Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for May, 2019

So Liu Xin’s has had a dialogue with Trish Regan…

*

FAREWELL SIN

*

A Sinful US Agent: Paid by Soros? NED?

Sinful Liu’s purpose of talking to Trish Regan is, she has said repeatedly, to help alter the general American perception towards China, favorably it seems:

  • Assuming that’s possible, which is far-fetched, why is it necessary?
  • Even assuming it is necessary, for both China and America, is it desirable?
  • Farther assume that it is desirable, whatever the platitudinous grounds, how will that break the cycle of dependency on America (handouts, aid, trade, banknotes, jobs, cars, doctors, vaccines, even an education) that’s been the root cause of so much misery the world over?

*

What’s Your Point, Sinful Liu?

Pay attention to the clip’s last five minutes that has a direct reference — and a contradiction — to Liu Xin’s narcissism and her Love America campaign.

Also note in the clip title, Liu Xin smearing the interviewee as a ‘hawk’. This is a term that is a direct import of American political dualism, of ideological language and moral values. The accuracy of the label in her branding can be determined with a mental test:

If Yan Xuetong is a hawk, what’s John Bolton? Or William Kristol?

The stupidity of this woman Liu Xin is boundless. Or maybe not. Worse for it, her absorption of Anglophile values have decapitated her ability to think critically and to recognize and then accept truth for whatever it is, and so see Trish Regan for who she is (below).

Hers is the same sort of colonial, racist, white ketuanan blinders Anglophiles put on, thus shackling countries like Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, India, Zimbabwe, Uganda and others, and from which they can’t get out from under. One million more such Liu Xins in China, we wouldn’t have come this far and are done for.

Has she sold herself to the CIA? Perhaps to its corporate front, George Soros — the way Malaysiakini and Steven Gan sold themselves to the the US Congress National Endowment for Democracy? Is Liu Xin now America’s Propagandist-in-Chief in China? This is asked because the US Deep State in the person of chief propagandist Bill Kristol is never shy of ‘regime change’ in China (below), as he, Bolton, Pompeo and others have in Iran, Venezuela, Brazil (successfully), Iraq (successfully), Ukraine (successful), Georgia (successful) and Russia. They actually think they have the right.

 

This sort of regime change, always, always begins with propaganda. To verify that ask Venezuela’s Guaido. Or ask Steven Gan. Whatever the case, it’s best China gets rid of this piece of Sin. Throw her into a dungeon or something. Maybe feed her to Uighurs.


This is an update when, one day, the Stupid and the Sneaky met…

*

The Naive Sin & the Evil Snake

*

You gotta to listen to this Nathan Rich. What did I say about these motherfucking Yankees? Bet you, over in America, they are having a good laugh at ‘Joyous’ Sin still pining for a repeat “dialogue” with Sneaky Blondie, as if to find endorsement from white people for their lives — like Anglophiles in Malaysia hankering after Anglo Saxon values.

Liu Xin to friends in CGTN:

I want to speak from my heart!

Trish Regan to friends in Fox News:

Did you hear that? Who gives a shit for her heart!

The Stupid vs Sneaky ‘dialogue’ is a microcosm of the deep chasm in China-US trade talks and Liu Xin exemplifies the stupid naivety that is cultural, ethical, intellectual and linguistic, all of which blinds her (and Anglophiles) to the white hubris America has long maintained:

  • (a) America is not the equal of China and won’t accept equal terms; it is superior;
  • (b) Americans never, never negotiate, to give and take; no, they take, you give; and,
  • (c) humility, sincerity, respect; what’s that? Some pansy religion?

Given all the above, the only card left on the table to deal is, Power.

As an American might say to a Chinese or Sneaky to Stupid:

“You just don’t get it, do you, Chinky?”

Oblivious to this truth, Stupid goes on the air, again and again and again, ossified to the belief that what works in talking to Chinese (or other Asians) also works with Americans — “So long as I open my heart,” says Stupid — and then merrily go on her delusion she is doing great things in US-China relations.

Americans call such people Useful Idiots. Perhaps Stupid will wake up only when bombs go off. We Chinese are lucky not to have her sitting in the National People’s Congress deciding policy so that it is the government that controls media corporations and not the other way around, as it is in the US.

“In America, Liu Xin, you are what they call, a Talking Head. So finish your tea, go home, feed the kids, walk the dog. And stay home so that we don’t have to nail you.”

***


*

GOODBYE GOOGLE, WELCOME ARK

*

One door closes, another opens…

Huawei’s Launches OS in July or August (Maybe)

Below, the clip announces Huawei’s new OS. It will be even better: the version in China is called Hongmeng, then modified in other languages called ARK. The latter, global version will be worked into new, ex-China shipments beginning early next year. Though in the timing, Hongmeng looks like a commercial test version for ARK, the former is actually an upgrade of existing phones made in China with future Huawei ones embedded with the new OS architecture and platform underlay.

Huawei is better because you won’t even know it’s there. That’s the point isn’t it? But the new OS is a dozen times faster. (Or your money back!) And it’s Open Source. Copy to your heart’s content if you know how.

With the new Huawei, worry not, therefore. You’ll have your favorite Apps, maps, chats, secret emails, and dirty videos, all deposited in and available from one place called Huawei AppGallery. There is especially a built-in platform — and this is the knockout one — a ready to install App for buying and selling online, the way we Chinese in China have been doing for ages.

Beep and it’s done and WeChat eWallet goes global. Believe it or not, we pay hawker food (and Klang River teh tarik) with the damn phone! From Ruili on the Yunnan-Myanmar border, we order and have jade stuff delivered to Heilongjian’s Yichun near Russia and North Korea. (Don’t believe me? Ask Jian about her global appetite for her tons of fashion jewelry in my — oops, our — drawer.)

The word ARK is self-explanatory. Hongmeng reads as one word, in hanzi 鴻蒙.

First syllable 鴻 hong reads exactly like the Chinese script 红, meaning red, Huawei’s color. Second syllable meng 蒙 sounds like meng of Meng Wanzhou, Ren Zhengfei’s daughter abducted by Canadians.

The Chinese OS name meng 蒙 is also used as a surname but more relevant, in Huawei’s context, is that it also means mist, as something in nature moving to envelope everything. Hence, in combination, 鴻蒙 hongmeng is a descriptive term to mean, to be suffused in, to permeate like it were mist: Softly, softly, the mist fills all.

We Chinese are very particular about names. Confucius taught us that. Names, words or terms when correct (in Chinese 正名 zhengming) then you know you are pointing to the truth of things, to the right thing and which points you to doing things properly. Hence in the Analects (Chapter 13): 名不正,則言不順;言不順. In translation: Terms must be correct. If terms are incorrect, meanings are not true, nothing comes to pass.

In trying to figure out how we get to know what we know (epistemology), the German philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein arrived at the exact same conclusion 2,500 years later in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1921):

The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.

Like Pompeo, like Trump, like all Anglophiles, Trish Regan tells the Chinese to “grow up”: Only the stupid and ignorant have a craving to be arrogant. They know not what they say.

*

Background

Huawei has been preparing for this day since … forever. (Below, Huawei’s Ren Zhengfei explains.) One factory known as HiSilicon, a Huawei subsidiary in Shenzhen, has been making the main chips but Huawei sat on pushing ahead and didn’t buy much anyway because it didn’t want to hurt relationships with existing Silicon Valley suppliers.

China-designed OS and Apps were tested in those HiSilicon and other chips and, again, for not wanting to hurt established suppliers and developers globally, those were not made available nor improved. This attitude is so Chinese, so Confucian: In whatever we do, first look inward then the other side. As this popular saying goes (repeatedly mistranslated, misquoted, misused, misrepresented by Anglophiles in Malaysia): The right foot forward launches the journey of a thousand li (one li being about one km).

The OS and related platform designs are ready to be rolled out with new Huawei devices, having been registered in China, Hong Kong, and Europe (European Intellectual Property Office or EUIPO; also see this Chinese news report).

*

***


*

The US Global Tech War

Why is Russia the only country unaffected?

The clip below gives you an excellent presentation — again, this is journalism not CNN nor Fox style — into what it means if America puts Huawei out of business. The short answer is, It will put America, specifically Google’s Android OS system and Windows, in complete control of the world’s Internet and mobile systems.

Only one country will be unaffected. It is called Russia. Why, and what does American control mean? The answer to that question also answers why Russia is not at the mercy of Americans, so the way to understand both is, picture it this way:

You’re in your room with an American. He walks out then switches off the light, and everything, the bathroom, kitchen, everything go dark inside. This is because the light switches are controlled outside the room. Move the light switches back inside, the American can’t do a thing inside your house.

The same answer helps explain why, fundamentally, America is shutting down Huawei and, immediately, Google jumped in: America demands to keep its monopoly. And it isn’t just the tech but also the profits derived and especially the power conferred to America.

With 5G, the issue isn’t just mobile phones and Google Apps. It covers drones, missile systems, and the security of communications regime without which America can walk into any country and you can’t even call your mother to say you have been drafted to fight Yankee invaders.

Keep the switches inside.

Now can you understand why Huawei’s global OS is called, the ARK?

Hey Malaiyoo! Thank us, Chinese, for saving your ass! Now pay us money.

The explanatory power in the journalism above by Dmitry Kiselyov is so good that in eight minutes you know all that there is to know about America tech war, cyber security, Huawei and why your mobile is caught in the cross-fire. Knowing all that, you then realize that hours of reading Malaysiakini, CNN (or listening to Liu Xin) and with visiting sites online have been a total waste of time: bullshit spun by western ‘journalists’ to an unsuspecting public to serve American corporate and the government interests.

Kiselyov is so good that Huawei should use his clip, One, as an explanatory tool and Two, to reassure the rest of the world: We are not going to die in the hands of America. Kiselyov broadcasts weekly in Russia’s Insight, program titled ‘News of the Week’.

***


曲終人散

Song to the Broken Man

***

Read Full Post »

Why America doesn’t want cyber security

&

And why it rejects Huawei’s offer for better security

*

Compare the discussions above and below.

The C-Span talk above is eternally far, far more useful to truly understand — national security, cyber security, US beating up Huawei, etc. — than that piece of yada, yada shit below, one more incontrovertible proof that western journalists (the Economist and Wall Street Journal to Fox News and Malaysiakini), are such fucking morons, the conveyor belts for American geopolitical propaganda. (Listen, for example, to that stupid kid from WSJ.)

As they say, the devil is in the details. Here is the takeaway from the C-Span broadcast: America doesn’t want to mitigate the risks from breaches of cyber security, nor get help from Huawei to build one.

And we all know why. A red herring is thrown into the pond, instead, which then makes it easy to fish out by motherfucking journalists. Further evidence to the journalism’s self-righteous propaganda attitude can be seen and heard below.

Liu Xin Thought with Anglophile Characteristics

Listen carefully to Trish Regan’s opening remarks: it isn’t so much the contradictions or the stomach-curling falsity that is sickening; those are commonplace in western journalism standards anyway. No, it’s her malice and mendacity that Liu Xin has not the stomach to point out then walk away.

*

NEW MEDIA WORLD ORDER

Simply by her attempts to debunk mythologies spread by Fox, Liu Xin doesn’t help matters stating China’s position in its relations with the US. On the contrary. Her ignorance or intentions or both adds fuel to the American propaganda bandwagon, reiterating the western self-righteousness.

Can’t you see that, Liu Xin?

Exhibit #A: I’m not a member of the Chinese Communist Party.

Saying she is not simply reaffirms Trish’s insinuation that the CCP is an evil thing, not credible. So what if you are, Liu Xin? Is Trish saying that truth has two sides, one from the CCP and one from Republicans? And that only Trish knows what’s true because she isn’t a CCP member? That Fox News and America have the monopoly on truth? Truth is always one-sided, and it is never revealed by arguing about two sides to a proposition. Something is either true or false — and never are there two sides to it.

Exhibit #B: This is a debate about IP trade.

