Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

[demon]

grammy:
"Well then by all means, let them put forth evidence that Guantanom is a gulag, I will be right here holding my breath."

Yes, like you were about the evidence for WMD.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

That was a pretty off topic and utterly predictable reply (that I tried to head off, unsuccessfuly) that has been hashed out, is being hashed out, in numerous other threads.

The opinion solicited is whether AI is becoming an organization with a political agenda, not one that is concerned for individual freedom from repression.

Well, excuse me for being predictable, and responding to what you posted in quotes. Next time, be sure to state specifically what you want the other posters to say, so I don't screw up and ad lib.

 

[Grammatron]

grammy:
"Well then by all means, let them put forth evidence that Guantanom is a gulag, I will be right here holding my breath."

Yes, like you were about the evidence for WMD.

Welcome to having nothing to do with this topic, you're the first, have a sit and relax more will come soon I am sure.

 

[Cleon]

Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

That was a pretty off topic and utterly predictable reply (that I tried to head off, unsuccessfuly) that has been hashed out, is being hashed out, in numerous other threads.

The opinion solicited is whether AI is becoming an organization with a political agenda, not one that is concerned for individual freedom from repression.

Or is the characterization of AI as "becoming an organization with a political agenda" based not on objective analysis but on the fact that the conclusions they're coming to aren't complimentary to the US?

It wouldn't be the first time. The ACLU has been subject to repeated attacks by conservatives for the crime of trying to keep religion out of government. Many of the attacks are the same; they accuse the ACLU of having a "political agenda"--atheism, secular humanism, even communism.

 

[Elind]

I generally think AI does a good job and I've been a member of them for a long time. But they do have to be careful in emotionally charged times. Using a word like "gulag" for Gitmo is a foolish thing to do IMO.

The point of AI (back when I first joined at least) was to have a single, uniform standard for human rights (roughly speaking) and apply it to everyone while simultaneously staying out of politics. Of course, that's easier said than done because when tell someone they're violating human rights they think you're interfering in their local politics.

Now and then we hear of AI coming down on the US for human rights violations and the reaction in the US often is "How can they come down on the US for thinks like the Qu'ran in toilets while ignoring the chopping off of heads by Al Qaeda?" But I assume and hope that AI produces reports condemning those things too but that those things just don't get as much press in the US.

Let's just say that making the types of comparisons they did, with "Gulags", is an insult to the millions who died in those. It's a hair's breadth off calling it a Nazi extermination factory, and shows a total loss of proportionality or understanding of history. They could easily have been critical, but with an entirely different slant.

This is only the latest of an increasingly strident anti US tone, which sounds like it is leading up to blaming the US for all the world's evils.

I think they are just another political group now.

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by Elind
The past years I have come to see it as a self serving entity that thinks it has a monopoly on morality and as an organization that depends on contributions, it has decided that it cannot have the respect of everyone and make good money, so it will go for the most emotional sector of the public at large, and in particular all those who hate the US. Ethics aside, it makes good business sense I suppose

I think the reasons you give for AI not being up to it's previous standards are pure speculation, but I agree they have overstepped themselves with this report. I believe when they do this, they lose credibility with all the more severe violations of human rights world wide.

Why should Iran be concerned if AI writes them up for allowing women to be stoned to death when the USA is written up for running a "gulag"?

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

Or is the characterization of AI as "becoming an organization with a political agenda" based not on objective analysis but on the fact that the conclusions they're coming to aren't complimentary to the US?

It wouldn't be the first time. The ACLU has been subject to repeated attacks by conservatives for the crime of trying to keep religion out of government. Many of the attacks are the same; they accuse the ACLU of having a "political agenda"--atheism, secular humanism, even communism.

So, you think a contrary opinion can be dismissed soley on the basis that it defends one side and since it's defensive it must be biased and therefore should be dismissed? I'm sure there is a term for that form of logic, I just can't think of it now.

 

[TragicMonkey]

This is only the latest of an increasingly strident anti US tone, which sounds like it is leading up to blaming the US for all the world's evils.

I think they are just another political group now.

