I swear, I thought this was the Babylon Bee:
Not that it is the first time this organization has allowed its political agenda to distort its stated mission, but this is especially outrageous. Here’s another highlight:
“Depending on the traveler’s gender identity, race, country of origin, ethnic background, or sexual orientation, they may be at higher risk of being targeted with gun violence, and should plan accordingly.”
Read the whole thing: Amnesty International doesn’t like the Second Amendment.
Now we can firmly deposit another once-respectable organization in the dark box containing teh sullied reputations of once beneficial non-profits that have disgraced themselves by being co-opted by partisan politics and/or anti-American agendas. Keeping Amnesty International company will be the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Nobel Peace Prize, the American Bar Association, the NAACP, and the United Nations, among other lesser lights.
It is increasingly clear to me that under the category of trust, the most crucial ethical value is integrity. Tragically, that appears to be the single value organizations today seem most incapable of maintaining.
Ethics Alarms 
“gender identity, race, country of origin, ethnic background, or sexual orientation,”
If they want to be helpful, how about advice regarding itinerary or destination? Thinking of heading to the South side of Chicago? West Baltimore? East St. Louis? Shouldn’t that advise against any of that?
I would question whether the Southern Poverty Law Center was ever in the “once-respectable” box.
Traditional American conservatives have always viewed Amnesty International, the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Nobel Peace Prize, the American Bar Association, the NAACP, and the United Nations as leftist organizations (and prizes) with an anti-American bias. Now, it is obvious that the traditional wisdom is true. The only question is whether this is a recent, coincidental development or have they always been this way and were just slightly better at hiding it in the past. It is sort of like realizing suddenly that the Democratic Party just views American blacks as tools to use for their own benefit. You can state this is a recent thing, that the party really did care and try to help the black community in the past, but when you try to find examples to support the idea, they become very difficult to find.
Hey, now! 2% of the counties in the US are somewhat dangerous by international standards! We’re not universally safe like Mexico is.
Hey now! Those 2% are the ones that have been controlled by the Democratic Party for at least 30 years. In 54% of US counties, there were 0 murders last year. Look at the map, you can just see the Democrat controlled cities pop right out at you. It is even more concentrated than that. Sixty three of the 77 neighborhoods in Chicago had 1 murder or less (of the 222 murders during the study period). Roughly half of the crime in major cities occurs in 5% or less of the city. Murders and rates of gun ownership are also inversely proportional, so obviously legal gun ownership is not the problem. So we know that our crime problem is in a tiny (geographically) part of the country. Why don’t we concentrate our efforts there? Because it would be racist, that is why! The second link is especially illuminating because it states that the data linking blacks and high crime rates are overwhelming evidence that crime is caused by racism. Of course, this wasn’t always the case, so it indicates that the US has become much more racist in the last 70 years! What else has changed in urban areas with large black populations in the last few decades that could account for the rising black crime rates there?
https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/
https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1108&context=bjcl
My favorite excerpt from the Warning:
“Under international human rights law, the United States has an obligation to enact a range of measures at the federal, state and local level to regulate access to firearms and to protect the rights of people to live and move about freely without the threat of gun violence. The government has not taken sufficient steps to meet this obligation.”
My reply, “Read the U.S. Constitution, comrade. Then go straight to hell. ”
More folks that want to remake the U.S. in Europe’s image. Ain’t happening, not without major spillage of blood, anyway.
Then “international human rights” is a hoax.
I mean, it almost certainly is. I’d love to know what governing judiciary can dictate laws to sovereign nations. “international human rights law” in that context almost certainly doesn’t exist. It would have to be voluntarily signed on to, and I can’t even think of what Amnesty might be referring to.
Does Amnesty usually issue travel advisories? Have they issued any for Mexico or Brazil?
They’re branching out into travel services. I hear they’ve hired Ilhan Omar to head up guided tours of Somalia during congressional breaks. Tour options will include such things as the possibility of finding a meal, small boat visits to commercial vessels off the coast, and something they refer to as the “Warlord Experience”..
Truly chuckle worthy, Wim
agreed
Thanks. Forgot to mention that they will also offer a pre-tour extension with “destination wedding” arrangements for any who would like to marry a sibling “in their faith”.
Oh, the “Warlord Experience” sounds thrilling.
It can be breathtaking…literally.
Guatemala and Venezuela also issued travel advisories, warning their citizens that they would be in danger if they visited dangerous parts of the United States (such as Albuquerque, New Mexico, apparently…). One would hope that the people who write these things have a very dry sense of humor…
Makes you wonder why these people fleeing violence would seek asylum in the U.S..
I am waiting for Trump to seize this PR stunt to seal the borders and start mass deportations. “Numerous countries and Amnesty International have recently published warnings about how dangerous it is to be in the United States. As President, I cannot allow foreign nationals to be exposed to this threat, especially the children. Effective immediately, I have ordered all non-citizens without proper paperwork to be removed from the United States to a safer country. I have been in contact with Canada and Mexico to notify them that we will be sending them each hundreds of thousands of refugees each week for safety.”
Amnesty International is not a human rights organization it is an anti-U.S. government organization.
You can download materials for how to protest and they use Ferguson and Baltimore as examples of the militarization of police. They teach how to deal with tear gas and pepper spray.
This is not about human rights it is about sowing hatred inside and outside the U.S. nowhere on their website discusses human rights abuses around the world.