What's new

Current Tensions in Xinjiang-China

Do not forget to ask the UN about that since the initials 'WMD' involves much more than functional nuclear warheads. Most people do not realize it but every UN inspection team chiefs have been non-Americans. That is by design: Butler (Aus), Ekeus (Swiss) and Blix (Swiss). If the initials 'WMD' does not include far more than just functional nuclear warheads, then what are the legal justifications for UN inspections in the first place? Why did none of these men spoke up about the flawed reasonings but instead all of them prosecuted the inspection regimes to the fullest? Butler in his book The Greatest Threat recalled how Iraq security forces attempted murders on his teams as they went about their duties.
they werent working on a nuclear weapon, there is absolutely no evidence that they were. in fact the only reactor they had was heavly damage by the Israelis and was never repairs, that reactor couldnt product nuclear weapons anyways(according to the french who sold it to iraq). i agree on the part about overthrowing the Saddam Hussein regime. this is about the only part that i agreed with as he was a terrible dictator

the un ispections are to make sure ur not making WMDs and that the materials are accounted for. anyways the case for war specifically linked iraq to nuclear weapons
Wrong...Here is what the IAEA actually does...

Publications: IAEA Factsheets and FAQs

Under Tools for Nuclear Inspections are important information regarding nuclear technologies and nuclear WEAPONS technologies, distinct categories, that you as a layman should know before making this kind of statement. UN nuclear inspections were to ensure that the current nuclear technologies a country possess does not cross the threshold into nuclear weapons technology capabilities. Iraq does not need to have a functional nuclear reactor in order to have a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Refined uranium can be purchased on the black market. The tools that UNMOVIC and UNSCOM used do not look for clearly obvious items like triggers or shaped charges that are used to compress fissionable materials. Those tools, like Swipe Sampling or Multi-channel analyzers, checks for evidences that certain nuclear technologies are being pushed beyond what is necessary to produce electricity. When Saddam ordered his thugs to harass inspectors, even to the point of endangering the inspectors' lives, there are no doubts as to what Saddam was hiding, which is the CAPABILITY to produce nuclear weapons.

Did we claimed such links exists? No...But in being prudent after a decade of Saddam's hatred towards US and on the Sept. 11, 2001 attack, we would be foolish not to explore such a possbility. Are you telling all here that no other governments would have done the same?
It would be better for YOU if you had actually read the report, not merely the title, for here is what YOUR source read...
"This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda," Bush said. "We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda."
The Bush Administration never claimed that Saddam Hussein had any direct involvement with the attack on US on Sept. 11, 2001. But it is only a prudent response that ANY leader in our shoes would look for such a link.

This has nothing to do with WMD. Frankly, we do not really care if any Iraqi cheered US on. But you might want to read some books by journalists who left The Green Zone and interact with ordinary Iraqis. They cannot afford to be openly glad that the US overthrew Saddam Hussein lest they and their families be killed."
never said it did just mentioning the terrible preplanned and the fiasco that came out of it
You questioned as to why there were no rejoicing among the Iraqis once Saddam Hussein was removed. There are plenty of evidences that ordinary Iraqis were glad, except that out of fear for their lives they could not express it.

Amazon.com: In the Red Zone: A Journey into the Soul of Iraq: Steven Vincent: Books

That book was one of the many journalists who dared to venture beyond the safety of the Green Zone and talked to numerous ordinary Iraqis. I can cite the author from any chapter. As far as we are concern, the silencing of ordinary Iraqis because of sectarian violence says far more about Iraqi society than it is about post invasion occupation by US. Finally, Steven Vincent was killed in Iraq while investigating Iraqi police corruption.

We are obligated to fund any war against any enemy who threatened US. We are not obligated to be charitable."
never said the us was obligated to be charitable, i was repling the mention and the US give aid to the Muslim world i was making the contrast that it is also arming those who the majority of the Muslim world considers an enemy
Are you implying that we gave arms to Israel strictly for the purpose of Palestinians oppression?

again i was only making a contrast, but what does "their oil came from foreign minds" mean?
That the Arabs would not know what to do with the oil.
 
China Govt PR campaign targets country's Muslims

The chorus of smiling Muslims and Han Chinese wore matching yellow polo shirts and appeared on television singing: “We are all part of the same family.” The TV spot Wednesday was the latest effort in a relentless propaganda campaign by the Chinese government to end the worst ethnic rioting in the far western Xinjiang region in decades.