Go back to the clip, all of which boils down to this: (a) That’s not debate but an interrogation in American Christian morality over a matter of law; and, (b) China steals — the same old diatribe heard countless times. Trish challenges Liu Xin to state, ‘Is it right to take something that’s not yours?‘ Is that an issue of trade or morality? The answer is simply this: It will be right if Trish Regan can state, categorically, it is right for Europeans, including the so-called American founders, to take something called land that was never theirs.

Exhibit #C: We know we have to grow up.

Does Liu Xin truly know what Trish means when she said, ‘Grow up, China!‘ a nation more than 5,000 years old. It’s people like Liu Xin who in the 1800s would have agreed with western powers when they demanded, at the point of a gun, “Good boy. Hand over Hong Kong.” And Suzhou and Tianjin and Qingdao and Shanghai…. This fucking stupid woman!

After all that, she pats herself on the shoulder and says, Well done! — this self-aggrandizing patronizing CGTN bunch. Is that what it is to be indoctrinated in Marxism-Leninism, practicing English with Chinese characteristics?

*

This is the trouble with Liu Xin: She adopts the American-western model of journalism which says journalists are the arbiters of truth/falsity (hence she cannot be a CCP member) and of good/evil, right/wrong. This model then feeds a swamp of Internet onlookers (see their comments), Anglophile motherfuckers who know no better and are equal in stupidity.

Fuck all that, Liu Xin! We are more discerning, and we are sick of all this.

Liu Xin is a disappointment: She is incompetent to take on American propaganda; to think critically, maybe, sometimes, but not to handle the hype.

Liu Xin can’t stop being Chinese in an English-speaking world — and this is another of her problem — so failing to see that empirical truths don’t matter to propagandists pretending to be ‘journalists’. Americans like Trish don’t want to understand China because it is not hard. But bringing out the truth would ruin the already formatted American story-line, their platform and, as they say, where Trish is coming from.

CGTN must change its model of journalism. Before that, sack all those Anglophiles and gweilos among them.

Here is the alternative to the journalism that’s been defined so far by westerners only: it is the Russian existential model in minimalist fashion. To see what I mean, see the following clips below because they are pretty good. This is media not in the mold of CNN, Fox, The New York Times and Malaysiakini but yet they are clearly superior, short, sharp, without Anglophile platitudes.

Example #1: Dialectical News

In this dialectical format, one piece of news (thesis) is juxtaposed against another (the anti-thesis), producing a synthesis, the cycle repeated, until you can clearly picture the cause-effect sequence. To work well requires the explanatory power of directness in language.

The Sinking Feeling in the US

*

Example #2: Inquire the News.

This news concern spying and trade. In such a format of making inquiry of the news, Liu Xin has only to know to ask the right question because the question is always half the answer. And the answer, below, will surprise you. Inquiring the news reveals what’s sitting at the bottom of the entire western media assault on China. That is, Who wants to be in control, to be Master of the World? Rick Sanchez again….

Google’s Epistemology

*

Example 2: Straight Narrative

The one below is best and requires some intelligence. It is delivered by a journalist without any panel (of idiots) or opinions (which doesn’t matter) but is instead the stitching of a sequence of events and statements, all bundled into eight minutes but made coherent, brisk, and clear so as to answer the single question, How did US-Iran standoff come about? It doesn’t attempt to answer the question why, because that’s impossible to know truthfully anyway. Rather it leaves behind a question to which you know the answer as if instinctively: Is a US-Iran war on the way?

US-Iran Standoff Without CNN

***


Reader Alert

UNCLE SAM IS WATCHING

…spying these pages via Taiwan and agents, keep.google.com, for example, and directly via gttac.com/fmi/webd/GTTAC and 10.11.12.72/monitoring/clipper/check. (Do not click on the links! Doing so makes it traceable back to you. Copy the addresses and access them from another computer/browser, preferably public ones. I am, however, safe in China from America.)

Take this, America!

Image result for middle finger japan girl

***


Related to Chinese Thought with English Characteristics…

Anglophile Apocalypse

***

***

Read Full Post »

《匆匆那年》

匆匆那年我們 究竟說了幾遍 再見之後再拖延 可惜誰有沒有 愛過不是一場 七情上面的雄辯 匆匆那年我們 一時匆忙撂下 難以承受的諾言 只有等別人兌現 。不怪那吻痕還 沒積累成繭 擁抱著冬眠也沒能 羽化再成仙 不怪這一段情 沒空反复再排練 是歲月寬容恩賜 反悔的時間 。

如果再見不能紅著眼 是否還能紅著臉 就像那年匆促 刻下永遠一起 那樣美麗的謠言 如果過去還值得眷戀 別太快冰釋前嫌 誰甘心就這樣 彼此無掛也無牽 我們要互相虧欠 要不然憑何懷緬 。匆匆那年我們 見過太少世面 只愛看同一張臉 那麼莫名其妙 那麼討人歡喜 鬧起來又太討厭 相愛那年活該 匆匆因為我們 不懂頑固的諾言 只是分手的前言

不怪那天太冷 淚滴水成冰 春風也一樣沒 吹進凝固的照片 不怪每一個人 沒能完整愛一遍 是歲月善意落下 殘缺的懸念 如果再見不能紅著眼 是否還能紅著臉 就像那年匆促 刻下永遠一起 那樣美麗的謠言 。

如果過去還值得眷戀 別太快冰釋前嫌 誰甘心就這樣 彼此無掛也無牽 如果再見不能紅著眼 是否還能紅著臉 就像那年匆促 刻下永遠一起 那樣美麗的謠言 如果過去還值得眷戀 別太快冰釋前嫌 誰甘心就這樣 彼此無掛也無牽 我們要互相虧欠 我們要藕斷絲連 。

Among friends, doing the work I like, helping with progress in my Motherland I love, fending off attacks, living comfortable, even the food is cooked for me, but why am I unhappy, thinking about Li Bai, missing home, missing her. When will this longing end.

