|
|
|
|
|
by Garvi
1023 days ago
|
|
Even your implication that I have ulterior motives shows the sad state of public debate on such topics. I am also curious as to what you perceived as "snark"? I have now fully read the article. Two Chinese US citizens claim they have escaped China where they were tortured for having too many babies. An alleged ex-guard corroborates their story, but cannot prove he was ever actually a guard. This case does seem like completely devoid of any proof. Are you seriously claiming this is sufficient evidence for genocide? But before anyone bites my head off for asking questions, please define genocide for me as you understand the word. It's extremely unclear what people are talking about in this case, as it continues to seem that no one claims any deaths. |
|
There are so many iterations of this same phenomena- some hugely impactful moral question is poised, but the basic facts are never clearly established, just the allegations. Was Epstein controlling global elites with sex trafficking? Did the CIA kill JFK? Are aliens real and on Earth? Are there DNA targeted bioweapons in Ukraine? Is China genociding the Uighur? All of these questions are of huge moral import, but seemingly unanswerable. Rather, the fact that officials could answer them definitively, but do not, makes it appear as if the answer is 'yes'. However, I think the point of the questions themselves isn't to establish truth. Instead, the implications of the questions themselves further control, whatever the answer is. Either the CIA really did kill JFK, or they want the question to remain open, to increase the perception of their power. Either way, they don't want the question answered, they want it open.
Your question about the status of the Uighurs is rational and earnest, but the question itself might be purely instrumental for governmental control. That's why there's always commenters that will abuse the request for proof. The reality isn't the point, the point is to angry at China.