How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda(bbc.co.uk)
bbc.co.uk
How a fake network pushes pro-China propaganda
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-58062630
152 comments
I find it amusing how the ex president of USA is banned from social media, while Chinese propaganda is left mostly untouched.
At this point I’m starting to warm to the Chinese system. At least the Han aren’t made to be guilty of the original sin of being White.
I don’t know what to call the US system we have now, but can’t say I’m a fan.
I don’t know what to call the US system we have now, but can’t say I’m a fan.
Yes, very excited to become a Chinese communist vassal state and follow the north korean model.
FYI for those skeptical about pro-China propaganda online:
Chinese channel with fake videos about how there is not really a genocide going on in Xinjiang: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5hykSm2o7oRpOyFrMYjeBg
This girl is actually responding to a video exposing these ridiculous videos, trying to make the argument that the criticism is actually anti-China propaganda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYUmBDJPX6k
Random white monkey guy trying to make the same argument: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvEdUm4yIzw
Keep in mind that in mainland China and especially Xinjiang, YouTube is inaccessible.
Laowhy86 video on this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWo2-Y1n1x0
Chinese channel with fake videos about how there is not really a genocide going on in Xinjiang: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5hykSm2o7oRpOyFrMYjeBg
This girl is actually responding to a video exposing these ridiculous videos, trying to make the argument that the criticism is actually anti-China propaganda: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYUmBDJPX6k
Random white monkey guy trying to make the same argument: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvEdUm4yIzw
Keep in mind that in mainland China and especially Xinjiang, YouTube is inaccessible.
Laowhy86 video on this topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWo2-Y1n1x0
laowhy is an excellent channel.
Used to be while he was actually in China.
Apparently he had some trouble with the authorities, falling on the wrong side of some rules that apply to journalists, and left the country in a hurry.
After that it seems that he found that he could get more clicks/money with sensationalists anti-China content. Not nearly as good as his prior content.
Apparently he had some trouble with the authorities, falling on the wrong side of some rules that apply to journalists, and left the country in a hurry.
After that it seems that he found that he could get more clicks/money with sensationalists anti-China content. Not nearly as good as his prior content.
Not really, he and serpentza has gone in the opposite direction I.e. grifting.
Which is sad cuz their experience is one of a kind.
Which is sad cuz their experience is one of a kind.
Grifting how? I havent seen them do much beyond the regular shilling for nordvpn and asking for patreon donations that come as standard for most youtubers who have bills to pay.
Their rhetoric about China has often time been very loaded deliberately or out of ignorance.
Compared to how they were during their stay in China especially serpentza saying how he "gets" why talking about politics is so important while very obviously barely cares about it (zero interest in his current country's politicsfor instance).
Or their weird "we are the true journalists" shtick like with covid or agood example being their claim of being the first to report illegal fishing by China when news outlets reported on it a week before.
Compared to how they were during their stay in China especially serpentza saying how he "gets" why talking about politics is so important while very obviously barely cares about it (zero interest in his current country's politicsfor instance).
Or their weird "we are the true journalists" shtick like with covid or agood example being their claim of being the first to report illegal fishing by China when news outlets reported on it a week before.
I can kind of sympathize with their sudden hyperpoliticization given what happened to them.
I sincerely hope they dont start talking about america. What would be the point?
I sincerely hope they dont start talking about america. What would be the point?
I am not exactly sure why every time he comes up on HN those who praise him are downvoted - I don't know about the situation with him and serpentza - I have only seen his videos.
Probably mainland Chinese immigrants. They're often notoriously snippy about hate they see as being directed at China and those two really hate the CCP.
I wonder how it stacks up to the fake network pushing anti-China propaganda.
Funny if you think about how Chinese government crackdown anti-China content in China's intranet. They used similar technics and analysis, plus raiding people's home to in order to take them down.
How The Epoch Times Created a Giant Influence Machine
"Since 2016, the Falun Gong-backed newspaper has used aggressive Facebook tactics and right-wing misinformation to create an anti-China, pro-Trump media empire."
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/technology/epoch-times-in...
"Since 2016, the Falun Gong-backed newspaper has used aggressive Facebook tactics and right-wing misinformation to create an anti-China, pro-Trump media empire."
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/technology/epoch-times-in...
Hilarious this is coming from NYT. Who just got caught trying to hide evidence that they have been pushing Chinese propaganda for years lol.
Exactly. The rivals of the current status quo are bad and cannot be trusted!
We only have to trust the people who pillaged Iraq under false pretences.
We only have to trust the people who pillaged Iraq under false pretences.
You don't have to trust anyone fully. In fact it's imperative to try to apply critical thinking to information that you encounter. (Both to counteract one's own and the other party's biases.)
That said, one group has a history of shady (and overt) shit (from internment of Japanese Americans during WWII to MK Ultra to all the horrible things that have been unearthed during the years via FOIA, whistleblowers, investigative journalism, the culture of respecting the protection of journalists' sources) and the other group is currently operating concentration camps, is actively hostile toward investigative journalists, actively subverts any independent power structure (see the brutal suppression of Hong Kong politics).
Of course it's important to put things into perspective. Both Room 641A and the Great Firewall are bad things. Both countries (and the groups that run these regions) have a lot of things to improve on. But the simple both sides whataboutism does not help here at all.
That said, one group has a history of shady (and overt) shit (from internment of Japanese Americans during WWII to MK Ultra to all the horrible things that have been unearthed during the years via FOIA, whistleblowers, investigative journalism, the culture of respecting the protection of journalists' sources) and the other group is currently operating concentration camps, is actively hostile toward investigative journalists, actively subverts any independent power structure (see the brutal suppression of Hong Kong politics).
Of course it's important to put things into perspective. Both Room 641A and the Great Firewall are bad things. Both countries (and the groups that run these regions) have a lot of things to improve on. But the simple both sides whataboutism does not help here at all.
It helps plenty, because it highlights the fact that one party is slandering another. Even though they're both equally bad. You have a finite amount of worrying in you, so shifting your focus to something else helps them get away with more themselves. To my mind this means that when such news comes from a party that is just a pot calling a kettle black, that's quite close to evidence of a guilty conscience.
Umm. Usually it's not slander/libel. It's easy to find shit to throw at each other. That's why it unhelpful, because it doesn't help giving people a model with real predictive power.
