This article was written by Luís Garcia, author of the book VENEZUELA: Westerners have lost the ability to reason!, and of numerous articles published on his website Nomadic Thoughts. He is the translator of the Portuguese version of Andre Vltchek’s book Por Lula: O Brasil de Bolsonaro (For Lula: Bolsonaro’s Brazil) and has also collaborated with authors like Tim Anderson, Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett, Stephen Gowans, and several others in the translation of their articles into Portuguese.
As Western Propaganda Machine can’t convince us to hate China with logical reasoning and intellectual honesty, BBC and many other Western media offer us emotional manipulation, with carefully selected words meant to transmit negative ideas about China.
Here’s an example: “In Xinjiang, displays of police might are everywhere”.
BBC employees surely heard about Goebbels, thus we can assume they know what they are doing:
There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be ‘the man in the street.’ Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology.”
This article proposes a full debunking of one of the most-watched videos on Youtube responsible for the creation of a myth that so many throughout the world now believe. Just like in the Western-proposed myths of the Chinese invasion of Africa or the nefariousness of the New Silk Road, the purpose is the very same: to damage the image of China as much as possible, a country seen by many others as the last hope for humankind.
As the incomparable Walter Rodney exposed in his masterpiece How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, Western powers did destroy all they could in Africa. These are the same powers now bashing China for what they committed in Africa. Similarly, the Western nations continuously bombing Muslim nations to Stone Age are proposing a parallel reality in which Muslims are rather victims of Chinese imperialism.
This kind of propaganda has to be exposed and it is actually very easy to expose if one compares it with factual reality backed by hard evidence. Let’s try it!
BBC starts by insinuating 4 sensational Chinese sins:
- large-scaled oppression;
- police forces don’t allow enlightened Western journalists to film evidence of Chinese sins;
- China omnipresent and repressive regime doesn’t allow Uighurs to express themselves;
- wise and superior Westerners know much better, only from browsing GoogleMaps!
And of course, BBC didn’t forget dramatic music suggesting we are about to witness some gruesome evidence proving once and for all that China, the Chinese government, the CCP, and the Chinese Han are indeed bad, really bad.
“The search for China’s hidden camps.”
Firstly no, BBC doesn’t need to search for well-known facilities already visited by BBC employees and other Western media, where footage was widely collected, thus proving the so-called “camps” are objectively visible and not “hidden” at all.
As for the many other “camps” BBC believes to exist thanks to GoogleMaps footage, well, if BBC journalists and experts managed to find those “camps”, then they are also not “hidden”. Conclusion: the use of the word “hidden” makes no sense at all.
Secondly, these are not camps. Until proven the contrary, Vocational Centers (Vocational Education and Training Centers, 职业技能教育培训中心 in Chinese), are what their creators call them: “Vocational Centers”. To call it a camp, BBC might be dishonestly insinuating the idea of “concentration camps”. If it is not the case, BBC should clarify what definition of “camps” shall the viewers use when watching BBC.
As for concentration camps, how do they actually look like? To read A Brief History of US Concentration Camps (by Brett Wilkins) would be a good starting point for these apparently oblivious BBC journalists. Otherwise, here are some examples:
Concentration camps for migrants in El Paso, USA, 2019
Concentration camps for German prisoners in France during WWII:
America’s Japanese Concentration Camps during WWII (an obvious example of a minority oppressed by its mother state):
“What has happened to the vanished Uighurs of Xinjiang?”
Firstly, which “Uighurs”? Can BBC provide a list of the Uighurs in question, including full names and locations where they were last seen? Extraordinary statements require equally extraordinary evidence.
Secondly, from an intellectually honest and sane perspective, it is unacceptable to talk about “vanished” persons, when we don’t even know who they are. One can’t even deny what BBC insinuates, for a matter of basic logical reasoning known to humankind at the least since the time of the great Greek philosophers: first, tell me who you believe to be missing, then someone might be able to prove you right or wrong.
Thirdly, if the BBC talks about unknown and unspecified persons that hypothetically vanished (or not), asking what “happened” to them is just irrelevant.
Although the BBC didn’t bother to explain it, one can easily understand that by “vanished Uighurs” BBC means the decrease in population of certain locations in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region due to the relocation of locals to other areas, where they get housing and new jobs to take them out of poverty. This has been happening inside Xinjiang Region, hence discrediting, even more, the insinuation of “vanished Uighurs of Xinjiang”. The fact that these projects are not exclusive of Xinjiang and the Uighurs, further discredit the incomprehensible alleged “persecution of Uighurs”.
