• AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.comEnglish
    1·
    12 hours ago

    “14 independent sources”, none of which provides photographic evidence of violence? These “leaks” are mostly reports in Chinese that you have to trust have been translated accurately and unbiasedly by western political actors, not “pictures of people in concentration camps”.

    I also mentioned multiple times the genocide in the comment you’re quoting, and you’re choosing to overfocus on the single time I didn’t.

    • Mjpasta710@midwest.social
      1·
      10 hours ago

      So you’re acknowledging that the actions in China against Uighurs also amount to genocidal?

      I also mentioned multiple times the genocide in the comment you’re quoting, and you’re choosing to overfocus on the single time I didn’t.

      I’m glad we’re in agreement. It seemed you were trying to make a different point.

      Given the sheer volume and consistency of evidence from multiple independent sources, it is difficult to dispute the compelling case of widespread human rights violations.

      • AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.comEnglish
        1·
        10 hours ago

        No, reported violations of human rights during a reduced and specific timeframe in a counter- terrorist campaign accompanied by massive investment in economic development, dont amount to genocidal.

        volume and consistency of evidence from multiple independent sources

        That is if you swallow CIA propaganda only

        • Mjpasta710@midwest.social
          1·
          10 hours ago

          Calling the comprehensive evidence of human rights abuses against Uighurs ‘CIA propaganda’ dismisses the work of:

          • Independent UN investigators who found credible allegations of crimes against humanity.
          • Respected international human rights organizations that conduct meticulous, on-the-ground investigations and collect survivor testimonies.
          • Academic scholars who publish peer-reviewed research.
          • Journalists from around the world who have risked their safety to document these realities.

          These are not government intelligence agencies. Their findings are based on a volume and consistency of evidence that stands up to scrutiny, regardless of how inconvenient it may be to label it as such. The narrative of ‘economic development’ doesn’t negate systematic human rights abuses.

          • AES_Enjoyer@reddthat.comEnglish
            1·
            10 hours ago

            These are not government intelligence agencies

            They don’t have to be to show western anti-chinese bias.

            Yes, I dismiss the Amnesty International research based on lies, a.k.a. “anonymous interviews”. Yes, I dismiss western-based analysis of translations of compiled gigabytes of Chinese documents. Yes, I dismiss “scholar” work based on the west.

            Would you trust a Chinese university’s analysis of, say, democracy in the US? Would you trust a Chinese NGO in its analysis of the treatment of Ukrainians in the ongoing conflict?