(Mass dislikes time!)
Yes, the US does evil shit in the Middle East. Killing brown-skinned practitioners of the other Abrahamic religion overseas is an American tradition.
That still doesn’t change the fact that China is persecuting Uyghurs in the Xinjiang province.
You can’t shit-talk one authoritarian state and cheer on another.
That still doesn’t change the fact that China is persecuting Uyghurs in the Xinjiang province.
The US tried to foment division in China by funding and organizing Salafi terrorist into Xinjiang, and once its efforts failed, it made lemonade out of its lemon by concocting and promoting a genocide narrative.
The only countries pushing this narrative are the “always the same map” imperial core countries, which just so happen to be largely the same ones supporting Israel’s genocide.
Almost no predominantly-Muslim country buys the Uyghur genocide narrative, because they know it’s bullshit, because they talked to the Uyghurs themselves.
https://twitter.com/un_hrc/status/1578003299827171330 #HRC51 | Draft resolution A/HRC/51/L.6 on holding a debate on the situation of human rights in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of #China, was REJECTED.
- The Uyghur Human Rights Project is a product of the National Endowment for Democracy, which is the American government’s main regime change NGO.
- A Reddit AMA Claiming To Be A Uyghur Quickly Exposes A CIA Asset Slandering China
- The Xinjiang Genocide Allegations Are Unjustified
- Uyghur genocide allegations
- American Debunks All Major Western Propaganda on Uyghurs and Xinjiang
- US-Funded Uyghur Activists Train as Soldiers of Empire
- The blueprint of regime change operations How regime change happens in the 21st century with your consent
Sources:
- china news propaganda site
- medium article from rando
- project syndicate link which is an op-ed site (not news)
- a wiki page from an incredibly biased group
- a youtube link…
- a site calling itself a news site, yet no actual credentials, but seems to be associated with China (Ajit Singh has written Chinese propaganda books)
- a substack link
This has to be the least compelling list of evidence one could provide, and yet you get upvotes because it looks like you’ve provided proof of something. All you’ve done is provide a lot of incredibly, seriously biased opinions with no actual facts at all.
Would you prefer something from America’s own fox news or New York Times?
No, neither. You’re making up a position and pretending like I believe that to make my argument look weak. I’m not the one posting shit sources.
What is an example of an axtually credible spurce in your opinion?
You’re not posting any sources at all. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I trust OIC and Muslim countries more than I trust any Western source. It is borderline farcical for Western governments and media to pretend to care about the welfare of Muslims in China while directly or indirectly enabling the genocide and ethnic cleansing in Palestine and invasions and war crimes in many other countries as well as the discriminatory policies in their own countries.
As opposed to all those unbiased sources you’ve provided, lol.
I’m absolutely not going to provide sources or even argue with anyone from .ml on an .ml community because it’s pointless. You all do not care about proper sourcing and think it’s even a detractor because it’s “western”. I’m pointing out the problems with the sources for all the other people that are observing that comment and being swayed, because it’s a bunch of baloney.
Disclaimer: not .ml.
Critisizing someone’s sources and then refusing to provide any other ones “because it’s pointless” seems a little hypocritical to me.
I’m pointing out the problems with the sources for all the other people that are observing that comment and being swayed, because it’s a bunch of baloney.
So we should trust your word over someone’s who has at least put in the effort to provide sources?
Look, you don’t need to prove anything, but if you’re gonna argue or act like you’re defending people from misinformation, then I’d expect to see more than just “don’t listen to that guy”. It’s not exactly easy finding objective information about various issues in China and filtering out all the American propaganda. Personally, I’d very much appreciate any links that don’t lead to obvious manipulation.
If someone claims to solve string theory and then provides shit sources there is never an obligation to provide sources that solve string theory. Pointing out sources are shit is part of science. I don’t need to provide a counter argument because that’s not the purpose of the conversation. I don’t need to provide proof of the alternative because the only thing I’m trying to accomplish is to stop this liar from spreading misinformation.
