Uighur treatment by China amounts to 'Genocide' says formal legal text - Page 12 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15159300
Rugoz wrote:Yes, the so-called "Muslim world" prefers to be outraged about Danish cartoons and other trivia. That should tell you something about the priorities of the "Muslim world" or rather the regimes that control most of it.


Notice how he is concerned about who is taking who's side, and not what is right and wrong here. That's telling.
#15159514
Rancid wrote:Notice how he is concerned about who is taking who's side, and not what is right and wrong here. That's telling.

This is just flatly untrue. I've addressed the "right and wrong" aspect at length in the thread, since I think it's important whether the claims being made about China are true or not - qualms that obviously don't affect those uncritically parroting atrocity propaganda.

Frankly, most of the accusations levelled at China simply don't pass the smell test if you look at them critically. The supposedly "eye-popping" IUD figures, which noemon in particular is hung up on, become considerably less "eye-popping" when you know that IUD prevalence in Central and East Asia is around 40% as standard. It all becomes even less "eye-popping" when the important context of China's two-child policy is added.

Rugoz wrote:Yes, the so-called "Muslim world" prefers to be outraged about Danish cartoons and other trivia. That should tell you something about the priorities of the "Muslim world" or rather the regimes that control most of it.

Yeah, it's completely insane that the Muslim world would be less than trusting of the US State Department after everything that has happened since 2001. But of course, keep telling yourself that it's because they're too primitive to know that America has their best interests at heart. :roll:
#15159523
Heisenberg wrote:This is just flatly untrue. I've addressed the "right and wrong" aspect at length in the thread, since I think it's important whether the claims being made about China are true or not - qualms that obviously don't affect those uncritically parroting atrocity propaganda.


Your participation in almost every thread we have collided has focused entirely on who took whose side and which media said what. You did the exact same thing in the Navalny thread where again your entire argument hinged on trying to prove that Navalny is more of a western media darling than Putin and consequently a "stooge", which was also shown to be wrong regardless but in an ideal world that should not have been required, the argument was worthless anyway. Let's be honest, that's not critical argument it's just refined wokeism & identity politics, exactly the same in this thread. Your entire focus has been on perception management not on the facts.

Heisenberg wrote:Frankly, most of the accusations levelled at China simply don't pass the smell test if you look at them critically. The supposedly "eye-popping" IUD figures, which noemon in particular is hung up on, become considerably less "eye-popping" when you know that IUD prevalence in Central and East Asia is around 40% as standard. It all becomes even less "eye-popping" when the important context of China's two-child policy is added.


At the rate China is sterilising Uyghur women, in a few years there will not be a single Uyghur female capable to bear children.

It should also be mentioned that while China is relaxing her child-policies for the Han Chinese she is forcibly pushing sterilisations against the Uyghurs who are a minority whose religion is not even officially recognised.

But more than that, what about the eye-popping internment camps? The Chinese officials telling the camera they have the right to detain people without trial based on 'pre-crimes'?

Yeah, it's completely insane that the Muslim world would be less than trusting of the US State Department after everything that has happened since 2001. But of course, keep telling yourself that it's because they're too primitive to know that America has their best interests at heart. :roll:


Rugoz did not even mention the US, he mentioned Denmark. The leaders of the Muslim world that stood with China on the Uyghurs simply destroyed whatever little credibility they might have had, while at the same time calling for jihad against Danish cartoons. :roll:
#15159540
noemon wrote:Your participation in almost every thread we have collided has focused entirely on who took whose side and which media said what(you did the exact same thing in the Navalny thread where again your entire argument hinged on trying to prove that Navalny is more of a western media darling than Putin and consequently a "stooge", which was also shown to be wrong regardless but that in an ideal world should not have been required, the argument was worthless anyway. Let's be honest, that's not critical argument it's just refined wokeism & identity politics, exactly the same in this thread.

What in the world is this babble? Aside from being completely incoherent, it's entirely unrelated to the issue under discussion. Practice what you preach and stay on topic, please.

noemon wrote:Your entire focus has been on perception management not on the facts.

This is a lie. I have responded to every single factual claim you have made in this thread.

noemon wrote:At the rate China is sterilising Uyghur women, in a few years there will not be a single Uyghur female capable to bear children.

:lol: Sure. There's not really much point replying to this, since it's clearly complete bullshit.

noemon wrote:It should also be mentioned that while China is relaxing her child-policies for the Han Chinese she is forcibly pushing sterilisations against the Uyghurs

This is a complete distortion of the facts. They relaxed the one child policy to a two child policy, and ended the explicit exemption on the policy for ethnic minorities, meaning the two child policy now applies to everyone.

noemon wrote:who are a minority whose religion is not even officially recognised.

Islam is an officially recognised religion in China. This takes five seconds to check.

noemon wrote:But more than that, what about the eye-popping internment camps?

