Protest Amnesty International's Love-In for Imperialist terrorism in Syria

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Aug 29, 2012 19:18

..includes usurpation at all levels...again, disrupt, contain, extract.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32518

Runaway train. Complete with loco motivation.

by lefty Tue Aug 28, 2012 21:44

"manufacturing dissent" on the left is not just limited to amnasty.

This interesting blog post highlights funding of the left in the US to control radicalism through self policing along the lines of the funders wishes and to maintain the ultimate veto of funding drying up in the event of serious deviation.

Left sentiment is not squashed, merely attenuated and channelled and "made safe".

Amongst those highlighted are "democracy now" and "the nation". Their funding level might surprise you!

http://memorygap.org/2012/08/03/the-financial-bearings-...sent/

by wageslave - (personal capacity) Sun Aug 26, 2012 20:21

certainly wasn't my idea! ;-)

But T's comment still stands regarding the corporate nature of facebook and the copyright and ownership of photos / videos placed on facebook and the ease with which they can just close any "annoying" account if requested.

For example, I think Shell to sea had some problems with their facebook account being closed down!

And they do log and follow IP addresses of people who visit / log on to facebook pages and they can build a trail / profile of your subsequent internet use using those "F" "like" buttons that appear on an increasing number of webpages. You only need to visit a page to have it registered and you do not even need to click the buttons.

Some tips:

The firefox browser extension "2 click like" goes some way towards remedying this facebook "like" button tracking method. I suggest you install it. **Not using firefox?? Thats brave of you!! ;-)
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2-click-like/

while you are at it, I highly recommend using "ghostery", "better privacy" , "cookie culler" ,"adblock plus" and "torbutton" as firefox add ons if you are concerned about the privacy issues etc. while browsing.

Also you can use http://startpage.com as your search page instead of going to google's search page directly.

And most importantly, you can just switch your router off and on regularly to change your IP address. Ideally isolate facebook / google account / email use with power cycles of your router to obtain a new dynamic IP address after such personally identifying activity. All of these simple measures serve to limit somewhat corporate ability to co-relate your internet activity and build reliable information profiles about you.

Also one should realise that every photo taken contains lots of extra data called "exif" data which, amongst other things, includes the make and unique serial number of your camera. This data is no doubt collated and sifted through too. Photos you take now that you want people to see can easily be linked to photos you take later that you may not want others to know you took.

this program may help squeegee personally identifying "exif" information before putting photos online:
http://www.friedemann-schmidt.com/software/exifer/


Back to indymedia's facebook page:
Whatever about public organisations/websites just wanting to build some awareness I certainly believe individuals should NOT put their personal information up on facebook as it is an insidious spying tool and helps destroy what remains of the notion of personal privacy on the internet.
In fact, In mark Zuckerbergs own immortal words people who trust him with their personal information are "dumb fucks". That's from the horse's mouth!

However whether or not there is a dysfunctional rss news feed of article titles from indymedia on facebook probably does not give the US government any extra information they could not get by just visiting the site.

And whether or not facebook close the indymedia account doesn't matter much to us either.

And we aren't putting personal info or photos or anything else like that up there.

It may possibly serve to bring a (very)few extra readers here by accident so in that sense it serves a purpose. But that's really all it does.

Hopefully those readers will then read about facebook here and immediately close their own facebook account in horror! ;-). In that sense I see no contradiction with opposing facebook and having a facebook account!! ;-)

If facebook's IPO plummetted facebook closed down tomorrow we'd lose no sleep over it that's for sure. And If it were just up to me, I'd happily close down our vestigial facebook page tomorrow!

People should consider exploring other less intrusive options for their social networking such as Diaspora.:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora

meanwhile here's another popular youtube video about facebook:

Caption: Video Id: DIGdWsxHJlM Type: Youtube Video
Embedded video Youtube Video

by JoeMc Sun Aug 26, 2012 18:08

Why does indymedia ireland have a facebook page ?

by lefty Sun Aug 26, 2012 17:11

re: facebook, You might enjoy this!

**It's funny because it's not all that far from the truth!!

Caption: Video Id: HY8lwlTeDio Type: Youtube Video
Sadly these days Onion news is often more thought provoking than real journalism

by W. Finnerty Sun Aug 26, 2012 16:28

For several years now, dating back to 2002, I have been informing Amnesty International of extremely serious government crime, which includes treasonous forms of of unconstitutional legislation, and they have NEVER done anything but COMPLETELY IGNORE all the hard evidence I have provided them with.

A selection of some of the evidence of government crime I have provided Amnesty International with can be viewed via the following link: http://tinyurl.com/c6w8lxq

My most recent e-mail to Amnesty International was sent this morning, and it included the piece of text in the section just below:

=========================

"America's Long-standing Campaign to Destabilize Russia" ...

"As has been clearly demonstrated in Syria, Iran, Pakistan and countless other places around the world, terrorism remains the favourite weapon in the arsenal of the ruling class in the West."

The excerpt just above is from the following Global Research location:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32442

=========================

The full text of my e-mail of this morning to Amnesty International can be viewed at the address provided below, and it was sent to try and expose their ongoing support of government crime (by ignoring it): and not because I believe there is any hope whatsoever that they will help me in any way to end the years of human rights abuses (which are ongoing) that I have become a target for.

http://www.humanrightsireland.com/BullyOnLine/26August2...ussia

by T Sun Aug 26, 2012 16:10

Anti-imperialist

I don't understand why the pictures against the imperialists are on a website (Facebook) which is one of the bastions of imperialism. Not only that Facebook impose all sorts of restrictions on access and mostly certainly track every IP address of any computer used to view them. And it is not even clear what the copyright/copyleft status is on the pictures once loaded on Facebook.