A lie can travel around the world before the truth takes a few steps. That’s exactly what that user is trying to do. Post as many lies as possible so that refuting them takes hours if not days if not months or years.
How can you know if the sources really are bad if it’s not obvious aftet reading? Do you just trust a random person’s words? In this case, you’re essentially arbitrarily picking one version over another.
The problem with ‘stopping lies’ is it requires effort, which not everyone may wish to dedicate. I’m by no means denouncing the other person for trying to stop misinformation (assuming that’s the case, since I still have no idea). However, it’s all in vain if they don’t bother to do anything to prove their point.
Anyone can post misinformation as sources, just as anyone can post that the sources are bad. Fundamentally there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the two. If you really feel the need to defend people from being misinformed, some better source or other form of proof, or at the very least a deeper explanation would go a long way.
So like
If someone claims there’s totally a genocide
Then provides shit sources…
🤔
How is it hypocritical? Either the sources are biased or not. The poster not providing proof for a counterargument is irrelevant. Or do you mean they should provide proof for the original sources being biased?
There’s no such thing as a source with no bias
Wow, I wonder why there aren’t any Western corporate media sources with a Media Bias/Fact Check seal of approval…
The first step is to understand the media, which Media Bias/Fact Check and the Ad Fontes Media* are never going to teach you. The only people who are taught it are those who get degrees in marketing, public relations, political science, history, and journalism; and even then only some of them.
The new post-Trump/“post-truth” media literacy curricula won’t teach it to you either, because it was paid for and crafted by the US military-industrial complex: New Media Literacy Standards Aim to Combat ‘Truth Decay’.
This week, the RAND Corporation released a new set of media literacy standards designed to support schools in this task.
The standards are part of RAND’s ongoing project on “truth decay”: a phenomenon that RAND researchers describe as “the diminishing role that facts, data, and analysis play in our political and civic discourse.”
None of it is a secret, though, and it can be learned.
- Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine
- Propaganda model
- Edward Bernays
- Walter Lippmann
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Powell Memorandum
- The Trilateral Commission’s report, The Crisis of Democracy
* I’ve criticized MBFC & Ad Fontes before:
Nobody said anything about MBFC. Good luck, like I said in another comment I’m not going to argue with anyone from .ml. I was pointing out the faults in your sources because they’re not proper sources no matter what region of the world you’re from.
It’s OK to distrust more than one Government, but how anyone can believe the Chineses Government in this matter is beyond me.
Did you not see the insanely violent crack down on Hong Kong Democracy Movement with you own eyes? Do you not remember Tianamen Square? Great Fire-Wall?
Theres liyteraly over 10GB or evidence of the persecution of Uyghurs by the Chinese Government:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_Police_Files
I can understand not wanting to believe/trust the US and EU Govs, but trusting the Chinese Government is (IMO) insane.
The Xinjiang Police Files are said to be leaked documents from the Xinjiang internment camps, forwarded to anthropologist Adrian Zenz from an anonymous source.
Adrian Nikolaus Zenz (born 1974) is a German anthropologist known for his studies of the Xinjiang internment camps and persecution of Uyghurs in China. He is a director and senior fellow in China studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, an anti-communist think tank established by the US government and based in Washington, DC.
Yeah… not suspicious at all.
It’s OK to distrust more than one Government
Then you should try it, you hypocritical dipshit. You believe everything that comes out of the western propaganda machine without question, and then assume anyone who doesn’t believe them are “believing the Chinese government”
If it were 2002 you would be accusing anyone who didn’t believe Iraq of having WMDs of “believing Saddam!”
Do you not remember Tianamen Square
So do you do this in the opposite direction? When people doubt a claim made by China, do you start randomly bringing up unrelated events from forty years ago. What exactly was the chain of reasoning that made you thought this was relevant? Oh right, there wasn’t one: you’ve just been trained like a literal dog to compulsively blurt out “Tinyman Square!” every time you hear the word “China”.
Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Cursing
That’s the reddit mindset: being as rude, condescending, and smug as humanly possible is fine, but a naughty word is just uncivil.
Did you not see the insanely violent crack down on Hong Kong Democracy Movement with you own eyes?