Are you referring again to that BBC video where they left at the weekends and were mostly shown learning Mandarin? Not exactly Guantanamo Bay, was it?
#15159543
Heisenberg wrote:This is a complete distortion of the facts. They relaxed the one child policy to a two child policy, and ended the explicit exemption on the policy for ethnic minorities, meaning the two child policy now applies to everyone.


Which is completely politically motivated, IMO.

Jump over to Macrotrends and you will see that the fertility rate for China has been 1.6 per woman (roughly) for the last thirty years.

This is significantly below the replacement rate, and will actually lead to the same problems faced by countries like Korea & Japan with an inverted age pyramid, greatly affecting tax revenues and government expenditures.

As PBS wrote in 2016:

ut now just years away from a mass retirement, that country is headed toward a severe workforce crisis and retirement cost cash crunch. Due to the country’s one-child policy from 1978 until 2015, the younger generation poised to take over is relatively small.
...
And, at that moment, extraordinary numbers of Chinese people will exit the work force, and the Chinese work force, which has already begun to shrink, will shrink in a vastly accelerated way. And so China's going to face huge retirement costs and Social Security costs, health care costs, related to this immense aging of the population.


Knowingly applying the two child policy to all minorities now is disastrous, and even having a two child policy is the wrong direction to go.

But, they have done it.

Is it due to incompetence? Probably not so much that; this is a pretty obvious problem.

It's probably clearly meanat to target particular minorities that they want to curb the numbers of, and I am guessing it is perhaps even selectively enforced.

Are you referring again to that BBC video where they left at the weekends and were mostly shown learning Mandarin? Not exactly Guantanamo Bay, was it?


Guys, guys! It's not that bad! The Chinese let a few journalists visit a Potemkin reeducation camp, and they even got to leave for the weekends ~.
#15159548
Heisenberg wrote:This is a complete distortion of the facts. They relaxed the one child policy to a two child policy, and ended the explicit exemption on the policy for ethnic minorities, meaning the two child policy now applies to everyone.


Meaning that Uyghur women who already have 2 or more children are all officially subject to a forced sterilisation and also one has to account for the fact that noone is actually checking that China is doing that just to those women and not to those with 1 or no children as well. Considering the figures(around 400k women in a single year and figures of similar levels for the past 5 or so years in Xinjiang among a population of Uyghurs of no more than 4 million women of breeding age) and the fact that China has no problem to tell the world she is detaining Uyghur men and women for pre-crimes then it obviously cannot be put past her but instead assumed to be true because where there is smoke there is a fire too.

Heisenberg wrote:Islam is an officially recognised religion in China. This takes five seconds to check.


Reality:

Freedom of Religion in China wrote:
China's five officially sanctioned religious organizations are the Buddhist Association of China, Chinese Taoist Association, Islamic Association of China, Three-Self Patriotic Movement and Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association. These groups have been overseen and controlled by the United Front Work Department of the Communist Party of China since the State Administration for Religious Affairs' absorption into the United Front Work Department in 2018.[6] Unregistered religious groups—including house churches, Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhists, Catholics, and Uyghur Muslims—face varying degrees of harassment, including imprisonment and torture.[2]
#15159555
noemon wrote:Meaning that Uyghur women who already have 2 or more children are all officially subject to a forced sterilisation and also one has to account for the fact that noone is actually checking that China is doing that just to those women and not to those with 1 or no children as well.

Speculation, not evidence. Citation needed.

noemon wrote:Considering the figures(around 400k women in a single year

For the last time, IUDs are not sterilisations.

noemon wrote:it obviously cannot be put past her but instead assumed to be true because where there is smoke there is a fire too.

I see you aren't even trying any more. We should just "assume it to be true", because you said so?

noemon wrote:Reality:

You're really betraying how little effort you've put into this with your heavy reliance on Wikipedia as a primary source, lol. It's so lazy that to call it half-arsed would be a compliment. :lol:

The "reality" is that the citation for that claim in the Wikipedia article is the "Congressional-Executive Commission on China", i.e. literally the US government. The document it cites is also from 2011, and primarily relies on the "reporting" of Radio Free Asia.
#15159568
Heisenberg wrote:Speculation, not evidence. Citation needed.


Here:

Heisenberg wrote:ended the explicit exemption on the policy for ethnic minorities, meaning the two child policy now applies


For the last time, IUDs are not sterilisations.


IUD's that must be removed only by a state clinic and only for good reason are usually the first step and permanent sterilisation the second step.

I see you aren't even trying any more. We should just "assume it to be true", because you said so?


China permanently sterilised 60k women in Xinjiang and placed IUD's(that must only be removed by the state) to another 330k women in a single year and has kept up similar figures for the past 5 years and counting, China is detaining Uyghur women and men that she deems too Uyghur to her liking without any trial and is openly talking about 'pre-crime'. China does not recognise the Uyghur religion. It is not an assumption to consider that China is indeed applying her sterilisation policy just as arbitrarily as she detains Uyghur people. The word assumption is an attempt to be amicable but you are still more interested in talking about perceptions rather than make any attempt to consider the very real facts looking at you straight in the face.


The "reality" is that the citation for that claim in the Wikipedia article is the "Congressional-Executive Commission on China", i.e. literally the US government. The report it cites is also from 2011.


Again identity politics, empty duds, if China recognised the Uyghur religion you can be certain she would have ensured that it would be written in Wikipedia loud & clear, what does 'unregistered' mean in CCP China?

Does that mean that it being true means you will consider condemning China for it?
#15159586
I'm not going to keep going round in circles with you.

Give this article a read and let me know if you have any thoughts.

I'd be particularly interested to know your thoughts on the plummeting infant and maternal mortality rates and rising life expectancy in Xinjiang, and how this reconciles with their supposed "genocide" of the Uyghur population there.

China's public health measures were even called a "remarkable success story" by the Lancet in 2019. One of the authors of the report - an American doctor! - said "they were very deliberate in focusing on reducing maternal and child mortality. They focused on reaching rural areas and ethnic minorities."

This should be fun. :lol:

noemon wrote:Again identity politics, empty duds, if China recognised the Uyghur religion you can be certain she would have ensured that it would be written in Wikipedia loud & clear, what does 'unregistered' mean in CCP China?

Does that mean that it being true means you will consider condemning China for it?

Is this really the best you can do? :knife:
#15159625
Heisenberg wrote:I'm not going to keep going round in circles with you.


Going around in circles is the only thing you do.

Give this article a read and let me know if you have any thoughts.


Your source and your own propaganda in here is identical which means that you have clearly been lifting the nonsense posted from in there from the very start of the thread. Your author's attempt to distract from the topic by focusing on Zenz's identity is as poor as yours.

More to the point, your author much like yourself ignores reality by compartmentalising anti-Uyghur policies and ignoring all those facts that no reply can be mustered. China is currently detaining arbitrarily hundreds of thousands of Uyghur men and women without trial, is sterilising Uyghur women at unprecedented rates and she does not recognise their religion. Your author is hypocritically pretending that China deserves the benefit of the doubt on the sterilisations, and just like you explains it away merely as "a levelling down with the Han" which is the mantra you have repeated for numerous posts, but this nonsensical mantra falls apart when one accounts for the internment camps and Chinese accusations that the Uyghurs are "terrorists". She is not levelling anyone up with the Han, she is openly "fighting Uyghur terrorism" with extreme prejudice while shamelessly arguing that she can do that based on 'pre-crime'. The benefit of the doubt which is central to the "innocent levelling up" narrative goes out of the window.

Heisenberg wrote:China's public health measures were even called a "remarkable success story" by the Lancet in 2019


This should become a topic on itself on how a user does shameless propaganda.

This is professional level of propaganda. You are now pretending that a review on health-care investment praising China for extending health-care coverage and reducing tobacco smoking is somehow pertinent to the question of the Uyghurs, when in fact it's not even mentioned. You are trying to convince people that someone allegedly praised Chinese anti-Uyghur policies as a "remarkable success", when in fact that is simply not true.

It's quite sad how invested you are and in what kind of lengths you will go to sustain your absurdity.

In case it were not clear to anybody reading. A "remarkable success story" is China's health-care coverage extension and her "remarkable efforts" to tackle smoking, chronic lung disease, dementia and lung cancer.

:knife: :lol:

Heisenberg wrote:This should be fun.


It is, thanks; bring some more nonsense like that to make it even easier.

Heiseberg thought out loud wrote:Is this really the best you can do?


Said the guy outraged by wikipedia being the source. :lol:

Freedom of Religion in China wrote:
China's five officially sanctioned religious organizations are the Buddhist Association of China, Chinese Taoist Association, Islamic Association of China, Three-Self Patriotic Movement and Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association. These groups have been overseen and controlled by the United Front Work Department of the Communist Party of China since the State Administration for Religious Affairs' absorption into the United Front Work Department in 2018.[6] Unregistered religious groups—including house churches, Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhists, Catholics, and Uyghur Muslims—face varying degrees of harassment, including imprisonment and torture.[2]


What does it mean to be an 'unregistered religious group' in CCP China?
#15159635
Oy vey, I wonder why I even bother.

noemon wrote:Going around in circles is the only thing you do.

I'm begging you to try and come up with a comeback that isn't "no u". This is like talking to a child.

*waits for the inevitable response: "the only child in this thread is you*

noemon wrote:Your source and your own propaganda in here is identical which means that you have clearly been lifting the nonsense posted from in there from the very start of the thread.

Lol, what the fuck are you prattling on about now?

noemon wrote:Your author's attempt to distract from the topic by focusing on Zenz's identity is as poor as yours.

The article is about the shoddy methods and manipulation of statistics on which 95% of the reporting on Xinjiang is based. It gives several examples which are nothing to do with "Zenz's identity".

You know, you should at least try and read the evidence given to you by your opponents.

noemon wrote:You are now pretending that a review on health-care investment praising China for extending health-care coverage and reducing tobacco smoking is somehow pertinent to the question of the Uyghurs, when in fact it's not even mentioned.

You very obviously haven't read this either, lol.

noemon wrote:In case it were not clear to anybody reading. A "remarkable success story" is China's health-care coverage extension and her "remarkable efforts" to tackle smoking, chronic lung disease, dementia and lung cancer.

...no, the quote I gave you was referring specifically to China's focus on reducing maternal and infant mortality rates, lol.

Here are the relevant quotes: "China is a spectacular success story in reducing child mortality at one of the fastest rates of decline in history. Their death rate among children under five went down by 9% a year for the past 20 years. That's extraordinary."

"They were very deliberate in focusing on reducing maternal and child mortality. They focused on reaching rural areas and ethnic minorities."

Backing this up, Xinjiang's maternal mortality rate fell from 43 per 100,000 in 2010, to 27 in 2018. The infant mortality rate dropped from 26.6% to 14% over the same period.

Also, I know you aren't an epidemiologist, but I'm sure even you are aware that smoking, chronic lung disease and lung cancer are not the leading causes of infant mortality.

Even more hilariously, you have picked out the examples (smoking, chronic diseases) where the Lancet, and Murray, said China has not been successful. :lol:
#15159637
Heisenberg wrote:I'm begging you to try and come up with a comeback that isn't "no u". This is like talking to a child.

*waits for the inevitable response: "the only child in this thread is you*


Indeed, when trolls like yourself try to troll, I do not engage with the trolling by doubling down, I just say the exact same thing the troll said back to them hoping that in the next post they will realise the futility of this back & forth, stop the trolling and focus on the topic but that is clearly not the case with you. You feel like doubling-down even on the trolling. Is there anything else that is possible to be said to your childish insults other than "you're the only child here"? :eh: You feel like inserting your feelings in the conversation as rhetorical devices but I am not interested in your feelings, nor am I interested to argue your personal insults or whether my "comeback on your trolling" was cool enough, it's not the topic nor is it my primary or even secondary concern. Again with the perception management, you evidently have very real and substantial issues focusing on the actual topic of the conversation.

Heisenberg wrote:You know, you should at least try and read the evidence given to you by your opponents.


You did not bring any evidence whatsoever, nor did you argue a single point which is yet more evidence of your desperation.

It gets tiring pointing this out to you but you are constantly projecting your failures to your interlocutor as is standard for anyone who lacks argument.

You should take your own advice and try to engage with the actual evidence:

More to the point, your author much like yourself ignores reality by compartmentalising anti-Uyghur policies and ignoring all those facts that no reply can be mustered. China is currently detaining arbitrarily hundreds of thousands of Uyghur men and women without trial, is sterilising Uyghur women at unprecedented rates and she does not recognise their religion. Your author is hypocritically pretending that China deserves the benefit of the doubt on the sterilisations, and just like you explains it away merely as "a levelling down with the Han" which is the mantra you have repeated for numerous posts, but this nonsensical mantra falls apart when one accounts for the internment camps and Chinese accusations that the Uyghurs are "terrorists". She is not levelling anyone up with the Han, she is openly "fighting Uyghur terrorism" with extreme prejudice and shamelessly arguing that China can do that based on 'pre-crime'. The benefit of the doubt which is central to the "innocent levelling up" narrative goes out of the window.


Like usual you totally ignored it.


You very obviously haven't read this either, lol.


This takes the cake of all time you brought an article praising China for tackling lung cancer and infant mortality as evidence that Chinese sterilisation policies against the Uyghurs have allegedly been praised as "remarkable". :lol: :lol: :lol:

We 've heard it all now.

...no, the quote I gave you was referring specifically to China's focus on reducing maternal and infant mortality rates, lol.

Here are the relevant quotes: "China is a spectacular success story in reducing child mortality at one of the fastest rates of decline in history. Their death rate among children under five went down by 9% a year for the past 20 years. That's extraordinary."

"They were very deliberate in focusing on reducing maternal and child mortality. They focused on reaching rural areas and ethnic minorities."


So you are actually doubling down? Wow. It's quite incredible.

Even more hilariously, you have picked out the examples (smoking, chronic diseases) where the Lancet, and Murray, said China has not been successful. You very obviously haven't even read the article! :lol:


Even that is false and off-topic too, the article is praising China for tackling chronic lung disease. It's got a nice graph too.

