Incidentally, I am very curious about this statement:
'International human rights law absolutely outlaws restrictions on free speech when they are based purely on the notion that others may find the content offensive - regardless of the beat behind the message, or where it's played.'
Really? So international human rights law is cool with the KKK performing in black churches then? Or just when it suits the liberal agenda for people's private space to be disturbed.
And that's the central issue for me. I absolutely support their right to broadcast and publish whatever opinions they come out with. But invading other peoples' space is not a human right.
But never mind about that, good old amnesty will write an email for you saying:
'I am writing to you to ask you to drop the charges of hooliganism against Maria Alekhina, Ekaterina Samutsevich and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, and immediately and unconditionally release them.'
Yes, away with your stinking courts Johny foreigner. Don't you realise I speak English and care not a whit for whatever rule of law exists in your country.
'I believe that Maria, Ekaterina and Nadezhda have been detained solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression, and as such are prisoners of conscience.'
'I believe'? That's really a line in a letter from a supposedly unbiased human rights organisation?
Well, I'd never sign that because it would make me a liar. If there was a petition saying that a lengthy prison sentence was unmerited, sure I'd happily sign that (if they are given one), but this is just profound dishonesty.
'Their crime? Performing a gig in a church.'
I kind of suspect that Amnesty fans would be pretty p***ed off if someone performed 'a gig' without being invited in their homes.
For a genuinely thoughtful and authoritative take on the Pussy Riot, read this excellent blog post by Alexander Mercouris. My one quibble is the Polish comparison as I think that was MUCH WORSE in Poland because the woman was only expressing an opinion on the air. But it really does show how skewed and bigoted Western discourse on free speech is.
Update: Amnesty's intellectual dishonesty has been pouring cash into adverts: