Tag Archives: Xi Jinping

Time To Exploit Deceptive China’s Fault Lines

(Sandeep Dhawan) Today every free country is looking at China in disbelief. The CPC and XI Jinping have opened up a number of fronts, more than they can afford. China faces humongous challenges in the aftermath of the pandemic. Unemployment is going through the ceiling, and demonstrations against the government are on the rise. PLA veterans are dissatisfied, and Wuhan citizens are still looking for millions of missing relatives. Anger amongst Uighur is likely to implode anytime soon, and Tibetans are ready to move beyond peaceful demonstrations. Hong Kong is on the boil. Indian and Taiwanese forces are at the highest alert.

So what could be better than giving a call for ’Pax Sinica’. Taking the nationalism to such heights that citizens give up their anger and pain and look up to the leadership in awe.

These methods may work within China but among other nations it has provoked strong anti-China emotions. The fault lines in the Chinese armour are visible to all and ready for the exploitation.

Xi Jinping – Fault Line One

Continue reading

China’s ‘Free’ Flu Vaccine Offer Follows Years of Scandals

Composed photo Epoch Times

Chinese dictator Xi Jinping promised the world free Chinese coronavirus vaccines, paid for by Beijing, during Monday’s World Health Assembly session. Xi made this vow after years of scandals at home fueled by the corrupt and incompetent manufacturing of much simpler vaccines for diseases such as polio.

China’s vaccines are so notorious that state-owned media outlets openly admit Chinese parents prefer foreign-made products. Xi’s regime claims to have cracked down on manufacturers intentionally developing watered-down vaccines that do not produce inoculation after one such company, Changsheng Biotechnology, produced close to one million substandard vaccines, distributed to hundreds of thousands of children in the country. The Changsheng scandal, which resulted in widespread protests, preceded a number of similar cases with other pharmaceutical companies in the country, and evidence suggests Xi directed more potent efforts towards silencing outraged parents than getting faulty vaccines out of Chinese clinics.

China’s recent history producing watered-down, dangerous vaccines did not factor into any discussion of a future vaccine for the Chinese coronavirus during the World Health Assembly, conducted virtually this year as a result of the pandemic. The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) instead offered Xi Jinping one of the first available speaking positions on Monday to make his statement unchallenged.

“In China, after making painstaking efforts and enormous sacrifice, we have turned the tide on the virus and protected the life and health of our people,” Xi told the W.H.O. audience, failing to mention mounting reports of surges in cases in multiple provinces of China, including Hubei, where the pandemic began.

“All along, we have acted with openness, transparency, and responsibility. We have provided information to the W.H.O. and the relevant countries in the most timely fashion,” Xi continued – another statement that did not address the fact that Beijing admitted to destroying early samples of the virus and has launched a campaign to promote the conspiracy theory that the virus originated in America.

Xi then announced a Chinese Communist Party healthcare giveaway.

“COVID-19 [Chinese coronavirus] vaccine development and deployment in China, when available, will be made a global public good. This will be China’s contribution to ensuring vaccine accessibility and affordability in developing countries,” Xi said. “China will provide US$2 billion over two years to help with COVID-19 response and with economic and social development in affected countries, especially developing countries.

The W.H.O. said on May 15 that 118 potential Chinese coronavirus vaccines exist around the world and eight have entered clinical trials. Half are in China, where at least one firm openly stated it preferred to experiment with its vaccine on foreigners rather than Chinese nationals. China has an advantage in developing the vaccine in that officials destroyed early samples of the vaccine, not offering the rest of the world a chance to study them and observe the natural evolution of the virus as it spread through humanity.

Despite this advantage, reports indicate that Washington has found evidence indicating Chinese hackers are trying to steal key research on a vaccine from American scientists, a claim Beijing’s state media outlets have denied.

Chinese state media outlets began immediately heralding the move as a sign of “China’s resolution and generosity in serving the international community.” American outlets like Politico, which is in a content partnership deal with the Alibaba-owned South China Morning Postcontrasted the “hope” Xi brought to the table with the allegation that his giveaway offers at the World Health Assembly left President Donald Trump “increasingly isolated.” Few have highlighted the poor development history of Chinese vaccines, and those who did identified the pandemic as a shot a “redemption.”

Xi Jinping’s regime would be seeking redemption from multiple scandals, the largest beginning in 2018. That year, adverse effects in children revealed that Changsheng Biotechnology and the state-run Wuhan Institute of Biological Products had sold nearly a million doses of substandard vaccines throughout the country. The vaccines in question were several varieties typically used to inoculate infants and young children and almost all of them were administered to children, Chinese officials said.

The vaccines prompted nationwide criticism and protests from infuriated parents, which triggered a censorship action much more formidable than the law enforcement response to the damaged vaccines. The most vocal activists began to disappear in late 2018 and police began shutting down social media groups for parents of affected children.

