Changes

[[Image:Amnesty international1.jpg|right|200px|thumb| A summary of all critical press releases

[[Image:Amnesty international1.jpg|right|200px|thumb| A summary of all critical press releases

put out by Amnesty over the period 1995–1998.<ref name="Phelps" />]]

put out by Amnesty over the period 1995–1998.<ref name="Phelps" />]]

Amnesty International has disproportionately criticized free democratic nations over authoritarian nations with grave human rights abuses, such as [[Cuba]], [[Vietnam]], and [[North Korea]]. This exposes an anti-American standpoint increasingly common in liberal groups. Peter Phelps, a writer for [[Australia]]’s leading free market think tank; The Institute for Public Affairs, wrote that Amnesty International has deviated from its founding goals,  

Amnesty International has disproportionately criticized free democratic nations over authoritarian nations with grave human rights abuses, such as [[Cuba]], [[Vietnam]], and [[North Korea]]. This exposes an anti-American standpoint increasingly common in liberal groups. Peter Phelps, a writer for [[Australia]]’s leading free market think tank, ''The Institute for Public Affairs'', wrote that Amnesty International has deviated from its founding goals,  

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

One of the main reasons for the disproportionate criticism has been Amnesty International's flawed methodology which relies heavily on the press inside of nations. This leads to a nation that is free and open, but had minor infractions, receiving much more criticism then a closed nation.<ref name="Phelps" />

One of the main reasons for the disproportionate criticism has been Amnesty International's flawed methodology which relies heavily on the press inside of nations. This leads to a nation that is free and open, but had minor infractions, receiving much more criticism then a closed nation.<ref name="Phelps" />

Conversely, some critics have asserted that Amnesty International is biased in favour of the interests of America and other wealthy nations.  For example, Amnesty International did not condemn [[South Africa]]'s [[apartheid]] regime, widely regarded as an abuse of human rights.  This has been interpreted as being due to South Africa's political and economic links with the [[British]] and American governments of the time.<ref>[http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/credib/2003/1306interview.htm "Is Amnesty International Biased?"], 2002.</ref>

Conversely, some critics have asserted that Amnesty International is biased in favour of the interests of America and other wealthy nations.  For example, Amnesty International did not condemn [[South Africa|South Africa's]] [[apartheid]] regime, widely regarded as an abuse of human rights.  This has been interpreted as being due to South Africa's political and economic links with the [[British]] and American governments of the time.<ref>[http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/credib/2003/1306interview.htm "Is Amnesty International Biased?"], 2002.</ref>

===Abortion===

===Abortion===