The UK’s 99 year lease to subjugate the people of Hong Kong ended, a lease which had been forced upon Imperial China at gunpoint during the century of humiliation. Hong Kong reintegration after the lease expired was a foregone conclusion. The last minute, US-backed attempt at color revolution failed. It was the so-called “revolutionaries” who brought the brutality, by the way.
Do you not remember Tianamen Square?
I’ve already asked another commenter this but it’s valid here too: Would you class the western oppression of dissent to be on the same level as that famous student protest in China?
Only someone misinformed about the 1989 protest and US/CIA/NED-orchestrated, murderously violent riot would ask this, which to be fair is 99% of Westerners.
- 📺 The Tiananmen Square “Massacre” Never Happened: part 1, part 2, part 3 — [Sources]
- Edit to add: YouTube took the original video down for “violating YouTube’s terms of service,” but I found a reploaded a copy, splitting it up into three pieces. This is why you don’t know what really happened, because Western corporate media don’t want you to know. They were reuploaded just today; who knows how long they’ll stay up.
- The Tian’anmen Square ‘Massacre’: The West’s Most Persuasive, Most Pervasive Lie.
- CBS, 1989: There Was No “Tiananmen Square Massacre”
- Images from Tiananmen 1989 the West never shows (NSFW / CW: violence and death)
- Tank Man video footage. Tiananmen Square, Beijing, 1989
- How psy-ops warriors fooled me about Tiananmen Square: a warning
- 1989 Tian’anmen Square riots
- A Note on the Tiananmen Protests
- Washington Post, 1989: Rebel Without a Magazine
[Chinese Intellectual’s founder] Liang [Heng] had come from his New York office, where he serves as the magazine’s foreign editor, to Washington Thursday and Friday to address the board of directors at the National Endowment for Democracy – a substantial financial backer of the magazine – to tell it what he knows, what he thinks and what will possibly happen. After his arrival in the United States, he earned his master’s degree in literature from Columbia University and secured an initial $200,000 grant from the NED, a private corporation created in 1983 to “strengthen democratic efforts worldwide,” to start his magazine.
- The Seattle Times, 2011: Quiet scholar who inspired uprisings
That is not to say [Gene] Sharp has not seen any action. In 1989, he jetted off to China to witness the uprising in Tiananmen Square. In the early 1990s, he sneaked into a Myanmar rebel camp at the invitation of Robert Helvey, a retired Army colonel who advised the opposition there. They met when Helvey was on a fellowship at Harvard; the military man thought the professor had ideas that could avoid war.
- The blueprint of regime change operations - How regime change happens in the 21st century with your consent
Great Fire-Wall?
The firewall isn’t there to keep Chinese people from The Truth. It’s there to keep imperial core meddling out, and to help China develop its own domestic internet services. In contrast, the rest of the world is dependent on / addicted to US internet services from Google/Alphabet, Amazon, Facebook/Meta, Microsoft, etc., which many countries are beginning to regret.
I already covered Xinjang elsewhere in this post, and if you had read it you would know that Adrian Zenz is a crackpot.
- 📺 The Tiananmen Square “Massacre” Never Happened: part 1, part 2, part 3 — [Sources]
You’re arguing with a guy that doesn’t want to change their mind. He literally sent me a video whose sources contradicted him and guess what happened when I pointed that to him? Never bothered to reply and he still uses that video as proof that he’s right.
As opposed to you people, who are totally open and eager to change your minds
Seeing as how I actually watched his video and looked at their sources and other sources and only after that did I reply? Yes. And even to this day I still leave room for doubt. I still think the truth is actually somewhere in the middle. Not you, tho. You’re convinced that what you believe is correct.
Not you, tho. You’re convinced that what you believe is correct.
Yeah, as opposed to believing what I believe is incorrect…
Do you even understand the concept of other minds?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Yeah
Removed by mod
"Yes, the US does evil shit in the Middle East. Killing brown-skinned practitioners of the other Abrahamic religion overseas is an American tradition.
That still doesn’t change the fact that Iraq is building weapons of mass destruction to attack the USA.
You can’t shit-talk one authoritarian state and cheer on another."
Seriously, how many times do you need to hear it before you western chauvanists realise it’s not about “good or bad”, it’s about trustworthy or untrustworthy.
Ironically Abrahamic religion’s influence feeds into liberalism’s good vs. evil worldview.
Philosophy professor Hans-Georg Moeller: If Morality Exists Everything Is Permitted
Genocide is bad. If your ideology prevents you from agreeing with that statement, you are a monster.
Genocide IS bad, but the “muslim genocide” in China is nothing but a CIA op, as usual
You are a CIA op.
Wow 10/10 lib response, so good
No u
Hot take:
The US has committed horrifying war crimes and crimes against humanity against Muslims and continues to do so.
And so does China
Its always fascinating to see the war between Nazis and Tankies fight over which imperial power is based, rather than demonstrating a working frontal lobe and damning both for their crimes.
And so does China
The only “evidence” of this comes from the empire and is demonstrably false
Eh, most people probably don’t brag about doing war crimes.
Idk man, this page has over 401 citations from various sources.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China?wprov=sfla1
Edit: This also has a lot of citations ns from various sources too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia_in_China?wprov=sfla1
The 400 citations in question:
[1] Victims of Communism Memorial Association
[2] Burger Eagle Freedom Institute
[3] China Freedom NGO (Washington DC)
[4-399] Western State Television Station (retrieved in 2020)
[400] Literally the CIA
The article editors in question:
u/USA_STEM_Edgelord_USA_1990
u/TotallyNotAFed69
u/WhiteCisManInHis30s
Good job outing yourself as someone who can only read up to 3 lines before they have to vomit bullshit onto the internet.
Ah yes. Libopedia the pinnicle of (western) truth!
Wikipedia is one of the most reliable sources of public information, most especially do to the international collaboration efforts on it.
You can’t just dismiss a source on the basis that you don’t like it. You need to provide actual evidence that the source is untrustworthy
Wikipedia is one of the most reliable sources of public information
Yeah if you’re looking up wood joints and math theorems. Not if you’re trying to learn anything about politics or history that ties into the interests of the systems and institutions that filter the media allowed as valid citations.
You need to provide actual evidence that the source is untrustworthy
Do they ban the New York Times because they lied the country into every war it’s been in since McKinley?
And you’ve read zero of them.
Sounds like cope
Someone once put together a book titled, “One Hundred Authors Against Einstein.” Einstein dismissed the book with the quip, “Why one hundred? If I were really wrong, they’d only need one.”
Sounds like a colossal reach at best, and pathetic cope at worst.
You understand the colossal differences between multiple independent journalists researching and reporting on the same topic, and a large organized group of pseudointellectuals trying to disprove a single person based on vibes alone, right?
You seem to be very desperately, and pathetically holding onto a form of fallacy of composition:
No, I’m simply calling out a lazy gish gallop. It’s the same in both cases.
How many sources are listed on the Wikipedia page for Christianity? If I accept your logic as valid, it seems I’ll have to convert.
China not empire. Behehehehehhehehehehehhehehhe!
Not only has China been an imperialist regional super power for the majority of its lo g history, but simply ask Taiwan, the Uyghurs, Tibet, Hong Kong, Vietnam or any of the various countries China is practicing neocolonialism in in Africa or Island nations
The people that try to equate fake genocide with real genocide are like the school staff punishing bully and victim alike. They are enabling the abuses. Also it must be deeply insulting to the real victims in gaza.
Imagine dying in a “fake genocide”.
No need to resort to imagination with a real verifiable genocide.
Someone at the NYT gets a fatal papercut
And you’re insanely insulting the the real victims in Xinjiang
https://hrf.org/latest/whats-happening-in-chinas-concentration-camps-qa-with-uyghur-camp-survivors/
Where is the evidence? This article is an interview showing two people telling stories, one of which is selling a book, just like Yeonmi Park.
I can too volunteer for an interview as I tell how Greenland is genociding left handed people. But nobody will ever want to pay me for that.Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Chinese genocide denialistYes, reporter, that is precisely what we’re doing. We’re denying that there was or is a genocide in Xinjiang.
We also deny the white genocide in South Africa, among other bogus accusations.Genocides are real things, so it’s important we reliably identify them with factual evidence, not falling for atrocity propaganda. Incorrectly identifying something as genocide is irresponsible much like denying a case of genocide that is actually taking place.
It’s supposedly been a decade long genocide and yet still nobody has been able to present any evidence beyond uncorroborated and inconsistent testimonials from a single digit number of sources, filtered exclusively through right wing American NGOs.
Meanwhile two years of genocide in Gaza produced an endless stream of audio-visual and forensic evidence so overwhelmingly undeniable that even governments participateing in the genocide have started to admit it.
Seriously.
The time jordanlund came here to make an ass of himself about the “Uyghur genocide”: https://lemmy.ml/post/25050001/16268910
A snippet from my response:
(a) Show me the Uyghur bodies
(b) Show me the serious bodily or mental harm
(c) Show me the conditions calculated to bring about physical destruction in whole or in part
(d) Show me the measures intended to prevent births within the group
In accordance with China’s affirmative action policies towards ethnic minorities, all non-Han ethnic groups were subject to different laws and were usually allowed to have two children in urban areas, and three or four in rural areas.
(e) Show me the forcible transfer of children from one group to another group
All you have are a couple of photos of prisons, which proves nothing, and some garbage testimonies that we’ve debunked a thousand fucking times already.
Both things can be true, China has very tight control of media and they’re officially doing only stuff to terrorists. It’s literally impossible to hide carpet bombing apartment blocks anywhere in the world. Disappearing people into reeducation camps inside isn’t.
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
-Michael Parenti
Both things can be true
Anything can be true if you retreat into your mind palace of pure logic and reasoning
Then you can literally just say whatever the fuck you want
With the numbers that Adrian Zenz claims it’s impossible to hide for that long.
The real victims in Xinjiang were the people who got stabbed & bombed & run over by CIA-funded Salafi jihad terrorists, which fortunately is no longer a thing, much to the CIA’s chagrin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China#Chronology_of_major_events
CIA is not mentioned a single time in the linked wiki article
It will 200% be declassified as a CIA operation in 40 years, but by then new accusations on new enemies of he US will be the new topic no one is able to question. If the US still exists by then lol
No shit the CIA isn’t mentioned. Do you think CIA agents would have been there at the scenes of these terrorist attacks? That’s not how any of this works.
Your argument seams conflicting. On one hand your arguing that there isn’t enough evidence to argue that there is no genocide in china (which I agree with) but your also stating that the US has covered up all the evidence of there involvement with terrorism in china but the cia is still involved. What evidence heavily suggests or proves there involvement?
CIA agents would be, CIA officers wouldn’t
Removed by mod
Its only legal if you just want to steal their natural resources
We’re very butthurt about our failed color revolution, and we’re very concerned that we can’t even manage to make lemonade out of our lemon.
Westerners, every time:
“Our genocides are the good genocides” thinking persisting this long is baffling. Even more disturbing is these people are in power.
Is it though? People hear what they want to hear and believe what they want to believe. No one wants to believe that their privileges are predicated on suffering elsewhere.
Westerners in particularly have always been very “heads in the sand” when it comes to modern history but it’s not surprising. Every nation struggles with the darker aspects of their history.
Correct: https://redsails.org/masses-elites-and-rebels/
Meanwhile I get nothing out of it but insults and the hope that a (very) few will begin their deprogramming journey, as I did soon after 9/11.
Listen, I’m sure there’s a very good reason why we have radically different policies towards Afghani Muslims and Uyghur Muslims, despite the fact they share a border and a litany of cultural practices.
Translation, we are very concerned because someone else is doing the killing, they took ur, joooobsss
So concerned that we bribed foreign terrorists to blow shit up in Xinjiang, forcing China to spend on education and job programs there.
These people, who don’t know shit about fuck, are absolutely sure that they already know everything that needs to be known, and that we don’t know shit about fuck.
And in twenty years they’ll say they knew it all along.
This is some next level racism.
Please elaborate: where’s the racism?
This has been the US playbook since before we were born, and funding, arming, and influencing Salafi jihadists in particular has been going on since at least the 1980s. Previously:
6 December 1993: Anti-Soviet warrior puts his army on the road to peace
FAIR: Forgotten Coverage of Afghan ‘Freedom Fighters’ But the U.S. government and the American press have not always opposed Afghan extremists. During the 1980s, the Mujahiddin guerrilla groups battling Soviet occupation had key features in common with the Taliban. In many ways, the Mujahiddin groups acted as an incubator for the later rise of the Taliban in the 1990s.
Despite CIA denials of any direct Agency support for Bin Laden’s activities, a considerable body of circumstantial evidence suggests the contrary. During the 1980s, Bin Laden’s activities in Afghanistan closely paralleled those of the CIA. Bin Laden held accounts in the Bank for Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), the bank the CIA used to finance its own covert actions. Bin Laden worked especially closely with Hekmatyar—the CIA’s favored Mujahiddin commander. In 1989, the U.S. shipped high-powered sniper rifles to a Mujahiddin faction that included bin Laden, according to a former bin Laden aide.
lol seriously. Most obvious propaganda scam of all time. Libs fell hook line and sinker though.
When lemmy.lib sends its people, they’re not sending their best.
Unfortunately, they are.
No need to censor, you can say A on lemmy.
LAMBO /s
Well, they can’t let another country move into their game.
Valid meme but hopefully it doesn’t minimize the plight of Uyghurs in peoples minds.
Maybe next time read the comments first.
The only plight is the plight of a psyop
Whataboutism, and possibly propaganda. They are both horrible and should not exist. Moral superiority doesn’t matter if people are being systematically murdered.
When dealing with hypocrites, whataboutism is the correct and logically consistent response.
People who complain about whataboutism are 99% hypocrites whose hypocrisy has been pointed out. And they have no rational arguments to defend their view other than deflecting the topic.
Citations Needed podcast:
Whataboutism - The Media’s Favorite Rhetorical Shield Against Criticism of US PolicySince the beginning of what’s generally called ‘RussiaGate’ three years ago, pundits, media outlets, even comedians have all become insta-experts on supposed Russian propaganda techniques. The most cunning of these tricks, we are told, is that of “whataboutism” – a devious Soviet tactic of deflecting criticism by pointing out the accusers’ hypocrisy and inconsistencies. The tu quoque - or, “you, also” - fallacy, but with a unique Slavic flavor of nihilism, used by Trump and leftists alike in an effort to change the subject and focus on the faults of the United States rather than the crimes of Official State Enemies.
But what if “whataboutism” isn’t describing a propaganda technique, but in fact is one itself: a zombie phrase that’s seeped into everyday liberal discourse that – while perhaps useful in the abstract - has manifestly turned any appeal to moral consistency into a cunning Russian psyop. From its origins in the Cold War as a means of deflecting and apologizing for Jim Crow to its braindead contemporary usage as a way of not engaging any criticism of the United States as the supposed arbiter of human rights, the term “whataboutism” has become a term that - 100 percent of the time - is simply used to defend and legitimizing American empire’s moral narratives.
Jesus Christ, “Whataboutism” really does just mean anything other than complete blind belief in the American Nat-sec blob now. “Oh, you don’t believe that people who activity cheer on the genocide of Palestinians are being sincere in their claimed concern for Chinese Muslims? WHATABOUTISM!”
people are being systematically murdered.
I assume you’re referring to Gaza? Because not even the most frothing sinophobes have tried to claim a “systematic murder” of Muslims in China, so if you’re not referring to Gaza, you are literally making up lies whole cloth.
Thanks for the vaguepost 👍
Are we to ignore the obvious evils of US Imperialism?
This meme doesn’t need the word “Muslims”
More likely the meme went over your head.
Substitute “people” for “Muslim”. The point is still valid.
