At times, the U.N. report reads like an Orwellian novel. "Almost all interviewees described either injections, pills or both being administered regularly, as well as blood samples being regularly collected in the [vocational education and training center] facilities. Interviewees were consistent in their descriptions of how the administered medicines made them feel drowsy ... None of the interviewees were properly informed about these medical treatments."

They're still calling this shit may?

[–] robinn@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Love the "Orwellian" comparison because it's such a stretch. Just invoking random names without any need for source material so that anything bad becomes "Orwellian" as westerners can only conceptualize wrong through the writing of that anti-Semitic racist crypto-fascist.

[–] Rogue_General@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Some activists are dissatisfied with the report's refusal to use the term "genocide." "In a final insult to Uyghur survivors, the report fails to mention the word genocide a single time," said Rahima Mahmut, a U.K.-based Uyghur campaigner. "You have to wonder what the U.N. is for if it can’t admit what is staring them plainly in the face."

Lots of damning info in the report. Refusing to call this a genocide doesn't change the horrific reality on the ground, just like calling something a "special military operation" doesn't magically make the horrors of war any less real.

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

you're completely right

as always idealogy is the death to truth

[–] naughty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The fact that he published the report just right before he stepped down also explains a lot.

[–] sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

China has that financial world impact so everyone seems to just awkwardly look away.