I find using the term “concentration camp” for something that resembles a youth correctional facility somewhat dishonest.
In a paranoid totalitarian ethno-state I don't think there's any real correction for minorities, only oppression. And the facilities are used accordingly.
I’m not talking about Chinese youth correctional facilities - no idea if they exist, I’d guess they do - but about the western ones. You get there for a couple of months, against your will, and you’ll be taught things like language, how to interact with the rest of society, and how you can fight stuff religious fundamentalists are forcing you to do. State propaganda calling that a concentration camp looks rather silly.
It's about 1/10th in scale to that...
Interesting, didnt know so many here are allergic to negative mentions of china, reacting with bbc flaming. Like cmon its just a dictatorship, accept it.
> allergic to negative mentions of china
Not exactly. Some of us would rather first and primarily focus on the disinfo artists who are destroying Western democracies than point the finger at a country that doesn't claim to be free and fair and open.
Pot, meet kettle: from the Wikipedia entry on Britain's GCHQ JTRIG unit: 'The scope of the JTRIG's mission includes using "dirty tricks" to "destroy, deny, degrade [and] disrupt" enemies by "discrediting" them, planting misinformation and shutting down their communications.'
And: 'In 2011, the JTRIG conducted a denial-of-service attack (DoS) on the activist network Anonymous.[1] Other JTRIG targets have included the government of Iran and the Taliban in Afghanistan.[2]
Campaigns operated by JTRIG have broadly fallen into two categories; cyber attacks and propaganda efforts.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Threat_Research_Intellig...
Edit: See also https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/how-to-spot-and-defe...
Not exactly. Some of us would rather first and primarily focus on the disinfo artists who are destroying Western democracies than point the finger at a country that doesn't claim to be free and fair and open.
Pot, meet kettle: from the Wikipedia entry on Britain's GCHQ JTRIG unit: 'The scope of the JTRIG's mission includes using "dirty tricks" to "destroy, deny, degrade [and] disrupt" enemies by "discrediting" them, planting misinformation and shutting down their communications.'
And: 'In 2011, the JTRIG conducted a denial-of-service attack (DoS) on the activist network Anonymous.[1] Other JTRIG targets have included the government of Iran and the Taliban in Afghanistan.[2]
Campaigns operated by JTRIG have broadly fallen into two categories; cyber attacks and propaganda efforts.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Threat_Research_Intellig...
Edit: See also https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/how-to-spot-and-defe...
Is there any evidence for the scale of such operations being conducted domestically?
> Is there any evidence
A core part of any domestic intelligence service is having the means to discredit and publically ridicule anyone who has or claims to have such evidence. Asking for it in this context is noble, but should be viewed as fundamentally futile. Either you will not have it, or the people providing it will most likely be crackpots to your perception.
A core part of any domestic intelligence service is having the means to discredit and publically ridicule anyone who has or claims to have such evidence. Asking for it in this context is noble, but should be viewed as fundamentally futile. Either you will not have it, or the people providing it will most likely be crackpots to your perception.
In this case the GCHQ isn't a domestic intelligence agency. In addition there usually is some slight evidence available for claims like these which would help support its existence. For example before the Snowden disclosures there were several other disclosures that demonstrated that mass surveillance was ongoing, for example with ECHELON and Room 641A.
> In 2011, the JTRIG conducted a denial-of-service attack (DoS) on the activist network Anonymous.[1] Other JTRIG targets have included the government of Iran and the Taliban in Afghanistan.[2]
what exactly is the problem with this?
what exactly is the problem with this?
Might be more of an allergy to unbridled hypocrisy than simply negative mentions of China.
Like hearing oil companies complain about the damage to the environment being wreaked by coal companies.
Or hearing Chinese state media complain about American human rights abuses (which is an example in this article cited by the BBC).
Like hearing oil companies complain about the damage to the environment being wreaked by coal companies.
Or hearing Chinese state media complain about American human rights abuses (which is an example in this article cited by the BBC).
coldtea(1)
Meanwhile the BBC pushes anti-China propaganda in plain sight.
This is likely how all Governments do it, including the UK with the help of their own 77th Brigade. Obviously the BBC won't be making any comparisons.
https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/formations-divisions-brig...
https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/formations-divisions-brig...
Steve Bannon etc as victims of fake news??????
Could it be that they are also active on Hacker News?
Somewhat, I don't think its a direct target but some people tend to parrot what they see on social media so indirectly it ends up here.
I suspect there are several PR firms active on HN. Some topics were suddenly very popular out of nowhere and criticising it was getting you a wall of downvote. Then it stopped.
More than any other tech company, negative things about Apple will get you quickly down voted into oblivion. Hard to know if its just rabid fanboys, or PR firms. Unfortunately, HN isn't interested in naming and shaming companies caught astroturfing and they don't like us to speculate. Its too bad because I would consider that information a huge kindness to humanity.
As someone who used to work in a reputation management firm, this is considered industry practice regarding public engagement.
Chances are keywords of interest are monitored on common social media, after applying sentiment analysis, an analyst specialising in Public engagement is assigned to engage with the public in order to shape the narrative.
Chances are keywords of interest are monitored on common social media, after applying sentiment analysis, an analyst specialising in Public engagement is assigned to engage with the public in order to shape the narrative.
For what it's worth, this is as far as I've seen it exactly what happens within every company (and as you say, every hired third party).
If you or anyone else think you see this happening on HN, please send links to [email protected], as the site guidelines ask. If we find actual evidence of it we'll crack down hard. What we don't allow is idle speculation about it in comments, because experience has shown that that's nearly always just fantasy.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This is cognitive bias. People who feel the opposite way about $BigCo see exactly the opposite pattern, and post isomorphic complaints to yours.
"Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email [email protected] and we'll look at the data."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
I've personally spent countless hours over many years poring over the data on this and I can tell you that the overwhelming majority of HN comments like yours are based on nothing more than imagination. It's extremely easy to imagine that you're seeing things and make up stories around what you think you're seeing. These stories almost never amount to anything. Even to say "almost never" is misleading—it's vanishingly rare. (Unless you count hapless voting rings from clueless startups. Those are common but they're naive abuses and not what people mean when they go on about sinister astroturfing.)