To state that Uighurs were “vanished” implies that they can no longer be found on Earth’s surface. That’s simply not true and, if the BBC insists on this bold accusation, hard evidence has to be provided, or it is simply BBC’s fake news. The real news is that these can easily be found and the Chinese initiative is taking hundreds of thousands of Uighurs out of poverty at a very fast pace:
“Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region lifted 537,000 people out of poverty last year.”
“A total of 513 villages and three counties in Xinjiang shook off poverty last year, and the region’s poverty headcount ratio dropped from 11.57 percent in 2017 to 6.51 percent.”
“The region invested over 33.4 billion yuan (4.9 billion U.S. dollars) in poverty relief last year, 92.3 percent of which went to the four prefectures, which sit on the edge of the Taklimakan Desert.”
“The region also built new houses for 68,900 households in 22 impoverished counties in southern Xinjiang last year.”
“In a bid to eliminate absolute poverty by 2020, Xinjiang will continue to use relocation as a means of poverty reduction and speed up infrastructure construction in poverty-stricken villages.”
Given the fact that the BBC and other Western media argue that the Chinese authorities do not let them film the [concentration] “camps”, why don’t they film the houses, factories, and farmland where the alleged “vanished” Uighurs live and work? Nobody will prevent them from going there, the locations are well known and there is also Google Maps footage of those places to be analyzed by experts. who would be mesmerized with the fast-paced construction of infrastructure usually called “progress”!
More emotional manipulation with carefully selected words in a deceptive attempt to transmit negative impressions: “In Xinjiang, displays of police might are everywhere?”.
One has to wonder what does “display of police might” means in BBC newspeak? To be dressed as policemen? To carry the same tools and light weapons every police force on Earth carries? To drive police cars as every police force does? No BBC, that’s just police forces doing their job!
This is an (unnecessary) display of police might in Boston, USA:
This is an (unnecessary) display of police might in the US:
As for “police everywhere”, everywhere where?
- Option 1: Only in Xinjiang?
- Option 2: Especially in Xinjiang?
- Option 3: Everywhere in China?
Option 1 is a clear lie. Let’s move on.
Option 2? Why not, but please do not forget to provide data showing that, on average, there’s more policemen or police cars in the streets of Xinjiang than in the rest of China (which would be perfectly normal given the number of terrorist attacks perpetrated in that region and/or perpetrated by individuals born in that region).
Option 3. I have been to several Chinese cities, I lived in China and, from my own experience, this “display of police mightiness” is quite common in China, especially in bus stations, train stations, and city-centers.
What about the unusual and illegal display of military might by UK/US forces in Afghanistan (country A) in the aftermath of a terrorist attack committed in country B (USA) by nationals of its close ally country C (Saudi Arabia)?
What about the display of police and military might everywhere in the Thai provinces of Pattani and Narathiwat? I personally experienced it being stopped every 2 or 3 km for dozens of kilometers in these provinces. Officially, this immense display of police and military might is there to prevent the occurrence of more terrorist attacks as the ones committed by members of the local Muslim minority. Where are the BBC reports on the display of military might in Southern Thailand?
Back to “vanished” people, what happened to people in Detroit? Why are locals “vanishing” there? Following BBC’s reasoning, Chinese CGTN could visit that half-ghost US city and equally conclude that “up to 1 million” US citizens vanished at the hands of the US repressive regime, and are now confined in some hidden concentration camps against their will.
False allegations, right? Right, and that’s exactly the problem with BBC’s report on Uighurs!
In truth, there are many modern slaves in the US, arrested by the millions in private jails that look more like concentration camps and where a minority is clearly the predominant target of persecution. Watch Tortured & Enslaved: Enter the World’s Biggest Prison, by Abby Martin.
“There’s something here they don’t want you to see.”
“You” who? BBC can’t be talking about BBC journalists and other Western journalists because several of them have entered vocational centers and were allowed to film inside. BBC can’t be talking about Western audiences because Western audiences have access to footage like the video being debunked here, plus access to Chinese news channels in the English language like CGTN.
And dear BBC, don’t say “ah, but Chinese media only show you what they want you to see”, implying that sick old dichotomic Western fallacy: we are the good guys, therefore, by definition, we are telling the truth about devil inferior races/regimes; we don’t have to prove it with hard evidence; on the other hand, if those devil races/regimes do not show evidence of the alleged horrific crimes we believe they are committing, we can conclude they are hiding the truth; the actual non-existence of what we want to believe in without evidence… is an irrelevant detail.
