What if the Uighurs were Christian rather than Muslim?
-
According to The New York Times this morning, violent clashes between Chinese government forces and Muslim Uighurs -- that country's long-oppressed minority -- have left at least 140 people dead and close to 1,000 injured. This incident in Western China highlights an important fact about America's "War on Terror."
Just imagine if the Uighurs were a Christian -- rather than Muslim -- minority, battling against the tyrannical Communist regime in Beijing, resisting various types of persecution, and demanding religious freedom. They would be lionized by America's Right, as similar Christian minorities, oppressed by tyrannical regimes, automatically are. Episodes like these -- where a declared Tyranny like China violently acts against citizens with whom we empathize -- are ones about which, in general, the American political class loves to sermonize.
But the Uighurs are Muslim, not Christian, and hostility towards them thus easily outweighs the opportunity they present to undermine the Chinese Government. Rather than support and venerate them, we instead spent this decade declaring them to be "enemy combatants" and locking them up in Guantanamo -- despite the fact that they have never evinced any interest in doing anything other than resisting Chinese persecution, and have certainly never taken actions against the U.S. (as even the Bush administration ultimately admitted). Yet even now, both Congress and the administration actively block release into the U.S. even of those Uighurs we wrongfully imprisoned for years, while the Right screams with outrage -- and fear -- over the administration's commendable efforts to find a home for them elsewhere.
For all the Serious analysis about the War on Terror, so much of it has been driven by nothing more complex or noble than sheer hostility towards Muslims. Muslims generally -- not just Al Qaeda -- replaced Communists as our New Enemy and became the new enabling force for our endless state of War and never-ending expansions of executive power. Rather obviously, the Uighurs were swept into the Enemy category solely by virtue of their status as Muslims. What more compelling evidence of that could be imagined than the fact that we imprisoned -- and continue to imprison -- people at Guantanamo whose only political interest is in resisting oppression by the Chinese government?
From Glenn Greenwald, via here
-
According to The New York Times this morning, violent clashes between Chinese government forces and Muslim Uighurs -- that country's long-oppressed minority -- have left at least 140 people dead and close to 1,000 injured. This incident in Western China highlights an important fact about America's "War on Terror."
Just imagine if the Uighurs were a Christian -- rather than Muslim -- minority, battling against the tyrannical Communist regime in Beijing, resisting various types of persecution, and demanding religious freedom. They would be lionized by America's Right, as similar Christian minorities, oppressed by tyrannical regimes, automatically are. Episodes like these -- where a declared Tyranny like China violently acts against citizens with whom we empathize -- are ones about which, in general, the American political class loves to sermonize.
But the Uighurs are Muslim, not Christian, and hostility towards them thus easily outweighs the opportunity they present to undermine the Chinese Government. Rather than support and venerate them, we instead spent this decade declaring them to be "enemy combatants" and locking them up in Guantanamo -- despite the fact that they have never evinced any interest in doing anything other than resisting Chinese persecution, and have certainly never taken actions against the U.S. (as even the Bush administration ultimately admitted). Yet even now, both Congress and the administration actively block release into the U.S. even of those Uighurs we wrongfully imprisoned for years, while the Right screams with outrage -- and fear -- over the administration's commendable efforts to find a home for them elsewhere.
For all the Serious analysis about the War on Terror, so much of it has been driven by nothing more complex or noble than sheer hostility towards Muslims. Muslims generally -- not just Al Qaeda -- replaced Communists as our New Enemy and became the new enabling force for our endless state of War and never-ending expansions of executive power. Rather obviously, the Uighurs were swept into the Enemy category solely by virtue of their status as Muslims. What more compelling evidence of that could be imagined than the fact that we imprisoned -- and continue to imprison -- people at Guantanamo whose only political interest is in resisting oppression by the Chinese government?
From Glenn Greenwald, via here
-
The Obama ice cream and drink had a lot more merit as a thread.
Which, says a lot about this feeble bs.
