You've made about 20 comments in this thread, mostly demanding sources and then dismissing those sources with vague ad-hominem and making zero attempt to engage with the substance of any claims.

Since you seem to be very well educated on this topic, can you share your sources? I'm eager to read them.

My understanding of the "Xinjiang issue" is that Xinjiang has a complex history of separatism & violent terrorism (see Urumqi attacks). Beijing implemented a counterterrorism program in the last decade or two, alongside other initiatives such as comprehensive anti-poverty campaigns. Broadly these programs have the same goal of stabilizing the region, its economy, its politics, its people, and overall they have been successful.

Recognizing China as a competitor on an unchecked rise, Washington "pivoted" its foreign policy on China towards antagonism at the beginning of the Obama admin. [1]

This resulted in a number of related attempts to internally destabilize China and loosen the dominance of the Communist Party, ideally leading to a Chinese regime that is submissive to Washington's demands (as occurred recently in India, Ukraine, Brazil and many other historical cases). Otherwise, China could very well surpass the USA as the most powerful nation on Earth.

Among those attempts is a fierce propaganda initiative, which takes any controversial issue related to China and warps it beyond recognition, with the goal of demonizing the Communist Party. Xinjiang, Hong Kong, COVID-19, Taiwan are among the extremely propagandized topics in circulation.

It is virtually impossible to get a fact-based perspective on these issues from mainstream Western media, because that is not their goal. If a mainstream Western outlet attempts to portray China in a neutral/positive, fact-based light, then they risk repercussions. For example, the illuminating PBS documentary entitled "China's War on Poverty" was removed from the airwaves in USA [2] citing "funding" concerns. Any attempt to deviate from official media policy on China could be labeled a "national security risk" and compromise major media corporation's access to funding and other opportunities. Simply not worth the risk (see Parenti's or Chomsky's "propaganda model").

Meanwhile, extremely dubious "reporting" that furthers this foreign policy agenda is amplified to incredible extents. This is how virtually all "China bad" stories end up tracing their origins from a relatively tiny inbred clique of Washington D.C.-based ideologues/think tanks/"human rights" groups, ETIM separatists, Falun Gong cultists, and weapons manufacturers who stand to profit enormously from the "China Threat" theory. Everyone else is directly or indirectly shut out.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_foreign_policy_of_t...

[2] - https://current.org/2020/05/after-pbs-drops-film-pbs-socal-r...

One source? There are multiple sources, including eyewitness accounts, reports from Chinese and Uyghur exiles, western experts, and even satellite imagery:

"The findings of this research contradict Chinese officials' claims that all 'trainees' from so-called vocational training [centers] had 'graduated' by late 2019," report author Nathan Ruser wrote. "Instead, available evidence suggests that many extrajudicial detainees in Xinjiang's vast 're-education' network are now being formally charged and locked up in higher security facilities, including newly built or expanded prisons, or sent to walled factory compounds for coerced [labor] assignments."

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/24/916665128/report-satellite-im...

Okay, so far you've linked Adrian Zenz and Raytheon-mouthpiece ASPI.

Is it really so much to ask for a source that doesn't have an obvious and massive Conflict of Interest in destabilizing China?

> have an obvious and massive Conflict of Interest in destabilizing China?

If only you would apply what you demand of others to your own brazen statements.

Rigorous, fact-based scrutiny is "brazen"? Ridiculous. Is this Reddit, or HN?

Please stay on topic: where are your primary sources that don't have a massive Conflict of Interest? It's okay to admit you don't have any.

He'll post the source of both claims when it's time for the Rapture.