I used to believe this until I went on a hunt to support that belief with evidence.
It’s not there. The various news reports are a giant chain of references to other news reports.
Most of them ultimately reference one of a few sources.
Adrian Zenz is one of the most referenced “experts” on the “Uyghur Genocide”. He used to just write about Jesus https://www.amazon.com/Worthy-Escape-Believers-Raptured-Tribulation/dp/1449769063 until God sent him on a mission to take down China. His two big works are “the Xinjiang Cables” (which don’t say what he says they say) and a report where he interviewed about a dozen people for their opinions, took it as fact and extrapolated it to the entire population of Xinjiang.
There are also a series of papers from the ASPI. A quick look at their funding list makes it pretty obvious what their agenda is (tl;dr a bunch of defense contractors).
There was a pseudonymous Canadian law student, Shawn Zhang, who pretended to be a satellite image expert and “identified” a bunch of detention centers. According to him it’s easy to tell because you can see the barbed wire. I’ve looked at the images he claimed to reference and there’s no barbed wire.
Most of the rest of the “evidence” is from organizations which receive over 90% of their funding from the US government.
The UN thing is a perfect way of finding out how serious someone is.
Genocide apologists will say “The UN did not call it a genocide,” or even stronger, “The UN determined it is not a genocide.” The thing they leave out is that the UN did call the treatment of Uyghurs crimes against humanity.
Seems like a pretty big thing for them to leave out, huh?
That’s because OP wasn’t talking about general “crimes against humanity”. They’re making the specific, and significantly stronger claim, of “genocide”.
Before going any further, can we at least agree that the treatment of Uyghurs by the government of China rises to the level of crimes against humanity?
My points were twofold. First, to find out if we could find some common ground. Second, to find out if you actually care about sources and evidence, or judge them retroactively based on whether or not you like the conclusions.
The latter makes the conversation a non-starter, because even within a single report, you’ll interpret it in different ways. Within the very constrained lens of not containing the word genocide, to you, it ought to be sufficient. When it comes to crimes against humanity, you don’t want to talk about it, start attacking, and dismiss it as “a distraction.” On the prior point, I hope that your frustration comes from some doubt within you, causing you discomfort. Keep pulling on that thread.
Good luck with everything. I hope things get better going forward.
I used to believe this until I went on a hunt to support that belief with evidence.
It’s not there. The various news reports are a giant chain of references to other news reports.
Most of them ultimately reference one of a few sources.
Adrian Zenz is one of the most referenced “experts” on the “Uyghur Genocide”. He used to just write about Jesus https://www.amazon.com/Worthy-Escape-Believers-Raptured-Tribulation/dp/1449769063 until God sent him on a mission to take down China. His two big works are “the Xinjiang Cables” (which don’t say what he says they say) and a report where he interviewed about a dozen people for their opinions, took it as fact and extrapolated it to the entire population of Xinjiang.
There are also a series of papers from the ASPI. A quick look at their funding list makes it pretty obvious what their agenda is (tl;dr a bunch of defense contractors).
There was a pseudonymous Canadian law student, Shawn Zhang, who pretended to be a satellite image expert and “identified” a bunch of detention centers. According to him it’s easy to tell because you can see the barbed wire. I’ve looked at the images he claimed to reference and there’s no barbed wire.
Most of the rest of the “evidence” is from organizations which receive over 90% of their funding from the US government.
Is the UN a organization that’s too Westoid to accept?
The UN thing is a perfect way of finding out how serious someone is.
Genocide apologists will say “The UN did not call it a genocide,” or even stronger, “The UN determined it is not a genocide.” The thing they leave out is that the UN did call the treatment of Uyghurs crimes against humanity.
Seems like a pretty big thing for them to leave out, huh?
That’s because OP wasn’t talking about general “crimes against humanity”. They’re making the specific, and significantly stronger claim, of “genocide”.
Before going any further, can we at least agree that the treatment of Uyghurs by the government of China rises to the level of crimes against humanity?
So you’re saying that instead of addressing the issue at hand you want to start with a premise of “China bad.” and just go from there. Great.
That’s not even remotely what I said, implied, or believe. Would you like to respond to what I did say, or put words in my mouth?
It wasn’t the topic of the thread and it’s not germane to the question of evidence.
It is, at best, a distraction.
No, it’s not.
My points were twofold. First, to find out if we could find some common ground. Second, to find out if you actually care about sources and evidence, or judge them retroactively based on whether or not you like the conclusions.
The latter makes the conversation a non-starter, because even within a single report, you’ll interpret it in different ways. Within the very constrained lens of not containing the word genocide, to you, it ought to be sufficient. When it comes to crimes against humanity, you don’t want to talk about it, start attacking, and dismiss it as “a distraction.” On the prior point, I hope that your frustration comes from some doubt within you, causing you discomfort. Keep pulling on that thread.
Good luck with everything. I hope things get better going forward.