Home > News > Global Times: “Blood stains the Silk Road”

Global Times: “Blood stains the Silk Road”

A group of security forces patrol central Kashi, Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region on Tuesday. (Global Times)

Global Times carried some really good coverage of the recent attacks in Kashgar, shedding light on the tension in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

Rest of this post is really just the Global Times article itself. That one idea I feel deserves still extra mentioning is the fact that people when feeling there is nothing to loose, will tend to engage in more extremist behavior. Thus, I feel China must continue her path of economic progress. Integrating young ethnic Uyghurs and helping them gain employment is a great idea. Perhaps America will learn to do that with Black youths from inner cities and Natives from Indian reservations across the country too.

Blood stains the Silk Road

Global Times | August 04, 2011 21:31
By Lin Meilian in Kashi and Xu Tianran in Hotan

Terrorists who spilled blood and bombed a building last month have again shaken Uyghur and Han residents in two cities along the ancient Silk Road in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

In Kashi, also known as Kashgar, the blood has been cleaned and damaged buildings have boarded up. The suspects of the violence have been arrested or killed. Recovering victims are wondering what triggered the random attacks and their anger is tinged with deep sadness.

Heavy security now blankets both Kashi, the westerly terminus of China’s Silk Road, and the city of Hotan, a border town with Pakistan about 500 kilometers down the Silk Road.

Last weekend, in Kashi, just before the beginning of Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting, terrorists hijacked a car and used it as a weapon to run down pedestrians. They also set fire to a restaurant and hacked people to death. At least 14 civilians were murdered and 40 injured, mostly Han people. Eight of the 10 rioters were killed by police.

Two weeks prior, a police station in Hotan came under a coordinated attack by 18 Uyghurs armed with knives and explosives. They killed four people including two women. The police shot and killed 14 attackers and arrested four others.

The local government said religious extremists, led by militants and trained in overseas terrorist camps, were behind the attacks that targeted Han people.

“Captured suspects confessed that their leaders had earlier trained in Pakistan and joined the separatist East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), the Kashi government said on its website.

“The intention behind the terror attacks was to sabotage inter-ethnic unity and harm social stability, provoking ethnic hatred and creating ethnic conflicts,” the Web posting said.

The Germany-based separatist group, the World Uyghur Congress (WUC) immediately capitalized on news of the attack with a different story and a demand for an independent investigation.

A WUC spokesman said that 20 Uyghur people were killed and 12 injured, including three who are still in critical condition.

Authorities in Xinjiang have dismissed this version of events.

Xinjiang borders eight countries

The vast Xinjiang region makes up one-sixth of China’s total territory. It borders Pakistan, Russia, India, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Mongolia.

The region is home to multiple ethnic groups; by far the largest ethnic minority is Muslim Uyghur.

About 80 percent of the 600,000 residents in Kashi are Muslim Uyghurs.

The Secretary of the Communist Party of China’s Kashi Committee, Zhang Jian, said the city has long been targeted by terrorists, with 350 attacks resulting in 60 deaths of government officials and civilians since the 1990s.

The conflicts in Xinjiang mainly revolve around tensions between ethnic Han people, who make up more than 95 percent of the country’s population, and Uyghur, who often look, speak and worship differently.

A mixture of poverty, unemployment and miscommunication has fueled the divide.

While the violence has made headlines at home and abroad, the Kashi government is determined to focus on the region’s continued economic development. City officials believe economic prosperity will fill the apparent vacuum and leave no space for unrest and extremism.

“The violence has seriously affected economic development and social order in the city, but normal life has returned and people are going about their business,” Maimaitiming Baikeli, Kashi’s mayor, said during a news conference.

Despite assurances of a return to normalcy, a Global Times reporter of Han descent encountered stares and glares from Uyghur people as he walked through the crowded Grand Bazaar market in Hotan.

The reporter’s treatment at the market’s police station, which was attacked on July 18, was harsher. “You go where you are led, or stay in your hotel. It’s dangerous here,” warned a police officer who also required the reporter delete the one photograph he had taken of the police station.

Tense atmosphere

In Kashi a silent tension also hangs in the air. People go about their daily life but the presence of heavily armed police and armored cars dampens the spirit.

A number of checkpoints have been set up and people are required to show their ID cards as they enter or leave the city. A nighttime curfew remains in force downtown.

