????????當?shù)貢r間1月28日，美國獨立新聞網(wǎng)站美國獨立媒體“灰色地帶”（The Grayzone）發(fā)表調(diào)查文章，揭批《紐約時報》借所謂“專家”抹黑中國。

????????文章題目寫道：《紐約時報》指責中國“種族滅絕”的假專家，實則為右翼邪教法x功的宣傳部門工作。

????????近日，《紐約時報》興師動眾地找專家，發(fā)表了一篇指控中國對維吾爾族犯下了“滅絕種族罪”的文章。該文章在事實上受到了質(zhì)疑，一經(jīng)發(fā)布就立即翻車了。

????????據(jù)“灰色地帶”披露，這篇題為《新疆發(fā)生種族滅絕，我才開始尋根》的評論文章作者彭?阿米莉亞（Amelia Pang），是法X功媒體《大紀元時報》的前員工。她在《大紀元時報》工作的五年中，發(fā)表了至少17篇宣傳邪教組織的文章，還發(fā)表了大量夸張的、毫無依據(jù)的反華報道。

• 彭?阿米莉亞恰巧是《大紀元時報》的前員工，而《大紀元時報》是狂熱的反華邪教法X功的極右翼宣傳機構(gòu)。

• …Amelia Pang, happens to be a former employee of the Epoch Times, a far-right propaganda arm of a fanatical anti-China cult called Falun Gong.?

• 這個極端組織認為，種族混合、同性戀、女權(quán)主義和科學是撒旦的陰謀，同時將特朗普尊為上帝一樣的人物，認為他是上天派下來摧毀中國共產(chǎn)黨的。

• he extremist group preaches that race-mixing, homosexuality, feminism, and science are Satanic plots, and reveres Donald Trump as a God-like figure who was sent?down from heaven to destroy the Communist Party of China.?

????????更諷刺的是，就在3個月前（2020年10月），《紐約時報》剛剛發(fā)表了一篇文章揭批《大紀元時報》，稱它是一份有反華傾向的低成本小報。

????????在這篇文章中，《紐約時報》曾為《大紀元時報》打上了“右翼錯誤信息主要提供者”的烙印，稱其“推動危險的陰謀論”，“愿意為極右分子的網(wǎng)絡狂熱提供信息”，而且“在特朗普核心圈子中的影響力與日俱增”。

• The New York Times' decision to run Pang's commentary was ironic in light of the lengthy feature it published on the Falun Gong propaganda arm in October 2020,?which branded the Epoch Times a "leading purveyor of right-wing misinformation" that is "pushing dangerous conspiracy theories" with a?"willingness to feed the online fever swamps of the far right," and a "growing influence in Mr. Trump's inner circle."

????????然而，才過去幾個月，《紐約時報》就改變立場，又來刊登《大紀元時報》工作人員的評論文章，如此打臉的操作，不得不讓人質(zhì)疑其專業(yè)性和真實性，更讓人懷疑其居心何在。

所謂新疆問題“專家”一生未曾去過新疆

????????在這篇發(fā)表在《紐約時報》的評論文章中，彭利用其八分之一的維吾爾族血統(tǒng)，將自己和家人描述成中國政府實施所謂“種族滅絕”的受害者。

• In her Times op-ed, Pang deployed her 1/8th Uighur heritage to portray herself and her family as victims of a purported “genocide” carried out by the Chinese government.?

????????彭在文章中寫道，“我的姥姥是半個維吾爾族人”，或者說她的曾祖母是維吾爾族人，這就使她有了八分之一的維吾爾族血統(tǒng)。

• …"my maternal grandmother was half Uighur" – or, her great-grandmother was Uighur, which made her 1/8th Uighur.?

????????與此同時，她承認自己一生都在美國生活，因此不太熟悉中國及中國社會。

• At the same time, she acknowledged that she has lived her entire life in the United States, and therefore has little familiarity with China and its society.

• “除了我的母親與一位伯母，（我的家族中）沒有人到過新疆，她們兩個也沒有與自己遇到的親戚保持聯(lián)系?！?/span>

• …"no one [in my family] had ever visited Xinjiang apart from my mother and one aunt, and neither of them had stayed in touch with the relatives they met."

????????盡管與中國沒有什么聯(lián)系，彭卻將自己及其家人描述成共產(chǎn)黨的受害者。她寫道：“中國的強制同化政策仍然影響著我”。她完全不了解維吾爾族文化，卻沒有將這點歸結(jié)為她們一家作為美國移民被同化，而是將其歸結(jié)為北京所謂的殘酷行為。

• Despite her distant connection to China, Pang characterized herself and her family as victims of the Chinese communist party. "China's forced assimilation policies still reached me," she wrote, attributing her total lack of knowledge of Uighur culture not to her family's fairly typical story of assimilation as American immigrants, but rather to Beijing's supposed cruelty.

