Amnesty International, PEN and a number of other leftist groups have been begun campaigns in defense of Ilham Tohti and his students, a Muslim activist they describe as a “moderate scholar”.
Obama Inc’s Jen Psaki, who can’t be bothered to speak about genuine political dissidents detained in the Muslim world, rushed out to demand that, “Chinese authorities to immediately account for the whereabouts of Mr. Tohti and his students and guarantee Mr. Tohti and his students the protections and freedoms to which they are entitled under China’s international human rights commitments, including the freedom of expression.”
Good luck with that.
They claim that he is suffering without food. In reality he chose not to eat because prison authorities wouldn’t provide him with an Islamic diet.
Most of all they rapidly gloss over why he was arrested describing him as a supporter of separatism.
Ilham Tohti was detained after brutal Uighur Islamist terrorist attacks. Even his public statements repeatedly made excuses for Islamic terrorism and played the old blackmail game.
After the Tienanmen Square he said that, “The best thing would be for the authorities to take a step back and examine what drives people to such desperation in the first place.”
“Every time something happens, the government responds with one word: pressure. High pressure, high pressure, and even greater pressure. This leads to greater resistance and more conflict,” Tohti said by phone. “The government should reflect and take responsibility for what is happening in Xinjiang now and in the future.”
“The government should know that in Xinjiang there is a peaceful resistance to violence, as well as a violent struggle against violence. Some of it has nothing to do with terrorism or separatism,” Tohti said.
“A lot of people just cannot go on this way. They can’t turn to legal channels or the media; they have no way to protect their own rights or express themselves. What are they supposed to do? Some of them choose confrontation and agitation,” he said.
Most of us recognize such rhetoric as typical of the political arm of terrorist groups. CAIR, for example, commonly traffics in it in the US.
The premise is if you don’t strike a deal with us, you’ll have to deal with the terrorists, when they are actually one and the same.
The United States has freedom of speech. China doesn’t. And it has much less tolerance for terrorism. By arresting Ilham Tohti they are sending a message that they won’t be playing a game of Good Jihadist, Bad Jihadist.
By arresting Ilham Tohti, China is stating that it won’t negotiate with Muslim terrorists, the real ones or their “moderate” front men.
Ilham Tohti played the political arm of the Jihad, threatening the authorities with more terrorism unless they met their demands. That’s what these quotes amount to. Liberals can’t be expected to see it because they’ve long since become numbed to the implications of their own rhetoric.
China chose to crack down more instead of negotiate. Considering where negotiating with Islamic terrorists has gotten us, who is to say that they’re wrong.





