But the message was falling flat on the streets of the dusty jade-trading oasis city of Hotan, where many Muslims are still seething with resentment over the Han, the dominant ethnic group in China. The residents spoke about the long-standing tensions in hushed voices in the Silk Road town’s bustling bazaar, where donkeys pulled carts piled high with melons, and women in colorful head scarves sold wheels of flat bread that looked like pizza crust.

One Muslim shopkeeper picked up a hatchet, raised it over his head and lowered it with one quick stroke before saying, “That’s the best way to deal with the Han Chinese.” The store owner, who only identified himself as Abdul, scoffed at the TV shows featuring members of his own Turkic minority ethnic group, the Uighurs, gushing about how harmonious and happy most of the people are in the sprawling oil-rich Xinjiang region, three times the size of Texas.

“I don’t believe these people,” the businessman said with a whisper, as he scouted the street for plainclothes police. “They get paid to say these things. Ninety percent of the Uighurs don’t believe that stuff.” The media campaign began after July 5 when ethnic rioting killed at least 192 people in Xinjiang’s capital, Urumqi. The violence started when police broke up a Uighur demonstration in the city’s main square, and the protesters scattered throughout the city, smashing windows, torching cars and beating Han Chinese. Two days later, groups of Han Chinese men went on a rampage against the Uighurs.

In the first days after the rioting, state-run media provided extensive reports about Uighurs savagely attacking Han Chinese, while playing down the subsequent Han-led violence. The government was quick to frame the Uighur attacks as an act of terrorism by a tiny minority of violent miscreants, led by the U.S.-based Uighur dissident Rebiya Kadeer.

Kadeer has repeatedly denied the allegations and has condemned the violence. As thousands of security forces restored order in Urumqi, the government’s propaganda campaign kicked in with TV shows, loudspeaker trucks and red banners. Many slogans warned against the “three evil forces” of terrorism, separatism and extremism. The campaign targeted all of Xinjiang, even Hotan on the edge of the Taklamakan desert - a two-hour flight south of Urumqi.

Hotan is predominantly Uighur and has a strong Muslim tradition.
Most of the women wear head scarves and long dresses, often decorated with sequins. The city is also famous for its carpets and its massive town square with a statue of late Communist leader Mao Zedong shaking hands with a Uighur worker.

On Wednesday, the propaganda continued with local TV showing the Uighur and Han singers swaying together as they sang, “We are all part of the same family.” There were also several personal profiles of Uighurs who acted heroically during the riots.

One elderly Uighur couple reportedly gave refuge to a Han teenager, allowing him to spend the night in their apartment until his father could pick him up in the morning. Another Uighur man was an ambulance driver who continued to rescue the wounded, even though he was injured and the windows of his vehicle were smashed. “I’m a Communist Party member,” the man said. “I should be doing more than the average citizen.” One news report showed farmers, some still gripping their shovels, huddled in a field as a communist cadre wearing a skullcap, or doppi, led a study session about the importance of ethnic harmony.



“Our lives are getting better and better each year,” said one of the farmers, whose voice was dubbed into Mandarin Chinese because he spoke the Turkic language of the Uighurs. “We won’t let the three evils ruin everything.” But on the streets of Hotan, it was difficult to find people who would say the same things. Most Uighurs declined to discuss the issue because they feared they might be overheard by informants or plainclothes police who were following an Associated Press reporter.



One vendor, who identified himself as Habib, said he disliked the Han Chinese. “Was the July 5 incident a bad thing? I don’t know,” he said with a grin and a laugh.



A college student, who identified herself as Gulinisa, said she was tuning out the propaganda. “I just can’t stand to watch the TV anymore,” she said. “It makes me so mad.” Many Uighurs believe the real underlying grievances - discrimination and restrictions on their religion - were being ignored and that pent-up anger will explode again. They also complain the propaganda campaign delegitimized their concerns.
The government has long used a two-pronged approach to Xinjiang: push for rapid economic development while crushing any signs of dissent. It has been mostly successful on both fronts. The region’s economy has grown by an average annual rate of 10.3 percent in the past 30 years, the government said. Large-scale uprisings have been relatively few in the past decade or so.



Xiong Kunxin, a professor of ethnic policy at Central Nationalities University in Beijing, said he agreed with the government’s view that the recent rioting was an act of terrorism, partly whipped up by outside forces. But he also believed that internal cultural, religious and political factors played a role.

He said local officials are often insensitive to the Uighurs’ culture. He said he visited a village near Hotan, where the Muslim farmers were told to raise pigs during the Maoist era. The local officials were trying to follow instructions from Mao, who wanted to increase agricultural output, he said. Xiong said the government needs to undertake a comprehensive review of its policy for minorities. “I am optimistic about the future for ethnic minorities in China, but we should not be blind to the severity and complexity of the long-term ethnic minority problems,” he said. “These are problems that affect the entire country..
 
