China is the fourth largest producer of arms now and sells weapons to war torn regions. Giving China the benefit of the doubt when they are now cranking out more billionaires than the US is a ship that sailed a long time ago.
Trumplethinskin, just like Pooh bear, has designs on neighboring countries. Mr. Pooh himself, “Taiwan independence is the chief culprit in undermining peace in the Taiwan Strait - we will absolutely not tolerate or condone it.” Yeah, something an imperialist would say, reminiscemt of Russia and Ukraine.
Refusal to recognize Taiwan’s unique culture and self-determination is just another nail in a very large coffin of Chinese Imperialism. While I do applaud them for not directly engaging in military conflict there is little reason to when they can control them politically much in the same way the US controls Mexico or Canada.
> “Guess who doesn’t bomb countries for breakfast? China”
[squints]
Sorry, I think they meant they don’t bomb countries in the material world that actually exists. In the speculative fantasy world that exists in your head, I’m sure they do all kinds of absolutely horrible things.
In fact, I think it’s high time that the imaginary world places imaginary sanctions on imaginary China.
In the speculative fantasy world that exists in your head, I’m sure they do all kinds of absolutely horrible things.
Oh, you’d like to talk about horrible things that China is already doing now, not just making preparations to do? Sure thing, friend. Where would you like to start?
Oh wow, you’re all the way into the organ harvesting stuff, that’s deep in the propaganda lore.
You know Falun Gong claims that the reason China is supposedly harvesting their organs is because they claim their organs have mystical powers? Do you believe that too, or is China just doing it because of some generic comic book supervillain motivations?
Lmao. Did you actually read beyond the title of anything you linked?
A 2006 report by a U.S. congressional research staffer questioned the credibility of Kilgour-Matas’s first report and stated that American officials in China were unable to verify organ harvesting allegations at a hospital in Shenyang.[12] Dissenters have cited the allegations’ inconsistency with other data, rejection by lawyers representing Falun Gong practitioners, and implausibility of the numbers.[13]
A 2017 article by The Washington Post disputes that China secretly conducts 60,000 to 100,000 organ transplants per year.[13] Data compiled by Quintiles IMS show China’s share of global demand for immunosuppressant drugs, which are necessary to prevent the bodies of patients from rejecting transplanted organs, was approximately in line with the proportion of global transplants China said it performed.[13] The journal also reports that lawyers who had represented Falun Gong practitioners rejected organ harvesting allegations and quotes a lawyer had “never heard of organs being taken from live prisoners” after defending 300 to 400 adepts of the movement.[13] According to health official Huang Jiefu, who has been working with an American surgeon to transform China’s transplant practices, a total of 13,238 organ transplant operations were performed in 2016.[13] Xu Jiapeng, a Quintiles IMS account manager in Beijing, said it was “unthinkable” to operate a clandestine system that the data on immunosuppressants did not pick up.[13] An Australian surgeon and vocal critic of China’s past transplant practices said it would not be plausible for the country to have more transplantations per year than the United States without that information leaking out.[13]
Oh cool, now we both agree Wikipedia isn’t propaganda again? Super, I’m glad we’ve established that. :D
I did in fact read it first. There are a total of four, count 'em, four paragraphs under the “Counterarguments” section (one of which isn’t actually a counterargument but we’ll get to that). That’s almost the length of an acceptable fourth grade book report. I’m very proud, as well as at your restraint at only directly copy and pasting one of them (and the other from the article lead – now I know the only two sections you actually bothered to read). Most of that entire section cites that same source, the Washington Post article.
I wonder how many subsections there are under the “Evidence” section?
… Hmmmm. Well, okay, okay, maybe they’re all really really short and poorly sourced! How do they stack up against the refutations?
Ahhhh. Golly, dozens of sources, lots to read – they’ve even got helpful diagrams for the slow tankies. Well, since you clearly went and picked out the quotes you liked best, now’s my turn. :3
Bo Xilai was governor of Liaoning province, which researchers believe was a major center for organ harvesting.[who?] The World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong made phone calls to mid- and high-level officials with prior connections to Bo, posing as members of the Communist Party’s discipline and inspection body that was building a case against him. They asked questions about the chain of command involved in procuring organs from prisoners, including Falun Gong practitioners. When asked about Bo’s involvement in organ harvesting, one senior Politburo member reportedly told investigators that Standing Committee member and security chief Zhou Yongkang “is in charge of this specifically. He knows it.”[72]
A city-level official in Liaoning province was asked by investigators what instructions Bo Xilai may have given on organ removal from Falun Gong prisoners. The official replied: “I was asked to take care of this task. Party central is actually taking care of this… Bo was involved quite positively. At that time we mainly talked about it during the meetings within the Standing Committee.”[verification needed] The official ended the call after realizing that he had not confirmed the caller’s identity.[72]
Emphasis mine.
And oh, hey, the very next paragraph after the one you quoted about that Washington Post article, that’s a good one too.
Kilgour, Matas, Gutmann, and experts in fields such as medicine wrote to the Post saying that drug prices can be 2.5 to 4 times cheaper in China than in the U.S., making sales data an unreliable proxy for dosage, and that a country’s global share of immunosuppressant sales does not need to match its share of transplantations, citing Japan and the U.S. as counterexamples.[144] Their letter also states that most Chinese hospitals have an unofficial pharmacy whose “significant” amount of business data are not included in IMS figures.[144]
“If you don’t believe that, there’s multiple different sources for you to follow.”
Oh cool, now we both agree Wikipedia isn’t propaganda again? Super, I’m glad we’ve established that. :D
No, actually, I never said that. You seem to be very confused about how sources work on a fundamental level.
If a king commissions a history book that heaps praise on himself, but that book also talks about the king’s ugly, crooked nose, then even if everything else in the book is unreliable propaganda, we can reasonably treat the part about the nose as credible, because it goes against the work’s overall bias, meaning that the only reason for its inclusion would be if it were true. It would be the same way if a source biased towards China admitted to things that reflect negatively on China. That is why I can cite Wikipedia or other Western sources while still considering it biased. Another reason is that you presented as a source which means you accept it as a source. I don’t have to accept it as a source in order to point out that it contradicts your position. If you cited Infowars and that source contradicted the claims you were making, I would be well within my rights to point out the contradictions, regardless of the fact that I obviously don’t consider it a reliable source.
There are a total of four, count 'em, four paragraphs under the “Counterarguments” section. That’s almost the length of an acceptable third grade book report
So much of your comment is just talking about length as if that had any relevance whatsoever. I assure you that I can find extremely long sources peddling all sorts of nonsense conspiracy theories. You don’t seem to understand how to evaluate sources at all.
The World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong
That sounds like a reliable, unbiased source.
This is no different than when US conservatives go into like a Planned Parenthood with a secret camera and cut the footage up and take things out of context to make it look bad.
When asked about Bo’s involvement in organ harvesting, one senior Politburo member reportedly told investigators that Standing Committee member and security chief Zhou Yongkang “is in charge of this specifically. He knows it.”[72]
A city-level official in Liaoning province was asked by investigators what instructions Bo Xilai may have given on organ removal from Falun Gong prisoners. The official replied: “I was asked to take care of this task. Party central is actually taking care of this…"
This is your smoking gun? Lmao.
There are legal avenues for organ donation in every (afaik) country in the world. They called up two people who are not involved in that field and don’t know all the details and they were tricked into directing them to other officials who would know more. Wow, amazing.
Kilgour, Matas, Gutmann, and experts in fields such as medicine wrote to the Post saying that drug prices can be 2.5 to 4 times cheaper in China than in the U.S., making sales data an unreliable proxy for dosage, and that a country’s global share of immunosuppressant sales does not need to match its share of transplantations, citing Japan and the U.S. as counterexamples.[144] Their letter also states that most Chinese hospitals have an unofficial pharmacy whose “significant” amount of business data are not included in IMS figures.[144]
Sorry, let me clarify something. Are you trying to argue that it’s theoretically possible that China could be engaged in organ harvesting, or are you claiming that there’s actual evidence of it, that it’s a proven thing? Because this is arguing that it may be theoretically possible, despite evidence pointing in the direction of it being impossible.
If you want to say that it’s theoretically possible China may be involved in organ harvesting, then I will return to what I said originally, that I’m sure the China in your head is doing all sorts of horrible nasty stuff, and I fully condemn imaginary China, which has nothing to do with the China that actually exists.
actually you did, where I posted a link to a wikipedia article (several actually but who’s counting, this is the one you wanted to bitch about) and you responded by dismissing it altogether as “deep propaganda lore”. Was all of fourteen hours ago.
Since you’re clearly having trouble keeping up – or, let’s be honest, willingly choose not to – I’m gonna stop reading right there at your “helpful explanation” about how sources work. I got better shit to do than listen to tankies trying (and failing, badly) at condescending to me; and it’s been funny watching you flail, but I’m bored now. You’re boring me now. Better luck next time!
let me preface this by saying I hate the direction the U.S. government has taken (both in general and more as of late), but
> “Guess who doesn’t bomb countries for breakfast? China”
[squints]
[looks over at China]
Well, not yet they don’t, I guess. But hey, 2026 isn’t even half over yet, we still got time to get this world war started proper.
This keeps coming up. Go Google search the last time China used military force to get something done.
Eventually you have to realize the only people who see potential war everywhere are Americans.
China is the fourth largest producer of arms now and sells weapons to war torn regions. Giving China the benefit of the doubt when they are now cranking out more billionaires than the US is a ship that sailed a long time ago.
Trumplethinskin, just like Pooh bear, has designs on neighboring countries. Mr. Pooh himself, “Taiwan independence is the chief culprit in undermining peace in the Taiwan Strait - we will absolutely not tolerate or condone it.” Yeah, something an imperialist would say, reminiscemt of Russia and Ukraine.
Refusal to recognize Taiwan’s unique culture and self-determination is just another nail in a very large coffin of Chinese Imperialism. While I do applaud them for not directly engaging in military conflict there is little reason to when they can control them politically much in the same way the US controls Mexico or Canada.
Sorry, I think they meant they don’t bomb countries in the material world that actually exists. In the speculative fantasy world that exists in your head, I’m sure they do all kinds of absolutely horrible things.
In fact, I think it’s high time that the imaginary world places imaginary sanctions on imaginary China.
Oh, you’d like to talk about horrible things that China is already doing now, not just making preparations to do? Sure thing, friend. Where would you like to start?
Oh wow, you’re all the way into the organ harvesting stuff, that’s deep in the propaganda lore.
You know Falun Gong claims that the reason China is supposedly harvesting their organs is because they claim their organs have mystical powers? Do you believe that too, or is China just doing it because of some generic comic book supervillain motivations?
riiiight, Wikipedia, which lists multiple different sources you’re free to follow, is “propaganda” now. 🤡
Though, now I’m confused. If Wikipedia is “propaganda”, now, why do you link to it in posts as a credible source?
Lmao. Did you actually read beyond the title of anything you linked?
Oh cool, now we both agree Wikipedia isn’t propaganda again? Super, I’m glad we’ve established that. :D
I did in fact read it first. There are a total of four, count 'em, four paragraphs under the “Counterarguments” section (one of which isn’t actually a counterargument but we’ll get to that). That’s almost the length of an acceptable fourth grade book report. I’m very proud, as well as at your restraint at only directly copy and pasting one of them (and the other from the article lead – now I know the only two sections you actually bothered to read). Most of that entire section cites that same source, the Washington Post article.
I wonder how many subsections there are under the “Evidence” section?
… Hmmmm. Well, okay, okay, maybe they’re all really really short and poorly sourced! How do they stack up against the refutations?
Ahhhh. Golly, dozens of sources, lots to read – they’ve even got helpful diagrams for the slow tankies. Well, since you clearly went and picked out the quotes you liked best, now’s my turn. :3
Emphasis mine.
And oh, hey, the very next paragraph after the one you quoted about that Washington Post article, that’s a good one too.
“If you don’t believe that, there’s multiple different sources for you to follow.”
No, actually, I never said that. You seem to be very confused about how sources work on a fundamental level.
If a king commissions a history book that heaps praise on himself, but that book also talks about the king’s ugly, crooked nose, then even if everything else in the book is unreliable propaganda, we can reasonably treat the part about the nose as credible, because it goes against the work’s overall bias, meaning that the only reason for its inclusion would be if it were true. It would be the same way if a source biased towards China admitted to things that reflect negatively on China. That is why I can cite Wikipedia or other Western sources while still considering it biased. Another reason is that you presented as a source which means you accept it as a source. I don’t have to accept it as a source in order to point out that it contradicts your position. If you cited Infowars and that source contradicted the claims you were making, I would be well within my rights to point out the contradictions, regardless of the fact that I obviously don’t consider it a reliable source.
So much of your comment is just talking about length as if that had any relevance whatsoever. I assure you that I can find extremely long sources peddling all sorts of nonsense conspiracy theories. You don’t seem to understand how to evaluate sources at all.
That sounds like a reliable, unbiased source.
This is no different than when US conservatives go into like a Planned Parenthood with a secret camera and cut the footage up and take things out of context to make it look bad.
This is your smoking gun? Lmao.
There are legal avenues for organ donation in every (afaik) country in the world. They called up two people who are not involved in that field and don’t know all the details and they were tricked into directing them to other officials who would know more. Wow, amazing.
Sorry, let me clarify something. Are you trying to argue that it’s theoretically possible that China could be engaged in organ harvesting, or are you claiming that there’s actual evidence of it, that it’s a proven thing? Because this is arguing that it may be theoretically possible, despite evidence pointing in the direction of it being impossible.
If you want to say that it’s theoretically possible China may be involved in organ harvesting, then I will return to what I said originally, that I’m sure the China in your head is doing all sorts of horrible nasty stuff, and I fully condemn imaginary China, which has nothing to do with the China that actually exists.
actually you did, where I posted a link to a wikipedia article (several actually but who’s counting, this is the one you wanted to bitch about) and you responded by dismissing it altogether as “deep propaganda lore”. Was all of fourteen hours ago.
Since you’re clearly having trouble keeping up – or, let’s be honest, willingly choose not to – I’m gonna stop reading right there at your “helpful explanation” about how sources work. I got better shit to do than listen to tankies trying (and failing, badly) at condescending to me; and it’s been funny watching you flail, but I’m bored now. You’re boring me now. Better luck next time!