's own website heads the page of these links with the following:


Links To Israeli And Palestinian (Human Rights) Organizations
Disclaimer: These sites contain information that may be of interest to human rights workers. The information contained on these sites is not controlled by Amnesty International. Links to these sites do not in any way imply Amnesty International supports either the organizations listed, or views presented.


The accusations of participating in anti-Israel rallies is probably ture, but it merely illustrates the problems with the situation.

The examples I've left out of the quote are obviously the views of individuals, not the organisation. Obviously there are some with extreme views in AI as in other organisations.

_
[6] Yitzhak Rabin himself denounced AI for its anti-Israel bias.


AI may very well be too anti-Israel. It's a common mistake.

_
[7] AI has taken positions that are absurd, comical, and ludicrous regarding what constitutes a “human right”.__ Not only is recognition of gay marriage a human right._ Not only are al-Qaida terrorists held by the US in Guantanamo entitled to AAA treatment becoming prisoners of war or ordinary incarcerated criminals in American suburbia.
_
AI recently discovered a NEW human right, the right not to have to listen to the music of the Barney and Sesame Street TV shows._ Newsweek reported recently that AI had issued an official protest that the al-Qaida and Taliba prisoners in Guantanamo were being forced to listen to background music from the purple reptile.__ Bert and Ernie are apparently sadistic violators of human rights far worse than Saddam Hussein ever was, in AI opinion.
_

I think recognition of gay marriage should be a human right. I think the terrorists should be entitled to human rights. And playing the same piece of music over and over for 24 hours _is_ torture.


"In training, they forced me to listen to the Barney "I Love You" song for 45 minutes. I never want to go through that again," one US operative told the magazine.
-http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3042907.stm


AI however doesn't say it is:



"This is an issue that seriously concerns us. If there is a prolonged period of sleep deprivation, it could well be considered torture," said a spokeswoman.
"It is a very difficult line to draw between what constitutes discomfort and what constitutes torture - that line will vary for individuals and it would depend on each particular case," she added.
-same source as above


_
[8] AI has long shown a vile anti-American bias._ Heather MacDonald recently did an expose of AI anti-Americanism.


What has the greater potential for improving the world? Shouting at the deaf ears of despots, or pointing out the flaws in systems that actually have it in them to change. AI isn't anti-American, it's simply got a different opinion than many Americans on what constitutes human rights.

When AI points out (or 'claims' if you will) that Norwegian practices of keeping acusees in custody for ... a long time (can't remember the exact violation) violates international agreements on human rights, or that imprisoning pasifists is against human rights, I don't start whining about political agendas and 'why don't they go after Sudan', even though I might not agree with them on every issue.

They'll still be getting my money.

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn
Amnesty International has no credibility with the American public because they are WAY to liberal and political. There needs to be a human rights group that is non-political.

In other words,

IF Amnesty International wrote nasty reports about countries that the USA had problems with,

THEN Amnesty International would be supported by more Americans.

I am sure he is right.

However, doing so would destroy the international credibility that AI has built up over so many years by consistently reporting the facts without regard to the agenda of any one nation. While President Bush does not worry too much about such things as international credibility, some people do value it quite highly.

[Earthborn]

Sudan is on that comes to mine and the rights of women in many Islamic countrys
And Iran
The War on Women
http://hrw.org/editorials/2002/women0822.htm

Slavery and Slave Redemption in the Sudan
http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/africa/sudanupdate.htm

Iran
http://hrw.org/wr2k2/mena3.htmlThanks. Did you notice this pattern from the Human Rights Watch website?[list=1]
Human Rights in the U.S.: 18 pages
U.S Foreign Policy and Human Rights: 33 pages
Israel, the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Palestinian Authority Territories: 11 pages
Iran: 6 pages
Sudan: 4 pages
[/list=1]
Same pattern as Amnesty: much more articles on the US and Israel. Oh, my God, it must be a conspiracy! :p

[Dancing David]

Baker i do see what your talking about , but reall I am not sure why there are more reports on America and Israel except to say that maybe people don't put thier lives at as great a risk reporting those violations.

But again AI is a grrass roots organization, if you read thier reports you will realize that they do criticize the US but the quality of derision they hold for the more abusive members is much higher. If you read thier action reports ot becomes obvious that there are a news network. i am sorry that they have an easier time getting reports on our country.