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
I've personally spent countless hours over many years poring over the data on this and I can tell you that the overwhelming majority of HN comments like yours are based on nothing more than imagination. It's extremely easy to imagine that you're seeing things and make up stories around what you think you're seeing. These stories almost never amount to anything. Even to say "almost never" is misleading—it's vanishingly rare. (Unless you count hapless voting rings from clueless startups. Those are common but they're naive abuses and not what people mean when they go on about sinister astroturfing.)
This comment was based not on imagination but an article on BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-58062630
which reports on "A sprawling network of more than 350 fake social media profiles..: HN is social media right so I don't think it's very far-fetched they would try to spread their messages also here. Here? It couldn't happen here, I hear you say.
> This comment was based not on imagination but an article on BBC
Assuming that a BBC article is describing HN is already imagination. If you think it applies to HN, I want to see specific links. Tip: look at the account histories first. Mostly it takes just a few seconds to see that $suspected-spy has been posting to HN for years about everything from Hyperloop to Rust to PyPy. I think the odds that such a user was planted as a Chinese agent in 2015 or whatever are similar to Russell's teacup orbiting the moon.
> It couldn't happen here, I hear you say
No, I'm saying that when commenters have posted such insinuations here, close study of the data has consistently shown them to be nothing more than cheap internet pontification, a.k.a. bullshit. The more flamboyant and grandiose the claims, the more fantasy-driven they prove to be. People come up with this stuff purely because they want to believe it, and will literally read anything into anything.
The problem is that such insinuations are not cost-free. They add noise, poison community, and in several cases have turned into mobs that have hounded people off HN. Hence the rule that you can't do it unless you have actual evidence. If anyone comes up with actual evidence—literally any whatsoever—we'll take it seriously and look closely into it. But someone else having an opposing view on $hot-topic doesn't count as evidence.
I know I'm sounding "flamboyant and grandiose" myself, which is not optimal, but it would take a robot not to lose patience after looking at as much of this data that I have. The truth, as far as I've been able to determine it after tons of effort, is that you guys really don't know what you're talking about. Sorry for being blunt. Here's a longer explanation from when I was in a better mood: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725.
Assuming that a BBC article is describing HN is already imagination. If you think it applies to HN, I want to see specific links. Tip: look at the account histories first. Mostly it takes just a few seconds to see that $suspected-spy has been posting to HN for years about everything from Hyperloop to Rust to PyPy. I think the odds that such a user was planted as a Chinese agent in 2015 or whatever are similar to Russell's teacup orbiting the moon.
> It couldn't happen here, I hear you say
No, I'm saying that when commenters have posted such insinuations here, close study of the data has consistently shown them to be nothing more than cheap internet pontification, a.k.a. bullshit. The more flamboyant and grandiose the claims, the more fantasy-driven they prove to be. People come up with this stuff purely because they want to believe it, and will literally read anything into anything.
The problem is that such insinuations are not cost-free. They add noise, poison community, and in several cases have turned into mobs that have hounded people off HN. Hence the rule that you can't do it unless you have actual evidence. If anyone comes up with actual evidence—literally any whatsoever—we'll take it seriously and look closely into it. But someone else having an opposing view on $hot-topic doesn't count as evidence.
I know I'm sounding "flamboyant and grandiose" myself, which is not optimal, but it would take a robot not to lose patience after looking at as much of this data that I have. The truth, as far as I've been able to determine it after tons of effort, is that you guys really don't know what you're talking about. Sorry for being blunt. Here's a longer explanation from when I was in a better mood: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725.
All the evidence says no: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725
Read ALL comments in this thread and you will get the correct answer... :-)
Now the question is are most of the comments on this thread examples or are they the social conditioned response of Chinese citizens abroad showing the flag.
It can get pretty creepy how aggressive students - for example - get supporting their government. That flash mob behavior isn't as effective as the Russian's conflict stoking troll farms, but man does it drown out conversation, and god help you if you run into it in person.
It can get pretty creepy how aggressive students - for example - get supporting their government. That flash mob behavior isn't as effective as the Russian's conflict stoking troll farms, but man does it drown out conversation, and god help you if you run into it in person.
Yeah I remember I had a colleague, a Chinese student, very nice person, we were going along nicely, until one day I mentioned the Dalai Lama, and he exploded. It seems like the brainwashing was very successful - he believed that the DL was a monster, killer, some demonic being aiming at the destruction of China and so on. I couldn't believe my ears. This person seemed otherwise completely normal.
I don't think it's a Chinese-only thing.
I had a coworker from Spain, he was very "balanced" and reasonable on all things. One day, during the 2017 Catalan independence protests and referendum, we (non-Spanish people) tried to understand the different arguments and the current situation, and someone mentioned that IF (we didn't say it was the case, we said IF) one day the overwhelming majority of Catalonia wants to leave Spain for whatever reason, an option for "amicable" split would be preferable over a revolution.
He completely snapped, said all kinds of very mean things about Catalonia, that I don't want to repeat here, but my point is that it's very difficult to view these things from a different perspective and do not get emotional if all your life you heard only one perspective.
I noticed similar tendencies from people from every country that are in the news and are somewhat controversial (Israel, Palestine, Pakistan, US, Poland, Ireland just to name a few).
I had a coworker from Spain, he was very "balanced" and reasonable on all things. One day, during the 2017 Catalan independence protests and referendum, we (non-Spanish people) tried to understand the different arguments and the current situation, and someone mentioned that IF (we didn't say it was the case, we said IF) one day the overwhelming majority of Catalonia wants to leave Spain for whatever reason, an option for "amicable" split would be preferable over a revolution.
He completely snapped, said all kinds of very mean things about Catalonia, that I don't want to repeat here, but my point is that it's very difficult to view these things from a different perspective and do not get emotional if all your life you heard only one perspective.
I noticed similar tendencies from people from every country that are in the news and are somewhat controversial (Israel, Palestine, Pakistan, US, Poland, Ireland just to name a few).
As someone who lives in Barcelona, it was a very strange time. The propaganda machine went into full swing, and they made the rest of the country hate everyone here. We heard rumours of higher up military generals suggesting that they send tanks to Barcelona to scare the people etc.
It still feels like it was just governments using it to split the people against each other instead of focusing on several political scandals that where going on.
It still feels like it was just governments using it to split the people against each other instead of focusing on several political scandals that where going on.
