tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37504814164955531502023-11-16T21:00:14.818+08:00China Support Network News*Promoting China democracy since 1989* <BR/>
News and opinion from CSN and the pro-democracy movementCurry Kenworthyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03951400763908058179noreply@blogger.comBlogger115125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-24830770003698878122014-06-04T11:26:00.000+08:002014-06-04T11:26:12.855+08:00Activist remembers Tiananmen massacreNote. Charlie Grapski is, and was in 1989, co-founder of the China Support Network. He has just published these recollections of what he did in the aftermath of the Tiananmen Square massacre -- the famous event of June 4, 1989:<br />
<br />
June 4. This anniversary is one of the most significant anniversaries in my life. My political "virginity" was lost 25 years ago today and tomorrow - as I saw what was happening in Tiananmen Square and said to two friends - "we have to do something."<br />
<br />
Throughout the 80s in college I had hoped to find a leader to follow and learn from. But in the early 80s - activism was not very widespread on campuses across the country. My nature is actually quite shy - despite what most know as my public persona. And I was far more interested in science than politics. But I had an inner voice calling me for years - telling me something was wrong in the world and that something needed to be done about it.<br />
<br />
It was that total naiveté that was perhaps the best aspect of my character at the time. I had no idea what I was doing - I "just did it" (its not just a slogan for sneakers - but for citizens).<br />
<br />
Within a few weeks of "doing it" - not knowing a thing about what I was doing - I was using the early internet to coordinate with people around the world - even finding one person in my own back yard - the hard way. This was years before the world wide web. The internet was mostly a haven for scientists - and thus for many of the students and scholars studying in the US who had been involved in the protests the previous months and whose lives were threatened by their government if and when they returned home.<br />
<br />
I coordinated with people, gave my first public speeches (a shock when I was told I was going to do so - at the University of Central Florida - never having spoken in public before), took over the annual general meeting of Amnesty International, co-authoring a document about how they could keep young people and students involved (in the years following Live Aid).<br />
<br />
And I wound up in Washington, D.C. I was using the office of a then freshman congresswoman, Nancy Pelosi, to help get a bill through the House Judiciary Committee - where it was stalled because of certain members insisting on incorporating anti-abortion clauses in the legislation aiming to protect those students and scholars who spoke out in our country from having to return on their limited J-1 visas for certain harassment - if not worse.<br />
<br />
Then I was asked to help get eight of the leaders who had escaped China and had made it to Paris - but were being denied US visas - come to America. OK, I said, again having no idea what I was doing - but just understanding that it needed to be done. So I just did it.<br />
<br />
Then a whirlwind tour of Congressional offices with these amazing young leaders (not all were students - one Wan Runnan, was the CEO of China's equivalent if IBM, and Yan Jiaqi who was the aide to the Party Secretary Zhou Zhiang who was removed for his support of the student movement; perhaps the closest relationship I formed among the group was with Li Lu, who recently was named a likely successor to Warren Buffet at Berkshire Hathaway, and then was the vice-commander of students on the Square) along with press conferences and talks at places like the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the National Press Club, and televised in the then fairly new to most people C-SPAN an event at the Heritage Foundation. Again - I have to reiterate - I knew absolutely nothing about what I was doing - only that I needed to be doing something - and what came naturally is how I learned - including from my mistakes (I even at one point, I am not sure if this was a mistake or not, turned down a meeting with the Vice President as a substitute for a meeting with Bush Senior. Then, when they relented and offered a meeting with the Secretary of State, which was acceptable except for wanting us to cancel a previous commitment, had to turn that meeting down as well!).<br />
<br />
That was twenty-five years ago today. In a sense - as a citizen - I am turning twenty-five (and that's better than my actual birthday coming next Monday) today. Yet I was so busy I had lost track of time until I had a moment to reflect during the evening - and realized the date.<br />
<br />
I have probably made more mistakes in those twenty-five years than right moves - but at least, I can say, I was moving - I was going - somewhere. Where? I hope heading toward, with my own contributions being but small pieces of a larger puzzle, a future of democracy - true democracy - that was dreamed of by those students on Tiananmen Square in the days before the tanks arrived - and then crushed them, literally, where many lay in their tents. That dream, however, is still alive. It lives, at least, within me. And I hope I have helped over the past two and a half decades encourage and instill that hope in others.<br />
<br />
<br />
Charlie Grapski<br />
June 3rd, 2014John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-69950305806205572522013-01-08T17:08:00.000+08:002013-01-09T09:26:30.222+08:002013: Chinese revolution?By John Kusumi for the China Support Network<br />
<br />
Massive protests have begun to disrupt both Hong Kong and mainland China. There comes a time when the status quo is flatly unacceptable and will no longer be tolerated by the populace. That generalization fits the current circumstances in China.<br />
<br />
China is experiencing a faceoff and showdown between a popular newspaper and an unpopular Communist propaganda chief of Guangdong province. This is a key and crucial juncture that will serve to test the leadership of China's new leader, Xi Jingping. As the leader of China, Xi is new -- he was installed at a party Congress in November, 2012.<br />
<br />
It needs to be remembered that the Chinese Communist Party is unelected, has no democratic legitimacy, and abuses the people of China. To gain power in 1949, it fought a civil war that killed an estimated 40 million Chinese people. In the time since then, it has killed a further 42.7 million Chinese people, as estimated by the China Support Network. It is an abomination in motion, as it continues its crimes against humanity. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) holds the world's record in democide (a/k/a death by government).<br />
<br />
The Year 2013 already has action to review. Whether we look at Hong Kong or at Guangdong province, "Beijing's man" is under pressure.<br />
<br />
January 1 was the occasion of large marches and demonstrations in Hong Kong, demanding the resignation of the Chief Executive of Hong Kong -- along with greater democracy, which would allow the next Chief Executive to be popularly elected.<br />
<br />
In Hong Kong, a former British colony, the people have been promised democracy, but instead the leadership continues to be hand-picked by Beijing. Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying is the latest pawn of Beijing, installed in that job in 2012.<br />
<br />
Over in Guangdong province, as mentioned, it is a standoff between a popular newspaper, the Southern Weekly, and the CCP's over-zealous propaganda chief for Guangdong province, Tuo Zhen, who newly came to the job in 2012.<br />
<br />
Guangdong is China's biggest province by population, and has the highest economic output. Because it is the southern province that wraps around Hong Kong, it is the factory floor to the world, containing the cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen.<br />
<br />
What's happening in Guangdong is very telling. The Southern Weekly newspaper wanted to publish its New Years' message, titled "China's Dream, the Dream of Constitutionalism." One might think it's a mild blandishment to suggest that a country (China) should follow its own Constitution. Even ex-paramount leader Deng Xiaoping extolled "the rule of law" and encouraged the training of young lawyers.<br />
<br />
But, for Tuo Zhen, the mild blandishment was out of bounds; and, he changed that New Year's message into a piece that praised the Communist Party. One immediate problem is that Southern Weekly already has a reputation as a reform-minded newspaper that pushes the envelope; another immediate problem is that the original message, and word of the change, got around electronically. Hence, Tuo Zhen can no longer work in the shadows, and he is an exposed man in the center of a firestorm of controversy.<br />
<br />
On January 4, journalists from the Southern Weekly signed an open letter, calling for the resignation of Tuo Zhen. This week, the journalists are on strike, leading to a BBC headline: "China newspaper journalists stage rare strike." On Monday, January 7, hundreds of supporters gathered outside the newspaper's office. Banners were seen calling for press freedom, constitutionalism, and democracy.<br />
<br />
Cue the Chinese democracy movement -- it's back in bloom. For China, this is it: push is coming to shove. It's really on. Once before, in 1989, Deng Xiaoping was able to roll tanks into Tiananmen Square and roll back the Chinese democracy movement. That allowed the CCP to reclaim power from the uprising, which was led by Beijing college students, calling for democracy, for two months.<br />
<br />
