Here's a 2018 video of the NATO commander of Afghanistan detailing how they are at war with ETIM, bombing them in order to reduce terrorism in Xinjiang Province.
But now, official US policy is that they don't exist.
So who are the ETIM?
ETIM hope to start up a Muslim ethnostate in Xinjiang. For years, they were persnally bankrolled by Osama Bin Laden, and its leader, Abdul Haq is on Al-Qaeda's council of elders.
US intel concluded that in 2001, ETIM protected OBL and helped him escape from a US capture attempt.
Throughout the 2000s and 2010s, when US/China relations were good, media were reporting on how 1000s of Uyghur extremists were going to the Middle East to be trained in jihad against China - and how they were indeed carrying out terror attacks in Xinjiang.
The ETIM attacks were the catalyst for a massive response from Beijing, putting Xinjiang under lockdown and drastically curtailing freedoms.
The US goverment was neutral when it started, but China's rise has led them to take up the plight of the Uyghurs trapped in the middle.
The removal of ETIM from the terror list was hailed by many as a step towards helping Uyghurs in XJ against a Chinese onslaught.
Yet actively lying about a terror group's existence does not bode well for the prospect of a peaceful 21st century.
Ultimately, this is all politicial:
The ETIM was placed on the list because of the US War on Terror.
Now it is taken off because of the coming War on China.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Exclusive: my @MintPressNews investigation into the London department training many of the West's spooks and spies, and its connections to supposedly independent intelligence outfit Bellingcat. (Thread)
No fewer than 6 Bellingcat contributors all did the same Master's course at the Department of War Studies at King's College, London (KCL).
KCL is known as the training ground for British, US and European intelligence operatives.
“I deeply appreciate the work that you do to train and to educate our future national security leaders, many of whom are in this audience,” ex-CIA boss Leon Panetta said.
(Thread) Support the tropes: My @FAIRmediawatch investigation into how media use progressive rhetoric and human rights discourse to get liberals into supporting war, regime change and sanctions.
In Afghanistan, media tried to convince us intervention was desireable to save women from oppression(left). When that liberation never came, 10 years later they tug on our heartstrings again, claiming we can't leave, else women will be even worse off(right)
"He's attacking his own people"
Whenever 🇺🇸 wants to intervene somewhere, DC pundits begin bleating about the brutality of its leader and its terrible human rights
eg. interest in Libyan human rights: a huge spike in interest 3/11 (just b4 the intervention).After that? Silence
Liberals are always more conflict skeptical than conservatives. So corporate media have come up with a number of ways of selling them wars. These include appeals like "think of the women" and "we must intervene to save democracy" or "he's attacking his own people."
Wars and interventions are almost always preceded by talk of human rights violations in the press.
COVID-19 has already killed 2.9 million people. But health experts I spoke to told me the coming antibiotic resistance pandemic could make the coronavirus look minor in comparison.
Between 2000 and 2015, antibiotic use increased by 77% on developing countries, driven partially by pharma giants offering cash incentives to unlicensed health workers to prescribe them.
Many in the Global South are so poor that they cannot afford a full course of them, thus accelerating the growth of resistant superbugs. The WHO estimates that 10million people will die each year by 2050 from this- almost 4x the number that have died of COVID in the last 12 mnths