this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
54 points (66.3% liked)
Memes
53557 readers
563 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Is Amnesty International a fundamentalist right wing organization, captured by Adrian Zenz?
They do cite him five times in their report on the subject, but their report does contain a total of 718 sources.
This is not to say that their report should be treated as uncritically correct, but neither should their claims be dismissed outright because of an anticommunist having been a part of doing research on the subject.
To illustrate - Candace Owens, a well known right-wing agitator and all-round piece of shit frequently speaks out against Israel. This does not, very obviously not, make Israel good.
I didn't read the entire thing but citing Adrian Zenz 5 times is not the only problem, the thing with Adrian Zenz is that other sources also cite him.
For example one the source is buzzfeed(heh) and the first one that I clicked: The police state of the future is already here also has Adrian zenz 5 times.
This thing is a mess.
Yep, this also extends further, other sources will cite the buzzfeed article, etc, like a giant source ouroboros.
As an endearing giant Balkan boy says, "It's a Snake eating its own ass."
And how many of those sources cite Zenz themselves?
Feel free to figure that part out. At a cursory glance, a not-insignificant part was information sourced directly by Amnesty.
I have figured it out: many of them. And no, Amnesty did not produce a significant amount of primary evidence. You're just straight up lying now.
Great! I salute your rigour in the matter. How many of them was it?
There are 430 hits for "Amnesty International interview" as sources.
Who knows, maybe they just interviewed Adrian Zenz for all of those claims. The joke would very much be on me in that case
Maybe you should have some rigour yourself, rather than immediately descending into bad faith time wasting.
And how many interviews does that correspond to? Who was interviewed and what did they actually say? When you strip out all the unsubstantiated Zenz stuff, how much of the story is still left?
From the report: This report is a product of field and remote research carried out between October 2019 and May 2021. The report’s findings and conclusions are based on first-hand testimonies that Amnesty International gathered from former detainees of the internment camps and other people who were present in Xinjiang after 2017, as well as from an analysis of satellite imagery and data. The report also draws on testimonial evidence and confidential government documents gathered and analysed by journalists, scholars, and other human rights organizations. One hundred twenty-eight people were interviewed for this report: 55 former detainees of internment camps in Xinjiang (39 men and 16 women), 15 other witnesses who lived in or visited Xinjiang since 2017, and 68 family members of people from Xinjiang who are currently missing or detained. The majority of the interviewees were Kazakh, a minority were Uyghurs, and a small number were Kyrgyz or Han Chinese.
Wow, that is sneaky: making it sound like the did the analysis themselves, when they actually got it from the right wing military industrial think tank ASPI
???
Yeah?
Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds; applies to institutions too.
https://mronline.org/2021/02/18/role-of-ngos-in-promoting-neo-colonialism/
It's way easier to trick people than to have them admit them they have been tricked. CIA knows that.