Whats more, Facebook software is always running in the background software that matches faces to its known tagged photographs with names. This is how it generates names over regular users photographs.

Perhaps somebody would post a few of the pictures here.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Sun Aug 26, 2012 01:35

Thanks for that a chara. I have spoken to several of AI's street collectors in Dublin. Most of them are foreign nationals, who just need a job in Ireland, and are willing to take anything. None of the collectors I spoke to knew anything about Syria or Libya, or anything else AI gets involved in. They have just learned a sales presentation off by heart, and get a percentage of anything they collect. They are exploited workers, who don't even know if they will have any wages at the end of the day. It takes alot of effort on the part of these poor young people to collect the 120,000 euro, plus expenses, paid annually to AI's chief executive in Ireland.

by JoeMc Sat Aug 25, 2012 15:44

The automatic deference the left used to pay to groups like Amnesty should be a thing of the past ; it's good to see people on the ground getting political on such an important issue. I wonder to what extent the groups of AI collectors that you see out on O'Connel St with their clipboards every day are aware of Amnesty's support of "humanitarian" intervention . Perhaps it would be an idea to speak to some of them ?

(On a separate issue , AI in Ireland should practice what it preaches . I can remember a time when getting somebody to work without paying them wages would have been called slavery by Amnesty Now it’s called Jobbridge or Internship ,and AI is currently advertising unpaid Youth and Student Internships at Sean McBride House as part of the Jobbridge scheme . Then again maybe the two issues aren't so separate . Perhaps ,for Amnesty , slave labour schemes in Ireland and support for NATO war crimes abroad come as part of the same "humanitarian " ethical package .)

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Sat Aug 25, 2012 02:22

Lots of good info here:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amnesty_Inte...ional

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Sat Aug 25, 2012 02:06

You can see some pics from the protest here:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=353763971370669&...eater

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Fri Aug 24, 2012 00:21

We had a great turnout tonight, and got a great response from the public. Given the blanket pro-imperialist propaganda in the bourgeois media, we were amazed at the numbers of people coming up to us to express their support for Syria and their opposition to US imperialism. I'd like to particularly thank Dublin IRSP for standing with us and giving the protest a great boost. We will post pictures as soon as possible.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Thu Aug 23, 2012 15:29

Filed under 'plausible deniability'.

My search attributes its origins as a focused strategy to one Paul Joseph Goebbels..."Lie ! Lie ! Lie ! and they will believe you".

And me giving LBJ or Nixon the credit...

by T Thu Aug 23, 2012 13:29

As it says in the above linked piece the key part to understand is:


In this broader context of imperial warfare coordinated out of USSTRATCOM in liaison with US Central Command (USCENTCOM), Netanyahu's attack plan against Iran, conveys the illusion that Tel Aviv rather than Washington calls the shots on waging a war on Iran.

The Israeli media reports mentioned above convey the impression that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are in a position to act independently of Washington as well as force Obama into supporting Israel's attack on Iran.

The notion that Israel could act alone and against the interests of the US is part of a subtle disinformation campaign. There is a longstanding foreign policy practice for Washington to encourage its close allies to take the first step in the unleashing a war, with the Pentagon pulling the military strings in the background.

Let us be under no illusion, the war plans directed against Iran, which have been on the Pentagon's drawing board since 2003, are established at the highest levels in Washington in consultation and coordination with Tel Aviv and NATO headquarters in Brussels.


And this is a bit like what happened when Georgia attacked South Osseita 4 years ago, where the USA and Israel armed Georgia and then strongly encouraged the local dictator to attack, all the while pretending they had no role in it.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Thu Aug 23, 2012 12:06

..they are smoke-screening

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=32428

tick-tock..

by Human Rights Defender Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:28

Perhaps Mick ought to check his facts

Here is a link to an article about recent developments in Amnesty USA. The comments made by their new Executive Director makes interesting reading

http://www.irishantiwar.org/node/1787

by Human Rights Defender Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:22

What part of the following letter is delusional? On the contrary, I think most Amnesty members would agree with the concerns that have been raised. Amnesty's position in Syria is clear, it fully criticises the Syrian regime, but engages in selective criticism of the rebels. For example there is absolutely NO criticism of arms supplies to the rebels. That is a political position to take, not a human rights position.

Dear Sir

We write with grave concern in relation to the conduct of Amnesty International regarding recent conflicts and in particular, the current conflict in Syria.

It appears to us that Amnesty International has abandonned all pretence of championing universal human rights and has in its place adopted a partisan political stance aimed at encouraging war and aggression in Syria and other countries against whom the USA and its NATO allies have strategic interests.

The result of this aggression has been a corresponding increase in the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity and other breaches of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law by non-state actors in Syria.

As an organisation which claims to support universal human rights, we fully understand the criticism that your organisation has laid against the Syrian State. We would expect nothing else from Amnesty International but calls for the investigation and punishment of alleged human rights violations by any State.

Silence on Arming, Funding and Training of Human Rights Abusers

We are deeply disappointed however that this same level of criticism is not also directed at those who are engaged in amred conflict against the Syrian State. For International Human Rights to be respected, they must be applied universally. A partisan and selective appraoch only serves to undermine the concept and value of universal human rights and we would have thought that this would be something that Amnesty International would have deeply appreciated.

We welcome statements such as that of 3rd August 2012, calling for non-state actors in Syria, and in particular the Free Syrian Army, to be held accountable for inter alia unlawful killings, kidnaps and torture which they are alleged to have committed.

However, where we see a glaring disparity in your statements is in relation to the arming of the various parties in this conflict. Your statements such as those of 10th July 2012 make clear your organisations's policy to attempt to prevent the further arming of the Syrian State.

