• @pingveno@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    Ah yes, a Chinese government website. They couldn’t possibly have a biased angle. And you never actually addressed anything about the NYT article, just dismissed it outright as essentially a hoax.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      Address the content of the article instead of using ad hominem. The article discusses the fact that Muslim majority nation leaders came to China, toured Xinjiang, and support China. These are verifiable facts. Meanwhile, your NYT article has no verifiable facts. That’s the difference. I find it depressing that I have to spell this out for you.

      • @pingveno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Address the content of the article instead of using ad hominem.

        It’s not an ad hominem attack. It’s completely justified to question how objective an account is when it’s literally propaganda. In this particular case, the envoys come from countries that need to play nice with China. They were likely given a highly limited tour. And even if they had expressed discomfort, would a CPC press release ever mention it?

        Meanwhile, your NYT article has no verifiable facts.

        They have been transparent about the general outline of who their source is, and why they do not want their identity revealed. Given that a source of that nature could be killed for that sort of leak, do you blame them?

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, it is an ad hominem attack. You’re discarding the source solely based on the fact that it comes from China. It literally states the fact that Muslim leaders toured Xinjiang and their comments about their trip. The envoys come from the vast majority of Muslim countries in the world.

          They were likely given a highly limited tour. And even if they had expressed discomfort, would a CPC press release ever mention it?

          Ah yes, all these envoys are just too dumb to understand what’s happening, it takes a white man from a country that hunts Muslims for sport to tell them what’s good for the Muslims. You ever listen to yourself?

          They have been transparent about the general outline of who their source is, and why they do not want their identity revealed. Given that a source of that nature could be killed for that sort of leak, do you blame them?

          I have a bridge to sell you, please dm. The article is literally unverifiable in any way. This is the same level of proof as the US official who was claiming that there was evidence that Russian missiles hit Poland before that story was debunked.

          You believe this article to be true solely because it fits your biases, which is precisely what this sort of propaganda hinges on. You’ve convinced yourself that China is some despotic regime without bothering to learn the first thing about the country, and now you’ll uncritically accept any propaganda that confirms your biases.

          • @pingveno@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            Ah yes, all these envoys are just too dumb to understand what’s happening, it takes a white man from a country that hunts Muslims for sport to tell them what’s good for the Muslims.

            I’m sure they know exactly what they’re doing, protecting their own country’s interests. I don’t for one moment think they would put the Uyghurs’ rights over the economic interests of their own country.

            The article is literally unverifiable in any way.

            So is yours, beyond “these people came to China”. Well where did they tour? Was the tour complete? Were they given unfettered access to Uyghurs that did not fear a reprisal? The article proves nothing. Meanwhile the New York Times has picked apart the document they were given. Are you saying that they are liars?

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
              link
              fedilink
              41 year ago

              I’m sure they know exactly what they’re doing, protecting their own country’s interests. I don’t for one moment think they would put the Uyghurs’ rights over the economic interests of their own country.

              Ah yes, and NYT is not protecting US interests, but is rather genuinely concerned about Uyghurs in China. Gotcha!

              So is yours, beyond “these people came to China”.

              At the very least my article documents an actual even that happened and the reactions from real people who toured China. The fact that you can’t see the difference between them says volumes.

              Meanwhile the New York Times has picked apart the document they were given. Are you saying that they are liars?

              Yes, because NYT has a history of lying. NYT published a shitload of articles from Zenz as well and these have been thoroughly debunked. NYT is a propaganda tool. It’s frankly shocking that you don’t understand that.

              • @pingveno@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                At the very least my article documents an actual even that happened and the reactions from real people who toured China. The fact that you can’t see the difference between them says volumes.

                Okay, an article from a journalist who has been on the ground then. China has tight control over journalism in Xinjiang. This journalist found that his sources - both Uyghur and Han Chinese - were going silent. Other journalists report being followed, hacked, having hotel rooms searched, etc. China can paper over their actions with carefully curated tours by tame envoys all they want. It doesn’t change that they’re not acting like an innocent party.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
                  link
                  fedilink
                  41 year ago

                  Why don’t we look at a much more recent article from an AP journalist on the ground that failed to find any of the things western media keeps saying are happening actually happening https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-lifestyle-china-health-travel-7a6967f335f97ca868cc618ea84b98b9

                  Literally all you have is FUD without any concrete evidence for the claims. Also, if there were atrocities happening in Xinjiang that western media claims are happening we’d see a huge flood of refugees, like 2.2 million refugees we see from Afghanistan where actual crimes against humanity have been committed by your country.

                  On that subject, it’s pretty weird to see Americans doing hand wringing over the plight of Uyghurs when US holds 20% of world’s prison population as literal slave labor. The prisoners in US also just happen to be predominantly minorities. Even if the claims about Uyghurs were taken at face value, they pale to what’s happening in US right now. These are well documented atrocities as opposed to imagined ones.

                  • @pingveno@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    31 year ago

                    Did you read that article? It says the exact opposite of what you are claiming. Conditions may have changed some, but the Chinese government is still oppressive towards the Uyghur minority. And they made it very clear that they could tell Chinese officials were censoring locals.

                    Also, if there were atrocities happening in Xinjiang that western media claims are happening we’d see a huge flood of refugees, like 2.2 million refugees we see from Afghanistan where actual crimes against humanity have been committed by your country.

                    This would seem to explain it. China is preventing them from leaving, and when they do manage to then China pressures other countries to return them. No such pressure existed in Afghanistan.

                    These are well documented atrocities as opposed to imagined ones.

                    They’re well documented because the US is an open society with a free press and organizations that concern themselves with the overuse of prisons. Government agents stalking journalists reporting on the prison system would be considered a scandal, not the norm.