Word from home: there’s been heavy rain; yellow alert went up several days ago; that should pass by now. Li Bai:

床前明月光, Before my bed, moon shines bright
疑是地上霜, Perhaps it’s frost lit on the ground
舉頭望明月, Raising my head, I see moon light
低頭思故鄉。 Lowering my head, I think of home.

Below, is another world that had arrived on a thing called WeChat

The day in the life of a Da Qing 大庆 official, 2019.

It was a quiet day and, fooling around, they had found an unusual device which is inscribed the words ‘Huawei P20’. Below is the result after they clicked. Look at the embroidery! The silk!

***

The Mazu History of the Overseas Chinese

The only Chinese deity that took China into the oceans and beyond, safely taking people and culture up and down the coast, from Fujian to as far as 2,000 km inland Guizhou, as far north as Shandong and Tianjin then Liaoning on the Russian border, and simultaneously sailing into the open seas, Taiwan, crossing the South China Sea to Borneo and Malaya and Singapore and onward to the Indian Ocean.

Mazu, actual name 林默娘 Lin Moniang, is thus the embodiment of the overseas Chinese and their history, our history.

To see Mazu, 1,100 years after her death, is to remember our history, home and family.

Image result for mazu liaoning

Mazu in Liaoning, Jinzhou, not far where I must go. Beyond, the Yellow Sea.

***


*

TRASHING TRISH: AN INTRODUCTION

The clip above is in Chinese. English speakers skip it. You lose nothing in the threads below. One piece of information you should know: Trish Regan is connected to Donald Trump via Ivanka and via Trump’s TV program, ‘The Apprentice’.

Below, a world even more remote from our lives: the America that the like of Trish Regan believes she is living out. Never in her life could she imagine that it’s an inferior, trash culture. Stupidity may have limits, not delusion.

Trish’s world above is microcosm of American bully psychology. It’s also how Trish sees herself. Tweet the bitch here.

Liu Xin, first understand that world.

***

Part A

If American tech is any good, nobody will buy Huawei

…and America won’t need to ban a tech nobody wants, not even for spying

*

LETTER TO 刘欣 LIU XIN

Dear 刘欣 你好

Understand that when you talk to Trish Regan, you are not talking to a journalist, partial or impartial, dependent or independent isn’t a point in contention. Never, in particular, imagine you are talking to some intellectual you might have bumped into in Switzerland though she is white, blond and Anglo-American. You are talking to a creature from purgatory and this is not an exaggeration.

Nobody — absolutely nobody — grows up in Anglo-American society without mastering hell and that the road to goodness is littered with hell’s attributes: evil, criminality, lies, deception, vengeance, murder. American feeds out of this pathway they call the ‘Valley of the Shadow of Death‘ (Psalm 23).

This is what Asians, people outside of America, Chinese most especially, don’t understand, that the results of this biblical Trishian Anglo-Saxon diet have produced slavery, extermination of Indian natives, the Chinese Exclusion Act, 1882 of USA;

  • the Chinese Immigration Act 1855 of Victoria, Australia;
  • the Chinese Exclusion Act 1861, revised 1881, of New South Wales, Australia;
  • the two above collected into the Immigration Restriction Act, 1901, Australia
  • the Chinese Immigration Act 1923 of Canada;

All that is also to say: We Chinese don’t have to give them a reason, or steal anything from Anglo-Americans or Anglophiles, they’d still want us dead. They didn’t need justification to exterminate Indians, why should they need any to smear you? Or China? If they need a cause then, rest assure, they’ll make something up.

This is why she is like a bullhorn, from which is derived the American word bullshit. There’s even a measuring meter for all her yada, yada.

Related image

*


Related image

Trish the Bullhorn

What’s the difference between picture above and the one immediately below?

Big crowd, small crowd? One is woman, the other is man? Trish is not Guaido?

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

Because she is the bullhorn, Fox News is the platform on which Guaido stands on. And Donald Trump is that Guaido bullhorn in hand, speaking through her cunt. Those seated beside Guaido is the Fox research team you talked about when criticizing her: they take pictures, put flyers on lamp posts, that sort of thing.

Here is the bottom line, Liu Xin: If American tech is half as good as it says it is — and everybody wants to steal it — then nobody will be buying Huawei. And America banning Huawei would be unnecessary.

Image result for bullhorn protest america venezuela guaido

*


In the natural sciences, research means … research, looking into the microscope, drilling into glaciers for evidences and breaking up atoms to see what happens. It means looking into previous published work by peers and checking the maths; it means days and months of observations, collecting samples, shifting through dung for worms; it means laboratories and test-tubes. Pray tell, Liu Xin, how do journalists like Trish do research when they sit in front of cameras, all day letting out fart? My grandma can do research in all the mountains of Sichuan far better than she sit for ten years behind cameras.

Here’s the truth: Trish gets credit from you for qualities that don’t exist. Reading a report is research? Can she even read? The only requisite credentials necessary for a bullhorn like Trish is to look pretty and that she has enough neck room to wrap your fingers around it. Journalists? Trish is a stenographer with no assets greater than a cunt, high on the pretense she can make or break the world talking, just talking. Please….

Now that we got the elementary bits out of the way, here are the follow-up questions: What are you going to say to a bullhorn? True, ‘words have consequences’. Those are their consequences. Why bother? Besides, do you think your words will produce a different set of consequences? Do you expect to change anything, and Trish will sit there, arms folded, and let you get away with it?

The reason you accept Trish’s challenge to a debate is because you believe you have ‘facts’ on your side, and that China is the victim of a smear campaign. Any of which is, of course, true. But how will you tell that to a bitch or, worse, to her fans?

You don’t own Trish, Liu Xin. That bullhorn belongs to America, specifically to Trump’s America; she is their mouthpiece. This is why as you negotiate with her on the date for the so-called ‘debate’, Trish is already at your throats, accusing you of being a Chinese government agent, therefore to smear both your intellectual ability and motives. You criticize her claim of victimhood and, yet, she repeats the same victimhood, by accusing you of ‘attacks’ and setting Trish as target. This is what I mean earlier in saying that America has no problem manufacturing grievances in order to justify what they want to do — regardless of the facts. Reason serves the Will.

