The analysis found that of the 78 concluded cases under the NSL at least 66 (84.6%) involved legitimate expression that should not have been criminalized according to international standards
These cases fall well short of the high threshold required for criminalization under international standards.
These people were wrongly criminalized! According to their country’s laws? Well no, according to totally undefined “”“international standards”“”. Are we going to apply those standards to, for instance, checking whether people imprisoned in the US are ‘wrongly criminalized’? Of course not.
After checking the most recent ten pages of articles, out of 120 entries there were five about the US, not a single one of which had anything to do with the indiscriminate mass arrests of immigrants. There are as many unique news stories about the new law in Georgia requiring foreign NGOs to disclose their sources of funding, as there are about the US in total. If you search ‘ICE’, there is one (1) article that mentions it in the headline, which when sorted by ‘Most Relevant’ is the NINTH article to appear, and which is complaining about the National Guard mobilization against the protests against ICE, not even ICE itself.
“Amnesty International” is an attack dog of the US State Department that has no purpose but to generate headlines bashing the enemies of the Empire, with the very occasional half-hearted jab at the most obviously inexcusable crimes of the US and Europe to maintain their cover as some sort of impartial third-party. On their ‘Take Action’ page, “Join the fight for freedom [sic] in Hong Kong” is displayed before “Lift the blockade on Gaza and stop the genocide”, which should tell you everything you need to know about their priorities.
Ah good, that accounts for 1 out of the 33 articles about Yemen written since the US and Israel started indiscriminately bombing the country for daring to act against their genocide of Palestine, the rest of which are criticizing “the Huthi de facto authorities” (i.e. the legitimate government of Yemen) for various perceived infractions.
And of course, the headline is not about any of the strikes on residential apartment blocks or civilian airports or seaports, but about hitting a migrant detention facility, so that the article can go on to spend half its length complaining about “the Huthi de facto authorities” and their detainment of migrants, their ‘restrictions on independent investigation’, and their ‘crackdown on civic spaces’.
The takeaway of the article, which pervades its entire language and tone, is that the US military needs to more carefully select and investigate its targets when bombing foreign countries, so that they only kill and destroy ‘legitimate military targets’ and don’t accidentally harm the poor innocents who these tyrannical foreign brutes are already terrorizing, implicitly suggesting the US is somehow a thoughtful moral actor that gives even a single fuck about killing civilians, and that its enemies do actually deserve to be murdered but only in the right way with cleaner, more nuanced weaponry.
They get all the support they need from the NED and CIA, what I want is for them to write NO reports so I never have to see another mealy-mouthed, wounded innocence “speaking truth to power” shitsmear of lies and insinuations against whoever dares to resist the will of the US State Department, when the overwhelming majority of human rights violations in the world today are very very clearly committed by the US Empire and its global proxy forces.