I mentioned that it doesn’t talk about killings, but I also point out that the reporter’s entire visit was tightly minded and regulated by party officials. I don’t imagine that they were in a special hurry to show them so much as a carton of spoiled milk.
But you’re still moving the goal posts. They didn’t post the AP article because it’s a credible source on events in Xinjiang (it isn’t). They posted it to demonstrate that even sources extremely biased against China weren’t going as far as making accusations of killings.
Yeah, okay, fair enough. I don’t have the time or will to commit to digging into resources to support my counter claim, and I’ll concede that I’m goalposting.
As to the other accusations about Xinjiang, that’s a more complicated discussion. I don’t think anybody is claiming that nothing dodgy was happening at all there, there was clearly some pretty heavy handed policing. Some people say it was justified to fight extremism; I don’t agree with that, but I also think that the Western media’s portrayal of it has been so cynical and exaggerated as to basically not resemble the truth at all.
brain_in_a_box did a great job explaining about the source, about how it was not chosen for being a good source. Rather is is “reliable in the mainsteam” (read: virulently racist fascist state department drivel) and is still walking back the claim of genocide (since none is occurring).
I will try not to waste your time, since you said you were low on time, but I want to talk about genocide claims for a second. A genocide is a very serious concept, it is a word reserved for the most atrocious acts of extermination like the holocaust. Calling something a genocide when it isn’t one is therefore anti-Semitic (this is brought up in the Foreign Policy article I linked) along with being deeply disrespectful to other peoples who have suffered through a genocide. Of course, the American government and the press it uses as mouthpieces do not care about this disrespect. You should though. I encourage you not to believe anything you read in the news, especially unverified claims of genocide without significant evidence. This is true for any given article, the info you are reading is manipulated, and “reliable” sources are actually lies designed to make you support war, racism, police murder, and other crimes against people.
So where does it talk about killings in Xinjiang? Or are you trying to move the goal posts.
I mentioned that it doesn’t talk about killings, but I also point out that the reporter’s entire visit was tightly minded and regulated by party officials. I don’t imagine that they were in a special hurry to show them so much as a carton of spoiled milk.
But you’re still moving the goal posts. They didn’t post the AP article because it’s a credible source on events in Xinjiang (it isn’t). They posted it to demonstrate that even sources extremely biased against China weren’t going as far as making accusations of killings.
Yeah, okay, fair enough. I don’t have the time or will to commit to digging into resources to support my counter claim, and I’ll concede that I’m goalposting.
Well I appreciate the good faith there.
As to the other accusations about Xinjiang, that’s a more complicated discussion. I don’t think anybody is claiming that nothing dodgy was happening at all there, there was clearly some pretty heavy handed policing. Some people say it was justified to fight extremism; I don’t agree with that, but I also think that the Western media’s portrayal of it has been so cynical and exaggerated as to basically not resemble the truth at all.
brain_in_a_box did a great job explaining about the source, about how it was not chosen for being a good source. Rather is is “reliable in the mainsteam” (read: virulently racist fascist state department drivel) and is still walking back the claim of genocide (since none is occurring).
I will try not to waste your time, since you said you were low on time, but I want to talk about genocide claims for a second. A genocide is a very serious concept, it is a word reserved for the most atrocious acts of extermination like the holocaust. Calling something a genocide when it isn’t one is therefore anti-Semitic (this is brought up in the Foreign Policy article I linked) along with being deeply disrespectful to other peoples who have suffered through a genocide. Of course, the American government and the press it uses as mouthpieces do not care about this disrespect. You should though. I encourage you not to believe anything you read in the news, especially unverified claims of genocide without significant evidence. This is true for any given article, the info you are reading is manipulated, and “reliable” sources are actually lies designed to make you support war, racism, police murder, and other crimes against people.
A YouTube link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same video on Invidious, which is a YouTube frontend that protects your privacy: