by Paul de Rooij
Any organization fighting torture and other human rights abuses deserves our support. A recognized leader in this fight is Amnesty International (AI), helping people escape with their lives or avoid torture for decades.
Given AI's track record and its role as a human rights monitor, one must be careful leveling criticism against it. But one can no longer be silent about AI's stance regarding Israel and Palestine.
This article analyzes Amnesty's entire public record and stance during the current intifada (Sep. 2000 thru Sep. 2002). It is an analysis of a meager record of 83 press releases and six reports . It reveals the following shortcomings and questions about its stance.
1. Trivializing Israeli violence
2. Why is there violence at all?
3. The human rights mantra--apolitical fence sitting
5. An astonishing report.
6. Evident bias
7. Adopting Israeli-centric language
8. The harmful
9. The Absurd
10. The questions
11. The semi-useful
13. Israeli propaganda compliant
AI's approach will please the Israeli government and its supporters. AI's current stance not only doesn't offend pro-Israeli organizations, it doesn't call for effective action putting it on a collision course.