While there may well not have been ethical intentions behind this removal (who knows), I think reporting to the press directly is probably better than reporting it to a government, so as to avoid giving the government a chance to cover things up.
US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
31–40 of 453 posts
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#32[flagged]
"subversive forces"
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#33Because the US government is no longer even pretending to care about human rights.
Perception is reality. If there is at least a pretense of caring about human rights, then there is some modicum of shame upon leadership in not living up to them. And even if the desire was fake, creating a website to "tell us when we are being evil" is real. Pulling off the mask and showing the "true self", which is what the Trump administration is doing (and far more than that, I should add. It is only showing the "true self" of a subset of the population), is removing not only the potential for shame, but also accountability. I don't have to believe that America is/was a flawless champion of human rights to believe that it is much, much worse now.
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#34Not that I agree with this decision, but is there any evidence that these reports yielded any consequences? Or rather, was it one of those, "After conducting an internal investigation, we have determined we did nothing wrong" kind of things?
I have a feeling thats exactly how it was used. But that makes its removal even more odd. The hosting cost must be trivial; an email support form connected to a shredder. Defund the organization in charge of checking and follow-ups is one thing, but its complete removal just smell of incompetence or acknowledging of wrongdoing, or some sort of performance. And the response is also baffling. "sorry we migrated it syst…
It’s not odd though. This administration has been very clear that they think things like rules of engagement or caring about collateral damage are bullshit.
On a weekly basis now, they are blowing up civilian boats without any evidence wrong doing. Even if they had evidence, it still wouldn’t warrant using hellfire missiles on civilian ships, especially when the U.S. navy or coastguard is more than capable of intercept these ships.
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#35Not that I agree with this decision, but is there any evidence that these reports yielded any consequences? Or rather, was it one of those, "After conducting an internal investigation, we have determined we did nothing wrong" kind of things?
Yes, I would think the 'smart evil' thing to do would be keeping it running and just ignoring what you don't like but now people will just send the stuff to WikiLeaks.
Or it gives you a nice warning about the evil things that have been discovered and its time to ramp up the psyops machine to cover it up...
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#36Not that I agree with this decision, but is there any evidence that these reports yielded any consequences? Or rather, was it one of those, "After conducting an internal investigation, we have determined we did nothing wrong" kind of things?
Even if the reports didn’t result in action, they would (in theory) leave a report trail that a FOI request could uncover.
There’s a lot of ifs in there though, and a lot of implied honesty just for record keeping. We’re all discovering (again) that implied honesty in governance will always be abused.
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#37Not that I know, but I could imagine that a public/anonymous form on the web (if that's what it was) was receiving 99.8% bot/garbage/spam/nuisance reports and they took it down for that reason. Though nothing in the article gives that as a reason, and quotes only the rather vague statement that "the US State Department insisted it was continuing to receive reports regarding gross violations of human rights and was engaging with "credible organisations" on a full spectrum of human rights concerns."
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#38[flagged]
The US commits human rights abuses constantly. The public should know. The US has no business being on a human rights committee quite frankly. We just committed genocide in Palestine.
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
It defeats the purpose of a veto if the executive branch can ignore the law.
[flagged]
At least I get to feel vindicated. Many many people, including me, have long asserted that the so-called "conservatives" in the Supreme Court are anything but. Historically their decisions have appealed to a certain kind of conservative political base, but the pretense is really starting to wear thin. Limiting the power of the executive branch in general was never the goal, it was only to limit the power of presidents who were willing to challenge the capitalist oligarchy master plan. They know that their job now, along with their allies and Congress, is to simply step aside and manage public outrage while the next phase of the plan is set in motion. I'm not just talking about in recent years either, go back through the Obama and W Bush administrations. You might notice that the conservatives in the court curiously turned more conservative when "their guy" isn't in office.
Re: US axes website for reporting human rights abuses by US-armed foreign forces
#40While there may well not have been ethical intentions behind this removal (who knows), I think reporting to the press directly is probably better than reporting it to a government, so as to avoid giving the government a chance to cover things up.
That’s next:
https://www.democracynow.org/2025/9/22/headlines/trump_says_...
> Trump Says It Is “Really Illegal” for Journalists to Give His Administration Negative Coverage
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/really-i...
> The president concluded that when coverage of someone is “bad” 97% of the time, “that’s no longer free speech.”
> “They’ll take a great story and they’ll make it bad,” he told reporters, referring to media outlets. “See, I think that’s really illegal.”