UPDATE 4-26-2008: Writers at the New Dominion were able to view the video references in this article. Readers are invited to visit this follow-up post to see stills and commentary.
According to a report on the website of the Middle East Media Research Institute’s (MEMRI) “Islamist Websites Monitor Project”, a video of the execution of three Chinese hostages, allegedly produced by the “Islamic Party of Turkestan” (IPT), was posted on the website Al-Hesbah on 9 April 2008. We have thus far been unable to locate the video itself, despite having a fluent speaker of Arabic search through the Al-Hesbah site. However, we are left with the still image of three men, apparently stripped and photographed from the shoulders up, with the Uyghur word zärbä زەربە “a knock, blow” superimposed. This image has reappeared on a Uyghur-language site claiming to be that of the Islamic Party of Turkestan. (A much more complete site, possibly official, can be found here.) It seems to have appeared on that site in the last month.
The language on the IPT seal graphic, the word on the video still, and the IPT site – including Romanization, font, and other linguistic clues – suggest that these were all produced by Xinjiang Uyghurs. The IPT site features several photos of Hasan Mahsum, the alleged founder of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) Shärqiy Türkistan Islam Härikiti, the “Dongyiyun” blamed by the PRC government for many expressions of discontent. He was killed in Pakistan in October 2003.
The name “Islamic Party of Turkestan” is problematic. Some sources suggest that the IPT is the new face of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), an organization established in the summer of 1998 in opposition to Uzbekistan’s secular government, but which was active in Uzbek areas of Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, as well. One of its co-founders, Juma Namangani, is meant to have founded this new group, called Hezb-e Islami Turkestan in Persian, in Afghanistan in 2001. Since this new group’s focus includes all of Central Asia and Xinjiang, it may be an umbrella organization for the Islamic Movement groups that sprang from the IMU, such as the Islamic Movement of Tajikistan. Namangani died in 2001, and the IMU is believed to have fractured and mostly disintegrated.
The site and the seal associated with the video are clearly labeled IPT Türkistan Islamiy Partiyisi, rather than “Islamic Party of East Turkestan” Shärqiy Türkistan Islamiy Partiyisi or as a product of ETIM, either of which would suggest a specific concern for Uyghurs and Xinjiang. However, they maintain some of the same imagery as ETIM, focusing, at least visually, on Hasan Mahsum. If this really was produced (and recently) by the IPT, could this indicate an attempt to reach out more directly to discontented Uyghurs?
Recently, we reported on a Chinese press release asserting the involvement of Hizb ut-Tahrir (HUT), an Islamic movement with a largely Central Asian and Pakistani base, in the March protests in Khotan. Since the IPT, as originally formed, may now be a very weak and diffuse group, could it now be linked with HUT? HUT is known to have a slight “technological” bent, using the internet and various media to spread its beliefs. (The IPT website appears to be registered in Karachi, Pakistan.) However, HUT disavows violence.
Could we just be looking at a video from years before, recycled by another terrorist group, or even an individual (or government) with hidden aims? The “other” IPT website seems like an official face for their organization — so why doesn’t it have this video, or would they want it to? Also, MEMRI is an itinerant collector of Islamic media, but they have an apparent anti-Islamic bias and may make mountains out of electronic molehills. We encourage any readers, especially with a knowledge of Arabic, to look into the provenance of the video in question.
In the meantime, all we have is a seal, a video still, and a mostly-empty website. More importantly, perhaps, we have the suggestion of a video of Chinese people being killed in the name of Uyghur Muslims. This is a powerful image in the hands of anyone concerned.
Some sources consulted:
Fredholm, Michael. 2007. Islam and Modernity in Contemporary Central Asia: Religious Faith versus Way of Life: A Study of Four Radical Disruptions (Asian Cultures and Modernity: Research Report No. 14, January 2007). Stockholm: Stockholm University.
——. 2006. Islamic Extremism as a Political Force: A Comparative Study of Central Asian Extremist Movements (Asian Cultures and Modernity: Research Report No. 12, October 2006). Stockholm: Stockholm University.
Shichor, Yitzhak. 2006. “Fact and Fiction: A Chinese Documentary on East Turkestan Terrorism” in China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly, Volume 4, No. 2, pp. 89-109.