Saddam’s nonexistent WMD story is the ultimate example of this wicked reasoning.
Really, a Westerner convinced that Chinese are lying or hidding something just because Chinese are Chinese and not Westerners, proves nothing about those unknown unproven assumptions and further exposes Western complexes of superiority and supremacist ideals, as well as the Western tendency for intellectual arrogance, colonial paternalism and exceptionalist perspective of reality.
Back to British propaganda, BBC can’t be talking about Chinese audiences because they too have access to the mentioned Western media and Chinese media in English plus to the Chinese media in Chinese Mandarin.
BBC can’t be talking about Chinese people passing by, as it is obvious they can see the outside. And the BBC can’t be talking about the inside either, because few seconds after this absurd claim, the BBC showed civilians entering the vocational center to visit relatives!
“Huge fences all around. Look. Behind this blue steal walls, in a former school, it is what China calls a vocational center. But it looks more like a prison.”
It makes perfect sense to install a vocational center in a former school, no? Did this BBC journalist spend at least a minute to think about the concept or is he just too full of Western supremacism to concede the Chinese people the possibility of being reasonable persons?
In his perspective, it looks like a prison. Ok, why not. But one can also argue the Westminster Palace looks like a gruesome symbol of imperial plunder and the enslaving of human beings in Africa and Asia.
Huge fences and steel walls? Yes, because now it is no longer a school. Now it is a vocational center, part of the Chinese government policy to irradicate religious extremism that led to several terrorist attacks and many injured/dead victims.
When extremist Islamists (a UK/US creation, not to be confounded with peaceful Islam) explode a bomb in Paris, Western MSM goes mad; people all over the planet, over-exposed to Western media, mourns the French victims; the French government keeps letting Saudi and Qatari extremists spread more Islamist extremism inside French mosques; French Army continues to occupy and bomb Muslim/Arab nations. And the West is absolutely fine with all that.
When Uighur extremist Islamists (supported by the US and with political representation in Washington) continuously commit terrorist attacks in China, Western media ignores it; indoctrinated Western audiences and many others living in Western vassal states never get to know about the terrorist attacks, let alone the number of Chinese people injured or killed.
Instead of disrespecting International Law, like France, the UK, and the US do, China does not invade nor bomb countries. China opts to re-brainwash Chinese Uighur citizens victims of extremist/terrorist brainwashing (so far a very effective measure, as the wave of terrorist attacks stopped).
Furthermore, in a very Chinese way of dealing with reality, China strongly bets on prevention. China offers Uighur people in danger of being radicalized (and everybody else) the chance to acquire professional skills and learn languages, promoting better chances of a prosperous future that will take Uighurs away from US-backed terrorist indoctrination.
“From above, the grim details can be picked out. Last year the school had a football pitch. Today it’s covered with what looks like accommodation blocks. Watchtowers are visible.”
But it is perfectly reasonable that a former school transformed into a vocational center has a hybrid look. It looks like the school it once was but with jail-like characteristics appropriated to its new purpose.
Many watchtowers, barbed wires for the vocational training centers? Why such tight security if they are vocational training centers?
Most of the newly-built vocational training centers are located in South Xinjiang where Uighurs predominate, and where many have been brainwashed with religious extremism especially Wahhabism. To detoxify their religious extremism, they are told to enroll in vocational centers with free lodging, food and skills training. There’s a need to have tight security around the training centers to prevent attacks by East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) terrorists. In the past, ETIM terrorists attacked fellow Uighurs when they refused to participate in terrorism.
As noted by others, how can it be detention camp when the trainees are free to go home for the weekends, and visits by relatives are allowed.
After a few years of cracking down on terrorism, the authority in Xinjiang turns its attention to the root cause of terrorism: poverty and ignorance. Empowering them with employable skills and detoxifying them are effective in cutting off new recruits by ETIM. So much so that there hasn’t been a single act of terrorism since 2016!”
Dormitories for people to stay overnight makes perfect sense in a vocational center (even in a school)! A “grim detail” would be to keep the football pitch and force trainees to sleep outdoor.
Watchtowers in a school would look odd, but not in a vocational center. Fences and watchtowers are there to protect facilities, employees, and trainees for the reasons already exposed. So what? Is BBC against the rule of law and against Chinese authorities’ right to enforce the law, a very soft law?
