This latest report is a good illustration of why Amnesty no longer commands the same respect. It pushes its pro-illegal immigration agenda and presents, once again, a compilation of fake news that criticizes governments that have put their nations’ interests first and seems to condone the breaking of laws by illegal immigrants.
Reading the report, I lost track of the number of mistakes in the sections about Hungary, but some passages were really extraordinary. Here are just a few examples:
The report starts off by saying that members of the Hungarian Parliament accepted an amendment to the Fundamental Law setting a protocol for a state of emergency in case of a terror threat. This provision is common in other European countries but was missing in the Hungarian legal system. Also, it was based on the legislation of other European countries, particularly that of France, and was approved with opposition support – but you’ll find none of these details in Amnesty’s report. The authors do, however, put the phrase terror threat situation in quotation marks in a way that seems to question its validity in today’s Europe.
The report then turns to the case of Ahmed H., a man living in Cyprus, originally from Syria, who was sentenced in a Hungarian court for coordinating and taking active part in a mob attacking, from the Serbian side of the border, a Hungarian border patrol. It fails to question what Ahmed H., as someone who lived on the territory of the European Union, was doing at a national border crossing between Serbia and Hungary with a stone in one hand and a megaphone in the other.
“In reality,” Amnesty International writes, “Ahmed H was only there because he was helping his elderly Syrian parents flee their war-torn country…Nevertheless, he was convicted, becoming a tragic, chilling symbol of a continent turning its back on human rights.”
The details of Ahmed H’s case are available here, but stop and think about that for a moment. If he had residence in Cyprus, a safe, EU member state, why would he be bringing his elderly parents to the border between Serbia and Hungary? Regardless, he was convicted for taking part in a violent attack on Hungarian border officials. His conviction was not a “chilling symbol of a continent turning its back on human rights.” His conviction was the enforcement of law and order.
The report also talks about “closing” the borders on the Balkans immigration route. “The move was initially championed by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, then taken up by Austria. For many EU leaders, the misery of refugees trapped in Greece was clearly a price worth paying to discourage more from coming.” Brings you to tears, but it is fake news. No borders were closed. The physical barriers were erected to make people go to the legal border crossings (which remained open) instead of illegally crossing the green borders.
The report resurrects a couple of tired, old stories to cast a negative light on Hungary. For example, it cites the terrible Roma killings that took place eight years ago under the previous government. The Orbán Government apprehended and convicted the perpetrators and provided compensation the families of the victims. The report also refers to far-right groups intimidating Roma communities in 2011 but fails to mention that since the Orbán Government outlawed such activities, such incidents have not taken place. Amnesty fails to mention those important details because it would undermine the narrative that they’re trying to build.
The report says that “within the EU, Poland, Hungary and Croatia muzzled public broadcasters,” but in the case of Hungary it refers only to the daily Népszabadság. Népszabadság is not a public broadcaster nor a public newspaper; it was privatized after the democratic transition in 1989-1990 and in 2016 was sold and closed down by a foreign investor. So, who did Hungary muzzle?
The real issue for George Soros-funded Amnesty International is migration. In the world that Amnesty advocates, it seems that there are no borders. People are entitled to travel around unchecked and undocumented, crossing borders as they please. Amnesty is entitled to its opinion, but that anarchistic utopia that they and other Soros-funded groups advocate is something this government, and many other governments, cannot support.
Then, as if that weren’t enough, the Amnesty International report strays off into the fever swamps. Behold the following paragraph from the report, describing the nemesis of populism:
“In 2016 populist movements and messages burst into the mainstream. Politicians across the region tapped into widespread feelings of alienation and insecurity. Their targets were many: political elites, the EU, immigration, liberal media, Muslims, foreign nationals, globalization, gender equality and the ever-present threat of terrorism. In power, in countries like Poland and Hungary, they achieved most, but also further west, they forced anxious establishment parties to borrow many of their clothes and usher in many of their policies. The result was a pervasive weakening of the rule of law and an erosion in the protection of human rights, particularly for refugees and terrorism suspects, but ultimately for everyone.”
If you feel like you need to read that again because it doesn’t make any sense, you’re not alone. Then again, it may not be worth the bother.
Unfortunately, Amnesty International, like many of the once prestigious, international human rights groups has become consumed by an ideologically driven agenda and abandoned reason. Governments elected by the citizens of the nations of Europe – whom they label as populist – have an obligation to put their citizens first. No matter how many poorly informed, fake news-based reports we confront, no matter how loud the denouncements from the Soros grantees, a true democrat has a responsibility to put the interest of the citizens first. That’s what we have endeavored to do all along, and that’s what we’ll continue to do.