Please Support me on Patreon!: patreon.com/KnowwaynohowHere's a video showing my recent trip 5 day to Xinjiang. With so much controversy around the region I ...
it is a cultural genocide in any case, according to the people who live there. The fear of the consequences for their family keep them from speaking out publicly.
So you’re telling me you can’t provide any names here, I have to damage my psyche listening to an extremely shitty publication’s awful talk radio turned podcast? There’s never been another article written about this extremely serious, definitely not entirely fabricated fantasy of the CIA and State Department? Hey did you know Democrats are bad? Unfortunately the only way for me to provide you with that information is you’re gonna have to watch twelve hours of Fox news and get back to me.
Here are some more these are video and written testimonies that contradict what your sources are saying.
These have first and last names as well as the location from which they are interviewed and as such are much more comprehensive and reliable than yours. Care to offer anything else?
You clearly didn’t watch it, I listened to the podcasts and came to the same conclusion as Babs and Hestia. The sources I linked are citizens that are clearly stating there is no cultural genocide.
I presented multiple sources that are holistic and contextual, in fact they are of the same nature as yours except they include last names and city where they live in addition to being a video format that directly state there is no cultural genocide. If my sources are based in belief and as such not valid, then so are yours.
Then I would point you to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States in 2019 which: Welcomes the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat’s delegation upon invitation from the People’s Republic of China; commends the efforts of the People’s Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and looks forward to further cooperation between the OIC and the People’s Republic of China.
as well as the letter, over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed (A/HRC/41/G/17) https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=A%2FHRC%2F41%2FG%2F17) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang:
…separatism and religious extremism has caused enormous damage to people of all ethnic groups in Xinjiang, which has seriously infringed upon human rights, including right to life, health and development. Faced with the grave challenge of terrorism and extremism, China has undertaken a series of counter-terrorism and deradicalization measures in Xinjiang, including setting up vocational education and training centers. Now safety and security has returned to Xinjiang and the fundamental human rights of people of all ethnic groups there are safeguarded. The past three consecutive years has seen not a single terrorist attack in Xinjiang and people there enjoy a stronger sense of happiness, fulfillment and security. We note with appreciation that human rights are respected and protected in China in the process of counter-terrorism and deradicalization.
We appreciate China’s commitment to openness and transparency. China has invited a number of diplomats, international organizations officials and journalist to Xinjiang to witness the progress of the human rights cause and the outcomes of counter-terrorism and deradicalization there. What they saw and heard in Xinjiang completely contradicted what was reported in the media. We call on relevant countries to refrain from employing unfounded charges against China based on unconfirmed information before they visit Xinjiang.
These are holistic and contextual facts from a non anecdotal source. Will you actually engage with the arguement instead performing strawman, no true scotsman, and motte & bailey fallacies?
They interviewed people affiliated with US state-funded propaganda groups who dole out money to exactly such folks. Some live in Waahington, DC, which is a bit on the nose, but I suppose this helps them act as props near tourist areas for poorly-attended protests.
At the slightest resistance, people who push Uighur genocide propaganda will immediately retreat to weaker claims that are harder to argue. OK, it’s not genocide, it’s something called cultural genocide, that doesn’t actually kill a bunch of people. OK, maybe there’s no evidence of that, either, but surely there are human rights abuses. They still don’t provide much evidence of those, and the accusations start to sound like the sorts of issues that happen everywhere people are charged with crimes and taken into custody.
Contrast this with the genocide in Palestine. There is no shortage of evidence for it, and no one who understands what’s going on will hem and haw their own argument down to “well come on, I’m sure some people are taken into custody without an adequate amount of due process.”
it’s much easier to get pictures of a person being killed then rights being violated, especially in a country where those rights are so restricted or functionally non-existent in the first place.
the conviction rate is over 99% in China, for example. Even if you go through “due process” in China, you probably don’t enjoy due process as someone who doesn’t live in China understands it.
Note also that in the U.S., 90%+ conviction rates are common for federal charges. Are U.S. federal courts a sham? If someone actually committed a crime and you put together a ton of evidence very neatly, you can give them all the due process in the world and they would still wind up convicted of that crime.