Nothing 'fake' about them. The reasons, multiple, for Iraq was to prevent Iraq from becoming a nuclear weapons state, to search for functional nuclear weapons devices if any exists, and to overthrow the Saddam Hussein regime.

Do not forget to ask the UN about that since the initials 'WMD' involves much more than functional nuclear warheads. Most people do not realize it but every UN inspection team chiefs have been non-Americans. That is by design: Butler (Aus), Ekeus (Swiss) and Blix (Swiss). If the initials 'WMD' does not include far more than just functional nuclear warheads, then what are the legal justifications for UN inspections in the first place? Why did none of these men spoke up about the flawed reasonings but instead all of them prosecuted the inspection regimes to the fullest? Butler in his book The Greatest Threat recalled how Iraq security forces attempted murders on his teams as they went about their duties.

Did we claimed such links exists? No...But in being prudent after a decade of Saddam's hatred towards US and on the Sept. 11, 2001 attack, we would be foolish not to explore such a possbility. Are you telling all here that no other governments would have done the same?

This has nothing to do with WMD. Frankly, we do not really care if any Iraqi cheered US on. But you might want to read some books by journalists who left The Green Zone and interact with ordinary Iraqis. They cannot afford to be openly glad that the US overthrew Saddam Hussein lest they and their families be killed.

We are obligated to fund any war against any enemy who threatened US. We are not obligated to be charitable.

So what? When I was a field service engineer for Santa Clara Plastics many years ago, Intel Israel was one of my install clients. Intel Israel produced the Pentium processor. Care to take a guess at how much in dollars THE WORLD profitted from the Jews just from this product alone? Given this level of accomplishment from this advanced society, why should we not give preference to such an ally? For the Arabs, their oil came from foreign minds and they are so lazy they import foreign workers to do manual labors and to abuse.

Really? Could have fooled me.


There was one more reason and that was to acquire oil fields in Iraq
 
Wrong...Here is what the IAEA actually does...

Publications: IAEA Factsheets and FAQs

Under Tools for Nuclear Inspections are important information regarding nuclear technologies and nuclear WEAPONS technologies, distinct categories, that you as a layman should know before making this kind of statement. UN nuclear inspections were to ensure that the current nuclear technologies a country possess does not cross the threshold into nuclear weapons technology capabilities. Iraq does not need to have a functional nuclear reactor in order to have a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Refined uranium can be purchased on the black market. The tools that UNMOVIC and UNSCOM used do not look for clearly obvious items like triggers or shaped charges that are used to compress fissionable materials. Those tools, like Swipe Sampling or Multi-channel analyzers, checks for evidences that certain nuclear technologies are being pushed beyond what is necessary to produce electricity. When Saddam ordered his thugs to harass inspectors, even to the point of endangering the inspectors' lives, there are no doubts as to what Saddam was hiding, which is the CAPABILITY to produce nuclear weapons.

It would be better for YOU if you had actually read the report, not merely the title, for here is what YOUR source read...The Bush Administration never claimed that Saddam Hussein had any direct involvement with the attack on US on Sept. 11, 2001. But it is only a prudent response that ANY leader in our shoes would look for such a link.

You questioned as to why there were no rejoicing among the Iraqis once Saddam Hussein was removed. There are plenty of evidences that ordinary Iraqis were glad, except that out of fear for their lives they could not express it.

Amazon.com: In the Red Zone: A Journey into the Soul of Iraq: Steven Vincent: Books

That book was one of the many journalists who dared to venture beyond the safety of the Green Zone and talked to numerous ordinary Iraqis. I can cite the author from any chapter. As far as we are concern, the silencing of ordinary Iraqis because of sectarian violence says far more about Iraqi society than it is about post invasion occupation by US. Finally, Steven Vincent was killed in Iraq while investigating Iraqi police corruption.

Are you implying that we gave arms to Israel strictly for the purpose of Palestinians oppression?

That the Arabs would not know what to do with the oil.

1. yea i do know what the IAEA does
About IAEA: IAEA Mission Statement
also on a side note iran and north korea seems fit the bill then for invadion can it happen already?
also india and pakistan is out side of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty... both have nukes
isreal is widely consider to have nukes
little is done about the first 2 and NOTHING is done about the latter 3
so for you to tell me that is the only reason they went it in is at best very difficult to believe.