It is certainly not praising China for her sterilisations and detainment policies against the Uyghurs which is our actual topic.

Now, I know you aren't an epidemiologist, but I'm sure even you are aware that smoking, chronic lung disease and lung cancer are not the leading causes of infant mortality.


Are you implying that China is sterilising hundreds of thousands of Uyghur women per year in an attempt to bring down infant mortality? That's a new one, it might even fly among pro-Chinese ignorami if we were not already aware that China is targeting Uyghurs because she treats the entire ethnic-group as terrorists.
#15159644
noemon wrote:You did not bring any evidence whatsoever, nor did you argue a single point which is yet more evidence of your desperation.

I have produced considerable amounts of evidence in this thread, 99% of which you have dismissed out of hand without even reading.

noemon wrote:You should take your own advice and try to engage with the actual evidence:

Uh huh. The reason I didn't reply last time is because I've addressed all of these claims ad nauseam:

noemon wrote:China is currently detaining arbitrarily hundreds of thousands of Uyghur men and women without trial

This is an assertion, not evidence. As shown previously in the thread, this number is based on extrapolations by Adrian Zenz, based on something like eight total interviews. When challenged on the source for this number, the UHRP guy could do no better than "western media estimates". If you want to produce actual hard evidence of this, you are welcome to.

noemon wrote:is sterilising Uyghur women at unprecedented rates

We've already been over this. I am obviously never going to convince you that contraception is not the same as sterilisation, and you are not going to convince me that they are the same.

noemon wrote:and she does not recognise their religion.

Islam is an officially recognised religion in China, and there are thousands of mosques in Xinjiang. What China does not recognise is the East Turkestan separatist movement, or its Salafist interpretation of Islam. If you think Salafism is essential and integral to being a Uyghur, then I don't really know what to tell you.

noemon wrote:Your author is hypocritically pretending that China deserves the benefit of the doubt on the sterilisations, and just like you explains it away merely as "a levelling down with the Han" which is the mantra you have repeated for numerous posts, but this nonsensical mantra falls apart when one accounts for the internment camps and Chinese accusations that the Uyghurs are "terrorists".

Please show evidence that China classes all Uyghurs as terrorists.

noemon wrote:Like usual you totally ignored it.

Because I have addressed this repeatedly, and the argument is going nowhere. I ask you to provide evidence to back up a claim, and rather than do so you call me a propagandist, conspiracy theorist, genocide denier and troll, all while pretending you're above personal insults. :lol: Why should I bother going round in circles any more?

noemon wrote:So you are actually doubling down? Wow. It's quite incredible.

Even that is false and off-topic too, the article is praising China for tackling chronic lung disease. It's got a nice graph too.

For anyone who wants to read it, here is the full text of the article. You can see for yourself if noemon's characterisation of its contents is accurate.

Noted Chinese propaganda arm NPR wrote:New Research: China Is Winning Some Health-Care Battles — And Losing Others

Ten years into China's multi-billion dollar investment in health-care reform, the country has made "spectacular" progress on some top public health challenges — including insurance coverage and deaths of children. But it's facing an uphill battle on others, including second-hand smoke and cancer, according to a special China-themed issue on September 28 of the journal The Lancet.

In the collection of nine peer-reviewed studies, commentaries, editorials and reviews of literature, researchers from academic institutions in Beijing and other areas of China, as well as the U.S. and Germany, found the country is making headway in reducing the incidence of infectious diseases like diarrhea and respiratory illnesses among its 1.3 billion citizens. They also found that China has dramatically increased the share of its population receiving insurance coverage for basic health care, up to 96%.

But they also show that the country has a long way to go in encouraging healthy lifestyles and cleaning up pollution to help people avoid cancers and chronic illnesses like heart disease and diabetes. Deaths from these ailments are on the rise.

Image

"China is beginning to look very much like the U.S.," says Dr. Christopher Murray, director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, Seattle.

Still, the country has done well in saving the lives of children, Murray says.

"China is a spectacular success story in reducing child mortality at one of the fastest rates of decline in history," he says. "Their death rate among children under five went down by 9% a year for the past 20 years. That's extraordinary." Murray was an author on one of the Lancet China-themed papers examining causes of illness and death in China since 1990.


A lot of the efforts to reduce infectious disease rates began as early as the 1980s, Murray says. But beginning in 2008, Chinese officials added significant money to their efforts — because, according to Murray, health care was getting increasingly costly, and the government recognized it would need to do something or face a public backlash. China quadrupled health expenditures from 359 billion yuan ($50.2 billion) in 2008 to 1.52 trillion yuan ($212.6 billion) in 2017, says Winnie Yip, professor of international health policy and economics at the Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

And they homed in on programs aimed at saving the lives of mothers and children. "They were very deliberate in focusing on reducing maternal and child mortality," says Murray. "They focused on reaching rural areas and ethnic minorities."