Xi Jinping himself said little of the scandal, merely dismissing it as “vile and shocking” and vowing an “investigation.” Many of Changsheng’s senior officials were, indeed, imprisoned, and the company went bankrupt in November 2019.

Long before then, however – in January 2019 – parents in Jiangsu province uncovered another set of faulty vaccines. Unlike the Changsheng scandal, where government officials confirmed that the vaccines were substandard, officials in Jiangsu said the polio vaccines in question were safe after parents of the affected children, who fell ill, independently discovered that the vaccines had expired.

Anger at the government at a boiling point, a mob of hundreds of parents in Jiangsu convened at a government health facility and surrounded government officials, beating at least one of them. The incident was caught on video.

China’s reputation on vaccines in its geopolitical neighborhood has suffered tremendously. In 2018, amid the Changsheng scandal, reports began surfacing that North Koreans, stuck in a country with a barely functional healthcare system, were actively avoiding Chinese-made medications. Reporting sympathetically on a new series of vaccine laws in China in January 2020, Sixth Tone, a state-owned outlet, noted that the laws had sent parents scampering to semi-illicit clinics as the supply had reduced dramatically. Many of these parents went to the clinics looking for foreign vaccines.

A month later, Chinese Communist Party officials admitted that 29 children in Shijiazhuang, northern China, had received watered-down vaccines at a local health center. The officials blamed not any manufacturer, but a local nurse accused of watering down the vaccines to make them cheaper and keep the difference in price between the functional vaccine and the diluted ones.

Forced mandatory Inoculation Cannot be Enforced! YOU CAN LEGALLY SAY NO! This Right Has Existed For Thousands Of Years! Everything They Are Doing Now Is Illegal! Even If they Say It Is The Law, It Is A Giant Bluff! International Humanitarian Law States You Cannot Be Forced To Give Up A Right, Such As Informed Consent, To Get A Benefit!

Source: by Francis Martel | Breitbart 

How They Control 1.4 Billion People


China’s social credit system, which becomes mandatory in 2020, aims to funnel all behavior into a credit score.

A few months ago, you accidentally defaulted on a phone bill. The mistake affects your credit score: It’s hard to get a loan. You can no longer make jokes about Marco Rubio on Twitter; such remarks will algorithmically define you as a libertarian loon—another sort of person likely to default on social obligations. After a couple of close friends miss their student loan repayments, you can’t even travel: your social circle is now all “discredited, unable to take a single step.”

This is the incipient scenario in China, whose state-backed “social credit scheme” will become mandatory for all residents by 2020. The quoted text is from a 2014 State Council resolution which promises that every involuntary participant will be rated according to their “commercial sincerity,” “social security,” “trust breaking” and “judicial credibility.” 

Some residents welcome it. Decades of political upheaval and endemic corruption has bred widespread mistrust; most still rely on close familial networks (guanxi) to get ahead, rather than public institutions. An endemic lack of trust is corroding society; frequent incidents of “bystander effect”—people refusing to help injured strangers for fear of being held responsible—have become a national embarrassment. Even the most enthusiastic middle-class supporters of the ruling Communist Party (CCP) feel perpetually insecure. “Fraud has become ever more common,” Lian Weiliang, vice chairman of the CCP’s National Development and Reform Commission, recently admitted. “Swindlers must pay a price.”

The solution, apparently, lies in a data-driven system that automatically separates the good, the bad, and the ugly. But with President Xi Jinping, China’s most authoritarian leader since Mao Zedong, at the helm, much English-language coverage of the plan so far predicts “unprecedented” levels of dictatorial surveillance.

Commercial versions of the nascent national program are already in operation. Ant Financial, the finance arm of e-commerce giant Alibaba, is piloting Sesame Credit, which offers a range of perks, such as travel upgrades and deposit-free car rentals, to top scorers. But Sesame’s system, which assigns a rating between 350 and 950, is murky and complicated. The company says even innocuous activities, like late-night web browsing or buying video games, could see one’s rank downgraded for “irresponsible” behavior. One undergraduate saw her score plummet to 350 after being named in an unresolved civil suit: Sesame had automatically listed her as a laolai, a deadbeat, “subject to enforcement for breaking trust.”

The worst-case scenario is a form of high-tech Stalinism for our brave new world, in which those who toe the line are kept doped with rewards like fast-track visas for countries with compliant customs (developing regions deeply indebted to China via its “One Belt, One Road” could end up having to align themselves with Beijing’s emigration and other policies). Meanwhile, those whom the system considers dissenters, dropouts or deadbeats would be effectively excommunicated from mainstream society. How these miscreants are defined is one of the most worrying aspects. “I have no doubt that the current efforts are intended to produce a more authoritarian state,” Stanley Lubman, a Chinese law specialist at UC Berkeley, tells me.

