Also kind of boggling that you’re calling mintpressnews and other anti-imperialist sources, as breitbart. Do you skip the parts about Zenz, the source of these claims, being a far-right evangelical anti-semite?
Mintpressnews are pro-Assad. I mean the same Assad who butchered Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians and who operated CIA dark sites after 9/11. That guy. What’s mind boggling is that you call that …anti-imperialism. That’s not anti-imperialism, it’s crude campism.
I have nothing to say about Zenz’s politics, that’s why I don’t. His politics are irrelevant with respect to the truth of what he alleges.
But to centre Zenz in this discourse is disingenuous. There are about 84,000 entries in the Xinjiang Victims Database. Those are the people to centre.
You’re right to point out my inconsistency when it comes to the two. Apologies.
So let me retract that and go back to this line: whoever Zenz is, the UN special rapporteur deemed him a credible enough source to include his work in a UN HRC report. The report has not been retracted. I’m not an expert on the sources, but I can in good faith assume that the UN HRC is a reasonable arbiter of reputability. This is the same standard as I use for other conflicts and controversial world events. I therefore accord this UN special rapporteur the same benefit of the doubt as his colleague, Francesca Albanese.
And just like I mistrust attacks on Albanese’s reputability when it comes to Palestine, I mistrust attacks on Obokata when it comes to Xinjiang.
So let me retract that and go back to this line: whoever Zenz is, the UN special rapporteur deemed him a credible enough source to include his work in a UN HRC report. The report has not been retracted. I’m not an expert on the sources, but I can in good faith assume that the UN HRC is a reasonable arbiter of reputability.
Damn, I recommend you look into some of the other claims Zenz has made before deciding he’s credible.
Also kind of boggling that you’re calling mintpressnews and other anti-imperialist sources, as breitbart. Do you skip the parts about Zenz, the source of these claims, being a far-right evangelical anti-semite?
Removed by mod
Mintpressnews are pro-Assad. I mean the same Assad who butchered Syrians, Lebanese and Palestinians and who operated CIA dark sites after 9/11. That guy. What’s mind boggling is that you call that …anti-imperialism. That’s not anti-imperialism, it’s crude campism.
I have nothing to say about Zenz’s politics, that’s why I don’t. His politics are irrelevant with respect to the truth of what he alleges.
But to centre Zenz in this discourse is disingenuous. There are about 84,000 entries in the Xinjiang Victims Database. Those are the people to centre.
Incredibly fucking ironic how say:
immediately after condemning Mintpress for their politics. Really goes to show that you’re not even trying to be good faith.
Funny you should say that, because I picked a person at random, and guess who the only source was? That’s right, Adrian Zenz, as always.
You’re right to point out my inconsistency when it comes to the two. Apologies.
So let me retract that and go back to this line: whoever Zenz is, the UN special rapporteur deemed him a credible enough source to include his work in a UN HRC report. The report has not been retracted. I’m not an expert on the sources, but I can in good faith assume that the UN HRC is a reasonable arbiter of reputability. This is the same standard as I use for other conflicts and controversial world events. I therefore accord this UN special rapporteur the same benefit of the doubt as his colleague, Francesca Albanese.
And just like I mistrust attacks on Albanese’s reputability when it comes to Palestine, I mistrust attacks on Obokata when it comes to Xinjiang.
And I’m going to leave it at that.
Damn, I recommend you look into some of the other claims Zenz has made before deciding he’s credible.