Comments 36
Great find! I wonder if anyone will ever be able to track down this video clip?
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 3:20 am ¶Couldnt open those videos. Obviously all pictorial content is non-Uyghur. Although it is written in Uyghur script. The turbanned gentleman is obviously not Uyghur if that is sposed to be Mahsum.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 7:28 am ¶The supposed photo of Mahsum looks more like the famous Arab freedom fighter Khatab who was killed in Chechnya some years ago. As I said the photograph is not of Mahsum.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 7:39 am ¶Dont make a mountain out of molehill about this yourselves ND. Its obviously fake propaganda. see my posts on opposite end. Regrds,. James
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 8:11 am ¶We already discussed thoroughly the possibility of this all being fake well before we posted the article, and furthermore acknowledge the likelihood of this in the content of the post. Which makes you look kind of silly coming in here and proudly making an observation that was already made inside the post, which apparently you didn’t read. Nor does the possibility that all this is fabricated make it not worth reporting on, which is all we have done here.
The only person that’s making mountains of molehills is you, my friend, with your blisteringly accurate powers of observation.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 10:53 am ¶whooo. touched a raw one there. Sorry prof…but it is sensationalist my friend overly…thats all im saying luv ya reaction…James
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 12:21 pm ¶all yu had to do is just say it was afake was really what i was getting at without al the pseudo investigative journalism/ treasure hunt type narrative…yu arent a journalist right???JUames
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 12:23 pm ¶Nah, JUames, we’re not journalists, but that’s not going to stop us from trying to find out more about interesting things. But I guess we really don’t cater to you, as you don’t seem to be the kind of person that well… I don’t know, likes finding things out. Even if the site were fake, nothing you said really constitutes proof that it’s fake. That’s the point of the post, there’s not really a lot of evidence either way, fake, or real – except the opinion of some arrogant blowhard. Seriously, though, if you’ve got a lot of solid, substantial dirt on why the site is 100% absolutely fake, you’re more than welcome to write an editorial for us. Just let us know.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 12:44 pm ¶I’m just going to say this, JUames. First of all, the accusation of “making mountains out of molehills” does touch a nerve and is inaccurate as we strove to simply report what we found AND give it a context – remember, not all our readers are scholars of Central Asian terrorism are you are, and so deserve the background information. Secondly, your observations are more then welcome: the reason we found this site is to encourage discussion with people interesting in Xinjiang, and the exact reason we posted this post was to elicit more information from knowledgeable readers like yourself, I think that’s clear in the article of the content, which was structured along the lines of: “This is what we found, here is some background, what do YOU think.” Thirdly, the accusation of being sensationalist does touch a nerve because if we hadn’t published this article, you wouldn’t have been able to show off to all the readers of TOEOC and our blog your immense mastery of the region’s history. Which also is sensationalist – because by your standards, it appears that just stating a bunch of facts and thoughts for the sake of encouraging discussion is “sensationalist.” That’s all we did – and that’s what you’re doing too, but with a touch of unwarranted arrogance. Basically, I’m welcoming you to add your knowledge to our site, just cut the bullshit.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 2:21 pm ¶Oh not a Journalist. Are yu working in China as a missionary then or as one of these American “academics” associated with an American governmental organization like former American academics in Xinjiang? Or like some of them using the Uyghur as your ‘subject’ to write about, so as to iron out your career when yu get “Home” and produce nice theses on them as a divided people?
Of course the site is bogus. Its an Islamicist group propagandizing Uyghur. Pan-Turkic and Pan Islmicist by their insignia and iconography. Not a Uyghur group.
Your use of the word “possibly” is culpable – the tiniest chance perhaps, possibly. I suppose the fact you can open it in Xinjiang is interestintg. It takes on an entire new meaning then. One issue is whether the fotos of Mhsum are credible or of someone else. Does he look Uyghur to yu prof or Afghan? I could be (forgive me for my arrogance – i mean arrogance in havinng a contrary opinion to yours) wrong. Maybe some Uyghurs have that mien. Also if Chinese people had been kidnapped China would be making a real noise about that especially if by Uyghurs, especially now. How could yu overlook that? This is where your ‘possibly’ is really irresponsible and sensationalist. As Jimba said over on the other end blog – these are more than likely file photos of former kidnapped detainess used for prop purposes – thats right not fake in origin but fake in their representation. “More than likely” is a lot less nebulous than “possibly”. Yu are neither a good journalist or reporter of interesting stories – the site is extremely interesting and real .Its representataion is bogus/fake/misleading – but your spin on it is a construction – lets dig in there fellow Arabic speakers to see if its a fake for the cause of truth and academic certitude – Give me a break. Where would that lead yu? – Whewww, boy, Central Asia these days is full of…educated ignoramuses and western sensationlists living in exotica protected from the awful realities people there really live under spending all theior time telling everyone on the net about how it “really” is where they are… James.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 2:40 pm ¶I read yr post after I posted the above which is not withdrawn. but “bullshit” really. How uncouth of yu. But yu are right yu did get hold of that site – and I think that was great as well as yr posting of Chinese language news sites- very informative. Still what yu did with the Islamicist site was irresponsible, quick and Im sorry about ya nerve- sensationalist- burst the bubble fella. cheers, J.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 2:54 pm ¶I would hardly call this post sensationalist… more like a sensational get! If you’re looking for something sensational, check out the graphic I made to link over to this post.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 5:56 pm ¶James, in reference to the long post you just made, you’re completely missing the point I made with previous comments. I’m going to repeat myself again: your contrary comments are more than welcome, and I observe that you’ve made some worthwhile observations both on our site and on Michael’s site – which was exactly what we wanted in writing this post in the first place. I have no beef with “contrary opinions” and I’m happy to see any information added to the post that we made. What “touched a nerve” was your accusation that we are making “mountains out of molehills” (which is ironic, since the we actually used that exact same phrase in our article, which was written cautiously), and that we are being “sensationalist,” (which if we weren’t, and if that’s the case, then being NOT sensationalist means not posting on things that are worth posting). What’s irresponsible about what was posted? We posted a link, and added some thoughts about it. You came in with some contrary observations, and that’s great. What I don’t understand is when you start telling us that we shouldn’t have posted it in the first place. The writers’ thoughts are in the posts, your thoughts are in the comments. Rather than telling us what to post, let’s just put all our thoughts out there and let the readers decide.
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 8:32 pm ¶@Porfiriy
Great post, ND. And, yes, useful background information, and just enough analysis to caution readers to the possibility that it’s not what it’s claimed to be. Coming from a non-journalist, it’s as good as it gets. If I were you, I’d ignore James’ rants (although, unbeknownest to himself, he does contribute to taking the discussion forward).
Posted 15 Apr 2008 at 11:12 pm ¶Porf your concilatory tone has won me over and ill continue in my ignorance (which the old china watcher has so insightfully pointed out- whats a China Watcher any way?) and unbeknownst to myself further contribute to wholesome discussion by ranting. Yu guys have no sense of strategy or provocation. Yu take everything at face value. Thank yu for proving the value of the ruse – very revealing. But Porf I do like ya blog. Thanks James.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 7:48 am ¶@Michael. Yes Michael I am always impressed by yr graphic work- its very good and always up to date. Keep it up chum. James
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 7:50 am ¶Porf another thought re the site. I havent had time to look into it thoroughly as I am busy ranting on other blogs across the netizen world, provoking and insulting all with my arrogant views; but what I do see there which would prove interesting to look into is the creation of an Islamic Uyghur Folk hero namely in Mahsum. Is there not an unopenable link there to his “sayings”? Hmm interesting. Waht doo yu make of ﮬﻪﺳﻪﻥ ﻣﻪﺧﺴﯘﻡ ﺩﻩﯞﻩﺗﻠﯩﺮﻯ 1- ﺑﯜﻟﯜﻡ 2- ﺑﯜﻟﯜﻡ 3- ﺑﯜﻟﯜﻡ 4 – ﺑﯜﻟﯜﻡ 5 – ﺑﯜﻟﯜﻡ 6 – ﺑﯜﻟﯜﻡ
in 5 parts?
Wish I can open that little link.
p.s.
