Riots in Xinjiang

[samsong]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6679150.ece

 

Here's the link again. Maybe it won't crash like it has been doing. Just copy and paste. About half way down the page and on the left is the archive section with the 1967 article in it.

I never had a link time out on me and be so uncooperative like that before. They're getting smarter.

[knloregon]

I'm fundamentally opposed to punishing families for the crimes of individuals. Not the rule of law as we know it. There will be executions in the wake of this, and I predict more Uighur unrest as a result. Because PRC is trying to keep the ethnic lid on, I think there will be some leniency, but also, as we have discussed before the rule of law also embraces all those things we have that they don't --- right to an impartial lawyer who will advocated aggressively in your favor, rules of evidence, right to cross-examine witnesses, freedom from self incrimination (can't beat it out of prisoners for instance)---everything that makes up our justice system---they don't have. ---and that will add to the strife---some who committed horrible crimes will go free (like our system)---but also, some innocent---or at least, not guilty of murder, may very well be executed.

 

I'm with SQN that its hard to see how this murderous attack wasn't premeditated by at least some Uighurs... btw, reporting in the WSJ suggests that there really was a rape by Uighurs on Han in Guangdong----that the recant is false to ease ethnic strife. In any case, if there were a rape it would not excuse the fatal Han retaliation..

[knloregon]

samsong, any chance you can post it?

[whome?]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090706/ts_nm/us_china_xinjiang

 

Nearly all Uighurs traced the protests on Sunday back to their own anger over a confrontation in far southern China in late June, when Han Chinese fought Uighurs working in a factory in Shaoguan, leaving two Uighurs dead, after a false allegation that some of them had raped a Han Chinese woman.

 

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...46-2703,00.html

 

Uighurs say the riots were triggered by the June 25 deaths of Uighur factory workers killed in a brawl in the southern Chinese city of Shaoguan. The trouble started when rumours began to spread that Turkic-speaking, mainly Muslim Uighur migrant workers at the toy plant had raped Chinese women.

 

Allegations were also posted online, and travelled through the Han community.

 

Police eventually said the charges were untrue. But as word spread of further alleged sexual assaults, enraged Han workers attacked their Uighur co-workers. State media say two Uighurs were killed and dozens injured. Uighur groups say the death toll was higher.

I saw the same information from CCTV 9 and China Daily newspaper this weekend. It was reported that a fired/disgruntled Han employee of the GUZ toy factory started the false rumor about the rape of a Han girl by Muslim Uighur.

 

From there internet blogs and posting fueled the fire including from the "Washington-based Uighur American Association" who are also the the ones saying there have been 1,000s of Muslim Uighur's killed.

 

The article below provides some information about the possiblity that the protests and attackes were planned.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6689733.ece

[samsong]

samsong, any chance you can post it?

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6679150.ece

 

Here's the url, Kim. I tried posting the link but it timed out with a 404. You can copy the url and paste it to get to the Times page. The 1967 article doesn't say much but it's kind of interesting. The people were against chairman mao.

Edited July 13, 2009 by samsong (see edit history)

[samsong]

An article reporting rioting in Xinjiang (Sinkiang) in 1967.

 

You can follow this link to the archive section shown on the left. It has the artcle from 1967. also on that page is the Apollo I accident of January 27, 1967.

The link to the archived article apparently is timed to expire. But it is an interesting page.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle6679150.ece

It seems to be working now. Maybe it's me that is having troubles/problems? Try the link and see if it works.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

I'm fundamentally opposed to punishing families for the crimes of individuals. Not the rule of law as we know it. There will be executions in the wake of this, and I predict more Uighur unrest as a result. Because PRC is trying to keep the ethnic lid on, I think there will be some leniency, but also, as we have discussed before the rule of law also embraces all those things we have that they don't --- right to an impartial lawyer who will advocated aggressively in your favor, rules of evidence, right to cross-examine witnesses, freedom from self incrimination (can't beat it out of prisoners for instance)---everything that makes up our justice system---they don't have. ---and that will add to the strife---some who committed horrible crimes will go free (like our system)---but also, some innocent---or at least, not guilty of murder, may very well be executed.

 

I'm with SQN that its hard to see how this murderous attack wasn't premeditated by at least some Uighurs... btw, reporting in the WSJ suggests that there really was a rape by Uighurs on Han in Guangdong----that the recant is false to ease ethnic strife. In any case, if there were a rape it would not excuse the fatal Han retaliation..

 

Punishing families of violent perpetrators is an extreme measure, that would not be appropriate for this situation. Protesting unfair treatment is one thing, but resorting to violent means, conveys a message of violence, that will always get violence in return.

 

There must be consequences to destructive actions, whether they be breaking windows, burning cars, or harming others. Someone started the violence here, and it appears it was the Muslim people, were angry from a previous instance in Guangdong for what they interpreted as workplace discrimination, that also erupted into violence.

 

Swift retribution must be dealt to the perpetrators and instigators of the violence. That includes the Muslim people that started it, and the Han people who went out to visit a form of vigilante justice. However, there is a large number of people that were caught up in the mess who simply tried to defend themselves; these people should of course be exempted from any kind of prosecution.

