Question for Amnesty International...

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Why is it that when I go to www.amnesty.org, i see all sorts of information on the responsibilities of the coalition forces, excessive use of force by police against anti-war demonstrators, the failure of coalition forces to curtail looting, the US' use of "cluster bombs... in heavily populated areas," and all sorts of other items criticizing the "coaliton of the willing," yet this allegedly unbiased organization says nothing about the fake surrender-ambushes by iraqi soldiers? why is there no mention of repeated use of suicide/homicide bombers by the Iraqis? how come they show nothing on the shooting of American POW's and the subsequent showing of their dead bodies on arab television? I'm sure there's a good, non-politicaly motivated reason why they've failed to mention these horrific human rights violations. They must be backed up... I'm sure they'll get around to it eventually...

 

[Rono]

You mean omething like this ?

http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-irq/index&start=60.1

Or a press release like this ?


http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGMDE140372003

 

[deep]

Headache,

It could be because people who accept an "either you are with us or against us" mentality have blinders on and only see one side.

 

[STING2]

They should be breaking out the booz to celebrate at Amnesty HQ. One of the worst violators of Human Rights in history is out of power. But perhaps people at Amnesty where blinders.

 

[Klaus]

STING2:

there was a big article about human rights violations of the iraqi regime last month in the german ai-journal.
But they said that, because of neutrality, they would never support a war to enforce the end of human right violations.

Klaus

 

[Klaus]

Was it this ai article which pissed some pro Iraq war people here?

Human rights organisation Amnesty International has accused the US and British forces in Iraq of working harder to protect the country's oilfields than the Iraqi people.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

They should be breaking out the booz to celebrate at Amnesty HQ. One of the worst violators of Human Rights in history is out of power. But perhaps people at Amnesty where blinders.

Amnesty definitely doesn't wear "blinders" - they've condemned the human rights abuses in Iraq for many years now. In fact Tony Blair used a dossier prepared by Amnesty to try and present a credible case for war. Sadly it was an old dossier which his government had ignored for several years, as Amnesty had to point out.

 

[oktobergirl]

I am skeptical of the organziation only because I think that it should stay out of taking sides in whether to go to war or not.

To me, AI is about protecting Human Rights and the rights of political prisoner's of conscience. I do not look to AI to give me their opininons on the War on Iraq.

I should probably stay out of this discussion. I support AI in certain cirmustances but I've never been a LONGSTANDING supporter because I feel they are way too one sided politically.

 

[Screaming Flower]

To me, AI is about protecting Human Rights and the rights of political prisoner's of conscience. I do not look to AI to give me their opininons on the War on Iraq.

agreed.



i'm an amnesty member but i'd be lying if i said that i didn't notice a one-sidedness on their part now and again.

i support and take part in many of their human rights campaigns but, like you said, i am sometimes wary of their political views.

although there is no organization that i would support 100%. it's impossible for any group to be completely unbiased.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

To me, AI is about protecting Human Rights and the rights of political prisoner's of conscience. I do not look to AI to give me their opininons on the War on Iraq.

That's interesting, I'd never really thought of it that way before. In my opinion, what Amnesty did with regard to Iraq was out of concern with human rights, for instance they asked people to email Bush and Blair and ask that they not use weapons which don't distinguish between civilians and military, and they asked people to campaign for people in Iraq to have their access to clean water restored as soon as possible. I think war is always a violation of human rights (simply because it is impossible to have a war that doesn't kill innocent people) and if this war could have been avoided it should have been - I guess Amnesty believed war could have been avoided and therefore chose to express opinions against war.

I hope their opinions on the war won't stop anyone from getting involved in their other campaigns.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

You mean omething like this ?

http://web.amnesty.org/library/eng-irq/index&start=60.1

Or a press release like this ?


http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGMDE140372003

all the articles on the first link were dated Feb. 11th and earlier... a good month or so before the war actually started. where are the articles condeming iraq for what they've done SINCE the war has started? Fine... you presented me with one article that mentions both iraqi and american prisoners. Still... I see multiple articles regarding actions by the coalition... hell... I've even seen articles regarding excessive use of force by police officers against anti-war protesters... but I have still yet to see anything condeming Iraq's use of suicide/homicide bombers... I have still yet to see anything condeming the fake surrenders used by Iraqi troops... I have yet to see anything about Iraqi troops firing on citizens attempting to leave Nasiriya... I haven't heard anything condeming the discovery of UNICEF packages that were ment for Iraqi children being found in the personal home of Uday Hussein... I don't want 2 month old links on past events... I want to see them, if they are truely neutral, say something about these events... don't tell me that we're the ones with blinders on when the only thing you have to counter my argument is a 2-month old link and a press release aimed at both the iraqis and the americans.

