China To Sterilise 10,000 To Curb Births

From SkyNews:

Health authorities are planning to sterilise nearly 10,000 people in southern China over the next four days as part of a population control programme.

A woman carries a child at the central railway station in Shanghai

The rule of one child per family has been in force for decades

Some of the people in Puning City will be forced to have the procedure carried out against their will.

Amnesty International says forced sterilisation “amounts to torture”.

Reports in the Chinese media say that Puning Health authorities in Guangdong Province have launched a special campaign to sterilise people who already have at least one child in order to ensure local birth control quotas are met.

Chinese newspaper reports say that those who refuse to be sterilised have seen their elderly mothers or fathers taken away and detained.

Hundreds of people in Puning are said to have been locked up.

Kate Allen, Director of Amnesty International UK, said: “It is appalling that the authorities are subjecting people to such an invasive procedure against their will.

“Reports that relatives are imprisoned as a means of pressurising couples into submitting to surgery are incredibly concerning.

“The Puning City authorities must condemn this practice immediately and ensure that others are not forcibly sterilised.”

More than 1,300 people in the city have been held in local government buildings where they were given “lectures” on China’s family planning regulations.

Huang Ruifeng is the father of three girls.

“Several days ago, a village official called me and asked me or my wife to return for the surgery,” Huang told the local paper. “Otherwise they would take away my father.”

He refused.

His father was later rounded up and detained by the authorities.

According to Puning rules, farmers are allowed to have a second child if the first child was a girl.


Obama Declares War On Pakistan


Webster G. Tarpley
December 14, 2009

featured stories   Obama Declares War On Pakistan

featured stories   Obama Declares War On Pakistan

Obama declared all-out war on Pakistan during his December 1, 2009, West Point speech.

Obama’s West Point speech of December 1 represents far more than the obvious brutal escalation in Afghanistan — it is nothing less than a declaration of all-out war by the United States against Pakistan. This is a brand-new war, a much wider war now targeting Pakistan, a country of 160 million people armed with nuclear weapons. In the process, Afghanistan is scheduled to be broken up. This is no longer the Bush Cheney Afghan war we have known in the past. This is something immensely bigger: the attempt to destroy the Pakistani central government in Islamabad and to sink that country into a chaos of civil war, Balkanization, subdivision and general mayhem. The chosen strategy is to massively export the Afghan civil war into Pakistan and beyond, fracturing Pakistan along ethnic lines. It is an oblique war using fourth-generation or guerrilla warfare techniques to assail a country which the United States and its associates in aggression are far too weak to attack directly. In this war, the Taliban are employed as US proxies. This aggression against Pakistan is Obama’s attempt to wage the Great Game against the hub of Central Asia and Eurasia or more generally.

Continue reading

Soros: China should lead ‘new world order’

From Raw Story:

China should step up to the plate as the leader of a new global economic order, and the US shouldn’t fear the establishment of a global currency because it would help the economy, billionaire investor George Soros says.

In a recent interview with the Financial Times, Soros said that China hasn’t been pulling its weight in reorganizing the global economy after last year’s economic collapse, and the way to convince China to lead is to allow it to “own” the reorganization of the global financial system that is underway.

“You really need to bring China into the creation of a new world order, a financial world order,” Soros told FT. “They are kind of reluctant members of the IMF. They play along, but they don’t make much of a contribution because it’s not their institution. … They have to own it the same way as, let’s say, the United States owns the Washington consensus, the current order, and I think this would be a more stable one where you would have co-ordinated policies. I think the makings of it are already there because the G20, in agreeing to peer reviews, effectively is moving in that direction.”

Continue reading

General Motors Doing Well – in China

From CNSNews:

Beijing (AP) – General Motors Co. said Friday it set a sales record in China in September and total sales for the first nine months of the year rose 55 percent to nearly 1.3 million vehicles.

GM and other global automakers are looking to China’s fast-growing market to drive sales amid slack demand elsewhere. China’s monthly sales have surpassed those of United States for all but two months this year.

GM and its Chinese joint-venture partners sold a total of 181,148 vehicles in September, the company said. It gave no comparative year-earlier figure.

“Sales continue to surpass forecasts as nearly all market segments experience growth,” said GM China Group President Kevin Wale in a statement.

First-time buyers in smaller Chinese cities were an important force driving sales, Wale said.

Beijing has helped to boost auto sales with tax cuts and subsidies for drivers to shift to cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars. Most of that aid has gone to Chinese makers of smaller cars, though foreign producers also see sales rising.

GM said September sales by its flagship joint venture, Shanghai GM, set a monthly record of 71,566 vehicles, while total sales for the first nine months of the year rose 40.2 percent from a year earlier.

