Atm the U.S. administration is, in a concerted effort, referring to the recent Amnesty International report (http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/index-eng) as 'absurd (http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=6173)'.

I find that questionable, to say the least.

Ironically, at the time of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, top Bush administration officials were regularly citing Amnesty International's human rights reports as evidence of the perfidy of Saddam Hussein's regime. For example, in reference to the Iraqi government, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asserted that "We know that it's a repressive regime" as a result of reports by Amnesty International and other human rights organizations "about how the regime of Saddam Hussein treats his people." Rumsfeld added that a "careful reading" of Amnesty International's reports documents "the viciousness of that regime."

As it seems, it is one thing to criticize human rights abuses by foreign governments the Bush administration seeks to overthrow, and it is quite another thing to criticize human rights abuses by the United States itself - that is then commented as stupid, naive little AI getting 'duped by U.S. enemies'. Sure thing.

The influence that Amnesty International has been able to wield over the years in advancing the cause of human rights has never come from the backing of governments or political parties, but from the support of concerned individuals from around the world.

That is, AI will be there when the Bush administration is long gone, as it was when they came into office.

:flaming: But the Bush administration's smug hypochrisy, or rather brazen dishonesty, is pissing me off anyway. :flaming:

You're arguement would be stronger if you used a reference a little more neutral than antiwar.com.

AI is an excellent organization, but can go a little overboard at times. Their effectiveness comes from their going out on a limb and painting everything in the worst possible light. 'Careful reading' is always recommended when looking over AI reports....

Edit: corrected a assault from the department of redundancy department

Earlier this week "The Daily Show"--not an unbiased source, of course--ran video clips of Bush, Rumsfeld, etc., denouncing AI and followed it with clips of the same people praising AI two years ago, just as Ragusa says, unless you want to argue that the tapes were doctored. I believe that Guantanamo will be a scandal that far eclipses Al Ghairab when it finally spills down the chute, as it eventually will. People with nothing to hide don't work so hard at hiding it.

I still like the episode of Fox's (natch) right-wing fantasy terrorism show '24' where a lawyer from 'Amnesty Global,' under the pay of the terrorists (natch), prevents the good guys from 'interrogating' a terrorist suspect under heavily time-sensitive conditions (of course, the good guy then goes out as a 'civilian' and breaks all the bad guy's fingers until he spills the info, thus saving the day and proving once again how useful torture is in the war on terror).

So the government needs these "Rogue Individuals" to actually protect the people, while being able to claim to support groups like AI?

T2Bruno,
antiwar.com only displayed that article from Inter Press Services, an news agency, after all they provide both news compilation and commentary.

The article also ran under "Jailhouse Rock" (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GF02Aa02.html). I was aware of that but to lazy to search that other link.

AI is an organization that aims to uncover the deepest s..t in every situation, regardless of what it thinks about the country in general, imo - a laudable attitude, although it tends to bring them quite a few enemies. Still, I consider them fairly neutral, and the ranting against them quite hypocritical.