Your organisation however has been silent on the arming, training and funding of armed insurgent groups in Syria, groups which your own organisation has levied allegations of the most serious human rights abuses. It is no secret that these groups are provided with logistical support from the NATO States, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, yet your criticism of arms supplies relate only to those weapons provided to the Syrian State, primarily by Russia.

Are the same principles of responsibility under International Law not applicable to States who arm non-state actors who commit human rights abuses?

The continued arming and funding of these groups only serves to facilitate their further human rights violations, and prolong the conflict in Syria.

Your failure to pay any scrutiny to the funding and arming of such groups calls into question whether Amnesty International is seriously interested in preventing human rights violations from occuring or in bringing the conflict in Syria to an end. A comprehensive arms embargo and assets freeze in relation to all parties to the armed conflict would surely be what members of Amnesty International could expect from its organisation. However arms and money continue to flow to Syrian rebels without comment from your organisation.

The silence on this issue is even more puzzling given that your organisation is currently in the middle of a campaign to have the global arms trade regulated. This further calls into question Amnesty's commitment to genuine arms control when it comes to those bodies which the US and NATO find convenient to arm.

Irish dimension

The issue of the training arming and support of these groups also has an Irish dimension. One former Irish resident, Mehdi Al Harati, and one Irish citizen, Hussam Najjar,, have been publically named in the media as providing miliary and other support to the insurgent groups. There are reports that other such international mercenaries are travelling to Syria intent on joining the conflict.

The Irish government has a legal responsilbilty to do all that it can do to prevent human rights abuses from occuring, particularly when it comes to its own citizens and residents. It also has an obligation to investigate and punish those responsible for such abuses. We have seen nothing from Amnesty International calling on the investigation of Irish nationals or residents who have admitted being invovled in the armed insurgency, or indeed the investigation of other foreign mercenaries by their country of nationality or residence.

Silence on Ethnic Cleansing

Amnesty International has also been silent on the clear religious sectarian agenda of the Syrian armed groups. Calls from the Free Syrian Army for the ethnic cleansing of Christians and Alawite Shia Muslims amount to calls for genocide. There is copious evidence of ethnic cleansing occuring on the ground, with an estimated 1 million Syrians having already been forced to flee from the rebels due to their ethnic, relgious or secular beliefs.

While there is clearly an issue in relation to the large numbers of internally displaced people and refugees from the conflict, there has been no comment by Amnesty of the ethnic cleansing element of this mass population movement.

Calls for International Military Intervention

Furthermore, Amnesty International has criticised the International community and in particular Russia and China, for not acting more decisively in Syria. The vetoed UN resolution which drew so much criticism from your organisation was a mandate for miilitary intervention and regime change in Syria.

Are we to understand that Amnesty International believe that military intervention is a solution to human rights violations in Syria? Does Amnesty International now support regime change? These would surely be a fundamental shift from the founding principles of the organisation.

Has Amnesty International forgotten its experience in Libya already?

We recall that in Libya Amnesty International made similar calls for UN action. We also recall that on the day after the UN agreed to such a mandate that Amensty International issued a statement asking that any international forces engaged in military intervention respect the rights of civilians.

Despite these calls, the number of civilians killed by NATO airstrikes remains uninvestigated, the number of other civilians who lost their lives in the conflict which was escalated and prolonged due to the NATO intervention is unknown, but is most certainly amongst the tens of thousands, amongst them thousands of black Africans who were subjected to racist attacks by non-state actors, spurred on by later withdrawn claims by Amnesty that the state had been using sub-Saharan mercenaries to commit abuses.

The position regarding human rights in Libya, (the reason why Amnesty supported international intervention), is today recognised as being dire, with arbitrary detention, torture and extra-judicial executions commonplace.

Has intervention helped the cause of humn rights in Libya? The similarities with Syria are stark. Non-state actors with stated genocidal intent are fighting an insurgency against the State, armed and supported by NATO and other nations. Yet Amnesty concentrate their criticism on the State and continue to call for international military intervention.

Conclusion

The above paints a picture of an organisation which is eager to facilitate US and NATO military intervention, and which will then appease itself in criticisng the human rights abuses which follow such intervention, much in the same way that your organisation appears eager to criticise abuses by the Free Syrian Army but takes no action to prevent them from receiving the money and arms which make their abuses possible.

This apporach does not help prevent human rights abuses, but actually facilitates them.

We feel duty bound to point out these anomolies to you, and to your members who we are sure would not support such an approach, and ask that you remedy these deficiencies or accept your share of the responsibility of continued human rights violations in Syria and beyond.

In that light we call on Amnesty International do the following:

 To call on governments across the world, including the Irish government, to support Syrian sovereignty and to unambiguously condemn rebel attrocties an NATO military interference in Syrian affairs.
 To call for the closure of the Turkish border to armed groups intent on etnering Syria to engage in armed conflict
 To call for an immediate and effective arms embargo and assets freeze on groups and individuals involved in promoting and engaging in armed conflict in Syria.
 To call for an end to the training and other logistical support provided to such groups, particularly from the US, UK, French, Turkish, Saudi and Qatari governments.
 To call on the Irish governnment to investigate and punish any Irish citizens or residents who have gone to Syria to commit crimes against Irish law, such as murder, or any crimes against International Human Rights Law or International Humanitarian Law.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Wed Aug 22, 2012 21:13

It's interesting that Mick gives three links to explain Amnesty International's view on Libya. All of them discussing the murderous chaos that is now Libya - none of them referring to AI's disgraceful role in helping NATO to put these racist lynch mobs into power in the first place.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Wed Aug 22, 2012 20:24

I find it amusing the way certain words are used in different eras to shut down opposition to the hegemonic régime. In the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church used the word "heretic" to shut up anyone who dared to think. Now the hegemonic régime and its cowardly footmen use the word "conspiracy." Anyone who dares to question power is dismissed as a "conspiracy nut."