Two days after the violence on July 31, vendors working the city’s downtown Xiangxie Street, where attackers stormed a restaurant, killed the owner and a waiter and set it on fire, are still haunted by the horrible memory.

Run like a mad cat

“When I saw them stabbing people, I immediately ran away like a mad cat,” a witness, Ma Jun said, adding that he later helped lead police to the scene.

He thinks the attack was well planned. “Look carefully. The restaurant is located at the end of the street and the doors are blocked by merchandise. Once they started killing, there was nowhere to run,” he added.

Some Uyghur seem indifferent to the heavy security, which they don’t see as being here to protect them. “We feel safe with the presence of the police,” said Abuduweili who runs a bookstore near the Id Kah Mosque. “But without them, we also feel safe,” he quickly added.

Preferential policies

Along with the government’s economic prosperity programs, it has enacted preferential policies and regulations favoring minorities. They are allowed to have more than one child, they benefit from affirmative action programs that make it easier to enter universities and allowances are made for language differences.

Yet the policies have not been a panacea for the region. Some say they are unfair and inherently discriminatory, while others suggest they don’t go nearly far enough in addressing apparent inequities.

While Xinjiang’s economy booms, an increasing number of Han people are moving to the region, leading some Uyghur to say they’re being shut out of the best opportunities. Some Han people meanwhile resent being excluded from social programs or having to pay taxes that support special privileges for Uyghur.

“The local Han and the Uyghur have been living together for a very long time and there’s no reason why we should favor one over the other,” said Ma Dazheng, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Making university entrance exams easier for Uyghur “is a good example of how affirmative action starts with good intentions but fails to make almost no one content,” said Ma.

Yet many experts believe chronic unemployment among Xinjiang’s college graduates is a threat to the region’s long-term stability and development.

The Xinjiang government will start another program this September that it hopes will make a positive difference. It plans to send 10,000 unemployed college graduates, mostly Uyghur who finished school after 2002, to 19 provinces and municipalities to receive job training in universities and with companies.

Despite the government’s apparent good intentions at social engineering and its belief that education and improved living standard will fill a void, the region is a roiling cauldron filled with historic grievances and imported rage from the extremist Muslim world.

Never ending sabotage

“Terrorist groups such as the WUG and ETIM, as well as separatist groups within China, have never stopped sabotaging attempts to improve things,” said Li Wei, director of the Anti-Terrorism Institute at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.

The 18 Uyghur men who attacked the police station in Hotan were reported to have spoken with an accent unfamiliar in Xinjiang. They also were reported to have raised a “jihadist flag” on the roof of the station. The attacks in Kashi were said to be linked to terrorist groups in Pakistan.

“Due to their religious and linguistic connections, some Uyghur are at risk of being influenced by terrorist groups such as ETIM,” said Pan Zhiping, director of the Institute of Central Asia at the Xinjiang Academy of Social Sciences.

Yet many experts suggest that language and religion are not the only issues. In an office in Hotan’s Nu’erbage district, 67-year-old Dawuti Aji of the Aitilaisi Mosque agreed that life for the elites of Uyghur society has significantly improved. The employment and living standards of Muslims visiting his mosque, he said, are “just so so,” before steering the conversation to another topic during a talk with journalists.

Maimaitiabula Rouzituohati, a young Uyghur teacher at school, said joblessness makes Uyghur vulnerable to extremist teachings. “There were some underground Koran classrooms, where separatism was spread to younger people.”

Director Pan takes a much stricter view of the issue and blames national leaders for not being tough enough. “Many religious leaders with separatist ideas were wrongly released after the Cultural Revolution (1966-76) and became leaders of separatism movement,” he said.

A lot of often-used rhetoric can also be heard from government officials in Xinjiang, who are charged with protecting lives and sovereignty.

Zhang Chunxian, Party secretary of Xinjiang, had this to say while announcing another crackdown on religious extremism following the recent attacks.

“We will resolutely combat religious extremists and curb illegal religious activities,” Zhang warned, adding that the “people of Xinjiang should recognize that terrorists are the ‘common enemy of all ethnic groups.”

Zhang’s tough talk is supported by Juma Tayir, the Imam at the Id Kah mosque, who told reporters Muslim extremists don’t represent Islam. “Islam doctrines exhort peace and solidarity. We are firmly against illegal religious activities and acts that split the motherland,” he said.