-
IIRC, we "arrested" them post-9/11 as suspected terrorists and they were detained at Gitmo ever since.
Here's a piece on their story: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=105188932
-
The Serbs were Christian.
So were the Branch Davidians.
So?
WSS
-
After all the liberal whiney-whiney, back door dissing of Bush and our troops in Afghanistan,
what the hell were they DOING in Afghanistan and Pakistan?
Never a bad word about terrorists.
Just cherry picking to try to find some kind of Bush injustice.
Really dumb.
-
First of all China is a communist government and they dont like it when religion comes into play, so keep buying the chinese shit at Wal Mart and keep pumping cash into the chinese army.
Those dirty little Muslim Uighurs live on some of the richest oil fields. Read it here!
'Climate of fear'
Severe repression since the launch of a "Strike Hard" campaign in 1996 has included harsher controls on religious activity, restrictions on movement and the denial of passports and the detention of individuals suspected of support for separatists and members of their families.
This has created a climate of fear and a great deal of resentment towards the authorities and the Han Chinese.
It is surprising that this resentment has not erupted into public anger and demonstrations before now, but that is a measure of the tightness of control that Beijing has been able to exercise over Xinjiang.
There are a number of emigre Uighur organisations in Europe and the United States; in most cases they advocate genuine autonomy for the region.
In the past Beijing has also blamed an Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement for causing unrest, although there is no evidence that this ever existed in Xinjiang.
The authorities in Beijing are unable to accept that their own policies in Xinjiang might be the cause of the conflict, and seek to blame outsiders for inciting the violence - as they do in the case of the Dalai Lama and Tibet.
Even if Uighur emigre organisations wished to provoke unrest, it would be difficult for them to do so, and there are, in any case, sufficient local reasons for unrest without the need for external intervention.
Michael Dillon is the former director of the Centre for Contemporary Chinese Studies at the University of Durham. He is also the author of a book entitled Xinjiang: China's Muslim Far Northwest.
-
First of all China is a communist government and they dont like it when religion comes into play, so keep buying the chinese shit at Wal Mart and keep pumping cash into the chinese army.
Those dirty little Muslim Uighurs live on some of the richest oil fields. Read it here!
'Climate of fear'
Severe repression since the launch of a "Strike Hard" campaign in 1996 has included harsher controls on religious activity, restrictions on movement and the denial of passports and the detention of individuals suspected of support for separatists and members of their families.
This has created a climate of fear and a great deal of resentment towards the authorities and the Han Chinese.
It is surprising that this resentment has not erupted into public anger and demonstrations before now, but that is a measure of the tightness of control that Beijing has been able to exercise over Xinjiang.
There are a number of emigre Uighur organisations in Europe and the United States; in most cases they advocate genuine autonomy for the region.
In the past Beijing has also blamed an Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement for causing unrest, although there is no evidence that this ever existed in Xinjiang.
The authorities in Beijing are unable to accept that their own policies in Xinjiang might be the cause of the conflict, and seek to blame outsiders for inciting the violence - as they do in the case of the Dalai Lama and Tibet.
Even if Uighur emigre organisations wished to provoke unrest, it would be difficult for them to do so, and there are, in any case, sufficient local reasons for unrest without the need for external intervention.
Michael Dillon is the former director of the Centre for Contemporary Chinese Studies at the University of Durham. He is also the author of a book entitled Xinjiang: China's Muslim Far Northwest.
First of all China is a communist government and they dont like it when religion comes into play,
And that differs from the DNC how?
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
And that differs from the DNC how?
WSS
Is this really what you've lowered youself to, Steve? McCarthy thinks you throw these words around recklessly and ignorantly...
Ever notice who the biggest complainers are around here? They're the "older" dudes who simply cannot and will not embrace progress.
-
It's a valid criticism -- of many -- to say that the "war on terror" went quickly off course after 9/11 when anti-Muslim paranoia replaced cold objectivity in the decision-making of the Bush administration, and therefore the country.
