RSSAmnesty International; Who Said Gulag?
Amnesty International further embarrassed itself today by appearing to back track on much of their inflammatory remarked they had made this past week comparing US prisons in Guantanamo Bay as Gulags. Nor did the head of the Amnesty International USA defend most of his irresponsible statements from this past week.
Despite highly publicized charges of U.S. mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo, the head of the Amnesty International USA said on Sunday the group doesn’t “know for sure” that the military is running a “gulag.”
Executive Director William Schulz said Amnesty, often cited worldwide for documenting human rights abuses, also did not know whether Secretary Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved severe torture methods such as beatings and starvation.
Schulz recently dubbed Rumsfeld an “apparent high-level architect of torture” in asserting he approved interrogation methods that violated international law.
“It would be fascinating to find out. I have no idea,” Schulz told “Fox News Sunday.”
A dispute has raged since Amnesty last month compared the prison for foreign terrorism suspects at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the vast, brutal Soviet gulag system of forced labor camps in which millions of prisoners died.
A leading Democratic U.S. senator on Sunday repeated his call for a full investigation and said the detention center should be closed.
The fascinating aspect of this interview is that Amnesty International released a report about human rights violations committed by the US and that its prisons were “gulags” then AI USA Executive Director William Schulz went on to say:
Schulz recently dubbed Rumsfeld an “apparent high-level architect of torture” in asserting he approved interrogation methods that violated international law.
“It would be fascinating to find out. I have no idea,” Schulz told “Fox News Sunday.”
Schulz said, “We don’t know for sure what all is happening at Guantanamo and our whole point is that the United States ought to allow independent human rights organizations to investigate.”
He also said he had “absolutely no idea” whether the International Red Cross had been given access to all prisoners and said the group feared others were being held at secret facilities or locations.
If Amnesty International has no idea about the allegations they made and want to find out and have no idea for sure what is going on inside of Guantanamo; how do they make a report not based on any facts?
Then Schultz was asked about the “gulag” comment and further lost credibility.
Asked about the comparison, Schulz said, “Clearly this is not an exact or a literal analogy.” (You certainly meant it to be until the heat got too much.)
“… But there are some similarities. The United States is maintaining an archipelago of prisons around the world, many of them secret prisons into which people are being literally disappeared … And in some cases, at least, we know that they are being mistreated, abused, tortured and even killed.”
He then went on to say,
The American head of Amnesty International admits his group did not pick the best analogy when it compared detainee conditions at Guantanamo Bay to the Soviet-era “gulag” forced-labor system.
“There are only about 70,000 in U.S. detention facilities, and to the best of our knowledge, they are not in forced labor, they are not being denied food.
Gee Mr. Schultz wouldn’t that by definition not be a gulag? One of the most telling comments by Chris Wallace during the interview was when he asked Schultz whether making such irresponsible comments that are so over the top actually hurt Amnesty International and their cause. Chris, you would be correct.
The Captain’s Quarters does a great job of shredding the intellectual honesty of AI:
No wonder the American media loves Amnesty International — they use the same editorial thresholds for publication. Just like Newsweek, AI apparently feels that any rumor that matches the preconceived notion of its publisher merits reporting as fact to its readers.
Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday pretty much hammered Schulz most of the interview pointing out the irresponsible rhetoric used by AI and the hypocrisy. Chris Wallace even went so far as to ask whether it was a practice of AI to make irresponsible statements for media reaction? By the looks of these numbers and reaction of the left, I guess it is.
But Schulz isn’t protesting too much. In the past week, traffic on Amnesty’s Web site has gone up sixfold, donations have quintupled and new memberships have doubled.
What’s a little irresponsible rhetoric with world wide implications in the Muslim world when it gets AI some PR and donations? That’s responsible.
Then there was the conflict of interest. The Hedgehog Report nails it head on.
The head of Amnesty International USA, William Schulz, admitted on Fox News Sunday that he is a heavy Democratic supporter.