SAIC-GM-Wuling, GM’s mini-commercial vehicle joint venture, sold 100,635 vehicles in September, boosting total sales for the first nine months by 64.5 percent to 801,869 units.

GM’s joint venture with Chinese truck maker FAW, FAW-GM Light Duty Commercial Vehicle Co. Ltd., sold 8,780 light-duty trucks and vans in September.

China weather “magic” conjures blue sky for parade

From Reuters:

BEIJING (Reuters) – China’s air force deployed a “magic-like” range of chemicals and technology to clear Beijing’s smoggy air for a grand parade marking the 60th anniversary of Communist China, state media said on Thursday.

Chemists and officials worked for weeks on the country’s most ambitious ever attempt at weather modification, with air force technicians fanning out across the region to help teams operate complex equipment, the official Xinhua agency said.

The evening before the parade chemicals were fired into the hazy skies, and a light rain washed the city clean.

Surrounding provinces had already been loading clouds with silver iodide and dry ice, to try and force rain to fall before it reached Beijing, the report added.

“Only a handful of countries in the world could organise such large-scale, magic-like weather modification,” said Cui Lianqing, a senior air force meteorologist who said the parade operation was the largest in China’s history.

Contingency plans allowed for the teams to use one kind of chemicals to bring down rain in the parade area, and another to hold it off, he told Xinhua.

China has been researching cloud seeding and other weather manipulation techniques since the 1950s, but in the past has met with mixed success.

The opening to last year’s flagship Olympic Games fell on a day when skies looked hazy despite a raft of anti-pollution and weather manipulation measures.

And a deluge in 2005 forced a hasty last-minute venue change for an outdoor ceremony featuring top Chinese leaders, even after organisers had been promised China could guarantee dry weather.

Cui said this year’s plans dwarfed those for the Olympics, but despite their success he said there was still room for further improvements.

“The technology we have mastered so far could only allow us to modify the weather to a limited extent,” he told Xinhua.

“There are many uncertainties up in the sky.”

(Reporting by Emma Graham-Harrison; Editing by Jeremy Laurence)

Beijing’s ‘aim is to make people docile’


BEIJING – When the deputy editor of China’s Nan Guo Morning Post, Liu Yuan, first heard details of the death of a 15-year-old boy at a camp to cure Internet addiction, he knew he had a powerful story – and a public responsibility.

The details were shocking.

The boy had been dropped off at the camp by his parents on Aug. 1 about 2 p.m. and less than 14 hours later he was dead – savagely beaten by camp “trainers.” Locals later learned the camp was an unregistered business that apparently benefited from state money.

Liu dispatched a reporter and the Post broke the story Aug. 4, revealing that 12 people had been arrested and the camp shut down.

Internet addiction among Chinese youth is a serious problem, according to state media.

The news swept across the Internet like a summer storm, and soon, national media followed.

It was public service journalism of a high order, and further investigation revealed many children at the camp had been beaten.

In other countries, Liu might have received praise, a raise or perhaps a promotion – maybe even an award.

Instead, he lost his job.

Local Communist leaders felt the story had shamed the city – and made them look inept.

The local office of the party’s propaganda department, responsible for keeping a tight rein on the media, removed Liu from his position.

Liu might have intended to “serve the people” – to borrow a phrase from Mao Zedong – but local leaders felt he hadn’t served the party.

Such is the upside-down world of journalism in the world’s most populous country, where watchdog journalists are kept on tight leashes and the interests of the party are always paramount.

Scholars say that aside from the People’s Liberation Army – which is directly accountable to the Communist Party of China – there is no more powerful and important administrative branch than the sprawling, bureaucratic establishment known as the Central Propaganda Department.

While its inner operations are highly secretive, its main tasks are well known: control information, instruct the masses and mobilize them when necessary – all in the service of the party.

The department has offices that extend down to provincial, municipal and even county levels, across the country.

From a distance, China appears to be a rapidly modernizing country.

But the Communist government hasn’t let go of the reins of its propaganda effort since the day it took power 60 years ago.

“It’s absolutely essential to maintaining one-party rule,” notes Li Datong, one of China’s most respected and outspoken journalists, who rankles at such control.

“The aim of the department is to make people docile,” he says, “by brainwashing them … and that’s what the party does.”

According to Anne-Marie Brady, a New Zealand political scientist and Chinese propaganda specialist, the department’s reach is so broad and so deep that it has, “a central guiding role over the whole of Chinese society.”

Through its tentacles, the department controls virtually every means of information distribution in the country: newspapers, books, broadcast outlets, the Internet, mobile phones, education, culture, film – just about everything.

