Okay, the guys from Harry's Place are very nice Lefties and I probably agree with them more than disagree, but personally I would be harsher in any critique of Amnesty international.
As they say, it has played a vital role for the best part of 50 years in the promotion of human rights and the refusal to allow the victims of repressive governments of all stripes to be forgotten.
But just as obviously in my view it has become increasingly politicised and has increasingly become a mouthpiece for Left Wing ideology and ideologues.
However, at an even more fundamental level, it is an organisation whose reason for being has largely disappeared and which now has to manufacture causes to continue its institutional existence.
In that respect it is like any bureaucracy and continuance for the sake of continuance becomes its chief purpose.
Organising demonstrations of "solidarity" (note the use of a typically Leftist term and trope) with the Islamist extremists imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay is a dead giveaway to all of this.
By all means there are valid reasons to oppose Gitmo, or to at least feel uneasy about it, and to want to see it closed.
(Though as Barack Obama is finding out now that he actually is responsible for running something and not just pontificating about it, the question of what you do with religious extremists who feel that violence is a holy act sanctioned by God Himself for which they will receive an everlasting reward in heaven, is not exactly easy.
Maybe it is now dawning on him what George Bush had to wrestle with as he sought to keep the United States safe from further attacks.)
But to demonstrate in solidarity with Khaled Shaikh Mohammed himself and also Mohammed al-Qahtani, Ramzi Binalshibh, Ammar al-Baluchi and Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi?
Very unwise and a little bit too revealing I think.