????????她發(fā)布推文稱，“很遺憾，新疆發(fā)生種族滅絕，我才開始尋根”。

• "I'm sorry it?took a genocide for me to remember I am Uighur,"?Pang tweeted.

提供虛假信息已成美媒報道常態(tài)

????????“灰色地帶”報道稱，為了證明中國政府犯有“種族滅絕”罪，彭暗示聯(lián)合國也譴責了中國的“罪行”。這種使用虛假信息的手段在西方媒體的反華報道中很常見。但事實是，聯(lián)合國并沒有這樣做。

• To make her?case that the Chinese government was?guilty of “genocide,” Pang misleadingly implied that the United Nations has accused China of? the crime – a disinformation tactic that has become common in?anti-China reporting in the Western media. But the UN has not done so.

????????彭還引用了美國國家廣播公司（NPR）的一篇報道，標題是，“報道稱，中國對維吾爾族的壓制與聯(lián)合國對種族滅絕的定義相符”（China Suppression Of Uighur Minorities Meets?UN?Definition Of Genocide, Report Says.）。

????????然而，“灰色地帶”認為，這篇報道同樣具有誤導性。

????????事實上，彭的文章以及NPR的報道引用的都不是聯(lián)合國的文件，而是一個極右的德國學者鄭國恩的調(diào)研結(jié)果。

• The report both Pang and NPR were citing was not a United Nations document,?but rather an investigation by a far-right German academic named Adrian Zenz.

????????“灰色地帶”曾揭批過鄭國恩，他是一名極右翼的原教旨主義基督徒，反對同性戀、性別平等問題，聲稱自己反華是“受到上帝的指引”。

????????他并沒有在中國待過多久，而且對于中國的政治、歷史、社會等問題也沒有明顯的學術見解，與其說他是一個學者，不如說他是一個右翼分子。

• The Grayzone has previously revealed Zenz?to be an extremist Christian who opposes homosexuality and gender equality and claims to be “l(fā)ed by God” against China.

• Zenz, who has not spent a significant period of time in China, and has no evident scholarly expertise on Chinese politics, history, or society, is not so much an academic as he is a?right-wing operative.

????????而鄭國恩的所謂“學術報告”是幾乎每個西方媒體控訴新疆“種族滅絕”及集中營問題時所引用的信源。

• The far-right German academic is the source for practically every Western media report?alleging "genocide" and enormous concentration camps in Xinjiang.?

????????“灰色地帶”稱，彭的專欄文章從第一行開始就是扭曲報道。她寫道，“我第一次真正意識到自己有維吾爾血統(tǒng)是在三年前，當時我看到一張在網(wǎng)上瘋傳、現(xiàn)已臭名昭著的照片：一排排身穿深藍色制服的突厥民族男性坐在新疆和田一個集中營的地上，新疆是中國所謂的維吾爾族自治區(qū)?！?/p>

• From the very first line, Amelia Pang's New York Times op-ed was based on distortions. She wrote, "The first time I truly realized I was Uighur was just three years ago, when I saw the now-infamous viral photo of rows of Turkic men in dark blue uniforms, sitting in a concentration camp in Hotan, Xinjiang, a so-called Uighur autonomous region in China."

彭在文章中提到的照片↓↓

????????這張照片在西方媒體和非政府組織中廣泛傳播，也幾乎成為新疆所謂“集中營”的唯一圖像證明。

• The photo Pang referenced has been heavily circulated by Western media outlets and NGOs, and is upheld as practically the only image proving the existence of “concentration camps” run by Beijing.?

????????令人噴飯的是，這張照片并不是由某個囚犯或記者所拍攝，而是中國政府自己在新聞稿中發(fā)布的，日期是在2014年，比美國國務院宣稱新疆“種族滅絕”開始的時間早了3年。

• The photo was not taken by some courageous prisoner or crusading investigative journalist; it was published by the Chinese government itself, in a?press release from 2014?— three years before the State Department claimed the "genocide" began in Xinjiang.

????????實際上，原圖發(fā)布在新疆司法廳的官方微信賬號中，并帶有水印，將其標識為中國政府拍攝的正式照片。西方進行反華宣傳時裁掉了水印，并將這一圖片作為政府開設集中營的證據(jù)。

• In fact, the original image was published on the Xinjiang Bureau of Justice's own WeChat account, with a watermark identifying it as an official photo taken by Chinese authorities. Western anti-China propagandists have subsequently cropped off the watermark and presented the photo as proof of China caught in the act.

不需要證據(jù)！

只要抹黑中國就行

????????“灰色地帶”在這篇文章中質(zhì)疑《紐約時報》作為媒體的公信力和傾向性。

????????文章稱，如今，在《紐約時報》編輯部，超同一性新自由主義者文化占據(jù)著主導地位，這足以使得作者（彭）具有不容置疑的可靠性。

• And in the?hyper-identitarian?neoliberal culture that now dominates the New York Times newsroom, this was enough to confer unassailable authority upon the author.