WALLACE: Mr. Schulz, if I can get a couple of final questions in. Last year, didn’t you contribute $2,000, the maximum, to John Kerry’s presidential campaign?
SCHULZ: I did indeed, yes.
WALLACE: Isn’t it a fact that you have already contributed $1,000 to Ted Kennedy’s next campaign?
SCHULZ: I have contributed, yes.
(Full Transcript from Fox News Sunday can be seen here)
Chicago Sun Times adds,
Amnesty International, which set off a storm by calling the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay “the gulag of our times,” backed away from the label Sunday.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had ripped as “reprehensible” the description, made last month when the human rights group’s secretary general, Irene Khan, issued its annual report.
Previous Posts: Amnesty International and John Kerry; No Agenda Here
The Minutemen (The Ultimate Volunteers) are Coming to the Volunteer State
After their successful campaign against illegal aliens on the Us border of Arizona, the Minute men are coming to Tennessee.
Those behind the effort say volunteers will patrol local businesses, looking for employers that are hiring people who’ve illegally crossed the border.
The US Boarder Patrol says they’ve never endorsed the activities of the Minutemen in Arizona, stressing that it’s the Border Patrol’s job to catch illegal immigrants.
Some in East Tennessee say these kinds of tactics amount to begging for trouble.
“I worry they’ll come up here and start some kind of chaos,” says Hispanic activist Luis Crespo.
WHAT PART ABOUT ILLEGAL DO YOU NOT GET MR. CRESPO?
It is sad that it takes the actions of caring Americans rather than politicians, both Republican & Democrat, to secure our borders. This has nothing to do with anti-Hispanic or anti-immigrant hostilities on the part of Americans. It is about ANTI-ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. It is sad that people opposed to the Minute men feel the necessity to harass them rather than have any form of constructive criticism. All this even after 9-11. Illegal immigrants and anyone for that matter crossing US borders freely. Have we learned nothing from the deaths of thousands of Americans?
Despite the objections, the Minutemen are moving forward. They hope to have as many as 600 volunteers in just two months.
These are the actions by Americans that represent what our country is all about. Civic responsibility to do the right thing for America rather than what both political parties seem to care about and that is to capture the Hispanic vote.
Hat Tip: PoliPundit
A Linda Foley Round Up from Not The Usual Suspects
Every one is linking to the Big Kids on the Block, but I looked at some the the smaller fish who have made some great points.
Linda, you stupid cow. Now, please don’t take that out of context.
As an aside, Editor & Publisher inadvertently indicts liberals in general and the liberal mainstream media by stating that “some conservative groups” and “several conservative news organizations” were upset with Foley’s slanderous and irresponsible remarks. That implies that liberal groups and liberal news organizations aren’t upset that this giggling, witless turd from the Newspaper Guild (Linda, don’t take that out of context either) has accused American servicepeople of murder. How many times have you heard liberals claim to support the troops?
From Eric Rangle, a soldier based in Baghdad (ed WOW)
Dear Newspaper Guild:
As an American serving here in Iraq, and having previously served in Afganistan, I am deeply offended by Ms. Linda Foley’s crystal clear allegation, made in a public forum to audience applause, that the U.S. military conducts targeted killings of foreign journalists in Iraq. Of course, she has no evidence. The U.S. military liberated these nations, and is providing security to facilitate the development of democratic governments that encourage constitutional freedoms, such as that of the press.
On the other hand, however, there is possible evidence that there are journalists, or people posing as journalists, who are actively supporting the insurgents and, therefore, their terrorist tactics. For example, there was recently a CBS journalist who was firing at U.S. troops. Interestingly, when he was first apprehended, many of the newspapers you represent breathlessly reported that the U.S. had wounded a CBS journalist. After a brief investigation that revealed the man’s actual role in attacking U.S. troops, many of the same papers changed their decription to say only that it was a man who carried the credentials of a CBS journalist.
Another example of journalists who actively support the insurgency occurred recently at the 14th Street Bridge in Baghdad. My sources are the troops who were themselves involved in this incident. The south end of the bridge was the site of a spectacular car-bomb attack several months ago and there is an abandoned building that stands alone near the site.
One morning, the Iraqi police guarding the bridge noticed an abandoned car near their checkpoint. Upon investigation, they found that it was filled with explosives. After safely moving the dozens of innocent civilians who would likely have otherwise been killed by a blast, the police neutralized the car bomb.
Within minutes, a television camera crew, emerged from the abandoned building. When the Iraqi police questioned them, they simply showed their Al-Jazeera “journalist” credentials, saying that they were filming the river and knew nothing of the car bomb. They then drove north toward the next bridge, where thirty minutes later a different car bomb detonated, killing Iraqi civilians. To the surprise of no one, the footage was aired on Al-Jazeera that night. Obviously, the crew had at least been informed of the terrorist plans, and even back-up plans, then actively supported terror against Iraqi civilians by filming and broadcasting it around the world.
Another example, which does not yet rise to the level of evidence, is the photographer who was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for his photo of insurgents executing Iraqi poll workers in the middle of a busy street, before the January 30th elections. From the perspective of the photo, it is clear that the photographer is close to the killers…and likely in the middle of the street with them.
It raises the question of whether the photographer was collaborating with the killers. That question is unlikely to be answered though, because Associated Press, the news organization who paid the photographer, refuses to give his or her name, and explained that they were doing so in order to protect the individual’s “safety.” I ask you, if he or she was comfortable enough to be that close to the men who were executing those poll workers in broad daylight, exactly who is it that might pose a danger to this person?
The men and women of the U.S. military are risking their lives to end tyranny and bring freedom to these countries. It is insulting for the leader and chief spokesperson for your organization, which represents journalists from all over the country, to make baseless allegations in order to smear the reputation of the members of our armed forces. She need not support, or even appreciate, the U.S. military, but she should not use her position to smear its reputation with charges that are equally horrible and baseless.
Ms. Foley seems better suited to write an opinion column, rather than to serve as the head of a leading organization that represents the members of a profession that, at its core, requires integrity and objectivity. I ask you to relieve Ms. Foley of her duties, and replace her with someone who understands the importance of having evidence to support sensational allegations, such as saying publicly that the U.S. military murders those from around the world who carry out one of our nation’s most sacred freedoms–the freedom of the press.
Thank you for your attention. Please e-mail a response to this address.
Sincerely,
Major Eric E.
Camp Victory
Baghdad
Ms. Foley obviously hasn’t a clue about targeting, projectile trajectories and effective miss distance. She is also apparently clueless about the jamming that Iraqis may have been doing to throw smart bombs off target.
She most definitely didn’t have a clue how much her comments would anger Americans. The blogosphere literally erupted in anger, not least the milbloggers and American military men, who piled on with both feet.
Well, a Foley is a guy in the movies who makes sounds match actions. Linda Foley, head of a newspaper union, on the other hand, makes noise that doesn’t match actions. Ms. Foly claims, just like Eason Jordon at CNN did before he was forced to resign, that the United States Military purposefully targets Arab journalists, murders them and bombs their studios. One has to wonder how in the world the Arab press continues to operate since the United States Military has little trouble smashing dictators and despots flat. If we were targeting Arab journalists, I have confidence there would be none left — they’re a noisy lot and don’t hide nearly as well as terrorists do. — Be sure to read the link above to Andi’s World, she is justifiably angry, as well we all should be, and she has links.
This is outrageous. There is much stronger evidence that American journalists constitute al Qaeda’s fifth column. Considering the direction in which the media is heading, however, it is concievable that they may make themselves legitimate targets before this war is over.
Please remember that the media is not the friend of the military. Some are sure, just as some some convicts actually did not commit the crime they are being punished for. So when you read your local paper, take it all with a grain of salt, and then head over to the blogosphere and get a dose of reality.
Updates Update: Looks like the story has hit the Mainstream Media. Barely, but it is now on the radar screen.
UPDATE TO: Another Airplane Diverted to Bangor, Maine
*** UPDATE***
Scroll down to the update link and read an amazing personal account of one individuals account, Blogger Nick Genes, of being on Alitalia flight 618 when it was diverted to Bangor, ME.
It would appear that for the second time in a week an International flight to the United States is being diverted to Bangor International Airport. This time it is an Alitalia jet en route from Milan, Italy to Boston, MA where it seems that a passenger on the flight matched that of a person on the U.S. government’s no-fly list.
Flight 618 landed shortly before 1 p.m after Canadian and U.S. fighter jets escorted the Boeing 767 to Bangor, where it was met by federal agents. It had been due to arrive in Boston about the same time.
It was the second time in less than a week that a Boston-bound European flight was diverted to Bangor. On Thursday, an Air France flight from Paris landed there because someone on board had nearly the same name and birth date as a person on the list of suspected terrorists.
Bangor International Airport has become a stopping-off point for problem flights because it is the last major U.S. airport for jets headed across the Atlantic and the first for incoming flights.
Let’s just hope that they diverted this plane for a good reason this time. Then again maybe we shouldn’t wish this. I guess the one explanation I would ask for is why can’t this be done when the plane is on the ground? It would seem a bit disconcerting being on a plane bound for Bangor, ME knowing there might be a terrorist on board. They may want to rethink the passenger list thing at Homeland Security.
UPDATE: A MUST READ
Get a first hand personal account of what it was like to be on the Alitalia flight 618 from the Blogborygmi. In his own words, Nick Genes :
When I explained that the luggage search, refueling, and flying home would take at least another hour, Mom asked what we were still doing on this plane. It’s a good question: if this man is wanted by the US, and dangerous enough to prompt a landing at the first available international airport on US soil, why not evacuate the plane during the luggage search? Wasn’t it possible we were sitting on a on a ticking bomb?
Mexico’s President apologizes for racist comments
Interesting that there was not an outcry about this. it could not be because he is opposing Bush over the border and it would not be in the best interests for the media? No, what was I thinking, that would be paranoid. The NAACP is definitely not working hand in hand with the Democratic Party, that would be illegal. They are a non partisan organization.
Mexico’s Fox Apologizes for Black Comment
MEXICO CITY — President Vicente Fox reversed course Monday night and apologized for saying that Mexicans in the United States do the work that blacks won’t.
Fox repeatedly refused to back away from his Friday comment, saying his remark had been misinterpreted. But later, in telephone conversations with the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton the president said he “regretted” the statement. “The president regretted any hurt feelings his statements may have caused,” the Foreign Relations Department said in a press statement. “He expressed the great respect he and his administration has for the African-American community in the United States.”
Jackson told Fox that he was sure the president had no racist intent, and suggested the two meet to discuss joint strategies between blacks and immigrant groups in the United States, Aguilar said.
Fox agreed to set up a visit to Mexico by Jackson, Sharpton and a group of American black leaders.
Despite Fox’s latest comment, many Mexicans _ stung by a new U.S. crackdown on illegal immigrants _ didn’t see the remark as offensive. Blackface comedy is still considered funny here and many people hand out nicknames based on skin color.
“The president was just telling the truth,” said Celedonio Gonzalez, a 35-year-old carpenter who worked illegally in Dallas for six months in 2001. “Mexicans go to the United States because they have to. Blacks want to earn better wages, and the Mexican _ because he is illegal _ takes what they pay him.”
Earlier Fox’s spokesman, Ruben Aguilar, said Fox’s comments were in defense of Mexican migrants as they come under attack by new U.S. immigration measures that include a wall along the Mexico-California border, and were not meant to offend anybody.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City had raised the issue with the Mexican government. “That’s a very insensitive and inappropriate way to phrase this and we would hope that (the Mexicans) would clarify the remarks,” Boucher said.
See our original post.
Vincente Fox is Going to Really Annoy the NAACP today