  1. raventhorn2000
    August 6th, 2011 at 13:59 | #1

    now it’s funny that WUG is announcing to Western media that it’s doubtful these guys were trained outside of China and then returned.

    It’s funny, because we all know US caught a few Uighurs in Afghanistan and Pakistan terrorist training camps, and had to pay millions to settle those guys in some tropical island.

    Yeah, no Uighur terrorists in training at all!! Right!!!

  2. Nihc
    August 6th, 2011 at 20:45 | #2

    I wonder many will have to die before people can live peacefully or discover that they can never live together.

  3. silentvoice
    August 7th, 2011 at 04:28 | #3

    Policies that privilege one group over another only serve to divide them.

    Also, use of terms like ‘Muslim Uyghurs’ and ‘Han people’ doesn’t help. Better terms are ‘Uyghur Chinese’ and ‘Han Chinese’.

  4. Pete North
    August 7th, 2011 at 19:50 | #4

    Nice idea silentvoice. One small problem you might find is the number of “Uyghur Chinese” who would be happy to use this term. Telling people what they are or how they should feel sounds like some kind of enforced harmony to me, and that doesnt seem to have a particularly good track record of success around the world.

  5. Al
    August 7th, 2011 at 20:07 | #5

    @Pete North
    It’s evident you didn’t really understand Silentvoice meaning..

  6. pug_ster
    August 7th, 2011 at 20:49 | #6

    Pete North,

    You really don’t know what you are talking about. Silentvoice is using the same analogy for Americans, IE, African Americans, Chinese Americans, Latin Americans, etc…

  7. August 8th, 2011 at 14:07 | #7

    I try to find videos for the recent riots but can’t seems to find any. The following video is a live footage taken in 2009. Three suspects took a sack full of machete to a mosque and try to force the people there to join them. Nobody join them and they try to cut people down. They were eventually shot by police.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuPWwwoOVak&feature=related

    The following is another video depicting the hunting down of more terrorists. You can actually see the fanatism in them, even after being shot they try to cut people down with machete. The video is rather long and consists of the search process through villages and field. It also showed the underground tunnel they have. The soldiers are not regular PLA but from the armed police as denote by the red color shoulder pad and insignia on collar. Part 1 to 3.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kIXQCPC2DM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CePCNO4IHuE&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNDl3HZ92Cc&feature=related

  8. raventhorn2000
    August 8th, 2011 at 16:20 | #8

    Wow. I heard about the story that these guys tried to get people to join them in Mosques in Urumqi, and people refused.

    The video was rather quite demonstrative.

  9. Charles Liu
    August 8th, 2011 at 17:48 | #9

    And the London riot that’s happening right now is a great example. I really wonder if folks like FOARP that have in the past rationalized the violence in Tibet and Xinjiang would hold true with London riot, or suddnely flip their opinion and say violence is not justfiable no matter what?

    I for one feel completely comfortable with my opionion – violence is never justifiable, no matter if it’s Tibet, Urumqi, or London.

  10. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 06:13 | #10

    Oh, I don’t think folks like FOARP will ever admit that they were “rationalizing” any violence. But they would still insist that the cause of the violence lies with the Chinese government’s policies.

    Still, I doubt they would say the same about UK now. (Same as UK media is attributing it to “troublemakers”).

    *Some people (including my wife), feel some sympathies toward “protesters”/”rioters”/”troublemakers”. They say that those people are “desperate”, as if that is a valid excuse.

    I say, lots of people are “desperate”. Look at Somalia, look at Haiti, look at the poorests of the poor nations on Earth, and what is our troubles in comparison?

    Governments are always ultimately responsible for the welfare of their people. But when people make light easy judgments of blames on governments, they turn on each other when things get “desperate”.

    And this is against the very notion of “society”, where the individual MUST accept restrictions to live in civilization.

    The individual MUST accept that he/she will not get everything he wants or needs, because that is NO different than if he/she lived alone in the wilderness.

    “Society” is for the protection of the individual, security above all else. For a man alone in the wilderness is weak against elements of nature and against the evil of other men.

    If the individual can be allowed to be roused to violence in society, then there is no point for society.

