Also, talking about burden of proof here makes not sense. You provided a source, one can either trust it or not. And the question was if you belived it to be true or not (which I assume you do since you linked it. I haven’t read it).
The burden of proof is on you since you claim: “There is a genocide happening in Xinjiang”. I can’t prove a negative. The proof your type (western propagandized libs) usually provides are western sources, which have been debunked by providing context (in the link I provided)
I’m not Tabooki2, I’m only here for the intresting dicussions and different view points and arguments. What stuck with me was the Tabooki2 asked if you believed what was stated in your link to which you responded with “the burden of proof is on you”.
When a claim is stated, the burden of proof is on that person. My argument here was that you claimed a source, and if proof has to be provided the claimer should have that burden. But that is a strange take since a a source is a proof and one can chose to trust it (or not).
So in the end, I was confused about your comment and tought you asked Tabooki2 to verify your source for you, not the original claim about “the treatment of wighurs”. I appologise for the confusion on my part.
And yours is based on???
Are you saying you don’t believe in the treatment of wighurs
https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/xinjiang
And you believe this is the truth.
The burden of proof is on you. I can only provide context for the claims that have been raised. If you look at the sources they’re all western
The burden of proof should be on you since you claimed https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/xinjiang as a source?
Also, talking about burden of proof here makes not sense. You provided a source, one can either trust it or not. And the question was if you belived it to be true or not (which I assume you do since you linked it. I haven’t read it).
The burden of proof is on you since you claim: “There is a genocide happening in Xinjiang”. I can’t prove a negative. The proof your type (western propagandized libs) usually provides are western sources, which have been debunked by providing context (in the link I provided)
I’m not Tabooki2, I’m only here for the intresting dicussions and different view points and arguments. What stuck with me was the Tabooki2 asked if you believed what was stated in your link to which you responded with “the burden of proof is on you”.
When a claim is stated, the burden of proof is on that person. My argument here was that you claimed a source, and if proof has to be provided the claimer should have that burden. But that is a strange take since a a source is a proof and one can chose to trust it (or not).
So in the end, I was confused about your comment and tought you asked Tabooki2 to verify your source for you, not the original claim about “the treatment of wighurs”. I appologise for the confusion on my part.
Just read the evidence, it won’t bite
I did, and they had to call an ambulance. I don’t think I will be able to walk again. /s
I won’t read the whole thing, I don’t have that time. I read the ingress and (a summary to get a basic understand of the message meant to be convyed).
Now what? I never disputed nor did I affirm anything.
Technically the white papers linked come from China, typically, but these are presented alongside western sources as the dominant viewpoint.
You believe in a genocide with literally no single proof
Are you saying you don’t believe in the white genocide going on in south africa right now?
Are you saying you don’t believe that Hamas beheaded 40 babies?
It’s spelled “Uyghurs”, by the way
Nice moym answer
“Your argument doesn’t count because I have no response to it!”
It’s only a non-answer if you have a sub-canine ability to process patterns