> Ditto in Guantanamo. I suggest doing a bit more research.
There are far more than 1000 Islamists in the US. Not sure where you're pulling that statement from.
> Done not by the US press but by Wikileaks, whose founder ( Assange) is being hounded by both the US govt and the media.
And I can freely read all about it.
It was picked up by every major news organization on American soil.
>Stop with the sanctimonious hypocrisy please.
Is it hypocritical to point out bad comparisons? I think Gitmo was bad. I think Xinjiang is worse given it's larger scale. I'd like both to stop, along with a billion other things, but here we are, on a thread about Xinjiang.
> There are far more than 1000 Islamists in the US. Not sure where you're pulling that statement from.
I am responding to this statement: "You are put there for your ethnicity and religion, (no suspected crimes are needed for detainment), despite being a Chinese citizen.".
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".
> Is it hypocritical to point out bad comparisons?
No, not as an individual and I will concede that to you. But as a government, MOST certainly yes. The US always berates and sanctions other nations for policies that itself regularly carries out without any blowback. Most of the bad stuff never makes it to the US media if the media favours the party in power and it doesn't serve US interests.
One set of standards for the US (& its close allies) and another set of standards for the rest of the world
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
It would be, if it was true. So far, the only source is the "China Tribunal" - a private NGO operating without any kind of legal mandate or even oversight, which to me looks like a propaganda outlet masquerading as a proper law institution.
Ditto in Guantanamo. I suggest doing a bit more research.
> 2) Freedom of press in the US means we found out bad things were happening in Guantanamo, and the prison has since been mostly wound down.
Done not by the US press but by Wikileaks, whose founder ( Assange) is being hounded by both the US govt and the media.
Stop with the sanctimonious hypocrisy please.