The only trouble is that such words only intimidate and silence weak minded people. Those who are exposing Amnesty International as a weapon of imperialist destruction are not weak minded and will not be silenced, no matter how much you shout your pathetic slanders. Bark all you like, it just shows we are doing something right.

As for the content of your post, I never said AI did nothing about the invasion of Iraq. I pointed out that AI constantly jumps on popular bandwagons, to maintain its generally "leftie" image. However, the vast bulk of AI's activities are directed against targets the Anglo-Zionist imperialist project has identified for attack and destruction, such as the Libyan and Syrian secular, Socialist, states, and, beyond them to Iran, Russia and China.

I think it says it all about Amnesty Ireland that it picked its boss from a Rabid Right party, which appealed to the lowest level of the Irish mentality, the level of greed and lack of empathy with the poor, and who constantly identified with the imperialist blood lust of the USA and the UK. In the end, this despicable party was even too obscene for the worst sort of Irish people, and had to fold up and fvck off in ignominy.

by MickHead Wed Aug 22, 2012 20:22

"The Wall Street Journal denounced Amnesty reports on Guantánamo as "pro al-Qaeda propaganda.""

That's interesting considering the US are directly supporting Al Qaeda in Syria, and their own Al Qaeda asset lead the attack on tripoli.

(All of which is/was usually reported by Amnesty from the point of view that these are/were freedom fighters liberating themselves from an evil dictator. Yeah right!)

I guess it's all right to arm Al Qaeda to the teeth and point them at countries you don't like and let them slaughter and torture innocent people. But saying something about the illegal show prison in Guantanamo where US does it's mild torture, well, that's just not on is it? No, thats just supporting "terrorists". the same "terrorists" that suddenly become "freedom fighters" when we see them shooting tied up Syrians up against a wall or throwing them from the top of buildings on youtube, or previously in Libya, executing Gadaffi's supporters wholesale without due process

The cognitive dissonance required to hold your POV must give you headaches Mick. At least the journalists in the wall street journal know they are lying and are only lying for a paycheck to feed their families!!

by Mick Wed Aug 22, 2012 20:11

Sorry,

This is the link on the AI stance of NATO in Libyia

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2012/0215/A...ntrol

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE19/002/2012/....html

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20004

by Mick Wed Aug 22, 2012 19:56

Irish Anti-Imperialist...you are without the shadow of a doubt the most delusional, insane and paranoid of people I have had the great misfortune to come across.
Like the Right Wing conspiracy theorist you attack any group or body that doesn't share your complete world view, sees patterns where there are no patterns and view everyone against you.

Let us take your idea for that AI American never did anything about the Second Iraq war. Now during the first AI and quite a few bodies where provided info to support the war. Allegations of Human Rights abuses where fed to many groups in the most novel of ways.

Anyway. The Second Iraq War. AI has drawn the most flak from the press in America because of its opposition to the war. The Wall Street Journal denounced Amnesty reports on Guantánamo as "pro al-Qaeda propaganda." As the Washington Post ranted in an editorial , "Turning a report on prisoner detention into another excuse for Bush-bashing or America-bashing undermines Amnesty's legitimate criticism of U.S. policies and weakens the force of its investigations on closed societies."

In America AI has been at the forefront of the anti-war movement with many other groups. Linked below is a recent AI America call for Bush to be arrested on a visit to Africa. A simple visit to their website and you can find loads of stuff.

As to them supporting NATO in Libya: http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/press-releases/amnesty-i...stice

I don't know, maybe you had a partner who ran of with a member of Amnesty or the head of Amnesty scored a winning goal against your school team, the point is you need either help or a facts checker.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Wed Aug 22, 2012 15:36

Thanks for that Opus, I knew that Amnesty had been hi-jacked by the CIA in the early 1980s, but I didn't know Amnesty was being used as a front for Right Wing death squads as early as 1975. Of course, Human Rights Watch was set up as Helsinki Watch, for the specific purpose of overthrowing the USSR through lies and propaganda, and HRW continues to function as a CIA weapon. But, Im inclined to believe that AI was started as a real human rights organization, and was hi-jacked once its usefulness became clear to the US ruling class.

Thanks also for the article on Hamas - very interesting.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:03

..the shifting-sands shuffle never sleeps

http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/21009-american-cresce....html

keepin it volatile...disrupt, contain, extract.

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Wed Aug 22, 2012 10:11

..any NGO behave in such an obscene fashion?'

Philip Agee answered that question in his 1975 book 'Inside the Company'..his record of his twenty years in the CIA, mostly operating in Latin America in the savage death-squad dirty wars.

He listed Amnesty, even then, as one of the fronts regularly used in the propaganda arsenal.

Amazon still has copies.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Wed Aug 22, 2012 01:46

Amnesty International's Ongoing Psy-Ops War against the Syrian People

In it's report "Year of Rebellion: Human Rights in the Middle East and North Africa," Amnesty International (AI) begins it's assault on Syria with the following obscene fantasy:

“I will crush the throat of your son with my foot. I will return him to you like Ghayath Mattar”
Words a security force officer allegedly said to the mother of 22-year-old Muhammad Muhammad Al Hamwi when her son and husband were arrested.

No attempt is made to substantiate this wild claim. It is simply presented at face value. As if the underlying message is: Don't you know that Amnesty International would not have recounted this story - if it were not true. Sadly, AI has good reason to be confident that the vast majority of it's readers will, indeed, accept this story-from-nowhere as concrete fact. Surely, a Nobel Prize winning NGO like Amnesty International would not lie about such grave matters...