[Guest jin979]

It's been reported that Chinese security forces opened fired on peaceful protesters.

"We are extremely saddened by the heavy-handed use of force by the Chinese security forces against the peaceful demonstrators," said Alim Seytoff, vice-president of the Washington-based Uighur American Association.

 

"We ask the international community to condemn China's killing of innocent Uighurs. This is a very dark day in the history of the Uighur people," he said.

 

So, who knows what to believe or who is actually at fault.

I've read where up to a thousand people where killed. I don't know what to believe. So all I can do is to blame both sides. The truth will never be known. I feel sorry for them.

 

 

Edited July 13, 2009 by jin979 (see edit history)

[tonado]

Please stay on topic. Stop fighting with each other.

[samsong]

Please stay on topic. Stop fighting with each other.

I see. Post made by others are deleted but post made by "the one" are allowed to stay. That's biased to censor.

See post below.

 

 

I'll guess again. If not Xinhua then it must be from Wikipedia. You like to wiki your quotes. I've should've known.

 

 

I think you make a habit of guessing on a regular basis. Quite interesting that you're now considering yourself an expert on the topic. Glad to see you had the time to tear yourself away from the Michael Jackson news updates long enough to get your self-appointed degree.

[griz326]

The sad news clearly shows the volatility of the Chinese people; demonstrates the power of the Internet/freedom of the press; and explains to some degree why China wants to control the Internet/the press.

 

I'm fundamentally opposed to punishing families for the crimes of individuals. Not the rule of law as we know it.

It is the rule of law as the Chinese have known it for centuries.

 

As for punishing families for the crimes of family members that is an old practice not limited to China and has proven extremely effective in controlling undesirable behavior. In fact, variations on that technique are used in law enforcement in the US.

 

... we have discussed before the rule of law also embraces all those things we have that they don't --- right to an impartial lawyer who will advocated aggressively in your favor, rules of evidence, right to cross-examine witnesses, freedom from self incrimination (can't beat it out of prisoners for instance)---everything that makes up our justice system---they don't have. ---and that will add to the strife---some who committed horrible crimes will go free (like our system)---but also, some innocent---or at least, not guilty of murder, may very well be executed.

So your saying the outcomes will be approximately the same: swift, sure, humanly flawed justice VS agonizingly slow, twisted, politically-shaped, humanly-flawed justice.

 

btw, reporting in the WSJ suggests that there really was a rape by Uighurs on Han in Guangdong----that the recant is false to ease ethnic strife. In any case, if there were a rape it would not excuse the fatal Han retaliation..

Taking a female for sex is normal behavior for the human male animal; only law and religion have cast that behavior as abnormal. Because of that, I never doubted the rape occurred. Just as "rape" is normal behavior for the male animal, so is the retaliation of "the offended village."

 

 

It seems to me that this whole, sad story started with the unintended consequences of a government trying to help people who needed jobs.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

The sad news clearly shows the volatility of the Chinese people; demonstrates the power of the Internet/freedom of the press; and explains to some degree why China wants to control the Internet/the press.

 

Let me first say, that I am an American. I love my country and it's people. The fundamental rules and laws written over 250 years have stood the test of time. The freedom of the press is a cornerstone of American life. It is the one place Americans can turn to learn more about things going on in Washington, the nation, and their communities. It can shine a spotlight on corruption, and illuminate stories about things we otherwise might not have learned.

 

I wonder however, what our founding fathers would have to say in this day and age where you can display images and video in real-time from virtually anywhere on planet earth. While these images and stories help us learn about what's going on, they can also be used to inflame already tense situations. Take for example, a hostage situation or violent demonstration. American police often forbid the media from displaying live video as the perpetrators could use the information to gain a tactical advantage.

 

Somewhere, there is a line that must be drawn between a complete and open reporting of stories, that inflame tense situations, and a responsible reporting that reports the truth without inflaming it.

 

We all know that China actively censors stories. I disagree with the practice in general, but there may be times that doing so helps maintain peace. Perhaps that might be a good thing, as long as the truth is not being oppressed.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Who's truth?

 

Truth is truth. It will stand on its own. If a country of new station is foolish enough to openly lie about something, they will be discovered. Of course, there remain things people want to believe. When one news report contradicts another, it should be a calling card for everyone to look deeper for facts. Journalists are supposed to report facts and not inject themselves or their personal view into a story. You rarely see that today.

[knloregon]

Don's right, it is a very slippery slope..this 'truth'

 

...and there is never a guarantee that the truth will come out in the end, and justice will be served.

 

Perfect example are the four Han hunter beheadings that I discussed eariler---no chance of justice for them---that crime was suppressed by PRC as a necessary expedience for ethnic tranquillity. And if the political powers that be aren't going to go to bat for you, and there is no free press to discover that fact-- you're screwed--- In a broader sense, the free presses best role is to publicly take to task those decisions, and force change in the ruling power---very hard to see how this moving target 'truth' is even approached without that. China will get there, in some form or another over time---Xinhua is so much more open now than when I first started following it 15 years ago, that it seems like its a different news organization..

[Guest jin979]

250 years, baby

 

give it another 5000 years and lets see .