[oreally]

> You can totally learn about something without physically going there.

And you can make mistakes with that learning too. And this isn't the first time - I recall the CIA claiming some farm buildings being missile silos. This is why you get closer to see if there are any mistakes. Otherwise you're just taking a single narrative and running with it, and repeating it. Multiple perspectives HELP.

Regarding evidence - do consider that it has a potential to be tainted too, similar to the claims about China and camp tours. News outlets don't verify these studies thoroughly and already present it as truth for outrage points.

[rich_sasha]

You're arguing against points I'm not making. All I'm saying is, arranged visits by Chinese government to Xinjiang are meaningless and can't prove, or even hint, what China is really doing there. The "evidence" provided by China will look the same, regardless of their fault or virtue.

So going/not going on such trips, and any authority rejecting or accepting this as evidence are meaningless.

[oreally]

> All I'm saying is, arranged visits by Chinese government to Xinjiang are meaningless and can't prove, or even hint, what China is really doing there. The "evidence" provided by China will look the same, regardless of their fault or virtue.

Just following the lines of thought. Essentially they've already accepted that the china trip is tainted and meaningless, even before taking the chance to opening their perspective on whether they could be wrong.

If life is suffering why not give up then?

This goes counter to the values of being 'open'. For someone of the free world this isn't very free.