 

[oktobergirl]

I'm probably in the minority in here, but I don't know if I'd actually take the stand that WAR is a violation of a human right. It certainly CAN be , and has in many instances, but I don't agree with it as a blanket statement.

I mean, you could look at it the OTHER way, and say that Hussein was violating the human rights of the citizens of that country until he was taken down.

I support Amnesty in terms of political prisoners or situations that arise. I don't support them as a cause whole heartedly because I dont' agree with many of their views. The same goes for Greenpeace for me. I think some of what they do is AMAZING but I do not always agree with their tactics.

 

[Rono]

all the articles on the first link were dated Feb. 11th and earlier... a good month or so before the war actually started. where are the articles condeming iraq for what they've done SINCE the war has started? Fine... you presented me with one article that mentions both iraqi and american prisoners. Still... I see multiple articles regarding actions by the coalition... hell... I've even seen articles regarding excessive use of force by police officers against anti-war protesters... but I have still yet to see anything condeming Iraq's use of suicide/homicide bombers... I have still yet to see anything condeming the fake surrenders used by Iraqi troops... I have yet to see anything about Iraqi troops firing on citizens attempting to leave Nasiriya... I haven't heard anything condeming the discovery of UNICEF packages that were ment for Iraqi children being found in the personal home of Uday Hussein... I don't want 2 month old links on past events... I want to see them, if they are truely neutral, say something about these events... don't tell me that we're the ones with blinders on when the only thing you have to counter my argument is a 2-month old link and a press release aimed at both the iraqis and the americans.

Past events ? Al what is happening now in Iraq is because of that past events. So they are valid as any other event. Even when it seems not usefull to the coalition.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

I'm probably in the minority in here, but I don't know if I'd actually take the stand that WAR is a violation of a human right. It certainly CAN be , and has in many instances, but I don't agree with it as a blanket statement.

I think you're actually most likely to be in the majority with that opinion...however I still disagree with you.

I would define human rights, very broadly, as those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (That's not to say I don't believe people have rights beyond those included in that declaration.) And included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the right to life. I think war inevitably kills innocent people (which isn't to say it's intentional, or people don't do their best to avoid it) and therefore violates their human rights.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Past events ? Al what is happening now in Iraq is because of that past events. So they are valid as any other event. Even when it seems not usefull to the coalition.

you still haven't answered my questions... why has AI been quiet when it concerns events that have occured since the war started by the outgoing Iraqi regime? Can anyone answer that one question? Or are you going to continue to just fence around it?

 

[Rono]

you still haven't answered my questions... why has AI been quiet when it concerns events that have occured since the war started by the outgoing Iraqi regime? Can anyone answer that one question? Or are you going to continue to just fence around it?

Yes,.i am giong to continue to fence around it. Especaly now even CNN reports about victims by cluster bombs. At least Amnesty was telling the truth.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

amnesty was telling the truth... it's their truth, and not the whole truth, but it still is the truth... it's very dangerous for a supposedly neutral organization meant to protect human rights turns a blind eye on certain events based on their own political beliefs

 

[diamond]

The truth of Mr Headache's posts shine thru just like a RockStar.

On a side note-

the Knicks are not RockStars

thank u
db3

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

the Knicks are not RockStars

and man do I wish i could get my hands on Jim Dolan for ruining my team....

 

[Klaus]

Headache in a Suitcase:

at the begin of the current Iraq war there was a special about human rights violations of Iraq in the german ai journal, so i don't know why you think they are onesided - maybe you just read the quotes about ai where conservatives get angry that ai criticizes the "liberation"?
Iraqs human right violations were often a reason for Urgent Actions of ai, so i don't see the point for your critics.
Should they only talk about human right violations when they also find a new human right violation from the oposite party??

Klaus

 

[TylerDurden]

you still haven't answered my questions... why has AI been quiet when it concerns events that have occured since the war started by the outgoing Iraqi regime? Can anyone answer that one question? Or are you going to continue to just fence around it?

Maybe because they were an outgoing regime? AI are about raising awareness and making noise for people who can't themselves. The suicide tactics from Iraq were front page news around the world, and the Coalition military, in my opinion, are not exactly the underdogs in this situation and are quite capable of making their own noise and dealing with that issue themselves, therefore no need for AI help.

AI are meant to look for the injustices that aren't being highlighted, aren't being fixed, and then try and throw a bit of the public awareness spotlight onto them. Like the very serious troubles and torture that Knick fans face year after year.