Is this BBC journalist, shocked by the soft measures China takes to fight terrorism (that would be seen as a progressive joke in the US, land of the Patriot Act), implying that he actually supports terror and extremism in China?
Anyway, if the Chinese policy of re-educating people brainwashed with extremism to give them tools to start a new life is just too much for BBC, what about the British government, the British Army, the British Secret Services, British media, and British NGO’s actively training, helping, financing, transporting, arming and/or campaigning for international terrorist organizations in Syria (including Uighur’s Turkestan Islamic Party, present in Idlib)?
And what about the jails for underaged citizens in the US sometimes indefinitely arrested because of insignificant transgressions like verbally offending a teacher? Aren’t they also oppressed by fences and watchtowers?
In a grim reality of US concentration camps do live thousands of child migrants, with “reports by children of rapes, sexual abuse and assaults” according to WSWS.
Southern migrants, are victims of scandalous inhuman conditions in a grim reality of US concentration camps :
This is what the Paso Del Norte Border Patrol station in El Paso looks like today. The queue of migrants who turned themselves in is stretched to the parking lot. pic.twitter.com/PTSblYP74R
— Valerie Gonzalez (@ValOnTheBorder) March 27, 2019
Compare it with life inside a Chinese vocational center:
This is a 2-minute long take I shot at the vocational training center in Kashgar, Xinjiang. pic.twitter.com/skQFNiVUEt
— Hu Xijin 胡锡进 (@HuXijin_GT) October 24, 2018
Compare it with “grim details” in the US imperialistic need to kill 1,147 innocent people abroad in order to execute 41 suspected foreign terrorists without trial.
Just imagine the Chinese Army killing 1,147 civilians abroad in their attempt to kill 41 Uighur men suspected of being terrorists. Imagine the Chinese Army slaughtering this amount of innocent people. How would the West react?
BBC journalist claimed “officials“ prevented him from interviewing relatives of people staying at the vocational center nearby.
Yet, the journalism failed to identify the person in question and to prove his “official” status. Yet, he was able to talk to that family, thanks to another alleged and unidentified “official”.
Then, the footage was edited; the video was trimmed on minute 1.22, thus hiding how long the journalist managed to talk to the family. 10 seconds? 10 minutes? One hour? We don’t know the answer for that but, given the noticeable differences in light and camera position before and after minute 1.22, it is clear that the conversation lasted more than mere seconds (as he insinuated), eventually stopped by that unidentified man BBC calls an “official”.
BBC wished to insinuate (systematic) censorship on this issue but failed to provide hard evidence of a single case of censorship; BBC wasted 27 seconds on thin air.
“Xinjiang’s main Muslim minority are known as the Uighurs.”
Correct, BBC finally got something right.
“We find many of their homes locked and deserted.”
BBC should have hard evidence to back such bold claims, but it doesn’t.
As Gerry Brown argued:
The video suggests that they all have been sent to detention camps. My article in Counterpunch quoted an official figure of 400,000 Uighurs having been relocated from remote villages to nearby towns and cities where they can be gainfully employed. As a result, 600,000 Uighurs have been lifted from poverty in 2 years to 2017. Such relocation is not confined to Uighurs in Xinjiang. It has been done for Han Chinese in other provinces as well, millions of them.
Another few thousand Uighurs have gone to Turkey through issues of Turkish passports by Turkey embassy and most ended up in Idlib fighting along with ISIL. In Northern Syria, the Uighur terrorists occupied the houses of Syrian Muslims, who were forced to leave their homes and land. And the West portrays these Uighur terrorists as the victims!
If there are Xinjiang deserted areas previously inhabited by Uighurs, why every single document on the demographics of Xinjiang suggests the very opposite? As Dennis Etler argued:
After the beginning of the economic reforms in the 1980s Xinjing had a population of 13.08 million of which 46% were Uighur and 40% were Han. The 2000 census recorded 18.46 million of which 45.21% were Uighur and 40.57 were Han. The 2010 census recorded a population of 21,813,334 with 43.3% Uighur and 41.0% Han. The demographics of Xinjiang have hardly changed over the last 35 years of economic reform and growth! So where is the vast demographic shift, the government sponsored premeditated flooding of Xinjiang with Han to dispossess the Uighurs that the Western media constantly harps about? IT’S SIMPLY NON-EXISTANT! Lies, lies and more lies.”
With a quick look at Xinjiang’s demographics on Wikipedia, one learns that between 2000 and 2015 the total amount and the percentage of Uighurs in Xinjiang actually increased, from 43,6% to 46,42%. During the same period, the percentage of Han Chinese decreased, from 40,6% to 38,99%. And we shall not forget that there are more Uighurs living in other regions of China. The math is easy and the conclusion is very simple: the absolute number of Uighurs living inside Chinese borders keeps growing year after year, proving that Uighurs are NOT vanishing.
Knowing all this, what can be said about: “we find many of their homes locked and deserted”?
Well, firstly, the BBC offered anti-journalism when it insinuated a correlation between a locked house of a single person to alleged desertification. Secondly, the BBC does not provide locations, thus undermining third-party verification. Thirdly, BBC does not provide evidence of a correlation between alleged desertification and the vocational centers’ policy. Fourthly, “many” is too vague.
Caught empty-handed, BBC tries to convince us about a gruesome made-up story. Goebbels would be very proud of BBC!
“Sinister official notices on the doors saying the missing are being looked after.”
Well, sinister this Machiavellian insinuation, and the fact BBC resumed 1 title and 6 topics into a single word: “sinister”.
Sinister is to have an international corporation with an annual budget of £4.722 billion (2013/14 figures) conveniently unable to provide a full translation of a tiny document that is not at all “sinister”. Here’s a translation:
“六个讲清楚” – “6 points of clarification”
1. 讲清楚其家人被关爱的原因 – To make it clear why the authority cares about his/her relative.
2. 讲清楚当前的严打政策 – To make it clear the current hard crackdown on terrorism.
3. 讲清楚宗教极端思想的现实危害 – To make it clear the harm of religious extremism.
4. 讲清楚被关爱的人如果不及时采取措施很可能危害社会，连累家庭 – To make it clear if his/her relative doesn’t take corrective action, he might endanger society and affect his family.
5. 讲清楚政府是立足帮忙挽救的出发点进行集中关爱 – To make it clear the authority is sincere in helping his/her relative, and such help will be given collectively.
6.讲清楚如果触犯法律法规必将严惩 – To make it clear if his/her relative breaks the law, the punishment will be meted out strictly.
See? Why manipulate this document’s content, suggesting “the missing are being looked after” as if they were “vanishing”.
To insinuate something without actually saying it is indeed one of the most common tactics used by Western lying MSM. In this case, insinuate a genocide is taking place in China,
In reality, the document explains why and how the Chinese authorities are leading with the radicalization of some of its citizens because of Western-sponsored religious extremism that resulted in numerous terrorist attacks in China while explaining how the Chinese government is trying to solve the problem.
What’s wrong with this document? Instead of opening vocational centers, should China do like the US rogue state, drone-bombing thousands of civilians or carpet-bombing entire countries?
Or is BBC trying to tell us that China shouldn’t do anything about terrorism and allow it to freely spread inside its borders?
“One credible estimate suggests up to a 1 million Uighurs may now be detained.”
Many might not be aware but the ONLY source for the 1 million + Uighurs who allegedly vanished in alleged concentration camps is the EXCLUSIVE work of the renowned anti-communist Adrian Zenz, a member of the North American non-profit anti-communist Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, an organization founded by Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Mister Zenz, according to his own research, came up with this figure by simply extrapolating numbers in the most unscientific manner and without hard evidence to back it. Here is it: “Wash Brains, Cleanse Hearts”: Evidence from Chinese Government Documents about the Nature and Extent of Xinjiang’s Extrajudicial Internment Campaign.
Since he published his research on vanished Uighurs, his unfounded allegation of 1 million + vanished Uighurs has been repeated millions of times throughout the world as the ultimate truth. Yet, a lie repeated many millions of times will never become the truth, no matter what. On the contrary, it ends by getting exposed like in Ben Norton’s article No, the UN did not report China has ‘massive internment camps’ for Uighur Muslims.
“But the BBC has seen new detailed satellite analysis of dozens of suspected camps across Xinjiang. ”
No, BBC looked at public footage, like everyone using Google Maps can do.
Exactly, “suspected”, not proven. Speculation is not proof.
Anyone can do better using Google Maps, such as analyzing dozens of very real military-based illegally installed in occupied Syria by 3 rogue states: the USA, the UK, and France.
“Few of them look much like schools. This giant compound is surrounded by a high wall with 16 watchtowers.”
Here, BBC posits it “looks like schools”, thus contradicting previous statements.
What about forgetting the concepts of “school” and “prison” and start referring to vocational centers as “vocational centers”? Everyone got it, it has a hybrid combination of both schools and prisons features, for the reasons already addressed here, and it has a name: vocational center!
“We try to approach the site by car (look at this), only to discover that’s being expanded on a massive scale (like a city).”
BBC team approached a “suspected camp” by car, to find out that the “suspected camp” has been expanded. So what? Before talking about the expansion of it, BBC still has to prove if it is, in fact, a “camp”.
If this place is another vocational center (China never denied the existence of vocational centers), what’s wrong with expanding it?
Finally, it is said: “massive scale! Like a city!” Sure, why not massive. Human beings able to reason will promptly ask back:
- What’s your definition of “massive”?
- Do you have precise numbers in square meters?
- Isn’t China’s size equally massive?
- Isn’t China’s population equally massive?
- So what’s the big deal?
“Then the police block our way. If this really is all about education, then why the effort to stop us getting close?”
Well, if BBC presence in China is really all about informing us about vocational centers, then why the effort to visit buildings under-construction instead of visiting vocational centers and showing us how a vocational center looks like from the inside?
The Chinese authorities do not stop foreign journalists from visiting vocational centers. On the contrary, they invite foreign journalists to visit vocational centers.
The “police blocked” his way? What’s wrong with it? Can’t this supposed journalist stop one minute to think about the reasons behind the creation of such facilities (eradicate terrorism)? What if this BBC journalist were a UK spy working for ETIM? Can’t he understand that strategic facilities built by the government to combat terrorism can’t be visited just like that, by a random guy, especially a foreign one? Can’t he understand that an invitation and/or an authorization are common requirements everywhere in the world?
In France, RT journalists were banned from attending Macron’s campaign. In Canada, Venezuelan Telesur was prevented from following the Lima Group’s meeting in which Western direct and illegal interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs was being discussed. These are blatant examples of violations of the Munich Declaration of the Duties and Rights of Journalists. Yet, BBC finds it unreasonable to have Chinese police blocking its journalists in such odd locations!
“If this really is all about education”?
No, this is not all about education. Period.
“Effort to stop us getting close”?
Luckily for the journalist, they were Chinese police forces and not US police forces. Otherwise, by now, he would probably be seven feet under the ground.
And then, there’s another pragmatic reason for not letting this BBC journalist getting closer. Look at the bulldozer next to his car:
Now is time to analyze the discourse of Ana Sebastián (unprofessionally, BBC spelled her name wrong).
“The satellite analysts show us a more recent image; it’s clear how much the site has grown.”
Really? One might wonder how dated satellite images can be more recent than footage filmed by a BBC cameraman standing right there!
Even if true the allegation that the not-yet-identified infrastructure “more than doubled” in size, what does it have to do with Chinese vocational centers?
“But the team is able to show that this one camp is part of something much bigger”.
“By identifying many other secure facilities right across Xinjiang.”
Amazing. These postmodern experts can label a given infrastructure as “camp” just by finding satellite footage of other similar unidentified infrastructures in some other unidentified locations. If lack of logic were a crime, these people would definitely be sentenced to the death penalty!
What if the similar (not identical) facilities are something else like, let’s say… prisons? Anything against the existence of prisons in China?
Can these postmodern pseudo-experts really prove what these facilities really are? Can they prove that these facilities are somehow related to Chinese vocational centers? Can they prove that these facilities are a synonym of Uighurs vanishing by the millions?
“Plotting their growth over time shows just how fast they are being built”.
Sure, but be amazed by the fast growth of infrastructure in China is like being amazed by the fact that 1+1=2. Can they prove some sort of correlation between this growth and their insinuation of “hidden camps”?
“Satellites see beyond what the human eyes can see.”
Nonsense. Some can, indeed! But not these ones, capturing regular footage using the visible spectrum. Those satellites do not see beyond our sight. They just shoot pictures. It still needs human eyes to look at those pictures, and then, using postmodern skills, find “camps” or unicorns on it.
“As the years pass, we have detected that the number of infrastructures being built… increases. And most significantly in the last 2 years.”
Sure, she found out that the number of unidentified buildings being built in China indeed increases!
But, why not analyze satellite images of the numerous Chinese projects created to take Uighurs out of poverty? Perhaps these experts on unicorns are not allowed to do so, as it wouldn’t fit in the pre-planned script to bash China.
“And prison design experts tell us this could now be one of the biggest detention facilities in the world, holding 11,000 inmates at the very least.”