But, as we have shown in the Libyan case above, AI does lie. And it's lies are almost exclusively directed at states who dare to stand in the way of the neo-liberal agenda of the United States and Britain.

Incredibly, AI continues its report with the following shocking statement:

"In early 2011, as unrest swept across much of the Middle East and North Africa, it appeared that Syrians might be too fearful to challenge their government."

Was ever a more blatant call for violence made? Here we have an organization, which won the Nobel Peace Prize, openly goading a population into armed rebellion. Clearly, the generally peaceful reaction of the Syrian people to the so called "Arab Spring" was a matter of grave disappointment to Amnesty. However, Amnesty was not to be disappointed for too long. The report crows that by the end of March 2011, Syria was descending nicely into the same kind of sectarian civil war that has destroyed Iraqi and Libyan society. I will spare my readers the lurid and gleefully lying accounts that AI gives of the violence, but, you may read this infamous report for yourselves online.

In the meantime, AI has set about letter writing campaigns to have the name of President Bashar al-Assad sent to the discredited "International Criminal Court," and petitions have been made to the UN Security Council to visit the same kind of Holocaust on Syria that was rained down on Libya. AI has set up a supposed "interactive" website called "Eyes on Syria," with propagates lies about the Syrian state, but refuses to allow anyone to post criticism of NATO's role in arming and funding violence in Syria.

The courageous action of Russia and China, in preventing a sectarian Holocaust in Syria has been viciously attacked by AI, and, as soon as these countries had vetoed NATO's plan to attack Syria, AI set about organizing a letter writing campaign to slander these nations. Of course, it would be ridiculous to imagine that either Russia or China would be influenced by AI's orchestrated letters campaigns, but this is not the objective. The objective is to add to the general "accepted wisdom" in Western countries that war against Syria is right and proper, and that no opposition to this war can be accepted in "respectable" society.

Needless to say, AI has given no credit to the outstanding achievement of Syria's new Draft Constitution, the outstanding achievement of holding a democratic referendum in a country under such vicious terrorist attack, or the outstanding bravery of the Syrian security forces in protecting millions of Syrian citizens, as they exercised their democratic right to vote in 14,000 polling stations all over Syria. No doubt, if the Syrian people have accepted the Draft Constitution, AI will join with Hillary Clinton, and all the other rabid dogs of war, in crying that the result is a "fix." This despite the fact that the Syrian government invited any and all international observers to come and verify that all procedures were correct and adhered to.

Amnesty International continues to use its websites and publications to propagate unsubstantiated reports from terrorist sources, and presents them as fact. It ignores statements from the Syrian government, and presents "tweets" from unknown persons, in unknown locations, as having more credibility than verifiable statements from the government.

So the question is, why would any NGO behave in such an obscene fashion? Particularly, after seeing the results of it's behaviour in Libya - well over 100,000 people dead, and a country ruined and under the misrule of roving gangs and lynch mobs.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Wed Aug 22, 2012 01:44

Amnesty International: A Weapon of Anglo-Saxon Imperialism

People in the West have been brought up to think of Amnesty International in terms of the utmost reverence. Fearless advocates of the political prisoner, and resolute opponent of oppression everywhere. Didn’t Amnesty USA even call for the arrest of George Bush Junior for war crimes? No cosying up to the establishment there.

A brave picture, indeed, but does it stand up to closer scrutiny? Our suspicions begin to rise when we consider that Amnesty Internation (AI) was the only human rights group in the world that refused to condemn Apartheid or the South African Apartheid regime. AI has never once called for an arms embargo against the Israeli Apartheid regime. Very few political prisoners in any Anglophone country have ever enjoyed the support of AI.

AI was founded in London, in July 1961, by English labour lawyer, Peter Benenson. According to his own account, he had been motivated by the case of two Portuguese students, who had been imprisoned by the Fascist regime for chanting pro-democracy slogans. And, for the first decades of it’s existence, AI became associated with the representation of political prisoners. In the 1970s, the profile of AI was lifted by the involvement of famous human rights lawyers, such as Seán MacBride. An annual fundraising event, ironically titled, The Secret Policeman’s Ball, and begun in 1976, drew the top names in British showbiz talent to the support of AI. By this time, the organisation was gaining a type of Mother Teresa, saintly aura. In 1977, AI was awarded the Noble Peace Prize. The organization seemed above reproach.

But, criticism did begin to be heard. In 1980, the USSR accused AI operatives of spying for the US government. Several other governments, including Morocco, accused AI of actively inciting violent incidents in their countries. Some people began to suspect that the utility of AI as a propaganda weapon had not been lost on the CIA and MI6. Funding to AI grew enormously during the Reagan era, as AI pumped out an almost daily barrage of horror stories against the USSR and other Socialist states. During this time, AI’s centre of administration moved from London to New York, and AI became much more openly associated with US geo-political ambitions.

For a while, after the attacks on the Twin Towers, in 2001, AI found itself in a difficult position. It was regarded with some suspicion by the US administration, as many of the rank and file members of AI wanted to take the US to task over its open use of kidnapping and torture. To protect itself against too direct a confrontation with the US administration, AI broadened the scope of its activities to include such issues as women’s rights, and it slowly lessened it’s focus on political prisoners. It still continued to pump out reports against states that dared to oppose Anglo-Saxon imperialism, such as the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK.)

With the release of the 2011 AI report, Year of Rebellion: Human Rights in the Middle East and North Africa, AI has found a new and very dangerous niche position for itself – regime change.

Without a doubt, AI was one of the main NGO’s that supplied the UN with the false information the Anglo-Saxons needed to carry out their conquest of Libya.

The report contains gems like this one:

“Young and old, women and children, killed, injured, disappeared – every family we have met here in Misratah has had its share of pain and loss.” Amnesty International research team, Misratah, 25 May 2011

We can see from the tone and content, that fact took a very secondary place to the task of stirring up the emotions of a Western public against the Libyan government. The report continues:

“On 1 January 2011 it would have been hard to imagine that anti-government protests would spread across Libya and evolve by late February into an armed conflict that would transform the oil-rich North African state.”

Indeed, this is correct. It would be very hard indeed, to imagine that a population with one of the highest standards of living in the world would wish to utterly destroy their nation, and turn it into another Iraq, with armed gangs and lynch mobs plundering, murdering and raping at will.

The authors of the report, at this point, abandon reality altogether, and abandon themselves to a flight of sheer fantasy:

“Draconian legislation outlawed dissent and the establishment of independent organizations. Hundreds of political prisoners were being detained arbitrarily. Special courts were sentencing opponents after grossly unfair trials. Impunity for torture, extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances was deeply entrenched. Calls for truth and justice by families of the some 1,200 detainees killed in the notorious Abu Salim Prison in 1996 were being ignored. Foreign nationals were living under risk of arrest, indefinite detention for “immigration offences” and torture and other ill-treatment.”

In fact, over four months into the misrule of the NATO backed NTC, no evidence has ever been found that detainees were killed in Abu Salim Prison. Immigrant workers were treated far better in the Libyan Jamahiriya than in most North African or European countries. It was under the NTC that immigrants fled for their lives. Under al-Gaddafi, they flocked to Libya in their millions. Human rights groups were concerned about five questionable deaths in Libyan police hands during the five years up until 2011. There were five questionable deaths in British police hands in one month alone in 2011. Libya had one of the world’s lowest prison populations – five times lower than that of the USA. Indeed, a UN report in 2010 had praised Libya for its commitment to human rights, and urged it to continue with its good work. Persons kidnapped by the British and the US régimes, and handed over to Libya to be tortured, were, instead, released. Abdel-Hakim Belhaj, current military governor of Tripoli, confirms this to be true. He was a victim of British state kidnapping.

Outside of this infamous report, Amnesty International was party to the propagation of two of the most insidious lies, which were used to justify the attack on Libya. One would have been comical, if it’s effects were not so murderous. The lie was that the Libyan government had supplied Viagra to its troops, so that they could rape unarmed protestors. Lurid accounts were then splashed all over the Western media of these “rapes.” Taped evidence was then supplied to the International Criminal Court, and an arrest warrant was issued for Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi. It turned out that the “evidence” were well known Arabic porno movies. But, the ICC failed to drop the charges, or to apologize for it’s disgraceful behaviour. Amnesty International eventually admitted that the story was a complete fabrication – but not until after the Libyan state had been overthrown.

The next lie that Amnesty was to the fore in propagating never had anything of a comical nature, and was genocidal from the very start. The lie was that Black members of the Libyan security forces were “mercenaries,” specially brought in from Sub-Saharan Africa, for the purpose of torturing and murdering peaceful protestors. This lie was then picked up by other groups, such as the Irish Anti-War Movement, and used to call for a “No Fly Zone” to keep out the “mercenary flights.” Needless to say, this lie gave cover to the most insidious element of the whole tragedy in Libya, i.e. the racist hatred of extremist groups towards all people with dark skin. Now, they had cover and carte blanche to carry out hundreds of public lynchings of Black people, and mass ethnic cleansing – such as the evacuation of the entire population of Tawarga - 30, 000 Black people forced out of their homes and into the desert, or into concentration camps set up by the rebels - where, to this day, they continue to be tortured, raped and murdered. A fact that even AI has been forced to admit.

Amnesty eventually admitted that they never had any evidence of the Libyan government using mercenaries, and that, in fact, thousands of mercenaries, from all over the world, had been used by the NATO side. But, needless to say, they only made this admission – once the USA, Britain, France and Israel had got what they wanted in Libya.

The dirty work of imperialism now done in Libya, Amnesty International has moved on to targeting the Syrian state. In the next part of this essay, we will focus on the AI’s activities against the Syrian People.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Tue Aug 21, 2012 21:55

Mary Fitzgerald and the Seven Devices of Propaganda

Advertising agencies refers to seven types of Propaganda, used to get the public to believe and feel what the company hiring the agency wants the public to believe and feel.

They are:

1. Bandwagon - To convince the audience to do or believe something because everyone else is doing it.

2. Plain Folks - Suggesting something is practical and a good value for ordinary people.

3. Glittering Generality - Using words so strongly positive in emotional content that just hearing them makes you feel good. The words express a positive meaning without actually giving a guarantee.

4. Transfer - Transferring good looks, feelings, or ideas to the person who the propaganda is meant to influence. Suggests the positive qualities to be associated with the product and the user.

5. Testimonial - Using a famous person to endorse the product.

6. Repetition - Using the product name or a keyword or phrase over and over.

7. Name Calling- Using harsh/kind words to make a point effective.

I have picked an Irish Time article, entirely randomly, in relation to Syria, to see how Fitzgerald employs these propaganda techniques to elicit sympathy for the sectarian terrorist groups in Syria, and to provoke hatred towards the Syrian Government and Security Forces.