But it would be laughably silly if Xi Jinping now tried to stage a military assault upon an empty newspaper building. His options are very few -- he must walk back the CCP's appointment of Tuo Zhen, and endorse the editorial as originally written by the Southern Weekly. China should get on the page with its own Constitution, and stop having odd, corrupt, or evil government behaviors by the mercurial fiat, or whim, of high officials.<br />
<br />
Even if Xi thinks that he can "partially" capitulate to the popular mood, in any partial capitulation he must talk the talk (or tacitly invite the talk) of constitutionalism. This will lead to more exposure of corruption and of those policy points where China is off the page with its own Constitution.<br />
<br />
If he is still in power in the future, Xi will feel like a fireman, rushing from one brush fire to the next as each of these issues will generate its own movement and its own demands for reform and change in China. The gears are in motion for the population to hold its politicians accountable for how they wield power.<br />
<br />
Perhaps 2013 is the year when we will see the triumphal return of the "student leaders" from the last uprising. They have been in exile, unable to return for the past 23 years. Some would like to see their parents before they die, and cruelly, the regime has prevented some parents from travelling outside of China to see their son, the exiled Chinese dissident.<br />
<br />
The China Support Network restates its demand that Liu Xiaobo and all political prisoners must be released; that Charter 08 (a document by Liu Xiaobo and others, a reasonable road map to Chinese democracy) must be supported; and that all Chinese in exile must be allowed to return to China and to freely run conferences on the future of China; form and register political parties; and participate in the political process democratically.<br />
<br />
China must also stop religious persecution, Falun Gong persecution, Tibetan persecution, Uighur persecution, Mongol persecution, laojiao administrative detention, and slave labor in laogai "reform through labor" camps. China must publish a complete list of the democide victims, and satisfy the affected families by bringing perpetrators to justice. China must "play fair" with its neighbors in the South China Sea, and reverse deploy the array of missiles that threaten Taiwan. China must stop deportation of North Korean refugees, and end its abusive one-child policy.<br />
<br />
It would be ideal if Xi Jinping would walk back the primacy, if not the existence, of the Chinese Communist Party. The only hope for today's political leaders to continue is if the Constitution now takes primacy in China.John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-43798420843269338262012-09-08T22:41:00.001+08:002012-09-08T22:41:22.901+08:00Speech: Let the Flame of Truth spread throughout the world!<h2 style="text-align: center;">
Let the Flame of Truth spread throughout the world!</h2>
<br />
<h3>
- Speech of pro-democracy Chinese dissident Tang Baiqiao to the Free Tibet campaigners -</h3>
Sept. 8, 2012<br />
<br />Today, we gather here to pass the Flame of Truth as a symbol of the Tibetan brothers and sisters who struggle for freedom. This torch symbolizes the self-immolation of Tibetan Freedom Fighters. We pass this torch of Truth, both to arouse the concern of the world's people, to oppose persecution suffered by Tibetans, but also to remember the Freedom Fighters who self-immolated!<br /><br />Never in the history of mankind has such tragic mass repression and persecution continued for so long. For sixty years, tyranny has been suffered, not just by Tibetans, but also people of all ethnic groups, affecting all under the rule of the Communist Party, the CCP.<br /><br />People are deprived of their freedoms as listed in the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And, people are deprived of freedom even under China's own Constitution. That lists freedom of speech, freedom of demonstration, freedom of association, freedom of belief, freedom of movement, and those freedoms are denied to those who are persecuted.<br /><br />When the Chinese Constitution says freedom of speech, that is just window dressing. That is for show, and it's not to be taken seriously. If you want to practice freedom of speech, then I'm sorry you had to go to jail, or be disappeared like the well-known human rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng.<br /><br />It is absurd that mainland Chinese need permission to visit Hong Kong; and it is absurd that Tibetans living in Sichuan and elsewhere need permission to visit their grandparents living in Lhasa. A regime this absurd cannot be found in the history books, nor even in fiction!<br /><br />Gao Zhisheng once said: "They are capable of great evil, but good people cannot imagine such evil."<br /><br />At one time, dissidents who oppose CCP tyranny were called "outdated and behind the times." When all the world wanted to dance with this evil regime, when the Rise of China was so popular among the international community, dissidents stood alone and refused to reconcile with the Chinese Communists. This required great courage and wisdom!<br /><br />Today, Chinese people scorn the CCP. Like when a rat runs across the street, everybody cries, "kill it!". Just yesterday, thousands of people surrounded the Legislative Council in Hong Kong. Loudly, they insist that Hong Kong must drop its plan to include Mainland propaganda and brainwashing in its educational curriculum.<br /><br />The people of Hong Kong are all angry. Students, the general public, and even artists are all publicly supporting the protests in Hong Kong.<br /><br />In Mainland China, any revolt against the authorities, in any form, gets a burst of applause from Internet users online. <br /><br />This should be an old saying in China: "Human corruption, can not live!" This is a result of our many years of unremitting efforts to fight and expose the truth. There are indications that the collapse of the CCP is just a matter of time, and has entered the final countdown. Some people may think that I am too optimistic. The problem is that not only do I look at it this way, many Western experts and scholars understand China are beginning to change their view of the past, now that Communist China is at the brink of collapse.<br /><br />So, today we stand here, and you can say out loud: "We're close to victory, and we will win!"<br /><br />Today I want to publicly pay my respects to you! You stayed on the long road to pursue freedom and justice, so that the world will not completely sink. You are a model of humanity and righteousness. I support your fight for freedom, and I learned a lot from you. Your sincerity, your wisdom, your courage, leave me deeply moved and encouraged. If I have been able to stay on this road, fighting for democracy and against tyranny, part of the reason is this: I am motivated by your spirit. I often said to myself, there are so many Tibetan friends who say 'no' to CCP tyranny - I am not alone.<br /><br />The Japanese writer Haruki Murakami said: "If there is a high wall of fortification, and eggs that are hitting that wall, I will always be on the side with the eggs."<br /><br />I believe everyone is here today because it is human nature to stand here and cry for freedom and justice. Human nature is a truly powerful and invincible force! We fight for freedom and justice, and sometimes we pay a price. But, when we get freedom; when justice is done; the joy in our hearts will be worth the price we paid.<br /><br />When this Truth Torch is passed in the world, I have a small request: I request all the world hear my voice and be touched by your conscience. Because the torch symbolizes those great Tibetan Freedom Fighters who burned themselves to death!<br /><br />Freedom to Tibet! Freedom to China!<br />John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-38535756025130235062012-06-05T03:08:00.003+08:002012-06-05T03:08:25.450+08:00No Fifth Dictator!<div style="font-family: "Trebuchet MS",sans-serif;">
<b><span style="font-size: small;">- As participants commemorate 2012's 23rd anniversary of Tiananmen's massacre, CSN's John Kusumi delivers a speech urging a new uprising in China -</span></b></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: x-small;">Video:</span><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/I2x4jcQSx88?rel=0" width="560"></iframe><br />
(See http://youtu.be/I2x4jcQSx88)<br />
<br />
<div style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Remarks as delivered:</span></div>
<br />
For the American people, I can tell you that "We saw that massacre!" The
massacre in Tiananmen Square, June 4 1989; it was not hidden. It was
rare as an event that was well-covered by CNN, and it was visible on
world television. It was obvious what the students in the square wanted:
They wanted freedom, democracy, human rights. And they used slogans
such as those from the American revolution. "Give me liberty, or give me
death" is a line that American people know from Patrick Henry.<br /><br />It
was obvious that the students in the square wanted a good, an upright,
an effective government with the rule of law and with the possibility of
justice.<br /><br />Obviously, the massacre in 1989 was an injustice.<br /><br />And
in America, I and many others could look at that scene on television
and say, "It is only a matter of time that justice will come to China."
Justice will come to China, the question of 'when' is a different
matter. And now it's 23 years later. We did not know that it would take
23 years for justice to come to China.<br /><br />But now, it is time for
the Chinese people to take matters into their own hands, and to begin to
create justice in China this year.<br /><br />And, the government of China,
of course, has a problem of scandal. It has had Wang Lijun; it has had
Bo Xilai; it has had Chen Guangcheng. All of these are scandals or
embarassments or humiliation. This is a loss of face for the Communist
Party.<br /><br />And so, they hope now to introduce a fifth administration.