2. i did read, you said quote "Did we claimed such links exists? No..." in the report the President said "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," and only later did the commssion say "What our staff statement found is there is no credible evidence that we can discover, after a long investigation, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein in any way were part of the attack on the United States."
IT is pretty clear that Bush and Donald Rumsfeld DID at the time claim a link between the 2, also in the second source Donald Rumsfeld says in "September 2002 that the CIA provided "bulletproof" evidence demonstrating "that there are, in fact, al Qaeda in Iraq." turn out not to be so bullet proof after the commission was done with it. So the CASE for war Originally not the research afterwords which i was talking about had Bush and his team saying YES there is a link, he didnt direct say they planned 9/11 (no proof at all) but he rhetoric was iraq=bad, Al Qaeda=attacked us, iraq in bed with Al Qaeda. so where was he heading torwards with that kind of talk .

3. not gonna read a book to post here but thanks.
but... Iraqi Citizen Poll Alarming... last para
my point was the expected welcome for US troop simply didn't appear never did i say why, whether its because of fear or they simply didn't want an invasion to occur is another matter

4.sigh... AGAIN i was making a contrast but on a side note are you gonna deny that those weapon didn't play a part in the oppression of the Palestinians?

5. what should have them done with the oil wealth according to you then?
 
1. yea i do know what the IAEA does
About IAEA: IAEA Mission Statement
also on a side note iran and north korea seems fit the bill then for invadion can it happen already?
also india and pakistan is out side of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty... both have nukes
isreal is widely consider to have nukes
little is done about the first 2 and NOTHING is done about the latter 3
so for you to tell me that is the only reason they went it in is at best very difficult to believe.
Whatever politically motivations that may or may not send the IAEA into Iran or NKR has nothing to do with your false perceptions of what the UN nuclear inspectors did in Iraq and what the initials 'WMD' really mean. To date, the only way to know with any certainty that an indigenous nuclear weapons program is a success is to actually detonate a nuclear explosive device, not necessarily a 'weaponized' device. That is what India and Pakistan did and they did it undercover. Iraq's nuclear weapons program, and no one can legitimately deny that Iraq had such a program, never got to the assembly stage and the UN Security Council was already alarmed and sent in inspectors. Why, if the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads? You and others conveniently forget that three separate teams were headed by non-Americans and all of them prosecuted Iraq to their best ability. Why, if the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads?

If the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads, and since an actually nuclear detonation never happened in Iraq, then the entire UN inspection regime was 'illegal' and violated Iraq's sovereignty from the beginning. Blaming US does no good. But then it really is no fun blaming the UN, correct? But then again, if the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads and since a nuclear detonation is only proof of such a program, by the time Iraq does managed to produce such a test, any inspection regime would be pointless. Saddam could just simply prevent any inspection team from entering the country. Therefore the initials 'WMD' cannot be as simplistic as you would like to believe.

So no...You do not know what the IAEA really does for a living.

2. i did read, you said quote "Did we claimed such links exists? No..." in the report the President said "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," and only later did the commssion say "What our staff statement found is there is no credible evidence that we can discover, after a long investigation, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein in any way were part of the attack on the United States."
IT is pretty clear that Bush and Donald Rumsfeld DID at the time claim a link between the 2, also in the second source Donald Rumsfeld says in "September 2002 that the CIA provided "bulletproof" evidence demonstrating "that there are, in fact, al Qaeda in Iraq." turn out not to be so bullet proof after the commission was done with it. So the CASE for war Originally not the research afterwords which i was talking about had Bush and his team saying YES there is a link, he didnt direct say they planned 9/11 (no proof at all) but he rhetoric was iraq=bad, Al Qaeda=attacked us, iraq in bed with Al Qaeda. so where was he heading torwards with that kind of talk .
The 'link' that everyone would like to condemn US is that we claimed there is a link of Iraq to the attack on US on Sept. 11, 2001. Not the Iraq and al-Qaeda link. The former 'link' we never claimed. The latter we did. And it is not unreasonable that we should place Iraq under suspicion for 9/11. Study the history of terrorism and you will see that groups like the Red Army Faction had East Germany's support. Or that the Viet Minh in North Viet Nam had communist China's support. Or that Hezbollah have Iran sponsorship. Now al-Qaeda had Afghanistan sponsorship. You continued to dodge the issue that EVERYONE ELSE would also have such a suspicion should their country were under attack to the scale of 9/11. This very reasonable suspicion is not another convenient rhetorical club to be held over America's head. Funny how Israel is seen as the root cause of just about every loony conspiracy in the world, from drugs to slavery, but it is inconceivable that Iraq could be linked to al-Qaeda.

