...

Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa on Friday ordered authorities to revoke the citizenship of additional individuals accused of “supporting” Iranian attacks on the country, Anadolu Agency reports.

The remarks, reported by the Bahrain News Agency, came days after the country announced on Monday that it had stripped the citizenship of 69 people, including families, over what it described as “sympathizing with and praising Iranian attacks.”

The king said that what Bahrain faced from what he called a “sinful Iranian aggression” targeting its security, stability and the safety of its people exposed those who “sold their conscience to the enemy,” he said.

He called on Iran to stop interfering in the internal affairs of Bahrain and other Gulf states. He also expressed anger over the developments and criticized what he described as the alignment of some lawmakers with “traitors.”

                • Otter@lemmy.ca
                  24·
                  2 days ago

                  Amnesty International did put something out in both of these cases.

                  For the first one, the additional link goes into why that testimony was initially included in their report before the correction.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony

                  Nayirah’s story was initially corroborated by Amnesty International, which published a report about the supposed killings[3] and testimony from Kuwaiti evacuees. Following the liberation of Kuwait, international media crews were given access to the country. A report by ABC News found that “patients, including premature babies, did die, when many of Kuwait’s nurses and doctors … fled” but Iraqi troops “almost certainly had not stolen hospital incubators and left hundreds of Kuwaiti babies to die.”[4] Later, Amnesty International USA reacted by issuing a correction, with executive director John Healey subsequently accusing the George H. W. Bush administration of “opportunistic manipulation of the international human rights movement.”

                  The second one is more complex, but they’re mentioned there too

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violence_in_the_October_7_attacks

                  Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International stated that these alleged confessions were likely extracted under torture, violate international law and basic human rights, and should be considered inadmissible as credible evidence.[61] They also called on the Israeli government to cease publishing such taped “confessions”.[61] Physicians for Human Rights Israel denounced these alleged taped confessions, citing “severe concern that the interrogations included the use of torture.”[64] The UN and reports by human rights organizations such as B’Tselem and media outlets have confirmed Israeli systematic use of torture during the Gaza war, including rape, gang-rape, sexualized torture and mutilation of detained Palestinian men, women and children by Israeli guards, including during interrogations.

                  My point is that, biases definitely exist and there is often selective reporting with news organizations.

                  I just find it weird to lump amnesty international in with all that when they seem to be one of the few that are actually calling out atrocities regardless of “sides”