Because you have already agreed and a date is set, here are two pieces of unsolicited advice.

  • One, remember you are in America where those fuckers don’t care for ‘substance’ (your word). Substance is deployed not on account of its empirical nature but as a fait accompli. If a piece of fact doesn’t work, Trish is happy to make up another if she can’t find a replacement.
  • Two, remember you are on American TV and it’s function is to entertain, not inform. This is why she is on Fox Business news, so that she always on to fighting, preaching, anything except business. Even in their TV evangelism, entertainment is build on and around their God.

Here is a sample of American TV-style business entertainment which you are welcome to use:

Hi, Trish. How’s the going? What’s all this shit I hear you are saying about my president in China? And when that’s not enough you are messing with one of our boys? Huawei. You know Huawei? Lucky for you they send me over to talk. Next time — if there’s a next time — they’d send over ISIS and maybe slice off that neck of yours on prime time TV. So I humbly suggest you watch your stupid mouth if you still want you head intact on your shoulders.

Now, are we are done? Consider yourself well-advised, bullhorn.

For a sample into the American way of entertaining America, see clip immediately below.

Listen, Liu Xin, Moral of the Story: You deal with cocksuckers, you treat them like cocksuckers that they are.

*

Stop asking, will ya! Just drop them bombs so we can go home.

These motherfuckers…

*

Liu Xin’s pre-debate introductory remarks

Hi Trish, so we’re stealing your tech. Why don’t you come to China and take it back? You don’t have to send your CIA. You come yourself. We could even tell you where to find it in an iPhone. We’ll give you ten for free, tech-satisfied guaranteed or your money back, ten times over. You know we make your iPhones don’t you? How much did you pay for it? One grand? Do you know, how much you’d have to pay if it was made in America? … Two grand. Do you know how much our people make out of one grand. Eight dollars and twenty-six cents for each of your fucking iPhone. And for all that money, we also collect your secrets. Yes, we know what you did last summer. We have all your emails, who you spoke to, when, where. We even know who you slept with while hubby was away in Hawaii, not alone though I must add. We even know where you slept and how many you fucked. You want back all this tech information? Come to China, you fucking piece of shit.

Now, are we done?

*

Part B

Here’s more advice, Liu Xin, but on what not to do.

Never talk about ‘substance’. Propaganda doesn’t have substance, anyway, and isn’t suppose to have any.

By way of refuting Trish, you resurrected the 2017 report by that so-called ‘Commission on the Theft of American IP’. Commission? It sounds grand. Two imbecile, half-educated Yankees sit across a coffee table and it’s called a Commission, capital C.

For crying out loud, it’s a fucking fraud. Yet, you unnecessarily give it biblical authority, as if it is god-appointed, then questions your certainty in saying the report’s US$600 bn number is yet to ‘independently verified’. Try verifying the Bible — ‘independently’, if you must. Once you go down this pathway, you have to concede to the report’s assertion in its title, saying,

  • (1) there is theft to begin with, by China in particular,
  • (2) that only people other than Americans steal, and
  • (3) American tech is worth stealing!

Have you any idea, how America came into being if not by outright theft, genocide and robbery? How do you think America build the atomic bomb? You make things worse for yourself once you cite the report’s US$600 bn loss by theft of America IP: Trish, you say, “mis-identifies” the number.

Mis-identify? Have you any idea what is to miss identify? But that’s the least of the problem. Below explains why:

  • (a) You concede to the genuineness of the Commission and truth in its report. But, what is it for a report to be true? How do we know its contents are true? Without being academic, I shall briefly state two ways:

1. each line and sentence in the report is synthetically, a priori true, example 2 + 2 = 4 so is true by force of tautology such as, ‘a bachelor is an unmarried man’, and

2. it is analytically, a posteriori true. This is to say that every proposition is verifiable from seeing and knowing.

Taking either criterion, or both, it is not good enough to say anybody stole from America because there exist a similar iPhone chip design some place else, just as it is not necessarily true it rained in Antarctic yesterday when I was never there. Copying is not always theft. The report not only has to prove that China stole by unauthorized copying an iPhone, but that any design or idea belongs first and foremost to America and none was itself copied or stolen, today or ever before. This is the equal of having to prove America is the creator god of tech, and the only one at that in the universe. Do you know that the 0,1 binary idea was conceived along the Silk Road more than 1,000 years before those Anglo-Saxon motherfuckers learned how to count and before America existed.

  • (b) Once you concede the Commission is genuine and its report is true, then you have to concede that China stole, a preposterous leap of logic. Yet, that’s not contested. Only the amount loss to America is in question and which you agree existed. It is in this way that falsity (or fake news, the current terminology) is spread as true, so that the media such as Reuters, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal are the world’s biggest conveyor-belt peddlers of lies. Journalists like you paint yourself to a corner: So it is not US$600 bn. What if it is US$590 or US$400 bn. What then are you’re going to say? Not only was Trish wrong but you as well. The report didn’t say America incurred a US$600 bn loss. It said the loss “may be as high as US$600 bn.” Meaning, it could be one fucking dollar! (See how the Commission is itself a fraud?) Besides, how do you prove, irrefutably, the amount of money in an IP — and globally at that? Someone stole a gold ring from me. The cost of the purchase is my loss. A chip design? How far do you go back into design allegedly ‘stolen’? The problem with IP is like that with pharma drugs, its chemistry copied from a plant specie taken from the Amazon jungles. Who owns the plant specie? Who owns the molecules, even supposing if that can be artificially created? Why should any American drug company be allowed to monopolize the pattern, therefore set exorbitant prices for a molecular structure even if it is the first to replicate design because, given time, an Indian drug company could make the same. Why is being first the only owner of a design?
  • (c) Your semantic inferences are as faulty as Trish’s. Your argument with her is as follows: (1) she ‘mis-identifies’ a number, (2) the US$600 bn is ‘unverified’, and (3) she had failed to define the term ‘theft’. By now I think you realize the errors in your argument. I shall not go into them, except to have you understand that the English is fundamentally a structured logical language. That is, unlike the Chinese language hanzi, it gives plenty of room for its users to lie and fabricate (see syllogism after this). For the moment, here are the linguistic consequences: One, the word ‘theft’ was employed in the beginning not by Trish but by the title in the Commission’s report which, as was established above, even you accept as correct. Stated another way, Trish is simply spreading the propaganda, true to her function as a bullhorn; western journalists do it all the time. Two, ‘mis-identifies’ implies an unintentional error. Trish and CNN, stupid as they may be, still know how to read. She didn’t mis-identify as if she mistook a boy for a girl. She deliberately distorted the number to fuel the anti-China propaganda. Three, the Commission needs no verification; it anoints itself as the ultimate ‘independent’ source of knowing into what is theft, what is stolen, and how much; it is investigator, prosecutor, judge and executioner, a four-in-one. It is the go-to place for western journalist seeking propaganda material, namely China steals. To ask for verification of its work is like asking God to verify God created the earth. Stupid as that may be, dozens of such commissions get away with lies — exactly the way the Bible gets away with being called ‘holy’ — because their kind of report is not physics wherein I can go out to a garden and watch an apple fall and thereby independently verify gravity exists (this is a posteriori true). The Commission’s report is, simply said, a political hit job.

