Death toll in Xinjiang riot rises to 140

SampanViking

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
The Guangdong Incident happened a couple of weeks ago now and was being dealt with very firmly and swiftly. The person that made the original allegation of rape was arrested very early on and already charged with very serious offences as indeed have those that led the attack on the Uighur dormitory.

In short as in issue, the Guangdong Incident was a non starter, there was no secrecy or cover up (I read it in Xinhua) and the main protagonists were already under arrest, in custody and facing due process for very serious crimes.
What more precisely would the authorities be expected to do?

If the Guangdong incident was being used, then it can only be as a pretext, used by local militants in collusion with outside organisations to inflame the situation and destabilise the province.

I got sense of the theatre on UK's C4 news this evening. The report started with a visit to a City hospital and showed lots of people who had clearly been severly attacked and beaten, cut, grazed, bruised, swollen and bedridden. We then saw some Uighur "victims" of Han revenge attacks. These people were walking around quite happily had no no visible marks but sported a few very clean and obviously newly applied bandages. It really was laughable.

I hope that it is soon made very clear that the events of Sunday were a deliberate and contrived act of terror and that the organisations that represent these people are nothing more than terrorist organisations. Countries that harbour and support these groups need to be under no illusions as to what they are doing is called and that there are consequences to be paid for doing so.
 
L

LostWraith

New Member
bladerunner said:
So what you are saying is that the riot/protest was planned a long time ago under the ghidance of Rebiya Kadeer and the Guandong incident , being a mere coincidence?
Click to expand...
I don't think that is his point at all. He is meerly stating the source of general social discontent, which extends far beyond the incident we have today.

I disagree with his statement though. The division between the Uyghurs and the Hans go far beyond the recent economic development. It started from the bloody conquest of Xinjiang after the communists rose to power, and possibly even farther back to historical conflicts between the Hans and the Uyghurs.

This ethnic tension is nothing new. China has been fighting in that area since the Han Dynasty, which started BC so that's a long time ago.
 
Y

yehe

Junior Member
bladerunner said:
So what you are saying is that the riot/protest was planned a long time ago under the ghidance of Rebiya Kadeer and the Guandong incident , being a mere coincidence?
Click to expand...

Errh? When did I even mentioned Rebiya Kadeer or anything been planned?

I dont believe in the goverment propaganda about Kadeer been the mastermind behind the hole thing, there is only so much Kadeer can do, blaming her is just a way for the goverment to not have to point the finger to the entire Uigher population for the bloody sunday incident, thus keep ethnic solidarity in the country.
Not a very good attempt tbh.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
yehe said:
Errh? When did I even mentioned Rebiya Kadeer or anything been planned?
Click to expand...

My mistake, got confused over another post.

I
dont believe in the goverment propaganda about Kadeer been the mastermind behind the hole thing, there is only so much Kadeer can do, blaming her is just a way for the goverment to not have to point the finger to the entire Uigher population for the bloody sunday incident, thus keep ethnic solidarity in the country.
Not a very good attempt tbh.
Click to expand...

July 6th Xinhua news reports incidences of Uighurs intervening and even helping some Chinese escape a beating.

If it was just a explosive response from pent up frustration, it goes to show that the authorities still don't get it.
Click to expand...
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
bladerunner said:
In the West anyway,To prove murder in the 'First Degree' you would have to PROVE INTENT
Click to expand...

So according to your logic, if I took a machine gun and fire it at a group of people but expected the bullets not to kill, and a lot of people died as a result, that is not murder?

People got attacked, which is a deliberate act. Some of those that got attacked lost their life. That is murder, end of story.
 
Last edited:
C

cmb=1968

Junior Member
Engineer said:
So according to your logic, if I took a machine gun and fire it at a group of people but expected the bullets not to kill, and a lot of people died as a result, that is not murder?

People got attacked, which is a deliberate act. Some of those that got attacked lost their life. That is murder, end of story.
Click to expand...

No way That kind of defense would work in a trial. You would have transferred intent if that person was committing a crime like robbery legally even someone being trampled by the fleeing mob that person would be guilty of first degree murder. Basically, any death that is caused by the original crime is first degree murder.
 
R

RedMercury

Junior Member
yehe said:
Errh? When did I even mentioned Rebiya Kadeer or anything been planned?

I dont believe in the goverment propaganda about Kadeer been the mastermind behind the hole thing, there is only so much Kadeer can do, blaming her is just a way for the goverment to not have to point the finger to the entire Uigher population for the bloody sunday incident, thus keep ethnic solidarity in the country.
Not a very good attempt tbh.
Click to expand...

