Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Amnesty International, ACLU Support Terrorist Organizations
The Bulletin ^ | March 4, 2009 | Herb Denenberg

Posted on 03/04/2009 10:05:26 AM PST by jazusamo

Here’s a quiz to determine if you are aware of America’s most immoral and dangerous enemies. Many are not aware of our enemies and, in fact, many Americans and other people around the world are not only unaware of the true nature of these enemies, but also lend their financial support to them.

Question one: What do these four organizations have in common: The ACLU, Hamas, Amnesty International and al-Qaida?

Question two: Of those four organizations named above, which two are the most immoral, depraved, and despicable?

Answer to question one: All four work on behalf of terrorists and terrorism and are among America’s enemies. More explanation to follow.


Answer to question two: ACLU and Amnesty International. They are on the side of terrorism, genocide and the slaughter of innocents (including American innocents). But they are even more immoral, depraved, and despicable than Hamas and al-Qaida, the barbarous, uncivilized mass murderers. ACLU and Amnesty International stand with them but are lower on the scale of morality, as they claim to be on the side of noble and lofty principles, while their work is directed to achieving the same ends as Hamas and al-Qaida.

This is not to offer praise to those two terrorists groups, but merely to give them a few points for honesty. For example, you can read Hamas’s charter and you know what they stand for, and they stand for terrorism and genocide. Their charter specifically talks about their objective of slaughtering innocents. In my view, the ACLU and Amnesty International work for the same ends, but hold forth pious pronouncements in explaining their positions, principles and purposes.

The work of the ACLU is well known, and has been well described as the nation’s pro bono fifth column — working to sabotage our war against terrorism and to defend and forward the interests of the terrorists. The ACLU seems to be against almost every move America makes to defend itself against the types that gave us 9/11, and provides the legal department working for the enemies of America. The ACLU says it is defending civil rights, but I’m afraid it is the civil right of terrorists to blow us all up, unimpaired by measures the government wants to take in defense, but which the ACLU usually finds objectionable.

Now I come to Amnesty International. Its Web site says if you contribute to it you “help defend human rights and protect lives around the world.” After reading its most recent report on the recent conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, I’d say they protect lives around the world, but those are the lives of terrorists, murderers, and genocidal maniacs.

I called Amnesty International and my first question was, “You want an arms embargo to be enforced against Hamas and Israel. But Israel gets its arms from legal sources such as the U.S., which would be cut off by an arms embargo. In contrast, Hamas smuggles in illegal arms and also makes some of its on. So an embargo would have no impact on Hamas, but would disarm Israel. So doesn’t that mean that you really want to render Israel defenseless, and enable Hamas to accomplish its stated objective of killing all Israelis.”

The media spokesman for Amnesty International paused and then said, I better get you our weapons expert. I suspect that was so as the media spokesman had no good answer to that question, except the honest one: Yes, Amnesty International wants to see Hamas kill all the Israelis. The media spokesman said the weapons expert would call me back, as I said I was on a deadline. For some reason, the weapons expert did not call. I’m afraid the most important weapon, the truth, would not work for him in answering my questions.


This of course amounts to an attempt to deny Israel the right of self-defense. That right is accorded every nation and every individual throughout history, by all legal systems, and by the most obvious of common sense and moral reckoning. Only Israel, alone among nations, is often denied this right of self-defense. And as it happens, Israel is the only Jewish state. So when you deny Israel this basic right, accorded all others, your position is not only anti-Israel but also anti-Semitic as well.

A classic form of anti-Semitism consists of denying Jews the rights accorded all others.

My second question would have been, “How come your report doesn’t even mention that Hamas is a terrorist group, and is so recognized by the U.S., the European Union, and many others (including Hamas itself)? And why does your report fail to mention that Israel acted in self-defense?”

I didn’t get my answer, but in another published report an Amnesty International staff member who helped write the report said the terrorist status of Hamas is irrelevant. And I suppose that person would say it was immaterial if Israel is acting in self-defense.

This is equivalent to the following scenario in a court of law: A convicted mass murderer assaults a passerby on the street. The passerby happens to be a clergyman, who fights off the convicted mass murderer and injures him in the process.

According to Amnesty International, when the convicted mass murderer sues for assault and battery, Amnesty International would have you believe it was immaterial the convicted mass murder was the aggressor, the clergyman acted in self-defense and the plaintiff happens to be a convicted mass murderer. Greater bias hath no organization.

This shows you the moral de pravity of Amnesty International, which has fallen into the moral equivalence morass, putting attempted genocide and murder, on one hand, and self-defense, on the other, on the same moral plane. But I don’t want to single out Amnesty International for advocating moral equivalence. It is practically the party line of the mass media including the journalistically and financially bankrupt Philadelphia Inquirer.

Then I would have asked the Amnesty International spokesman why they ignored the fact that Hamas deliberately hides behind civilians and stations its terrorists among them. According to a published report, Amnesty International responded to such questions, as follows: “We have had no [such] reports?”

There have been 20 boatloads of such reports, and there have even been reports that Hamas brags about hiding behind civilians. When Amnesty International claims there have been no reports of Hamas hiding behind civilians, it becomes obvious that the organization is not interested in the truth. Furthermore, if it is truly unaware of such reports, it also proves that Amnesty International has been ostrich-like ignoring the truth in order to carry out it’s anti-Israel and anti-Semitic agenda.

Something else is revealed by the response, “We have had no [such] reports.” When it comes to something that would put Israel in a good light, Amnesty International does not gather evidence. It waits for someone to drop a “report” on the matter into the organization’s mailbox.