  11. Charles Liu
    August 9th, 2011 at 09:44 | #11

    @raventhorn2000

    Exactely, heaven forbid our impartial media should print stuff like “Tibet/Xinjiang riots spread as Tibetan/Uyghur rampage, torch businesses”:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-london-riots-20110810,0,919931.story

    To me the difference is glaring – while riots in China are painted as human rights issue, the London riot is narrated as far away from human rights as possible, as above dominate theme demonstrates.

    Also, what responsible media would link the protests spreading beyond London to Jasmine Revolution?

  12. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 10:03 | #12

    Noticeably, Charles,

    Amnesty International is completely silent on the Riots in UK, while they are currently challenging China’s account of the riot in Xinjiang.

    (even when UK police have rounded up over 500 people over the riot, some of whom are arrested due to UK police’s trace of their online social media activities, organizing the “trouble”).

    And AI’s headquarters is located in LONDON!!

    Apparently, they know more about things in Xinjiang, but they won’t look out of their own windows in London!!

  13. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 14:05 | #13

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8692077/London-riots-spark-shock-and-gloating-around-the-world.html

    US embassy warn US citizens in UK to shut up or risk injury.

    Britain’s closest international ally, the United States warned Americans that “the current situation remains fluid” after civil disturbances throughout the country.

    “If you find yourself near any civil unrest, leave,” the US “citizens’ services” website warned. “Do not challenge debate or make unwise comments. This will only increase your chance of becoming a victim of violence.”

  14. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 14:13 | #14

    UK PM Cameron calls riot “nothing to do with the initial protest against police shooting of a man, it was needless opportunistic violence”.

    Well, way to not connect the dot, Cameron. The riot started RIGHT AT the protest, same time, same place. Gee, nothing to do with it at all!!

  15. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 14:29 | #15

    Research In Motion, maker of Blackberry, is cooperating with UK police to give them trace information on rioters.

    Hackers strike at RIM.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/london-riots-2011-protesters-blackberry-messenger-hackers-back/story?id=14264839

  16. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 15:54 | #16

    Misinformation/speculation on social media spreads even for UK riot. (Let’s just call that “Freedom Vomit”)

    They even used a 2009 photo of a building on fire in China for a report on UK riot!

    This is what happens when the “PEOPLE” have unrestrained freedom of speech with no responsibilities.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/london-riot-photos-misinformation-and-truth-spreading-through-social-media-badlondonphoto/2011/08/09/gIQANe2o4I_blog.html

  17. raventhorn2000
    August 9th, 2011 at 15:57 | #17
  18. August 9th, 2011 at 17:27 | #18

    @raventhorn2000 #17

    10,000 police? WOW. Please keep an eye. Not everything is necessarily the same as Middle East. The West still sets the rule, the terminology, the norms … at home and abroad… But it’s interesting to see how protesters become “rioters” who “attack” while “peaceful” protesters in Middle East were “freedom lovers” who clashed with the the dark hands of the “state.”

    It’s also amazing to see how messenger services on blackberry Twitter become tools for sabotage while Twitter was a tool for liberation…

  19. August 9th, 2011 at 18:32 | #19

    raventhorn2000 :

    Noticeably, Charles,

    Amnesty International is completely silent on the Riots in UK, while they are currently challenging China’s account of the riot in Xinjiang.

    (even when UK police have rounded up over 500 people over the riot, some of whom are arrested due to UK police’s trace of their online social media activities, organizing the “trouble”).

    And AI’s headquarters is located in LONDON!!

    Apparently, they know more about things in Xinjiang, but they won’t look out of their own windows in London!!

    Amnesty International is a political whore. So are HRW, HRIC, etc.

  20. August 9th, 2011 at 18:38 | #20

    I remarked to my wife today, “Some nations, like UK, has hooligans who join in riots because they have nothing better to do. In China, people don’t join in riots/protests, they just gather in large crowds nearby and watch on with curiosity.”

    Reflecting what happened in UK, Egypt, vs. what happened in Beijing, where there were a large crowd of curious passerby’s, but never materialized into any violence, I think some of this is due to culture, some due to history.

    China, with its long history, had plenty of experiences with violent uprisings and crackdowns. Ordinary Chinese, even if not well educated, hesitate to join in any kind of violent movement, and would prefer to simply watch, even when there is a crackdown.

