The recent academic-looking report entitled "The Uyghur Genocide", published by the Newslines Institute of Strategy and Policy looks very sensational and according to the Guardian newspaper and CNN, is the "first independent report into the Xinjiang genocide allegations."

However, independent it certainly is not. A closer look at the report and the institutions behind it reveals its authors' claims of "impartial" and "expertise" to be a blatant deception.

A majority of the report's "expert" signatories are members of the Newlines Institute for Strategy and Policy, with abundant evidence tying it to the International Institute of Islamic Thought, an alleged Muslim Brotherhood institution that has been accused of supporting terrorism.

Ahmed Alwani, the founder and president of Newlines, also is vice-president of the institute, according to Newline's website. He also has served as the president of Fairfax University of America, which is the parent institution of Newlines and also financed the report.

However, the school's credentials were in doubt, and it was severely criticized by local regulators and nearly closed at one time.

According to the university's official website, it was originally named Virginia International University, which is a "private university" in Virginia. According to the Washington Post, the US National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity recommended the ACICS cease the recognition the university needs to operate, because of a lack of effective oversight of the nation's "independent colleges."

The statistics of the US Department of Education showed that there were only 153 students registered at the university between the 2020 and 2021 academic year. The school's official Twitter account has only 13 followers.

An anonymous employee in Fairfax who has been working there full-time for more than a year mentioned that their management only cares about the dollars they are bringing in and don't care about employees. He advised not to waste time there.

A netizen surnamed DrObserver also noticed that there were only a dozen faculty but it funded Newlines with over 100 staff - how is that possible without an enormous infusion of money?

Forbes writing about the report asks, "how much more evidence is needed before the international community acts on Xinjiang." The existing "evidence" of "genocide" is flimsy; perhaps this report adds something new?

I guess not. This "25,000-page report" contains only 55 pages. The truth is, there is nothing new added to this report. The report is largely a rehash of Adrian Zenz, an infamous anti-China pseudo-scholar.

S M Hai, a retired group captain in Pakistan Air Force, described Adrian Zenz on his op-ed published on Daily Times as the dubious champion of Uygur Muslims.

Adrian Zenz is behind numerous "reports" on Xinjiang, which are full of false claims, and has faced a lawsuit from companies and individuals in Xinjiang for causing reputational damage and economic losses.

Starting in 2016, he began commenting on China's Xinjiang, and wantonly slandering and distorting China's policies in the region. He made up more than 10 reports relating to Xinjiang, including "1 million Uygurs are illegally detained in Xinjiang," "Xinjiang imposes birth control measures on Uygurs and minorities," and "Xinjiang is having culture genocide on minorities."

However, a closer look at Zenz's reports reveals his intention to disguise anti-China purposes.

Zenz's reports are full of imagination based on bias. He assumed Xinjiang's regular recruitment of police officers is to prepare for "detaining" Uygurs and other minority groups, described Xinjiang's boarding schools as a guarantee for massive "detention," and slandered local residents' voluntary employment outside Xinjiang as "forced labor" organized by the local government. His reports are also full of assumptions; words like "may" or "estimated" are usually seen.

No wonder he is hailed as a hero in the West and his "research" articles are used to levy sanctions against China. Only within two years, Zenz, who started as a scholar on theology, turned himself into an "authoritative expert" on Xinjiang.

This report is full of lies which indicates that it is not a purely academic but one with very strong political bias and is aligned with certain forces in the Western society to smear China, Chinese observers noted.

"It's really challenging to resist such forces, but we need to keep refuting such false claims and talk," Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University said during an interview with the Global times.