Now that we have cleared the faults in your own argument, let’s do some simple revisions into basic logic that I earlier said is build into the structure of language, particularly English. This built-in logical structure explains why Anglo-American and western world are so good at propaganda. We shall use the most commonly employed deductive logic called syllogism. It is a logical form with three premises (marked P), at the end of which is the conclusion (C):

  • Huawei steals tech (P).
  • China steals tech (P).
  • Huawei is Chinese (P).
  • Therefore, all Chinese steals (C).

You could stacked up more premises on top of the three, but this is enough to illustrate my point. A logical structure is like a formula: Put in their places any of the words such as Huawei (with Apple) or China (America), you get exactly the same conclusion.

Syllogisms is the most commonly used form of faulty logic, and repeated to no end in the western mass media. This is why English is such a poison on critical thinking and China is right to block those motherfuckers on the Net. But, because it’s a structure, it is also easy to disassemble: Cut off any of the three legs supporting the conclusion, brings down the edifice.

It’s easy to cut off a leg because the proposition must prove itself. Pick one premise, any one and let’s used what seems hardest: Huawei is Chinese. There are two prongs in your answer to Trish, One, it’s for her to prove Huawei is Chinese and not for you to prove it isn’t. Two, recall, syllogism is a formula. Once Trish says Huawei is a Chinese name, replace the word Huawei with the word ‘Apple’. Immediately you create the following doubts: Is Apple American? But it’s a fruit name. To say Huawei is Chinese because of its name is also to say Apple is not American because it is the name of a fruit grown in Azerbaijan.

The ability to tear an argument to shreds requires much academic training and practice. But, talking to Trish, you don’t need much of that. Remember she is a journalist. Also remember a simple rule, suggested earlier. Go after Trish all the time; Anglophiles call this ‘turning the tables’ on your opponent. In doing that, claiming China is innocent becomes unnecessary. America must prove the charge not for you to prove your innocence — this is fundamental in Anglo-American jurisprudence.

We Chinese very naturally attack a person in an argument. Westerners don’t like it on the (false) assumption that a person speaking should be separated from the matter discussed at hand. But yet, ad hominem attacks are always used because it’s 100 percent effective and white people can’t stand for it. She will freak out:

Trish, you are a fucking racist! It is proven in your anti-Chinese propaganda (which is pretty obvious) and your never-ending diatribe against China (also true).

Saying the above, you don’t even have to prove she is racist: in an ad hominem, the burden of proof changes side. In the world of American news entertainment, simply asserting is proof! This is why they keep repeating, China steals, China steals. Stupid as this may seem, speech becomes, in English courtrooms, evidence.

You see, like most Americans watching Fox, Trish doesn’t believe in substance. They may refer to ‘facts’, but that’s purely to serve the agenda. The American audience and population is a very stupid one and so they like one liners they call sound bites. This is entertainment. So entertain them: the filthier the better, the more entertaining it gets. Have fun! (See the Jimmy Dore show in the clip.)

Here’s another talking point for you, Liu Xin:

If American tech is half as good as it says it is, then nobody will be buying Huawei and America banning Huawei wouldn’t be necessary, No?

And stealing from America? Why would anyone want to steal trash, a trash like you, Trish.

*

Part C

CONCLUSION

The Chinese Geist

China, not the West and not America certainly, is today coming to the end of history of the world, and in doing so realizes its full autonomy in the true spirit of the German word Geist. Only in China we see this unfolding of absolute freedom in which, not just the State, but individual Chinese, feel free, act with volition, commits to duty and honor, all with or without the constraints of the law and of the State or without both. We are, in Hegelian terms, at one with the State. We are the Chinese State and the Chinese State is us. We are, along with the State, recognized as the supreme civilization and culture, second to none, an entirety embodied in the single, indivisible concept called Chinese. We act and conduct ourselves like we, you and I, are the State and yet which is what the State would wish for. The People’s Republic is, like it or not, evolving into the embodiment of 1,400 million people and they, in turn, collapsed into one. This is the Chinese spirit, Geist.

We will return to the glory days of our ancestors in the Han and the Tang eras. Only we have the capability to reach this end because, after all, which other country has before it 5,000, 6,000 years of evolutionary progress? America is but a fart in the span of our history.

America is also a great delusional country: the anti-thesis of itself and its declared aims. Its government does what it wants to itself and to others; its people believe they have freedom but cannot find it, and wherever they look they find that their freedom when not in confrontation with the State is in confrontation with one another, brother wars against brother, neighbor kills neighbor, and their government stands with folded arms and declare this is rule of law. The more it preaches, the more alienated is its people, first from themselves, then one against the other until they finally finished each other off, all in self-assured mutual destruction.

