- F Stop Fitzgerald
- Dec 12, 2010
-
|
Press so free that they just make poo poo up.
Journalists might be the only people in society worse than cops.
the nyt alone probably got more people killed
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 02:27
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2024 07:47
|
|
- Hubbert
- Mar 25, 2007
-
At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
|
Yes, those are also human rights abuses. Wow, that wasn`t hard to acknowledge at all! Bit of an imperfect comparison though, since Guantano is down to about 50 inmates. What´s amazing and tragic is that they`re still afforded slihtly more rights and legal transparency than the average Chinese prisoner. And Guantano Bay has been toured by a dozen different documentary crews at this point.
I´d love to raise heck about Abu Gharaib, but the officers and leaders responsible were arrested and prosecuted years before I had an account. It`s not worth mutch, but president Bush apologized to the world for what happened as something vaguely resembling public accountability . Let us know when Xi Jinping does the same
Has China Won? The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy - Kishore Mahbubani posted:
Americans are also fair people. They believe that people should practice what they preach. Americans would also agree with the broad principle that a country that violates certain fundamental principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not have the moral authority to preach to others the virtues of these human rights.
However, while Americans agree with these points in theory, they do not implement them in practice. This can be seen in the reactions of American leaders to the reports that China has incarcerated a million Muslims in reeducation camps in Xinjiang. Many Americans have expressed outrage over the treatment of innocent Muslim civilians by the Chinese government. Americans believe that they have the right to express outrage because they believe that America treats innocent Muslim civilians better.
But which country treats innocent Muslim civilians better? America or China? If the reports are true, the Chinese government has incarcerated hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslim civilians in reeducation camps. If the reports are true, the American government has tortured or killed thousands of innocent Muslim civilians since September 9, 2011. Unfortunately, in both cases, the facts seem to be true. The Chinese government has incarcerated hundreds of thousands of Muslim civilians. Enough media reports have confirmed this. Similarly, the American government has tortured thousands of Muslims. Since 9/11, America has been dropping thousands of bombs on Islamic countries, killing many innocent civilians as a result.
John Mearsheimer summarizes these facts in The Great Delusion. Most Americans are aware that torture was carried out systematically in Guantanamo Bay. Fewer Americans are aware that “the Bush administration devised the infamous policy of extraordinary rendition, in which high-value prisoners were sent to countries that cared little about human rights, like Egypt and Syria, to be tortured and interrogated. It appears the CIA also tortured prisoners at its ‘black sites’ in Europe as well as at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and Abu Ghraib in Iraq. This policy clearly violated American and international law, both of which forbid torture.”*
Torture is a greater violation of human rights than incarceration. Most moral philosophers would agree on this. They would also agree that what is worse than torture is assassination because the most basic human right is the right to live. Few people may realize that in recent years the American government has stepped up its assassination programs. Mearsheimer describes how it came about :
quote:
Because the Obama administration could neither prosecute nor release the detainees at Guantanamo, it had little interest in capturing new prisoners and subjecting them to indefinite detention. So Obama and his advisors apparently decided instead to assassinate suspected enemy combatants wherever they were found. While it is surely easier to kill suspects than bring them to Guantanamo and perpetuate its legal morass, the effects of this new policy may be even more poisonous.
Mearsheimer also adds the following observation: “As the journalist Tom Engelhardt writes, ‘Once upon a time, off-the-books assassination was generally a rare act of state that presidents could deny. Now, it is part of everyday life in the White House and at the CIA. The president’s role as assassin in chief has been all but publicly promoted as a political plus.’”
Since the records of both the American and Chinese governments in respecting the human rights of innocent Muslim civilians has been less than perfect, it would be unwise for either government to preach to the other the importance of respecting fundamental human rights. A wiser approach for both governments to take is to look at the big picture and acknowledge that both governments face a common challenge of dealing with the threats posed by terrorists recruited by radical Islamic groups. America woke up to this threat after 9/11. China experienced similar 9/11 moments when terrorists recruited from the Xinjiang region went on a killing spree in several cities. Ishaan Tharoor wrote in the Washington Post on May 22, 2014: “A gruesome terror attack Thursday morning led to at least 31 deaths in Urumqi. The attack—in which assailants in two cars plowed over shoppers and set off explosives in a crowded market area—is the worst such incident in years, surpassing a horrific slaughter in March, when knife-wielding attackers hacked down 29 people at a train station in the southwestern city of Kunming. As in Kunming, authorities suspect ethnic Uighur extremists.”* Most Americans are unaware that China, too, has experienced domestic terrorism. If they were, they would see the long-term value of both the American and Chinese governments cooperating together to assist in one of the largest existential challenges that humanity faces.
This challenge is the massive efforts being made by the 1.3 billion Muslims to modernize and create the same kind of comfortable and secure middle-class living standards that most American and Chinese citizens already enjoy. Fortunately, most Muslim societies are slowly and steadily succeeding, including the most populous Islamic countries of Indonesia and Malaysia, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Over time, these more successful Islamic societies will have a positive impact on some of the more troubled Arab nations in the Middle East. America has already spent a lot of blood and resources trying to fix several Arab societies. Most of these efforts have failed. Yet, America is more likely to succeed if it can cooperate with the successful moderate Muslim societies of Asia and with China. In short, vis-à-vis the Islamic world, America and China should not focus on their differences; they should focus on their common challenges and opportunities.
If a positive growth dynamic develops in all corners of the Islamic world, the result will be fewer human rights violations (incarceration, torture, or assassinations) by America and China. In short, even in the area of values where there are differences of views, there is potential for collaboration. In so doing, both America and China will also be creating a safer future for their own populations.
The common interest that America and China have in dealing with terrorism and with the troubled parts of the Islamic world reinforces the key message of this book. If America and China were to focus on their core interests of improving the livelihood and well-being of their citizens, they would come to realize that there are no fundamental contradictions in their long-term national interests. In 2010, then prime minister Manmohan Singh and Premier Wen Jiabao captured the positive spirit of Sino-Indian relations in a joint statement: “There is enough space in the world for the development of both India and China and indeed, enough areas for India and China to cooperate.”* Similarly, there is enough space in the world for both America and China to thrive together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 02:42
|
|
- Grapplejack
- Nov 27, 2007
-
|
if the US pulled back support for Taiwan completely and abandoned the area would the PRC force them to unify or would they recognize them ala Mongolia
Mongolia is almost exactly the same situation as Taiwan (buffer state created from chinese land by larger power looking to contain the PRC) but Mongolia is OK to exist, while Taiwan is not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 03:25
|
|
- Atrocious Joe
- Sep 2, 2011
-
|
This New York Times had a recent story about a Uyghur guy who was sent to Gitmo and now lives in Albania. He still believes the USA will help liberate East Turkestan. So maybe Gitmo isn't as bad as Communist China?
quote:After being exonerated in 2006 by a military court, Mr. Qassim was shackled onto a military transport plane and flown overnight to Tirana from Cuba. Since then, repeated efforts to obtain visas for the United States and Canada have failed, with all but one of the five from Guantanamo still in Albania. The one who left moved to Sweden, where he works as a taxi driver.
Qassim said he laughed when he heard last month that US officials were negotiating with the Taliban over access to Kabul’s international airport after the US-backed government collapsed on August 15 and ceded control of the Afghan capital to the insurgents.
During his detention at Guantanamo, he said, “they kept telling me that the Taliban were terrorists and accused me of collaborating with the Taliban, but now they are collaborating with the Taliban.”
The world, he noted, “has certainly changed a lot in 20 years.”
One comforting change, he said, is the evolution of attitudes toward China. When he was first sent to Guantanamo, the Bush administration had embraced China’s view that Uighurs demanding independence or even simply greater autonomy were dangerous extremists. In 2002, Washington named a largely phantom Uighur group called the East Turkestan Islamic Movement as an al-Qaeda affiliate, a move that covered up Chinese claims that Uighurs protesting their treatment were terrorists.
Last year, the The Trump administration eliminated the Uighur group from the U.S. terrorism list, saying there was no evidence of its existence.
“We talked about the risk of China more than 20 years ago and we constantly told everyone, ‘Be careful with China,'” Qassim said. “But they are only now beginning to understand what kind of country the Chinese Communist Party has created.”
He last communicated with his wife and three children in China in 2016, when the Communist Party appointed a new hardline chief in Xinjiang and began a program of mass arrests that has since detained a million or more Uyghurs. and other Muslims in “re-education” Camps. He is concerned that his relatives, tainted by his dangerous extremist status in China, have become victims of what the State Department described this year as “genocide” in Xinjiang.
The last she heard about her 21-year-old daughter in Xinjiang, she said, she had not been arrested and was working in a shop, but was being pressured to marry a Han Chinese to demonstrate her loyalty to Beijing. and avoid arrest.
Separated from his family in Xinjiang, Mr. Qassim took a second wife in Albania, a Uighur woman with whom he had three children. He said he told his first wife over the phone that he had remarried, and “she was a bit angry,” but she understood that due to Chinese policies in Xinjiang, their chances of getting back together were slim.
...
The Albanian Ministry of the Interior said that Mr. Qassim had not applied for a passport. Mr. Qassim said that his lawyer had asked the ministry and was told that the Uighurs’ “humanitarian protection” status precluded the possibility of a passport.
Although he is angry at the United States for his years at Guantanamo and his 15 years in limbo in Albania, he still sees the United States as the Uighurs’ only real hope.
“If Turkestan ever gains independence, it will be thanks to the United States,” Qassim said. “All countries make mistakes, but I can’t stop believing in America just because they committed an injustice with five Uighurs sent to Albania.”
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 03:30
|
|
- i say swears online
- Mar 4, 2005
-
|
good thing the nyt cleaned up their act after judy miller
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 03:35
|
|
- stephenthinkpad
- Jan 2, 2020
-
|
if the US pulled back support for Taiwan completely and abandoned the area would the PRC force them to unify or would they recognize them ala Mongolia
Mongolia is almost exactly the same situation as Taiwan (buffer state created from chinese land by larger power looking to contain the PRC) but Mongolia is OK to exist, while Taiwan is not.
You have to understand Inner and Outer Mongolia was not historically split into 2 parts. It was a relatively new concept that czar Russia came up with and essentially cut out a smaller piece from Mongolia, which was a client state of the Qing Empire. Right now Inner Mongolia is much more populated than (Outer) Mongolia and has had a relatively smooth integration into PRC.
So in order for this analogy to hold true, Taiwan Island has to split into 2 and the populated west side will become part of PRC and the rural east side will be it's own country. And, this is the important part, militarily not allowed to take a side between US and China.
If Jiang the Younger offered that option 4 decades ago, Deng probably would take it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 03:41
|
|
- Mirello
- Jan 29, 2006
-
by Fluffdaddy
|
I'm about to be probed. just got really pissed off and posted in the D&D thread. gently caress them man. warmongers
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 03:58
|
|
- Grapplejack
- Nov 27, 2007
-
|
I'm about to be probed. just got really pissed off and posted in the D&D thread. gently caress them man. warmongers
lol u dumby
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:01
|
|
- F Stop Fitzgerald
- Dec 12, 2010
-
|
still lmaoing at the idea of a guy who thinks china is doing a no poo poo genocide but would consider changing his mind if Xi formally apologized for it. absolutely fuckin lib brained lmao
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:07
|
|
- runaway pancake
- Dec 13, 2008
-
by Fluffdaddy
-
Gravy Boat 2k
|
D&D is not sending their best
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:08
|
|
- MLSM
- Apr 3, 2021
-
by Azathoth
|
How many d&d mods are jarheads again
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:08
|
|
- runaway pancake
- Dec 13, 2008
-
by Fluffdaddy
-
Gravy Boat 2k
|
Free Mongolia
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:09
|
|
- Judakel
- Jul 29, 2004
-
Can't post for 9 years!
|
How many d&d mods are jarheads again
empty? all of them
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:09
|
|
- F Stop Fitzgerald
- Dec 12, 2010
-
|
Which explains why a number Uyghur business owners, politicians, academics, and other gainfully employed members of the community have been detained without charge. Maybe their friends and families are all lying, who knows. What's their legal resource? Because they can't seem to get proof of life, let alone an appeal hearing or a court date.
https://twitter.com/goodopinionhavr/status/1446170219517468672?s=12
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:37
|
|
- Hubbert
- Mar 25, 2007
-
At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
|
D&D taught me that when it comes to American intervention in a war to defend Taiwan, a pyrrhic victory beats a flat loss
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:51
|
|
- sullat
- Jan 9, 2012
-
|
D&D taught me that when it comes to American intervention in a war to defend Taiwan, a pyrrhic victory beats a flat loss
We will defend Taiwan to the last drop of Taiwanese blood!
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 04:55
|
|
- Lostconfused
- Oct 1, 2008
-
|
Better hope none of those advisors over there get clipped by accident.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 05:34
|
|
- je1 healthcare
- Sep 29, 2015
-
|
So the CCP detained the sister of a CIA translator. Not sure why that surprises anyone
Do think these things stopped the genocide the USA committed in Afghanistan and Iraq from happening?
Like I don't want to be all whataboutism here, but this is extremely naive about what liberal capitalist states do. China has a completely different government and methods for handling terrorism, which are certainly authoritarian and heavy-handed. But I'm not confident switching to the Western system would stop it from happening. What you have to describe here is, how would you want to handle a heavily radicalised Muslim population, which has a separatist movement (possibly funded by foreign influences) committing terrorist attacks in its midst? How do you deradicalise the population and suppress that movement without some civil liberties being suppressed?
Edit: drat, Kishore Mahbubani making my argument way more eloquently there
I'm in support of any measure that makes it harder for any government to commit genocide or human rights abuses. A freeflow of information is pretty key, yet it's one that the CCP is inexplicably hostile to, judging by the frequent phone searches and government minders that western tourists of Xinjiang have to regularly go through.
Besides that, how does a government define a population or individuals as "radicalized" or "extremist"? To answer that question we can go by 2017's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Regulation on De-extremification:
https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/xinjiang-uyghur-autonomous-region-regulation-on-de-extremification/
quote:Article 9: The following words and actions under the influence of extremism are extremification, and are to be prohibited:
(1) Advocating or spreading extremist thinking;
(2) Interfering with others' freedom of religion by forcing others to participate in religious activities, forcing others to supply properties or labor services to religious activity sites or religious professionals;
(3) Interfering with activities such as others' weddings and funerals or inheritance;
(4) Interfering with others from having communication, exchanges, mixing with, or living together, with persons of other ethnicities or other faiths; or driving persons of other ethnicities or faiths to leave their homes
(5) Interfering with cultural and recreational activities, rejecting or refusing public goods and services such as radio and television.
(6) Generalizing the concept of Halal, to make Halal expand into areas other beyond Halal foods, and using the idea of something being not-halal to reject or interfere with others secular lives;
(7) Wearing, or compelling others to wear, burqas with face coverings, or to bear symbols of extremification;
(8) Spreading religious fanaticism through irregular beards or name selection;
(9) Failing to perform the legal formalities in marrying or divorcing by religious methods;
(10) Not allowing children to receive public education, obstructing the implementation of the national education system;
(11) Intimidating or inducing others to boycott national policies; to intentionally destroy state documents prescribed for by law, such as resident identity cards, household registration books; or to deface currency;
(12) Intentionally damaging or destroying public or private property;
(13) Publishing, printing, distributing, selling, producing, downloading, storing, reproducing, accessing, copying, or possessing articles, publications, audio or video with extremification content;
(14) Deliberately interfering with or undermining the implementation of family planning policies;
(15) Other speech and acts of extremification.
These are legal terms now which the Chinese government uses to justify extrajudicial detentions. Dangerous activities, such as claiming that non-halal foods are actually halal. These are legal terms now which the Chinese government uses to justify extrajudicial detentions. Not owning a TV. Giving your kid the wrong name. Bearing whatever the "symbols of extemification" are. Having one too many kids. "Spreading religious fanaticism through irregular beards". I find it hard to see how any of these are remotely reliable predictors of terrorism. But maybe the translation is wrong, someone let me know if that's the case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 05:56
|
|
- Mirello
- Jan 29, 2006
-
by Fluffdaddy
|
Sounds good to me.
I think so much of the western dumbassary on China is that they can't fathom that the govt in China actually helps people. Basically every govt program in the west is a scam. China pulled over a billion people out of poverty. It built amazing infrastructure. Just 30 years ago it was a backwater and now it's a world giant.
People in the west have been experiencing decline basically their entire lives (I'd say since 1973). They refuse to believe that chinas deradicalization program is actually effective and accepted by the population
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 06:10
|
|
- indigi
- Jul 20, 2004
-
how can we not talk about family
when family's all that we got?
|
lol why did you bold “interfering with weddings or funerals”
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 06:18
|
|
- mortons stork
- Oct 13, 2012
-
|
America, famed for not interfering with weddings and funerals
Children afraid of blue skies.txt
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 06:35
|
|
- je1 healthcare
- Sep 29, 2015
-
|
lol why did you bold “interfering with weddings or funerals”
Does pestering a relative into having a religious wedding or funeral warrant a prison sentence? The laws are broadly-worded enough that they could apply to literally anything, which is why I'm hoping to get a second opinion on the translation
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 06:36
|
|
- Atrocious Joe
- Sep 2, 2011
-
|
I'd missed that the new line is that China was responsible for Uighurs being imprisoned in Gitmo.
quote:When China Convinced the U.S. That Uighurs Were Waging Jihad
By Richard Bernstein
March 19, 2019
Initially, American interrogators believed Qasim and his compatriots. During the Uighur detainees’ first year at Guantánamo, reports filed by interrogators found most of them not to be “enemy combatants,” and they were deemed eligible for release. For reasons that have never been made clear, though, they were not released — very likely, this was initially because there was no place to release them to, then because, except for a small number of them, the Bush Administration simply refused to let them go. Rushan Abbas, who had been a reporter for Radio Free Asia in Washington and who subsequently spent months in Guantánamo as the interpreter for the Uighurs, told me that Major General Michael E. Dunlavey, the commander of the task force responsible for interrogating the prisoners in Guantánamo’s early days, had said to her that he’d felt the Uighurs were being detained in error. Years later, he emailed her: “Every time when I read about how our government screwed up the release of the Uighurs, I feel very angry.” Multiple attempts to contact Dunlavey were unsuccessful, but those remarks are consistent with a statement he has reportedly made about Guantánamo detainees.
In Qasim’s case, a review by what was called the Joint Task Force Guantanamo, dated February 21, 2004, which was among a full set of such memos published by WikiLeaks, acknowledges Qasim’s “prior assessment” as “not affiliated with al-Qaeda or a Taliban leader.” But, it continues, “new information” indicated that Qasim “is a probable member” of ETIM, which “is a Uighur separatist organization dedicated to the creation of a Uighur Islamic homeland in China, through armed insurrection and terrorism.”
In describing ETIM in those words, officials echoed the portrayals of Uighur “terrorists” that Chinese propaganda had been disseminating. The United States had also been incorporating this sort of language into its official statements. In late 2002, reversing its earlier resistance, the State Department designated ETIM as a terrorist organization. A fact sheet on this decision described ETIM as a “violent group believed responsible for committing numerous acts of terrorism in China, including bombings of buses, movie theaters, department stores,” and other targets. Between 1990 and 2001, it continued, “members of ETIM reportedly committed over 200 acts of terrorism in China, resulting in at least 162 deaths and over 440 injuries. Its objective is the creation of a fundamentalist Muslim state called ‘East Turkistan.’”
This statement repeats figures included in a document issued by China’s State Council, the country’s main governing body, in which China publicly laid out its case against ETIM and other Uighur radicals it blamed for violence in Xinjiang. Missing from the State Department fact sheet, and from other statements of the United States’ position, was any echo of Washington’s previous views — that Uighur grievances were local and could not be dealt with by counterterrorism methods, or that China made no distinction between those perpetrating violence and those advocating for greater freedom. In the post-9/11 frenzy, and in its eagerness to enlist Beijing’s support in the wider War on Terror, the United States had adopted China’s position without qualification.
Moreover, whether China’s description of ETIM was accurate or not, it would say nothing about whether the Guantánamo Uighurs were members of the group. When the Bush administration was called upon to make the case that the prisoners were members of ETIM, it also presented evidence that appears to have been generated by China. In 2008, a group of the Guantánamo Uighurs, arguing that “there was not one iota of actual evidence” connecting them to any terrorist organization or act, was able to bring a habeas-corpus suit to the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington. The government’s lawyers put a cache of classified documents into the record, ostensibly to show that the men were indeed enemy combatants. This material has never been made public. The court, after reviewing the documents, not only overturned the government’s enemy-combatant finding, but also dismissed in derisive terms the evidence presented by the U.S. government, describing it as Chinese propaganda. Judge Merrick Garland, who wrote the unanimous opinion of the three-judge panel, noted that the government’s case rested on four “intelligence documents,” which were themselves full of words and phrases like “reportedly,” or references to “things that ‘may’ be true or are ‘suspected of’ having taken place,” with no indication of who “‘reported’ or ‘said’ or ‘suspected’ those things.”
The classified documents were so similar that they seemed to have a “common source,” which he said was “the Chinese government, which may be less than objective with respect to the Uighurs.” In a separate case several months later, a U.S. district court ordered that the Uighurs detained at Guantánamo be released into the United States. But the Bush administration succeeded in getting that order reversed, and so, except for five of the Uighurs captured in Pakistan, including Qasim, who had been released to Albania in 2006, the others remained at Guantánamo.
The Obama administration accepted that the Uighurs still being held at Guantánamo posed no danger to the United States, and proposed to resettle them in Northern Virginia, where there was a Uighur American community ready to take care of them. But this effort died in the face of vociferous opposition from the Republican representative Frank Wolf and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, both of whom, consciously or not, based their objections on the same Chinese assertions that the government had depended on earlier. Wolf called the Uighurs “these terrorists” who were “members of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, a designated terrorist organization affiliated with al-Qaeda,” while Gingrich warned that the Guantánamo Uighurs had been “instructed by the same terrorists responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001.”
By the end of 2013, the remaining Uighurs had been released from Guantánamo and sent to a variety of different countries. According to Abbas, the former translator for the Uighurs who has remained in contact with many of them, even now they try to keep their whereabouts a secret, worried that Beijing will pressure their host countries to send them back to China.
Their imprisonment had been part of an effort by the United States to gain cooperation in the War on Terror. Instead, China won American cooperation in its war against the Uighurs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 06:47
|
|
- BULBASAUR
- Apr 6, 2009
-
-
Soiled Meat
|
I'm sure there are more benign cases, but most of the interviews I read from Uighurs fell into a pattern of 'I was reported for thinking the TV was the devil, I now recognize this is wrong', 'I was reported for forcing my wife to not leave the house, I now recognize this is wrong', 'I was reported because I refused to let my children attend school, go to social events, or watch TV, I now recognize this was wrong' etc. At what point should a state do something in such situations (especially with respect to assimilation?)
In the United States there is a more hands-off approach. Loopholes exist through things like religious freedom or home schooling that can allow such things parallel to the mainstream society. Traditionally a state won't step in.
In my mind a state has the right to enforce things like reproductive rights, rights to education, child welfare, etc. When I think of two imperfect solutions to assimilation, one extreme that might send a person into a vocational re-education camp and the other extreme allowing polygamous sects with child brides, I would pick the former.
