Via Bryan at Hot Air: The title is the byline to Amnesty International. If you click the link you’ll see it’s at the search page with the name Gillian Gibbons in the search field. No results. Gibbons is the teacher in Sudan who’s in big trouble because she let her 7 year old students name a teddy bear “Muhammad.” Why do you think AI doesn’t have a file on her? Do they not know what’s happening? I suspect there are a couple of reasons why they aren’t rallying around her: Political correctness is one. Because it’s a religious issue, especially because it involves Muslims, AI doesn’t want to interfere or criticize. Secondly, AI isn’t politically neutral. Brennan at The American Pundit notes that there are 611 search results for “Guantanamo”. To be fair, he also includes a link to a BBC piece in which AI is asked to give a statement about the case:
The sentence is a mockery of justice and Amnesty International consider Gillian to be a prisoner of conscience.
She should be immediately and unconditionally released.
Perhaps they’re too busy writing about Guantanamo to add anything about Ms Gibbons’ case. My point is that just by questioning them I and others are opening ourselves up to being accused of not caring about human rights. You see, the title of this post says they’re working to protect human rights. How can anyone be opposed to that? It’s the same kind of thing with National Organization for Women, Human Rights Watch, ACLU, etc. Many people take their names and descriptions at face value. If you disagree with them it supposedly means you disagree with their stated goals.