Liu Xin, we should not stop them! If anything, we should encourage them along their path. If they don’t want Huawei, don’t give Huawei. If they don’t want 5G, why insist otherwise? If they don’t want progress, why fight it on their behalf? No trade? Great! We have already got what we want from Americans; we need nothing more! If they say we steal, then hard luck, motherfuckers. Next time, design better locks.

Look, Liu Xin! There’s nothing to debate!

Comrade Xi Jinping, is right into what he said on a trip to Jiangsu: Far, far more important than Americans is, we Chinese have one another — all 1,400 million of us! You have your family, I have mine, and our families have each other; we have our mountains, rivers, valleys and forests, the seasons turn, the snow and rain come, pandas and birds have each other. Isn’t that enough?

*

套马杆

The place above would be 呼伦贝尔 Hulun Buir, not far from where I must return soon, an obscure steppe village, but that would be fine, Liu Xin. We don’t need American endorsement as to how we conduct our lives.

A woman named Altantuya could have been a neighbor. But she was murdered, blown up, like the Bamyan statutes, in Anglophile Malaysia, that vassal country of Yankees. Her father couldn’t even find enough bones and dust to half fill a small urn.

*

Part D

Trashing Trish

Liu Xin, the clip above is for the benefit of readers who hadn’t heard your rebuttal to Trish Regan. Want to know why she came back to you after that? It has nothing to with your refutation into the ‘substance’. American TV doesn’t care for substance; facts don’t attract eyeballs.

Trish came back to you because you called her ’emotional’ — and a ‘bigot’ at that. That’s ad hominem and you know it works because Trish came out with her own edition, avoiding calling your name because she can’t pronounce it. That stupid bitch. Americans can’t stand to be called bigots also because it is true. Hence, Trish’s sub-head in the image below: ‘China wages war against me’, not unlike a kid at the schoolyard, ‘Mama, she beat me’.

Do more ad hominem, Liu Xin. 加油!The facts that you marshal for the purpose of attacks are simply the spears you use to lob at her.

Also notice, she equates you and China, then dressing this up as ‘set the record straight‘ (farther below). America long ago has decided the Chinese are evil (go back to the Chinese exclusion laws), like Iran is evil, like Iraq, like Syria, like Russians. Defense of China is therefore pointless and ineffective. To equate you and China is tar you as evil: this western preoccupation with good-bad dichotomy is in their DNA, reinforced in Bible classes, and near impossible to eradicate tomorrow or next year. Your task, therefore, in any debate with any American rests on an identical moral platform which they can capture readily: Flip the morality around. America is evil in which books have been written.

Listen to Kim Iversen (in the following clip below) to give yourself a sense of people like Trish, of American media propaganda, its use by the American government. They are a sorry state, Americans. This is none of our business until it affects one of our people and this is where you come in and where we fight when it comes to people like Meng Wanzhou. (Know this: HSBC provided to Reuters confidential details of its 2012 meetings between it and Meng; with that information Reuters, just weeks later, colluded with the FBI in order to set up Meng; late last year Cathay Pacific tipped off the FBI and Canadians authorities about Meng’s flight itinerary; the list goes on and on.)

All this hypocrisy, backstabbing and propaganda lies so shook up Kim that she appeared in clip barely able to control her emotions. Born 1980, half Vietnamese, mother’s side, Kim is the anti-thesis of Trish Regan.

Throughout her narrative, Kim does not use the word ‘honest’. What does this mean, Liu Xin? It tells about Yankee characteristics: Only motherfuckers like Trish with evil to cover up do they employ the language of morality.

*

Effects of Trishian Propaganda from Deep State America

*

Image result for liu xin 刘欣 america

Part E

Background

Trish the Rottweiler

Trish Regan is the Fox News blue-eyed girl. Although she has never seen a set of T-table accounts, much less the inside of an economics textbook, she hosts Fox’s prime time Business News segment.

Her ignorance shows nightly on prime time, much like Mahathir Mohamad when explaining the difference between Gross Domestic Product and Gross National Product are the two words in the middle. Debating Trish economics or trade or finance, you might as well try explaining fiscal policies to a taxi driver.

For example, in a 2018 August report on the Danish socialist economy, she said: “Everyone in Denmark works for the government” then contradicts herself to add, “no-one wants to work, and nobody graduates from school.

This media Rottweiler of the Republican party, her niche in American business broadcasting has been … bark, so few people take her seriously. But, when her remarks about Denmark were replayed in the Danish Press, she was forced to respond, talking instead about Venezuela, comparing the socialism in both countries. Can you see the stupidity in this bitch?

But this is the expected standard: Western journalism, sold by the like of Reuters and Fox, copied in Malaysiakini, has always been political entertainment.

Today, it is simply the turn for Trish to attack China; truth, veracity are beside the point and are used only if it serves the agenda. Reason serves the Will.

At the risk of being trite, I shall repeat the background in this little fight. It is the American government’s agenda to demonize China. They call it ‘containment’. This didn’t start last year nor a decade ago. They can afford to do it because they have the power: US dollar, global institutions, control of the banks, aircraft carriers, military bases and so on. Neither Fox News nor was Trish caught in any so-called cross fire. They are actually taking it upon themselves to shoot. Trish inserted herself into the fight, a government bullhorn in popular TV platform, much like The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal are the printed propaganda versions.

Underlining these attacks on China is racism — China is the world’s first “non-Caucasian” global power — and I believe I need not elaborate. So be yourself racist, and there are ways of doing it without showing your hand. How I wish for the sake of our Motherland, I am in your shoes: I would eat her, chew and then spit out her bones.


Below, the chronological sequence in tweets between Liu Xin and Trish Regan, most recent on top.

*

https://i0.wp.com/p2.cri.cn/M00/2D/82/CqgNOlzo32KAO5UyAAAAAAAAAAA960.1080x2240.jpg

*


Part F (last)

  • 1. Keep your fire trained on Trish — always — not on defending China or trade. Remember you are talking to a bullhorn. If you can, do it the way Jimmy Dore tears down Maddox, below.