A fifth communist dictator - following Mao, following Deng, following
Jiang, following Hu. Now they want to give a fifth communist dictator to
China. A man named Xi Jinping.<br /><br />There should be no fifth dictator
from the Communist Party. And the people of China should take this
opportunity this year to stand up and demand, "No Fifth Dictator!"<br /><br />My
urging to the people of China is make a movement right now that
insists: No Fifth Dictator from the Communist Party! That is when
justice will begin to come to China. And it is time now - we have waited
for 23 years - I feel that the people must take matters into their own
hands, and make that change of the Chinese government; make it happen
this year.<br /><br />Thank you for listening to my speech. Xie xie!John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-50355387732227621982012-05-28T16:02:00.002+08:002012-05-28T16:02:35.720+08:00Tiananmen Crackdown Adds 1 Casualty: Ya WeilinMay 28, 2012 (CSN) -- Human Rights in China has released the following English translation of an obituary from the Tiananmen Mothers, a group of parents of those who were killed in the June 4, 1989 crackdown at Tiananmen Square, Beijing, China.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>
Today, we announce with immense sorrow that Mr. Ya Weilin (轧伟林), father of Ya Aiguo (轧爱国), a victim of June Fourth government crackdown on the 1989 protests, and a key member of the Tiananmen Mothers, committed suicide by hanging himself on May 25. He was 73 years old.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
Ya Weilin and his wife, Ms. Zhang Zhenxia (张振霞), an affectionate couple, have two sons. The younger son, Ya Aiguo was shot in the head by martial law troops in the vicinity of Gongzhufen (公主坟) in Beijing around 10 p.m. in the evening of June 3, 1989, and later died in the No. 301 Hospital. He was 22 years old. His family members were not able to locate his body until June 5. They buried him in Tianjin, their hometown.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
Mr. Ya Weilin was a retired employee of the Food Department of the Second Institute of the Nuclear Industry Ministry. Since the Tiananmen Mothers contacted them in the 1990s, Mr. Ya and his wife had actively participated in the group’s protest activities without hesitation. Despite police intimidation and surveillance for many times, they never wavered.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
Mr. Ya was usually in good health. He was introverted, honest and conscientious in his work. Every year, he joined the open letter signature campaign to demand a just resolution on the issue of June Fourth and also closely monitored the response from the government. He endured the passage of time for more than twenty years. His prolonged grief and depression finally led to despair.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
According to his wife and his older son, they found a piece of paper on Ya recently, with the following written on it: his name, work unit, and, more importantly, information on his son’s death in the 1989 Tiananmen, that this grievance had not been redressed for more than 20 years, and that he would fight to his death. At that time, he was dissuaded by his family members from taking any action.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
In the end, at 10 a.m. on May 24, 2012, on the eve of the 23rd anniversary of June Fourth, Mr. Ya left home. Family members and relatives looked everywhere but could not find him. After 24 hours, they reported to the local police, seeking help to find him but to no avail. In the afternoon of May 25, three family members found Mr. Ya body in a newly-constructed, un-used underground parking garage of the building where the couple lived, which belongs to the Second Institute of the Nuclear Industry Ministry.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The police immediately sent personnel and vehicles to cordon off the area, and moved Mr. Ya’s body away. His remains were cremated this morning, May 27.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The death of Mr. Ya—an ordinary citizen who, having given up hope in his long-term demand, ended his life in such a resolute way to protest the government’s brutality—is a new sin that has been added to old un-redressed grievances.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The death of Ya Weilin and his son are tragedies directly wrought by the Chinese government. The news of Mr. Ya’s death shocked us, the Tiananmen Mothers, like a sword piercing through our hearts. We want to cry but have no more tears; want to tell the world but have no more words.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
Ms. Zhang Zhenxia, suffering from severe rheumatoid arthritis, has lost a good husband who helped her through the hard times and took good care of her. We, the Tiananmen Mothers, have, once again, lost a good brother and partner.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
We strongly condemn the Chinese Communist authorities’ cold-blooded behavior against humanity and demand an immediate return of Mr. Ya’s suicide note to his family members.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
We are closely monitoring developments of the situation and call on all Chinese people globally and in China as well as the international community to coordinate their efforts to urge the Chinese government to justly resolve the June Fourth issue and not let the tragedy like Mr. Ya Weilin happen again.</blockquote>
<br />
The death of Ya Weilin completely changes the tenor of this year's commemoration of June 4 -- the anniversary of Tiananmen Square's bloody massacre, which took the life of Ya Aiguo. It is very arguably true that the Tiananmen crackdown continues today, because we know that justice was never served; there has been no redress of the people's grievances; and pro-democracy advocates continue to languish in jail (Wang Bingzhang, Liu Xiaobo, and Zhou Yongjun are three pro-democracy dissidents now in captivity).<br />
<br />The crackdown is still with us, and the crackdown has just taken another life: that of Ya Weilin. For the third time this year, the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) has a black mark of shame, a public humilation that has been added to its long record of disreputable behaviors and unfortunate outcomes for the people of China.<br />
<br />The China Support Network, from 1989-2005, estimated 3,000 deaths in the Tiananmen crackdown. In 2005, the death of Zhao Ziyang prompted us to "estimate" 3,001. Today, with the death of Ya Weilin, we are raising our estimate to note that at least 3,002 are dead in this ongoing, brutal, and vicious Tiananmen crackdown -- still happening in mainland Red China.<br />
<br />
<br />John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-69157663151778085972012-04-30T23:50:00.000+08:002012-04-30T23:50:44.949+08:00Prediction of the Week: Mishandling of U.S.-China policy<b>By John Kusumi </b><br />
<br />
From 1999 to the present, U.S. China policy has been no better than "leaving the Jews in the gas chambers." For thirteen years, China has conducted a crackdown against Falun Gong which will be remembered in the history books as an episode of genocide. And, for the same thirteen years, U.S. China policy has served only to appease and enrich the Communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs of mainland Red China.<br /><br />
I've opened my article here with very strong words that evoke the Holocaust, as befell the Jews under Nazi Germany in World War II. For perspective, some comparison and contrast is in order. It is true that The Holocaust as befell the Jews was far deadlier -- 6 million Jews are said to have perished under the Nazis, while Falun Gong can only document some 3,500 deaths.<br /><br />
Perhaps we can write of The Holocaust with capital letters on the one hand, and write of the holocaust as befalls the Falun Gong with lower case letters. With the widely divergent death tolls, commentators can point out that The Holocaust was a larger human rights abuse than the holocaust.<br /><br />
Falun Gong, however, can (and has) replied by pointing out that the perpetrator -- China's Communist Party -- has a prior record of crimes against humanity. The persecution of Falun Gong is the fifth hideous atrocity in a list of the largest:<br />
<br />• "Land Reform" of 1950-52, death toll 3.7 million;<br />• "The Great Leap Forward" of 1959-61, death toll 31.5 million;<br />• "The Cultural Revolution" of 1966-76, death toll 7.5 million;<br />• "June 4th," the Tiananmen massacre of 1989, death toll 3,000+;<br />• Persecution of Falun Gong, ongoing, death toll 3,500+<br /><br />
The preceding are atrocities during the reign of the Communist Party (CCP); but, we can recall that the CCP came to power in a civil war, during which 40 million people were killed. By a sum of these numbers, we see that the CCP is responsible for 82,706,500+ untimely deaths in China. They also brag that their "one child policy" has prevented over 300 million live births.<br /><br />
The suffering of the Chinese people under that Communist Party is unparallelled in history. That death toll is larger than World War II, which may have killed 60 million people world-wide. China's Communist Party is the deadliest killer in history, bar none. (And indeed, the Guiness Book of World Records used to cite the CCP for the world record in mass murder.)<br /><br />
As history's largest tragedy proceeds and continues unfolding today, is it appropriate for U.S. President Barack Obama to once again "punt on first down" in U.S. relations with Communist China?<br /><br />
No! Absolutely nothing is appropriate about engaging, glad handing, appeasing, and enriching communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs. Diplomats in Beijing are now looking for ways to finesse (read, sweep under the rug) the escape of blind lawyer Chen Guangcheng from captivity.<br /><br />
First it was Wang Lijun (an official who sought refuge at a U.S. consulate in February, 2012), and now it is Chen Guangcheng. For the Communist Party, these two incidents are a loss of face and like self-inflicted gunshot wounds. Diplomats from the U.S. are likely to say that they will proceed with high-level talks as if they don't see the two smoking holes that the CCP has blown into its own feet.<br /><br />
I see no prospect that the Obama administration will do the right thing, and usher the Communist Party off of the world stage. By the end of this week, we can say of the Obama administration: "There they go again." The Obama adminstration has displayed weakness with China -- through on-again, off-again jet sales to Taiwan, and through refusing to designate China a currency manipulator.<br /><br />
