Photo Essay: Amnesty International mobilises on January 11

by Amnesty1 - Amnesty International Mon Jan 14, 2008 10:57 info at amnesty dot ie

More photos from January 11.

NOTE: All photos in this post and the preceding one remain the copyright of the photographers.

Guantánamo prisoner in Phibsboro 2

Guantánamo prisoner chained in Wicklow

Guantánamo prisoner at Stephen's Green

Guantánamo prisoner in Dun Laoghaire

Guantánamo prisoner in arrivals hall of Shannon Airport

by Eddie Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:22

AI have claimed that they could not get involved in human rights abuses in Rossport
yet here they are in Shannon. But that would involve going against a large multinational
on home turf.
It's hard to take them seriously.

by ASISC Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:47

But Guantánamo is in Cuba - why do you feel the need to pick holes in others actions?

by CMcC - Amnesty Int'l (member) Mon Jan 14, 2008 13:23

Well done all - I hope it makes people more aware of the problems of Guantanamo & Amnesty's work in general. Some folks think Amnesty is for animal rights!!!
As to Eddie's comment, I can't speak for Amnesty, but if you know of human rights abuses in & around Rossport, then tell yr concerns to Amnesty again, & to any organisation that has an interest in the matters involved there, & keep on till u get a response.

by Eddie Mon Jan 14, 2008 17:12

CMcC - Amnesty Int'l (member)
Here:
http://www.gcmonitor.org/article.php?list=type&type=61
As I said AI didn't want to know.

For ASISC
It smells of political correctness, that's all. Are the people of Rossport less important
than those in Guantanamo? Why did AI refuse to get involved? Maybe you can answer.

by Ciaron -former Amnesty member - Catholic Worker Mon Jan 14, 2008 17:54

I was an Amnesty International member in the 1970's, when the Queensland (Australia) state government I dwelt under would denounce Amensty International as a communist group. Now some of the members of that same right wing party are members of the parliamentary Amnesty group...as was more recently the Australian Attorney General Philip Ruddock who detained refugees indefinitel in outback gulags.

Amnesty was a victim of its own success, it got quite corporate quite quiclky in the mid-80's when it hitched a lift on the U2 juggernaut. I've spent 2 years imprisoned as a "prisoner of conscience" and never heard from Amnesty. I recently went through 4 years of dodgy treatment by the Irish legal system (initially denied bail and then forced to sign on daily for over a year) for a nonviolent action against the war and never heard from Amnesty International.

The chugging gets me down a bit (altho I know everyone has to make a crust, even if you are young and beautiful and chosen to chug for Amnesty for pretty good wages). What pisses me off at that point is the chuggers throw all the guilt trippin' shapes I use to throw as a youngster going door to door collecting for various charities. That relationship seem to have more authenticity a dynamic between a volunteer who had given up their time and dodged alsations and a donor...the shape throwing seemed justifed.

Anyways I digress, Amnesty is what it is - well funded and capable of good research. They seemed reluctant to link the Guantanamo issue with where the rubber hits the road in Ireland at Shannon Airport...so it's good to see they had a presence at Shannon last week. I know they were very much against the nonviolent direct action taken by the Catholic Workers and others (83) arrested in Gitmo gear. occupying the U.S. Supreme Court last Friday www.witnesstorture.org . It is a reluctance to move past photo op.....the grassroots Amnesty activists are probably more radical than the professional elite. There's a good crew down in Enniscorty where I gave a talk about the the Arms Trade in Ireland", the other speaker was an Amnesty pro who didn't mention Derry or Raytheon, so I guess there definition of Ireland is defined by partition.

NGO's can be a bit like the small political parties in that they have no sense of mutuality with other activists...they are viewed as competitiors in a limited market.

I thought the Gitmo Prisoner street theatre was well done and a good idea.

by prole Mon Jan 14, 2008 19:33

AI will have no more of my money, too commercial now. Yet I will support campaigns for human rights, any where they are needed.

by One Story Mon Jan 14, 2008 19:56

http://www.rsf.org/article/php3?id_article=24994

by _ Mon Jan 14, 2008 20:16

http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2006/DA_fall_06/prisoner/p....html
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=24994

CPJ= committee to Protect Journalists.