  • 2. For once, stop being so Chinese, stop being nice. Americans won’t appreciate that. Remember you are in Hollywood and remember the clip near the beginning of this post. You are not debating, you are entertaining — the American public.
  • 3. Don’t worry about calling Trish a racist; in America that’s politically correct. And it’s guaranteed to work; she will freak out.
  • 4. Facts, evidences don’t matter. Russiagate clearly illustrated this. If America wants somebody or some country, they will be happy to make up a tale. And Trish is simply their hit man. See the clip below. Substitute Russia with China and you will see why America is after China. It is a self-destruction mechanism, America quarreling with everybody.

***


Afterword: Chinese to Chinese

Related image

刘欣 加油!

我们中国人是一个有成就的人

It is the fate of the Chinese we have to deal with white people. But we will outlast them as we have outlast all other civilizations. It is not for nothing we are called huaxia 华夏 and huaren 华人 , an accomplished people.

Liu Xin, think of the debate as karaoke, above. Have fun with it!

*

不染

A painful love story had taken place on the western shore and no one had heard of it until a soft-hearted singer brought it back.

*

After this ‘debate’, America and China must never meet again. The ‘trade war’ is a wake-up call.

One, there is no bridging between us. See, above; see how different we are. We don’t even love the same way and Chinese artistic, material, moral and aesthetic culture is superior to the West. Two, American values, passed on by English, will poison our land and we must stop that before the situation becomes irreparable.

***

Read Full Post »

How to End Muslim Uighur-Style Terrorism

The ultimate SA solution for Uighurs

Leave China, go back to Turkey. Or Mecca. Otherwise choke on your death, like Europeans.

Follow the Blacks: The Indigenous Revolution in Chinese Homeland

***


Death of a KKK Racist

Thanks be to Allah. Praise Jesus. Hooray!

Mahathir Mohamad. Next.

***

Read Full Post »

*

In Sri Lanka

MUSLIM UIGHUR-STYLE TERRORISM

***

Read Full Post »

They took my daughter. Shot the company to pieces. Huawei will not die. … This fight is not about Huawei. … This is about our soul. Our nation will not be bullied. Our soul rests in our culture and philosophy. Education builds our soul. They detain our people and think they can beat us. They never knew we can be so strong in our will.

Interview in full below. Extract with English translation after that.

华为根本不会死

*

***

HUAWEI IN AMERICA

Spying? What spying?

Huawei goes where American networks won’t go. Because of…?

***

Read Full Post »

How can you tell if something you read is (a) ‘journalism’ and not, say, propaganda, and (b) if that ‘journalism’ is actually independent, such as in Steven Gan’s ‘independent journalism’? (For something to be independent, it has to be ‘independent of’ or ‘independent from’ and, failing which, to be ‘dependent on.’

As people say, the proof of the pudding is in the icing. Here, below, are the most recent ‘journalism’ results.

See if you can tell that the news below is ‘journalism’ and not propaganda, and if Stevie’s brand of journalism is actually stand alone ‘independent’ or actually dependent on… something, someone.

*

1. From Reuters

Shore up defences? Where? In California or New York? How about Reuters’ London?

Below, see and listen: who threatens who?

*

2. From George Soros, Malaysiakini’s sponsor

Threaten? The free world?

America is free? Free to what? Bomb Iraq, starve Venezuela? And now invade Iran?

Compare the above to those two below. What’s common between them?

Chinese, No?

But, why Chinese? How did that happen? Who, or what, had over the generations — and this still goes on — shaped this equivalence of Chinese equaling an ‘evil threat’ so that, as in Indonesia, Malaysia and Anglo-America, you only have to mention the word ‘Chinese’, people will take care of the rest, and know what to do.

*

3. From Mahathir Mohamad, March 2019

Do you see any of those headlines or those ‘stories’ ever coming out of China or Iran or Russia, those that Anglo-Americans call evil?

For his entire life, Mahathir has only to use the word ‘Chinese’ to spread news and gain political muscle, both happily peddled by journalism. Today, he in bed with the Chinese DAP, China is proxy for his continued racism. Hence, Uighurs, ECRL, Forest City, debt trap, Chinese immigrants….

Below, why, like Mahathir, would Indonesian provocateurs use the Chinese and not, say, Arabs or Americans? Other than Robert Kuok getting rich, what have the Chinese done to Mahathir to deserve his death trap?

*

4. From Indonesia, this month.

*

Now compare the above to those below.

From China

From Russia

Note that in both clips, those are not news but merely responses, calling out Anglo-American peddling ‘threats’ — otherwise known as propaganda.

Below is the the American journalist Trish Regan on Twitter who, called out as a propagandist and a bigot at that, wants a debate.

Debate? She means like Najib Razak versus Lim Kit Siang debate?

After which notice the arrogant, moral high-horse righteousness of language in Trish’s spittle, so that instead of properly naming Liu Xin, Regan sneers at her as ‘China State TV’ then, in turn, label herself by (false) association as ‘honest’. Honest — all in caps!

That, too, would be the language of Reuters and Steven Gan when they throw around phrases like ‘defense‘ of America and peddle Harapan propaganda about ‘hope‘ and ‘real journalism‘ (sic!).

*

Liu Xin’s response to Trish.

First…

Then

Liu Xin is wasting her time with Regan who does what she does — propagandize — not solely on ideological grounds but that she is heir of Anglo-American Christian racism: China, they say, is the only ‘non-Caucasian‘ (sic, below) global power today.

Which is also to say that, if blacks, Africans and natives of the Americas, Canada, Australia have no place under the sun, neither will there be any for the Chinese.

Isn’t this the same supremacist, ‘ketuanan‘ racism but peddled as religious righteousness by ex-Umno politicians, by Mahathir, by Rais Hussin, and by Anglophiles in Malaysia? Even by Joseph ‘I-am-not-Chinese’ Lim Guan Eng?

From America, May, this month…

***


Update

HUAWEI FALLOUT CONTINUES

In the NY Stock Exchange.

In Montana farms.

*

Support for Huawei from Ali Baba’s Jack Ma, Taiwan’s TSMC, UK’s Vodafone.

*

How America routinely pummels to death the competition, Japan, France, Germany.

*

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »