It does show a bias that at this point should be obvious even to you: you are conditioned to believe US prison victims - I’m guessing including those forced into slavery - deserve it, and to believe those imprisoned for all kinds of felonies in China don’t.
Just for due diligence, I looked at your "references":
1) the first two are from the same person, and are unattributed. So I kind of doubt they're even true.
But let's pretend they are: "irrelevant formality" -- going to your probation appointment is pretty important. It's not "nothing." Probation is what they gave you instead of prison. I thought you were in favor of keeping people out of prison.
"Dirty urine" probably means they were using drugs. They were let out of prison on the promise that they'd stay off drugs. You think people should use drugs after pledging not to?
2) your third one: One extremely biased side of a case which I assume has other sides, from an extremely biased source. Try to do better.
as for the "felonious" people in China: what did the Uyghurs do to deserve it?
If you talk to almost any defense attorney (as I've done), they'll freely admit that the vast majority of their clients are guilty.
>as for the "felonious" people in China: what did the Uyghurs do to deserve it?
Terrorism. The difference between Uighurs and the victims of American invasion on Middle East is that Chinese aren’t mass executing them from safe distance like Americans do.
As for "millions of random people for being poor" I think you'll find they were imprisoned for committing crimes, and imprisoned after a jury trial or a plea bargain.
As opposed to, I don't know, publishing a newspaper in Hong Kong. Or being Uyghur.