2007 figures indicate a 244% rise in Imprisonments/deaths and dissappearances
of writers/web designers and journos- but they keep doing it.

Solidarity!

Sami al-Haj , al jazeera journo and prisoner in Gitmo

by Amnesty Member Mon Jan 14, 2008 21:38

I think it's really depressing that so much of the time on Indymedia whenever an organisation does something people line up to criticise it even if they support what the organisation has done. I'm not saying people should not criticise Amnesty or whoever, but it seems to me that whenever any organisation on Indymedia does anything people knock the organisation for not doing something else. Why don't people start separate debates when they want to do that?

I don't know much about Rossport to be honest Eddie but I would be curious to know what response you got back when he contacted Amnesty about it. We only have so much in the way of resources as we refuse to take money from the state to maintain our independence, one of very few ngos to do that.

I disagree slightly with Ciaron's point about Amnesty and Shannon. We published a report in 2006 making clear the link between Shannon and rendition and we've frequently said the government has to stop accepting assurances from the US. I might not agree with the notion of your kind of direct action and you might not agree with my kind of campaign work, but at least we're on the same side.

I would also say that if people want to be involved in Amnesty they should think about joining and being part of the organisation. I'm disappointed Ciaron is not a member anymore and glad some people on the site have reacted positively to the Guantánamo protests which got really good media coverage and helped remind people of the issue.

by CMcC Mon Jan 14, 2008 22:23

Eddie, I am sorry for your trouble; I've been to Rossport a few times & felt the heavy hand of Gardai a little, but I can't imagine how fearful it is to live there & experience what's been going on in your home for years. The vile behaviour of Shell & Gardai there is all but indescribable - I will keep giving out to AI, et al, about the situation. It's still a good thing that AI does what it does, just that its ambitions exceed its capabilities. No organisation is above criticism, but a lot of good has been done, & there's a whole lot more needs doing.

by Ciaron - Catholic Worker Mon Jan 14, 2008 22:31

It's ok to have disagreements even when you're on the same side.
Amnesty did issue directions that their folks were not to walk to the Supreme Court in D.C. with our folks (400) some of them (83) who were commited to nonviolent direct action.

NVDA has a long history in the U.S. from the Boston Tea Party (property destruction) to the underground railroad for slaves (property theft) to Matin Luther King (public holiday)...the action planned and carried out for the Supreme Court on Friday was simple tresspass. See photos on this link
http://www.witnesstorture.org/taxonomy_menu/3/6

I appreciated my time in Amnesty (I did turn out for the Irish Amnesty football team against England Amnesty in dublin in 2002 - "we took no prisoners!") and appreciate there's a lot of good folks doing a lot of good stuff. But I do have criticisms & disappointments which I've outlined above and I'm sure they have criticisms of our praxis.

I thought the solo street theatre stuff around town and in Shannon was great.

by anticomm Tue Jan 15, 2008 03:40

Amnesty now has PD as its head what more do we need to know.
Your establishment human rights group.
BIt like Greenpeace but atleast they still climb shit and sail after things.

by J. King Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:32

Can committed Catholics now, in conscience, support Amnesty International knowing that their
donations and efforts may be used in a way that is contrary to their beliefs and contrary to human rights?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0818/amnesty.html?rss

"The Vatican says Amnesty has betrayed its mission."

by lulu Tue Jan 15, 2008 13:30

Yes they can, as it's about much more than abortion.

by C Murray Tue Jan 15, 2008 13:39

The Irish section of Amnesty international opted out of this one .

Which of course would make me query the issue from another perspective- and that is why Irish Amnesty
have politicised the abortion issue alongside the dictats of the established RC Church position?I did my little
letter of protest to the Irish Section which was never responded to and the issues are referred to on the
Newswire in relation to Choice Ireland. The situation in Poland, in Nicaragua, In Portugal and at the moment
in Madrid (where abortion clinics are striking citing state and municipal interferences in abortion rights).
Spanish women I spoke to last summer really did not 'get' the fuss on the privacy issue that emanates
from here. (personally I feel that religious leaders have no rights when it comes to the whole area of
partruition and I would rather listen to the doctor or the midwife in terms of care, adherence to hippocratic
oath and bodily integrity issues).

by Ciaron - Catholic Worker Tue Jan 15, 2008 13:55

Well as you know there are a billion Catholics, probably the only true universal phenomenon (according to the liberal "Guardian" newspaper) and contrary to popular lefty stereotypes there is a lot of debate in the RC church.