I don't always approve of them but they condemn oppression where it is reported.

[aerocontrols]

Amnesty has to raise money in order to operate. Who will give them money for 'exposing' the obvious truth that Iran and Sudan are horrible places to live?

MattJ

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Earthborn
Are you now denying that supporters of AI are predominantly (but not exclusively!) left-wingers? That's a claim that requires evidence.

Human Rights have nothing to do with political parties, you know.

In Europe ,humans rights were mostly violated in the communist countries and for years the left was denying this fact. Back to those days, the parties of the left claiming that whoever was accusing the communist totalitarian countries for violations of the human rights, was financed by CIA... give me a break please.

Human Rights is a very serious thing to be involved in political parties, especially those that have a very guilty past...

[Dancing David]

I think AI is a sort of grass roots organization, they equally condem governments regardless of which way they lean.

[Baker]

AI is undoubtedly not a perfect organization, such do not exist. But this critisism is so obviously biased it's almost funny.





[1] AI suffers from an acute case of the Moynihan Syndrome.





So what would you have them do? Ignore the reports of human rights abuse from countries with free speech, and go after the ones that _must_ be hiding evidence?


You left out the rest of the comment.
The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country. The reason is obvious. Those countries in which human rights are the most severely violated are also those where no freedom of speech nor press is permitted. This explains the AI reticence and almost total absence of denunciation of human rights abuses in places like North Korea and Cambodia. It also explains why AI apparently had no knowledge of the killing fields in southern Iraq until US and British troops uncovered them in the recent war.

I don't see where they said to ignore the reports of human rights abuse from countries with free speech.
Its saying they are just simply ignoring some countries that have no free press because they don't get as many reports it gives the impression that democratic countries have more human rights violations which of course is false.




_
[2] AI makes no distinction between the fighting of wars and the civil procedures of judicial due process. If AI were setting the rules, the Allied troops in World War II would never shoot a German nor a Japanese soldier before first Mirandizing them and making sure they had the right to appeal their being shot in a duly constituted courtroom with public defenders present.






This is silly hyperbole. Amnesty's concern is human rights abuse, not protection of soldiers. If you take a look at the material on the latest war in Iraq every issue deals with the protection of civilians, or prisoners of war.

They also pointed out that AI has generally NOT condemned terrorists for causing these innocent bystanders getting hurt by hiding amongst them and for opening fire from behind human shields.
If they have a safer method for fighting terrorist where no bystander gets hurt then they should provided it.




[3] AI has an academic notion of ethical pureness, which it insists must be applied in the dirty business of war and in the battle against terror._ While paying mere lip service to why terror is not nice, AI refuses to draw the obvious conclusion that those battling against terror must use means that sometimes have unpleasant side affects._ If those fighting terror never use violence, terror wins.__ If those fighting terror must never use impure methods that may cause collateral damages, this is the same as saying they give up any struggle against terrorism altogether.




_

This isn't a political agenda, it's a philosophical difference of opinon. I agree with AI that "the obvious conclusion that those battling against terror must use means that sometimes have unpleasant side affects" isn't obvious.

No they made very good points they are either wrong or right on them I see no way to just brush it off as just an opinion.


[4] AI routinely goes beyond issuing complaints about violations of human rights to open endorsements of the political aims of anti-American, anti-Israel, Far Left and Third World totalitarian political organizations.






This is just silly. The only example is, as always, Palestine/Israel, and if I'm not mistaken, even the US now sees a Palestinian state as a goal.

There biggest complaint was the right of return of Palestinians who never lived there and those that did left on their own.
Also to migrate to and reclaim any property inside Israel they may wish to claim. Of the countless hundreds of millions of people who became refugees after World War II, the only ones with such an AI-recognized “right” are the Palestinians.
AI doesn't say what the rights of the Israelis already living those area's will do once their currant land is taken.



