wow.

this post has been up for hours and no one's yet taken issue with this specious reasoning:

The relatives of most of the deceased believed [but have no reliable evidence to support their belief] that the World Uighur Congress headed by Rebiya has inescapable responsibility for the incident.

But they may indeed have the belief, so what's the problem? Many people believe someone created the world but could not show reliable evidence, and yet that belief is foundamentally influential in the world.

Is it so? Rebiya and WUC called the demonstration by:

1) twisting China's well-intended minority works program into accusation of slavery;

2) rile sentiments by exploiting the Gaungdong factory brawl, falsely accuse the police of not holding anyone responsible (the ex-worker who spread rumor on-line was arrested on 6/28, press conference on 7/1 to report case filing), exaggerating the casualty from 2 to 100 in order to make genocide accusation.

After the Guangdong brawl, instead of verifying facts and calling for calm, Rybia and WUC fabricated accusations to foment unrest.

I don't blame the victim's families, Han and Uyghur, holding Rybia and WUC responsible. Not one bit.

Charles
If you are inside China, you will not have had access to much of the information available elsewhere e.g. the video of the attacks on the Uighurs in Guangdong (available on You Tube) which clearly show the numbers involved were far higher than the government is saying.
So far, there is absolutely no evidence to show the involvement of the WUC.Only allegations from the Government.
Having said that, there is clearly a lot which has happened which is being suppressed. Interesting link here if you can get it.

link

Charles, I also don't blame the families for holding her responsible. Doesn't mean they are right though.

Plus, if your reasoning is that it the reactions to the Guangdong "brawl" (christ, have you seen the videos, a brawl it was not) can be held responsible for Urumqi, then it would be perfectly logical to blame the Guangdong authorities for the Urumqi riots, as their piss-poor handling of the murders (no arrests of the alleged killers until after Urumqi) inflamed tensions, allowed rumour to spread and sparked to the initial demonstration.

I also suspect the riots were orchestrated: my Uighur friends in Urumqi said that many Uighurs in the city had been anticipating "something big" as far as a month before 7/5, way before the Shaoguan incident. However, I very much doubt it was Rebiya Kadeer who organized it. Her brain child, maybe. But, with all due respect to her business prowess in the early days of the "Reform Era", Rebiya seems to lack the skills and resources to have the riots so well planned that the ethnic Chinese there were caught by total surprise. If you read the recent NY Times coverage, you might walk away with the impression that our admirably fearless Rebiya lacks political judgment, is clumsy in media manipulation, and perhaps more than a bit coo coo crazy, confused with self-aggrandizement and not always clear about fantasy vs. reality. Her memoir is written in "language that betrays limited modesty and perhaps even limited self-knowledge" (NYTimes). Not like Dalai Lama at all. Her office, supposedly the brain center of the wicked, anti-China maneuvers, is tiny and messy, staffed by a handful of her relatives. Her "circle" in Washington is very small even by the standard of oversea dissidents, benefiting from little long-term endorsement from any political faction in US. An interested party would from time to time drop by, use Rebiya as a prop to make a point about Big Bad China, then toss her aside like a torn pantyhose.

My consipracy theory is that China's intelligence apparatus discovered the riots to be planned by organizations that are based in a "friendly nation", probably with tacit permission that nation's intelligence and police authorities. It is diplomatically inconvenient to have a public fallout with such a nation, especially when that nation seems to have been bending to US influence and pressure...... So, Rebiya becomes the "fall gal", in a way not unwillingly, her well-understood psyche of self-aggrandizement is exploited to the fullest.

I have long admired and respected Jia Zhangke. I intend to continue doing so. Therefore I refuse to believe he made such a statement. I prefer to believe that this a prank to make him appear as merely just another (albeit more subtle) Han imperialist.

Interesting article, I wonder why Australian newspapers aren't picking it up? maybe they have but I haven't seen it anywhere.

Anyway, I mentioned your article in www.typeboard.com

Mike, "no arrests of the alleged killers until after Urumq"

This is false.