You're right that it is better than blaming the entire Uighur population. The Chinese government is talking to its own citizens first and foremost, international audiences are a secondary matter. If the government pointed fingers at internal causes, there would be more pressure from citizens and hardliners to take tougher measures. By blaming international actors, the government hopes to deflect blame from the Uighur population and give itself more freedom of maneuver. By saying the riots were caused by false rumors and agitation from abroad, it leaves space for leniency. Fanning ethnic hatred would let the WUC and its backers win.
 
optionsss

optionsss

Junior Member
Murder is a highly charged word
In the West anyway,To prove murder in the 'First Degree' you would have to PROVE INTENT
Click to expand...

Not really, in general first degree murder has to be premeditated, and second degree murder are non-premeditated. For example, if B punches A and kills A, because of a heated argument, it is second degree murder. But, if B carry a weapon to the street, start setting things on fire, and started killing people, it is first degree murder. B planned ahead, when he left home, he choose to carry a weapon, that is INTENT to harm.

I found it funny you actually used the words "in the West", did you know in New York, even if a person have shown intent, it is still second degree murder, unless that person killed someone special or killed many times.
 
R

RedMercury

Junior Member
luhai said:
I second Engineer's response, most of the articles are indeed anti-Chinese (especially anti "Han" chinese) instead of anti-Chinese. And you'll find even livelier discussions on the economist's article comment page than the BBC.

It's quite funny how many posters in China have resorts to discussions in english (though sometimes in Chinese, but the websites can't display the characters right) on foreign site as most forum in China are down like baidu tieba or deleting post like crazy like Tianya. Since since earlier discussions earlier on Chinese BBS where people seems to want to overthrow the government and put the word "National" in front of "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" I can understand how these sites down.
Click to expand...

For all its faults, the Chinese "communist" government is the current guardian of the Chinese nation. For those who wish it ill, they in turn wish ill of the Chinese people.

While in this particular case Chinese netizens are using foreign boards to avoid censorship, I want to comment about Chinese (in CHina) using English on foreign boards in general. By using a second language, a person immediately seems less intelligent, so those Chinese who are less than experts in English commenting on english forums are at a huge rhetorical disadvantage. Add to this cultural differences and the end result is that they get laughed off or further turn audiences against their viewpoints. I see no need for Chinese to justify their actions to the world. If they want to have discussions about Chinese matters with Chinese, foreigners are welcome to the many Chinese BBS.

bladerunner said:
Meanwhile the authorities have not provided any evidence to support their, rather dubious, side of events have they?
Click to expand...
Do you still believe the deaths during the rioting were from the police actions? If so, you disgust me and I will never take anything you write seriously again.

SampanViking said:
I hope that it is soon made very clear that the events of Sunday were a deliberate and contrived act of terror and that the organisations that represent these people are nothing more than terrorist organisations. Countries that harbour and support these groups need to be under no illusions as to what they are doing is called and that there are consequences to be paid for doing so.
Click to expand...
Wishful thinking. Unfortunately China lacks the hard and soft power to do anything like declaring "you are with us or against us". Though, I think behind the scenes there will be escalation of actions, though probably not the "kinetic" sort.

As to Hu skipping the G-8 summit, I don't think it is an embarrasing move nor a sign of weakness. Perhaps the riot organizers hoped for such a result, or to embarras Hu during the conference, or they were just hoping to ride the wave of US patriotism after July 4 (and not on July 4, or otherwise the news coverage will be minimal, well timed, anyway). If anything, Hu snubbed the G-8; it was a way of saying, mess with my country and I will not support your economic recovery.
 
bladerunner

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Engineer said:
So according to your logic, if I took a machine gun and fire it at a group of people but expected the bullets not to kill, and a lot of people died as a result, that is not murder?
Click to expand...

That's different, besides in the West it depends on how good your lawyer is. Diminished responsibility and all that.
Your lawyer could also argue that you didn't know the gun was loaded. You were just fooling around. In our country you could be charged with reckless use of a gun causing death, the prison sentence may not be as long as murder.

Ill see if i can elaborate.
You and your friend go out drinking and you are driving which is breaking the law in some countries where there is zero tolerance You then have an accident in which your friend is killed. Are you charged with his murder? No.Because there was never any intent to kill him.

or you. end up having fight with someone in the bar. Unfortunately that person dies after receiving several blows from you. (a good lawyer should be able to get you off with a charge of man slaughter.Once again a lesser charge)


People got attacked, which is a deliberate act. Some of those that got attacked lost their life. That is murder, end of story.
Click to expand...

I can see the point you are making.A killing is a killing - no in betweens. So why is there in America various degrees of murder one can be charged with?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top