AMNESTY VIDEO

>Message Passer Onner

Oh no you don't - don't post stuff you are willing to defend and run away ! And think yourself lucky it's only me around, compared to the battering HRW got earlier from 'respinner' - how are Amnesty differnt from HRW ?
 https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/03/334945.html?c=on#c143560

Can you tell this person what the top salaries Amnesty pays are ?
 https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/03/335009.html

>Amnesty have made a twisted shopping channel parody, but with a difference, they're selling AK47s instead of nose hair clippers.

Parody ? Irony ? Well done, it it healthy to laugh. How about a little anger sometimes to differentiate that from simple mockery or lack of concern ? A little less conversation, a little more action ?

>Maybe you think they're wasting your charitable donations by having poncey dinners with ad directors,

Nah, I wouldn't waste any of my limited funds on careerist salary-men who have poncey dinners with NuLab murderers. If I can't do something myself I contribute to those volunteers I know who can.

>but they do have an agenda:

Reforming tyranny ? Pleading with torturers ? Please expand. What are rights and who has the right to issue them ?

>the ad is part of their campaign to sort out the arms trade.

I'm sure your tactics will be as succesful as they have been in ending torture. Unfortunately.

>There's a number at the end of the film, please use it.

Yeah, everyone phone them up and ask them what their pension scheme is like.

According to wikipedia, Amnesty finances in 2002

* Membership Support: £2,816,800 (12%)
* Campaigning Activities: £2,387,100 (10%)
* Publications and Translation: £2,810,600 (12%)
* Research and Action: £5,828,800 (26%)
* Deconcentrated Offices: £1,720,400 (7%)
* Research and Action Support: £3,481,100 (15%)
* Administrative Costs: £3,918,400 (18%)
* Relief Payments: £48,000
* Total: £23,728,000 (including contingency)


So 0.2 % of donated funds go to relief payments, which is where most people would like to see their donations go I'd imagine. So if you were planning on giving £10 to Amnesty, just post any political prisoner 20p and you will have the same effect. Then use the remaining £9.80 to do something yourself, or if you can't then give it to a volunteer who is able and motivated enough to make a difference directly.

RE: 0.2 % of donated funds go to relief payments, which is where most people would like to see their donations go I'd imagine.

No, not true at all. I don't donate to amnesty to give money to prisoners, I give money to help them highlight abuses, which they do very well. I can donate to individual or prisoner support campaigns or direct if i want to support a specific prisoner. Amnesty produce detailed in depth reports and run good international solidarity network. They get taken seriously, which is more than can be said for a lot of local smaller campaign groups - though i'm not criticising important work they do. They have a pretty clear remit. If you want more action then use the information Amnesty supplies and start your own direct action group, simple. In several cases I've known it's taken the involvement of Amnesty before both the media and politicians woke up and payed attention to people being abused. They do important work.

The ad is related to the control arms camapaign btw:
 http://www.controlarms.org/

Danny,

I unreservedly apologise for giving the impression that I was defending Amnesty International by the tenor of my previous post. I cut and pasted it from a mail sent to me. I do not agree with Amnesty in several ways, I do think they spent the money wisely in this case.

First. Danny, you can not change the world by yourself (the Fallacy of the Great Man of History, so beloved of Fascism). From reading other posts, I'm sure you are aware and appreciate this - that people not only matter but that they damn well deserve a better world.

Second, I think any money spent on highlighting the trade in instruments of murder contributes to improving the world. I don't care if Amnesty shmooze some corporate imagepimp. I really don't care that the advert is bordering on consumer pornography. The message is simple: guns are available. Anybody can buy them. All you need is cash. You want a world where anything can be bought and sold. Fine. I do not.

Third, I do not think that Amnesty question the origin of Rights. My personal opinion is that any Right I have incurs a Duty to secure that Right for all other Persons. On balance, I don't think I will defend the "Freedom Of Speech for a Fascist" since the long run would be diminishing the "Freedom of Speech For Others". In redistributing the Amnesty link I was not intending to imply I approve of every part of Amnesty as an Organisation. I see Organisations as things to be deeply distrustful of - they have a tendency to dehumanise no matter what their overt purpose. But I keep my mouth shut now and again. I am not seeing "Human Rights" as being within the gift of some powerbroker. For exactly this reason i do not equate Human Rights Watch with Amnesty International. HRW I see as being a parochial Organisation with a will to see Rights Imposed on the "bad powerbrokers" Freedoms from the barrel of a gun. I'm not sure I understand why they take such as simplistically free trade approach - or maybe I just think I have better things to do.

