former prisoner knows gulags

former gulag prisoner Pavel Litvinov relates [bugmenot login] a conversation discussing the amnesty international statement equating guantanamo bay with soviet gulags:

"Don't you think that there's an enormous difference?" I asked him.
"Sure," he said, "but after all, it attracts attention to the problem of Guantanamo detainees." [italics added]

there was a time when AI didn't strive to 'attract attention', rather allowing "its fact-based, objective and balanced approach to the defense of human rights" to serve as "a source of hope for dissidents everywhere". however, Litvinonv maintains AI overreached with the "gulag of our time" rhetoric

There is ample reason for Amnesty to be critical of certain U.S. actions. But by using hyperbole and muddling the difference between repressive regimes and the imperfections of democracy, Amnesty's spokesmen put its authority at risk.
[snip]
The most effective way to criticize U.S. behavior is to frankly acknowledge that this country should be held to a higher standard based on its own Constitution, laws and traditions.
[snip]
Words are important. When Amnesty spokesmen use the word "gulag" to describe U.S. human rights violations, they allow the Bush administration to dismiss justified criticism and undermine Amnesty's credibility.

¶ - nitish @ 4:19 PM