I think the thing is, you associate yourself with a national indentity, almost every one does. And when you do, you treat attacks or seemingly-attacks on that nation as attacks on yourself, hence the anger.
Propaganda alone would never explain it, I think we tend to treat the problems of our nation as problems of our own. It is normal to get defensive on these things.
Propaganda alone would never explain it, I think we tend to treat the problems of our nation as problems of our own. It is normal to get defensive on these things.
Nations engage in a lot of propaganda themselves to ensure their citizens feel that way, things like the pledge of allegiance every day in school, the way history is taught, the anthems before football games, national news and what is presented by journalists and politicians, etc.
I assume people would identify with more local groups, if left to their own devices. National politics usually seems to revolve around bigger is better, even if they have to force people to remain.
I assume people would identify with more local groups, if left to their own devices. National politics usually seems to revolve around bigger is better, even if they have to force people to remain.
Twelve people were killed because of cartoons
I'm pretty sure this generation of Dalai Lama didn't kill anyone, he never had that kind of power, but it should be noted his previous generations have, and consistently did. It should be noted that DL was not just a religious leader, but also had the status of a king, with more power than your typical medieval dictator, who just treat people like trash, and kill, and torture, and rape whoever they want, which really shouldn't be surprising to anyone.
Although, the Catholic Church have also killed gigantic amount of people anyway, modern day priests seems to continue the habit of raping little boys regardless. Those organizations still exist, and will keep existing, so whatever, that's just this world. I'm forever a non-believer for instituionalized religion for those reasons alone.
(Also note DL never did reform Tibet to democratic society on his own, so regardless, I don't think he should be the symbol of Tibet, or as a leader. Afterall, the theme for these last centuries was that ALL despots must be abolished unless they made democratic reforms.)
Although, the Catholic Church have also killed gigantic amount of people anyway, modern day priests seems to continue the habit of raping little boys regardless. Those organizations still exist, and will keep existing, so whatever, that's just this world. I'm forever a non-believer for instituionalized religion for those reasons alone.
(Also note DL never did reform Tibet to democratic society on his own, so regardless, I don't think he should be the symbol of Tibet, or as a leader. Afterall, the theme for these last centuries was that ALL despots must be abolished unless they made democratic reforms.)
I agree with all but the last point: the current DL never had a chance to change anything in Tibet as he was very young when the Chinese invaded, but he was bent on to doing this in spite of opposition[0]:
> In May 1990, as a result of His Holiness’s reforms the Tibetan administration in exile was fully democratized. The Tibetan Cabinet (Kashag), which until then had been appointed by His Holiness, was dissolved along with the Tenth Assembly of the Tibetan People's Deputies (the Tibetan parliament in exile). In the same year, exiled Tibetans living in India and more than 33 other countries elected 46 members to an expanded Eleventh Tibetan Assembly on a one-person one-vote basis. That Assembly then elected the members of a new cabinet.
[0] https://www.dalailama.com/the-dalai-lama/biography-and-daily...
> In May 1990, as a result of His Holiness’s reforms the Tibetan administration in exile was fully democratized. The Tibetan Cabinet (Kashag), which until then had been appointed by His Holiness, was dissolved along with the Tenth Assembly of the Tibetan People's Deputies (the Tibetan parliament in exile). In the same year, exiled Tibetans living in India and more than 33 other countries elected 46 members to an expanded Eleventh Tibetan Assembly on a one-person one-vote basis. That Assembly then elected the members of a new cabinet.
[0] https://www.dalailama.com/the-dalai-lama/biography-and-daily...
Well, monarch are not just who they are, they are also what they represent. However, I agree the current DL likely never had the chance, but I don't support that he should be granted the chance. I suspect he will reform even as an adult, had he remained a monarch. All in all, he carries the lineage then he bears and sins and glories associated with it alike.
I feel that we all people educated in the West might not be able to fully understand the mentality of the whole society at question and the difficulty of the reform from the top. The efforts of the Bhutanese king are a good example. "Yes, we will become a democracy but only to fulfill your will, Your Majesty", "Yes, we will go to vote but only to make you happy, YM". They really think their king is excellent (I'm not saying he's not) and that whoever will be chosen will be inferior (we don't know, but we can't rule it out). Someone changing the very fabric of the society will always meet with an enormous amount of opposition, and will often fail.
If they were honest about being upset by past atrocities by past rulers of Tibet, then surely he’d be upset when mentioning Mao. I’m certain Mao in absolute numbers was responsible for vastly more deaths of his own people.
It's a wonder why Mao always get mentioned in those sort of things. Mao is a problematic leader by today's standard, but would be a saint in pre-modern history. What happened was horrible, but those aren't atrocities. Mao was certain he was doing the right thing, which is exactly the issue at that time. It's radically different from the nobilities who do things to others because they think they are born superior, Mao was obviously not that.
> DL was a monster, killer, some demonic being aiming at the destruction of China
Or he is a democratically elected peaceful spiritual leader (like a reincarnated pope) from an independent theocratic serfdom kingdom?
Or he is a democratically elected peaceful spiritual leader (like a reincarnated pope) from an independent theocratic serfdom kingdom?
This is the general tone that China justifies the invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, we liberated them, now everybody is happy.
There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great liberator - only because of superior military power.
Many witnesses of what happened in the 50s are till alive, some managed to escape to India. When you read their testimony[0] all arguments of China become bleak.
[0] https://www.amazon.com/Autobiography-Tibetan-Monk-Palden-Gya...
There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great liberator - only because of superior military power.
Many witnesses of what happened in the 50s are till alive, some managed to escape to India. When you read their testimony[0] all arguments of China become bleak.
[0] https://www.amazon.com/Autobiography-Tibetan-Monk-Palden-Gya...
> There had been many bad things going on in Tibet, but it does not mean you can just invade the country, destroy all forms of religion, put people in prisons, starve and kill your victims, grab the resources, make the life of Tibetans miserable, and pretend you are the great liberator - only because of superior military power.
Is it just me or the sentence also makes perfect sense if Tibet is replaced by Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya?
Is it just me or the sentence also makes perfect sense if Tibet is replaced by Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya?
I agree, there is very little difference between these. The invasion on Afghanistan was one of the most senseless, impulsive actions on the part of the USA: Bush desperately wanted tho show a strong reaction to 9/11 but was too stupid to do something that would have some actual positive impact and in the end made the situation worse. Also, he hasn't managed to kill Bin Laden, Obama did.