One of that organization’s source links is dead, the other is here. Haven’t had time to read through it all to see if the claims about conviction rates stand up.
Also ran across this site. Not sure how reliable it is, but it does not appear to be friendly towards the PRC. This part was interesting:
Chinese prosecutors tend to explain low acquittal rates as an indicator of good work. In 2012, a Beijing prosecutor told Legal Daily that a high level of “judicial precision” allowed good prosecutors to “filter out” cases likely to result in acquittal so that the majority of people standing trial were “guilty"…
Local procuratorates followed suit by putting forth “zero acquittals” as the ultimate goal in their annual work reports. Among various performance indicators, the acquittal rate was the most important, legal scholar Yuan Yicheng told Legal Daily in 2012.
Rather than risk acquittal, it is an unspoken rule that prosecutors decide to withdraw indictments.
The approach seems to be to only prosecute cases you’re sure you’ll win. This is largely the approach in the U.S. federal system, and is pretty prevalent among state and local prosecutors, too.
the 99% conviction rate is a very common statistic provided by the supreme people’s court of China
“This is so common, it’s everywhere, everyone knows it, it’s so easy to find, but I’m going to link to fucking Wikipedia instead so I can use it to launder a number from some bullshit NGO”
“Are U.S. federal courts a sham?”
How bad does your conviction rate need to be for you to accept that a judicial system has fair trials? Do you want police and prosecutors pursuing a bunch of cases they can’t adequately prove?
Oh great. “I lack any remotely credible evidence of my accusation, but that’s because the government has erased all evidence”.
Eqyivalent to: “I lack any remotely credible evidence that the Earth is flat, just as can be expected after the insidious NASA destroyed all evidence”.
you can call it a genocide, sure.
it is a cultural genocide in any case, according to the people who live there. The fear of the consequences for their family keep them from speaking out publicly.
that’s a good point, thanks
Can you find one who says that and had never been paid to do so?
yes, of course.
the kidnappings and detentions are common knowledge in China and at this point affect nearly every part of the xinjiang population.
there’s a pretty good report by the economist about the culture of fear, they interview uyghur exiles and family members of detainees:
part1
part2
Podcasts? You link to podcasts? You have got me absolutely fucked up if you think I am going to listen to podcasts from the fucking Economist.
no worries, those are the answers to your questions if you get curious.
uyghurs on the ground and all that.
So you’re telling me you can’t provide any names here, I have to damage my psyche listening to an extremely shitty publication’s awful talk radio turned podcast? There’s never been another article written about this extremely serious, definitely not entirely fabricated fantasy of the CIA and State Department? Hey did you know Democrats are bad? Unfortunately the only way for me to provide you with that information is you’re gonna have to watch twelve hours of Fox news and get back to me.
“you’re telling me you can’t provide any names here,”
no, that is not what I’m telling you.
nobody is going to make you listen to a podcast you don’t want to, but they include the specific uyghur testimony you asked for.
Tell me the name of the Uyghur. I am not listening to that horseshit, I am a real person with real shit to do.
the uyghur?
do you want any uyghur name?
So you’ve got nothing, unsurprising
I have a first-hand source that contradicts yours:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1po9oTVtYw
Here are some more these are video and written testimonies that contradict what your sources are saying. These have first and last names as well as the location from which they are interviewed and as such are much more comprehensive and reliable than yours. Care to offer anything else?
that doesn’t seem to contradict anything from my comments.
what do you mean?
You clearly didn’t watch it, I listened to the podcasts and came to the same conclusion as Babs and Hestia. The sources I linked are citizens that are clearly stating there is no cultural genocide.
I did watch part of it, but none of it seems relevant to my comments.
I have no problem with people’s beliefs.
I like holistic, contextual facts, but I don’t really care if others don’t.
Is holistic, contextual facts a term that means “unsourced podcasts and anecdotes”?
haha, no.
I presented multiple sources that are holistic and contextual, in fact they are of the same nature as yours except they include last names and city where they live in addition to being a video format that directly state there is no cultural genocide. If my sources are based in belief and as such not valid, then so are yours.
Then I would point you to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States in 2019 which: Welcomes the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat’s delegation upon invitation from the People’s Republic of China; commends the efforts of the People’s Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and looks forward to further cooperation between the OIC and the People’s Republic of China.
https://www.oic-oci.org/docdown/?docID=4447&refID=1250
as well as the letter, over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed (A/HRC/41/G/17) https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=A%2FHRC%2F41%2FG%2F17) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang:
These are holistic and contextual facts from a non anecdotal source. Will you actually engage with the arguement instead performing strawman, no true scotsman, and motte & bailey fallacies?
They interviewed people affiliated with US state-funded propaganda groups who dole out money to exactly such folks. Some live in Waahington, DC, which is a bit on the nose, but I suppose this helps them act as props near tourist areas for poorly-attended protests.
Hey for anyone looking for the sources, I checked these podcasts. They are anonymous, first-name-only sources, of course.
aaahahahahahahaha
At the slightest resistance, people who push Uighur genocide propaganda will immediately retreat to weaker claims that are harder to argue. OK, it’s not genocide, it’s something called cultural genocide, that doesn’t actually kill a bunch of people. OK, maybe there’s no evidence of that, either, but surely there are human rights abuses. They still don’t provide much evidence of those, and the accusations start to sound like the sorts of issues that happen everywhere people are charged with crimes and taken into custody.
Contrast this with the genocide in Palestine. There is no shortage of evidence for it, and no one who understands what’s going on will hem and haw their own argument down to “well come on, I’m sure some people are taken into custody without an adequate amount of due process.”
Motte-and-bailey argument
it’s much easier to get pictures of a person being killed then rights being violated, especially in a country where those rights are so restricted or functionally non-existent in the first place.
the conviction rate is over 99% in China, for example. Even if you go through “due process” in China, you probably don’t enjoy due process as someone who doesn’t live in China understands it.
Let’s start with a source on this one.
Note also that in the U.S., 90%+ conviction rates are common for federal charges. Are U.S. federal courts a sham? If someone actually committed a crime and you put together a ton of evidence very neatly, you can give them all the due process in the world and they would still wind up convicted of that crime.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate
I just linked the first source, but the 99% conviction rate is a very common statistic provided by the supreme people’s court of China.
1.2 million tried, 1039 found not guilty according to the court.
“Are U.S. federal courts a sham?”
Yes. pretty clearly. in many senses of the word “sham”.
So your source is a Wikipedia article that cites “Safeguard Defenders”, a western anti-china NGO?
One of that organization’s source links is dead, the other is here. Haven’t had time to read through it all to see if the claims about conviction rates stand up.
Also ran across this site. Not sure how reliable it is, but it does not appear to be friendly towards the PRC. This part was interesting:
The approach seems to be to only prosecute cases you’re sure you’ll win. This is largely the approach in the U.S. federal system, and is pretty prevalent among state and local prosecutors, too.
“This is so common, it’s everywhere, everyone knows it, it’s so easy to find, but I’m going to link to fucking Wikipedia instead so I can use it to launder a number from some bullshit NGO”
How bad does your conviction rate need to be for you to accept that a judicial system has fair trials? Do you want police and prosecutors pursuing a bunch of cases they can’t adequately prove?
fair trials are not simply about the conviction rate, they are about the rights of the citizens holding up under the oppression of the court.
Then why are you citing (alleging, really, without a citation) conviction rates in China as evidence that their judicial system isn’t fair?
because the conviction rate in China is pretty good. evidence that their judicial system isn’t fair.
Source?
The supreme People’s Court of China
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate
That’s a Wikipedia article that cites a western anti-china NGO. Please don’t lie about your sources.
there’s no need for you to lie about these sources, they’re very straightforward and publicly available.
Correct, which is why I don’t lie about them. I would encourage you to stop lying about them to.
I haven’t yet and I’m not going to start lying about any of these sources.
It’s much easier to make shit up than provide actual evidence, as you clearly already know
Wrong and dumb
Oh great. “I lack any remotely credible evidence of my accusation, but that’s because the government has erased all evidence”.
Eqyivalent to: “I lack any remotely credible evidence that the Earth is flat, just as can be expected after the insidious NASA destroyed all evidence”.