Those “cards” at Amnesty International are it at it again with their Solzhenitsyn jokes.
William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty’s Washington-based branch, speaking on “Fox News Sunday,” defended the human rights group’s recent criticism of U.S. treatment of detainees at the naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
“The U.S. is maintaining an archipelago of prisons around the world, many of them secret prisons, into which people are being literally disappeared, held in indefinite, incommunicado detention without access to lawyers or a judicial system or to their families,” Schulz said.
“And in some cases, at least, we know they are being mistreated, abused, tortured and even killed.”
Okay, here’s what I’d like to know. How much are these guys being paid to spew this propaganda? I mean what’s the salary of the excutive director of Amnesty International’s Washington Branch and the other key Amnesty executives? Shouldn’t such things be transparent in a pro bono organization like that? I just Googled the question and unfortunately ended up on Monster.com. Maybe someone more web savvy can come up with better information, because people who continue to use the rhetoric applied to Soviet mass murder to characterize US government activities in the War on Terror most probably are making a fair amount of money from it (assuming they’re not members of Islamic Jihad or Al Qaeda). Furthermore, it would be interesting to study Amnesty fund-raising patterns as they relate to increases and decreases in this kind of inflammatory and idiotic verbiage.
UPDATE: NGO salaries can be found here (registration necessary). As of 2002, William Schulz was solidly over 200K. My reason for bringing it up, however, was not solely to attack the man’s salary, but to underscore that there is real money involved in the decisions made by people in these orgazinations. This affects not only their own incomes, but more importantly the general funds of their organizations. Simple-minded anti-Americanisms pay. (You might even attract George Soros.)
I just Googled the question and unfortunately ended up on Monster.com.
Some sort of divination, sounds like, a modern version of the I-Ching? All we need is the commentary. I would like to know how the AI finances work too, but time for bed.
I’m sure whatever their salary was, it is more now.
Until they open up their books I’m sticking with my statement. Prove me wrong. But even that wouldn’t work. So many tables to be under these days. This WoT, hate Bush, America the Gulag is big business. Hasn’t been booming like this since Vietnam.
How many people earn a large enough income to afford donating a huge sum of money to a political candidate?:
NYT Omits Amnesty Leaders Donations to Kerry
ìByron Calame
Public Editor
The New York Times
Dear Mr. Calame:
I believe today’s Times article on the war of words between Amnesty International and the Bush administration omitted some important facts.
The Times reports that “Amnesty has fired right back, pointing out that the administration often cites its reports when that suits its purposes. ‘If our reports are so ‘absurd,’ why did the administration repeatedly cite our findings about Saddam Hussein before the Iraq war?’ wrote William F. Schultz, executive director of the group’s United States branch, in a letter to the editor being published Saturday in The New York Times. ‘Why does it welcome our criticisms of Cuba, China and North Korea? And why does it cite our research in its own annual human rights reports?’” (Source: NY Times )
What the Times failed to additionally report is that Mr. Schultz donated $2,000, the maximum amount allowed by the Federal Election Commission, last year to Bush’s Democratic opponent, Sen. John Kerry.
And Mr. Schultz was not the only Amnesty leader contributing to Kerry’s campaign for the White House in 2004. The chairman of the group’s board of directors, Mr. Joe “Chip” Pitts, along with other top officials of Amnesty, gave money to Kerry. Indeed, all donations from Amnesty executives went to Democratic Party candidates and causes, something not mentioned in the Times.î
http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2005_06_04_mpetrelis_archive.html#111791784959850308
Honestly, this leftist “beam in your eye” stuff is really tiresome.
Only in the warped minds of Mr. Schulz and his fellow leftist freaks could the abject depravity of several hundred other nations that engage in real, bonafide, iron-maiden torture, starvation and murder could the benevolent U.S. detention of 500 scumbags that have taken up arms against us be considered the greater evil.
I don’t no whether to be discouraged that so many idiots think this way, or simply mad that they’re brains have become so bent and flaccid that they no longer have the barest conception of the truth.
N.B. This asshole’s use of “archipelago.” Clever, n’est pas?
Solzhenitzyn would be so touched.
This guy’s not only a world-class schmuck but a really lousy metaphor-builder.
Here’s the address etc:
Amnesty International USA
5 Penn Plaza 14th Floor
New York, NY 10001
phone: (212) 807-8400
fax: (212) 627-1451
email: aimember@aiusa.org
Let’s ask them for their public records.
Do you suppose the peculiar references to the world wide archipelago of secret prisons has anything to do with the practice of “repatriating” prisoners to their countries of orgin for questioning? I wonder how much of that we’re doing.
I would say the same thing to Mr. Schulz as I said to Eason Jordan. These are serious charges and if you have evidence of this mistreatment, abuse, torture and death, please present it. Schulz seems to think that using words like “alleged” and “apparent” absolves him and AI of all responsibility. Those are weasel words, Mr. Schulz, because your organization is the one making the allegations.
I still think his answer to Wallace’s question about whether he really believed that Rumsfeld is an “apparent high-level architect of torture”–It would be fascinating to find out. I have no idea–is priceless. No doubt there would be some fascinating things to find out about you, Mr. Schulz, as well.
Yes, bed.
Absurd. Obscene. This is the nonprofit equivalent of the new wave of over-the-top fast food restaurant ads featuring Paris Hilton and other porn allusions as a way fo breaking through advertising clutter.
More than Schulz’s salary, I wonder about Amnesty International’s continued reputation as an unbiased, non-partisan rights organization. For awhile, that reputation was earned, enough that they could partner up with corporations like Reebok and Bank One (see below.) Do these companies know they’re now tethered to an organization with flagrant anti-American (and anti-Israel) biases, to the point that they’ve undermined their cause?
http://www.amnestyusa.org/join/platinum_visa_card.html
Support Amnesty International
VISAPlatinum Visa Card
Apply for your Amnesty International Visa Card Today!
