4 ms·

That’s the western media narrative. Consider what the other side is saying too https://youtu.be/u4cYE6E27_g https://youtu.be/u4cYE6E27_g

by lucian1900 7y ago

justicezyx 7y ago
Second this! A lot of people criticizing, but was from the human rights perspective. While it's important to debunk the lies about terrorisms happened in Xinjiang, which was used by Chinese propaganda to disguise as the legitimate excuse and secured the support from the Chinese citizens, even people living in Xinjiang.
- drieddust 7y ago
  What China is doing is terrible but elephant in the room can't be ignored. Islamist around the world are responsible for causing a lot of human suffering. It is pattern which can't be ignored. Look at what happened recently in Delhi.
  - iLemming 7y ago
    It's so easy to label an entire nation as Islamists, Zionists, fascists, and other "-ists." Millions of people, human beings. Children, mothers, fathers, their elders. You'd think in the 21st century, we'd finally learned from our own mistakes of the past. Alas, nothing much changed, probably for over 3 million years, from the time when Lucy the Australopithecus has walked on this planet. We are still the same idiots, always striving for self-extinction and complete annihilation of our habitat. Uygurs are the descendants of ancient clans of merchants and craftsmen. They've peacefully thrived even under Chengiz Khan's reign. There are hundreds of thousands of them in Turkey, in Central Asia, in other countries. Somehow Kazakhstan doesn't seem to be eager to build "re-education camps" for them. You speak like radicalism is some virus that needs to be controlled, and those people en-mass need to be quarantined and "cured." All religions and any radical movements are the human-made shit. And the only proper way to fight radicalism is through improving the quality of life and access to education. What the Chinese government is doing right now, is planting seeds of even greater evil. Anyone who says or thinks otherwise is an ignorant fool who doesn't care about the future our children would live in.
aptidude187 7y ago
By 'other side' you mean....the CCP: "CGTN is funded in whole or in part by the Chinese government."
- dntbnmpls 7y ago
  "The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) is a non-partisan defence and strategic policy think tank based in Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, founded by the Australian government and partly funded by the Australian Department of Defence." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Strategic_Policy_Institute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Strategic_Policy_In... So yes, lets see what both sides have to say. Or neither. You can't defend one set of propagandists while rejecting another without seeming a bit biased or agenda-driven.
  - aptidude187 7y ago
    Your argument appears sane on the surface, but falls flat on its face, when considering that the CCP has a well established track record of outright lying and denying facts, which were established through independent international research. What interest would the Australian government have in challenging China, when much of their economy relies on them! On top of that, most of the provided information just matches other independent research. The only one who is defending propagandists is you.
    - lonelappde 7y ago
      US companies sponsor the think tank to promote US over China. They don't try to hide that.
    - dirtyid 7y ago
      >What interest would the Australian government have in challenging China There's a general misalignment in FVEY countries between security and trade interests. Australia is particularly divided due to huge Chinese economic dependency but also absolute US security dependency (also Pine Gap). It's not surprising that intelligence agencies in countries in similar positions have tried protect their organizational interests - see UK defense Secretary Williamson fired over Huawei leak when US threaten to sever intelligence sharing if UK allowed even limited Huawei presence. AU PM basically admitted that the main reason for banning Huawei was because they didn't want to lose intelligence sharing not risk of Chinese spying. Then you have the recent fiasco with Wang Liqiang in Australia, the defecting Chinese "spy" whose ridiculous claims unsurprisingly turned out be sensationalist farce, debunked by multiple AU security sources including ASIO who vetted Wang a month before China Hawk MP Andrew Hastie tried to make his defection a narrative. They still let the story play out. It's textbook western propaganda. In the coordinated reports at the time, ASPI executive director Peter Jennings said something to the affect that Wang's testimony provided unprecedented insight into Beijing’s espionage activities, when all of Wang's dubious claims was immediately identified by anyone with 2 brain cells to be false. I mentioned in another post that ASPI does some decent work on aggregating Chinese data points, but their conclusions skew anti-China and pro-US because despite being and AU think tank, much of their funding comes from US and US aligned parties. Biased sources can still be useful, as long as you're aware it's biased.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

That’s the western media narrative. Consider what the other side is saying too https://youtu.be/u4cYE6E27_g https://youtu.be/u4cYE6E27_g

justicezyx 7y ago

Second this! A lot of people criticizing, but was from the human rights perspective. While it's important to debunk the lies about terrorisms happened in Xinjiang, which was used by Chinese propaganda to disguise as the legitimate excuse and secured the support from the Chinese citizens, even people living in Xinjiang.

drieddust 7y ago
What China is doing is terrible but elephant in the room can't be ignored. Islamist around the world are responsible for causing a lot of human suffering. It is pattern which can't be ignored. Look at what happened recently in Delhi.
- iLemming 7y ago
  It's so easy to label an entire nation as Islamists, Zionists, fascists, and other "-ists." Millions of people, human beings. Children, mothers, fathers, their elders. You'd think in the 21st century, we'd finally learned from our own mistakes of the past. Alas, nothing much changed, probably for over 3 million years, from the time when Lucy the Australopithecus has walked on this planet. We are still the same idiots, always striving for self-extinction and complete annihilation of our habitat. Uygurs are the descendants of ancient clans of merchants and craftsmen. They've peacefully thrived even under Chengiz Khan's reign. There are hundreds of thousands of them in Turkey, in Central Asia, in other countries. Somehow Kazakhstan doesn't seem to be eager to build "re-education camps" for them. You speak like radicalism is some virus that needs to be controlled, and those people en-mass need to be quarantined and "cured." All religions and any radical movements are the human-made shit. And the only proper way to fight radicalism is through improving the quality of life and access to education. What the Chinese government is doing right now, is planting seeds of even greater evil. Anyone who says or thinks otherwise is an ignorant fool who doesn't care about the future our children would live in.

aptidude187 7y ago

By 'other side' you mean....the CCP: "CGTN is funded in whole or in part by the Chinese government."

dntbnmpls 7y ago
"The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) is a non-partisan defence and strategic policy think tank based in Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, founded by the Australian government and partly funded by the Australian Department of Defence." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Strategic_Policy_Institute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Strategic_Policy_In... So yes, lets see what both sides have to say. Or neither. You can't defend one set of propagandists while rejecting another without seeming a bit biased or agenda-driven.
- aptidude187 7y ago
  Your argument appears sane on the surface, but falls flat on its face, when considering that the CCP has a well established track record of outright lying and denying facts, which were established through independent international research. What interest would the Australian government have in challenging China, when much of their economy relies on them! On top of that, most of the provided information just matches other independent research. The only one who is defending propagandists is you.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    US companies sponsor the think tank to promote US over China. They don't try to hide that.
  - dirtyid 7y ago
    >What interest would the Australian government have in challenging China There's a general misalignment in FVEY countries between security and trade interests. Australia is particularly divided due to huge Chinese economic dependency but also absolute US security dependency (also Pine Gap). It's not surprising that intelligence agencies in countries in similar positions have tried protect their organizational interests - see UK defense Secretary Williamson fired over Huawei leak when US threaten to sever intelligence sharing if UK allowed even limited Huawei presence. AU PM basically admitted that the main reason for banning Huawei was because they didn't want to lose intelligence sharing not risk of Chinese spying. Then you have the recent fiasco with Wang Liqiang in Australia, the defecting Chinese "spy" whose ridiculous claims unsurprisingly turned out be sensationalist farce, debunked by multiple AU security sources including ASIO who vetted Wang a month before China Hawk MP Andrew Hastie tried to make his defection a narrative. They still let the story play out. It's textbook western propaganda. In the coordinated reports at the time, ASPI executive director Peter Jennings said something to the affect that Wang's testimony provided unprecedented insight into Beijing’s espionage activities, when all of Wang's dubious claims was immediately identified by anyone with 2 brain cells to be false. I mentioned in another post that ASPI does some decent work on aggregating Chinese data points, but their conclusions skew anti-China and pro-US because despite being and AU think tank, much of their funding comes from US and US aligned parties. Biased sources can still be useful, as long as you're aware it's biased.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]