17 1 min 14 yrs

Interesting to note that the Roman Catholic church in Northern Ireland has started to instruct schools to disband Amnesty International support groups because of the human rights organisation’s pro-abortion stance. A spokesman for the church in Ireland confirmed that one of its grammar schools in Greater Belfast had been advised to wind up its Amnesty group. He also revealed that the Irish bishops will meet next month to discuss the presence of Amnesty in all Roman Catholic schools.

My reaction is why was Amnesty ever allowed INTO schools in the first place since it is a disgraceful Jihad-supporting anti-human rights organised hypocrisy? I fully agree with this decision and congratulate the Roman Catholic Church on banning Amnesty although one can be certain the pious hypocrites in Amnesty will now wear their victim hood on their arms at this ban. I hope that others will show Amnesty the door.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

17 thoughts on “(Sh)AMNESTY BANNED BY CHURCH

  1. Good for them. Shamnesty should have nothing to do with this issue and the fact that they have decided to adopt this stance makes them incompatible with the RC’s own doctrine. Frankly so should a lot of other things but this is about as cut and dried a case as could be conceived of (no pun intended).

  2. The RC church was happy to give Amnesty a soapbox when it was shouting about Finucane, Nelson et al. Their recent pro-abortion stance has put the RC church behind the 8 ball.

    I recall talking to an Amnesty boy up the street one day. He was giving it loads about the aforementioned and how they had been denied the most sacred of human rights – the right to life. I heard him out and then asked him why he hadn’t mentioned the 302 RUC officers who had been denied the same right. Snow off a rope springs to mind! I haven’t seen him since.

  3. A brief look at the Amnesty International website does not support the right-wing carricature of "a disgraceful Jihad-supporting anti-human rights organised hypocrisy".

    Have a look and see what you think.

  4. "a disgraceful Jihad-supporting anti-human rights organised hypocrisy".

    Minus the jihad (maybe insert paedo) and in so many ways Amnesty and the church deserve one another.

  5. Amnesty used to be an impartial opponent of apartheid AND gulags. Today, it is an implacable foe of the west.

  6. Well bearing in mind not very long ago this organisation was carrying a poll on its front page asking people whether senior US officials or Adolf Hitler are ‘worse’, I will approach this one with a due sense of amusement.

    Top headline story as at 12.00 is Darfur. Opening paragraph:

    "Darfur today is a place of violence and terrifying insecurity. The people are trapped in a web of armed attacks that grow ever more complex with weapons readily available. Janjaweed and Paramilitary forces, armed by the Sudanese government grow ever stronger while more and more armed opposition groups emerge."

    So, let’s see. Its one of those ‘complex’ situations of course, which is sure enough, as always, code for ‘we arent going to mention Islam once’. And they don’t.

    Only one side is attacking civilians. Only one side is committing massacres and gang rapes, only one side has penned hundreds of thousands of people in refugee camps. But its a ‘complex’ issue, according to Amnesty. In fact lines like this:

    "Rape and sexual slavery continue to be carried out with complete impunity. For example, on 26 December 2006 in Deribat village, about 50 women were abducted and systematically raped by armed men."

    …reads like the typical ‘attacker of indeterminate origin with absolutely no connection to a certain religion, honest’ article we see in the MSM when Mohammed Miscellaniq has just murdered someone.

    That top story pretty much nails it for me…

  7. DSD

    None of your analysis remotely supports the description of Amnesty as "a disgraceful Jihad-supporting anti-human rights organised hypocrisy".

  8. Hotspur

    I’m saying it’s absurd to label it as "a disgraceful Jihad-supporting anti-human rights organised hypocrisy".

    I’m not saying it’s perfect. If you want to criticise it, go right ahead, but spare us the absurd name-calling.

  9. Peter/Hotspur,

    I have to base my views on Amnesty on my own experiences of them. Last time we clashed on air, the local Amnesty supremo was trawling Moazaam Begg, the alleged ex-Gitmo Jihadist, around town and it was the US they sought to blacken, not Islam. I have spoken to other Amnesty people here in NI and they share this loathing of the US, which disgusts me. So I have to say that I do not think I am being absurd in how I describe. As I recall, the ludicrous Irene Kahn described Guantanamo as a "gulag"- not sure how weight-gain squares with that!

  10. David

    Opposition to, or even loathing of US foreign policy does not equate to supporting jihad. My point was that Amnesty’s website does not support that interpretation of their views.

  11. No

    One bad example is not enough to say that AI is pro-jihad. That’s an absurd claim to make, as a glance at their website would confirm.

  12. I’d love to see a list of what groups are permitted in the schools and compare their overall records to that of Amensty International.

Comments are closed.