Support Amnesty International with every purchase you make! Through our partnership with Bank One, when you open an account Bank One will immediately donate $1 to Amnesty, and will continue to donate 1/2 % of all your charges.
Apply Now
Oh, btw, you missed one, Roger: http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/112144/1
May 26 (OneWorld) – Rights watchdog Amnesty International urged foreign governments Wednesday to investigate and prosecute President George W. Bush much as they once did former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.
”If the United States permits the architects of torture policy to get off scot-free, then other nations should step into the breach,” William Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA, said in a statement launching Amnesty’s annual report.
”If the U.S. government continues to shirk its responsibility, Amnesty International calls on foreign governments to uphold their obligations under international law by investigating all senior U.S. officials involved in the torture scandal,” Schulz said.
”If those investigations support prosecution, the governments should arrest any official who enters their territory and begin legal proceedings against them,” he added. ”The apparent high-level architects of torture should think twice before planning their next vacation to places like Acapulco or the French Riviera because they may find themselves under arrest as Augusto Pinochet famously did in London in 1998.”
Comical. Love the imagery, too: as if Bush and Rumsfeld would vacation in France or a second-rate mass market package tour dump like Acapulco.
Also note the repeated “if, then” trope that sounds like something out of a stressed and none too bright first-year law student’s scribbled final exam. This is hypothetical garbage dressed up in pseudo-legalese so as to cover for Amnesty’s bizarre departure from documenting violations that have occurred.
Oh, and wtf is an apparent high-level architect of torture?
Who takes this clown seriously?
Here’s a cache of useful information (which I’ve only skimmed).
For the year 10/02-09/03, William Schulz earned $221,187 including “salary and, if applicable, benefit plans, expense accounts and other allowances”.
Now, really, bed.
This shit stinks so badly even al-Guardian is onto them.
On Wednesday, when Frank Gaffney questioned Amnesty’s analogy, Schultz pawned off the blame on some Bangladeshian British agent of Amnesty International. Whatever the case is, you know Howard believed it. AI and the ACLU have an anti-war, anti-Bush agenda at all times. I really have no recollection of them ever being outraged at any malevolent act purveyed by the terrorists.
More on my blog.
I googled around a bit.
I did find info on the economy of the Swedish branch of AI, they spent around $400.000 on “administration”, including salaries. According to the site, that’s 9% of the money they got donated. The cost of collecting money is 19%.
http://net11.amnesty.se/www/om/ekonomi/vadkostarinsamling
This may, or may not, correspond to the rest of Amnesty.
Then I decided to check out AI international, and Amnesty USA, but couldn’t find the same info there, at least not as easy as on the Swedish site.
Surfing around a bit, I did find this link about Amnesty:
http://discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6185
There are some mentioning of funding there, (Columbia Foundation; the Ford Foundation; the John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; and the Rockefeller Foundation) but I’m not really sure how to confirm that.
Then I decided to check out Mr Schulz:
http://discoverthenetwork.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1800
This is his bio at Amnesty:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/about/williamschulz.html
It gives pretty much the same info; served on the boards of People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the Communitarian Network and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, among others. Also wrote the book “Tainted Legacy: 9/11 and the Ruin of Human Rights”
Just one more thing before I go. Buried in another thread that you may not have seen, Roger, is a link to Schulz’s press conference announcing the report. Have a listen.
(having a hard time tearing myself away…this topic has had us exercised all day)
Amazon has 3 editorial reviews for Tainted Legacy: 9/11 and the Ruin of Human Rights (they have copyrights attached and I’m not clear on the rules for reproduction).
The Schulz spin is that AI sets the standards and issues the reports and he’s the US messenger. Nice try, Mr. Schulz. Try again.
A study in contrasts: AI and NorKor in this fpm.com article. Excerpt:
“… testimony from Sun Ok Lee, herself a former Party member in North Korea, falsely accused and sentenced to six years in forced labor camps. One would think that her autobiography, Eyes of the Tailless Animals: Prison Memoirs of a North Korean Woman, along with reams of Congressional testimony detailing her brutal experiences would be sufficient to get at least an expression of interest from [Amnesty International], but it has not been so.”
Later:
“The US executive director of AI, William Schultz, has been with the organization for several years. He was influential in rejecting the 1995 North Korean defector’s testimony. Schultz is also reported to be affiliated with groups such as the Unitarian Universalist Association that was extreme in its condemnation of South Korea during the 1970s and 1980s but mute in any judgment about the brutality occurring north of the DMZ in the evil twin, North Korea. Many of his colleagues have visited North Korea, celebrating such occasions as Kim Il Sung’s birthday and enthusiastically participating in seminars on the ‘Juche Ideology.’ [NorKor's statist ideology/religion]“
No matter how much he makes, the point that he is speaking lunacy stands on its own. Tying the condemnation of his crazy allegations to a challengeble and unnecessary assertion about money just weakens the counter argument.
There are plenty of people spewing this stuff around the country these days, from positions of power to the tiniest blogs, and many of them do it for nothing but the exercise of whatever internal demons torment them. It’s a form of rhetoric that has become fashionable, not necessarily driven by corruption or conspiracy. And it’s simply stupid and self-destructive, but that point presently seems beyond their grasp at the moment.
Roger,
Shouldn’t such things be transparent in a pro bono organization like that?