BTW as someone pointed out on the TOEC blog really if anyone had jumped the guin on the site ciontent it was MEMRI
pps @China watcher where is your gaze directed from? The term CHINAWATCHER is one that belongs to the days before detente- Its a Cold War euphenism interpreted in China as SPY. China has been OPEN since the LONLEY PLANET GUYS invaded in the early 1980s – Its alright now yu can travel freely now among THEM. Lets meet up in an undisclosed place in real time.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 8:00 am ¶Dear Porf: Re former post a correction shopuld read: “in 6 parts.” Also no Dictionaries on me at present as I am on the road in a mountainous area of the Himalaya but “dawatliri”? Mahsum’s dawatliri. How do yu read that? Regards, James online.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 8:05 am ¶It appears to me that James has pulled a swifty on you and has simply baited you all. His insights on Mahsum are certainly way ahead of where you are all coming from concerning the site and perhaps the really significant point to the mentioned site and definitely worth looking into. Terrance.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 8:35 am ¶Where are my comments. Oh no not censorship now????!!!
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 8:49 am ¶Dear Porf, why is it when I log on to your site from a different computer I cannot find these comments? James.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 11:48 am ¶Excellent post. The very existence of such a video – fake, real, otherwise – is clearly important, as it will invariably embolden the Pan-Turkic identity meme.
Let’s not make a mountain out of the molehill that is James.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 12:21 pm ¶James:
You comments didn’t appear because I have a job during working hours, Beijing time, and at those hours I can’t approve comments. Yes, we approve comments. You can get some really drastic comments when you run a site like this, comments that endanger the site itself. Yours, as inflammatory as they are, aren’t those type of comments. Be patient!
Also, different computer? No. According to what I can see you’re using the same computer for the last several posts. Same IP address. Curiously, your IP address is also exactly the same as another person posting comments on this blog. Come now, James. Lies don’t befit such a man like yourself.
Finally, if you have questions about Uyghur, best direct them not to me but to the other writer of this site, OpkeHessip. I don’t speak Uyghur.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 1:03 pm ¶Thanks I use a common use computer and dont spy around on IPs . Yu may have been in China too long already Porf. But if yu must do such things perhaps all of your bloggers need watch their security as well. Umm anyway as far as I know I am the only one talking to yu at present. Ill see if any one else has been… I have some interesting friends…but lies…really…yu know there are no lies Porf…dont get too paranoid..its all fun and games…
so could Upkehessip perhaps give us the run on dawatliri…
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 2:08 pm ¶Mr H-, I mean, um, James:
Wow, your cockiness level just went down an octave! Anyways, spying? No spying. All blogging software logs IPs of their commenters. Have a privacy issue? Take it up with wordpress. Also, I didn’t even have to really look for it: in our comment approval queue (remember you were being impatient? When I got off work, I read all the comments then approved them), there were two comments literally right next to each other. Different names, same IP address. It was sort of hard to miss. So I didn’t have to try, or spy, Mr. H-, I mean, James. You did all the work for me. Your really weak evasion of the point I just made is really unbecoming of you, my friend, especially when read it alongside your extremely confident and swaggering comments you made previously.
Maybe you should be the one who should be a little more paranoid! An expert at cynicism, an expert at baiting, an expert on Xinjiang matters – isn’t necessarily an expert with this quirky thing called the internet. Or an expert at masking multiple identities.
Maybe someone’s trying a LITTLE too hard to get off on pissing people off on the internet. Watch it! As you mock us greenhorns your pants are slipping down. As I said several times, your observations are actually quite worthwhile. But your arrogance – and now, your mysterious multiple identities – really damages your credibility. Especially for someone at a uni! Just say it as it is, you know? Isn’t that what academic discussion is all about? Why the masks and the boasting? But if you do want to post again under multiple identities to give people the impression that there are several people approving of James’ witty comments – make sure you use different computers for each account. Just a tip.
Hope you’re having a pleasant autumn,
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 2:36 pm ¶P.
