Terror v. Terror, China’s Way to Prevent Terrorist Attack

Shopkeepers line up with wooden clubs to perform their daily anti-terror drill outside the bazaar in Kashgar, Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, China, March 24, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas Peter

Before China adopts the measure of terror v. terror, there were quite a few reports of terrorists killing tens and even hundreds of victims indiscriminately not only in Xinjiang, Chinese terrorists’ homeland, but also in quite a few large cities.

There was real terror created by the terrorist attacks that have give rise to stampede that hurt people when people heard the panic yelling about terrorist attack, though quite a few of that turned out false alarms.

China adopts the measures of terror v. terror, including:

1. It bans report on terrorist attack so that terrorist cannot create terror among Chinese people. That is most important as creation of terror is precisely what terrorists want more than the killing of innocent people.

2. It counters terror with terror. It fills its media with reports on how people have been organized to fight terrorists with clubs and conduct mass search of terrorist attackers. It has indeed organized people for fighting terrorists not only in Uighur heartland but also all over China. As far as I know more than 100,000 people have been organized to fight terrorists in Shanghai, my hometown.

Chinese media are even filled with reports on the stories of people resisting terrorists with clubs and even stools and killing them without arresting them to punish them and on mass search of terrorists by lots of civilians armed with clubs. The photo on top shows how shopkeepers have been organized to fight terrorists with clubs.

3. According to Reuters’ report “Terror threats transform China’s Uighur heartland into security state” yesterday, China has built thousands of what the authorities call “convenience police stations” across Xinjiang and hired some 30,000 new officers to man them to set up grid-style surveillance there. As a result, terrorists have no way to escape after their attack. That certainly terrifies terrorists.

Certainly, the surveillance has caused some inconvenience just as I felt when my bag was checked for security when I took subway in Shenzhen, but I place the blame on terrorists instead of the authority that imposes such surveillance.

Reuters says in its report, “This month a video purportedly released by the Islamic State group showed Uighur fighters training in Iraq and vowing that blood would ‘flow in rivers’ in China.” It tells us that there is real threat of terrorist attacks in China.

Comment by Chan Kai Yee on Reuters’ report, full text of which can be viewed at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-xinjiang-security-insight-idUSKBN1713AS.

8 Comments on “Terror v. Terror, China’s Way to Prevent Terrorist Attack”

  1. […] “Terror v. Terror, China’s Way to Prevent Terrorist Attack” […]


  2. leading says:

    It’s very clear who is behind these terrorist activities – the CIA’s national endowment for democracy. I hope china has long term plans for payback. It’s an atrocity such demonic groups are allowed to freely wreak havoc around the world.


    • Mad Max says:

      Absolutely. America as a country must learn to pay for the sins of their elected and non elected officials who’s causing havoc on the world for the last 200 years. Nothing much to admire about Amerika and its “independence”. It was and continues to butcher the people of this world. When the red line is crossed, the world fervently hopes the Amerikan “butcher of the world” will be fully and completely vaporized and destroyed, never to rise again to terrorize the world, the way they did.


  3. Simon says:

    In the UK I was watching the news this past weak about the lone attack at Westminister, London. Unsurprisingly I notice the British media calls it a terrorist attack including the BBC who wasted no time declaring it to be a terror attack regardless before or after details was made available by the police.
    Not long ago the BBC recieved many complaints of bias news when covering attacks in Xinjiang and elsewhere in China by refusing to categorise these attacks as act of terrorism by putting the term “terrorism” in quotes. The BBC defended their decision by saying there is no evidence these attackers are link to terrorist groups outside China and that they lack the sophistication of a planned attacks, the attackers made use of sophisticated bombs or recieved high level of training abroad to carry out the attacks. Instead the BBC blamed China, siding with the terrorist’s accusation and excuses that it was the government supression of its way of life that drove section of the muslim population to fight back spontaneously. This is despite many of the attacks by Uighur extremists were organised in groups, planned with prior co-ordination and asssisted from abroad.
    In the Westminister attack the assailant Khalid Masood was british born, acted alone, has no affliation to known terrorist groups, not travelled abroad for training or training of any kind for purpose of terrorism and no evidence of being radicalised. Masood acted alone without any sophistication. His action was none other than a grudge fueled by Islamaphobia in his country and his own isolationism. The contrast here could not be more stark when what is deemed as “terrorism” by Westerrn media can be applied so errantly when a attack occur in its own country yet the same Western media refuse to recognise terrorism when obviouse sophisticated organised terror attacks occur in China.


    • Steve says:

      This is not surprising. In history, the untrustworthy British are known for their 3 handed approach or born with 3 hands. First they befriend U, Second to gain your trust and third stab u behind your back. They are among the worst untrustworthy scoundrels in history … divide and conquer. Its their so called freedom of expression leading to freedom of lies, deceit, chaos and anarchy. India and China should know very well of it’s history of colonial rule.


      • Simon says:

        Following the Westminister attack Chinese Premier Li Keqiang offer his country’s support to Britain to condemn the terrorist attack. I felt it is a mistake to support Britain to condemn the attack as “terrorism” when it is clearly not. Britain refuse to offer support to China in condemning organised terror attacks in its country, instead it criticises China accusing its of oppression by supporting the terrorists. China should do likewise and criticise Britain for Islamaphobia an marginalsiation of people of minority groups.
        The thing with the Westminster attack, if it was carried out by a white man who is not a Muslim the British press and government would never call it a “terrorist attack”.


        • Steve says:

          Truth – Democracy brings us trouble due to politicians (& peoples) self centred selfish behaviour. Generally speaking, people seeks self benefits and greedy for profits and fame. Especially in a western style democracy will lead to upheaval and confrontations.

          Premier Li did the right thing because China is not UK. Western powers are the worst oppressors using its military to subdue by force and they get away with their own democratic rule of law.

          China only has to get along with its economy, trade and money followed closely by military. Other Nations will follow this path and not the path of US/UK/France/Australia where military comes first by way of terror. The world has come to realise that China is the true diplomatic and economic superpower. At any given time China can dump US treasury bonds if US plays hardball with its protectionism policies. The era of westernisation is slowly coming to a close and the Easternisation of China is reaping rewards.


    • Mad Max says:

      In other words, the entire world is being brainwashed daily by the Amerikan-Anglo mass media for the global terrorism created by their governments.

      How sick is the Amerikan-Anglo axis.

      Truth is, Amerika and its British mass media and spy services should all be destroyed. They have gone too far.