The article may be read in full here:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0731/....html

I will only pick one example of each type of propaganda device, thought the whole article is awash with examples. The title of this article is “Syrian army bombards Allepo.” Now, this is clearly a lie. The sectarian groups only ever held a couple of suburbs in the East of the City. The title leads one to believe that the whole of Allepo is being bombarded. As is now generally admitted, even in these few areas held captive by the terrorist groups, they got little or no support from the residents. In frustration at this turn of events, the sectarian groups carried out many atrocities against locals, including publicly shooting dead most of the male members of one Sunni family. When the Syrian Army liberated these suburbs, there was widespread cheering and rejoicing. Why would the Syrian Army bombard civilians, that they knew supported them? In fact, as in Homs, the Syrian Army fought from street to street and only used heavy armour against dug in positions held by the sectarian groups. But, here, Fitzgerald and the Irish Times have “jumped on the Bandwagon.” All the pro-imperialist Anglophone media were using outlandish statement like the title of this article, so it was to be expected that the readers of the Irish Times would have been well enough conditioned to simply accept this nonsensical claim.

Fitzgerald begins the article with the word “Activists.” Now, since the heady days of the Civil Rights Movement in the USA, the term “activist” has been surrounded by a glow of positivity. All good people want to be on the side of “activists.” We see here the employment of Propaganda Device 3 – Glittering Generality. We immediately know which side Mary Fitzgerald is on, and which side she expects us, as Irish Times readers, to be on. We immediately know that this article will be written from the perspective of the “activists.” These particular “activists,” however, are not wielding placards calling for Civil Rights, but are wielding US, Israeli and even Swiss made lethal weapons.

Fitzgerald then labels the violence in the outskirts of Allepo as “The Battle for Allepo.” How does a rather small incursion of various Islamist and sectarian groups into the outskirts of the city, with no local support, become a battle for the whole city? Certainly, the terrorist groups have been receiving large shipments of weapons and money from their Western backers, and certainly, as the Washington think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations, has admitted, the so called “Free Syria Army” has been greatly boosted by Al Qaeda fighters, but, there was never any possibility of a “battle for Allepo.” The only battle was how long could the terrorist groups hang on, until the vastly superior force of the Syrian Defence Forces arrested or killed them. Be all that as it may, Fitzgerald, the Irish Times, and all the rest of the pro-imperialist media have repeated this hysterical term, ad nauseum, to the point that readers could be forgiven for thinking that there actually had been a “battle for Allepo” going on.

Propaganda Device 7 gives us an interesting example. Of course, there are all their usual bad names given to the Syrian Government, but, Fitzgerald also includes an interesting one. She constantly refers to President al-Assad as “Dr. Assad.” Now, it’s true that Al-Assad does have a Phd, but why harp on his academic qualifications? I think it can hardly escape us that Fitzgerald is trying to set the Syrian President up as a sort of cartoon super-villain, in the mode of Doctor Strangeglove, or even Doctor Mengele. There is always a slight trepidation, among the general puplic, in regard to doctors, particularly very powerful doctors. Why would we not feel sympathy for those nice “activists” in their attempts to escape the Evil Doctor. This is made all the more clear with Fitzgerald’s constantly referring to the Syrian National Army as “Dr. Assad’s troops.”

Propaganda Device 2 is subtlely employed. The aim, when using this device is always to create an Us and Them dynamic. We are the people who use a certain product, or hold a certain belief, while they are the “loosers” or “misfits” who don’t. Right from the start of this article, Fitzgerald uses a conspiratorial tone with her Irish Times readers. Information is give exclusively from “rebel” sources. The subtext ebing that the “rebels” are Us. And we are the Plain People, the Good People. We are given an example of a Syrian diplomat “defecting” and joining Us, the Good People. He is reported as claiming “he could no longer represent a government that committed such “violent and oppressive acts” against its own people.” The fact that a great number of the “rebels” in Allepo were not Syrian at all is not alluded to.

Fitzgerald ends her article with a recource to Propaganda Device 5, i.e. Testimonial. No less a figure than US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, is wheeled on stage to inform us: The Assad regime’s assault on Aleppo could be the final “nail in the coffin” for the leader. Mr Panetta said Dr Assad had “lost all legitimacy, and the more violence he engages in, the more he makes the case that the regime is coming to an end”.

Of course, Mary Fitzgerald fails to mention that the Syrian people have already voted themselves a new democratic constitution, with over 60% support (US citizens have never been allowed to vote on their constitution, and the United Kingdom has no written constitution.) The Syrian Constitution strips the Ba’ath Party of its privilege. Political parties are allowed to freely organize. The only one exception is parties, which are based on religious difference. The recent elections in Libya also employed this restriction. Strangely enough, neither the Irish Times, nor Mary Fitzgerald found anything objectionable about this provision in Libya.

Perhaps the reason that the citizens of Allepo refused to support the armed groups in Allepo is that they know that if they do not want Bashar al-Assad as their president, all they have to do is vote him out. There is no need for violence.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Tue Aug 21, 2012 21:20

Mary Fitzgerald and the Five Type of Propaganda

Advertising agencies refers to five types of Propaganda, used to get the public to believe and feel what the company hiring the agency wants the public to believe and feel.

They are:

1. Bandwagon - To convince the audience to do or believe something because everyone else is doing it.

2. Plain Folks - Suggesting something is practical and a good value for ordinary people.

3. Glittering Generality - Using words so strongly positive in emotional content that just hearing them makes you feel good. The words express a positive meaning without actually giving a guarantee.

4. Transfer - Transferring good looks, feelings, or ideas to the person who the propaganda is meant to influence. Suggests the positive qualities to be associated with the product and the user.

5. Testimonial - Using a famous person to endorse the product.

6. Repetition - Using the product name or a keyword or phrase over and over.

7. Name Calling- Using harsh/kind words to make a point effective.

I have picked an Irish Time article, entirely randomly, in relation to Syria, to see how Fitzgerald employs these five propaganda techniques to elicit sympathy for the sectarian terrorist groups in Syria, and to provoke hatred towards the Syrian Government and Security Forces.