It should be noted Amnesty International had plenty of time for listening to Hamas’s side and gathering information from those subject to intimidation and execution by Hamas if they didn’t tell the “right” story. The world learned long ago the Palestinians and Hamas terrorists often exaggerate and lie to make a point, and think nothing of intimidating and killing people and journalists whose behavior does not satisfy their demands. Only Amnesty International is unaware of this, or perhaps they claim to be aware of this in order to put forth their anti-Israel objectives.

Amnesty International wants to gobble up and accept any wild and unsubstantiated claim of Hamas, but wants to ignore any facts or assertions that might put Israel in a good light. For example, another key issue is that Amnesty International ignored the fact that Israel does not target civilians. My guess, from published reports, is that Amnesty International considers that irrelevant, as it would consider Hamas’s targeting of civilians irrelevant.

By like token, Amnesty International also considers it irrelevant that Hamas is supported by a network of international terrorists. In other words, on Amnesty International’s moral compass murder equals self-defense, targeting civilians for death equals trying to avoid civilian casualties, and hiding among civilians also equals trying to avoid civilian casualties.

The bottom line is that Amnesty International wants to ignore the history, the background and the context of the conflict. It just sees bullets and bombs flying back and forth, and counts and calibrates what is going on without putting any moral characterizations on the matter. Its report boils down to Amnesty International finding both the would-be genocidal murderer and the victim that they are both wrong. To think they collect millions of dollars to write reports preaching such pure lunacy is on the north side of mind-boggling.

Amnesty International also faults Israel for a “disproportionate response.” Israel is being showered with rockets threatening schools, homes and everything else. Yet it is supposed to respond in accordance with Amnesty International’s view of what is not too strong.

For example, it criticizes Israel for using missiles “designed to cause maximum injury.” Apparently, Amnesty International would want Israel to use stun guns and powder puffs to protect terrorists from fatal and serious injuries. Amnesty International has unlimited compassion for the terrorists but little time for the babies and mothers they try to slaughter.

What can you do about this? For starters make sure you don’t contribute to Amnesty International or the ACLU. Write letters to the editors to respond to the pro-terrorist propaganda that often appears in news accounts after one of its reports is published. Renew your efforts to boycott mainstream media outlets that reflect the same kind of bias displayed by Amnesty International. Start with The Philadelphia Inquirer, and then cancel The New York Times. In addition you can, in effect, join The New York Times boycott by going to the site sponsored by the media watchdog, Accuracy in Media (AIM), at: boycottnyt.com.

Remember when you lend credibility and moral support to terrorists and terrorism, you are no better than the terrorists. Don’t stand for it, even if it comes dressed in fancy verbiage, or disguised behind high-sounding names such as Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union.

You should also be aware this report from Amnesty International is just one small piece of a larger attempt to delegitimize and destroy Israel. For example,  United Press International (March 2, 2009) just reported an international conference will be convened this week in Tehran. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman announced they will “study the documents related to Israel’s atrocities.” I’m glad they haven’t made up their minds yet. Needless to say, Israel wasn’t invited. The conference will be headed by Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijan. In the meantime, as further proof of Iran’s open mind on this issue, Iran is setting up a war crimes court to try Israel’s leaders.

Hamas and other terrorists groups and their supporters such as Amnesty International will be present, according to the UPI report. What is more surprising is some of the other groups that will be represented: Red Cross, UNICEF, Human Rights Watch, and the Human Rights Council in Geneva. So it looks like Amnesty International isn’t the only group that has lost its moral compass.

And it looks like the war against Israel, with all its bigotry, its anti-Semitism and evil intent, is going mainstream. Perhaps the Red Cross will get a slot on the war crimes court to try Israeli leaders. Perhaps they can feature that kind of achievement in their next fund raising effort.

Herb Denenberg is a former Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commissioner, and professor at the Wharton School. He is a longtime Philadelphia journalist and  consumer advocate. He is also a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of the Sciences. His column appears daily in The Bulletin. You can reach him at advocate@thebulletin.us.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Israel; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aclu; amnestyinternational; denenberg; hamas; israel; terrorism; wot

1 posted on 03/04/2009 10:05:26 AM PST by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you'd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

2 posted on 03/04/2009 10:36:35 AM PST by SJackson (a tax cut is non-targeted…no guarantee…they’re free to invest anywhere that they want, J Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Amnesty International and the ACLU.

It's ironic that as defenders of the philosophy of the Axis of Evil, these two organizations would be the very first to be shut down should their clients gain a wider degree of influence and power.

I'm sure this irony is lost on them, though.

3 posted on 03/04/2009 10:39:13 AM PST by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

In days past, Amnesty International supported Viet Cong, Sandinistas, FMLN and other reprehensibles. They’re dispicable.


4 posted on 03/04/2009 10:39:47 AM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flycatcher

You’re right, they’d be the first to go. The stupidity of leftists is hard to figure, they’ve absolutely no common sense.


5 posted on 03/04/2009 10:47:08 AM PST by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

Amen to that!

Vanessa Redgrave was a big supporter of AI as I believe Hanoi Jane was also, that speaks volumns.


6 posted on 03/04/2009 10:49:00 AM PST by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Great article on these two true “Hate Groups” the ACLU and AI

Both support terrorists over their victims....illegal aliens over American citizens, etc....

Their vile anti-Semitism needs to be more exposed....and this article did an excellent job of pointing this all out


7 posted on 03/04/2009 12:31:09 PM PST by UCFRoadWarrior (The Biggest Threat To American Soverignty Is Rampant Economic Anti-Americanism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

8 posted on 03/04/2009 3:01:38 PM PST by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson