> the Uighur people in reeducation camps are the islamic fighters returning from Afghanistan
How many fighters do you think there were?
> he says he just reads official Chinese press statements, but he "reads between the lines". Encouraging.
Yes, it's a great technique. For example, the government didn't publish arrest statistics for 2017, but did publish them for 2013-2017 in aggregate, so by reading between the lines and subtracting the numbers of previous years, one can infer the magnitude of the wave of mass arrests in 2017 in Xinjiang (227882 people, 21% of all arrests in China) https://web.archive.org/web/20180725042225/https://www.nchrd...
(Incidentally, the group of researchers here doesn't include Zenz. Lots of people can do this kind of analysis of public information. But if you want more of the same, reading Zenz' articles and the sources he cites is a good start.)
Reading between the lines of official Chinese government statements is a great technique for finding secret dirt (like a genocide) on the Chinese government. Do you stand behind this statement you just made?
> How many fighters do you think there were?
I too read Zens stating there are millions in reeducation camps. You're using circular logic.
> the group of researchers here doesn't include Zenz
What group of researchers? If there's so many, you shouldn't have trouble naming someone besides Zens.
> Do you stand behind this statement you just made?
I stand behind the statements I made and went to the trouble to provide you with an easily checked example, but it seems you ignored it completely? Did you overlook the archive.org link?
> I too read Zens stating there are millions in reeducation camps.
I was asking you how many fighters you think there were. If you believe that everyone arrested was a fighter, and also Zenz' claim that millions were arrested, that implies you think there were millions of fighters. On the other hand, it doesn't seem like you believe him, so you probably think the number of fighters is less. So how many were there?
But my point was that you don't have to believe Zenz, you can just skim his writing for links to citations and read those instead.
> You're using circular logic.
Where is the cycle in my reasoning?
> What group of researchers? If there's so many, you shouldn't have trouble naming someone besides Zens.
If you read the article I linked, you wouldn't have trouble finding the list of names at the end: Renee Xia, Victor Clemens, Frances Eve
How many fighters do you think there were?
> he says he just reads official Chinese press statements, but he "reads between the lines". Encouraging.
Yes, it's a great technique. For example, the government didn't publish arrest statistics for 2017, but did publish them for 2013-2017 in aggregate, so by reading between the lines and subtracting the numbers of previous years, one can infer the magnitude of the wave of mass arrests in 2017 in Xinjiang (227882 people, 21% of all arrests in China) https://web.archive.org/web/20180725042225/https://www.nchrd...
(Incidentally, the group of researchers here doesn't include Zenz. Lots of people can do this kind of analysis of public information. But if you want more of the same, reading Zenz' articles and the sources he cites is a good start.)