  21. silentvoice
    August 10th, 2011 at 00:03 | #21

    There’s a lot of things we Singaporeans dislike about our government but I think in the area of race relations our government did right. Over the years, policies that look drastic to Western eyes have helped us bury the racial divide and forge a common national identity. Unlike in the US, where minorities are left on their own to blend in, we actually mean it when we say we want to create a multicultural society. Through laws and incentives, different races are required to live together in the same neighborhoods, attend the same schools, and serve in the army. You cannot find race ghettos here, nor can you find affirmative action type policies that privilege one person over another based on the color of their skin.

    It would be arrogant of me to suggest that other countries learn from our example. However, looking at the situation in the US, UK, France and Italy, it’s clear that racial harmony don’t come about without government policies that bring people together. You just cannot have a hands-off approach because people have a tendency to form groups with others most like themselves. However unpopular in the short-term, some amount of forced integration is necessary for the sake of nation building.

    I hope China gets the formula right with regards to Tibetan Chinese and Uyghur Chinese. The worst thing Chinese leaders could do is to learn from failed examples of the West.

  22. Pete North
    August 12th, 2011 at 21:43 | #22

    Indeed silentvoice, China will come up with its own failed example. The hate and mistrust here is stronger than I have ever felt. Only now the fear has gone….
    It’s great that you have hope for the future, but I wonder how you think things are progressing thus far. Do you see those Han slaughtered in the streets of Urumqi and Kashgar as part of this necessary “forced integration” as collateral damage?
    Perhaps the tanks should roll into Chinatowns around the world in order to smash these groups who are clearly so anti-nation.

  23. August 12th, 2011 at 22:04 | #23

    @Pete North #22

    Perhaps the tanks should roll into Chinatowns around the world in order to smash these groups who are clearly so anti-nation.

    Can you point to one example of such a Chinese anti-nation group? Just one example of a Chinese group that seeks independence?

  24. Pete North
    August 12th, 2011 at 22:54 | #24

    Silent voice didnt mention that these groups specifically want independence.
    He/ she said:
    ‘You just cannot have a hands-off approach because people have a tendency to form groups with others most like themselves. However unpopular in the short-term, some amount of forced integration is necessary for the sake of nation building.’

    The implication is that groups of Uyghurs and Tibetans are by their very nature against the business of nation- building, and should be broken up. There is no more evidence that this is true for these minorities than it is for PRC Han who have migrated to other countries, or is there?
    And even if there is, does the existence of one’ anti-nation’ group of a particular ethnic origin necessitate the forced assimilation of all groups, or will this just have the opposite effect to that which is desired? And is seeking independence such a bad thing anyway? Most of the Han I know here consider the Uyghurs to be a bunch of lazy, uncivilized ingrates anyway…

  25. August 13th, 2011 at 09:48 | #25

    @silentvoice #21

    I don’t like the term “forced integration” even if you qualified it with “some amount of.” The reason is because there is no force. Gov’t policy might favor integration (that’s an ideal that generations of civil rights activists have fought for in the U.S.) – but that’s not the same as “forced integration.”

  26. August 13th, 2011 at 12:32 | #26

    “The implication is that groups of Uyghurs and Tibetans are by their very nature against the business of nation- building, and should be broken up.”

    The implication is some groups form as anti-unity groups, NOT “by their very nature”.

    You take your logic too stretchy.

    “even if there is, does the existence of one’ anti-nation’ group of a particular ethnic origin necessitate the forced assimilation of all groups, or will this just have the opposite effect to that which is desired? And is seeking independence such a bad thing anyway? Most of the Han I know here consider the Uyghurs to be a bunch of lazy, uncivilized ingrates anyway…”

    I don’t know what “forced assimilation” you are talking about.

    “is seeking independence such a bad thing any way?”

    If it’s so good and simple, I don’t see Westerners hollering for independence just for the fun of it. (Is it that bad?)

    “Most of the Han I know here consider the Uyghurs to be a bunch of lazy, uncivilized ingrates anyway…”

    Laziness and “uncivilized ingrates” have nothing to do with political sovereignty issue, (even if your experience is believable without any specifics).

    I’m sure there are lot of “lazy, uncivilized” Han Chinese in China too (considered by some Han Chinese), doesn’t mean that whoever can just start carving up borders.