It looks like AI isn’t big on transparency. AI is shredding documents like a Nazi concentration camp commander before liberation:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/05/national/05aclu.html?ei=5065&en=6ae08e08ba53587f&ex=1118548800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
Hey, if AI can conjure up stupid methaphors, why can’t I? After all, these days, everybody gets to be a Nazi for 15 minutes. I suppose I should at least give AI credit for not making a Nazi allusion – which are rapidly approaching cliche status.
Morning all.
This loser can make all the cracks he wants about the US using their information, but that was then and this is now and I doubt very much if professionals like Coni Rice would take AI’s word for much of anything these days.
Happens all the time, new management comes in and the place goes to hell.
The secret prison system would I think refer to the prisons of other nations. But since this rich white self satisfied mouthy propagandist fails to actually come out with evidence to support his claims we can only guess.
It sounds like he has a history as a liberal mouth piece. He can say AI is not political, but if that were so I doubt they would hire a guy like him.
Didn’t Norman Lear run the People for the American Way or something? I wonder how much money he gave AI to put this guy on staff?
They never have come up with a reasonable alternative to Gitmo. In fact if all the lawyers would go home they might resolve questions of who gets tried where and end a lot of the controversy.
But the truth is the world knows there are worse prisons out there than anything envisioned at Gitmo and the fact that AI is using its resources to go after the US makes them look political. And that is not good for their long term standing.
I wonder how much of this has to do with Schulz’s buddy John Kerry, the man who would be president? Trashing the US military is something he is famous for. sounds about right. next will be the other pics from AbuGhraib. the bastards.
speaking of human rights…
Who has done more to feed, shelter, liberate, and protect the rights of ordinary people? Sshulz or the US military..the answer is easy. When the tsunami hit those poor folks were a lot happier to see the US Navy than the NGOs with their clip boards and land rovers.
Think of China, North Korea, the Sudan…most of Africa. When was the last time Amnesty checked out a French prison? the list goes on.
Do they care about women being stoned to death in the Muslim world? Or about women being mutilated and left to die of sepsis or blood loss? It seems not.
Bush is right, they are absurd and I would like to see the French try to arrest Rumsfeld. that would be freaking entertaining.
But should Mugabe or Chavez be arrested? apparently not.
Guys like Schulz do everything they can to destroy the image of the US and then they brag about it.
I don’t know what US libel and slander laws are but but if Schultz had called x a child molester then used the lame “It would be fascinating to find out. I have no idea” excuse he would end up living in a cardboard box.
Peter:
This is America. If you say Saddam had weapons you are a liar. If you call an American soldier a war criminal you are speaking truth to power or some such shit.
BTW the NYT has decided that Gitmo is our ‘national shame’. [and here I thought it was our failure to ratify Kyoto]
I think the Times should start an Adopt a Terrorist Campaign. You know, since we can not keep them under lock and key maybe some of these guys who are so outraged would like to bring these folks into their homes. The terrorists can wear leg bracelets and bunk with family. That way we will know they are happy and well cared for.
I heard General Myers say a few days ago that about 68,000 people have gone through American custody. I would assume that includes Iraq and Afghanistan. He said there had been about 100 cases of abuse and about 300 people had been arrested and are facing military justice. I think there have been 27 deaths.
I am not saying that any deaths are acceptable, but I doubt if our domestic prison system has a record that good.
Ryan Sager wrote an excellent piece in the NY Post describing the interlinkage between foundations and charitable trusts pushing the passage of the Soros/McCain/Feingold legislation. Byron York’s book ‘The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy’ furnishes detailed information on how Moveon and ACT abused their 501(3)c status with impunity during the last election.
AI/Pew/Ford/Moveon/ACT/Tides/ANSWER can be considered one organization – an organization dedicated to changing America into somethng that really would resemble the Gulag. I don’t care how much Schulz is paid to practice sedition (although that was a great find, Kyda), I do care that he is part of a coordinated effort that is far more dangerous to the US than OFF is to the UN. The Soros/McCain/Feingold act is the first abridgement of free speech that I’ve seen. It is a black mark for George Bush in signing it, a black mark for the USSC in upholding it and an especially black mark on the record of every legislator who voted for it.
Please read the Sager piece cited above. It is a real ‘canary in the coal mine’ concerning the 501(3)c’s. They are not harmless dogooders with a leftward tilt – they are termites at the foundation.
Let’s see… AI has apparently called for the arrest of the President of the United States, accused the US of running the 21st Century’s gulag, yet…
Despite highly publicized charges of U.S. mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo, the head of the Amnesty International USA said on Sunday the group doesn’t “know for sure” that the military is running a “gulag.”
Executive Director William Schulz said Amnesty, often cited worldwide for documenting human rights abuses, also did not know whether Secretary Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved severe torture methods such as beatings and starvation.
and…
Schulz said, “We don’t know for sure what all is happening at Guantanamo and our whole point is that the United States ought to allow independent human rights organizations to investigate.”
He also said he had “absolutely no idea” whether the International Red Cross had been given access to all prisoners and said the group feared others were being held at secret facilities or locations.
To quote a famous rabbit, “What a maroon.”
Here is the page from Charity Navigator:
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3294.htm
They give Amnesty a 2 Star rating. (Magen David Adom US gets a 4 Star rating!)
oops, I neglected to source my quotes which are from this Reuters articles.
While hundreds of thousands of Dafur black Muslims (the Christians have been mostly killed off by now) are being systematically raped, mutilated and slaughtered by the racist Arab Janjaweed, Amnesty International is hyperventilating over the rights and comfort of a few hundred Muslim terrorists and suspects at Gitmo. According to WaPo, “In the past week, traffic on Amnesty’s Web site has gone up sixfold, donations have quintupled and new memberships have doubled.”
While we and Iraqis are struggling to build a free, safer and saner country in the ME, the ACLU just successfully sued to keep last year’s hazing and humiliation incident of suspected terrorists and hardened criminals at Abu Ghraib in the headlines and now on video. How much money have they made this week?