3. not gonna read a book to post here but thanks.
but... Iraqi Citizen Poll Alarming... last para
my point was the expected welcome for US troop simply didn't appear never did i say why, whether its because of fear or they simply didn't want an invasion to occur is another matter
Initially, there were rejoicing by Iraqis that Saddam would no longer rule over Iraq. But when the Iraqis civil society became less civil, that became fertile ground for sectarian violence. Saddam used violence of his own to keep this animosity in check. We are not the likes of the Saddam Hussein regime. We expected better from the Iraqis. We were wrong in underestimating the hatred between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites. This supposedly lack of support for US in removing Saddam Hussein is just another rhetorical club you can hold over America's head. It really is meaningless as far as the larger goal is concerned, which is denying an odious regime from nuclear weapons.

4.sigh... AGAIN i was making a contrast but on a side note are you gonna deny that those weapon didn't play a part in the oppression of the Palestinians?
What a loaded phrase '...play a part...'. What does that mean? That we instruct the Israelis to use those arms we sold them against the Palestinians? Why not expand that implication to mean that anyone who support Israel in any way, from economics to diplomatic, also 'play a part in the oppression of the Palestinians'?

5. what should have them done with the oil wealth according to you then?
What I meant was that without foreign minds, the Arabs would not have a clue of what to do with the oil. You objected that we give disproportionate aid to Israel. I am saying that we do so is because the Jews managed to excel themselves and their country in that hostile part of the world far better than what the Arabs have done despite all the oil they own, which they could not become so wealthy had it not been for foreigners. So why should we not give disproportionate aid to such a smart bunch of people?
 
KAZAKHSTAN — The Border Service of Kazakhstan’s National Security Committee reported on July 13 that it had detained 12 Chinese citizens on the border who tried to illegally enter the country. Border Service officials said off the record that they were Uighurs who fled the Xinjiang-Uighur Autonomous Region because of government repression, including the threat of death penalties for those involved in unrest in Urumqi on July 5.

The National Security Committee said seven Chinese citizens were detained on July 11 at the Almalysu border station. They entered Kazakhstan on foot. Five others who rode horses over the border were detained that night at the Sarybukhter station.

This is the largest number of illegal border crossings into Kazakhstan since 1997, when there was mass unrest in the Xinjiang-Uighur region. At that time, almost all of the refugees detained by authorities were returned to China where they were later tried, sentenced to death and executed.

Officials in the Xinjiang-Uighur region said on July 10 that 184 people were killed in the riots in Urumchi. The Xinhua news agency said 137 were Chinese Hans, 46 were Uighurs, and one has not been identified. AFP reported on July 13 that Chinese soldiers shot two other Uigurs involved in protests in Urumchi. More than 1,400 people, mostly Uighurs, were arrested on suspicion of participating in or organising the protests on July 5.

Communist Party City Committee Secretary Li Chi said at a press conference on July 8 that, “We will execute those who have committed especially violent crimes.”

The Uighur Youth Union organised a memorial for those killed in Urumchi on July 10 in the village of Druzhba on the outskirts of Almaty, Kazakhstan’s biggest city. Abdulla Ushurov, chairman of the Almaty Uighur Cultural Centre, told Azattyk radio, “We were not dispersed today, and I consider that support from the government.”\

Uigurs flee to Kazakhstan from China - Central Asia News
 
A militant leader whose group has links to al Qaeda denounced Chinese treatment of Uyghur Muslims in western China and threatened to seek "revenge."
The leader of the Turkistan Islamic Party, in a video that appeared on Islamic Web sites, blames the Chinese for "genocide" against people in East Turkistan -- what some Uyghurs calls the region of Xinjiang province in western China where they live.
Earlier this month, Uyghurs demonstrated in Urumqi, the Xinjiang capital, to protest the killing of two Uyghur migrant workers at a toy factory in the southeast Chinese province of Guangdong in late June after a brawl between Uyghur and Han people.

The Urumqi protest turned violent, and fighting ensued in that city and elsewhere, with Uyghurs and Han attacking each other.

The remarks were delivered by Seyfullah, commander of the Turkistan Islamic Party and dated July 8. They came after the violence erupted between Uyghur Muslims and Han Chinese.

The speaker urged his people to "kill the Chinese Communists where you find them, take them and besiege them and ambush them wherever you can."

"Let them know that these Muslim people have men who will seek their revenge and they are about to do that very soon, before the horses of God will reach you, God willing, so be prepared for that moment because we are too getting prepared."

The U.S. State Department said the group has taken credit for violent incidents in the past.

Militant issues threats over Uyghur unrest - CNN.com
 
^^^^ I think ALL countries should speak out and demand an end to the violence inflicted on the Uighurs by the Chinese government.

sticking to the topic

I agree with you - China needs to act responsibly in it Western province
And Pakistan needs to stop looking for handouts from China - sorry have to say that this is no simple internal matter.

Freedom of religion and human rights are important - mis reporting the true extent of whats going on - and us relying on that is simple not good enough
And exactly how much use is the Friend China if he beats his wife with a stick - are we as friends just gonna look the other way cos he so big and lets us hang out in his gang?
Like in real life if Pakistan's is a true friend to china and vice versa we have to have the guts to say to our friend you are doing something wrong stop it or we will take steps!
Pakistan Helped the Afgan civilians in the 1980's - this is no less as important -
For God sake at least say something.
 
A militant leader whose group has links to al Qaeda denounced Chinese treatment of Uyghur Muslims in western China and threatened to seek "revenge."
The leader of the Turkistan Islamic Party, in a video that appeared on Islamic Web sites, blames the Chinese for "genocide" against people in East Turkistan -- what some Uyghurs calls the region of Xinjiang province in western China where they live.
Earlier this month, Uyghurs demonstrated in Urumqi, the Xinjiang capital, to protest the killing of two Uyghur migrant workers at a toy factory in the southeast Chinese province of Guangdong in late June after a brawl between Uyghur and Han people.

The Urumqi protest turned violent, and fighting ensued in that city and elsewhere, with Uyghurs and Han attacking each other.

The remarks were delivered by Seyfullah, commander of the Turkistan Islamic Party and dated July 8. They came after the violence erupted between Uyghur Muslims and Han Chinese.

The speaker urged his people to "kill the Chinese Communists where you find them, take them and besiege them and ambush them wherever you can."

"Let them know that these Muslim people have men who will seek their revenge and they are about to do that very soon, before the horses of God will reach you, God willing, so be prepared for that moment because we are too getting prepared."

The U.S. State Department said the group has taken credit for violent incidents in the past.

Militant issues threats over Uyghur unrest - CNN.com

don't believe hype by extremists to always take the centre stage they demean the whole people with their empty rhetoric they are powerless and egotistical - taking credit
next the'll take credit for the eclipse!!
 
Muslim countries should condemn this on strongest possible terms

---------- Post added at 10:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 AM ----------

China is atheist and will not understand Islam
 
Muslim countries should condemn this on strongest possible terms

---------- Post added at 10:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 AM ----------

China is atheist and will not understand Islam

A friend came back from china and was amazed at the amount of new masjid in china.....








These chinese must really be anti muslim if there going about building masjids
 
Whatever politically motivations that may or may not send the IAEA into Iran or NKR has nothing to do with your false perceptions of what the UN nuclear inspectors did in Iraq and what the initials 'WMD' really mean. To date, the only way to know with any certainty that an indigenous nuclear weapons program is a success is to actually detonate a nuclear explosive device, not necessarily a 'weaponized' device. That is what India and Pakistan did and they did it undercover. Iraq's nuclear weapons program, and no one can legitimately deny that Iraq had such a program, never got to the assembly stage and the UN Security Council was already alarmed and sent in inspectors. Why, if the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads? You and others conveniently forget that three separate teams were headed by non-Americans and all of them prosecuted Iraq to their best ability. Why, if the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads?
appears that whatever you think i know is completely different form what i actually know, i understant that WMD's cover nuclear, biological, chemical, Radiological anything that can kill large amounts of people . however WMD do indeed mean a weaponized device hence the name WEAPons of mass destruction, anything not weaponizd is a concern, and can but steps lead toward but not a weapon.


and please tell me what my percetions are about IAEA in Iraq since you apparently know me better than i do. my original post stated that yea Iraq had a nuclear plant and yes the IAEA was there for inspection to ensure that WMD ie the nuclear type will not result from the plant said to be used for power generation(politcal reason and such i did not dicuss). and i made no mentioned of what they thought of the place just that there were no proof of weaponization going on and the the french who provided the plant and had engineers at the site guaranteed that the plant cannot produce nuclear fuel needed for making a bomb(this was in late 70's-early 80's) after the plant was bombed it was never rebuilt and was dicovered during the occupation that it was indeed non-operational. my point was there was no substance to the presidents claims at the time just prior to invasion. and for some reason you went on about what the iaea does, and what wmds means, we werent discussing about those things

If the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads, and since an actually nuclear detonation never happened in Iraq, then the entire UN inspection regime was 'illegal' and violated Iraq's sovereignty from the beginning. Blaming US does no good. But then it really is no fun blaming the UN, correct? But then again, if the initials 'WMD' is to mean only functional nuclear warheads and since a nuclear detonation is only proof of such a program, by the time Iraq does managed to produce such a test, any inspection regime would be pointless. Saddam could just simply prevent any inspection team from entering the country. Therefore the initials 'WMD' cannot be as simplistic as you would like to believe.

