It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: Condemnation of War on Terror

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 08:17 AM
link   
The group most people don't want to hear from, Amnesty International, condemned the U.S. led "War on Terror" in it's annual report. The U.S and it's allies in the War on Terror are guilty of sacrificing basic human rights in it's pursuit for security according to the group. Amnesty International cites the unlawful killings of Iraqi civilians, questionable arrest and mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan and opposition to the new global criminal court. It also criticized several European and Asian countries for handling of asylum seekers.
 



Amnesty condemns 'War on Terror'

"The global security agenda promoted by the US administration is bankrupt of vision and bereft of principle," Amnesty head Irene Khan said, launching its annual report.

"Violating rights at home, turning a blind eye to abuses abroad and using pre-emptive military force where and when it chooses has damaged justice and freedom - and made the world a more dangerous place."
"The world is crying out for principled leadership," Khan added, saying the negative effects of US-led anti-terror policies had spread far and wide.

"Governments are losing their moral compass, sacrificing the global values of human rights in a blind pursuit of security."


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

While many of people disagree and condemn the group Amnesty International for their criticism in world affairs, it is only fair that they voice their opinions. It is not like Amnesty International has much political or popular sway on the outcome of the situation. The watchdog group can only bark and hope that some listen.


[Edited on 5-26-2004 by worldwatcher]



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 09:50 AM
link   
One could hardly consider this a surprise from AI. I suppose one could ask the question, if they're condemning the war on terror that means they must support the terrorists position. While they may have some good points to make at times, their left wing orientation kills mainstream crediblity.



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 12:16 PM
link   
They do blame them as well.

"Amnesty also condemned the "callous, cruel and criminal attacks" by groups such as al-Qaida.

The combined effect of those attacks and states' violations of rights was to create the most serious assault on rights and humanitarian law in half a century and make "a world of growing mistrust, fear and division", it said."

Funny enough the article is a little different on CNN

www.cnn.com...



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by CommonSense
One could hardly consider this a surprise from AI. I suppose one could ask the question, if they're condemning the war on terror that means they must support the terrorists position. While they may have some good points to make at times, their left wing orientation kills mainstream crediblity.


Oh please, don't give me that crap. Just becuase they condemn actions taken in the war against terror doesn't mean they support the terrorists. Do you honestly believe that? Even if they didn't pubilcly denounce the actions of Al Qaeda, they are a watchdog group that tries to make atrocities that disregard the human rights of others known. Thir agenda when reporting these things is not political, and they are not taking sides against any one. Becuase the ACLU defends the KKK's rights to free speech are they racist? NO, because the issue is not racism, but peoples' right to be racist if they so choose.



posted on May, 26 2004 @ 06:45 PM
link   
No, my point was a sarcastic reply to people or groups who live too close to either fringe! The real problem is that they alienate the mainstream which, for the most part, is where compromise and solution is found!




top topics
 
0

log in

join