The marketing of anti-Americanism is so lucrative that to hell with safeguarding the lives and civil rights of innocents. “Protecting” their torturers and killers and hating the US brings in a bigger buck. Please, Roger, stay on the money trail, and we should all shame those “centrist” Dem pols into speaking out loudly about this sick opportunism. For them to stay on the sidelines is to be complicit and opportunistic, as well.
…we should all shame those “centrist” Dem pols into speaking out loudly about this sick opportunism. For them to stay on the sidelines is to be complicit and opportunistic, as well.
Where have all the Moynihans gone?
Would the late Senator recognize his party?
Moynihan’s law: “The number of complaints about a nation’s violation of human rights is inversely proportional to their actual violation of human rights.”
C,
You are, of course, correct. This was a fundraising stunt for AI in the time-honored “sucker born every minute” mode. The suckers sent their money to AI.
Pretty much tells us what AI and other such organizations think of their benefactors, doesn’t it. No truth, not even a little bit of perspective is required. Just whip up some red meat for the fools and watch the donations roll in.
Rick Ballard:
“AI/Pew/Ford/Moveon/ACT/Tides/ANSWER can be considered one organization – an organization dedicated to changing America into somethng that really would resemble the Gulag.”
Rick, I believe the name of the Organization they all belong to is the Democratic Party. And yes, throw in the MSM also, that is the PR Arm.
OneOrganization Government?
You’re right, Mr. Simon. Studying their funding would be a capital idea…as would any de-funding we could encourage. I’ll bet much of it comes from Mrs. Kerry’s — sorry, she returned to her old name, Mrs. Heinz — umbrella foundation for funding all sorts of leftist/socialist/anti-American groups. Usually they have the word ‘justice’ in their title somewhere.
Here’s a neologism from Eamonn Fitzgerald’s blog: Animosity International. Great name!
http://www.eamonn.com/
Also — some research is in order to find organizations which report accurately on the topics which Animosity distorts and ignores. The truth, sans the hate-America-first twist, would be refreshing.
Um…Roger, is is also possible that they may be taking other forms of payment to spew their vitriol in this fashion?
BurbankErnie,
I would not characterize the Democratic Party as seditionist in nature. The SBL, Ltd. purchase of the DNC (which is not, in reality, the party) is going to split the Democrats cleanly. The heart of the party, the life of the party has always been and hopefully, will always be, patriotically American in nature. Fifth Avenue born Howlin’ Howie and Giggolo John are in the process of being rejected as representatives of what was, and hopefully will be again a party that at least pretends to speak for the interests of the average worker.
Weathervane Biden is always a good indicator of wind direction at the party base level and he repudiated Howie rather forcefully yeaterday. The cabana boy’s latest attempts to seek the limelight are being met with either silence or outright derision.
The OneWorlder’s are using the DNC as a megaphone with the aid of the fellow traveling Fantasy 500 editors in the MSM propaganda organs but it’s not worling too well. The fall off in donations to the DNC is a fairly good indicator of just how badly the message is being received. The party is going to have to split fairly soon or it’s going to become simply irrelevant.
Oh..I forgot: my favorite Russian joke:
There was a carnival exhibition in Moscow. The signs outside claimed that for a kopek you could go in and see a talking horse.
People paid their coin and took their seats inside. Slowly the place filled up and everyone looked expectantly at the horse on stage. The horse, however, ignored them, and simply stood there.
The crowd began to grow restive; there was an increasing murmur among the audience. Still, the horse stood there, looking off into space.
The murmurs of dissatifaction grew louder. People began to demand their money back. Finally, the barker who’d been outside urging people in, ran up the aisle, grabbed a stout pole, and bashed the horse over the head.
Heaving a big sigh, the horse turned to the audience and said dolefully, “why can’t I just die?”
___
PS The world is divided into those who get this joke and those who don’t. For those of us who do, it’s pluperfect Russian humor.
Rick,
Sorry, I misremembered where Dean was raised, it was Park Avenue, not Fifth Avenue.
The son of a stockbroker and art appraiser, Howard Brush Dean III was born November 17, 1948. He split his childhood between his family’s residences on Park Avenue on New York’s Upper East Side and in the Hamptons, a favorite stomping ground for New York’s elite on southeastern Long Island.
ChicagoBoyz’ Mitch Townsend does a good job of pointing out some of the stuff AI neglected to mention during their fundraising campaign. See it here (well worth the long read) at Amnesty Travesty.
Here’s a WaPo “Column” by Dana Milbank that containes an interesting, if true, factoid: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/04/AR2005060401344.html
Schulz isn’t protesting too much. In the past week, traffic on Amnesty’s Web site has gone up sixfold, donations have quintupled and new memberships have doubled.
Far be it from me to extrapolate on the basis of one week’s worth of data points. Given most journalists’ innumeracy, I also wonder whether these data points are even accurate for the period in question. And you can almost see the author’s smirk as he ties this can to Bush’s tail.
Is it true? Or just a bad reading of a couple of data points? Has anyone found any hard data on trends in Amnesty’s donations and the dynamic of its mix of donors?
Dymphna,
I had a Russian working for me for a year and found his humor to be deliciously dark, sardonic and affirming all at the same time. Sometimes it was a struggle to fully appreciate the experience behind his ‘edge’, but it was always more accessible after a shot of vodka–
Russians could probably teach us a thing or two about how to simultaneously suffer and mock the propaganda of AI and other anti-humanitarian/American organizations.
thibaud,
I linked to that article, too, but am a bit frustrated that Milbank didn’t cite his source on those numbers. Have you any leads?
Amnesty’s reaction to intensified competition for donations is no different from the reaction of Carl Jr’s or Wendy’s to intensified competition in their markets: hit ‘em where they ain’t. Focus on an edgier target market that’s not been sewn up by your competitors. Grab mindshare through in-your-face advertising tailored to this edgy niche.
Compare each’s Brand/Target Niche/Channel/Pitch:
–Carl Jr’s/16-24 yr-old white suburban males/TV ads/Paris Hilton in a latex thong holding a Carl’s superburger. Provokes reaction from watchdog groups considered uncool by young males. Huge PR bonanza; Carl Jr’s CEO laughs at critics and makes “outrageous” remarks that garner still mroe PR. Carl Jr’s is branded as edgy, cool, hip. Verdict: huge success.
–Amnesty Int’l/MoveOn+Kos+DU Bushhaters/MSM press coverage/Wm Schultz calling Gitmo a Gulag, then part of an “archipelago”. Provokes reaction from Bush admin, bloggers, others considered evil by the target audience. Huge PR bonanza; Amnesty’s chief sneers at critics and makes “outrageous” remarks that garner still more PR. Amnesty is re-branded as edgy, cool, hip. Verdict: huge success.
In the past week, traffic on Amnesty’s Web site has gone up sixfold, donations have quintupled and new memberships have doubled.
Well this might be true.The ‘believers’must have their Must-Hate Bush moments.
The problem is that AI means NOTHING .Being excessively candid for a moment,and with some respect for the moral rightness of pointing out where the brutes are being their most brutal,is there any indication that AI really DOES anything to defeat the monsters?
Does Mugabe give a rat’s a** whether he makes the top ten on AI’s lists ?Does the Burmese junta? Does Castro? Do the Iranian Muallahs?How about the Chinese ?
I think not. AI can collect all the money it wants and sign up all the ‘usual suspects’,and in the end —- Nada,Zip,Nothing.Their only real influence in the past was having some peripherial impact on the actions of the BIG movers and shakers in the world.
Pissing Off the Numero Uno Power in the World and voluntarily removing yourself from the calculations seems a poor way to actually accomplish your end goals.Well unless your end goals are really to feel ever so good about yourself,and PRETEND that you are doing so much GOOD. AI is becoming like Move-On.org;a giant echo chamber of same-o,same-o,with no impact on events outside of its self-important imagination.
Also note the smirking, gossipy nature of Milbank’s “column”. I don’t read it regularly, or WaPo for that matter, so perhaps I’m attaching more importance to it than I should. (Is this buried on page C17 of the dead-tree edition?)
But isn’t there something faintly repulsive about a journalist treating this controversy as a little catfight, with snarky, sarcastic asides and winks?
“Gulag” is a grave charge. The sacred memory of millions slaughtered there is as serious and heavy as anything connected with the holocaust. For a marketing organization – and that’s what AI has become, in the main – to exploit this memory in order to dun extra $$$$ from Bush-haters is disgusting, no matter how the MSM’s jokers wish to spin this.
Thibaud,
It doesn’t seem to be easy to get a look at how AI gets it’s money.
Best I can figger they are a low $30M/yr org. Call it $35M. Now let’s (for the sake of making the ‘rithmetic easier) assume that $9M of that comes from various heavy hitters. That leaves $26M/year from donations from the Little People (TM).
That, of course, is $0.5M/week. Or, to not burden some with the horrors of the Metric System, that’s $500,000 per week. If their donations quintupled that would mean $2,500,000 for the week. I think the SwiftVets beat that in a day or two and the tsunami relief site (Amazon) that my daughter and I tracked was jumping nearly that much ever coupla hours. If a quintupling spike in AI’s donations might mean something less that $2.5M, they are in trouble.
I hereby assert that AI lost more than 50% of their annual pledges thereby dwarfing whatever uptick they got from Shultz’s “I know nothing” performance and, in fact, a full 1/3 of their membership resigned in protest of their report and actions surrounding.
I have no proof nor did I contact AI to ask, but it would be fascinating to find out.
There is no longer a “paper of record.” Pinch Sulzberger’s stated strategy is to cater to the views and needs of his “most loyal” core readers, ie his Bush-hating urban metrosexual audience. This means the Times will favor Guardian-style viewspaper reporting, and especially opinion and “analysis”, over straight news reporting.
There is no longer an independent “conscience” organization devoted to the cause of human rights. Schulz and his ilk are clearly seeking to do another Joe Trippi and grab a share of the Kos/MoveOn/DU wallet, the same resource that gave Dean, another over-the-top, Carl’s Jr-style screamer, ~$50m in a matter of several weeks. This means we can expect more screaming and more partisanship from AI. Buckle your belts.
Anyone else sense another opportunity for the blogosphere to pick up the fallen standard of objective, fact-based straight reporting?
“Bloggers International” for Human Rights.
Here’s a “moderate” Dem indirectly standing up for rights of the Gitmo terrorists by calling for the camp’s closure (ht Charles Johnson):
…Sunday, Sen. Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), D-Del, said in Washington the United States should move toward shutting down the military prison camp in Cuba, calling it “the greatest propaganda tool that exists for recruiting of terrorists around the world.”
Rather rich, isn’t it, that by calling the place a propaganda tool for terrorists Biden is promulgating propaganda for the anti-American lib/leftists/radical Muslims who would shut down Gitmo? His reasoning must be that, if our enemies, to include AI, propagandize against our security measures, then we should forfeit them- the measures and not our support and tolerance of those who oppose us. Good thinking, Joe.
Let’s try that link, again on Biden.
Knuck – good analysis; you’re probably in the ballpark on the numbers. I’d agree that Amnesty is probably in bad financial shape, and desperate to gain share of mind again.