  27. cp
    August 13th, 2011 at 22:11 | #27

    For well over a century, the Left has generally been conceded to have morality, justice, and “idealism” on its side; the Conservative opposition to the Left has largely been confined to the “impracticality” of its ideals. A common view, for example, is that socialism is splendid “in theory,” but that it cannot “work” in practical life. What the Conservatives failed to see is that while short-run gains can indeed be made by appealing to the impracticality of radical departures from the status quo, that by conceding the ethical and the “ideal” to the Left they were doomed to long-run defeat. For if one side is granted ethics and the “ideal” from the start, then that side will be able to effect gradual but sure changes in its own direction; and as these changes accumulate, the stigma of “impracticality” becomes less and less directly relevant. The Conservative opposition, having staked its all on the seemingly firm ground of the “practical” (that is, the status quo) is doomed to lose as the status quo moves further in the left direction. The fact that the unreconstructed Stalinists are universally considered to be the “Conservatives” in the Soviet Union is a happy logical joke upon conservatism; for in Russia the unrepentant statists are indeed the repositories of at least a superficial “practicality” and of a clinging to the existing status quo.

    Never has the virus of “practicality” been more widespread than in the United States, for Americans consider themselves a “practical” people, and hence, the opposition to the Left, while originally stronger than elsewhere, has been perhaps the least firm at its foundation. It is now the advocates of the free market and the free society who have to meet the common charge of “impracticality.”

    In no area has the Left been granted justice and morality as extensively and almost universally as in its espousal of massive equality. It is rare indeed in the United States to find anyone, especially any intellectual, challenging the beauty and goodness of the egalitarian ideal. So committed is everyone to this ideal that “impracticality” – that is, the weakening of economic incentives – has been virtually the only criticism against even the most bizarre egalitarian programs. The inexorable march of egalitarianism is indication enough of the impossibility of avoiding ethical commitments; the fiercely “practical” Americans, in attempting to avoid ethical doctrines, cannot help setting forth such doctrines, but they can now only do so in unconscious, ad hoc, and unsystematic fashion. Keynes’s famous insight that “practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist” – is true all the more of ethical judgements and ethical theory.
    by Murray Rothbard · January 1st, 1973

    It’s ironic that the most vocal criticism of china’s policy toward ethnic minorities are the same people who are also the strongest supporters of egalitarian values in their own country. China’s socialist policies in many ways are not dissimilar to the egalitarian ideology espoused in the west. We’ve all seen the culmination of these values in the form of huge welfare states in Western Europe and America, and more recently in the London riots, the shooting in Norway, in the general rise of right-wing nationalism in Europe.

    The failure is evident in the social harmony policy – that the politburo is all too fond of – to cross ethnic boundaries. Self identifying ethnic and cultural groups do not feel the need to adhere to the social policies enforced by the government and we see the results of this in form of ethnic tension. Western critics are all too happy to point out the failures of these faux-socialist policies in China and quick to point to Han-ethnocentrism as the root of all problems as to excuse any responsibly of other parties. In a similar vain that, “white-privilege”, is often invoked as a crux to shut down any arguments against liberalism.

    Ultimately there needs to be more “diversity”; more freedom; more tolerance — except where intolerance and open rebellion from the “oppressed” toward the evil(han) oppressors is acceptable and quietly encouraged.

  28. raventhorn2000
    September 8th, 2011 at 05:33 | #28

    Uighur Terrorist group video claims responsibility for attacks in Xinjiang.

    But NY Times enclosed this little double-talk.

    “Many terrorism analysts have called those claims overblown, but they say that the Turkestan Islamic Party appears to be a genuine group whose threats should be taken seriously.”

    Claims “overblown”, but should be taken seriously?? What sort of generalized rhetorical non-sense is this?

    Maybe NY Times is talking about itself as “overblown” but like to be (or desperate to be) taken seriously. (Which sort of fits the general state of Western media – overblown, but desperate to be taken seriously).

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/world/asia/09china.html?_r=1

  29. raventhorn2000
    September 8th, 2011 at 08:08 | #29

    @raventhorn2000

    Where is WUC’s denial of terrorist involvement now? I guess they are too busy trying to put out the fire on their pants.

  30. raventhorn2000
    September 8th, 2011 at 10:17 | #30

    alright, who pressed the “Troll Button”?! I know I didn’t.

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.