Terror attack

Dark day

A brutal knife attack shocks China and raises questions about its policy towards ethnic minorities

See article

Readers' comments



The name Xinjian, is just the Chinese version of Sincan, the historical name of East Turkestan.


Ruday Giuliani returned a $10 million donation from Prince Al-Waleed w hen Prince Al-Waleed said (taken from wikipeida): "At times like this, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should re-examine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance toward the Palestinian cause."

An attack is an attack. There is no justification for this kind of stuff. This particular attack in China is the same -- why blame it on government policies? It bothers me a great deal when I see double standards in reporting or public opinion of this sort.


I don't know what to say about this incident as described in this article. The true picture may or may not the same as most Chinese papers have described those days. Despite that, however, those innocent people killed brutally deserve notice. Sometimes, I coundn't stop wondering why today's media focus so much on justifying those bloodshedding events that they forget to pity for those innocent victims. Maybe that's how media behave as an "impartial" channel for people to get to know what is happening in other parts of the world. But, to be fair, shouldn't a journalist go into in-depth investigation before they make comments? And, again, there are good and bad guys in all countries, and the government may be going all out to deceive the people, but people have eyes, ears and brains to help them see, hear and judge.


While I admit that some previous dishonest reports or conducts of the chinese government might naturally cause the west to spontaneously doubt whether this time the chinese media has been reporting this incident faithfully, It is pretty straightforward to call indiscriminately killing a terrorist attack.


Maybe you admire this life：Everyday you have the possiple to find a hand of 'turky' in your pocket .If you are attracted by the these turky's peddling nut candy. You have to buy it with a price you can't accept. And if you ask police for help, they will say: 'guy, ethnic harmony is the first, you should tolerate!' And you would have being tolerated till the that day you would be stabbed


"East Turkestan was the name of a short-lived independent state in the region in the 1940s and is the name many Uighurs prefer over Xinjiang, the Chinese name."

How many Uighurs did The Economist inteviewed to draw such a conclusion? One thousand? Ten thousand? Or one hundrand thousand? Is the number a "many" compared to the 10 million Uighurs?

Did The Economist got the impression -- "many" by phone or by interviewing Uighurs face to face? Or she just got the "many" by imagination?

The Economist is obviously biased as to this event. She intended to place the blame on Chinese government for the massacre happening in Kunming. She doesn't think that the stabbing is inhuman. All she got from this horrible event is that this is another evidence that Chinese govenment has always been supressing Uighurs.

It is like that The Eonomist is saying to all Chinese that 29 lives are shit to us, we don't care a shit about it. we have our ideologies, we just want Uighurs get what "we" consider freedoms, no matter how many Hans died of it.

The Economist thinks ordinary Han Chinese's opinions are useless, so they don't bother to interview them. She thinks what she got is truth. This is just unfair.

joshyang in reply to guest-selewei

Consistent biased reports for sure will in the end discredit any media outlet that produced them. It's just the same as the Chinese state media has almost completely lost its credit from the Chinese public. The Western media is doing the same thing to itself for years now.

For either issue from Xinjiang or Tibet, most Western media didn't realize a simple fact that the vast majority of Chinese public will not tolerate any attempt from these areas to break away. Like Americans would imagine Texas breaks away. Any biased report obviously wouldn't help deliver whatever the agenda or message the media intended to, except for a self-service.

Connect The Dots

The silver lining in the Chinese knife attacks:
Imagine the devastation if the Jihadi attackers had AK-47s, grenades, and bombs.
The latter is the reality of Muslim Militant Extremists
in the Mideast, North Africa and Pakistan. And sometimes India and the West.
Jihad is Global!
China is not spared.
This is NOT about minority rights in China.
China has 10,000 plus minorities that are integrated, peaceful, increasingly wealthy,
and not going ape-shit.
This is about Violent Islamic Worldwide Jihad--now threatening the Middle Kingdom.
The World needs to UNITE to fight Global Islamic Jihad.


This is not China's 9-11.

There is distinct difference between the two tragedies: 9-11 was staged by terrorists from outside U.S. while the 3-1 attack at Kunming was staged from inside the country.

So after 9-11, U.S. implemented measures like tightening the border with Canada, imposing strict measures on airline security,...etc., have more or less reduced the chance of another 9-11 with a few exceptions like the Boston Marathon bombing.

However, most likely China has a hard time to prevent the recurrence of another terrorist attack since, first, ironically it is much easier for the potential terroist to get access to other provinces after the completion of the Southern Xinjiang railway and second, now almost every major inland city has sizable Uyghur population that the potential terrorists can easily blend in.

There is no doubt that the terrorists can hardly escape because they have distinct physical features. But it is harder to detect the conspiracy beforehand because it seems like the security apparatus has problem in collecting intelligence judged by this tragedy.


An act of violence against the innocent aiming to terrorize the public, no matter what reason it is, should be always considered as terrorism. Didn't the "heavy-handed" invasions against Iraq and Afghanistan that killed thousands of Muslims also motivate the attacks in London and Madrid? Or those incidents are not acts of terrorism as well? The end cannot justify the means, and if the West still wants to promote their universal values, please stop being so hypocritical and double-standard.


US should be cautious in supporting Islamic movements in attempt to create trouble for potential geopolitical adversaries, in this case China.
The US supported the Afghan Mujahideen prior to and during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Although this succeeded in creating huge trouble for the Soviets, this support in effect trained and armed what later partly became Al-Qaeda, which launched terrorist attacks back against its old patron the US, including 9-11.
US might have also snickered while Russia struggled with the Islamic Chechen insurgency. US is smiling no more when the Boston Marathon is struck by a bomb set by the Tsarnaev brothers, Chechen-Americans under the same Islamic sentiment. So while TE claims that this Kunming attack may be a result of what TE calls "heavy-handed rule from Beijing", the US should also reflect what US did to provoke the Boston bombing. And the answer is really: nothing, the argument for US oppression against Muslims is weak. So it seems that radical Islam will attack anyone who is not Muslim under Sharia Law (though Muslims are not exactly peaceful within its own factions either). I hope that TE can elaborate on its claims since the fact is that Xinjiang's number of Mosques-per-capita is much higher than that of Central Asian nations.
Currently organizations such as the World Uyghur Congress receives funding from the US National Endowment for Democracy or NED. The National Endowment for Democracy is a U.S. non-profit organization founded in 1983 to promote democracy by providing cash grants funded primarily through an annual allocation from the U.S. Congress. But given US's track record, it is not hard to see that the NED is also a vehicle for subversive projects.
The United States government detained twenty-two Uyghurs in Guantanamo Bay since 2002, since evidence surfaced that they may have links with established terrorist organizations in the Middle East.
Radical Islam Terrorist Activities pose a threat to the entire world.
The question is whether US will shoot itself in the foot again.



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