Fourth, the creeping disapproval of anything that fall outside of strict rule bound world views is really starting to piss me off. Fascists everywhere are turning this planet into a cess pit of disapproval. I care that people are being shot by AK47s. I care that people get shot in the UK on a more regular basis. If the manufacturers of these weapons were charged with murder each time one of their weapons ended up illegally killing someone and were compelled to defend themselves in court - I'd be happy. I wouldn't care that legal/illegal is a petty distinction to the dead person. I would disapprove - retrospectively - that all deaths due to guns were no reason enough to drive arms manufacturers out of business. But I would accept all victories as being good. learning from progress is far better than prohibiting change - which is all the creeping disapproval ever does.

Finally, I would defend Amnesty International. They are not Human Rights Watch. You can compare to learn. They are not a fund to provide political prisoners with physical comfort but to ensure the intellectual and spiritual discomfort of everybody who does not question why the abuse of rights continues. Which is why I think it's perfectly right for Danny to question my integrity in posting the blurb i posted. Not the video - the less than critical blurb.

>I do think they spent the money wisely in this case.

Me too, having reread your posts. I still want to see their salary breakdown.

>Second, I think any money spent on highlighting the trade in instruments of murder contributes to improving the world.

"The system gives you just enough
to make you think that you see change
they sing you right to sleep
then they screw you just the same" -ani difranco

>I see Organisations as things to be deeply distrustful of - they have a tendency to dehumanise no matter what their overt purpose. But I keep my mouth shut now and again.

I don't like it when people criticise other peoples well intended actions without actually doing anything themselves and I try not to myself. I think any large grouping of people ( from commune to corporation) should be challenged anyway that you can. It improves a good groups and diminishes bad groups. Still, maybe I should've kept my mouth shut this time, Amnesty aren't my enemy.

>Fourth, the creeping disapproval of anything that fall outside of strict rule bound world views is really starting to piss me off.

It is important to also register approval and encorage tolerance but I hate going to events that demand you bring 'a positive attitude' as I gave mine away a long, long time ago.


>Fascists everywhere are turning this planet into a cess pit of disapproval.

I have a large vat of radioactive waste in my soul that is full of hate, rage, contempt and disgust. It keeps me warm and it keeps me moving, but it isn't healthy and it often slips out as disapproval. On the other hand, I'm also quite gullible and the phrase 'question everything' was meant for me.

>I care that people are being shot by AK47s. I care that people get shot in the UK on a more regular basis.

Me too, not so much admittedly. I'll pay more attention to the subject when the casuality rate in Falkirk approaches that in Fallujah.

>If the manufacturers of these weapons were charged with murder each time one of their weapons ended up illegally killing someone and were compelled to defend themselves in court - I'd be happy.

Yes, a simple solution to the problem, treat the gun companies just like normal companies - even tobacco peddlers - who are legally responsible for their wares. The next of kin of Joseph Ileto are bring suit against Glock amongst other coompanies who armed the white supremicist who killed him. Unfortunately in the real world the weak can never petition justice from the powerful. Ever heard the phrase "industry-sponsored immunity legislation" ?

"The U.S. Supreme Court allowed victims of a white supremacist's shooting rampage in Southern California to sue gun manufacturers Monday and left intact a groundbreaking ruling exposing gunmakers to damages for allegedly flooding the market with weapons that end up in criminal hands. The court's action was praised by a lawyer for the city of San Francisco, which has asked a state appeals court to reinstate a similar lawsuit by 12 local governments accusing gun manufacturers of supplying an illegal gun market. But such suits could be short-circuited by Congress, which came close to passing industry-sponsored immunity legislation last year and is expected to consider it again this year. "

One nation under G.O.D. (guns, opium and dollars)

>But I would accept all victories as being good.