As to the numbers, here’s another approach. If you know the # of employees, you can estimate any organization’s revenues by assigning a Full Time Equivalent cost to each employee, depending on the business they’re in, and multiply that FTE cost/employee by the # of employees. For a non-profit NGO that does research and produces paper and speeches, an appropriate FTE cost would probably be in the neighborhood of $80k/employee. If Amnesty has 300 full time equivalent employees, then their annual revenues would be in the neighborhood of $24M.
If so, then every year, Mr Shulz and his comrades must huddle before the powerpoints and whiteboards and figure out a path to at least $24m in revenues. Like any sales exec, they’ll survey their major account officers, or whatever Amnesty calls the guys they assign to stroking the sugar daddies at Carnegie, Ford, Macarthur, Soros etc., and then ask their marketing people to devise a strategy to come up with the difference between what the sugarpop guild will produce for Amnesty and $24m.
Look at Amnesty’s plight. Why would Soros, for example, pony up more than a few hundred $000 for Amnesty? Soros wants to be in the same business, as it were. They’ve hired a major name, Aryeh Neier to run their own human rights gig, and clearly George Soros himself wants for himself the prestige and glory of leading the charge of human rights.
As to Carnegie and Ford, they too are branching out. They have literally hundreds of claimants on their money and, more importantly, their attention. In the private equity/venture capital world, it’s often impossible for a very large fund to make medium-to-small investments because the fund simply doesn’t have enough people to manage lots of little investments effectively. Carlyle, TPG, GE Capital: these firms IIRC will not make investments below, oh, about $20M. To the extent Amnesty in the past was dependent on relatively small investments from funds like Macarthur that have expanded enormously in the last two decades, Amnesty ran the risk of falling into a nowhere land of “neither big enough nor cool enough” to warrant significant money and time.
Which means that Amnesty’s donor base MUST shift if Amnesty is to keep its doors open. Hello, Kos! Yoo hoo, MoveOn! Over here!
Just my guess, but it stands to reason, given the extremely crowded NGO market these days.
I care far less about how much Mr. Schulz makes or who pays for it than I do about whether he has presented any verifiable evidence in support of his claim. As far as I can tell, he’s presented precisely as much as I can present for a claim that he helped plan and execute the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
I’m with Knucklehead. I know that AI is a communist front and that its executives wear opposite sex underwear. Moreover, as reported in Newsweek, Mr. Schulz’s Depends failed, and he accidentally wet himself while desecrating a
Bible.
I have abolutely no evidence for any of my claims, but I think it would be fascinating to find out.
Check this out, folks. Results of my five-minute phone conversation just now with the member services director of AmnestyUSA in NYC (“Jeffrey”, no last name given):
AMNESTY USA is an independent operating subsidiary (“chapter”) of Amnesty International, which is headquartered in the UK.
Members: 300
2004 revenues: $40M
2004 expenses: $46M
% of revenues devoted to fund-raising and admin: 31%
Composition of revenues:
75% of total ($30m) came from small donors (ave contribution size = $40)
Regulatory/environmental challenges:
Great pressure now from new Patriot Act requirements that Amnesty, other NGOs verify source of funds is not a terrorist organization.
SUM:
–A $6M annual operating deficit, ie an operating margin of -15%!
–Fund-raising has become much mroe difficult due to the Patriot Act.
–Amnesty is almost totally dependent on small donations.
Becoming a little clearer, eh?
Note that I was wrong on the cost per FTE (full time equivalent employee), partly because of the high cost of maintaining a Manhattan office (and offices in high-priced labor mkts like SF, LA, DC), but more likely because Amnesty’s salaries are way out of line.
I guessed that nonprofit types make ca $80k per year – if this is too low for NYC, SF etc, then bump it to $120k/FTE. But even that higher figure, on an employee base of 300, would yield total expenses of only $36m. Instead, Amnesty’s expenses in 2004 were $46m, or ca. $152k per FTE. No expert on NGOs here but that strikes me as ridiculously high.
And $152k/FTE is the average. The likely explanations are that either Amnesty is ridiculously top-heavy, with far too many senior people like Schulz drawing down salaries north of $200k, or else the majority of staff earn normal NGO salaries in the $75k range and an extraordinary amount fo $ is wasted on… what could it be?
Marketing, perhaps? 7% of revenues is normal for a healthy organization. Amnesty is probably spending twice that % on marketing. Which means, to put it simply, that Amnesty’s marketing is a disaster. Add the continuing Patriot Act squeeze and you have an organization that is ripe for desperate PR and marketing stunts.
And unlike the Paris Hilton pornburger ad campaign, screaming “Gulag” didn’t cost AI one penny. Brilliant. Deserves to be written up in Adweek.
Great work thibaud! Thanks, that clarifies things quite a bit. Do you have anything to say about the 31% for fundraising/admin. IIRC these numbers in the Swedish branch broke down as ~10% admin, 20% fundraising. I assume the remainder goes to research and ?. Anyway, thanks again.
Great work, thibaud. It looks like they fell far short of meeting expected revenues last year. I suspect they had amped up expectations and expenditures following a bonanza in 2003.
It is also possible that they were working down a surplus – as a not-for-profit (I assume) I believe they would need to plow any surplus back into their operations.
See comments on marketing expense as a % of revenues. I’m willing to cut a little slack to an NGO – maybe 10% of revenues is normal for marketing spend – but if AI USA is, as I suspect, spending 15%+ on marketing, then it’s pretty obvious what must be constantly weighing on the minds of Schulz and their executive committee.
Especially when you have to ‘splain to your UK parent why you need them to cover you for $6M per year, or 15% of your revenues….
Can you imagine the phone conversations between London (AI International) and Schulz et al in NYC?