Iraq seems even worse. They admitted they invaded it on false grounds and the supposed WMDs haven't been found to this day. And it was just the beginning, because the invasion created an even greater evil, ISIS.
As for Libya, it's true that many people hated Kadafi and he was a cruel man (just like Hussein, Bin Laden and the rest of the crew), but the final result for ordinary people was a disaster. So whenever someone proposes "let's kill a dictator and al problems will disappear" for me such a person is a lunatic.
Iraq seems even worse. They admitted they invaded it on false grounds and the supposed WMDs haven't been found to this day. And it was just the beginning, because the invasion created an even greater evil, ISIS.
As for Libya, it's true that many people hated Kadafi and he was a cruel man (just like Hussein, Bin Laden and the rest of the crew), but the final result for ordinary people was a disaster. So whenever someone proposes "let's kill a dictator and al problems will disappear" for me such a person is a lunatic.
ISIS, 9/11 and the invasions were planned
you don't think people in high places are just some kids getting angry and acting on it, do you?
the dictators when you try to reasonate anything they're doing, you can see clearly they're working for someone, and you guess who might this one be.
because of course, destroying a whole country, violating human rights etc, isn't going to guarantee you a good long life for you and your family unless you have someone stronge enough to make you trust him tell you otherwise.
most dictators are against what the population believe and are enslaving people more or less. it's just the modern unseen slavery of the west.
By the way, USA made Al Qaueda and they were called the freedom fighters or something like that inb4.
What changed? the USSR ended and now they found another use for them, to stereotype the muslims and cause distress and push them off their religion to the new world-wide religion, humanity, ps. sugar-coated atheism.
the dictators when you try to reasonate anything they're doing, you can see clearly they're working for someone, and you guess who might this one be.
because of course, destroying a whole country, violating human rights etc, isn't going to guarantee you a good long life for you and your family unless you have someone stronge enough to make you trust him tell you otherwise.
most dictators are against what the population believe and are enslaving people more or less. it's just the modern unseen slavery of the west.
By the way, USA made Al Qaueda and they were called the freedom fighters or something like that inb4.
What changed? the USSR ended and now they found another use for them, to stereotype the muslims and cause distress and push them off their religion to the new world-wide religion, humanity, ps. sugar-coated atheism.
This is a topic for a completely different discussion. In short, 9/11 happened much earlier than 9/11, in the sense that there were decades of anger and resentment on the part of - generally speaking - Middle-East Muslim community at the actions of Israel and the USA. When 9/11 happened some people were actually happy. I know this because I spoke to them personally. It's hard do believe but it shows how large the divide had become: you needed this kind of horror to make it a mainstream topic.
So what the American president is doing? Instead of finally starting to work hard on American-ME relations, he decided to invade another country. A country that had been unsuccessfully invaded in the past and has the worst natural conditions for invasion, with Taliban with bazookas hiding in caves and ordinary people living in villages, and the two freely mixing. What could possibly go wrong?
I'm not saying that peace in the ME is easy, it even became a kind of meme that it's impossible, but there is no hope if Israel doesn't consider some concessions. And year after year, decade after decade it becomes worse. Any American interventions, any casualty makes it much worse. But it seems we're to stupid to work on the causes and can only deal with the results. It just makes me sad as ordinary people can't do anything about it.
So what the American president is doing? Instead of finally starting to work hard on American-ME relations, he decided to invade another country. A country that had been unsuccessfully invaded in the past and has the worst natural conditions for invasion, with Taliban with bazookas hiding in caves and ordinary people living in villages, and the two freely mixing. What could possibly go wrong?
I'm not saying that peace in the ME is easy, it even became a kind of meme that it's impossible, but there is no hope if Israel doesn't consider some concessions. And year after year, decade after decade it becomes worse. Any American interventions, any casualty makes it much worse. But it seems we're to stupid to work on the causes and can only deal with the results. It just makes me sad as ordinary people can't do anything about it.
It makes perfect sense if op want a Balkanized Tibet
I think China would argue that it wasn't really an invasion, because Tibet had for a couple of hundred years kowtowed to the emperor, and was therefore really part of the empire.
Note that if you read the testimonies of those who escaped to India, it's hardly surprising that they are uniformly critical of the occupation. A more balanced history shows that prior to the occupation, peasants were generally the property of the landowner; a peasant needed the permission of his "owner" to get married, and that would not be granted if the intended was from another estate; and that many lives were objectively improved by the occupation.
I'm by no means a supporter of the occupation/invasion; it's been racist and kleptocratic since the beginning. But let's be clear: pre-occupation Tibet was no Shangri-La.
Note that if you read the testimonies of those who escaped to India, it's hardly surprising that they are uniformly critical of the occupation. A more balanced history shows that prior to the occupation, peasants were generally the property of the landowner; a peasant needed the permission of his "owner" to get married, and that would not be granted if the intended was from another estate; and that many lives were objectively improved by the occupation.
I'm by no means a supporter of the occupation/invasion; it's been racist and kleptocratic since the beginning. But let's be clear: pre-occupation Tibet was no Shangri-La.
I cannot disagree. It was similar in Central Europe, for example in the Kingdom of Hungary the feudal system ended in 1931, some hundreds years later than in France.
On the other hand, I know several people whose lives are made worse by the occupation. There was a period of some limited freedom a few decades ago, now it seems worse. As a Westerner you can't just visit Tibet and go where you want. And when you go there, you can notice that apart from official and public situations, Tibetans will avoid any contact with you. Many of them are simply afraid of accusations of spying or collaborating with the enemy etc. They try to keep a low profile and be obedient to stay away from prison. They cannot possess objects like a picture of the DL and so on. So even though from a material point of view their lives might look better, when you talk to them, there is no happiness inside.
On the other hand, I know several people whose lives are made worse by the occupation. There was a period of some limited freedom a few decades ago, now it seems worse. As a Westerner you can't just visit Tibet and go where you want. And when you go there, you can notice that apart from official and public situations, Tibetans will avoid any contact with you. Many of them are simply afraid of accusations of spying or collaborating with the enemy etc. They try to keep a low profile and be obedient to stay away from prison. They cannot possess objects like a picture of the DL and so on. So even though from a material point of view their lives might look better, when you talk to them, there is no happiness inside.
