Dems are as bad, I’m not campaigning for Trump. If I’m saying Dems are as bad as Republicans, Republicans must be pretty damn bad. That’s isn’t the typical endorsement of support from someone.

Young voters that are clueless of her history. And only hear the whitewashed version spewing populist rhetoric.

Nothing about the $100m spent in 2024 by AIPAC to influence US elections? AIPAC is a larger threat to the US than anything any other country could do

They are not wrong

They still believe that using 1950s strongarm tactics works. And crickets about AIPAC spending over $100m to influence US elections

They should focus inward on their own attempts to manipulate opinion.

I’m using Trump’s quote because liberals quote it while ignoring their team is finishing the job.

You are trying to conflate MAGA and the QAnon freaks.

You are using the people claiming there is a genocide as the source for the claim.

#The Uyghurs in Xinjiang

Anti-Communists and Sinophobes claim that there is an ongoing genocide-- a modern-day holocaust, even-- happening right now in China. They say that Uyghur Muslims are being mass incarcerated; they are indoctrinated with propaganda in concentration camps; their organs are being harvested; they are being force-sterilized. These comically villainous allegations have little basis in reality and omit key context.

Background

Xinjiang, officially the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, is a province located in the northwest of China. It is the largest province in China, covering an area of over 1.6 million square kilometers, and shares borders with eight other countries including Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Mongolia, India, and Pakistan.

Xinjiang is a diverse region with a population of over 25 million people, made up of various ethnic groups including the Uyghur, Han Chinese, Kazakhs, Tajiks, and many others. The largest ethnic group in Xinjiang is the Uyghur who are predominantly Muslim and speak a Turkic language. It is also home to the ancient Silk Road cities of Kashgar and Turpan.

Since the early 2000s, there have been a number of violent incidents attributed to extremist Uyghur groups in Xinjiang including bombings, shootings, and knife attacks. In 2014-2016, the Chinese government launched a “Strike Hard” campaign to crack down on terrorism in Xinjiang, implementing strict security measures and detaining thousands of Uyghurs. In 2017, reports of human rights abuses in Xinjiang including mass detentions and forced labour, began to emerge.

Counterpoints

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The OIC released Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States in 2019 which:

20. Welcomes the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat’s delegation upon invitation from the People’s Republic of China; commends the efforts of the People’s Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and looks forward to further cooperation between the OIC and the People’s Republic of China.

In this same document, the OIC expressed much greater concern about the Rohingya Muslim Community in Myanmar, which the West was relatively silent on.

Over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed a letter (A/HRC/41/G/17) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang:

The World Bank sent a team to investigate in 2019 and found that, “The review did not substantiate the allegations.” (See: World Bank Statement on Review of Project in Xinjiang, China)

Even if you believe the deradicalization efforts are wholly unjustified, and that the mass detention of Uyghur’s amounts to a crime against humanity, it’s still not genocide. Even the U.S. State Department’s legal experts admit as much:

The U.S. State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor concluded earlier this year that China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide, placing the United States’ top diplomatic lawyers at odds with both the Trump and Biden administrations, according to three former and current U.S. officials.

State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China | Colum Lynch, Foreign Policy. (2021)

A Comparative Analysis: The War on Terror

The United States, in the wake of “9/11”, saw the threat of terrorism and violent extremism due to religious fundamentalism as a matter of national security. They invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks, with the goal of ousting the Taliban government that was harbouring Al-Qaeda. The US also launched the Iraq War in 2003 based on Iraq’s alleged possession of WMDs and links to terrorism. However, these claims turned out to be unfounded.

According to a report by Brown University’s Costs of War project, at least 897,000 people, including civilians, militants, and security forces, have been killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, and other countries. Other estimates place the total number of deaths at over one million. The report estimated that many more may have died from indirect effects of war such as water loss and disease. The war has also resulted in the displacement of tens of millions of people, with estimates ranging from 37 million to over 59 million. The War on Terror also popularized such novel concepts as the “Military-Aged Male” which allowed the US military to exclude civilians killed by drone strikes from collateral damage statistics. (See: ‘Military Age Males’ in US Drone Strikes)

In summary:

• The U.S. responded by invading or bombing half a dozen countries, directly killing nearly a million and displacing tens of millions from their homes.
• China responded with a program of deradicalization and vocational training.

Which one of those responses sounds genocidal?

Side note: It is practically impossible to actually charge the U.S. with war crimes, because of the Hague Invasion Act.

Who is driving the Uyghur genocide narrative?

One of the main proponents of these narratives is Adrian Zenz, a German far-right fundamentalist Christian and Senior Fellow and Director in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, who believes he is “led by God” on a “mission” against China has driven much of the narrative. He relies heavily on limited and questionable data sources, particularly from anonymous and unverified Uyghur sources, coming up with estimates based on assumptions which are not supported by concrete evidence.

The World Uyghur Congress, headquartered in Germany, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) which is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, using funding to support organizations that promote American interests rather than the interests of the local communities they claim to represent.

Radio Free Asia (RFA) is part of a larger project of U.S. imperialism in Asia, one that seeks to control the flow of information, undermine independent media, and advance American geopolitical interests in the region. Rather than providing an objective and impartial news source, RFA is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, one that seeks to shape the narrative in Asia in ways that serve the interests of the U.S. government and its allies.

The first country to call the treatment of Uyghurs a genocide was the United States of America. In 2021, the Secretary of State declared that China’s treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang constitutes “genocide” and “crimes against humanity.” Both the Trump and Biden administrations upheld this line.

Why is this narrative being promoted?

As materialists, we should always look first to the economic base for insight into issues occurring in the superstructure. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive Chinese infrastructure development project that aims to build economic corridors, ports, highways, railways, and other infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Xinjiang is a key region for this project.

Promoting the Uyghur genocide narrative harms China and benefits the US in several ways. It portrays China as a human rights violator which could damage China’s reputation in the international community and which could lead to economic sanctions against China; this would harm China’s economy and give American an economic advantage in competing with China. It could also lead to more protests and violence in Xinjiang, which could further destabilize the region and threaten the longterm success of the BRI.

I took up speaking out against the duopoly 30 years ago

Just to be clear how has voting for the same people expecting different results changed literally anything? We are having the exact same conversations about wages, housing, employment, healthcare education, etc. that they were having during the civil rights movements, that they were having during the Great depression. If we’re continuing to have the exact same conversations, things are not getting any better

Page 308 of P2025.

The Forest Service should instead be focusing on addressing the precipitous annual amassing of biomass in the national forests that drive the behavior of wildfires. By thinning trees, removing live fuels and deadwood, and taking other preventive steps, the Forest Service can help to minimize the consequences of wildfires. Increasing timber sales could also play an important role in the effort to change the behavior of wildfire because there would be less biomass.

Nowhere in the document does it imply to cut all forests, but to thin them and clear out accumulated biomass, exactly as Biden has proposed.

This must be why the author only posted a link to P2025 and not the actual text, relying on the reader to assume they were being honest.

Get better

That sounds like a bunch of lesser evil bullshit, lesser evil doesnt exist. That’s bullshit liberals tell themselves to make them feel better for not having the proverbial balls to vote their conscience and do what’s right. It prolongs the suffering of marginalized because they prefer a slow agonizing death over a quick one. There is also the choice of no death. 50.yesrs of liberal ‘lesser evil’ has grown into an enormous one that they can’t control. This is the bed they made and want non Democrats to help them out of the mess they created. Good luck

It was slapped down by the court because he was trying to use emergency powers act that did not give him the authority to forgive student debt. And in his opinion, Justice Roberts specified exactly how to go about forgiving student debt. Something that Biden has still yet to do.

The Biden administration is advancing its plan to restrict logging within old-growth forests that are increasingly threatened by climate change, with exceptions that include cutting trees to make forests less susceptible to wildfires, according to a U.S. government analysis obtained by The Associated Press.

Like ive always said P2025 has always been 100% bipartisan

When one of those sides completely defunded UNRWA they are the same, When one of those sides keeps providing weapons and money to slaughter Palestinians, they are the same. When Biden and Harris are providing those weapons and money to Israel they are allowing Netanyahu to ‘finish the job’

Diversity of opinion that goes against the grain of the echo chamber is never welcome around these parts.

So you read the propaganda about her and the table with Putin and Flynn, but you didn’t read the information coming from the Senate Intelligence Committee about that dinner that said it was a nothingbuger?

It’s 100% true. And when Democrat voters were told that they did not have the votes, where were their calls to have those voting pro life primaried? Their typical answer has always been 'We’ve tried nothing and are all out of ideas"

AOC has the gall to call Jill Stein a predator meanwhile Kamala Harris as DA in San Francisco sided with actual sexual predators in the Catholic Church and ignored survivors of clergy abuse who were trying to get help from her office.

I’m not the one blatantly breaking the rules. They believe that they are immune to those rules if it involves someone that does not contribute to their echo chamber.