London: “$6M??? Again?! What in bloody hell are you folks doing over there?”
Schulz: “Hey, don’t talk to me, talk to Ashcroft. Cut us some slack. This Patriot Act thing’s a bitch. The ACLU’s helping but it’s gonna take time.”
London: “We’re tired of your excuses. Either you close the gap in 2005, or we’ll find another set of directors of AI USA.” [slams phone]
Schulz [adds to list of To-do's]:
1) put resume on Monster.com
2) call Sy Hersh
3) research off-balance sheet transaction thingy (Enron guyz’ approach)
4) arr mtg with PR to revise strategy – remember, no new mktg funds!!
Note another point re marketing expense as a % of revenues. Even if NGOs normally spend – let’s be generous – on fund-raising up to 20% of revenues, Amnesty’s marketing is still failing to get the job done. Clearly, in strategic terms, this is an organization undergoing intense pressure from new competitors and from a new regulatory environment. This is the kind of perfect storm that can bring down an organization – or, at a minimum, cause the executive team to lose their jobs.
I don’t have all the necessary info, but given the bite that the Patriot Act must be taking on these people, there’s clearly more than a whiff of desperation in Amnesty’s executive suite.
The Gulag-mongering’s going to get a lot worse. $6M is a high hurdle when most of your donations are only $40/pop, and this hurdle will get even higher if the large donors decide to scale back and distance themselves from the new Gulagmongering/ pornburger AmnestyUSA.
Do the math. Unless the size of the average donation changes – and there’s no reason to believe that it would – Amnesty needs about $6m/$40 = 150,000 new donations just to break even and get London off its back. The only way to turn this around is, literally, with a tsunami at your back.
Or by screaming, ChiMPy bUSHiTlER’s GULaG arCHipElAGo!!!
I think I’ll contact the foundations, and politely ask that they consider defunding AI on the grounds that it no longer makes an honest effort to fulfill its mission.
I will suggest that they shift funding to Freedom House which, while not perfect, does a much better job of remaining objective in its analyses, rather than warping its conclusions to fit its marketing needs.
A noble mission, Morgan, but futile. Note that Amnesty’s revenues pre-GulagPorn were almost completely dependent on small donors, and are now almost certainly weighted even more toward the little guys.
The grand lesson of Trippi and Kos in 2004 was that you can raise enormous sums – in their case $50m for Dean – from many hundreds of thousands of small donors, in a hurry, provided you scream loud enough for them.
I don’t know whether AI USA can reach 150,000 such screamers, but I’d bet they’re getting close. Strange times we live in. Expect much more of this.
thibaud:
I’d like to see some of the 25% of that funding that comes from the big guys yanked.
Screeching “Gulag Archipelago!” is a one-shot deal. It may get them the funds they need this year, but next year, the year after that…
They’ll need to screech louder, and they’ll sound even stupider. And they’ll lose more big donors.
I’d like to put them in a tough spot – clean up or sacrifice their last shred of respectability.
Either outcome would be fine.
Slightly OT–
I hate to get technical, but aren’t air shafts usually located up high? Was the soldier who dribbled his golden shower on the Koran peeing off a roof or what?
While, I’m on the subject, how did the military verify that this really happened? Did they take a urine sample from the prisoner’s Koran and match it up? If so, how much did the spectroanalysis cost the U.S. taxpayers?
Is there any end in sight to this stupidity?
Fresh Air,
Newsweek reported that internet hunting technology perfected in Texas is now being used to remotely direct a golden stream toward a Gitmo Qu’r'a’n of the customer’s choosing. The pump thus controlled is mounted inside the air shaft, with the camera mounted on the ceiling of the detainee’s cell. The internet company offering this is expected to IPO in Q1 2006.
Thibaud–
Yeah, I saw that, too. I also heard Cheney and Bu$Hitler are getting allotments of cheap stock before the IPO. Richard Mellon Scaife and Carlyle Group provided the venture capital.
Hear what the brokerage houses are calling the deal? I Pee…Oh
Take that, Larsen.
Went to bed mad, woke up mad (with lots of weird dreams inbetween), still mad.
The Network for Good (put them on your contact list, Morgan), has financial statement data from AIUSA Form 990 for fiscal year ending 9/30/03. They reported a net loss: $(5,589,900). Administrative expenses were 5.5% of total expenditures and “other” expenses (primarily fundraising/marketing I should think) were 22% of total expenditures.
I did not find data anywhere for FY 2004.
Who is entitled to access IRS Form 990?
For FY 2004 AIUSA reported an operating surplus of $359,000.
http://charityreports.give.org/Public/Report.aspx?CharityID=143
Looks like they gave thibaud outdated information.
The fall off in donations to the DNC is a fairly good indicator of just how badly the message is being received.
The lefty blogs have taken issue with the reports showing that fundraising under Dean has significantly fallen off. If you throw out 2004 (which seems proper since it was a presidential election year), they say, the DNC in 1st quarter 2005 has raised more money than in any year since the previous presidental election year. I went to the FEC website to see for myself. The numbers Kos, DU and others are throwing out are somewhat skewed because they went straight to the bottom lines for their data, but the actual contribution numbers do support their position. The following numbers are for total contributions from individuals and PACs for the 1st quarter (except for 2001 which shows data the period 1/1-6/30 as there is no 1st quarter report available):
2005 $14,095,989
2003 8,322,262
2002 8,723,958
2001 13,295,067
On this basis (should you agree with the premise), old Howard’s not doing so badly.
Thanks, Morgan. That’s data from the web site I found last night. Duh.