“Good” behavior is equally subjective. Sesame Credit automatically upgrades customers who purchase curtains or diapers, for example—items which suggest a certain middle-class stability. This is partly because Sesame “is designed to incentivize behaviors that drive profits for Alibaba,” explains Mark Natkin, managing director of Beijing-based Marbridge Consulting, such as “heavier online and offline use of Alibaba’s payment tool, Alipay, and the user’s ability to recruit more friends to join their Alipay [social] circle.” Mrs. Chu, a middle-class working mother in her early 30s, tells me she finds Sesame “very convenient… because I have a high score, I can get refunds [online] quicker, without having to wait to return the items.”

But once compulsory state “social credit” goes national in 2020, these shadowy algorithms will become even more opaque. Social credit will align with Communist Party policy to become another form of law enforcement. Since Beijing relaxed its One Child Policy to cope with an aging population (400 million seniors by 2035), the government has increasingly indulged in a form of nationalist natalism to encourage more two-child families. Will women be penalized for staying single, and rewarded for swapping their careers for childbirth? In April, one of the country’s largest social-media companies banned homosexual content from its Weibo platform in order to “create a bright and harmonious community environment” (the decision was later rescinded in favor of cracking down on all sexual content). Will people once again be forced to hide non-normative sexual orientations in order to maintain their rights? An investigation by the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab also warns that social credit policies would be used to discourage protest.

State media has defended social credit against Orwellian charges, arguing that China’s maturing economy requires a “well-functioning” apparatus like the U.S.’s FICO credit score system. But, counters Lubman, “the U.S. systems, maintained by three companies, collect only financially related information.” In the UK, citizens are entitled to an Equifax report itemizing their credit status. In China, only the security services have access to an individual’s dang’an, the personal file containing every scrap of information the state keeps on them, from exam results to their religious and political views.

While outside observers agree that the situation likely bodes ill for many unwitting citizens, few have considered how vulnerable the system is to the corruption, con artistry, and incompetence that plagues much of Chinese society. Who will have access to the data, and how will they be able to use or abuse it? Will it be shared between ministries and departments, or jealously guarded? Can it be manipulated, altered, faked—or stolen?

Private data in China is already openly (and cheaply) available on eBay-like platforms such as Alibaba’s own Taobao, making the company indirectly responsible for both harvesting and selling its customers’ data. Scams and identity theft are infuriatingly common. Sesame Credit requires highly sensitive personal information, such as degree certificates and title deeds, to be uploaded to its cloud to enhance users’ credit scores — cyber security experts say such a centralized digital database would be a treasure trove for hackers.

Meanwhile, reports in China’s financial media suggest the commercial systems are already being abused, with micro-lenders using it to scam clients. “Sesame Credit… is still unable to control the quality of the data reported by partner lenders,” observed a Caixin article. “Information often includes errors like mistaken user identity, and some lenders deliberately misrepresent user information… they will actually put their favorite customers on their blacklist shared with other lenders, so that other platforms will reject the customer, allowing the original lender to have exclusive access.”

And it’s not just businesses and crooks looking to game the latest gimmick: Already accustomed to having their data mined and lives surveilled, tech-savvy Chinese are wondering how they can rig their scores—and entrepreneurial hackers will be more than willing to oblige. On the popular Q&A site Zhihu, users constantly wonder how to boost the numbers: “Can I click-farm this?” many ask. The top-rated answer skewers the system mercilessly:  

With my countrymen’s knowledge for seizing every opportunity, and penchant for taking shortcuts, it won’t be long before we’ll have plenty of companies willing to farm your score. What’s that? Sesame scores are connected to the frequency you use your credit cards? Simple—my company will help swipe and repay your card for a year, then charge you for how many points your score accumulates.

What? Sesame points are related to the scores of your circle of friends? Simple. I’ve got plenty of high-score friends: I’ll bring you in. What’s that? You’re afraid of bringing down everyone else’s scores? Don’t be. Using some bullshit card-swiping method, we’ll aggregate the IDs of all your parents, relatives and friends in the countryside to bring up your score, and when the time comes, divide up the points evenly. Don’t think it’s not possible.

The Zhihu user explains that he is simply applying a pattern of past behavior to the new model: “Some things that you can’t do in other countries, you can do in China, like fake divorces to get around housing purchase limits, or driving restrictions in Beijing. I’ve a friend who got a dozen buddies to help him enter the license-plate lottery… Of course I think there’s an urgent need for a credit rating system. But I really don’t have faith that they’ll do it well.” 

Marbridge’s Natkin acknowledges some dangers and drawbacks, but suggests social credit ratings “will also create a greater disincentive to engage in anti-social behavior, like a landlord capriciously deciding not to return a security deposit, or a shared-bike user parking in the middle of the street.” These are everyday grievances in China’s scofflaw society that many will be glad to see gone, or at least punished.