Contray to Ms. Kadeer's claim no one was held responsible for the 6/26 Guangdong factory brawl, it was immediately investigated, and people were arrested as early as 6/28:

a - The former factory worker who started the false rape rumor online against the Uyghur workers was arrested on 6/28: link

"散布谣言引起2死120伤群架 广东韶关肇事者被拘留
…
２８日，警方查获在“市民心声”栏目的发帖者朱某。朱某对其在网上发布《旭日真垃圾》虚假信息的事实供认不讳，称其原为旭日玩具厂员工，辞职后再次应聘被该厂拒绝，因此心怀不满发布了该帖文。目前，警方已对朱某依法实行刑事拘留。"

"Spreading Rumur Caused Two Death 120 Injuries In Brawl, Guangdong Shaoguan Troublemaker Arrested
…
On [June] 28th, police found Mr. Zhu’s posting on “Citizen Voice”. Zhu posted on the website “Xuri Is Trash” article with false information, who was Xuri toy factory worker, but was not rehired after he resigned. Because of this, he posted the article out of contempt. Right now, Police has arrested Zhu according to law."

b - On 7/1 Guangdong authroity announced investigation progresss up to 6/30: link

- The day of 6/26, city government began the task of caring for the injuired
- The evening of 6/26, relevant departments and magistrates begain analyzing the case
- The criminal disorder case was officially introduced on 6/29, after preliminary investigation

c - 13 of the 15 people involved in the Guangdong brawl were arrested before 7/5: link

"13名韶关626集体斗殴事件犯罪嫌疑人已被刑拘
…
截至7月5日，已经有13名参与集体斗殴事件的人员被公安机关刑事拘留，其中新疆籍人员3名，其他地区人员10名"

"13 Shaoguan 6/26 Group Brawl Suspects Are Arrested
…
As of 7/5, 13 group brawl participants have been arrested by police, including 3 from Xinjiang, 10 from other areas"

Please look into these facts.

@Orpheus
for god's sakes, would it kill you to say Pakistan.

"Interesting article, I wonder why Australian newspapers aren't picking it up? maybe they have but I haven't seen it anywhere."

They've been on it from the outset, beginning with the festival's organiser telling the Chinese where to stick their unreasonable and aggressive demands. Good for him.

Now the fenqing have hacked into the festival's website, I would guess with the Chinese government's proxy.

@George Sunyun: I share your disbelief that an independent thinker like Jia would sound like Chinese government on unthinking condemnation of a fringe character. So I checked out the original （see the Chinese text and my translation at the end of this comment). My takeaways:
1. Jia's choice of words is very careful, and his message is more nuanced than most readers seem to realize.
2. The quote about "relatives of most of the deceased believed......" was not said by Jia at all. Eric: you really need to re-read the article you linked to in the post; pay careful attention to the punctuations). Instead, Jia said the following: "The history of Xinjiang does not fall in my immediate realm of acquaintance; however, it's been just two weeks since the riots in Urumqi. I feel we should at least adopt a cautious attitude, in order not to demean the dead unwittingly."
3. The remark about Ken Loach vs. Israel is also ambivalent, leaving it unclear whether Jia disagrees with Loach or the MIFF organizers. What we can conclude is only Jia's decrying of over-politicizing of the Festival, by either Loach or the organizer, or both.

It troubles me to note that neither the author of this post nor most of the comentators seem to have bothered checking the original statement by Jia.

Allow me to also take this opportunity to lament a larger problem: the degradation of discourse on any China topic, by both Chinese and Westerners, to such a deplorable coarseness that anyone saying anything subtle will be distorted or simply ignored.

[FW] Jia Zhang-Ke's Statement about His Withdrawl from the Melbourne International Film Festival
贾樟柯发表关于退出墨尔本影展的声明

1. We have no intention to intervene in the freedom of a film festival as a platform for artistic exchanges. Our withdrawl from MIFF is merely a conscious act of self-discipline. The history of Xinjiang does not fall in my immediate realm of acquaintance; however, it's been just two weeks since the riots in Urumqi. I feel we should at least adopt a cautious attitude, in order not to demean the dead unwittingly.
一，我们并无意干涉电影节作为艺术交流平台的自由，退出墨尔本影展仅仅是我们的一种自我约束行为。新疆历史并不是我个人谙熟的领域，但发生在乌鲁木齐的暴力事件刚刚过去两周，我想至少应该采取一种审慎的态度，不要让自己无意识的行为玷污那些死去的人们。

2. We feel this year's Melbourne Film Festival has been increasingly politicized. First the British film-maker Ken Loach questioned the financing of MIFF, alleging the organizing committee of taking "blood money". Then the documentary "The 10 Conditions of Love", with Rebiya as the central figure, appeared on the festival's program, backed by a series of publicity events by the organizer.
二，今年的墨尔本电影节让我们觉得政治意味越来越浓，首先是英国导演肯-洛奇质疑墨尔本电影节的资金来源，称他们是在拿“带血的钱”办影展。接着以热比娅为中心人物的纪录片《爱的十个条件》出现在影展的节目单上，主办方为她安排了一系列宣传活动。

3. We feel that a co-appearance with Rebiya at the politically-charged MIFF is inappropriate by our basic personal, emotional and behavioral principles. Therefore our firm has unanimously decided to withdraw from the festival as an expression of our personal attitude and position.
三，我们认为和热比娅同时出现在充满政治意味的墨尔本影展上，于我们的个人感情和行为底线是不能接受的，是不合适的。因此，公司西河星汇全体一致决定采取退出影展的方法以表达我们个人的态度和立场。

4. On July 19, the firm's representative, Zhou Qiang, announced the withdrawl of two films (*****) from this year's MIFF, and the cancellation of appearance by the film directors and producers.
四，7月19日，公司代表周强致信影展主席，宣布西河星汇的两部影片《河上的爱情》与《完美生活》退出本届墨尔本电影节，同时取消导演唐晓白与监制周强的出席计划。

Hereby,

Jia Zhang-Ke

特此说明。
贾樟柯

"@Orpheus
for god's sakes, would it kill you to say Pakistan."

@pak: well, that, and it could be a nation in Shanghai Cooperation Organization that starts with a "U". Or "K". Or (less likely) "T".

In my translation of Jia's statement above, please note how persistent he was using the word "personal".
The obvious cynical reading is that Jia tried to stay clear of the allegation of bending to the Chinese authority. I would not have agreed to this cheap analysis, but that is irrelevant. REGARDLESS, isn't it refreshing that, for once on matters "patriotic", a Chinese person would speak for only HIMSELF, not "on behalf of the Chinese nation", or representing "all proud, self-respecting, upstanding Chinese"?

Trust me Orpheus, patriotic Americans like myself would do the same thing as Jia, if Osama Bin Ladin was invited to a film festival to promote his legitmate grievances and struggle against US middle east policy.

After the 5/7 riot where majority of the death were Han, again instead of calling for calm and verifying facts, Kadeer and WUC continued to fabricate charges against the Chinese government:

- UWC claimed 800 Uyghurs were killed by government force, however Anthony Kuhn of NPR, who was in Urumqi, reported majority of the death from 7/5 riot were Han Chinese:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106333891

"Anthony Kuhn: Well, I’ve heard from one official that of those killed only 30 were Uighurs, the rest [126] were Han and other ethnic groups. But it suggests that the Uighurs killed were in the minority.”

- Kadeer claimed large number of Hans took revenge, while Peter Foster of London Telegraph, on the ground, reported riot police in Urumqi protected Uyghurs from Chinese protesters following the 7/5 riot:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterfoster/100002643/urumqi-criticism-and-credit-for-the-chinese-police/

"Han crowds on Tuesday effectively were allowed to go round and round in circles, exhausting themselves in the hot sun while never actually being allowed to reach the objects of their anger. To my mind, this was very smart policing.

Then on Wednesday, after an overwhelming show of force, the police made sure that the Han protestors largely stayed off the streets."

@Charles: but Jia carefully avoided making his decision look like a patriotic statement, which I respect, considering the eyeball-seeking excesses of many Chinese celebrities.

So I wouldn't characterize Jia's move as an act of patriotic fervor, which China has no lack of. Respecting the dead from the riots is more like a humanitarian statement, which is rare among Chinese.

Charles. I think we have been through this before at another location, but I still maintain that there was no arrests of the alleged killers (killers, not the rumour monger, and arrests, not investigations) until after 7/5. The closest I have seen is a newspaper report dated 7/6 that said 13 had been arrested. But before 7/5, there were no reports to this effect. Either there were arrests but it was deemed un-newsworthy, or there were arrests but this was not disclosed or there were no arrests until after 7/5. I have to say, based on "these facts", I still have to go with the latter option. If you can show me a link that proves my choice to be a poor one (and a link that is clearly dated pre-7/5) then I am quite prepared to change my mind.
thanks