Interesting Global News
What is global news?
Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media posts
Avoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
- !legalnews@lemmy.zip - International and local legal news.
- !technology@lemmy.zip - Technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
- !interestingshare@lemmy.zip - Interesting articles, projects, and research that doesn't fit the definition of news.
- !europe@feddit.org - News and information from Europe.
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
view the rest of the comments
Report by "Safeguard Defenders" formerly "China Action"... website here if you want to see a bunch of "HOLY SHIT CHINA BAD" stuff....
Wasn't this deemed super false? Those "police offices" were just outreach centers for Chinese nationals needing help filling out paperwork or being tracked down to remind them to fill out paperwork?
Nowhere in the article does it source any of these claims. Doesn't even link to the "report"
heheh... misspelled "individuals"...
From the Safeguard Defenders website where the .pdf for the report is located. The first two sentences reframes things differently from the EuroNews linked article.
Its not JUST Chinese citizens, its people that that the Chinese government is claiming have broken the law and fled the country.
Also... the EuroNews article says the report is 169 pages long, the .pdf from Safeguard Defenders is only 69 pages long.
I mean... sure, if you want to make an argument about how the Chinese government may or may not be following extradition treaties/laws to have people accused of criminal activity brought back to the country to stand trial, you can make that argument. Framing it as "Chinese government kidnaps citizens traveling abroad!!!!" is wildly inaccurate.
You are linking the wrong report.
The article mentions the new report, found here.
Pg. 18:
Nothing alleged here is remotely objectionable.
That's the quote from the linked article in footnote 19, not allegation, read below.
...what?
I'm referencing the actual report you just linked to. I quoted a section of the report that provides an example of the conduct it criticizes. It's nothing; the report is bullshit.
You quoted the section of the report that quotes the linked articles. Apart from the transcript font used, it also links to the footnote.
And? A footnote does not change the fact that the report is bullshit.
You didn't. You quoted the official statement of the Chinese government, which was quoted in the report. It was not an example provided by the report authors. Their examples and argument is below the quoted section. I'm not sure if you are just misunderstanding or pretending to misunderstand. But in any case, you are welcome to your opinion that the report is "bullshit". But that is not a good argument if you want to bring someone to your way of thinking. You need more objective details for that.
Ah, I see. What page of the report gives the authors' version of what actually happened in those cases, or gives an example of something that could be described as kidnapping?
Which doesn't mean anything since they are not in China and such an act would be, as the title says, abduction. Which is a crime and a violation of sovereignty.
Isn't most of this Chinese embassies reaching out to fugitives and taking them into going back home to have things sorted out?
Do we know anything about what kind of crimes they're on the run because of or what consequences they gave when they go home? I wouldn't be surprised if most of it is really banale stuff.