How Convenient: Amnesty International Changes Definition of

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Left-wing NGOs are a blight. Rather than helping people, they are determined to pass woke political agendas on the people and nations they hate.

Like Israel.

Here’s Amnesty International, which is supposed to be focused on justice and safety, literally changing the definition of ‘genocide’ in order to smear and attack Israel.

.@amnesty international literally redefined the legal term of genocide to suit their accusation, stripping the term of its actual meaning in the process. The craziest part? They admit this in their report, correctly assuming that most people won’t read all the way to p. 101: 🧵 https://t.co/lqJYrjkidU

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

Just maddening.

This is not just a failure of factual accuracy; it is a willful misrepresentation of international law.

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

Because they want to help terrorists destroy Israel.

in Bosnia v. Serbia (2007), the ICJ held that genocidal intent must be the only plausible inference drawn from a pattern of conduct.

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

A pattern of conduct.

The court reaffirmed this high bar in Croatia v. Serbia (2015), stating that such intent must be “fully conclusive.”

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

That is fully conclusive.

Those words are important.

How does Amnesty get around this inconvenient fact?
THEY DON’T. Take a look at p. 101: pic.twitter.com/8mMyiXLN6E

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

Forget international law and jurisprudence.

THE JOOOS!

Or something.

“As outlined below, Amnesty International considers this an overly cramped interpretation of international jurisprudence…”

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

‘We’re going to ignore what the law says because we have to smear Israel.’

Amnesty says a determination of genocide must be made ‘holistically,” and that “the context in which Israel’s military campaign took place must be part of this holistic examination.”
Ok, @amnesty, you mean the Oct 7 massacre right? That’s the relevant context, right?
Right?…

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

No, no, no.

That’s merely ‘resistance’ to ‘genocidal’ Israel.

Today, it is Israel, but if @amnesty‘s ‘definition’ of genocide was to be accepted then in the future every democracy that wages war to defend itself against terrorism- or even a more conventional enemy- will face the specter of being labeled genocidal.

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) December 5, 2024

The purpose is to label any defensive war as ‘genocidal’, because Amnesty International sides with terrorists and bad actors.

The entire thread is long, but worth a read.

Words mean things. Legal definitions mean things. Amnesty International knows this, which is exactly why they’re changing the meaning and legal definitions of words.

Shame on Amnesty International.