You are just regretting the fact Tibet is no longer a large anthropology zoo that westerners can freely visit and observe, like the romance recorded by Ernst Schäfer or James Hilton in the 30s. It's mystic, primitive and slavery culture destroyed by CCP while locals are adopting welfare and education and modernizing to yet another indifferentiable boring place like an average Chinese town.
It was never a zoo. The lamas weren't keen on letting visitors in, and the Chinese continue this tradition, although they will kindly let you in a few known places if you agree to be under constant surveillance.
Chinas invasion brought with it all those horrors:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution
You would need lots of modernization and economic growth to offset this.
Plus its hard to say where Tibet would be without chinese occupation.
Yup, and let's be even more clear about this.
This Chinese tone that "justifies" the invasion creates these kinds of side discussions, which serves the same purpose as Whataboutism, even if that isn't the intent of the speaker/writer.
A thought experiment: Assume that Tibet was actually some kind of horrific feudal empire that did whatever horrible things to its people you can imagine.
Even if that is some kind of justification for an invasion, e.g., the people had pleaded with the CCP to get freed - which they did not, it is CCP's actions ever since the invasion that betray's their intent.
If the goal had been to free the Tibetean people, they would have removed the leadership, which was done in days, and then freed the people. But CCP has done the opposite, consistently holding more tightly to the land, eliminating the Tibetian's culture and freedom, and claiming ownership.
It is as if the US had not only invaded Iraq to remove the dictator who annexed adjacent countries, but then claimed the land and oil as it's own, and also started systematically removing all mosques, moving US families into each town, and imposing American culture on Iraq.
China are illegitimate occupiers, and wrongfully claim stolen Tibetan territory as their own. Full Stop.
This Chinese tone that "justifies" the invasion creates these kinds of side discussions, which serves the same purpose as Whataboutism, even if that isn't the intent of the speaker/writer.
A thought experiment: Assume that Tibet was actually some kind of horrific feudal empire that did whatever horrible things to its people you can imagine.
Even if that is some kind of justification for an invasion, e.g., the people had pleaded with the CCP to get freed - which they did not, it is CCP's actions ever since the invasion that betray's their intent.
If the goal had been to free the Tibetean people, they would have removed the leadership, which was done in days, and then freed the people. But CCP has done the opposite, consistently holding more tightly to the land, eliminating the Tibetian's culture and freedom, and claiming ownership.
It is as if the US had not only invaded Iraq to remove the dictator who annexed adjacent countries, but then claimed the land and oil as it's own, and also started systematically removing all mosques, moving US families into each town, and imposing American culture on Iraq.
China are illegitimate occupiers, and wrongfully claim stolen Tibetan territory as their own. Full Stop.
It's a bit more complicated than that. Tibet was internationally recognized as part of China - not as an independent country. After the Chinese revolution of 1911, China fell apart, and Tibet became de facto independent. But that occurred throughout China, as various warlords took control of different parts of the country. China was in turmoil (the Japanese invasion and near-constant civil war) until 1949. Once the country had a strong central government, that government immediately tried to reassert its authority over the territories that were de jure part of China, including Tibet. You can think of this what you want, but it's not at all similar to invading a country in the other side of the world.
Right, not at all similar - China is not only invading, it is claiming it for itself, purposefully erasing Tibetan culture and religion, and claiming the resources for itself, all against the will of the Tibetean people.
The fact that there was some prior recognition is quite irrelevant. Should the EU nations claim their pre 1911 boundaries against the will of the people living there, by force?
Should the Lenape Native Americans whose predecessors sold Manhattan to the Dutch be able to reclaim it by force? How about the Dutch?
Your argument is sophistry, and nothing but inane justification for an authoritarian and expansionist regime.
Moreover while that regime repeatedly proclaims that no one should interfere in the internal affairs of other nations, it feels completely free to interfere and claim other nations, including, Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong (yes it was leased and returned, but they are already violating the terms of the return).
This is not a regime to defend.
The fact that there was some prior recognition is quite irrelevant. Should the EU nations claim their pre 1911 boundaries against the will of the people living there, by force?
Should the Lenape Native Americans whose predecessors sold Manhattan to the Dutch be able to reclaim it by force? How about the Dutch?
Your argument is sophistry, and nothing but inane justification for an authoritarian and expansionist regime.
Moreover while that regime repeatedly proclaims that no one should interfere in the internal affairs of other nations, it feels completely free to interfere and claim other nations, including, Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong (yes it was leased and returned, but they are already violating the terms of the return).
This is not a regime to defend.
This is the general tone that Lamas justifies the Buddhism invasion: Tibet was feudal, people were slaves, Lamas liberated them, now everybody is happy. One particular Lama even assassinated Langdarma, the last King of Tibet.
In fact as of today the 14th DL actively suppress native Tibetan religions like Dorje Shugden.
If you think Lamas were peaceful monks, check out how many "independent states" they have invaded in the 20th century
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48wkBskmYnE
> some managed to escape to India
More like India invaded those independent "princely states"
In fact as of today the 14th DL actively suppress native Tibetan religions like Dorje Shugden.
If you think Lamas were peaceful monks, check out how many "independent states" they have invaded in the 20th century
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48wkBskmYnE
> some managed to escape to India
More like India invaded those independent "princely states"
I don't think that any lama claims what you say. The assassination if Langdarma took place 1200 years ago.
But all this is not the point - it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion. The Chinese never address things like "you invaded a country, you were killing people, putting them in prison, starving to death". Instead, they turn to arguments like: "But lamas were very bad, they were abusing ordinary people".
Of course the past system was bad and abusive. The problem is, the current system is so much worse that ordinary people prefer to self-immolate than to live in it.
But all this is not the point - it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion. The Chinese never address things like "you invaded a country, you were killing people, putting them in prison, starving to death". Instead, they turn to arguments like: "But lamas were very bad, they were abusing ordinary people".
Of course the past system was bad and abusive. The problem is, the current system is so much worse that ordinary people prefer to self-immolate than to live in it.
I don't think the current system is so much worse. It's just not possible. DL is an actual dictator in a world without news coverage, just imagine.
That's also not just the CCP's argument, it's the same argument for most modern day states that's desposed of monarch.
Self-immolate is an act of religious fervert, it would be out of the ordinary to reason with. Generally, I think most people simply don't kill themselves like that, unless they believe there is something to be gained after death. The same reason for suicidal bombing. For people who are generally not happy or find live unbearable, they wouldn't kill themselves using those kinds of excruciating and painful methods, unless of course, they were trying to achieve something, which are most likely religious or it just doesn't make sense.
That's also not just the CCP's argument, it's the same argument for most modern day states that's desposed of monarch.
Self-immolate is an act of religious fervert, it would be out of the ordinary to reason with. Generally, I think most people simply don't kill themselves like that, unless they believe there is something to be gained after death. The same reason for suicidal bombing. For people who are generally not happy or find live unbearable, they wouldn't kill themselves using those kinds of excruciating and painful methods, unless of course, they were trying to achieve something, which are most likely religious or it just doesn't make sense.
> But all this is not the point
Why? I thought you were arguing with your colleague whether DL is good or bad?
> it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion
So yeah, Tibet was in bad shape when DL reigned. That's the whole point.
> so much worse that ordinary people prefer to self-immolate than to live in it
If you look up news closely, you'd see that only privileged Lamas self-immolate.
Why? I thought you were arguing with your colleague whether DL is good or bad?
> it's obvious that there were many bad things going on before the Chinese invasion
So yeah, Tibet was in bad shape when DL reigned. That's the whole point.
> so much worse that ordinary people prefer to self-immolate than to live in it
If you look up news closely, you'd see that only privileged Lamas self-immolate.
"Privileged lamas"... Seems like they are not so privileged after all.
https://freetibet.org/about/self-immolation-protests
https://freetibet.org/about/self-immolation-protests
just search their name you'd see they were monks.
Tibetan/Mongoila monks were a grand scheme invented by the Chinese to sterialize tribes with their no-marriable policy, for a local family only 1 or 2 boys are allowed to breed and labor, rest of siblings were all destined to be Lamas in remote places. Tibetan and Mongolia's working & total population dropped dramatically after the school of Gelug took power and no longer pose a threat to east & central asia.
The title of Dalai & Panchen were invented and installed directly by the Qing rulers (Jampalyang) to manipulate the Gelug hierarchy. 14th DL is a guy gone rogue and sold Tibet to East India Company.
Tibetan/Mongoila monks were a grand scheme invented by the Chinese to sterialize tribes with their no-marriable policy, for a local family only 1 or 2 boys are allowed to breed and labor, rest of siblings were all destined to be Lamas in remote places. Tibetan and Mongolia's working & total population dropped dramatically after the school of Gelug took power and no longer pose a threat to east & central asia.
The title of Dalai & Panchen were invented and installed directly by the Qing rulers (Jampalyang) to manipulate the Gelug hierarchy. 14th DL is a guy gone rogue and sold Tibet to East India Company.
>brainwashing was very successful
TBH this is as much your brainwashing as your colleagues. 14th DL was part of CIA Tibetan program. You mentioned serf/feudalism, he was old enough to perpetuate before exile. Current Dalai Lama was literally a killer who tried to undermine PRC sovereignty. This is like when mainstream America suddenly found out Christopher Columbus was kind of a monster, because previously it was simply not taught / common knowledge.
Just like your claim in another comment that China said they would nuke Japan. Some random PRC netizen posted it and got popular, it's not an official CCP foreign policy position as misreported from many western media. Don't get me wrong, Chinese nationalists would LOVE to nuke Japan if they came to the defense of Taiwan, which to PRC = if a previous invader who committed horrible atrocities decides to meddle militarily in the ongoing Chinese civil war. It's completely expected nationalism based on historic grievances. CCP isn't fanning anti-Japanese flames this hard, frequently they have to rein nationalists in, especially when it comes to Japanese drama. BTW you'll find South Korean comments about nuking Japan as well. Except western propaganda doesn't deliberately conflate that with SK foreign policy.
>This person seemed otherwise completely normal.
This gets said so frequently, yet never with any self reflection. Maybe the Chinese colleague (and friend / girlfriend / wife), typically very educated, who likely speaks both languages, has lived in both cultures, and has dual perspectives, is not the one that experienced very successful brainwashing. Growing up in a society with free press doesn't automatically make one more informed. Almost always, it's not the Chinese person with information deficit. They're exposed to both sides of the story.
TBH this is as much your brainwashing as your colleagues. 14th DL was part of CIA Tibetan program. You mentioned serf/feudalism, he was old enough to perpetuate before exile. Current Dalai Lama was literally a killer who tried to undermine PRC sovereignty. This is like when mainstream America suddenly found out Christopher Columbus was kind of a monster, because previously it was simply not taught / common knowledge.
Just like your claim in another comment that China said they would nuke Japan. Some random PRC netizen posted it and got popular, it's not an official CCP foreign policy position as misreported from many western media. Don't get me wrong, Chinese nationalists would LOVE to nuke Japan if they came to the defense of Taiwan, which to PRC = if a previous invader who committed horrible atrocities decides to meddle militarily in the ongoing Chinese civil war. It's completely expected nationalism based on historic grievances. CCP isn't fanning anti-Japanese flames this hard, frequently they have to rein nationalists in, especially when it comes to Japanese drama. BTW you'll find South Korean comments about nuking Japan as well. Except western propaganda doesn't deliberately conflate that with SK foreign policy.
>This person seemed otherwise completely normal.
This gets said so frequently, yet never with any self reflection. Maybe the Chinese colleague (and friend / girlfriend / wife), typically very educated, who likely speaks both languages, has lived in both cultures, and has dual perspectives, is not the one that experienced very successful brainwashing. Growing up in a society with free press doesn't automatically make one more informed. Almost always, it's not the Chinese person with information deficit. They're exposed to both sides of the story.
This, this, is what I was talking about. Aggressive blind defense of the party and dismissal of criticisms and almost certainly not a propaganda account. It reminds me of the reaction of my more rabidly religious relations :D
> agressive blind defense
You're confusing nuanced, informed, counter-argument compared to your agressive blind accusation. This is what PRC diaspora in the west has to deal with, brainwashed people who are signficantly less informed than them who accuse everyone of being shill / propaganda accounts. It's every bit as dogmatic as rabid religious folk, with even less self awareness.