????????然而，值得注意的是，《紐約時報》對許多在新疆自治區(qū)出生、長大、支持中國共產(chǎn)黨及政府發(fā)展決策的維吾爾族人采取忽視并禁聲的態(tài)度，卻如此樂意接納一位擁有1/8維吾爾族血統(tǒng)的美國撰稿人的指責和焦慮。

• It is notable that the Times was so willing to entertain the accusatory angst of?a US pundit with 1/8th Uighur heritage, while it actively ignores and?silences the many Uighurs born and raised in China's Xinjiang province, who support the Communist Party of China and the?government's developmental policies.?

????????“灰色地帶”認為，彭的這篇漏洞百出的文章足以成為典型的研究案例，說明任何一篇文章，只要是指控美國官方認定的敵人犯下最嚴重的戰(zhàn)爭罪行，媒體就可以不需要任何證據(jù)就為其開綠燈。

• The?faulty?article was a case?study in how little evidence corporate media editors require to green light a piece as long as it accuses official US enemies of the most titanic of war crimes.

????????目前，《紐約時報》將彭的文章翻譯成簡體中文和繁體中文，以便全世界都可以閱讀。

• The Times translated the op-ed from English into both simplified and traditional Chinese so it could be read around the world.

?利用各類媒體大肆抹黑中國

????????此外，彭的這篇文章發(fā)表的時間也很微妙：在特朗普政府正式指控中國犯下“種族滅絕罪”的前幾天，彭的評論文章刊登了出來。

????????蓬佩奧任期內(nèi)的美國國務院宣稱中國的“種族滅絕”運動始于2017年3月，卻無法為其極端指控提供任何證據(jù)。

• The Pompeo State Department provided no evidence to bolster its extreme accusations, yet alleged that China’s campaign of “genocide” began in March 2017.

????????與此同時，美國利用媒體大肆抹黑中國。

?????????“灰色地帶”表示，《紐約時報》已經(jīng)成為傳播美國對華信息戰(zhàn)的中心傳送帶，給這場信息戰(zhàn)披上了新聞公信力的外衣，并將其推銷給包括《紐約時報》讀者群在內(nèi)的自由主義知識分子。

• The New York Times has been a central conveyor belt for the transmission of the US information war against China, providing it with a critical patina of journalistic credibility and marketing it to the liberal intelligensia that comprises the Times' readership.

????????同時，包括推特與臉譜在內(nèi)的社交媒體平臺暫停了一些知名維吾爾人及其他中國伊斯蘭教徒的賬戶，因為這些人針對這場沖突提出了另外一種觀點。而西方媒體僅允許一種觀點：即符合華盛頓及其新冷戰(zhàn)利益的觀點。

• Meanwhile, social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook have suspended the accounts of prominent Uighurs and other Chinese Muslims who provided an alternative perspective on the conflict. In Western media, only one viewpoint is allowed: that which serves the interest of Washington and its new Cold War.

????????事實上，有關西方對中國進行的虛假情報運動，“灰色地帶”已經(jīng)進行了廣泛報道。

• The Grayzone has reported extensively on the Western disinformation campaign against China…

????????在幾乎所有案例中，與該議題相關的煽動性媒體和美國國務院所依賴的研究，都是由這兩類機構(gòu)做出的：持極端觀點的極右翼機構(gòu)，以及由美國政府及軍需工業(yè)提供資金支持的反華非政府組織?！盎疑貛А闭J為，這些研究都是值得懷疑的。

• In nearly every case, incendiary corporate media and State Department claims related to the issue rely on questionable research by a single far-right operative with extremist views and a network of anti-China NGOs funded by the US government and the arms industry.

美國支援新疆分裂勢力
企圖煽動中國內(nèi)亂

????????司馬昭之心，路人皆知。

????????“灰色地帶”在文章中明確揭露，通過鼓勵新疆的分裂勢力，美國的目的就是為了對中國產(chǎn)生巨大影響。

????????曾任美國前國務卿科林·鮑威爾辦公室主任的勞倫斯·威爾克森曾在一次演講中公開表示，美國中央情報局（CIA）就是想利用在敘利亞境內(nèi)的新疆維吾爾族人煽動中國內(nèi)亂，從而達到破壞中國穩(wěn)定的目的。

????????為此，CIA下屬的美國國家民主基金會（NED）曾向新疆的分裂勢力提供數(shù)百萬美元的資助。

• 2020年12月，NED曾在推特上公開宣稱，對新疆分裂運動提供資金支持。

• The NED publicly boasted of its support for the Uighur separatist movement on Twitter in December 2020.

來源：中國日報

編輯：胡雨濛、王瑜

運營實習生：張瑩