Few in the media business dare to disagree with the department. One does so at one’s peril, for the propaganda department has a lock on licensing – the key document needed to run a media outlet in China, giving the department extraordinary power.

Every week, explains Li Datong, the editors-in-chief of the country’s major outlets must attend at the department’s unmarked offices in central Beijing to take their marching orders – usually from a deputy minister.

If proximity to power is a sign of strength, then the propaganda department is strong indeed: its offices, at 5 West Chang’an Ave., are located near the senior party leaders’ compound known as Zhongnanhai, the Chinese equivalent of the White House.

“No one in Beijing actually knows that the building is home to the propaganda department,” says Li.

“Only some people in the media know – there’s no sign marking it. It’s as though they’re acting like an underground party – it’s like a joke. Such an enormous party and yet all of its departments are kept secret.”

At the meetings, usually held Fridays, 20 to 30 editors make the pilgrimage and are told which stories they must emphasize, which must be downplayed and what topics are off-limits.

They are also told which outlets have been found guilty of breaking regulations.

In addition, editors-in-chief regularly receive a stream of specific instructions via email: not only on what to write, but how much, how stories should be laid out and what articles must be removed from websites.

Those who flout the system can be fired.

In 2000 a warning system was introduced, Li notes. Now warnings are issued to those who break regulations and repeated offenses can lead to dismissal.

Following the Friday meetings, the editors return to their offices Monday and pass the instructions on to their department heads, who then pass them to staff.

“All the journalists know the instructions come from the CPD,” says one disgruntled journalist over lunch.

“It’s not like they make a secret of it. They just tell us openly: ‘These are the instructions.’ “

A journalist from another newspaper is asked if the experience is demoralizing?

“Of course. We hate the CPD,” says the reporter, whose paper is known for challenging department guidelines.

But few papers do.

Seasoned editors note that 90 per cent of Chinese papers are filled with entertainment and sports and lighter fare that the propaganda department couldn’t care less about.

“They’re only interested in controlling news about politics and current affairs,” Li says.

Li gained national and international notoriety in 2005 when a confidential memo he wrote was leaked online.

In the memo, he denounced a more senior editor’s plan that would link journalists’ bonuses to praise received for their articles from party officials.

Writing an article that was among the top three best-read in the paper would win the writer 50 points. But earning praise from the propaganda department would earn the journalist 120 points. And garnering a compliment from the Politburo would win a jackpot of 300 points.

Li was revolted and his resistance and the ensuing bad publicity led to the plan being scrapped.

He has come a long way from the days when he began his career at China Youth Daily in 1979. Then, journalists were disabused of any notions about editorial freedom from the outset, he recalls.

“I remember we were told flat out, `You are the party’s propagandists,'” he says.

The situation improved during the 1980s when the state eased up on its insistence that journalists be pure propagandists. Chinese journalists also began adopting some Western journalistic methods.

But 1989 changed everything, says Xiao Qiang, professor at University of California at Berkeley, who directs the China Internet Project.

Following the Tiananmen Square massacre, the propaganda department took on immense power.

“After Tiananmen the top leadership summarized their lessons learned,” says Xiao. “One of the most important, in their view, was simply: `Never let the media out of our control again.'”

The weekly meetings were introduced then, and continue to this day.

Xiao notes, however, that propaganda has been central to the Communist party strategy from the very beginning – not just since 1949, but during the Chinese Civil War which began in the 1920s.

“Victory depended on a two-pronged strategy: One was the military of course, but the other was the ability to mobilize people through propaganda.

“When they took power in 1949, they simply kept the same strategy.”

“In the Communists’ own words it was the power of the gun and the power of the pen.”

But Xiao also notes that, lately, there are growing signs of resistance from within the system.

People have been leaking instructions issued by the propaganda department directly to the Internet using Twitter, giving the public a rare insight into the heart of the system.

He has been placing them on the China Internet Project’s website, China Digital Times.

Some directives appear innocent and prosaic: “All websites need to use bright red color to promote a celebratory atmosphere” for the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic Oct. 1. “Roll out the red carpet,” the department instructs.

But there are other, more muscular instructions that speak to the department’s power, ordering media to “immediately remove,” material, or ensure that “negative reports … not exceed 30 per cent,” and finally to “close all comments” on a story embarrassing to the party.

And there was this:

“As for 60th anniversary columns that take a look back in history … do not allow articles that keep dwelling on the ’60s and ’70s . … “

Those were difficult decades for China – the time of China’s violent and chaotic Cultural Revolution – an event the Communist Party Propaganda Department would prefer be forgotten.