[5] AI’s own wesite links to a large number of pro-terrorist, anti-Jewish, pro-violence, extremist organizations.__ The Anti-Defamation League has repeatedly denounced AI for its anti-Jewish bias (http://www.adl.org/Israel/jenin/), although has praised AI efforts on behalf of the imprisoned Iranian Jews who were “convicted” in an Iranian show trial._ AI has participated in anti-Israel political rallies and collaborated with Arab and other anti-Jewish propagandists._






AI's own website heads the page of these links with the following:




Links To Israeli And Palestinian (Human Rights) Organizations
Disclaimer: These sites contain information that may be of interest to human rights workers. The information contained on these sites is not controlled by Amnesty International. Links to these sites do not in any way imply Amnesty International supports either the organizations listed, or views presented.





The accusations of participating in anti-Israel rallies is probably ture, but it merely illustrates the problems with the situation.

The examples I've left out of the quote are obviously the views of individuals, not the organisation. Obviously there are some with extreme views in AI as in other organisations.

Showing their extreme views isn't their job even if it's a minority in AI doing this it still has to stop.

_
[6] Yitzhak Rabin himself denounced AI for its anti-Israel bias.






AI may very well be too anti-Israel. It's a common mistake.

I see so its wrong but so many other groups do it that is shouldn't matter?


_
[7] AI has taken positions that are absurd, comical, and ludicrous regarding what constitutes a “human right”.__ Not only is recognition of gay marriage a human right._ Not only are al-Qaida terrorists held by the US in Guantanamo entitled to AAA treatment becoming prisoners of war or ordinary incarcerated criminals in American suburbia.
_
AI recently discovered a NEW human right, the right not to have to listen to the music of the Barney and Sesame Street TV shows._ Newsweek reported recently that AI had issued an official protest that the al-Qaida and Taliba prisoners in Guantanamo were being forced to listen to background music from the purple reptile.__ Bert and Ernie are apparently sadistic violators of human rights far worse than Saddam Hussein ever was, in AI opinion.






I think recognition of gay marriage should be a human right. I think the terrorists should be entitled to human rights. And playing the same piece of music over and over for 24 hours _is_ torture.




"In training, they forced me to listen to the Barney "I Love You" song for 45 minutes. I never want to go through that again," one US operative told the magazine.
-http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3042907.stm






AI however doesn't say it is:





"This is an issue that seriously concerns us. If there is a prolonged period of sleep deprivation, it could well be considered torture," said a spokeswoman.
"It is a very difficult line to draw between what constitutes discomfort and what constitutes torture - that line will vary for individuals and it would depend on each particular case," she added.
-same source as above




They also pointed out-
AI considers the forced transfer of people involved in terrorism from one town to another town in the "occupied territories" to be a human rights abuse (AI Index: MDE 15/133/2002 (Public) News Service No: 154 3 September 2002), and I suspect a teacher transferring a roudy pupil from one row to the next might also be at risk of arousing AI ire.




_
[8] AI has long shown a vile anti-American bias._ Heather MacDonald recently did an expose of AI anti-Americanism.
AI has conducted a jihad against America’s attempt to defend itself from Islamofascist terrorism. It refuses to acknowledge that such terrorism even exists. It routinely refers to September 11 and other atrocities as “terrorism,” WITH the quotation marks, and as the “so-called war against terrorism." Throughout its report of the anti-terror campaign, Amnesty puts “terrorist” in quotes to signal the organization’s ironic detachment from the term. As MacDonald has said, “If you can’t bring yourself to use the word ‘terrorist’ non-ironically, there is indeed much about recent government actions that will look arbitrary or discriminatory.” AI insists that the American anti-terror campaign has a hidden, nefarious, racist anti-Arab agenda.







What has the greater potential for improving the world? Shouting at the deaf ears of despots, or pointing out the flaws in systems that actually have it in them to change. AI isn't anti-American, it's simply got a different opinion than many Americans on what constitutes human rights.


I added a little more of the comments made on 8 if this isn't anti-Americanism I'm not sure what is.

[Dancing David]

So basicaly the problem is that AI doesn't get reports from countries that repress free speech.

I think that they do not target the US the way they target some other countries. The US is listed but has very few action alerts, compared to say Latin America or Pakistan.

Peace

[Dancing David]

In fact a perusal of thier home page (Amnesty's) shows that while the US is mentioned in two articles, there is no Action Appeal on the US. So we are watched and our intentions questioned but they don't fell that we are gross perpetrators.

For example there is an action appeal on Russia and domestic violence right now.