The article may be read in full here:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0731/....html

I will only pick one example of each type of propaganda device, thought the whole article is awash with examples. The title of this article is “Syrian army bombards Allepo.” Now, this is clearly a lie. The sectarian groups only ever held a couple of suburbs in the East of the City. The title leads one to believe that the whole of Allepo is being bombarded. As is now generally admitted, even in these few areas held captive by the terrorist groups, they got little or no support from the residents. In frustration at this turn of events, the sectarian groups carried out many atrocities against locals, including publicly shooting dead most of the male members of one Sunni family. When the Syrian Army liberated these suburbs, there was widespread cheering and rejoicing. Why would the Syrian Army bombard civilians, that they knew supported them? In fact, as in Homs, the Syrian Army fought from street to street and only used heavy armour against dug in positions held by the sectarian groups. But, here, Fitzgerald and the Irish Times have “jumped on the Bandwagon.” All the pro-imperialist Anglophone media were using outlandish statement like the title of this article, so it was to be expected that the readers of the Irish Times would have been well enough conditioned to simply accept this nonsensical claim.

Fitzgerald begins the article with the word “Activists.” Now, since the heady days of the Civil Rights Movement in the USA, the term “activist” has been surrounded by a glow of positivity. All good people want to be on the side of “activists.” We see here the employment of Propaganda Device 3 – Glittering Generality. We immediately know which side Mary Fitzgerald is on, and which side she expects us, as Irish Times readers, to be on. We immediately know that this article will be written from the perspective of the “activists.” These particular “activists,” however, are not wielding placards calling for Civil Rights, but are wielding US, Israeli and even Swiss made lethal weapons.

Fitzgerald then labels the violence in the outskirts of Allepo as “The Battle for Allepo.” How does a rather small incursion of various Islamist and sectarian groups into the outskirts of the city, with no local support, become a battle for the whole city? Certainly, the terrorist groups have been receiving large shipments of weapons and money from their Western backers, and certainly, as the Washington think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations, has admitted, the so called “Free Syria Army” has been greatly boosted by Al Qaeda fighters, but, there was never any possibility of a “battle for Allepo.” The only battle was how long could the terrorist groups hang on, until the vastly superior force of the Syrian Defence Forces arrested or killed them. Be all that as it may, Fitzgerald, the Irish Times, and all the rest of the pro-imperialist media have repeated this hysterical term, ad nauseum, to the point that readers could be forgiven for thinking that there actually had been a “battle for Allepo” going on.

Propaganda Device 7 gives us an interesting example. Of course, there are all their usual bad names given to the Syrian Government, but, Fitzgerald also includes an interesting one. She constantly refers to President al-Assad as “Dr. Assad.” Now, it’s true that Al-Assad does have a Phd, but why harp on his academic qualifications? I think it can hardly escape us that Fitzgerald is trying to set the Syrian President up as a sort of cartoon super-villain, in the mode of Doctor Strangeglove, or even Doctor Mengele. There is always a slight trepidation, among the general puplic, in regard to doctors, particularly very powerful doctors. Why would we not feel sympathy for those nice “activists” in their attempts to escape the Evil Doctor. This is made all the more clear with Fitzgerald’s constantly referring to the Syrian National Army as “Dr. Assad’s troops.”

Propaganda Device 2 is subtlely employed. The aim, when using this device is always to create an Us and Them dynamic. We are the people who use a certain product, or hold a certain belief, while they are the “loosers” or “misfits” who don’t. Right from the start of this article, Fitzgerald uses a conspiratorial tone with her Irish Times readers. Information is give exclusively from “rebel” sources. The subtext ebing that the “rebels” are Us. And we are the Plain People, the Good People. We are given an example of a Syrian diplomat “defecting” and joining Us, the Good People. He is reported as claiming “he could no longer represent a government that committed such “violent and oppressive acts” against its own people.” The fact that a great number of the “rebels” in Allepo were not Syrian at all is not alluded to.

Fitzgerald ends her article with a recource to Propaganda Device 5, i.e. Testimonial. No less a figure than US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, is wheeled on stage to inform us: The Assad regime’s assault on Aleppo could be the final “nail in the coffin” for the leader. Mr Panetta said Dr Assad had “lost all legitimacy, and the more violence he engages in, the more he makes the case that the regime is coming to an end”.

Of course, Mary Fitzgerald fails to mention that the Syrian people have already voted themselves a new democratic constitution, with over 60% support (US citizens have never been allowed to vote on their constitution, and the United Kingdom has no written constitution.) The Syrian Constitution strips the Ba’ath Party of its privilege. Political parties are allowed to freely organize. The only one exception is parties, which are based on religious difference. The recent elections in Libya also employed this restriction. Strangely enough, neither the Irish Times, nor Mary Fitzgerald found anything objectionable about this provision in Libya.

Perhaps the reason that the citizens of Allepo refused to support the armed groups in Allepo is that they know that if they do not want Bashar al-Assad as their president, all they have to do is vote him out. There is no need for violence.

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Tue Aug 21, 2012 18:22

This is the original Irish Times article by Mary Fitzgerald, where she encourages Irish citizens to travel to Syria and break Syrian law, including carrying out murder and terrorism. I will remind everyone that the Irish police can arrest any Irish citizen who has broken the laws of a foreign state:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2012/0801/122....html

by Irish Anti-Imperialist Tue Aug 21, 2012 18:15

Notice how Mary loving describes Madhi al-Harait, without ever mentioning the fact that he is a self confessed CIA agent, or that he was involved in war crimes in Libya:

http://syriathemediawar.blogspot.ie/2012/08/httpwww.html