Prison design experts? Really, namely who? And what do they gave to do with the subject of vocational centers?
They say it “could”, right, but presumptions, speculations, wild guesses, and any other kind of conditional assertions do not qualify as evidence and are contrary to the principle of serious journalistic research.
“China denies it is detaining Muslims in Xinjiang.”
Yes, exactly. China denies it is “detaining Muslims” for 2 very obvious reasons.
Firstly, the target of this de-radicalization program is extremism/terrorism. If the target were Islam, China would have to “detain” more than 24,7 million Muslims belonging to many different ethnic groups (Hui, Uyghur, Kazakh, Dongxiang, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, Salar, Tajik, Bonan, and Tatar). The Uighurs are not even the biggest Muslim minority in China!
Secondly, China denies it because those “Muslims” are not detained. Real detainees in a real prison can’t go home; regular detainees in a regular prison can’t receive visits the way they do in vocational centers; detainees do not have this kind of access to training courses and respective certificates.
Please turn off the sound and focus on the footage the BBC collected inside a Chinese vocational center for another piece of their sinophobic propaganda:
What does it look like? A school, a prison, or rather what Chinese authorities claim it is a vocational center?
If Uighurs are horribly treated by Chinese authorities, and if China really is that almighty high-tech dystopian surveillance nightmare Western media is always telling China is, how come there’s no footage leaked to prove it?
And if there’s no footage yet leaked, how can a serious journalist allege despicable crimes against Uighurs based only on witnesses with links to US government-sponsored organizations? Manufacturing of dissidents, witnessing lies about Xinjiang or North Korea in the name of the US propaganda machine have been widely exposed, one only needs to look at the facts:
While waiting for the pieces of hard evidence to back Western allegations and already discredited witnesses, one can look at what the Western incoherent accusers have been doing in places like Abu Ghraib or Bagram:
“In response to the allegations, state TV has been showing classrooms of supposedly grateful adults willingly undergoing re-education.”
Yes, Chinese TV channels have been showing footage. Yes, in response to BBC’s baseless allegations, Chinese authorities show footage disproving them.
“Supposedly grateful adults”?
BBC supposed so. No one else did. If really in pursuit of truth, the BBC could probably find people truly grateful to their parents, friends, or the Chinese state for having helped them to get rid of terrorist ideology by joining this program. And, probably, the opposite too. The human psyche is too complex. The BBC journalist should keep his manipulative hyperbole for himself.
“Willingly undergoing re-education”?
Some do, some don’t. Does BBC have hard evidence that all of them, or a large majority of them, were forced to join the program? And if forced, what’s the problem of forcing people to pass through a program of de-radicalization, after the country have had experienced a wave of deadly terror attacks?
When the US, the UK, and the Saudi terrorist states impose an illegal full-blockade on the impoverished and military offended Yemen, aren’t 14 million-plus Yemenis forced to starve to death? In Yemen, there’s a serious problem, a serious crime going on, a slow-motion genocide on the making that BBC dishonestly opts to systematically downgrade!
Back to China, of course, some were forced by their relatives and some others forced by somebody else with the intention of taking those persons away from something like this:
What is BBC’s point in all this? Does the BBC support the presence of thousands of Uighur (TIP) terrorists in Syria? Does the BBC support the return of Uighurs terrorists trained by the al-Qaeda in Idlib to perform terrorist attacks in China? Knowing TIP is an ally of al-Qaeda/HTS in Syria, can we conclude the BBC supports al-Qaeda?
Well, the British Army occupying Syria surely did so. The British government financing the al-Qaeda-affiliated White Helmets group in Syria also did it for sure.
The BBC, as the propaganda state channel of a genocidal state that still sponsors terrorism overseas, including in the Chinese city of Hong Kong, should refrain from accusing China without serious evidence.
Yes, exactly. Although during the whole report BBC shows skepticism about the existence of a true re-education program taking place there, that’s what we objectively can see:
But if in BBC newspeak, a classroom of a vocational center in Xinjiang is rather a camp, or a concentration camp, or a prison… then, following the same Orwellian deconstruction of reality, these orange-dressed students are having a good time in a university campus located in Guantanamo, right?
“Without this, I might have followed religious extremists.”
Finally, BBC shares the opinion of one of the trainees undergoing a de-radicalization program. She surely knows better about her own life and her own socio-cultural background than BBC does. In a few words, she denied several of BBC’s allegations!
