8 ms·

> I am sure you are aware that there were no suspected crimes needed for detainment in Gitmo and the US government said: "It Can Indefinitely Detain Anyone — Ev

> I am sure you are aware that there were no suspected crimes needed for detainment in Gitmo and the US government said: "It Can Indefinitely Detain Anyone — Even U.S. Citizens". My point was that didn't happen. If we were putting people there solely for their religion and ethnicity, it'd be much more than a thousand. It would be millions... like in Xinjiang. > No, not as an individual and I will concede that to you. But as a government, MOST certainly yes. I'm not a government. You called me hypocritical. In any case, democracies are necessarily hypocritical. They change leaders pretty often, and different leaders tend to have different beliefs.

lenkite 5y ago
> My point was that didn't happen. If we were putting people there solely for their religion and ethnicity, it'd be much more than a thousand. It would be millions... like in Xinjiang. Tens of thousands passed through Abu Ghraib too in Iraq. A truckload of torture and prisoner abuse done to people of only ONE ethnicity. People lost limbs in prison. No one in the US administration paid for these crimes against humanity. Some folks in the US govt who were in explicit favour of hard intervention in Iraq and who were deeply influential in igniting the Iraq war are the same ones criticising China now. (Hint: Under Secretary of State). So, yes, it is definitely sanctimonious and ridiculous hypocrisy. Not you personally, but I assumed you were supporting the US government in this stance. If not, I apologize.
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  > Tens of thousands passed through Abu Ghraib too in Iraq. A truckload of torture and prisoner abuse done to people of only ONE ethnicity. If we put Iraqis in prison because of their religion and ethnicity, there would have been millions locked up. In Xinjiang, people are put in camps because of their religion and ethnicity, that's why millions are locked up. Key word: because > Some folks in the US govt who were in explicit favour of hard intervention in Iraq and who were deeply influential in igniting the Iraq war are the same ones criticising China now. Sometimes murderers snitch on murderers. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be arrested. I mean, there is plenty of evidence on what's happening in Xinjiang, it's not like we are talking about taking war-hawks on their word.
  - lenkite 5y ago
    > In Xinjiang, people are put in camps because of their religion and ethnicity, that's why millions are locked up. Well, it's not by Religion. If so, China would have ~45 million muslims permanently imprisoned. Contrary to popular belief, the folks in Xinjiang don't make up the majority of Muslims in China. Those would be the Hui who make up ~3% of the population just by themselves. It is indeed deeply distressing that Uyghurs are detained for months, under-go re-education before being released. And torture if they fail to comply. But we have an international council for that - the UNHRC. The US has no leg to stand on to individually judge other nations with their extra-ordinary violent history and propaganda in the modern era. > Sometimes murderers snitch on murderers.. Indeed and such people should be treated for the evil hypocrites they truly are until they pay for their crimes. American citizens can support them and be sanctimonious about this, but the rest of the world (esp Middle-East/Asia) will take it for what it truly is: "Might Makes Right and Daddy USA is Mightier Than You, So None Can Judge Us, But We Can Judge You". The US should make make a clear, evidenced case at UNHRC, hold an international hearing and attempt a resolution. But hey, then everything would need to be questioned and analysed from more than one party.
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      Weird how the parts of the world with the least press and human rights are the most against talking about Xinjiang. Probably just a coincidence tho.
      - lenkite 5y ago
        Weird how the nation with the most propaganda, maximum incarcerated and most wars/bombings in the modern era acts holier-than-thou all the time. Probably just a coincidence tho.
  - trasz 5y ago
    >If we put Iraqis in prison because of their religion and ethnicity, there would have been millions locked up Oh, but you only put there those that you didn't kill in the first place. China, on the other hand, isn't exterminating those people up front.

lenkite 5y ago

> My point was that didn't happen. If we were putting people there solely for their religion and ethnicity, it'd be much more than a thousand. It would be millions... like in Xinjiang. Tens of thousands passed through Abu Ghraib too in Iraq. A truckload of torture and prisoner abuse done to people of only ONE ethnicity. People lost limbs in prison. No one in the US administration paid for these crimes against humanity. Some folks in the US govt who were in explicit favour of hard intervention in Iraq and who were deeply influential in igniting the Iraq war are the same ones criticising China now. (Hint: Under Secretary of State). So, yes, it is definitely sanctimonious and ridiculous hypocrisy. Not you personally, but I assumed you were supporting the US government in this stance. If not, I apologize.

BobbyJo 5y ago
> Tens of thousands passed through Abu Ghraib too in Iraq. A truckload of torture and prisoner abuse done to people of only ONE ethnicity. If we put Iraqis in prison because of their religion and ethnicity, there would have been millions locked up. In Xinjiang, people are put in camps because of their religion and ethnicity, that's why millions are locked up. Key word: because > Some folks in the US govt who were in explicit favour of hard intervention in Iraq and who were deeply influential in igniting the Iraq war are the same ones criticising China now. Sometimes murderers snitch on murderers. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be arrested. I mean, there is plenty of evidence on what's happening in Xinjiang, it's not like we are talking about taking war-hawks on their word.
- lenkite 5y ago
  > In Xinjiang, people are put in camps because of their religion and ethnicity, that's why millions are locked up. Well, it's not by Religion. If so, China would have ~45 million muslims permanently imprisoned. Contrary to popular belief, the folks in Xinjiang don't make up the majority of Muslims in China. Those would be the Hui who make up ~3% of the population just by themselves. It is indeed deeply distressing that Uyghurs are detained for months, under-go re-education before being released. And torture if they fail to comply. But we have an international council for that - the UNHRC. The US has no leg to stand on to individually judge other nations with their extra-ordinary violent history and propaganda in the modern era. > Sometimes murderers snitch on murderers.. Indeed and such people should be treated for the evil hypocrites they truly are until they pay for their crimes. American citizens can support them and be sanctimonious about this, but the rest of the world (esp Middle-East/Asia) will take it for what it truly is: "Might Makes Right and Daddy USA is Mightier Than You, So None Can Judge Us, But We Can Judge You". The US should make make a clear, evidenced case at UNHRC, hold an international hearing and attempt a resolution. But hey, then everything would need to be questioned and analysed from more than one party.
  - BobbyJo 5y ago
    Weird how the parts of the world with the least press and human rights are the most against talking about Xinjiang. Probably just a coincidence tho.
    - lenkite 5y ago
      Weird how the nation with the most propaganda, maximum incarcerated and most wars/bombings in the modern era acts holier-than-thou all the time. Probably just a coincidence tho.
- trasz 5y ago
  >If we put Iraqis in prison because of their religion and ethnicity, there would have been millions locked up Oh, but you only put there those that you didn't kill in the first place. China, on the other hand, isn't exterminating those people up front.