Riding the country’s flagship high-speed rail this year, I overheard an announcement warning passengers that bad behavior on board “could affect your personal credit”—now it’s been revealed that a whole range of infractions, from smoking to having the wrong tickets, could land citizens on a “deadbeat blacklist.” (So, too, will offering “insincere” apologies for defaulting on loans; one must not only learn to grovel, but like it.)

To work effectively, social credit requires Chinese citizens to place complete trust in both their unaccountable government and vast cartel-like corporations. And therein lies the problem: A secretive scheme that proposes to (literally) codify credibility within a society that inherently lacks any is more likely to undermine public trust that instill it. Few would knowingly risk signing up for such a scheme; unfortunately, by 2020, no one living in the People’s Republic of China—foreign or Chinese—will have a choice.

Source: By Robert Foyle Hunwick | New Republic

China Bans All ‘Original News Reporting’ On The Internet

Internet portals must shut all original reporting operations

Web services can now carry only state-approved media news


China’s top internet regulator ordered major online companies including Sina Corp. and Tencent Holdings Ltd. to stop original news reporting, the latest effort by the government to tighten its grip over the country’s web and information industries.

The Cyberspace Administration of China imposed the ban on several major news portals, including Sohu.com Inc. and NetEase Inc., Chinese media reported in identically worded articles citing an unidentified official from the agency’s Beijing office. The companies have “seriously violated” internet regulations by carrying plenty of news content obtained through original reporting, causing “huge negative effects,” according to a report that appeared in The Paper on Sunday.

The agency instructed the operators of mobile and online news services to dismantle “current-affairs news” operations on Friday, after earlier calling a halt to such activity at Tencent, according to people familiar with the situation. Like its peers, Asia’s largest internet company had developed a news operation and grown its team. Henceforth, they and other services can only carry reports provided by government-controlled print or online media, the people said, asking not to be identified because the issue is politically sensitive.

The sweeping ban gives authorities near-absolute control over online news and political discourse, in keeping with a broader crackdown on information increasingly distributed over the web and mobile devices. President Xi Jinping has stressed that Chinese media must serve the interests of the ruling Communist Party.

The party has long been sensitive to the potential for negative reporting to stir up unrest, the greatest threat to its decades-old hold on power. Regulations forbidding enterprise reporting have been in place for years without consistent enforcement, but the latest ordinance suggests “they really mean business,” said Willy Lam, an adjunct professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong’s Center for China Studies. 

Xi’s ‘Crusade’

Xi is cementing his power base and silencing dissenters ahead of a twice-a-decade reshuffle at next year’s party congress. Lam said that he “is really tightening up his crusade to silence opponents in the media.”

The regulator will slap financial penalties on sites found in violation of the regulations, the Paper cited the official as saying. A representative of Sohu declined to comment on the report. Tencent, Sina and NetEase didn’t respond to messages and phone calls seeking comment. The cyberspace administration has yet to respond to a faxed request for comment.

The government is now considering ways to exert a more direct form of influence over the country’s online media institutions. In recent months, Chinese authorities have held discussions with internet providers on a pilot project intended to pave the way for the government to start taking board seats and stakes of at least 1 percent in those companies. In return, they would get a license to provide news on a daily basis.

China’s online giants serve content, games and news to hundreds of millions of people across the country — Tencent’s QQ and WeChat alone host more than a billion users, combined. Online news services however have always operated in a regulatory gray area. They’re not authorized to provide original content and technically aren’t allowed to hire reporters or editors. Still, outlets have recently published investigative stories on official corruption cases, and covered sensitive social issues from demonstrations to human rights. For instance, NetEase ran a feature in April after the party announced an investigation into a senior Hebei provincial official, Zhang Yue. The story was later removed from the internet.


“Current-affairs news” is a broad term in China and encompasses all news and commentary related to politics, economics, military, foreign affairs and social issues, according to the draft version of China’s online information law. The amended draft of the regulation is currently seeking public feedback on the CAC’s official website.

The change in the guidelines on original reporting also comes weeks after China replaced its chief internet regulator. Xu Lin, a former Shanghai propaganda chief who worked briefly with Xi during his half-year stint as Shanghai party boss in 2007, succeeded Lu Wei in June as head of the cyberspace administration. 

The regulator has since tightened its grip on online news reports, such as by warning news or social network websites against publishing news without proper verification. In another sign that the government is exerting influence over information, the publishers of a private purchasing managers index suspended that popular gauge without explanation.

by Bloomberg News

In other news, DNC emails recently released to the public on (( THE INTERNET )) expose top democrat party planners mocking Gays, Jews, Mexicans and Blacks.


Yep, that’s what happens when you vote for political party sponsored candidates.

%d bloggers like this: