Amnesty International chose recently to throw its reputation, credibility, and honor into the gutter with a report that accuses Israel of being an "apartheid state" and guilty of "crimes against humanity."  Amnesty has apparently embraced the purported intersectionality between the genuine oppression of black Americans prior to legal and social changes that made discrimination both unlawful and socially unacceptable and terrorists who have stated openly their intention to exterminate or drive out the region's Jews, implement genuine apartheid against Christians, and treat women and LGBT people like second-class citizens or worse.

Terrorists are no bargain for peaceful Muslims, either, and an Amnesty International part-time worker named Hind Khoudary is alleged credibly to have set up an Arab peace activist to be arrested (he was), tortured, and possibly murdered by Hamas, as he was never heard from again.  "Khoudary explained that she did not tag Hamas officials in her Facebook posts against Rami Aman to get him arrested but as a protest against normalization activities."  She therefore stipulates that (1) she made sure terrorists learned that Rami Aman was communicating with Israelis, which Hamas regards as treason, and (2) she is against normalization activities.  As for not wanting him arrested, what did she expect to happen to him?

Amnesty's report also comes dangerously close to the line, and quite possibly on the wrong side of it, of denial of Israel's right to exist, which is anti-Semitic by definition.  The report cites for example the "right" of Palestinians who fled their homes during the invasion of Israel by terrorists (I prefer "terrorists" to "Arabs" in this context, just as I would have blamed "Nazis" rather than "Germans" for the events of 1939 through 1945) to return to Israel and overwhelm Israel demographically to the extent that it becomes just one more dictatorship similar to Syria and also Gaza instead of a free nation with equal rights for all its citizens, including Muslims and Christians who share its ideals.  The report adds, "For example, Palestinian citizens of Israel are denied a nationality, establishing a legal differentiation from Jewish Israelis."  Arabs (and therefore presumably Palestinians) are well represented in the Knesset.

Antisemite International's support (please feel free to use this new name for them) of the so-called Right of Return is but one example of perceived denial of Israel's right to exist.  "Since its establishment in 1948, Israel has pursued a policy of establishing and then maintaining a Jewish demographic majority, and maximizing control over land and resources to benefit Jewish Israelis."  Nobody apologizes for the fact that Israel was created deliberately by the United Nations as a Jewish state in 1948, noting also that land was put aside for Palestinian Arabs as well.  The latter were driven from their homes, or encouraged to leave, by the terrorists who invaded Israel with the openly expressed intention of driving the Jews into the sea.

If Amnesty International has a problem with Israel's defense of its population in 1948 and subsequently in 1967 and 1973, and against rocket attacks today, then it is fair to conclude that the organization has a problem with Jews.  It also turns out that Amnesty International voted down a resolution to fight anti-Semitism in the U.K., which suggests that hatred of Jews has not just a home, but a mansion in Amnesty International.  My perception is that the new name of Antisemite International is well deserved.  See also this page on foreign policy bias, high staff salaries, and a toxic work environment at this organization.

Who are the instigators?

Why did Amnesty International throw away its good name by shilling for the agenda of Hamas?  We can speculate reasonably that it is for the same reason that 501(c)(3) professional societies such as the American Studies Association and Middle East Studies Association, religious organizations like the Presbyterian Church USA and the United Church of Christ, and 501(c)(5) unions such as the Seattle Education Association and PSC-CUNY are putting their good names at risk by joining what I perceive as the Hamas-American Bund: dupes, stooges, and useful idiots for the agenda of terrorists.  Legal Insurrection reports, in fact, that "Hamas 'views with great appreciation and respect the efforts of Amnesty International,'" just as I am sure Hitler viewed with great appreciation and respect the efforts of the German-American Bund during the late 1930s.  It is reasonable to believe that, in most if not all cases, various cabals of instigators are manipulating the organizations in question the same way a virus infests a cell and forces it to make copies of the virus.  That's good for the virus but bad for the cell.

"Scientists discover tipping point for the spread of ideas" describes how a relatively small cabal of manipulators can take over an organization or a society.  "[W]hen only ten percent of the public holds a firm opinion, the majority will always follow."  This is how the Nazis took over one of Europe's most advanced and civilized nations during the 1930s and then led it to ruin.  Dr. Paul Linebarger's Psychological Warfare contends, however, that the figure is closer to two percent, as proven by the communists.  If your organization, whether it's Amnesty International, PCUSA, ASA, MESA, Seattle Education Association, PSC-CUNY, or whatever, has only two or three members out of every hundred who, whether through ignorance, hatred of Jews, hatred of Western civilization, or support for terrorism, can coordinate their efforts sufficiently well to put your organization into the Hamas-American Bund, that is exactly what will happen.

These instigators and agents provocateurs believe that sacrifices must be made for the Cause, at least sacrifices by anybody but themselves.  If your organization's reputation is left in ruins, as has happened to Ben & Jerry's, you get sued by your own members, as happened to the ASA and PSC-CUNY, or your tax exemption gets revoked for ultra vires activities or because the pro-Israel side found material on your website that could be construed reasonably as an attempt to influence an election — and material of that nature has indeed been found and reported to the IRS via Form 13909 in a couple of cases — it's just part of the price that must be paid, and not by the instigators.

Remember that there is a difference between cancer and a virus.  Cancer cannot outlive its host, but a virus kills its host and goes on living.  The instigators who are dragging your business, 501(c)(3) organization, or 501(c)(5) union into the anti-Israel movement are quite likely to imitate a virus by ruining your organization, but they will simply write it off as a cost of serving the Cause and go on to wreak more havoc elsewhere.  Businesses should therefore consider disciplinary action up to and including dismissal, and 501(c)(3)s and 501(c)(5)s sanctions up to and including expulsion, for activity of this nature.

This is not "cancel culture" that seeks to get somebody fired for opinions he expresses outside the organization and while not speaking on its behalf, but rather self-defense against instigators who bring these agendas under the organization's roof.

Civis Americanus is the pen name of a contributor who remembers the lessons of history and wants to ensure that our country never needs to learn those lessons again the hard way.  The author is remaining anonymous due to the likely prospect of being subjected to "cancel culture" for exposing the Big Lie behind Black Lives Matter.

Image: Prachatai via Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.