Amnesty International seems to have forgotten all about this from Gita Sahgal:
A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when a great organisation must ask: if it lies to itself, can it demand the truth of others? For in defending the torture standard, one of the strongest and most embedded in international human rights law, Amnesty International has sanitized the history and politics of the ex-Guantanamo detainee, Moazzam Begg and completely failed to recognize the nature of his organisation Cageprisoners.
David Vance was up against it today on Sheila Fogarty’s (13:47) show as he argued in defence of ‘enhanced interrogation’ methods against Amnesty International’s representative and the BBC’s default position that Amnesty’s line is the correct one…..that a cup of tea that is too hot or a biscuit without chocolate on it in the course of an interrogation amounts to torture.
Amnesty is horrified that the great British Public are not wholeheartedly behind their campaign to eliminate what they call torture completely…and blames films and television for de-sensitising us…the Public just doesn’t understand the horror and brutality of torture.
Of course we might just be taking a rational view and think that certain methods, not all, are acceptable if the stakes are high enough……and that’s the rub…what constitutes ‘torture’ and is it justified to save possibly thousands of lives?
Amnesty thinks not.
DV thought it was….and claimed AI was acting as de facto apologists for our enemies in the war on terror….joining forces with the Islamist Caged Prisoners (Now ‘Cage’) doesn’t help AI’s case of course.
The BBC has been all too ready itself to come to the aid of Islamists such as Moazzem Begg and spread accusations of abuse by British forces….probably no coincidence AI releases its poll results today as the BBC has this as its headline story:
ICC to investigate claims of abuse by UK forces in Iraq
It tells us that:
Even though this is not an ICC “formal investigation”, at least yet, it’s still a significant victory for the Human Rights Lawyer Phil Shiner and his firm Public Interest Lawyers.
He’s long argued that British forces were involved in the systematic abuse of Iraqis.
He believes that mistreatment – some of which has been proven – was allowed by senior military officers and even ministers.
In other words that it wasn’t just a “few bad apples”.
and then says:
The anger in the MOD and the military will be directed at Mr Shiner more than the ICC. They feel he’s dragging the British military’s reputation through the mud.
Unforgiveably the BBC doesn’t tell us that Shiner & Co withheld information crucial to an ongoing case…that they actually had no evidence of abuse by British troops…a case that, had that information been revealed, would have been thrown out of court…..and Shiner & Co wouldn’t have been paid millions of pounds in legal aid money….and their own reputation, such as it is, wrecked….they do themselves seem intent on dragging the British Military’s reputation through the mud for as long as possible.
You’ll be hard pushed to find a mention of that case being abandoned on the BBC webpages….no link referring to it being added to other reports.
Happy to link to this from a year ago though:
With regard to torture, anyone who has been ‘held’ overnight in an NHS hospital could claim to have been tortured, simply because they keep the wards lit at night.
Or deprived of food and water – North Staffs Hospital for example.
god she annoys the hell out of me does that shelagh fogarty,apart from her constant annoying childish giggling everyday on her show,her total left wing liberal bias is plain to hear when she does these interviews on her show,radio 5 live presenters are suppossed to be impartial and leave there politics at home,that does not seem to apply to quiet alot of radio 5 live presenters like vicky derbyshire,ricky bacon and co and her interview with david vance today just proved that the bbc and there presenters will never shake off this left wing liberal bias that they are rightly accussed of on almost a daily basis these days.
I feel your pain re Victoria Derbyshire – From 2009.
Fogarty is like Campbell, a great laugh and they care a lot about being impartial. The only really difference is Campbell´s generally a bit of a leftie and Fogarty is a bit on the right.
Of course Amnesty International wants interrogation methods softened. They do not want us to find out what the terrorists are planning, or who they are. In the fight against Moslem terrorism, they, and the BBC, are always on the side of the friendly neighbourhood terrorist, who would never hurt you. (They hope to kill you so quickly, that it does not hurt!!!)
I am sure that prisoners that have been held by Islamists would love to complain to A.I. If they hadn’t lost their heads!!
As an example Daniel Pearl’s who’s throat was slit, and his head was severed from his body
‘Amnesty International ‘makes a complete mockery of international law’
Not that we didn’t know that already
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/NGO-Monitor-blasts-Amnesty-for-not-condemning-rockets
I refused to have anything to do with Amnesty International decades ago when they decided prisoners who have advocated or practised violence for their cause could still be adopted as political prisoners.
Claiming the death penalty for murderers is a human rights violation was another ‘pass the sick bag’ moment.
As ever, note the double standard. Folks on the right pointing out stuff that actually happened is ‘inflammatory’ but leftists trading in bonkers conspiracy theories are ‘human rights activists’.
Ditto, the Great British Public is always on the edge of a ‘backlash’ but there’s now way anyone could be provoked by phony ‘Islamophobia’ atrocity stories.
Couldn`t we just send Hoon, Blair, Campbell, Straw etc over by bus to Damascus to plead their cases before the court of public opinion?
That surely would shut the Amnesty blowhards up, and let the rest of us sleep at night…because I worry about what Amnesty say…really I do.