Death toll in Xinjiang riot rises to 140

maozedong · Jul 8, 2009

bladerunner said:
In my opinion a lot of the evidence in the clipping you provided is circumstancial, which can also be applied to some of your evidence.
I also think most posters here still resort to playing the victim card, time to move on.

if you think so, U.S 911 attack still no evidence, CIA and FBI got the evidence but you beleived,after 911 incident no longer, US army already into Afghanistan.
China's intelligence agencies is a waste? Last year occurred in Xinjiang have been terrorist attacks, the suspects were also arrested, the Chinese authorities have already mastered the evidence, had not started today.
Today, the 911 detainees still in the trial of suspects, but the U.S. military has been fighting in Afghanistan as long as eight years,

bladerunner · Jul 8, 2009

RedMercury said:
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.

WHAT?!!! I never said or implied any such thing.and I do not believe that the deaths were due to police actions and never have.despite stories circulating that shots were fired. What gave you that idea?. Im implying the governments evidence about the cause of the riots, that is blaming it on Kadeer and associates was circumstancial rather than factual..Just because some said something does not always translate to the act of doing. IN WESTERN COURTS YOU CANNOT CONVICT SOMEONE ON CIRCUMSTANCIAL EVIDENCE. But then that is something the Chinese people may fail to understand when you don't have a independent judiciary.
Also how do we know that the riots wasn't just a reflection of built up frustration? rather than Kaddeer fanning the flames of discontent., but dont misunderstand me, I don't condone extreme violence displayed by the Uighurs.

optionsss · Jul 8, 2009

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?

The official reason is simple. The justice system should be base on rehabilitation, not retribution. So, the reason why a person committing a crime makes a huge difference.

In reality, it just makes a rich person getting away from crime easier, like how Donté Stallworth getting 30 day imprisonment for manslaughter...

bladerunner · Jul 8, 2009

optionsss said:
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.

Click to expand...

You worded it much better than myself

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.

Click to expand...

Is it because you have life long incaceration for murder.
Over here Murder one max on average is about 18-20yrs. You use to be eligible for parole after about 2/3rds of the sentence, though it may have changed.

Player 0 · Jul 8, 2009

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here's an article that critique's the increasing bias in the west and clears up the specific misconceptions.

Engineer · Jul 9, 2009

RedMercury said:
Amen. Living in the US for many years has taught me this lesson well. Every time something happens concerning China, I check the usual suspects for anti-China bias, and 90% of the time I find it. Sometimes it's subtle and insidious, like the wording in one of the BBC photo captions describing the two young ladies who were injured and bleeding from the riots as having "blood on their hands".

I saw that particular photo, too. A classic case of pointing at white and calling it black.

RedMercury said:
For me, this constant demonization has built up a deep well of resentment. Sometimes I think the Chinese government is doing the west too big a favor by censoring its biased media. If the average Chinese citizen read all that bullcrap, there would be more xenophobia and more ammunition for hardliners. Western politicians think that if the western viewpoint was uncensored, the average Chinese would suddenly be enlightened and rise up against the government. This fallacy underestimates how well-informed and smart Chinese are. They know, first hand, the problems with their government, they don't need people overseas to tell them. They'll see right through the hypocritical bull crap. It is unfortunate the Chinese government also underestimate the intelligence their own citizens.

I concur absolutely with this view point. Often time, I am very angry at the people in China's propaganda department because they seem brain-dead. Blocking information is an extremely stupid idea. Instead of blocking reporting from the west, anti-China reporting should be broadcast on CCTV at 6-o'clock news. All it takes is a statement "<insert media name> says that the riot on <insert time> was a peaceful protest", then broadcast news footages from the west, and that would be done. Western media would be utterly discredited in China for the next decade.

Engineer · Jul 9, 2009

RedMercury said:
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.

Now that you have mentioned it, I also want to point out something related. Since the riot last year, I have on many occasions come across one particular type of comments from people that criticize China. The comments make an implicit argument that views from Chinese defending China have no credibility, because China blocks the flow of information, because Chinese can't have (online) discussions among themselves, and because the criticizers haven't seen any said discussion online among Chinese.

I was utterly stunned when I first read that type of comments. Obviously, these people are completely oblivion to the fact that Chinese use Chinese to communicate and have Chinese discussion boards for discussions. But what's most alarming is that one can sense so much hate from the comments, as if even Chinese as a language is illegitimate. This is another example of anti-Chinese bias that we have discussed earlier.

Quickie · Jul 9, 2009

bladerunner said:
So by your logic Chinese assailants should get treated in the same manner as the Uighurs?

Yes, of course. This even applies to killing the killer himself, as unimaginable as it might seem to be. Only the court of law can mete out the sentence. But then also, there's the question of self defence to protect your own life.

Strictly speaking no there isnt.any excuse/
but some countries measure it in degrees and hence a lesser charge and resulting sentence.eg, The French in their crime of passion, and the middle eastern belief in honor killing.

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

Huh? Is there really a difference between a criminal acting out to kill a person and his intention to do so?

bladerunner · Jul 9, 2009

Player 0 said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here's an article that critique's the increasing bias in the west and clears up the specific misconceptions.

Interesting read, but you make no mention of the remedy as proposed by the writer.- Creating a national unity among the people, that sort of existed under Mao's early days

GreenestGDP · Jul 9, 2009

Engineer said:
。。。。。。
I concur absolutely with this view point. Often time, I am very angry at the people in China's propaganda department because they seem brain-dead. Blocking information is an extremely stupid idea. Instead of blocking reporting from the west, anti-China reporting should be broadcast on CCTV at 6-o'clock news. All it takes is a statement "<insert media name> says that the riot on <insert time> was a peaceful protest", then broadcast news footages from the west, and that would be done. Western media would be utterly discredited in China for the next decade.

I absolutely support your opinions on -- how the widespread bias, malicious western news media reporting and westerners penchant of maliciously blaming and undermining all things Chinese should be shown on a special programming channel on CCTV every day.

It is about time the Chinese TV media replace their anti Japanese movies with the the widespread bias, malicious western news media reporting.

Plenty of Chinese, young and old are paying heavy personal price by always kowtowing and providing VIP treatments to the westerners in general.

Only a very few westerners deserve the Chinese preferential treatments of respect and admiration.

I will start by tipping my hat off to BD Popeye the moderator for being just and balance.

Death toll in Xinjiang riot rises to 140

maozedong

Banned Idiot

bladerunner

Banned Idiot

optionsss

Junior Member

bladerunner

Banned Idiot

Player 0

Junior Member

Engineer

Major

Engineer

Major

Quickie

Colonel

bladerunner

Banned Idiot

GreenestGDP

Junior Member