So no...You do not know what the IAEA really does for a living.


again i never said anything about iaea approving or dissaproving the invasion however what i did say was that the invasion was never a UN approved one and try actually reading my posts where did i claim that WMD's ONLY mean live nuclear warheads? but since you dont seem to be doing that carefully ill just tell you here I NEVER cLAIM THAT WMD's ARE ONLY FUCTIONAL NUCLEAR WARHEADS, however bush claim specifically about nukes which was what i was talking about, many can consider the gas weapons Iraq had to be a minor WMD but that was not that issue raised by the president. also dont tell me what i know and don't know, also about the IAEA, was i wrong to say that north korea is being watched by the IAEA? i do indeed understand what the IAEA does, thank you. their works consist of safeguarding and verification, safety and security, science and technology, meaning that it is it's job to promote safely using nuclear technology, verify materials and such so that they do not end up in the wrong hands, and promoting the advancement of peaceful application of nuclear energy. they are after all the INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY. inspections are merely part of the job that is require for the safeguarding, verification and security part. and was i wrong to say that the US and NATO has done little to verify that isreal has no nuclear warhead though many experts say they do? was i wrong to say that north korea which had detonated nuclear weapon twice did not see invasion as a consequence even though Iraq which if it had a weapons program was much farther away from obtain any types of nuclear warheads and was invaded?

The 'link' that everyone would like to condemn US is that we claimed there is a link of Iraq to the attack on US on Sept. 11, 2001. Not the Iraq and al-Qaeda link. The former 'link' we never claimed. The latter we did. And it is not unreasonable that we should place Iraq under suspicion for 9/11. Study the history of terrorism and you will see that groups like the Red Army Faction had East Germany's support. Or that the Viet Minh in North Viet Nam had communist China's support. Or that Hezbollah have Iran sponsorship. Now al-Qaeda had Afghanistan sponsorship. You continued to dodge the issue that EVERYONE ELSE would also have such a suspicion should their country were under attack to the scale of 9/11. This very reasonable suspicion is not another convenient rhetorical club to be held over America's head. Funny how Israel is seen as the root cause of just about every loony conspiracy in the world, from drugs to slavery, but it is inconceivable that Iraq could be linked to al-Qaeda.


i made no mention of iraq 9/11 links, but as you have said it was a suspicion which i agree was warranted in this case. but since when does suspicion instantly mean invasion there was no proof and there still isnt that the former government of iraq supported or cooperated in anyway with the terrorist for the 9/11 attack. if all nation attack on suspicion alone then no place on earth would be peaceful . and personally i do not believe very much in conspiracies. suspicions are not wrong to make but that the reason for war, without proof is

Initially, there were rejoicing by Iraqis that Saddam would no longer rule over Iraq. But when the Iraqis civil society became less civil, that became fertile ground for sectarian violence. Saddam used violence of his own to keep this animosity in check. We are not the likes of the Saddam Hussein regime. We expected better from the Iraqis. We were wrong in underestimating the hatred between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites. This supposedly lack of support for US in removing Saddam Hussein is just another rhetorical club you can hold over America's head. It really is meaningless as far as the larger goal is concerned, which is denying an odious regime from nuclear weapons.

you dont seem to be understanding what im saying i was saying the initial planning was pretty bad in fact if you read my post i said quote "never said it did just mentioning the terrible preplanned and the fiasco that came out of it" but since YOU kept going on about it i simply answered you

What a loaded phrase '...play a part...'. What does that mean? That we instruct the Israelis to use those arms we sold them against the Palestinians? Why not expand that implication to mean that anyone who support Israel in any way, from economics to diplomatic, also 'play a part in the oppression of the Palestinians'?

you said "Are you implying that we gave arms to Israel strictly for the purpose of Palestinians oppression?" what you got out of my data for us aids im not sure but i had clearly said and i quote "i was repling the mention and the US give aid to the Muslim world i was making the contrast that it is also arming those who the majority of the Muslim world considers an enemy" now then are you gonna claim that isreal is friendly with many Muslim nations? they are clearly not but the post before mine stated that the us give lots to the muslim worlds and i replied that it is not much compared to others LIKE Israel even though i made this clear you then asked me if i implied they are solely for the persecution of Palestinians, a claim i never once made. so i asked if the persecution was indeed there then is the aggressor 's largest aid provider, arms provider, tech provider not at all responsible for the persecution (and i place emphasis on the aid and arms part)? and to make this point clear in the US accessory to murder is still a crime