BULBASAUR has issued a correction as of 08:49 on Oct 9, 2021
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:04
|
|
- GoLambo
- Apr 11, 2006
-
|
Does pestering a relative into having a religious wedding or funeral warrant a prison sentence? The laws are broadly-worded enough that they could apply to literally anything, which is why I'm hoping to get a second opinion on the translation
The translation is never going to mean anything out of context, there is no objective arbiter of how law is interpreted anywhere on the planet regardless of how this reads to you. What matters is how these laws are actually interpreted and prosecuted within the legal system, which you don't actually seem to have any understand of or evidence to suggest anything nefarious is happening. You admittedly don't know anything about Chinese law or case history, and a couple blog posts isn't actually going to even get you close to familiarizing yourself with a topic so broad. We would both be out of our depth here making claims about these laws actually impact anyone, and maybe you should take that fact as more important than worrying about literal propaganda handed down from the american state department.
And beyond all that, your perspective is self admittedly molded by appreciating western liberal legal systems and outcomes as somehow being fair or just at all. Sure would be awkward if one of those model legal systems was imprisoning the most people on the planet in history literally ever, a system of law which had mostly been selectively racist in its interpretation with mountains of documented history in English that maybe you have probably already read.
Why don't you just like, take your head out of your rear end and drop your ego for a minute and think about that fact? The rights to fair process you seem so concerned with have only coexisted alongside the most brutal, domestically oppressive, provably racist police state in the world, the United States of America.
And the Chinese help people get loving jobs. You absolutely dense motherfucker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:06
|
|
- 30.5 Days
- Nov 19, 2006
-
|
In my mind a state has the right to enforce things like reproductive rights, rights to education, child welfare, etc. When I think of two imperfect solutions to assimilation, one extreme that might send a person into a vocational re-education camp and the other extreme allowing polygamous sects with child brides, I would pick the latter.
Er...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:31
|
|
- Judakel
- Jul 29, 2004
-
Can't post for 9 years!
|
Advocates of freedom always land at child-loving.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:32
|
|
- Anime Schoolgirl
- Nov 28, 2002
-
|
I'm sure there are more benign cases, but most of the interviews I read from Uighurs fell into a pattern of 'I was reported for thinking the TV was the devil, I now recognize this is wrong', 'I was reported for forcing my wife to not leave the house, I now recognize this is wrong', 'I was reported because I refused to let my children attend school, go to social events, or watch TV, I now recognize this was wrong' etc. At what point should a state do something in such situations (especially with respect to assimilation?)
In the United States there is a more hands-off approach. Loopholes exist through things like religious freedom or home schooling that can allow such things parallel to the mainstream society. Traditionally a state won't step in.
In my mind a state has the right to enforce things like reproductive rights, rights to education, child welfare, etc. When I think of two imperfect solutions to assimilation, one extreme that might send a person into a vocational re-education camp and the other extreme allowing polygamous sects with child brides, I would pick the latter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:43
|
|
- wynott dunn
- Aug 9, 2006
-
What is to be done?
Who or what can challenge, and stand a chance at beating, the corporate juggernauts dominating the world?
|
I'm sure there are more benign cases, but most of the interviews I read from Uighurs fell into a pattern of 'I was reported for thinking the TV was the devil, I now recognize this is wrong', 'I was reported for forcing my wife to not leave the house, I now recognize this is wrong', 'I was reported because I refused to let my children attend school, go to social events, or watch TV, I now recognize this was wrong' etc. At what point should a state do something in such situations (especially with respect to assimilation?)
In the United States there is a more hands-off approach. Loopholes exist through things like religious freedom or home schooling that can allow such things parallel to the mainstream society. Traditionally a state won't step in.
In my mind a state has the right to enforce things like reproductive rights, rights to education, child welfare, etc. When I think of two imperfect solutions to assimilation, one extreme that might send a person into a vocational re-education camp and the other extreme allowing polygamous sects with child brides, I would pick the latter.
what do you call your act?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:45
|
|
- Red and Black
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
If only China had an independent judiciary and a free press like in the US. Then its problems of mass incarcerating minority populations would be solved
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 08:48
|
|
- stephenthinkpad
- Jan 2, 2020
-
|
Polygamous Sects with Child Brides, it's good band name. Just saying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 09:10
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2024 07:47
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2021 02:27