The Chinese efforts at saving children and reducing infectious diseases show up in a couple of examples. In a ranking of the number of deaths per 100,000 people, neonatal disorders was the fifth-most common cause in 1990; by 2017, it was down to 27th. And diarrheal diseases dropped from the 20th highest number of deaths per 100,000 in 1990 to the 78th highest cause of deaths in 2017, according to the Lancet study on causes of death and disease.

Worldwide, diarrhea is the second leading cause of death among children under five — responsible for the deaths of more than 2,000 children every day, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Getting the population covered by some level of insurance and tackling infectious diseases are impressive achievements. But China hasn't been as successful at helping its citizens avoid cancer, heart disease, stroke, obesity and diabetes, all of which are increasing.

Those chronic diseases often relate to lifestyle choices. And, says Murray, the government so far doesn't seem to want to get involved in people's personal decisions, like whether to smoke, drink or eat unhealthy foods.


"In the case of tobacco, the government itself is a producer of tobacco, and it's a tremendous source of revenue," he says. Cigarettes are relatively cheap in China — a pack costs the equivalent of about $1.40, according to one of the Lancet papers. In China, 26.6% of adults smoke, compared to 19% around the world, and 14% in the U.S.

At least when they get sick, almost all Chinese citizens have health insurance. "China has two kinds of insurance. One is for the employed population, and the other for everyone else," Yip says. In 2003, only 22% of the population had insurance, and all insurance came through employment. That's when the government began rolling out subsidized insurance for those who didn't get insurance through their workplace. By 2008, 87% of Chinese people were insured. And now, almost everyone is covered.

"They were able to do that in a very short time. It's pretty impressive," Yip says.

But there's a significant hiccup to the high rate of insurance coverage. "The government's principle is to cover basic health care," says Yip. "But in practice there's no explicit list of what is basic care. About the only thing people agree on is that cosmetic surgery is not basic health care."

As in many countries, the escalating cost of health care in China is hard to control, says Yip. China has a very entrepreneurial, unregulated health-care system. For example, the government used to allow hospitals to mark up drug prices without limit. As a result, drug costs in hospitals were out of control, and hospitals were prescribing unusually high amounts of prescription drugs.

Then the government initiated a zero-profit drug policy. "They have to sell the drug at the price they bought it for. It's working in that it has reduced prescriptions in hospitals," she says. But to make up for the lost revenue from drugs, she says, hospitals are now ordering more diagnostic tests than they did before the zero-profit drug policy. To bring in revenue, "rather than giving them drugs, physicians are now sending patients off for lab tests," she says.

Two of the biggest threats to the health of Chinese people are tobacco and environmental pollution. "Smoking is a complicated policy in China because many regions in China rely on the tobacco industry," says Yip.

Rates of exposure to secondhand smoke have gone down from 2010 to 2018, but remain high, according to one article in the China-themed Lancet. For example, 63% of workplaces allowed smoking in 2010, and 51% still did in 2018. In 2010, 39% of China's hospitals and health centers allowed smoking; in 2018, it was 24%. For restaurants, the number dropped from 89% to 73%.

"Recently, in a major government restructuring, tobacco has moved from the Department of Commerce to the Department of Health," Yip says. "It will take time, but I think the health interest will eventually take priority."

And pollution? For decades, China was keen on economic development without much thought of the environment or the effects of pollution on health. One 2015 study by the independent research group Berkeley Earth found that air pollution contributes to 1.6 million deaths per year in China. But now, health is part of the equation when considering future economic development, Yip says.

"It's not easy," she says. "With the magnitude of pollution — air, water soil --that, too, will take time."

So the important quotes, which I have now given you three times, show that China has drastically reduced infant mortality rates, and has made special effort to do so in rural areas and those with ethnic minorities - like Xinjiang.

This is also backed up by the statistics, which once again you flatly ignored, showing plummeting maternal and infant mortality rates in Xinjiang between 2010 and 2018. This is the opposite of what you would see if the intent was to eradicate the Uyghurs. Genocidal dictatorships don't tend to put a lot of effort into improving maternity and neonatal care for their target groups.

noemon wrote:It is certainly not praising China for her sterilisations and detainment policies against the Uyghurs which is our actual topic.

Last I saw, the "actual topic" was the alleged genocide of the Uyghurs, of which the alleged sterilisations and alleged detainment policies form a part. I am giving you evidence which would give you reason to question the narrative (if you had any interest whatsoever in thinking about this fairly).

noemon wrote:Are you implying that China is sterilising hundreds of thousands of Uyghur women per year in an attempt to bring down infant mortality?