What I meant was that without foreign minds, the Arabs would not have a clue of what to do with the oil. You objected that we give disproportionate aid to Israel. I am saying that we do so is because the Jews managed to excel themselves and their country in that hostile part of the world far better than what the Arabs have done despite all the oil they own, which they could not become so wealthy had it not been for foreigners. So why should we not give disproportionate aid to such a smart bunch of people?

i never objected in my posts and i had already said this, it was a contrast but of course you dont read my posts through. but now that you brought this up i do indeed object to sending so much of our tax money to Israel, it is disproportionally large for a single country. as you had said the Israelis had done well, made money from tech and other industries, what i say is that i have absolutely no problems with our trade with them what i do have a problem with is the amount of aid ie: free money(even if stings are attached) that we give them but if as you claim they are great and smart and successful then why do they require aid at all if by ur logic the most innovative and rich country should recieve the largest amount of aid then the USA should lead the world in receiving, but by my logic rich and innovative country would infact created the largest trade networks and make the money on their own(ie: not free money) and infact give out aid to those who Need it (food water, shelter). and before you said it, yes i know they are an ally, governments decision not mine, however it is still large even by standards of alliance aid. also i am not gonna argue with you about the arabs, not what we're talking about here
 

Exiled Uighur leader visits Japan, angering Beijing


The exiled leader of China's Uighur minority arrived in Japan for a visit that has angered Beijing, which accuses her of masterminding recent ethnic violence in the country's remote northwest.

Rebiya Kadeer, 62, the US-based head of the World Uighur Congress, was expected to use her visit to call for support for the mainly Muslim minority, following deadly clashes this month in the Xinjiang region.

The mother of 11 and grandmother, wearing a traditional Uighur hat, was greeted at Tokyo's Narita airport by a handful of her Japanese supporters waving flags and a sign that read "Free the Uighurs."

China's foreign ministry yesterday expressed "strong dissatisfaction" about Japan's decision to allow entry to Kadeer, who spent around six years in a Chinese prison before being released under US pressure in 2005.

"Ignoring China's repeated and solemn representations, the Japanese Government persisted in allowing Rebiya (Kadeer) to engage in anti-China separatist activities," foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.

Exiled Uighur leader visits Japan, angering Beijing
 
Uighurs in Kashgar see their culture and heritage as under attack by the Chinese government. In the latest move, authorities have started to demolish Kashgar's old town — an atmospheric, mud-brick maze of courtyard homes, winding cobblestone streets plied by donkey carts, and dozens of centuries-old mosques.

Tearing Down Old Kashgar: A Blow to the Uighurs - TIME



A friend came back from china and was amazed at the amount of new masjid in china.....

Perhaps rather than just a few pictures you could say where the pictures were taken and when the Masjid were built i find it a little hard to belive a goverment that arrests people for praying spends a fortune building mosques in one place while it buldozes dozens else where.
 
Tearing Down Old Kashgar: A Blow to the Uighurs - TIME





Perhaps rather than just a few pictures you could say where the pictures were taken and when the Masjid were built i find it a little hard to belive a goverment that arrests people for praying spends a fortune building mosques in one place while it buldozes dozens else where.

Perhaps you can get out of New Zealand and give it back to Asians/Maoris and stop killing them. :) :sniper:

Netizen blamed for Urumqi riot by spreading fake video


A netizen, who was believed to be a key member of the World Uygur Congress (WUC), was blamed by Chinese authorities for fanning ethnic confrontation that caused the deadly July 5 riot in Urumqi by spreading online a fake video about "a Uygur girl beaten to death".

The video, about a girl in red being beaten to death by a group of people using stones, was originally broadcast by the CNN in May, 2007, as something happened in the Mosul city of Iraq on April 7, 2007.

However, on July 3, 2009, the netizen, named "Mukadaisi", spread it on an Internet group of Uygurs on qq.com and said it was a Uygur girl beaten to death by the Han people.

Authorities said their investigations found that the man was a key member of the WUC in Germany and his fake video fanned ethnic confrontation and "added fuel to the fire".

In the Internet group, the man used extreme words to encourage Uygur people to "fight back with violence" and "repay blood with blood".

(Xinhua News Agency July 29, 2009)
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom