State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China - FP
Creepy mfs
Thanks, I collect these
No shit.
Yeah no shit, If no genocide is going on obv you won’t have sufficient evidence
some legal experts suspect China’s behavior may fall short of actual genocide.
Isn’t an all clear, it’s far from it.
Yeah you’re right that is why china should stay guilty until proven innocent, even when the evidence for genocide is paper thin in first place
The source I posted is western and the fact that they even acknowledge a lack of evidence is quite telling.
Since it’s impossible to prove a negative and taking western hegemony in (western) news sources into account makes i an almost impossible task to disprove the genocide narrative, I’ll post the Chinese perspective which provides a much larger context: https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/xinjiang
That’s a dead link
Heres the original, I’ll check and update the post when I find an alternative
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/
Edit: Archive works again.
The “guilty until proven innocent” part highlights a tactic to push back on manufactured claims of genocide paired with smears of genocide denial: genocide is a formally defined crime, just like murder. Just like murder, you start with a presumption of innocence – that is, you start by denying the accusation, and it is on the accuser to prove what happened.
In cases like the Holocaust (or Palestine today) you have a mountain of evidence. You have countless eyewitnesses backed by film, sometimes video, and almost always official statements or internal documents showing intent.
In China you have significant motivation and credibility questions about the much smaller number of witnesses, you don’t have anything like the photographic documentation of the Holocaust, you have some blurry satellite photos of… something despite the U.S. having spy satellites that can read a license plate, and your official statements (that are themselves backed by significant evidence) are about combating radicalization through development.
In short, there is actually a live question about the credibility and weight of the evidence. You do have to engage with the evidence and not simply take the accusation at face value, just like you would at a murder trial.
They need to learn from sodastream how to market unfair and unequal employment conditions.
deleted by creator
I never mentioned Ninestar. Most of us in MENA don’t trust US/NATO reports, they are serial liars. Various Muslim countries as well as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation visited the region and didn’t find anything nefarious. Plus, we can see clearly in the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine how much they really care.
I never mentioned Ninestar
Sorry, I assumed the “they” in your comment on the article posted by OP referred to Ninestar, as the article was about that firm
Maybe don’t use slaves in your factories if you do not want to be black listed it’s that simple 💅
Removed by mod
Do you have a good source for this? I lean towards that opinion as well, but i don’t have any direct sources.
Then why does US law explicitly allow slave labour? Do they blacklist themselves as well?
Yes everyone on the list is black.
Removed by mod
You said the secret word!
How is it whataboutism if the US bans importing goods made with slave labour if they themselves make use of it? That is just hypocriticism on the US’ side.
Removed by mod
It doesn’t take attention away in this case. If the US is like, “hey, don’t use slavery in your factories”, it’s a massive hypocritical statement. Especially considering the 13th amendment allows slavery for criminal convictions.
It’s a clear point of stating, “bro, WTF you gettin’ on my ass about slavery when you’re using it right fucking now!”
Well, it’s not that easy though, is it. You cannot prove a negative. So if I accused you of some sickening murder rape robbing spree where you harmed 20 people and by law it was on you to prove that you didn’t do it, you’d be fucked because you couldn’t prove that something isn’t true.
I mean, screw this og so poor multi billion company and their
worthless pieces f shitlaser printers, yet I am wary of the increasing tendency internationally to flip “in dubio pro reo” on it’s head.deleted by creator
But… you know that a chinese factory does not need approval by US regulators to run, right? Like… the US doesn’t run the whole world and it’s not a normal thing that US regulators check out foreign factories, nor should it be.
Now if you get accused of using slave labour… how can you prove that you do not do that? You’d need to prove that the slave-labour-factories don’t produce anything that then gets sold to you, right? Because absence of slave workers in your factories is not proof that you don’t subcontract a slave labour factory. So you’d need to demonstrate that you’ve got nothing to do with them. But if you don’t work with those factories, you have no stake in the factories that exploit slave labour, so you can’t let (foreign) regulators into those factories. Now, even if you manage to do that, one could just turn around and say “Well, then you must use another factory we don’t know of, prove that this isn’t the case”. You cannot prove innocence, you can only prove guilt.
deleted by creator
well, technically they don’t. Nor does any other nation technically speaking need any justification to deny US businesses from operating there (see sanctions against Russia or the US ban of Huawei). Yet that is so oversimplified that I won’t even entertain the argument and it is way besides the point I was making originally.
Yet that is so oversimplified that I won’t even entertain the argument and it is way besides the point I was making originally.
I think that went perfectly to the heart of the argument.
Didn’t Volkswagen hire an independent inspector who found no evidence of slavery labour in their supply chain?
Maybe don’t regurgitate empire propaganda uncritically if you want people to take you seriously it’s that simple 💅
