There are a number of elements which stand out in the Urumqi incident:
1) The "rioting" on July 5th has very much the look of a planned military assault, and not something that somehow "evolved" out of the protest that evening. In fact, it is reported that the violence began at several different points in the city simultaneously at around 8pm. There was plenty of police at the protest, but there were few or no police where the rampage took place. Over 150 people were killed and 200 fires were set, plus over 1000 people badly injured. You cannot do this kind of damage without some preparation and I think even training in the case of arson. It also requires the rioters to bring such things as metal pipes or bats and maybe gasoline, for example. The rioters were prepared for what they did, and they acted in a cold-blooded way. People had their throats slit, women were bludgeoned to death, buses were set on fire with people inside. On the other hand, handout photos given out by Uighur anti-Chinese organizations of the "peaceful protest" prior to the violence do not show any such obvious equipment. Nor do any photos of this 6pm protest show any "clash with the authorities".
2) The two actions, protest and riot, were planned as two parts of one action. The events, both the protest at 6pm and the "rioting" at 8pm as well as attacks against Chinese representative offices in other countries, were planned through cell phone and Internet networking in the days leading up to July 5th. In fact the relatively late hour for the demonstration allowed the associated assault to take place under cover of the night. The protest also served as a diversion to cover the real damage being inflicted.
3) The Uighur separatists are trying to follow a Tibetan model. It is a species of copy-cat crime. There is a "peaceful protest" followed by rioting. In both cases, the rioting apparently starts on some cue, inexplicable to outside witnesses. In both cases there is an office outside of China which somehow has a script prepared for the press as soon as the story breaks: "it was a peaceful protest followed by a violent crackdown by the authorities, and this led to widespread anger and rioting." In the news reports, this is followed by "explanations" regarding conditions in China's minority regions, about discrimination, cultural "genocide", the "seething anger", etc. In the case of Tibet, the script included an instant body count of 200, while today the media simply insinuates that the reported casualties were caused by the "repressive regime".
4) In the case of the protests last year, the "foreign office" in question is the Dalai Lama's office in India (Dharmsala) and its ally, Campaign for Tibet. This office, of course, is led by the "spiritual leader of the Tibetan people" the Dalai Lama himself. This year, the obligatory news contact for the Western media is the office of the World Uighur Congress, led by Rebiya Kadeer, in Washington, DC. This woman is being referred to as "our spiritual mother" and her organization is being touted as some sort of umbrella for Uighur groups internationally.
5) In both cases, the Western media accepts the script virtually without question. Neither in the case of Tibet last year, or Xinjiang now is there any evidence of violence by the authorities. None of the photos or videos show this, nor the nature of the injuries (no bullet holes). In the case of Tibet last year, anti-Chinese U-tubers had to resort to using imagery from Nepal to show physical repression, and yet, in videos I saw of the "peaceful protest", one could make out plenty of people with cell-phone cameras or regular digital cameras taking pictures and videos.
Bladerunner, I don't know exactly what part of this was planned and directed by Rebiya Kadeer, but I do know that her office played an important role in this overall script, and that at least they acted as someone who is well aware of the plans and what their part is in these plans. It is obvious also that they were quite inspired by the riots in Tibet last year, and their potential for "doing damage" to China, which this woman reportedly relishes. As well, she refuses to disassociate herself from the events. I don't know if any of this would count as "evidence" of whatever particular crime she could be charged with legally, but I know that the Chinese government is making a POLITICAL statement about this, and not a legal one, and that under the circumstances it is hard to argue that certain other states in the world are aiding and abetting this kind of injury to China by harboring people like her.
