Breaking news!!
- Thread starter zoom
- Start date
- Status
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
Engineer
Major
Failed, but nice try with that misdirection. It doesn't make the London riot started out differently than the one in Xinjiang, if the rumor is true. Your ever more elaborate attempt to differentiate the two riots only highlights the similarities.
I should also take this opportunity to point out that your double standard and hypocripsy is pretty transparent. Arson and looting in the West are called riots, where as people getting their head hacked off in China is peaceful protest.
Last edited:
Might be a bit late to say this but tune the personal attacks down.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Let's not forget Hong Kong. On US TV I saw an interview right before the handover of a man who when he was a kid in Hong Kong in the 1960s was arrested along with his brother and imprisoned for three years for daring to protest that the truth be taught in schools about how Hong Kong was acquired through the Opium Wars which wasn't mentioned at all.
Take China out of the picture. Let's ask the Irish in Northern Ireland if they had their rights abused.
Take China out of the picture. Let's ask the Irish in Northern Ireland if they had their rights abused.
Engineer
Major
Pretty irrelevant considering the article already shows your stereotypical view of rioters being poor, unemployed, and uneducated as being false. With mob mentality at works, anyone can participate in a riot. Of course, the Western media is not going to spin this as people being oppressed.
In other news:
ABC said:
Last edited:
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
The media said the same things about economic disparity being the cause of unrest in China. Now all of the sudden that's not an excuse when it happens in their countries.
Engineer
Major
Funny how the media doesn't refer to protests/riots as uprisings the first chance it gets either. But this is true only if said protests/riots are not happening in the West.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
How anyone can take what those tools in the UWC says seriously is beyond me.
Those guys are as predictable as they are unimaginative. Every single time there is an inexcusable outbreak of violent protest, you can bet they will come out and claim the police started it by shooting 'peaceful protesters'.
Have you actually thought their claims through at all?
Look at the tragedy in Norway. One man with one gun killed how many people? There were hundreds of people on that island, and he had one gun. If they rushed him as soon as he opened fire, he would have only managed to kill a fraction of the number of people he did ultimately murder.
But in reality, when the gunman opened fire, the crowd broke and ran for their lives. It is the universal human reaction when unarmed people realize they are being shot at.
If police really opened fire on peaceful protesters, those protesters would run screaming back home, not go charging the police lines or attack innocent passers by for no reason other than their race.
As for the statement that police did open fire, well what police force wouldn't when they see rioters hacking people to death in the streets? That 'admission' proves nothing, but it is telling how you try so hard to twist that statement to suit your own goals.
The London riots are significantly different from the Xinjiang one, as the rioters were out for loot instead of blood. Had there been the kind of massed ethical attacks as happened in Xinjiang, the police response would have been significantly different, and rioters would have been shot dead by police as they tried to protect the innocent.
A better comparison would have been the LA riots. And refresh my memory, but did the police not shoot anyone there?
Again it is telling how you are deliberately ignoring the glaring difference between how the two riots were covered in the western media on the one hand, going out of your way to make a distinction where there is none on the other, and yet somehow completely ignored all the differences when talking about the police response and outcome. Cherry pick much?
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
How about applying a little logic yourself?
THat doesnt mean they didn't have time to take it out on the Chinese on the way home or in the ensuing minutes and hours.
What is there to twist, Im simply going with the statement that the police fired first which resulted in the riots and killings.
Its simply a case of shoot and we'll fudge the issue later by blaming Kadeer
I dont have an issue if the police feel there is the necessity to shoot. However in this case the uighurs claim the shooting inspired the riots which lead to the killing spree
Cherry pick much?[/QUOTE]
Tell me who doesnt?
Reasons for the riots aside, The riots were handled completely differently by the respective police forces. While the Chinese decided to go in heavy and try to nip in the bud, the British police went for a policy of containment and hoping the riots would burn itself out. (sadly neither worked)
The British police in an enviroment of PC correctness and newspapermen and cameras just a few yards away were careful not to resort to thuggish means which would have all the newspapers screaming about Police brutality,(much to the disapointment of many members here) while the Chinese police had no such qualms, given most likely there would have only been poor quality cell phone cameras if anything.
If they do get filmed shooting somebody they would probably react in the sameway they did with the Tibetean refugees that were shot at. BLUSTER. Remember the girl that got filmed shot in the back while fleeing?
With that type of record , its pretty hard to give the Chinese police or security any credibility with their excuses.
Last edited:
- Status