Any victory is encouraging but you shouldn't celebrate one victory too long when you are losing the war.

I do appreciate Amnesty supporters letters do influence worthy cases for the better, and probably a few of them do get more involved with those cases. The same could be organised with a website and volunteer-activists though. £24 million each year could buy the release of a lot of prisoners or hostages each year. Gary Glitter was able to buy his way out of a possible death sentence with £1000 after all.

I don't think worthy causes should ever pay staff. Part of the tax of each Amnesty employee goes to the running of Belmarsh prison just like part of the earnings of every CND employee goes to paying the MoD. Instead, small affinity groups of activists could register as charities, solicit donations directly for cases they cared enough about through a mailing list or central fund, and keep it all voluntary and tax-free.

Also, I do think Human Rights groups should concentrate more on their own governemnts and corporations and other oppressors before looking abroad. Since Amnesty is stuffed with lawyers why don't they bring more prosecutions against the Heads of State / companies involved ? They obviously aren't into nvda so they could at least play to their strengths more.

>learning from progress is far better than prohibiting change - which is all the creeping disapproval ever does.

I used to vote against people (Thatcher, Blair) to try to encourage small victories, I don't now. Chomsky said to vote Democrat against Bush for reasons you'd probably approve of but Mark Thomas said don't vote and Emma Goldmann explained why, and they outrank him in my imaginary personal heirarchy.

I finally figured out my politics vary.

I think I start off post-left, an individualist.
I'm an anarch, anarcho-monarchist, whenever someone looks easily subjectated.
I'm an anarcho-pacifist on NVDA.
I'm an illegalist is I can escape arrest.
I'm a primitivist when I'm lost on a hill.
I'm a eco-anarchist when I can feed myself on the hill.
I'm an anarcho-communist when the commune I stumble across gives me digs.
I'm an anarcha-feminist when I meet the women in the commune.
I'm a situationalist when they show me their etchings.
I'm an anarcho-syndicalist when they make me work for my digs.
I'm a nihilist when I don't complain.
I'm a mutualist if they feed me too.
I'm an anarcho-capitalist when I rob the commune and shoot everyone.
I'm an individualist once I'm on my own again.


More ani as a reward for your post and as a partial explanation of where I am in my head

coming of age during the plague
of reagan and bush
watching capitalism gun down democracy
it had this funny effect on me
i guess

i am cancer
i am HIV
and i'm down at the blue jesus
blue cross hospital
just lookin' up from my pillow
feeling blessed

and the mighty multinationals
have monopolized the oxygen
so it's as easy as breathing
for us all to participate

yes they're buying and selling
off shares of air
and you know it's all around you
but it's hard to point and say "there"
so you just sit on your hands
and quietly contemplate

your next bold move
the next thing you're gonna need to prove
to yourself

what a waste of thumbs that are opposable
to make machines that are disposable
and sell them to seagulls flying in circles
around one big right wing

yes, the left wing was broken long ago
by the slingshot of cointelpro
and now it's so hard to have faith in
anything

especially your next bold move
or the next thing you're gonna need to prove
to yourself

you want to track each trickle
back to its source
and then scream up the faucet
'til your face is hoarse
cuz you're surrounded by a world's worth
of things you just can't excuse

but you've got the hard cough of a chain smoker
and you're at the arctic circle playing strip poker
and it's getting colder and colder
everytime you lose

so go ahead
make your next bold move
tell us
what's the next thing you're gonna need to prove
to yourself

If Amnesty said they were to take legal action over their report then I'd donate.

"However, there continue to be reports of torture and ill-treatment of detainees by US troops, which have occurred since the Abu Ghraib prison scandal was exposed. While dozens of US soldiers have been court-martialed in connection with the abuse of detainees, senior US administration officials have remained free from independent scrutiny....Amnesty International is concerned that several of those tried and convicted by US military courts for committing serious human rights violations in Iraq, including torture or ill-treatment, have received sentences that fail to reflect the gravity of these violations."

Beyond Abu Ghraib: detention and torture in Iraq
 http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde140012006

Also:
www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/etn/dic/exec-sum.asp