Red Flag To Fly Over White House


by Chuck Baldwin
September 9, 2009

Lest anyone doubt the communist leanings of President Barack Obama, look no further than to his decision to hoist the Red Chinese flag (for the first time in history) over the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Sunday, September 20.

According to China Daily, “Chinese associations in the United States had applied to hold a ceremony in front of the US President’s residence to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of PRC [People’s Republic of China] . . .

“More than 1,000 people will attend the ceremony and the performances held after it, according to Zhao Luqun, who will direct the performances.

“Zhao said the performances will demonstrate the friendship, magnanimous spirit and kindness of modern Chinese people.”

Trying to find words to describe the extreme offensiveness of flying the Communist Chinese flag over the White House challenges my vocabulary. Words such as UNBELIEVABLE, UNREAL, HORRIFIC, OBSCENE, even TRAITOROUS quickly come to mind. Maybe Obama really is the Manchurian Candidate.

Remember, the communist leaders of Mao’s China are not called the “Butchers of Beijing” for nothing. Since seizing power in 1949, it is estimated that the communist government in China has murdered more than 50 million people (some reports say the number is over 70 million). As many as 3 million were killed in Mao’s initial revolution.

The historical record of Mao’s murderous march to power staggers the imagination. According to Chinese historian Jung Chang, from 1958-1961, 38 million Chinese people were starved or worked to death, and 27 million died in Laogai death camps through 1976. The Weekly Standard quotes Chinese freedom fighter Harry Wu as saying that 15 million died in China’s labor camps through 1997. According to Agence France Presse, as many as 5 million were killed in rural purges from 1946-1949, and 1 million were killed in urban purges through 1957.

Then there is Tiananmen Square in 1989, when the Communist Chinese army murdered more than 2,000 college students. The number first reported by Chinese officials was 2,600, but then was quickly retracted. Early American estimates put the number at more than 3,000. The true number of deaths will likely never be known.

But let’s bring the discussion closer to home. Does the name Chosin Reservoir mean anything to anyone? Obviously, the name doesn’t mean anything to President Barack Obama. However, that name means much to the tens of thousands of American families who lost husbands, sons, and fathers there.

By mid-1950, the Korean conflict was all but over. U.S. Army and Marine forces had handily defeated the North Korean army. It looked realistic that our fighting men would be home by Christmas. But from October of that year, more than 60,000 communist troops from China crossed the border into North Korea. During the next two months, the invading communist forces killed more than 4,000 American troops. Of course, China’s involvement in the conflict ensured a long, protracted war that resulted in the deaths of more than 50,000 brave Americans. And, of course, don’t forget that Communist China also helped the Communist North Vietnamese kill more than 50,000 U.S. soldiers and Marines.

Now President Barack Obama is going to hoist the Communist Chinese flag above the White House to “celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of PRC.”

This is the same PRC that murdered 50-70 million of its own people. This is the same PRC that murdered thousands of Chinese students at Tiananmen Square. This is the same PRC that sent tens of thousands of troops to kill American soldiers and Marines in North Korea and Vietnam. This is the same PRC that yet today persecutes, imprisons, tortures, and kills Christians, Buddhists, and other people of faith. This is the PRC that still operates torture chambers, labor camps, and death squads. This is the same PRC that demands that Chinese families have no more than one child: meaning death to children where there is already a sibling present in the home. This is the same PRC that Obama wants to “celebrate” by flying its flag above the White House.

Why is the mainstream press not all over this story? Where is the outrage by veterans’ organizations (especially Korean War veterans)? Where is the national VFW? Where is the American Legion? Where is John Murtha? Where is John Kerry? Where is John McCain?

Perhaps one blogger summed it up the best. He said, “It can now be official–leave the [Chinese] flag there.” His point is well taken.

China already owns more U.S. debt than any other entity. America’s politicians from both parties have superintended over the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs and factories to (mostly) China. America’s business elite at the Chamber of Commerce has willingly traded U.S. business interests to China at unprecedented and dangerous levels. Major banking institutions have enthusiastically orchestrated the commercial and financial buildup of Communist China. America’s military and political leadership have even helped augment Red China’s military apparatus.

“Made in China” labels appear on almost everything we buy today; perhaps it is appropriate that the Red flag flies over the White House. While we’re at it, let’s hoist the Red flag over the newsrooms of many of America’s newspapers; the headquarters of ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN; most of the political science classrooms at America’s major colleges and universities; many of our mainline “Christian” denominations; the boardrooms of many major U.S. corporations; and also over many of the smoke-filled parlors of Big Labor. In the end, they all seem to be colored a pale shade of red these days.