As I've outlined above, Amnesty International is a liberal corporation and the debate on how to relate to it now that it has taken a pro-choice/pro-abortion position is a crisis for, and a debate occuring in, liberal or social democratic Catholicism. Meanwhile radical Catholics can't understand how the church can entertain a relativist just war ethic in relation to the violence of warfare and an absolutist pacifist ethic in relation to the violence of abortion. There are radical reasons not to join Amnesty International that have nothing to do with abortion.

Here is some of the debate occuring in Roman Catholicism in relation to relating to Amnesty International. If you're going to have a Catholic debate you may as well wheel out the Jesuits and put all that schoolin' to use....

Fr. Frank Brennan SJ "Don't Boycott Pro-Choice Amnesty"
http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3757

Fr. Chris Middleton SJ rebuts Fr. Frank Brennan SJ Position on Amnesty International
http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=3797

by ora pro nobis Tue Jan 15, 2008 14:46

Great links to Jesuits there Ciaron, thank you. When I first saw the comment which led to them, I thought about the attack launched in the last year by the RC church on liberalism in Spain. That culminated in a large open air mass by the Spanish cardinal complete with special message from the pontiff declaring that the PSOE under Zapatero had undermined human rights by allowing civil partnership (marriage) to homosexuals & refusing to alter the abortion laws. The implications were clear no RC of good conscience can vote PSOE. ah..... then the PP (the right wing) clarified that if elected on March 9th 2008, they would not rescind the gay marriage laws or adjust the abortion laws of the Spanish state. Oh well, then. Now I go several ways thinking about this. First - the RC church doesn't recognise civil partnership "registry office" marriages between hetrosexuals so what is tickling its bum so much about people using the same legal mechanisms to declare commitment to those of the same sex? & then it gets be thinking about the RC figures. You (catholics) always trump out the "billion" figure, but where does it come from???
Easy one that - the RC church comes up with the figure. The Central Statistics Office (2007) refers to the Statistical Yearbook of the Church 2005 (Libreria Editrice Vaticana) & suggests a global membership of 1,114,966,000 people based on (a) baptism records (b) census declarations.
Yet at closer examination the baptism records don't tally. For example in 2005 the RC church claimed 67,515,016 catholics in the USA based on census reports but could only offer 953,688 infant Baptism certs: & records of 64,464 adults. Further examination shows 1,638,114 students in primary schools, 672,426 in high schools & 785,619 university students at RC 3rd level institutions. I'm sorry Ciaron - but unless the RC population of the USA is demographically weird - there aren't enough kiddies registered to justify the 24% of total population claimed........perhaps they're all really old? If considering the blatent massaging of census data in the USA is not enough now let's consider the Spanish example. The RC church as I wrote earlier has campaigned against the democratically elected government on the grounds that it has undermined the church & family. Yet in another breath it claims over 90% of the population of Spain are Roman catholic. Which is it really? Similarly the RC yearbook claims over 90% of the republic of Ireland are RC. Yet on any Sunday morning you will not find over 90% of the population in church. Once we leave well documented societies such as our 3 examples (USA, Spain & Ireland) behind and go to the other states we really come up against utter silliness. Look at this diagram if you don't believe me -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Catholic_population.png Frankly any cult which claims life long membership unless the individual in question furnishes an equivalent of the RC "Actus formalis defectionis ab Ecclesia catholica" (the formal act of defection from the Catholic Church) an action by which someone formally, and not just de facto, leaves the Catholic Church. Canons 1086, 1117 and 1174 of the Code of Canon Law indicated some effects of such an act) is exagerating its membership. & even once that "actus" has been made Ciaron, the RC church ignores it. In early 2007 one individual (the brother of a friend) who had indeed written the neccesary formulae of "auto-excommunication" on the grounds of his homosexuality and political beliefs died tragically in a swimming accident. His funeral was held in a RC church in the words of his co-workers (he had been employed in a bank) for their "communal benefit". & this despite no concession being granted by the local bishop or the Vatican to re-admit him post-humously into the communion. In short - they never took his formal declaration of non-affiliation seriously.

Admit it - there are lots of Catholics, some of the devout, but most can't even remember their prayers. & there by no means over a billion of ye.

by Ciaron - Catholic Worker Tue Jan 15, 2008 15:08

"The implications were clear no RC of good conscience can vote PSOE. ah....."

I run with the position that no RC of good conscience can vote.You're mandating a system that is implicitly violent - jails, military etc. As Ammon Hennacy would say "when you are choosing the lesser of two evils, you soon forget you'r choosing evil!" "By voting you are handing the first stone to be cast by the state" (See IWW Utah Phillips/ Ani De Franco fine track "Anarchy" about Hennacy on "The Past Didn't Go Anywhere!" album.)

The "billion" stat comes from The Guardian, you're going to have to take it up with them. In terms of gay Catholic theology, try James Allison's "Faith beyond Resentment: Fragments Catholic & Gay"

Let's go back to the thread....
I give feedback as a former "prisoner of conscience" that Amnesty are set up to service and fundraise on the basis that they will seek me out no matter how deep the dungeon and advocate for me. This was not my experience. The illusion is because of the effective branding campaign if you want to oppose torture, renditions, etc and support and advocate for prisoners of conscience you have to go through the monopoly of Amnesty International Inc.

As I tell my parents, who are pensioners, and seem to sign on for direct debits to these overfunded, overresourced groups..Amnesty, Greenpeace et. al there are other options. I suggest in this instance you donate direct to four prisoners of conscience presently ensconsed for their nonviolent resistance to torture training at Fort Huachuca write them in jail directly or go to their website www.tortureontrial.org and find out how to support them. School of Americas Watch ain't bad either www.soaw.org challenging the torture tarining for Latin American troops at Ft. Benning, Georgia USA
My guess is that both these smaller groups have lower overheads than Amnesty.

At the same time my (left social democrat) cousin is moving to rural Ireland soon and I'm suggesting to her she join the local Amnesty group wo meet llike minded folks and do good stuff.

by ex member Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:34

I was a member British Section for 4 years, it seemed like the Groups were devoted and I met some lovely people working for a variety of good causes, but the head office was like the Vatican giving orders from on high, the shop assistants were rude, then Amnesty gave a gong to cash kids U2 as part of their try to be the Number One human rights organisation. what does that say to thousnds of people who supported them for years on pensions or low incomes

by Ciaron Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:30

Having recently been into their London HQ it looks like a corporate office. Maybe that's what it is.

I remember 10 years ago I called London HQ and said I heard they were running a campaign on aboriginal deaths in custody. they put me through to the Australia desk. Some Dutch guy answered the phone. I told him I had been in jail on three occasions in Australia when aborigines had been killed or suicided in custody. I said I'd like to drop around and see what they've got in terms of campaign info. He was pretty rude and said no thanks.

A few years ago, I was doinsupport for 6 East Timorese in jail Preston, England. I was in contact with an Australian Amnesty worker at London HQ. She did nothing for the East Timorese. The last words we exchanged after they had been i jail for a week and she called to check up on the situation informing me she had done nothing for them ended with "You're a careerist. As long as you know that. And you know that I know that!"

Latets I heard she's married to a government minister in East Timor. Woo hoo!

I think the best thing Amnesty could have done in D.C. is support their members who were willing to do a little nvda and spend a night in custody. It would be good formation. I wonder how many, or any of their bureaucrats/carrerists have experineced any kind of incareration? With some of the eco NGO's careerists train up then jump ship to become environmental consultanst to mining companies ripping off indigeneous people. Has this happened with post Amnesty career trajectories.

by C McC Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:40

Fair enough. Corporate Amnesty needs to address these concerns. But there's no harm or cost in taking online actions to help people like human rights defenders, trade unionists, & just any1 threatened with death or torture.