Okay, we all know that Amnesty International got captured by the militant left years ago and went from a group fighting for the release of prisoners of conscience to a run-of-the-mill political lobby group masquerading as a charity. Anyone who took them seriously after their general secretary said the US prison at Guantanamo Bay was “the gulag of our times” in 2005 is an idiot. Naturally, this means those at the BBC take them seriously, hence an Amnesty report singling out Trump for special criticism is front page news:
Politicians who have used a divisive and dehumanised rhetoric are creating a more divided and dangerous world, says rights group Amnesty International.
Its annual report singles out President Donald Trump as an example of an “angrier and more divisive politics”.
There’s a spectacularly odd notion out there that Donald Trump is a divisive President, implying he approached a unified country and split it in two via “dehumanised” rhetoric. Hopefully there is at least someone out there besides me who thinks Trump’s success was born of the fact that America was already deeply divided long before he threw his hat in the ring for the Republican nomination.
But it criticises other leaders, including those of Turkey, Hungary and the Philippines, who it says have used narratives of fear, blame and division.
It would be easier to list those politicians who don’t employ such narratives. Or are we to believe that the vitriol being poured onto those Brits who voted to leave the EU by the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker and the anti-English bile spewed by Nicola Sturgeon is somehow different?
The group also says governments are exploiting refugees for political ends.
By importing them by the million as voting-fodder and (laughably) to shore up collapsing government finances?
The report, which covers 159 countries, cited a rise in hate speech across the US and Europe targeting refugees and said the reverberations would see more attacks on people on the basis of race, gender, nationality and religion.
Alas, the Amnesty Report doesn’t say what they mean by “hate speech”. What’s the betting their definition includes a mere questioning of the merits of unfettered immigration?
“Instead of fighting for people’s rights, too many leaders have adopted a dehumanizing agenda for political expediency,” Salil Shetty, secretary general of Amnesty International, said in a statement.
“The limits of what is acceptable have shifted. Politicians are shamelessly and actively legitimizing all sorts of hateful rhetoric and policies based on people’s identity: misogyny, racism and homophobia.”
Yes, identity politics is an awful thing, isn’t it? Causes all sorts of rifts and divisions. Just the sort of divisions a man like Trump could come in and exploit, actually. Only he didn’t create them, did he?
The group made special reference to Mr Trump’s executive order last month that banned refugees and immigrants from seven mostly Muslim countries from entering the US.
It said Mr Trump put “his hateful xenophobic pre-election rhetoric” into action by signing the measure.
Whereas Obama’s decision to end the policy of America accepting Cuban refugees doesn’t warrant a mention. Here’s what the report does say about Obama and Cuba (page 25):
Notable events during 2016 included US President Barack Obama’s historic state visit to Cuba, which put the two countries’ human rights challenges – including the ill-treatment of migrants in the USA, the impact of the US embargo on Cuba’s human rights situation, and the lack of freedom of expression and the repression of activists in Cuba – in the international spotlight
It does also say this, though (page 12):
[Trump’s] predecessor, President Barack Obama, leaves a legacy that includes many grievous failures to uphold human rights, not least the expansion of the CIA’s secretive campaign of drone strikes and the development of a gargantuan mass surveillance machine as revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Not that the BBC included this snippet in their article. For reasons of space, presumably.