I'm implying that the policies which Zenz and others have deliberately misinterpreted as "coercive mass sterilisation" actually look a lot more like increased investment in public health, and that this is borne out by the statistics.

noemon wrote:China is targeting Uyghurs because she treats the entire ethnic-group as terrorists

Any evidence at all for this?
#15159734
@Heisenberg is demanding "evidence" that China is targeting the Uyghurs because she is treating them as terrorists and extremists while at the same time he falsely accuses the Uyghurs of being terrorists & extremists by simply throwing the buzzword "Salafism" out there in order to justify the lack of recognition of the Uyghur religion by China.

Heisenberg wrote:What China does not recognise is the East Turkestan separatist movement, or its Salafist interpretation of Islam. If you think Salafism is essential and integral to being a Uyghur, then I don't really know what to tell you.


Bring evidence that Uyghurs are represented by Salafist Islam and that as a consequence they deserve to be a non-recognised religious group.

I'm genuinely curious here, is the Chinese embassy good enough "evidence" or will the Chinese embassy be accused of being "a tool of the US government" like all of the evidence provided in this thread? It is in the US after all which is already a red-flag. :roll:

The Guardian wrote:Genocide gets the girlboss treatment

You know those horrific mass detention camps in China? Turns out we were all completely wrong about them. The Chinese government isn’t oppressing its Muslim minority population, it’s simply rounded up over a million Uighurs in order to open their minds. It’s not forcibly sterilizing Uighur women, it’s just teaching them feminist theory.

I know that may sound a little hard to believe, but the Chinese government has firmly assured us that this is the case. On Thursday the Chinese embassy in the US tweeted a link to the findings of a report on demographics in Xinjiang, a predominantly Uighur area. Birth rates have dropped dramatically in recent years – something that many international observers believe is down to forced sterilizations. That’s nonsense, according to the report, which was created by a state-run thinktank, and reported on by China Daily, an English-language newspaper owned by the publicity department of the Chinese Communist party. The real reason for declining Uighur birth rates is gender equality.

“In the process of eradicating extremism, the minds of Uygur women in Xinjiang were emancipated and gender equality and reproductive health were promoted, making them no longer baby-making machines,” the Chinese embassy in the US tweeted. “They are more confident and independent.”

Does Twitter have any issue with this outrageous propaganda? Nah, of course not: the social network has said that the tweet doesn’t violate its policy against hateful conduct. That doesn’t mean you can say whatever you like on Twitter without censure, of course. If you incite a coup then you will be locked out of your account for 12 hours. Twitter takes its responsibilities very seriously!

The full extent of what China is doing to its Uighur population isn’t clear. However, evidence of what some experts have called a form of “demographic genocide” is mounting. An Associated Press investigation last year found that the state of Xinjiang “regularly subjects minority women to pregnancy checks, and forces intrauterine devices, sterilization and even abortion on hundreds of thousands”.


Or would you like to hear the evidence from Chinese officials live on TV?



Image

Image

Heisenberg wrote:So the important quotes, which I have now given you three times, show that China has drastically reduced infant mortality rates ..... "coercive mass sterilisation" actually look a lot more like increased investment in public health


:| What does one say to you without you getting offended and crying that you are somehow the victim here?

What would you say if some apologist were claiming that the US is mass sterilising roughly 400k Native American women per year in a bid to "increase public health investment and reduce infant mortality rates"?
#15159738
noemon wrote:@Heisenberg is demanding "evidence" that China is targeting the Uyghurs because she is treating them as terrorists and extremists

A crazy idea, I know. Care to provide any? :)

An opinion article in the Guardian called "genocide gets the girlboss treatment" and the same video you've already shared a dozen times (and which has been addressed at length) ain't gonna cut it.

noemon wrote:at the same time he falsely accuses the Uyghurs of being terrorists & extremists

Come on man, you know full well this is just a lie. My posts are public record, so anyone can see you're just making shit up now. :lol:

noemon wrote:Bring evidence that Uyghurs are represented by Salafist Islam and that as a consequence they deserve to be a non-recognised religious group.

Show me where I said either of these things first.

noemon wrote:What does one say to you without you getting offended and crying that you are somehow the victim here?

Lol, what the actual fuck are you talking about? :lol:
#15159752
Heisenberg wrote:Come on man, you know full well this is just a lie.


When Heisenberg was asked 'why China does not recognise the Uyghur religion?' he justified that with the buzzword "Salafism". Nevermind the Uyghurs are not even Salafists and never mind that even if they were that would not be reason to deny them recognition anyway. The Hui for example practice Salafism in China and they are registered and recognised. The Uyghurs are not Salafists but they still are not recognised.

We see that so often in PoFo, some guy makes such a hugely stupid justification that not even himself can digest it, so once uncovered, it must be a "lie".

Feel free to elaborate on your claim about Uyghurs, Salafism and the refusal of China to officially recognise the Uyghur religion.

Heisenberg wrote:My posts are public record, so anyone can see you're just making shit up now. :lol: Show me where I said either of these things first.


Not only are your posts public record but the post itself was quoted exactly as it was(still has not prevented you from denying it exists): :knife:

Heisenberg responding to the question, why does China not recognise the Uyghur religion? wrote:What China does not recognise is the East Turkestan separatist movement, or its Salafist interpretation of Islam. If you think Salafism is essential and integral to being a Uyghur, then I don't really know what to tell you.


Heisenberg wrote:An opinion article in the Guardian called "genocide gets the girlboss treatment" and the same video you've already shared a dozen times (and which has been addressed at length) ain't gonna cut it.


You do not even accept your own self as evidence :lol: , nor the Chinese embassy not even the Chinese officials.

So you insist that China does not use "terrorism and religious extremism" as a justification for its anti-Uyghur policies. Mmmkay.

You also insist that you did not justify such anti-Uyghur policies(lack of religious recognition) by using the "Salafist/terrorist" argument, despite doing exactly that in your post yesterday. :roll:

This is hilarious, you do not even know which button to push('Uyghur bad terrorists, China good sorting them out' or 'nothing happening China is just investing on sorting out infant mortality rates'), these immense contradictions are borne out of unhealthy apologies pushing apologists beyond the capacity of their own absurdity.



I'm genuinely curious here, is the Chinese embassy good enough "evidence" or will the Chinese embassy be accused of being "a tool of the US government" like all of the evidence provided in this thread? It is in the US after all which is already a red-flag. :roll:

The Guardian wrote:Genocide gets the girlboss treatment

You know those horrific mass detention camps in China? Turns out we were all completely wrong about them. The Chinese government isn’t oppressing its Muslim minority population, it’s simply rounded up over a million Uighurs in order to open their minds. It’s not forcibly sterilizing Uighur women, it’s just teaching them feminist theory.

I know that may sound a little hard to believe, but the Chinese government has firmly assured us that this is the case. On Thursday the Chinese embassy in the US tweeted a link to the findings of a report on demographics in Xinjiang, a predominantly Uighur area. Birth rates have dropped dramatically in recent years – something that many international observers believe is down to forced sterilizations. That’s nonsense, according to the report, which was created by a state-run thinktank, and reported on by China Daily, an English-language newspaper owned by the publicity department of the Chinese Communist party. The real reason for declining Uighur birth rates is gender equality.

“In the process of eradicating extremism, the minds of Uygur women in Xinjiang were emancipated and gender equality and reproductive health were promoted, making them no longer baby-making machines,” the Chinese embassy in the US tweeted. “They are more confident and independent.”

Does Twitter have any issue with this outrageous propaganda? Nah, of course not: the social network has said that the tweet doesn’t violate its policy against hateful conduct. That doesn’t mean you can say whatever you like on Twitter without censure, of course. If you incite a coup then you will be locked out of your account for 12 hours. Twitter takes its responsibilities very seriously!

The full extent of what China is doing to its Uighur population isn’t clear. However, evidence of what some experts have called a form of “demographic genocide” is mounting. An Associated Press investigation last year found that the state of Xinjiang “regularly subjects minority women to pregnancy checks, and forces intrauterine devices, sterilization and even abortion on hundreds of thousands”.


What does the Chinese embassy mean by “In the process of eradicating extremism, the minds of Uygur women in Xinjiang were emancipated and gender equality and reproductive health were promoted, making them no longer baby-making machines”

Or would you like to hear the evidence from Chinese officials live on TV?

Image

Image



You claim that you addressed this, quote and link to the post where you allegedly "address" the fact that China is officially detaining Uyghurs and sterilising their women on the pretext of terrorism. You claim that China does not do this because of "terrorism & separatism", where have you shown this to be so?

Heisenberg wrote:So the important quotes, which I have now given you three times, show that China has drastically reduced infant mortality rates ..... "coercive mass sterilisation" actually look a lot more like increased investment in public health


What would you say if some apologist were claiming that the US is mass sterilising roughly 400k Native American women per year in a bid to "increase public health investment and reduce infant mortality rates"?

While at the same time refusing to recognise their Native American religion & detaining them in special re-education camps to make them proper Americans.

What would you say if the US did that today and then added insult to injury by insisting that "all's good, nothing happening, just move along"?
#15160197
A 2-minute propaganda video justifies the arbitrary detainment of Uyghur men & women for unspecified periods without committing a crime?

Muslims the world over are calling for jihad against Danish cartoons but keeping quiet on Muslim women being subjected to mass sterilisation and arbitrary detainment.

:roll:
  • 1
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 25
The War on Cuba Part I and II

I am a Progressive that supported Liz Warren duri[…]

Excellent quotes you endorse?

"This goes to the bitches that's hanging from[…]

If the Dems increase the size of the court to 13 […]

Now reading

Asimov is a terrible writer, as far as I can tell[…]