It's also a fair to point out that the Clinton administration supported Muslims in Bosnian and Kosovo, though perhaps the biggest difference between the Clinton policies and the Bush policies was that the people Clinton helped were not Arabs. Ethnically, Bosniaks and Albanians are Caucasian.
So maybe the real issue here is not religion but ethnicity? Should we be saying the Bush administration has an ethnic bias?
-
mz the pussy - they came to AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM???????????????????????????????
ROF,LMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You paint such a gloomy and warped picture when you post.
"Gee, I think I'll go to PAKISTAN and AFGHANISTAN so I can
be free to practice my religion".........
ROF,LMAO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So, WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY D-O-I-N-G in those countries?
Gosh, maybe they were trying to convince al quaeda to drop their arms and
turn the other cheek?
Maybe just teaching al quaeda to play Monopoly?
-
And that differs from the DNC how?
WSS
Is this really what you've lowered youself to, Steve? McCarthy thinks you throw these words around recklessly and ignorantly...
Ever notice who the biggest complainers are around here? They're the "older" dudes who simply cannot and will not embrace progress.
mz. said:
Is this really what you've lowered youself to, Steve? McCarthy thinks you throw these words around recklessly and ignorantly...Ever notice who the biggest complainers are around here? They're the "older" dudes who simply cannot and will not embrace progress.
First of all China is a communist government and they dont like it when religion comes into play,
OK.
So it differs from you how?
Besides the usual lashing out tell me how you like it when "religion comes into play."
WSS
-
And that differs from the DNC how?
WSS
They are equal =
look at this group of badass motherF;kers,
here are the faces of the democrat elite!
Where is the man bra teddy?
-
mz. said:
Is this really what you've lowered youself to, Steve? McCarthy thinks you throw these words around recklessly and ignorantly...Ever notice who the biggest complainers are around here? They're the "older" dudes who simply cannot and will not embrace progress.
First of all China is a communist government and they dont like it when religion comes into play,
OK.
So it differs from you how?
Besides the usual lashing out tell me how you like it when "religion comes into play."
WSS
First of all China is a communist government and they dont like it when religion comes into play,
OK.
So it differs from you how?
Besides the usual lashing out tell me how you like it when "religion comes into play."
WSS
I think you're replying to me and someone else at once.
But how do I differ from a Communist government? Is that what you're asking?
Well, first off, I'm not a Communist government, or a Communist. And I don't mind religion until it makes its way into politics and into people trying to influence the way I live my life, through religion via politics. You're allowed to believe in whatever you want to believe in, but afford me the same respect.
They are equal =
look at this group of badass motherF;kers,
You're acting like a child. The next time you're interested in engaging in something serious, PM me and we'll chat. I'm serious.
-
You're replying to a post Inspecta made, not me, you fcuking moron.
**************************************************
Well, shithead, I have you know who on ignore, and YOU posted the original post,
and have NOT answered the question, as usual.
Besides, there is little difference. Almost none.
So, you disagree - the Uighurs did NOT flee to avoid religious persecution?
Don't be so stupid - your own link talks about how they fired an AK-47 some.
Maybe at American soldiers? THEN they got caught?
Yeah, THAT kind of "peaceloving, fleeing religious persecution boo hoo a hippo's rear end"
You are SO naive when it comes to worhipping the progressive idol.
Let the rest of us know when you want to stop being an arrogant, dimwitted smart ass and
want to talk seriously about subjects. You know, how you all lamented and whined about?
Let it be known, that YOU ended the truce. Seriously.
-
Moron was actually a real, clinically-used term back in the day. Meaning it actually described a range of IQ scores. As did imbecile (lower score range than moron) and idiot (lower score range than imbecile, and lowest of them all IIRC). So, in retrospect I wasn't as disrespectful as you might have thought.
Well, the f-word in front of the formerly-used clinical term does probably penalize the recipient of the score a point or two..........mere peanuts.
Truces are solidified over time, and every cease fire has a flame-up once in awhile.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login