You're confusing nuanced, informed, counter-argument compared to your agressive blind accusation. This is what PRC diaspora in the west has to deal with, brainwashed people who are signficantly less informed than them who accuse everyone of being shill / propaganda accounts. It's every bit as dogmatic as rabid religious folk, with even less self awareness.
Your comment is self-contradictory.
I recall the online version of our student newspaper once wrote an article with some fairly generic criticisms of China's government having a very interesting comments section that week
(the guy who wrote the article went on to be a journalist for the FT)
Then I recall reading forums full of British supposedly mature adults reacting with similarly preposterous rage to a non-story about an Oxford college taking down a picture of the Queen, and I'm absolutely certain the Royal Family weren't paying them...
Pretty sure that China's actual paid propagandists are doing the difficult job of changing the focus of the attack when evidence of government shortcomings surfaces on Chinese message boards, not hanging around on niche English language forums which categorise politics as "off topic" in case California-based computer programmers' views of China aren't universally positive (or for that matter bombarding student publications of with the sort of outraged anonymous comments that look... actually pretty similar in tone to the letters to the editor by named undergraduates)
Then I recall reading forums full of British supposedly mature adults reacting with similarly preposterous rage to a non-story about an Oxford college taking down a picture of the Queen, and I'm absolutely certain the Royal Family weren't paying them...
Pretty sure that China's actual paid propagandists are doing the difficult job of changing the focus of the attack when evidence of government shortcomings surfaces on Chinese message boards, not hanging around on niche English language forums which categorise politics as "off topic" in case California-based computer programmers' views of China aren't universally positive (or for that matter bombarding student publications of with the sort of outraged anonymous comments that look... actually pretty similar in tone to the letters to the editor by named undergraduates)
Which comments specifically?
I've never seen anything that looks like wumao on HN. On reddit theyre usually pretty obvious.
I've never seen anything that looks like wumao on HN. On reddit theyre usually pretty obvious.
You know, I was going to go and link the comments that made me post that in the first place but they seem to have been eaten or buried while I was asleep (or seemed worse because it was 3 in the morning)
But! For less extreme examples, check out the discussion of the occupation of Tibet that spontaneously generated under my first comment and:
> Meanwhile the BBC pushes anti-China propaganda in plain sight.
> I wonder how it stacks up to the fake network pushing anti-China propaganda.
> Brought to you by the 5 eyes propaganda machine: Bullshit Broadcasting Corporation
> I find using the term “concentration camp” for something that resembles a youth correctional facility somewhat dishonest.
But! For less extreme examples, check out the discussion of the occupation of Tibet that spontaneously generated under my first comment and:
> Meanwhile the BBC pushes anti-China propaganda in plain sight.
> I wonder how it stacks up to the fake network pushing anti-China propaganda.
> Brought to you by the 5 eyes propaganda machine: Bullshit Broadcasting Corporation
> I find using the term “concentration camp” for something that resembles a youth correctional facility somewhat dishonest.
Why should Westerners care about a "sprawling network of more than 350 fake social media profiles" when our own governments have been lying to us and spewing propaganda about almost everything of importance for DECADES? See my comment about GCHQ's JTRIG unit elsewhere on this page.
Western propaganda campaigns are often a prelude to war. And they usually deploy several orders of magnitude more assets than "350 fake social media profiles." Remember WMDs in Iraq, Libya and Gaddafi, babies in incubators? I have no interest in unquestioningly accepting the BBC's version of what's important. If we let our psycho warmongers start another war based on lies, millions will die on both sides.
See Thucydides Trap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides_Trap
Western propaganda campaigns are often a prelude to war. And they usually deploy several orders of magnitude more assets than "350 fake social media profiles." Remember WMDs in Iraq, Libya and Gaddafi, babies in incubators? I have no interest in unquestioningly accepting the BBC's version of what's important. If we let our psycho warmongers start another war based on lies, millions will die on both sides.
See Thucydides Trap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thucydides_Trap
Such an excellent example of whataboutism! You have no interest in accepting any BBC version of events because you prefer comfortable confirmation bias from blogs and the twitterati?
Its quite peculiar you only post on topics that are about China.
Since you seem like a peace loving person then what do you think about what is happening in Xinjiang?
Also to debunk your obvious whataboutism.
First of wmd in Iraq has been confirmed before the Iraq War even happen.
Baby in incubator was something kuwait said to the us not the other way around.
Lastly never heard about wmd in Libya since they scrap it in 2003.
Since you seem like a peace loving person then what do you think about what is happening in Xinjiang?
Also to debunk your obvious whataboutism.
First of wmd in Iraq has been confirmed before the Iraq War even happen.
Baby in incubator was something kuwait said to the us not the other way around.
Lastly never heard about wmd in Libya since they scrap it in 2003.
> wmd in Iraq has been confirmed
They never existed and it would frankly be an enormous stretch of the imagination to think intelligence services are so earth-shatteringly incompetent that they would not be aware of this fact.
They never existed and it would frankly be an enormous stretch of the imagination to think intelligence services are so earth-shatteringly incompetent that they would not be aware of this fact.
Not coming down on either side of this, bit Iraq's use of chemical weapons against their Kurdish population [0] is well documented.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_chemical_weapons_program
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_chemical_weapons_program
Yes, only Americans seem to have any degree of agency or capability of having unbiased discussions online.
I don't see comments that heavily support us gov and try to change topics like the chinese one do. So your sarcasm is false and let's not change the topic here again.
God no, we've got our own bizarre horrorshows.
But I don't think I've ever seen that political reflex as strongly in Americans nearly as much. It's like for some topics (Tibet, Human Rights, Tienanmen, etc) they're stuck at the height of the Freedom Fries / Dixie Chicks rage machine after 9/11.
But I don't think I've ever seen that political reflex as strongly in Americans nearly as much. It's like for some topics (Tibet, Human Rights, Tienanmen, etc) they're stuck at the height of the Freedom Fries / Dixie Chicks rage machine after 9/11.
You broke the site guidelines badly here. Please don't do that on HN again. We have this rule for good, extremely well-supported-by-data reasons:
"Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email [email protected] and we'll look at the data."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
You can read many years' worth of past explanations if you want to understand more:
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
"Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email [email protected] and we'll look at the data."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
You can read many years' worth of past explanations if you want to understand more:
https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
windoze123(1)
dirtyid(1)
howtofly(1)
samdung(2)
a0-prw(1)
"Yellow Peril" is trendy.