A typical Western reaction to this would be to argue that she was forced to say it. Once again, if someone argues so, then proof has to be provided, or else it just becomes one more example of racism towards the Chinese of the kind that implies evilness in anything done by Chinese officials. Because no, the Chinese are not a crowd of 1,4 billion indoctrinated zombies thinking all exactly the same due to CCP brainwash. Probably, that’s what most Westerners believe Chinese are after having passed through a long massive process of Western sinophobic indoctrination, but their beliefs won’t change Chinese reality.
“From a vegetable field to another one of China’s new schools in less than six months, complete with watchtowers.”
Why the reference to “a vegetable field”? Does BBC also have something against the Chinese turning a vegetable field into a vocational center?
“Less than six months.”
Amazing, right? But guess what, the Chinese, on average, are incredibly industrious, organized, and efficient!
“With watchtowers” in a school.
Apparently, BBC will never get it right but the place in question is a vocational center, not a school.
“We try to film one of them, but once again, while trying to get to the truth, we’re asked to leave.”
He “tries to film one of them?”
No, he didn’t. He has already been inside on vocational center. He doesn’t need to try, he only has to get permission (as he previously got). This is just footage of a prankster behaving like a spoiled little brat.
“While trying to get to the truth, we’re asked to leave”?
Why didn’t he try to get the truth when he was inside a vocational center? The explanation is rather simple. He was too busy ridiculing the Chinese people and mistreating the Chinese authorities with his deplorable (wrong) sense of moral and civilizational superiority! And here he incoherently plays the victim.
Anyways, since when BBC cares about the truth? Faked news about baby incubators destroyed in Kuwait? Faked evidence of WMD in Iraq? Staged evidence of chemical attacks in Syria? The BBC never cared much about the truth. The BBC consistently cares about hiding the truth and broadcast lies to promote as many Western crimes against humanity as possible!
No, BBC has absolutely nothing to do with truth or reporting the truth:
(One of John Pilger’s best documentaries. From 32:19 to 37:25 he exposes the hypocrisy of Fran Unsworth, then BBC Head of Newsgathering).
As for the Chinese policemen working there, he was just doing his job. He wouldn’t risk losing his job for letting an unknown bad-tempered domineering British person with complexes of superiority enter such facility without confirmed authorization.
This BBC’s journalist probably thinks he is still living in the Century of Humiliation, the dark era for China’s history during which the barbarian armies of France and the UK plundered and destroyed the Summer Palace, a great example of the refined Chinese civilization. Or during which supremacist Europeans could literally buy Chinese slaves, while imposing racist laws granting impunity to European missionaries and other Europeans committing crimes against the Chinese people in China? Or during which the UK imposed the collapse of the biggest economy in the world by forcing the Chinese to get addicted to British opium?
Silencing journalist for real is what is happening with Julian Assange. Silencing journalism for real happens when RT and Sputnik are banned from a UK media freedom conference. Silencing journalism happened in Bolivia when the non-elected fascist regime of Jeanine Áñez ordered teleSur and RT Spanish to be shut down.
There are numerous recent examples of censorship in the West, in Western vassal states, or in countries victims of US imperialism like Haiti or Honduras. There’s systematic censorship on Western social media like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube. In Europe, there are UE-funded pro-NATO think tanks like European Values, organizations ruled by Russophobic fundamentalist fascists openly demanding a TOTAL BAN on Russian media and Russian journalists in Europe!
On the other hand, BBC journalists and many other Western journalists are absolutely free to lie about China and vilify China while staying in Chinese territory. This fundamental contradiction illustrates very well the double-standards of the supremacist mentality behind the gigantic informative war on China being carried out by the NATO alliance.
To conclude, this and many other dishonest reports making up atrocities in China have the only purpose of discrediting China, undermining future constructive links between the West and China (New Silk Road being the ultimate example) and a way to postpone a bit more the inevitable fall of Western-NATO imperial and often criminal control of our mother Earth.
As Zhang Yi kindly elucidates:
The China-through-a-Western-lens is an incomplete, one-sided and defective approach. Western media see a quite different China from the real China. Such an image of China may exist in the Western media sphere for a long time, as the West needs it to cling to its sense of superiority. Sadly, such unwarranted pride will prevent the West from understanding the real China.”
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
- Biden Holds First Phone Call With Xi, Both Sides Offer Vastly Different Accounts Of What Was Said
- China Mocks “Doomsday Clown” Pompeo After ‘Genocide’ Designation For Uighur Persecution