Thread by @ChengxinPan

This 'leaked' document features prominently in BBC reporting of the alleged 'shoot to kill' policy in Xinjiang. It has no doubt shocked millions of people already given the coordinated coverage in Western MSM.

https://twitter.com/Cinqscories/status/1529035490032340993

As many have already pointed out, however, the font of some words used in the document is not consistent with simplified Chinese.

https://twitter.com/Cinqscories/status/1529035490032340993

Moreover, when I downloaded the 'leaked file' from xinjiangpolicefiles.org/key-documents/
the version has been changed: instead of having 11 main points, it now has 9 main points.

Still, the numbering system is all over the place. For example, the very first point uses '1', and then is followed by the Chinese character for one (一), two (二), and three (三). I haven't seen any official or non-official documents which are so casually formatted.

Also the strange font used in the 'original' 'leaked' document has disappeared, replaced with normal simplified Chinese font. However, the title of this document still contains non-simplified Chinese font. Perhaps the real author of the document forgot to change them as well?

Finally, the last point doesn't make grammatical sense to me. These are phrases used as 'nouns' in Chinese documents, rather than as stand-alone sentences. A quick search shows that they always appear within a sentence, often followed by '落实情况'.

Given the large number of suspicious points noted above and noted by others, I highly doubt the credibility of this document as an authentic document. This could mean that someone went out of their way to make up this document to try to prove their point, which should really ring

alarm bells about the overall credibility of whoever is behind all of this. As the US Department of Defense's Report of the Defense Science Board’s Task Force on Strategic Communication would remind us: books.google.com/books?id=lvtTK…

If most accusations of China's atrocities in Xinjiang have been built on such foundations, no wonder the accusers are uneasy ('concerned') about the visit of UN Human Rights Commissioner to Xinjiang. It's like the reaction of a child faking sickness when told to see a doctor.