The website is a collection of sources with links gathered by a hexbear user because we got sick of having to do this song and dance every time. You can literally go interact with each link and each source individually - they all state where each claim comes from
Hmm, looks like the response to the un report is some guy on Twitter. And he seems to mostly handwave a ton of eyewitness testimony and investigations because they’re from western governments.
You mean the dude pointing out how there’s no first hand sources, the report is making use of unofficial translations and the report is in part based on observations made by the us army? Seems like a bit more than just “handwaving” eyewitness testimony to me.
What do you mean no first hand sources? I thought those were the the eyewitness that he dismissed because some of them hadn’t talked to people about their traumatic experiences before talking to the UN.
I’m not bothered by the translations. An office translation would need to be by China, right? So they’d have a motive to mistranslate to downplay what they’re doing. As long as the original documents as well as the translations are available, it should be easy enough to check the translation accuracy.
Here’s a very approachable resource that debunks the claims of genocide in Xinjiang, using mainly western sources https://xinjiangahr.carrd.co/
I can’t find the source of that website. Do you know where it comes from?
The website is a collection of sources with links gathered by a hexbear user because we got sick of having to do this song and dance every time. You can literally go interact with each link and each source individually - they all state where each claim comes from
Hmm, looks like the response to the un report is some guy on Twitter. And he seems to mostly handwave a ton of eyewitness testimony and investigations because they’re from western governments.
You mean the dude pointing out how there’s no first hand sources, the report is making use of unofficial translations and the report is in part based on observations made by the us army? Seems like a bit more than just “handwaving” eyewitness testimony to me.
What do you mean no first hand sources? I thought those were the the eyewitness that he dismissed because some of them hadn’t talked to people about their traumatic experiences before talking to the UN.
I’m not bothered by the translations. An office translation would need to be by China, right? So they’d have a motive to mistranslate to downplay what they’re doing. As long as the original documents as well as the translations are available, it should be easy enough to check the translation accuracy.