Xinjiang and Human Rights
The Xinjiang Atrocity Propaganda Blitz
Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation
Breaking down the BBC’s visit to Hotan, Xinjiang
Post actually going over a BBC report from within one of these centers
The Case of the Keriya Aitika Mosque
Thread on the UN Xinjiang Report
Xinjiang Police Files (XPF) Debunk
Note: The quote from the NYT Article: “absolutely no mercy” was from a 2014 speech on the terror attacks, specifically was referring to the perpetrators of the terror attacks, and did not scapegoat Uyghurs to any extent (what a wonder a three word quote could be taken out of context!) in addition, the phrase “organs of dictatorship” from that speech refers to the proletarian class dictatorship
Diplomatic Visit to Xinjiang by Representatives of Islamic Nations (2022)
Diplomatic Visit to Xinjiang by Representatives of Islamic Nations (2023)
Estimations of 1 million detainees (and onwards):
- 2018 UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination report authored by the NGO (Network of) Chinese Human Rights Defenders [which has received NED funding]
-
2015 IRS filing forms show that $819,553 (out of $820,023) of the organization’s funds came from government grants
-
2016 IRS filing forms: $859,091 (out of $1,284,893)
-
2017 IRS filing forms: $497,684 (out of $898,256)
-
2019 IRS filing forms: $757,884 (out of $760, 803)
Uyghur 'unrest' was a CIA narrative planned to destabilize China, top US army Chief admits. 2018
Adrian Zenz’s deliberate fabrications regarding sterilization statistics [“new IUD”]
[On “net IUD” (~80% as misleading figure)]
CGTN Documentaries: (the first one is better)
Fighting terrorism in Xinjiang
The black hand — ETIM and terrorism in Xinjiang
White Papers:
The Fight Against Terrorism and Extremism and Human Rights Protection in Xinjiang
Human Rights in Xinjiang - Development and Progress
Cultural Protection and Development in Xinjiang
Vocational Education and Training in Xinjiang
Western Establishment News Reports:
The Independent: More than 35 countries defend China over mass detention of Uighur Muslims in UN letter
Reuters: Diplomatic Visits to Xinjiang by Representatives of Islamic Nations
Associated Press: Terror & Tourism: Xinjiang eases its grip, but fear remains (provided by @stinky)
Foreign Policy: State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China
I’ll go through these. I’m sure I’ll have questions.
One of the problems I know already is that blogs etc. are not valid news sources. Even if I trust people here and extend that trust to the blogs y’all cite like Red Sails, that will not convince anyone whose not already pro-China. Their anti-anarchist screeds don’t help their case as an arbiter of truth, btw.
The article by Associated Press a year or so ago that goes over how the camps etc are basically shut down now does far more to convince people than sites like Gray Zone whose front page looks identical to any number of far-right news sources. Stuff like their anti-vax BS really hurts their credibility and calls into question how accurate their reporting really is.
Even Sixth Tone, which literally run by the Party, is much more reliable and trustworthy as a source. Unfortunately, they are not a proper daily news outlet, so they don’t cover everything and mostly focus on cultural issues.
These aren’t non-issues or “whatabout-isms” either. How you treat an issue people know about (in the case of libs, it’s anti-vax bs; in the case of leftists, it’s anarchism) effect how much trust they afford to the source in other issues.
Four years after Beijing launched a brutal crackdown that swept up to a million or more Uyghurs and other mostly Muslim minorities into detention camps and prisons
I don't think this AP article is helping.
Grayzone is definitely very iffy but these specific posts are good. I verified each of the blog posts as well. The issue isn't "trust", if I cited a blog as saying something and they didn't prove their point then it would be a bad citation. The only time I cited blog posts was for analysis of establishment news, and critique them if you like but don't just go "they're not valid news sources", because that isn't the issue and nothing is claimed as a revelation or without proof. If the issue is with sharing this to other people, then you should first establish what the difference is between news and analysis.
Note: That AP article is far too entrenched in propaganda to be shared as a source. You'd have much more trouble with optics in that case.
Yeah, I’ll give them a read. As I said, I trust people here enough to not reflexively dismiss the sources. I was just stating my issues with them and why I tend to not use them that often.
I guess our mileage varies on the AP article. I’ve shown it to people to convince them that China isn’t genociding a million Uyghurs. That leads us to the other parts of the propaganda, yes, but at least it stops them from saying it’s a new Holocaust, which is a win in my book.
I agree that it would obviously be preferable to use prestigious sources with good web design and well-known authors. Unfortunately my resources are limited. Feel free to suggest another article and I'll consider adding it (perhaps I could make a "mainstream news" section?).
not valid news sources
This game is unwinnable. If a "valid news source" published something pro-China, then it would cease to be valid in the eyes of liberals. If a person is too close-minded to critically engage with an alternative news source, then they're too close-minded to have their mind changed---so don't bother.
Gray Zone [...] front page looks identical to any number of far-right news sources
Thank for you for the education, but no matter how many links you have I have given up on discussing the topic with friends or basically anyone not on this website.