What if they were only blaming the US for some of the world's evils? Specifically, what if the allegations about Guantanamo are true? Do you think that there are no abuses going on, or that there are some abuses but they aren't as bad as alleged? Or do you care whether the allegations are true or not, and maintain that regardless, it's rude and wrong to point them out?

My money's on bad stuff going on, but not too bad, and AI exaggerating, and some people overreacting to criticism. You can point out the exaggeration by countering with facts, but it sounds like you're going too far and rejecting all notion of criticism. When you start refusing to entertain any criticism because "everyone's against you"...that's when people start suspecting you really are that wacky.

 

[Cleon]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

So, you think a contrary opinion can be dismissed soley on the basis that it defends one side and since it's defensive it must be biased and therefore should be dismissed? I'm sure there is a term for that form of logic, I just can't think of it now.

Actually, I'm just raising it as a possibility given that such dismissals of organizations as "politically motivated" for doing their (sometimes unpopular) jobs can and does happen.

Do you deny the possibility?

 

[Elind]

Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

I think the reasons you give for AI not being up to it's previous standards are pure speculation, but I agree they have overstepped themselves with this report. I believe when they do this, they lose credibility with all the more severe violations of human rights world wide.

Why should Iran be concerned if AI writes them up for allowing women to be stoned to death when the USA is written up for running a "gulag"?

True, my speculation about sources of donation etc. are just that, with some logical basis I think.

I can make analogies with some other groups that have been around for a long time, but seem to me to have become self serving, political, entities over time. Greenpeace comes to mind. Seems more like a dangerous stunt group anymore. The NRA is another. Used to be for gun safety and hunting. Entirely self perpetuation in the political arena now. Wait for PETA to morph soon.

AI lost it some time ago, before Guantanamo, in my opinion.

 

[a_unique_person]

Hearsay, for one thing. Secondly, if they are willing to make sweeping and potentially defanitory remarks against the US on such a basis, I would expect to see similar press for China, Syria, and the other charmers out there.

Ignorance is not an argument. If you look at their home page, http://www.amnesty.org/ , the current honours go to China, DRC and Mexico.

 

[Cleon]

Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

Wait for PETA to morph soon.

PETA has always been a bunch of self-serving wack jobs. No morphing is necessary.

 

[crimresearch]

Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

That was a pretty off topic and utterly predictable reply (that I tried to head off, unsuccessfuly) that has been hashed out, is being hashed out, in numerous other threads.

The opinion solicited is whether AI is becoming an organization with a political agenda, not one that is concerned for individual freedom from repression.

Whether or not they are motivated by a political agenda is probably going to be hard to assess, absent overt statements on their part.

What does seem painfully obvious is that they are using a sliding scale, wherein lesser transgressions are given explosive labels if committed by some countries, while severe atrocities are downplayed if committed by other nations.

 

[a_unique_person]

Let's just say that making the types of comparisons they did, with "Gulags", is an insult to the millions who died in those. It's a hair's breadth off calling it a Nazi extermination factory, and shows a total loss of proportionality or understanding of history. They could easily have been critical, but with an entirely different slant.

This is only the latest of an increasingly strident anti US tone, which sounds like it is leading up to blaming the US for all the world's evils.

I think they are just another political group now.

Have a look at their home page, read some reports. It looks like they are pretty happy to have a go at anyone. To just write them off for this is not logical.

My call on the Gulag is that it was a prison system beyond the rule of law. Guantanamo Bay was set up precisely for that reason.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Ah, never mind. Now that I found the article on my own, since the OP didn't provide a link, I see that Cheney did deny the allegations.

Cheney said detainees at Guantanamo "have been well treated, treated humanely and decently."

"Occasionally there are allegations of mistreatment," Cheney said. "But if you trace those back, in nearly every case, it turns out to come from somebody who had been inside and released to their home country and now are peddling lies about how they were treated."

*removed broken link*

eta: crap. Yahoo News screws up their links so they can sell more ads. Find it yerselves.

 

[demon]

Elind:
"Let's just say that making the types of comparisons they did, with "Gulags", is an insult to the millions who died in those. It's a hair's breadth off calling it a Nazi extermination factory, and shows a total loss of proportionality or understanding of history."

Does your outrage of such comparisons extend to Bush and his cronies comparing Saddam to Hitler, the illiterate, one legged feral Jordanian al-Zarqawi to Hitler, the Iraqi Invasion compared to another Second World War etc etc etc?
Was that an insult to the millions who died too?

 

[Cleon]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

Whether or not they are motivated by a political agenda is probably going to be hard to assess, absent overt statements on their part.

What does seem painfully obvious is that they are using a sliding scale, wherein lesser transgressions are given explosive labels if committed by some countries, while severe atrocities are downplayed if committed by other nations.

Which, to be quite frank, makes a certain amount of sense. If--and I want to stress I said if--the self-proclaimed leader of the world in freedom and human rights is in fact a major violator of the same, wouldn't it make sense to hold them to a higher standard? Also there's the question of scale; if, say, the Stalinist Democratic People's Republic of Nowhereland is torturing people and holding them without trial, that's one thing. If an ostensible democracy is backing and even encouraging those human rights abuses in Nowhereland, as well as abuses in Somewherestan and Somplacia, not only do you have hypocrisy angle but you also are obligated to point out that the "democracy" is globally backing human rights abuses much more than any of those countries individually.

 

[Elind]

Cheney had no response to the substance of the allegations, hence his sidestep.

The issue was not if it was as big as the Gulag of the USSR, but if it was like the Gulag or not. According to AI, it fits the bill.

Do I presume it fits the bill for you too? A quick definition search gives this:

gu·lag also Gu·lag (gū'läg) pronunciation
n.

1. A network of forced labor camps in the former Soviet Union.
2. A forced labor camp or prison, especially for political dissidents.
3. A place or situation of great suffering and hardship, likened to the atmosphere in a prison system or a forced labor camp.


Such places exist in many countries but the reason Gulag exists in the dictionary is precisely because of the attrocious scale in which it operated. Presumably AI also thinks that those 500 people are making license plates and imprisoned for "political" positions they took also?

Do you know what happens when one makes a reference to the "H" word in this forum? The argument gets flushed immediately.

That is what AI did using the "G" word.

 

[a_unique_person]

Re: Re: Re: Amnesty Internations becomes seriously political

True, my speculation about sources of donation etc. are just that, with some logical basis I think.

I can make analogies with some other groups that have been around for a long time, but seem to me to have become self serving, political, entities over time. Greenpeace comes to mind. Seems more like a dangerous stunt group anymore. The NRA is another. Used to be for gun safety and hunting. Entirely self perpetuation in the political arena now. Wait for PETA to morph soon.

AI lost it some time ago, before Guantanamo, in my opinion.

Some evidence please? One report does not make this an organsiation that has lost it's credibility.

Here is one of the reports

This week, prosecution and defense counsel argued motions in the first military commission hearings conducted by the USA in 60 years, US v. Hicks. The commission does not operate under US law or the Uniform Code of Military Justice (US military law), but under a set of rules drafted by Department of Defense officials. Because the rules are not fully formed, defense counsel brought numerous motions challenging the structure and content of the commission in addition to challenging the charges brought against Australian national David Hicks.

The defense sought to bring in six expert witnesses who are legal scholars to explain various aspects of customary international law, military law and the law of war. The request was denied first by the presiding officer of the military commission panel and later by the entire panel. In rejecting the defense request, one member of the panel stated that if they (the panel) felt that they needed expert witnesses, they would call their own witnesses. When defense counsel commented that anyone would be hard pressed to find more experienced expert witnesses, the panel member replied that he saw that as a challenge.

I have said before, it these guys are guilty of crimes, convict them. But this is not a court of law in any respect.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511552004?open&of=ENG-USA

 

[TragicMonkey]

Do you know what happens when one makes a reference to the "H" word in this forum? The argument gets flushed immediately.

That is what AI did using the "G" word.

So, you automatically discount everything they might say from now on?