Morgan, here’s the source of the confusion:
In addition, some ($6,794,728, or 19%) of the total program expenses reported represents donated services, and is also recognized in AIUSAís financial statements as a source of revenue
I believe that these $6m in “donated services” represent the contribution of the UK parent organization to Amnesty USA that covers the $6m deficit the fund-raising chief described to me on the phone. Note that it is absurd to classify this as both an expense and a revenue. It’s what accountants call a plug number, and ought properly be included not on the P&L but on the balance sheet as a cash infusion.
Put it another way: what kind of “services” could cost $6M?? I mean, it’s not the UN we’re talking about.
thibaud,
could the donated services cover such things as letter writing? One of the big points of the old AI was to get individuals to write letters to government officials and such.
Doubt it. How would that constitute “revenue”?
They clearly include the $6M in the $46M revenue total, contrary to the $40M revenue figure that the head of fund-raising gave me. However, they don’t break out or describe these supposed “services”, so we’ve no way of knowing whether it was letter-writing or letter-opening or letter-delivering – or more likely, simply a check from Amnesty International to cover the US operation’s deficit.
I believe that my source – who, as the guy charged with bringing in donations, touches and tallies the revenue every day – is more reliable than an incomplete summary of an incomplete and non-transparent P&L.
A “plug number” in accounting is usually a variable. On the income statement, for example, it might be an indirect overhead cost included in Cost of Goods Sold. On the balance sheet, it might be an intangible like “goodwill”.
Donated goods and services belong on the income statement just like donated cash.
Sorry, but something here doesn’t smell right. The guy who raises money for Amnesty told me that their revenues in 2004 were $40m and their expenses $46m. Surely he has his numbers straight. Clearly, he is not including the $6m in the revenue total, and neither should we. Amnesty is in trouble. It is relying on infusions of cash from its parent to cover its deficit.
Thibaud–
Donated services would probably be a “contra-expense,” such as free use of a meeting facility, free legal services, etc. They would probably record the full expense and net out the donated part.
My guess is this would be necessary in order for the donor to claim a tax deduction. DennisthePeasant would know.
Channelling Dennis…
{brain waves stretching towards Ohio}
FA,
DtP is waaay too deep in The Adventures of Treeflower and Noam to give this much thought.
“Contra accounts” are normally balance sheet accounts used to arrive at net valuations for assets and liabilities (eg. accumulated depreciation is a contra account).
Let me see if I can regroup here. If I donate, say, a car to a charity, it records that donation at fair market value as an asset (and correspondingly as an increase in capital). If the charity sells that car for cash, the fixed asset is removed and the cash asset increased, thus again, possibly, affecting the capital account. If the charity uses the car, the fixed asset is depreciated over time and the accumulated depreciation is expensed on the P&I. Intangible assets are armortizied into expense over the period benefited.
Seems to me we don’t have enough information.
Without wishing to sound negative,whilst funding provides a motive for Animosity Intended’s outrageous rant,there is no direct proof that this was the reason.What is needed is a level of proof that would stand up in court,a good lawyer would simply cut the connection between the meticulously collated figures and AI’s intentions.
There appears to be discrepancies in AI’s figures,Khan and Schulz made felitously timed outrageous claims,what has got to be proved is a connection.
Who’s getting the tax deductions for the ‘donated services’ one wonders?
Buddy,
Scope for a little larseny?
Well…heh heh…got ‘expenses’ ya know…just like Mark Felt….
…whose real name, in the old country, before he Americanized it, was “Felt Tip Marker”.
Yes it must be gruelling being the UN representative in Texas,having to buy your own drinks and not a bribe as far as the eye can see.
Arrr, it stinks, it do.
Great analysis Thibaud.
Just some general comments:
We do not need a ‘Bloggers International for Human Rights’. It’s enough that we promote democracy.
“–Fund-raising has become much mroe difficult due to the Patriot Act. ”
Now we know the REAL reason the left hates the Patriot Act. All that civil liberties bunk is a smokescreen.
Their biggest competitor in the long run is democracy. Both democracy promotion and the Patriot Act are because of Bush. I’m beginning to understand the hatred even more.
I noted a comment at tim blair’s:
“Left-wing global populism only supports fascism and oppresion.”
Globalization is an enabling factor for the spread of democracy. Democracy makes it easier to feed the poor because tyrants no longer control the money. If you have only tyrants/fascism and oppression you have need for hand wringers/populists/do-gooders/international
institutions/fund raisers/ngo’s.
If the Left doesn’t maintain it’s reactionary stand against globalization, it will have no reason to exist.
Oh, they could still exist, but in a local way. No more international legitimacy.
Poor things.
Their problem, besides a decrepit ideology, is a total lack of flexibility. They cannot change with the times.
Not unlike the Greens who have taken a snapshot of the earth with all its species and wish to maintain this one moment of geological time forever.
Dynamite, Syl, and great spadework, Thibaud. I’m gonna hit paypal and toss in a little on the bandwidth, my small contribution to putting down some face pie on that Schultz dude.
Okay, transaction done…take THAT, Schultz, you big fat red fraud. I wonder what all this bird books as ‘expenses’, in addition to his 221k/yr salary from his red-ink (in more ways than one) business enterprise. I’d guess ‘everything’. Publish your tax returns, Schultz–as other pols do.
I’m not sure that an accountant will make sense of that third-party’s summary of AI’s financials, which are not presented in any meaningful detail. It gets very murky when intercompany contributions, like the $6m that AmnestyUSA’s fund-raising director told me came from the London parent, are not clearly marked as such.
But it’s still worth asking an accountant. Anyone have Dennis the Peasant’s email?
thibaud:
Top-right here:
http://dennisthepeasant.typepad.com/
Link-filled report on AI from two yrs ago, more relevant than ever, and a little one-minute film on Arafat, whose relationship with AI never made much sense to many folks.