Yes I have used the same computer for the last few posts except the previous to this but when checked from another computer I could not see posts – ummm— yu are right I need patience. BTW I know now who yu contacted about me- hahah thats really funny. Hes a good friend; he showed me what he wrote to yu. Why didnt yu just address that on the blog instead of going private? Are yu really that worried about what I say to yu? Is it threatening or disturbing? Yu are a lil spooky. I noticed on another stream on this site when someone questioned your linguistic approach yu became quite, quite defensive..is this a pattern? Surely not! James
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 2:42 pm ¶Hm, linguistic approach? I don’t deal with linguistic stuff. Don’t recall what you’re referring to, and also double checked the comments to refresh my memory. Making stuff up now, pal?
James! You are spooky. Don’t try to derail this thread of discussion. I’ll bring us back on track by explaining why you’re spooky. You’re spooky because there are multiple users on this site with the same IP address. Yours. Listen, you’re a smart guy, and you make valid points when it comes to Xinjiang facts – that never was questioned. But why do you need to make ghost accounts to bolster your position? Listen, pal, we’ve got pretty solid evidence that you’re playing multiple personalities here, and now that it’s out in the open, I’m sure our curious readers would like to know why you even need to do that? Especially considering how persuasive you are, as is. So, I think this is a valid point to discuss – especially since I believe the record shows I never questioned your observations about Mahsum. So, audiences want to know: why are you posting as two people from the same computer? Otherwise, I think we’ll just have no choice but to dismiss you as someone out for attention. And, if he doesn’t get that attention…well… he gives it to himself.
You sure are spooky!
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 2:54 pm ¶Oh, and don’t make it look like I sent an email to an acquaintance of yours behind your back (I knew he was an acquaintance of yours, after all!). I sent you an email too! Why haven’t you responded? I was pretty sincere about my Xinjiang viewpoints in it. It was a sincere gesture, too, I’m just trying to open up a private discussion with a guy who knows his stuff! Or… are you not interested in discussion if there isn’t a way for other people to see your godly brilliance? I’m sadly waiting for a reply…
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 3:06 pm ¶Sorry I havent read yr email I will now
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 4:40 pm ¶Heh heh, 30 comments. Frikin’ awesome.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 4:58 pm ¶I hope things are clearer to yu now porf and I must apologize for thinking yu and Upke were the same person. It just seems that way seeing yu both use the same computer…just jokin…but… Did yu get my email? James
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 5:18 pm ¶Urumqida is wise. I am unimportant. I am the voice of the tortured. James.
Posted 16 Apr 2008 at 6:49 pm ¶Woh, look at the new kids comin’ up on the block… 30 somethin’ comments and shiiiiit! Are you guys paying James to up your comment count? In fact, I’m gonna go all out with it… JAMES AND HIS MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS ARE ALL CONTROLLED by this mysterious Porfiriy character. Now I’ve got you, Porfiriy.
Oh, sorry… I don’t know what came over me.
Posted 17 Apr 2008 at 1:17 am ¶Porfiriy and James: u 2 should set up a sister site where u can duke it out on the main page, rather than in comments. You can call it “Xinjiang Smackdown.” Pretty entertaining.
James: thank you for the kind words. I’m touched. Always nice to be acknowledged by greatness.
Anyhow, folks interested in this discussion might find this link interesting:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JD18Ad01.html
Posted 18 Apr 2008 at 4:47 pm ¶Thanks Urumqida. Thats a good article. Video and all..
Posted 19 Apr 2008 at 8:54 am ¶There are always cocky people who are more interested in bashing China than helping minorities. Their real motivation in condemning China is not really heartfelt care for Uyghurs. Instead, the problems of the Uyghurs line up to the american government’s geopolitical intentions. That being said, there are still some people who truely cares for the minorities, but their cause is being defiled by these imperialist swines.
Posted 10 May 2008 at 3:13 pm ¶Trackbacks & Pingbacks 3
[...] The New Dominion commented on a report regarding a video of an attack on three Chinese men, one apparently produced or packaged with the intent to rally [...]
[...] surprise and concern were quickly quashed by the content of the actual video itself which, as we covered here at The New Dominion, contained a number of inconsistencies and puzzling questions, all but ruling [...]
[...] – bookmarked by 4 members originally found by flashmegan on 2008-09-23 Report of Chinese Hostage Execution Video, Possible Central Asia Link [...]
Post a Comment