By next week, I will be able to write a column--perhaps headlined, "One More Missed Opportunity--and note that once again, as per its standard procedure, the Obama administration has punted on first down and kow-towed to tyrants.<br />
<br />
The story of Chen Guangcheng's escape is a soaring example of an indomitable human spirit that will accomplish Herculean feats in the pursuit of freedom, liberty, and justice. Chen's escape will be remembered in the annals of freedom.<br /><br />
America's founding fathers would be proud of Chen Guangcheng, and ashamed of Obama, Clinton, their diplomacy, and their complicity with tyranny, genocide, crimes against humanity, and their easy countenance for atrocities including those listed above. Not to mention their own war crimes, committed in America's name.<br /><br />
Once factor makes the scene interesting: The existential crisis at the CCP is happening during a U.S. presidential election year. That means, instead of silence on human rights abuses, suddenly the American news media is paying attention. It is the occasion for challengers to the President to criticize his handling of U.S.-China relations.<br /><br />
Republican challenger Mitt Romney has already been sharply critical of Obama in regards to China. Sunday, he issued a statement that said in part, "Any serious U.S. policy toward China must confront the facts of the Chinese government's denial of political liberties, its one-child policy and other violations of human rights."<br /><br />
The Chinese regime would prefer that we never hear the names Wang Lijun, Chen Guangcheng, and Mitt Romney. For them, those three names mean loss of face, loss of face, and loss of face, respectively. At present, it is an embarrassment and a humiliation to be a representative of the Chinese Communist Party.<br />John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-67696985438775889982012-03-23T22:35:00.004+08:002012-03-23T23:25:23.177+08:00Hu's On First?<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><b>Periphery asks of Beijing: "Who is in charge of China?"</b></span></h3>
<br />
<br />
New York, March 23, 2012 (CSN) -- The Chinese Communist Party has always been a power struggle in motion. Recently, the power struggle burst into public view, and Beijing's officials have become so tight-lipped that an official newspaper (the Global Times) has published an editorial urging Beijing to break its "radio silence."<br />
<br />
As reported in The Epoch Times, "The anonymous editorial calls on the party’s highest authorities to clarify the situation....it...reveals confusion about who is now in charge of the country."<br />
<br />
Western reporters, looking for a quick way to write the story, tend to begin with Wang Lijun's dramatic flight to the U.S. Consulate in Chengdu on Feb. 6, when he tried to defect or obtain asylum from the United States. U.S. officials declined to fulfill his request, but they spent the night debriefing Wang and taking documents that Wang had brought with him. It seems that Wang revealed plans for a coup d'etat.<br />
<br />
A U.S. official told Bill Gertz, who wrote in the Washington Free Beacon that "Wang possessed invaluable knowledge of...the efforts of the hardliners like Zhou Yongkang and Bo Xilai to upset the smooth succession of Xi Jinping." [See http://freebeacon.com/china-probes-police-official-after-obama-administration-rejected-asylum-request/.]<br />
<br />
Xi Jinping, currently Vice President, is on track to become President in a leadership transition slated to begin later this year. "To upset the smooth succession" is polite terminology, or diplomatic understatement, for a coup d'etat.<br />
<br />
Wang was also exposing corruption on the part of his boss, Bo Xilai, who was the top Communist Party Secretary in Chongqing, known as a neo-Maoist "princeling" in Chinese politics. Bo led a campaign of "singing red songs," in which there was organized mass singing of Maoist-era communist songs, bringing back the sounds of China's disasterous Cultural Revolution, a tragedy / travesty of 1966 - 1976.<br />
<br />
It was under reported in the U.S. that on Feb. 7, the U.S. Consulate was surrounded by not one -- but two -- sizeable mobilizations of armed security forces. Those two mobilizations were from two different factions in China's power struggle. [A blow-by-blow account of this story appears at http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/china-news/how-wang-lijun-fled-to-the-us-consulate-190363.html.]<br />
<br />
The first mobilization was 70 police cars, armored personnel carriers, and tanks from Chongqing, led by Huang Qifan, the mayor of Chongqing, at the behest of Bo Xilai.<br />
<br />
The second group was Sichuan Provincial National Security and police, mobilized at the behest of Beijing's Ministry of State Security.<br />
<br />
The Chongqing forces surrounded the consulate up until noon on Feb. 7, at which time they were expelled by the provincial forces. While the Chongqing faction wanted to take custody of Wang Lijun, at the end of day he was taken to Beijing.<br />
<br />
The Chongqing faction has been crumbling ever since then. Bo Xilai was sacked on March 15, after Premier Wen Jiabao closed the National People's Congress with a press conference -- and unique remarks -- on March 14.<br />
<br />
Wen said, "The present Chongqing municipal Party committee and the municipal government must reflect seriously and learn a lesson from the Wang Lijun incident." That was a tip off to the smack down which was coming the next day.<br />
<br />
Wen also said, "The mistakes of the Cultural Revolution and feudalism have not been completely eliminated." This was an open rebuke to the neo-Maoist strain of communism that was represented by Bo Xilai, who was fired the next day.<br />
<br />
After Wang and Bo, the tip of the spear would logically move to Zhou Yongkang, who serves or served on the nine-member Politburo Standing Committee (PSC), the top committee of CCP leadership. On the PSC, Zhou was a patron to Bo Xilai, and was a supporter for Bo to join the PSC in the next leadership shuffle. Zhou could also be thought of as a neo-Maoist hardliner who was anti-American abroad and brutally despotic at home.<br />
<br />
On March 19, rumors swirled that a military coup had taken place in Beijing. The rumor turned out to be false, but plausible.<br />
<br />
China analysts have noted that China recently spends more money on its internal security -- to "maintain social stability" -- than it spends on its military. Hence, the internal security apparatus is beyond that of its external security apparatus. And, what minister had that budget -- larger than the armed forces? Zhou Yongkang.<br />
<br />
From the Politburo Standing Committee, Zhou led the Political and Law Committee, with authority over the paramilitary People's Armed Police along with courts and prosecutors. This is a weakness of the Communist Party system. One man had far too much power, domestically. Zhou Yongkang could be judge, jury, and executioner -- and is the only man who could credibly mount a forcible, armed coup against the other top Communists.<br />
<br />
The false-but-plausible rumor of a coup has led to a swirl of additional rumors. Throughout the week of March 19 - 23, we have observed:<br />
<br />
• The Twitter-like Sina Weibo blocked searches for "coup," "Bo Xilai," and "Zhou Yongkang."<br />
<br />
• This was a bad week in which to be a Ferrari dealer in China. "Ferrari" was also blocked as a search term. Rumors were swirling that a high-level somebody had perished when a red Ferrari crashed in Beijing on March 18.<br />
<br />
• Bo Xilai is reported to be under house arrest.<br />
<br />
• Zhou Yongkang is said to have lost the power struggle and to have been arrested.<br />
<br />
• The Financial Times (a UK paper) quoted an unnamed source who said, "Mr Zhou had been ordered not to make any public appearances or take any high-level meetings and was 'already under some degree of control.'"<br />
<br />
• The purge is said to have widened to include Jia Qinglin and Li Changchun, two more members of the nine-member Politburo Standing Committee.<br />
<br />
• Holes appeared in the Great Firewall of China -- the system of filtering the internet. Certain people including Zhou Yongkang and the propaganda minister Li Changchun were known to be champions of internet censorship. During this week, it became possible for netizens in China to search and retrieve results for forbidden terms such as Falun Gong and June 4 (the date of the Tiananmen Square massacre).<br />
<br />
Notably, when Falun Gong persecution is exposed, together with its raft of crimes against humanity, this is a blow against the perpetrators. The persecution was ordered by former President Jiang Zemin, and conducted or supported by the others who are now in trouble and falling out of power: Jia Qinglin, Li Changchun, Zhou Yongkang, Luo Gan, Bo Xilai, Wang Lijun.<br />
<br />
It is a happy day for Falun Gong when Maoist websites are going down, and Falun Gong websites are coming up. The perpetrators and persecutors are falling from power.<br />
<br />
At mid-week, it was announced that 3,300 local secretaries, under Zhou's Political and Law Committee, are required to attend "ideological training sessions" at the behest of Beijing. There, they will study Hu Jintao's theory of Scientific Development. The announcement made no mention of Zhou Yongkang.<br />
<br />
This seems to be convincing evidence that the power struggle is going favorably for the Hu - Wen faction. However, there have been no definitive statements to place closure on the matter of this power struggle. This led to the Thursday editorial by the Global Times that basically asked for central guidance as to "Who's in charge, here?"<br />
<br />
By the end of the week it seemed that China's Internet censors could no longer figure out which rumors to promote, and which rumors to hide.<br />
<br />
On Friday, March 23, this office (the China Support Network) moved to appear on New Tang Dynasty Television, to demand freedom for Chinese dissidents and three key reforms: freedom of speech, abolition of laogai (reform-through-labor camps), and abolition of laojiao (administrative detention).<br />
<br />
China Support Network founder John Kusumi said that in his view, "It's time to be singing the blue songs and hitting the red."John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-57006077728399302322011-09-19T22:23:00.001+08:002011-09-19T22:23:22.561+08:00<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Starting the China Support Network:</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Radio interview recalls activity of 1989</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: small;">CSN's John Kusumi recalls starting to help China's democracy movement, in response to the Tiananmen massacre of June 4, 1989 </span></b></div>
<br />
<br />What follows is an excerpt from a radio interview with John Kusumi (<b>JPK</b>), founder of the China Support Network. This was broadcast on Thursday, Sept. 1, 2011, on American Freedom Radio network, reaching about 20 radio stations across the United States.<br />
<br />
<br /><b>Host: </b> I'm your host, Truther Girl Sonia, and I'm here with John Kusumi, former independent U.S. presidential candidate, and founder of the China Support Network.<br /><br />...I have a couple of questions for you - how is China different? I mean, obviously it's a communist country, but how does the Chinese political system work? -Economic system, too.<br /><br /><br /><b>JPK:</b> China, as we'll remember, the People's Republic was established by Chairman Mao in 1949, and that's by the Communist Party of China. Now, the Communist Party of China was sort of an off shoot, or it was basically encouraged or built up there, with aid from the Soviet Communist Party. In fact it was like modelled or patterned on the Soviet Communist Party.<br /><br />So, the trouble in China is that what they have there is anything but freedom. It's the opposite. It is a one-party dictatorship. It's given to brutal totalitarianism. And in general, we can just say that leading China, at the top in the leadership, is: communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs.<br /><br />I happened to be the same age as the college students who rose up in Tiananmen Square, and that was 1989 when they had the pro-democracy uprising. And then the Chinese army was sent in to clear out the approach routes to Tiananmen Square. About 3,000 people were killed. We're talking about civilians of Beijing, being killed off in a massacre by the Chinese government.<br /><br />In China, the thing is that what they have is the Communist Party; and everything else is subordinate to that, which means that the army really is not the army of the state, it's the army of the party.<br /><br />Certain things like the Constitution of China -- it will bend to the will of the Communist Party.<br /><br />It's almost like if you tried to install a deity; a God. Something above all else. The Communist Party just tries to put itself in there as the top level entity. And anything else that you hear about -- the army, the Constitution -- it's the Party's army; the Party's Constitution.<br /><br />China's state apparatus is there in name, but it's just a parallel thing. In other words, there's a structure of people like, let's say, in the Party who care about business and then there might be "The Ministry of Economic Development" where they supposedly care about business. And these two structures exist side-by-side, and someone from the Party works inside every office of that ministry. The ministry is really like a sock puppet; the Party is pulling the strings.<br /><br /><br /><b>Host: </b> Have you been there?<br /><br /><br /><b>JPK:</b> No, I haven't. I've studied it, and I began in 1989 at the time of the massacre -- this was an eye popping thing on television. <br />You know, when you watch a huge tragedy like maybe the earthquake in Haiti, or the tsunami in Asia, you know how people just want to help the cause. Well, Tiananmen Square was like that; it was a tragedy, the difference is that it was a man-made, not a natural tragedy, and to fight it it's a political fight, not just a matter of delivering some aid or something.<br /><br />Anyway, there were top student leaders from the uprising who escaped out of China and came to the West. They arrived in Washington DC, where they met me -- I was working on the China Support Network, a response organization that was built up spontaneously from the sentiment that "We've got to help this cause."<br /><br /><br /><b>Host:</b> How did they know you were there?<br /><br /><br /><b>JPK:</b> I was plugged in. Somehow, there was a Chinese student group; I think it was graduate students at the University of Maryland. And they had been given the heads up that these dissidents from Beijing were coming to town. And so then I was on the phone with someone in the Maryland group, and they said, "I need your help."<br /><br />So, I went there and a couple of other people - in fact, the China Support Network had, I think, four people in Washington for their first week.<br /><br />We were a little bit like political handlers. In other words, when you have a political campaign, there needs to be handlers who arrange things. So, for their first time when they spoke at the National Press Club, guess who was the one who went down the street to rent out a room at the National Press Club? I did that. I was taking the phone calls; people were seeking the daybook, the schedule, and I had to arrange transportation and just everything of -- it was like a campaign swing through Washington DC, and the dissidents were the political stars at that time.<br /><br />It was a popular cause at first. America was very sympathetic in those days; we had just finished the Reagan years; we were accustomed to being staunch anti-Communists; and nobody thought that we should sit still, or take it, or countenance -- you know, it was mass murder of civilians in China!<br /><br />I happen to suspect, if they had killed off 3,000 baby boomers, that we would have a very different China policy. But the thing is that the student uprising was led by Generation X'ers, and basically that's the younger group that basically had no political voice at the time.<br /><br />The administration of George Bush senior -- at the time, that was the U.S. executive branch under Bush, senior -- refused to meet with the dissidents as they arrived from China. You would think that the leader of the free world might want to talk to the pro-democracy forces of China, but no -- the administration was refusing to meet with those dissidents.<br /><br />However, during that first week, we did arrange that the dissidents had lunch with the Republican National Committee, and they met the Senate Joint Leadership with Bob Dole and George Mitchell. So, there were Congressional faces who cared about the situation, or they wanted to meet with the dissidents, and there was plenty of news media attention.<br /><br /><br /><b>Host: </b> But the government itself would not show any support for them. But, that doesn't come as a big surprise to me, because China apparently has a lot of power economically over America, I mean, they hold--<br /><br /><br /><b>JPK: </b> Well *now* they do.<br /><br /><br /><b>Host:</b> Or, how was it back then? They probably had an alliance though, at high levels all along.<br /><br /><br /><b>JPK:</b> Well, of course there's a back story to all of this. But now, the thing is that in the 1980s, the US trade deficit with China was always less than $5 billion. It was maybe $2 billion, $3 billion; maybe topped out at $4 billion. It was tiny; a tiny trade deficit.<br /><br />And now it's over a quarter of a trillion. So, the rise of our trade deficit with China has happened *afterwards*; *after* Tiananmen. Almost like as if it's a reward for bad behavior.<br /><br /><br /><b>Host:</b> Yes, that what it seems to me -- like this was probably the plan all along, was to have labor outsourced to the best place for cheap labor, which was China - Communist China. And help that government to get rich, or their certain corporations, their elites, while benefiting off basically the slave labor, meanwhile undermining our own economy here in North America and turning us into slaves as well.<br /><br />I tend to think that they had this planned out -- I mean, they couldn't have really thought that it was going to bring prosperity to the middle class, to have some corporations doing what they're doing with the free trade in China. And so, it probably -- it didn't really matter if they killed their own people, because they had America's support, or the government, executive branch -- they had their support. So the government would just want to sweep it under the rug.<br />John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-85298701255510437642011-05-28T12:31:00.003+08:002011-05-28T23:15:43.722+08:00China revolution planning at weekend conventionFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE<br />CONTACT TANG BAIQIAO 718-840-7166 <a href="mailto:tbqfl64@hotmail.com">tbqfl64@hotmail.com</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Chinese dissidents converge on New York<br />for revolutionary conference<br /></span><br />A large meeting for an important matter</strong><br /></div><br /><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><br /><div align="left">New York May 28, 2011</div><br /><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><br /><div align="left">(China Support Network) -- This year, the world faces revolution in many places, beginning with the Middle East and North Africa. Facing unrest and strong winds of change, many despotic dictators are falling from power.<br /><br />The world's largest autocratic regime is the one which has ruled and enslaved the Chinese people -- 1/5th of the world's population -- since 1949. A democratic revolution is needed in China more urgently than anywhere. It is time now to overthrow despotism and build a free and democratic China.<br /><br />Fortunately, the Chinese public is awakening to the ugency and necessity for change. The Chinese youth movement, seeking change, has now called for a Jasmine revolution, to echo those of the Middle East and North Africa, which were also called Jasmine revolutions.<br /><br />In the free world, overseas Chinese dissidents are meeting in New York this weekend to plot the course of the revolution and to address urgent questions such as how to effectively impel and encourage this revolution; and what objectives, strategies, tactics, and actions will be employed.<br /><br />With these questions in the air, dissidents planned a two-day conference for May 28 and 29, 2011. The conference coincides with two anniversaries: The 100th anniversary of the 1911 revolution, and the 22nd anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown. Accordingly, they have named the conference to reflect democratic revolution from 1911 to the present.<br /><br />The conference should serve as a forum and a venue for the exchange of views and ideas among China experts, democracy campaigners, and human rights advocates. Also, as word spreads about this gathering, it may serve as a point of encouragement to China's domestic populace. They are invited to join the great movement to bravely oppose the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party.<br /><br />Rebellions will be planned in open sessions, closed sessions, and sideline sessions, lunches, and dinners. Chinese dissidents with pre-existing "platform" (prominent, famous names) are already in town ahead of the sessions: Feng Congde, Yan Xiong, Tang Baiqiao, and Lianchao Han are among those already known for their lengthy track records in service to Chinese democracy.<br /><br />Various other guests will include American writers Greg Autry and John Kusumi, filmmaker Bruce Kivo, and a delegation of Burmese dissidents who also seek freedom for their homeland, and who stand in solidarity with Chinese dissidents.<br /><br />The weekend's conference will highlight and raise the issue of Chinese revolution, and aims ultimately to overthow the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party and to establish a democratic republic in China -- a new addition to the free world.<br /><br />Conference time: 9:00 am to 5:00 pm<br /><br />Conference venue: Marco Laguardia Hotel, 137-07 Northern Blvd, Flushing, NYC<br /><br />We salute all who will join the revolution, at this weekend's events or by other means!</div><br /><br /><div align="left"></div><br /><br /><div align="center"># # #</div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-56861760795456560982011-05-12T12:11:00.000+08:002011-05-14T04:49:53.560+08:00Dissidents seek to derail the nomination of Gary Locke for U.S. ambassador<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Has Locke acted as an agent of persecution for Communist China?</span><br /></div><br /><br />By John Kusumi<br />NEW YORK | Thursday, May 12, 2011<br /><br />(China Support Network) - An array of pro-democracy Chinese dissidents, Falun Gong practitioners, and rights groups are lodging vociferous objections to the nomination of Gary Locke for U.S. ambassador to China.<br /><br />Locke, a Chinese-American, is a former governor of Washington state and currently the Commerce Secretary in the cabinet of U.S. President Barack Obama, who nominated Locke to replace outgoing ambassador Jon Huntsman.<br /><br />The U.S. Senate is scheduled to hold hearings today on the question of whether to confirm Obama's nominee. Chinese dissidents say that Locke, with pro-CCP (Chinese Communist Party) leanings and business interests, is anti-Falun Gong and has severe black marks on his own human rights scorecard.<br /><br />In fact, they have prepared a "bombshell" witness, available to the Committee, accusing Locke of "Complicity in Genocide." The story is detailed in litigation that has been filed demanding a criminal investigation of Gary Locke by the U.S. Justice Department.<br /><br />U.S. Senators Lugar (R-IN) and Kerry (D-MA), who lead the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have been alerted to this controversy by way of letters and pleadings in the case, copies of which were obtained by the China Support Network.<br /><br />The 'bombshell' witness is renowned cancer researcher and Falun Gong practitioner Dr. Lotus King Weiss, also known as Dr. Tongwen Wang. She is the plaintiff in the mentioned litigation, and Chinese dissident Ning Ye is the attorney representing her.<br /><br />Dr. Weiss is described as "a well established, nationally prominent life scientist." Her Ph.D in cell development and molecular biology was obtained from the University of Florida in 1992, her work took her to Harvard Medical School and the Benaroya Research Institute. Her credits include various awards and grants, and publication of her work in peer-reviewed outlets including Science, Journal of Biochemistry, Journal of Immunology, etc.<br /><br />In 1997, Gary Locke became Governor of the state of Washington. In 1999, the Chinese government began to crack down forcibly against all practitioners of Falun Gong. That crackdown is a holocaust of genocidal persecution. The words of Jiang Zemin (former head of the Chinese Communist Party) in ordering the crackdown were, "ruin their reputation; make them financially bankrupt; and eliminate them physically."<br /><br />In 2002, Weiss undertook research to investigate human immune system responses to the practice of Falun Gong -- research that would use the techniques of Western medicine to perhaps vindicate the reported health benefits of practicing Falun Gong and advance cancer research.<br /><br />That year, the American Cancer Society awarded a grant of $1 million to Dr. Weiss' laboratory. She was the Principal Investigator at this lab, which was under the Benaroya Research Institute (BRI) and affiliated with the University of Washington in Seattle. Her laboratory also had funding from the National Institutes of Health.<br /><br />While it may be politically sensitive, it is not a crime to research Falun Gong during a genocidal crackdown. In American society, there is no reason why such research should be stopped -- by someone working for then-Governor Gary Locke.<br /><br />Any impetus to quash activity related to Falun Gong did not come from American society. As Chinese dissidents now raise complaints, they see the hand of the CCP, directing Gary Locke as their de facto agent to do the bidding of Jiang Zemin: "ruin their reputation; make them financially bankrupt; and eliminate them physically."<br /><br />The affidavit of Dr. Weiss, in the case filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, directly accuses former Gov. Locke of complicity in genocide, and describes the shutdown of her laboratory in 2003, by saying:<br /><blockquote>"a representative was sent from Mr. Gary Locke's Office, who mysteriously met with Dr. Gerald Nepom behind the door, for two hours; immediately, Dr. Gerald Nepom completely changed his attitude towards my interest in continuing the projects on the health benefits of practicing Falun Dafa; he officially informed me that I was not allowed to talk about Falun Dafa in the research center, since 'it is too political'...Dr. Gerald Nepom finally decided to dismiss me from the BRI, informing me that my scientific research projects 'no longer conform to the mission of the BRI'"<br /></blockquote>In addition to working through Governor Gary Locke, it is evident that the CCP directly targeted Dr. Weiss for yet more Falun Gong persecution. This followed on the heels of her presentation at the Boston Future Science Forum in April, 2002. (URL: http://www.pureinsight.org/node/195 )<br /><br />Her affidavit states,<br /><blockquote>"I became black-listed by the Chinese Communist Government, which started to threat[en] my parents in China, claiming to them, 'We know everything your daughter does in America' and ordered them to pressure me to stop practicing Falun Dafa."<br /></blockquote>The CCP authorities evidently got through to Weiss' former husband, using their propaganda to warn him about "Falun Gong, the evil cult" -- and this prompted her husband to divorce her and to remove their seven year old boy from her custody.<br /><br />Also in her affidavit, "the Chinese Communist Government ordered my own family members to force me back to China." Her older brother, Jianxin Bao, "then went to Dr. Gerald Nepom and informed him that I 'found a nice position in China' and asked him to ship all of my research equipments to China." By April of 2005, Dr. Weiss was effectively homeless on the streets of New York.<br /><br />Such persecution makes for a stark story. However, it is fair to ask questions such as, why did the CCP work through Governor Gary Locke? And, why did he assent to play the role that he did in the saga of Dr. Weiss? If this is not Falun Gong persecution, then can Locke offer another reason why Weiss' career was summarily crushed? Did he receive some payment or any quid-pro-quo from Communist China?<br /><br />As an agent of persecution, if not the Communist Party, Gary Locke has clearly opened himself up to the present charge of complicity in genocide. Also, since Dr. Weiss operated on the frontiers of science, findings from her laboratory could directly impact the future of the entire life science field and the battle between humanity and diseases. Findings from her laboratory are now suppressed, and all of us may have suffered a loss from the career interference that Dr. Weiss suffered.<br /><br />The entire Falun Gong community can rightly look upon this incident as a setback for Falun Gong. For that reason, the China Support Network is adding its voice into the mix here, calling for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to postpone and delay approval of Gary Locke's prospective ambassadorship, pending the outcome of a full investigation.<br /><br />Attorney Ning Ye is deeply suspicious of Gary Locke. In writing to the U.S. Senate, he said that he is "deeply concerned" about the Locke nomination as as "ominous development."<br /><br />Less formally, he is even more alarmed. To the China Support Network, Ye called the Locke nomination a "lethally dangerous development," and said, "I really suspect that Mr. Locke has been PRC's 'sunken fish' on strategic level."<br /><br />In his letter to the U.S. Senate, Ye allowed that the case of Dr. Weiss "may not be sufficient to prove [Locke's] affiliation to any potentially hostile foreign power," yet he continued, "however, it may implicate his value system and his bias and loyalty under an undue foreign influence. If his personal involvement in direct persecution against FLG [Falun Gong] practitioners here in the United States is proven true, we then have to question what is his real partisanship, loyalty and affiliation?"<br /><br />In fact, Ning Ye may have an answer to a question asked above: Did Locke "receive some payment or any quid-pro-quo from Communist China?"<br /><br />Writing to the Senate, Ye noted, "After Mr. Locke retired from the governor’s office, he was recruited to work as a partner with Davis Wright Tremaine (2005 to 2009)....handling the firm's China related business." This led Ye to ask even more pointed questions:<br /><br /><blockquote>"Did he use any improper political influence right from his fresh departure from the Governor's office, to unethically help the Chinese Communist clients with Davis Wright Tremaine? --This nominee needs to fully disclose the complete laundry list of his actual, preexisting, potential, and prospective PRC and PRC related clients, and such clients obtained by Davis Wright Tremaine. He may also need to disclose whether or not he has received any direct or indirect profits, benefits, and interests from Davis Wright Tremaine after 2009, or such profits, benefits, and interests from the government agencies of the PRC, or any sort of clients with PRC background via Davis Wright Tremaine.<br /><br />"The U.S. Congress, and the People of the United States may also be interested to learn of any change of profit margin of Davis Wright Tremaine before, during, and after Mr. Locke's merging his influence -- an intangible asset -- as an investment in that private firm."<br /></blockquote>It seems that Communist China placed business with Davis Wright Tremaine, and that this may have been quid pro quo; a chance for the CCP to scratch Locke's back after he had run the errand for them, against Falun Gong. In addition, as a trustee of the University of Washington, Locke voted in 2008 to approve a $6 million grant which was given to Dr. Gerald Nepom, the BRI researcher who terminated Dr. Weiss under pressure from the Governor's office. That looks like quid pro quo; a reward to Dr. Nepom for the harm done to Falun Gong research.<br /><br />As Ye noted in his letter to the Senate, "Dr. Nepom had been Dr. Weiss' staunch supporter for Dr. Weiss' cutting-edge research project funded by NIH and the American Cancer Society, before Mr. Locke got himself involved."<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"># # #</div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-36670021046644220812011-04-23T22:47:00.002+08:002011-04-23T23:00:16.758+08:00Western powers 'Leaving the Jews in the gas chambers'<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:130%;" >Western powers<br />'Leaving the Jews in the gas chambers'</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">U.S. China policy remains an atrocity of its own</span><br /></div><br />Prepared remarks for<br />Falun Gong rally, 4/23/2011<br />By John Kusumi<br /><br />FLUSHING, NY (CSN) -- Greetings from the China Support Network. Today is an anniversary day for Falun Gong, the group of meditating qi gong practitioners with teachings that seem like a variety of Buddhism. Falun Gong arose in China at a time when China itself is a troubled place.<br /><br />The evil men of the 20th century famously include Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Chairman Mao Zedong began the regime that has ruled China with an iron fist ever since 1949. Of course, China has 5,000 years of non-Communist history prior to 1949, but most adults today came of age during the reign of Chairman Mao's Chinese Communist Party, the CCP.<br /><br />The evil of the 20th century didn't end with Mao. Mao was succeeded by Deng Xiaoping and by Jiang Zemin.<br /><br />Now it is the 21st century, and Falun Gong is still on the receiving end of evil!<br /><br />Falun Gong is persecuted, but it also has "company on persecution row." Uighurs are persecuted, Mongols are persecuted, house church Christians are persecuted, bloggers are persecuted, journalists are persecuted, and lawyers are persecuted -- indeed, anyone who would stand up for justice is face to face with brutal oppression.<br /><br />Pro-democracy political dissidents remain on the receiving end of evil. Now the Tiananmen generation is joined by the Jasmine generation in the prisons of Communist China. The famous artist Ai Weiwei has recently been taken into custody.<br /><br />And we should note that Tibetans are once again on the receiving end of evil -- reports tell us that on Thursday April 21, Chinese authorities rounded up 300 Tibetan monks and killed two civilians who protested that action at Kirti monastery.<br /><br />Our gathering today is to remember the beginning of the crackdown on Falun Gong. That crackdown remains the largest and deadliest one going. In fact, history will remember it as an ugly holocaust of persecution and genocide.<br /><br />I believe also that history will remember <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">the silence of Western leaders and news outlets</span>. Through their policies of free trade with Communist China, they have continued to lavish rewards upon the communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs who oppress China. With their deliberate blind eye for this persecution, they have brought shame to a Western world that once vowed, "Never again" in the face of genocide.<br /><br />Let me be clear. Their China policy is no better than "leaving the Jews in the gas chambers." Their China policy is one of moral cowardice, and reveals craven indifference to human suffering. Western China policy is akin to a crime against humanity of its very own.<br /><br />Someone such as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ought to stop the Western complicity. Freedom will come to China, and the equivalent of the Gates of Auschwitz will be opened up. We will gain a better view of the points that I am making here.<br /><br />The international human rights community was pleased by the opening of the International Criminal Court in 2002. The upshot of the ICC is to show that genocide has consequences. War crimes have consequences. And crimes against humanity have consequences.<br /><br />Facing genocide, the Western world once vowed, "Never again." The ICC now provides a tool that can assist in fulfilling that vow. Western leaders should:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">• face these facts;</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">• use that tool </span>and any clatter that's necessary to ultimately:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">• Stop this genocide!</span><br /><br /><br />This episode of history is disgraceful for China, and it is shameful for the West. Even while that is true, I like to end my speeches by saying:<br /><br />Thank you for having me -- god bless China -- and god bless America! Thank you again!John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-9151224170245449302011-03-01T14:17:00.002+08:002011-03-01T14:20:35.815+08:00Web Sites Under AttackFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, March 1, 2011<br />CONTACT PERSON: Tang Baiqaio, Chinese dissident / former "June 4" student leader<br /><br /><br /><div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">WEB PRESENCE OF CHINESE 'JASMINE' REVOLUTION UNDER ATTACK</span></strong></div><br /><br />March 1, 2011 (CSN News) -- Chinese dissidents are condemning new cyber attacks - interference from Beijing - and also apologizing to web users for the inconvenience as their pro-Jasmine web sites experience denial-of-service (DOS) attacks.<br /><br /><br />Online calls for a Middle East-style 'Jasmine' revolution in China first appeared at the web site Boxun.com. Over the weekend, Boxun announced that it would no longer disseminate Jasmine-related information, due to heavy-handed tactics deployed by the Chinese government against their servers, their staff, and family members of their staff.<br /><br /><br />Chinese dissidents promptly condemned the attacks against Boxun, and announced a federation of dissident websites that would carry Jasmine-related material.<br /><br /><br />Now, member websites of that federation are coming under attack, presumably from Beijing, and dissidents are denouncing the attacks, and asking for patience from the community - web users who would access that material.<br /><br /><br />The eight web sites of the federation, announced this weekend, are:<br /><br /><br />Jasmine on Facebook: facebook.com/chinarevolution<br />China Affairs: chinaaffairs.org<br />Huang Hua Gang magazine: huanghuagang.org<br />Fire of Liberty: fireofliberty.org<br />Wolfax: wolfax.com<br />Future China Forum: bbs.futurechinafourm.org<br />Chinese Human Rights: cnrights.com<br />China Support Network: chinasupport.net<br /><br /><br />At this writing, five of these sites are up-and-running, and a sixth is also working, but the front page (at wolfax.com) is not served until the user solves a 'captcha' puzzle. Future China Forum is down, and CNRights.com is returning a blank page.<br /><br /><br />Organizer Tang Baiqiao praised the enthusiastic response to date, and vowed that all obstacles will be overcome until a Chinese revolution successfully establishes democracy in that land.<br /><br /><div align="center"># # # </div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-53927735854563946312011-02-27T10:26:00.003+08:002011-02-27T10:46:03.573+08:00The Dynamics of Jasmine<div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">The Dynamics of Jasmine</span></strong></div><br /><strong>By John Kusumi </strong>2011.2.27<br /><br />At this time, it is not clear who were the originators of the first internet postings which called for a Chinese Jasmine Revolution. We cannot judge their stature; nor the rectitude of their intentions; nor even interview them to inquire about these matters, without knowing who they are.<br /><br />But as a matter in general, there should logically be a world-wide impact stemming from the wave of people power sweeping away dictatorships in the Middle East.<br /><br />During Egypt's uprising, there were fears that Tahrir Square would become a Tiananmen Square -- in other words, a bloodbath echoing that of 1989 in Beijing, when the military opened fire with live ammunition to take back the square from civilian pro-democracy demonstrators.<br /><br />Chinese dissidents remember that time vividly, and they rightly leaned into watching the events in Egypt intently. Early feelings that "We've seen this movie before" changed into feelings of elation when the dictator fell. The army had not opened fire against the crowd of demonstrators! Tahrir Square escaped the fate of Tiananmen Square!<br /><br />The Arab world had people who were beaten down and abused; and yet they had hope, plus new social media. Their country changed when they also overcame their fear about the dictatorship and the security forces.<br /><br />The Arab world experienced a change. Instead of people being afraid of governments, suddenly the governments are afraid of people.<br /><br />That is not a strictly Arab phenomenon, nor should it be. During this Jasmine time -- on the same day Mubarak left power in Egypt -- Governor Scott Walker of the U.S. state of Wisconsin threatened to call out the National Guard for use in the case of dissent in Wisconsin. He was introducing an unpopular rollback of the rights of labor unions.<br /><br />The people of Wisconsin did not fear the National Guard. They stood up, and now America has more protestors in the streets than it has had in many years. Many labor unions have turned out their members to go to public rallies in all 50 states of the USA.<br /><br />Similarly, the people of Beijing should not live in fear of Hu Jintao. Who elected him?<br /><br /><strong>Jasmine<br /></strong><br />And so we come to the story of the efforts for a Chinese Jasmine Revolution. The first attempt was supposed to be Feb. 20, but the invitation only circulated on Feb. 19, which meant that very little time was allowed for the invitation to circulate. On Feb. 20, most Chinese had never heard of the calls for Jasmine gatherings.<br /><br />It was absurd to promulgate an invitation with such short notice. It would have been wiser to announce a date with one, two, or three weeks to allow the word to get around, and to build up a sense of anticipation and suspense.<br /><br />So the first Jasmine invitation was on short notice and with scant publicity. The publicity that it did receive was largely due to the government crackdown against it. The government was able to block the word Jasmine on the internet; and pre-emptively detain dissidents on Feb. 19; and increase police presence for Feb. 20. Also, some college students were warned to stay on campus.<br /><br />The events of last weekend show how nervous the Chinese government is about any spread of the Jasmine Revolution into China. In previous weeks, they had blocked other search terms such as Egypt, Cairo, and Mubarak in their attempt to prevent Egyptian news from reaching China.<br /><br />The government's over-reaction may have been ham-handed, but it was largely effective. While some tried to gather at the designated locations, the police presence inhibited any chanting or speech making.<br /><br />The scene caused the more snarky journalists to pronounce dead any hopes of a Chinese Jasmine Revolution, but Chinese dissidents actually valued the occasion as a good start. "It's progress, and we're happy to have it," seems the logical dissident attitude.<br /><br />Yes, it was progress. It yielded four new things: (1.) The name of the revolution. Prior to Tunisia's events, one might have expected a color revolution. Instead, it's a flower revolution. (2.) Plenty of publicity that reached mainstream news outlets and led to headlines like, 'Middle East domino effect reaches China.' The Chinese efforts gain a boost from the tie-in with the Middle East. (3.) A new government crackdown is keeping this matter in the headlines. (4.) The crackdown has over-reacted by kidnapping human rights lawyers and by charging other detainees with crimes. Therefore, the government side has taken prisoners, and the dissident side must demand the release of the Jasmine prisoners.<br /><br /><strong>Jasmine is here to stay<br /></strong><br />The internet posters of Jasmine-for-China quickly issued a call to gather again this weekend, and to make these Jasmine gatherings a regular weekly occurrence. They simply updated their hashtag from #cn220 to #cn227, where 227 means Feb. 27.<br /><br />This time the gatherings have advance notice, and a week of publicity in the run up. There has been time for endorsements to come from pro-democracy groups of Hong Kong and Taiwan, and from Chinese dissident quarters both domestic and international.<br /><br />In addition, there is the dynamic seen in Item #4, above. We are reminded about how the Tibetan uprising started in 2008.<br /><br />Every March 10 is Tibetan uprising day, the anniversary of the 1959 occasion which caused the Dalai Lama to go into exile.<br /><br />But, the uprising in 2008 is known as the 3.14 incident. Why the discrepancy?<br /><br />Tibetan monks went out to have their usual commemoration of March 10. On that day, the Chinese authorities arrested or detained some monks. Therefore, it was incumbent upon the Tibetan monks to go out again on March 11 to say, "Release our prisoners! Give us our men back!" At that demonstration, more monks were detained or arrested. So, it was incumbent upon the Tibetan monks to go out again on March 12 and say, "Release our prisoners! Give us our men back!" At that demonstration, more monks were detained or arrested. That led to more of the same on March 13. Violence on March 14 only broke out after the Chinese government had been squeezing them incrementally harder for the prior four days.<br /><br />Right now, Jasmine has the same dynamic. The Chinese government has taken prisoners, and it is incumbent upon the human rights community to demand their release. This week, the Jasmine protestors have more to protest than they did last week. And any new ham-handed abuses of this week will compound into the grievances of next week.<br /><br />A lot of Chinese dissidents may have been caught unaware, when internet calls for Jasmine popped up on Feb. 19. The calls were promulgated anonymously, and not under the names of long standing groups.<br /><br />Some people would have felt better, or more confidence, if the call said it was from "The Wei Jingsheng Foundation, the Overseas Chinese Democracy Coaltion, the Federation for Democracy in China, the China Democracy Party (various branches), the China Peace and Democracy Federation, the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements, the Party for Freedom and Democracy in China, Initiatives for China, the Tiananmen Mothers, and the signers of Charter 08."<br /><br />That's a list of groups, and one could add Beijing Spring, the Free China Movement, the Tiananmen Generation Association, the IFCSS (Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars), the LRF (Laogai Research Foundation), and the CIG (China Interim Government).<br /><br />But really, the overseas dissidents in exile have not had enough unity to put all of their names on one call. [Note: Tiananmen Mothers and Charter 08 are domestic, not exile groups.] The above is an interesting signature list, but it seems unlikely that we will see them all together on the same page, except here.<br /><br />It no longer matters where the call came from, originally. Jasmine is happening, and the situation draws into it every human rights group that would call for the release of the Jasmine prisoners / detainees. It is fully predictable that even the U.S. State Department must call for the release of those dissidents, and soon we will hear Congressmen on the floor of the House of Representatives calling for their release.<br /><br />While the original call for Jasmine was anonymous, it drew the response from the Chinese goverment, and then the imprimatur of all the news wires, newspapers, and media organizations that began to report it.<br /><br />As a result, the Jasmine period in world history sees "people power" standing up against governments world-wide, whether we speak of the Middle East, or China, or the United States.<br /><br />In fact, there is a Jasmine uprising happening in Iraq, the place where the United States invaded and installed the current government. People power may sweep away the puppet government of Iraq, but that is a profound humiliation for the United States, which thought that it was the occupying power!<br /><br />Perhaps Jasmine entails a domino effect for dictators; and for the United States, it represents "the emperor's wardrobe malfunction."<br /><br />In earlier writing for the China Support Network, I have previously called for Hillary Clinton to resign as the U.S. Secretary of State.<br /><br />At this time, the China Support Network demands that Beijing:<br /><br />- Stop the Jasmine crackdown;<br />- Release the Jasmine detainees, and all prisoners of conscience;<br />- Lift all restrictions on dissidents, allow the exiles to return to China;<br />- Meet the demands of Charter 08;<br />- Meet the demands of the Tiananmen Mothers.<br /><br />The above five demands are intended for a reasonable Chinese government. In the alternative, if the government will not be reasonable, then we have only one demand:<br /><br />- Hu Jintao, step down!<br /><br /><strong>Internal movement controversy<br /></strong><br />2002 and 2003 was the winter of discontent for Chinese dissidents. Bill Clinton had started unquestioned free trade with China, and network TV news anchors in the U.S. had basically "turned off the microphone" for Chinese dissidents. September 11, 2001 was a fresh memory, and the War On Terror overshadowed all else in mainstream news.<br /><br />Those were times when the China Support Network was almost the only place where one could turn for news and information of the Chinese democracy movement and human rights abuses in China. Because no one else covered this news beat, the China Support Network (CSN) was very vigorous about publishing any and all relevant news that we could find in English.<br /><br />Imagine a time with no Twitter, no Facebook, no YouTube, and no Epoch Times (Dajiyuan). Capitol Hill legislative aide Joel Segal praised the CSN, saying, "If it weren't for CSN updates, I wouldn't know what was going on."<br /><br />Things changed in 2004. The Epoch Times launched its English edition. They had more sources, a larger staff, and they were deeply plugged in to the Falun Gong.<br /><br />As the Epoch Times began to become "the newspaper of record" for human rights and Chinese dissent, the CSN dialed down to a slower pace of publishing. We have been happy that the Epoch Times is on the scene and covering the news beat of Chinese dissent.<br /><br />There have been times when the Epoch Times raised an eyebrow on my part. For example, they provided a lot of coverage when disgruntled constituents began to demonize and villify John Liu, a New York politician. I never completely understood the basis of the campaign against Liu.<br /><br />(Is he a politician that's not listening to the people? 308 million people might say, "Welcome to America." However, unless there is election fraud, then he is duly elected to do his job as he sees fit. To be inattentive, or even to take a different side in a controversy, is not a crime in America.)<br /><br />For one internal movement controversy, I clearly take the side of the Epoch Times. In 2006, they reported about forced organ harvesting, with just-in-time executions for Falun Gong practitioners who became the unwilling sources of organs removed for profitable transplant surgery.<br /><br />The Kilgour-Matas report was a study that was later released. It was absolutely impeccable, from towering figures in the Canadian human rights community. Based on careful research and investigation, it concluded that yes, indeed, this crime of organ harvesting was indeed happening in China. And subsequent to its release, even more evidence appeared to corroborate the claim.<br /><br />Prior to its release, Chinese dissident Harry Wu had expressed his skepticism about organ harvesting at the Sujiatan facility where it was first reported. That skepticism, together with a cursory inspection by the U.S. State Department, became the basis for the mainstream media to write off these reports as discredited.<br /><br />I knew that (a.) three weeks had passed between the initial report and the show tour that was given to the U.S. State Department. There was plenty of time for the Chinese government to remove evidence from Sujiatan. And (b.) plenty of sources away from Sujiatan were providing evidence that the practice was occuring at dozens of other sites in China.<br /><br />The mainstream media chose to err on the side against the Epoch Times and the Falun Gong practitioners who cried foul. That also means they erred on the side of believing communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs, while the latter committed systemic murder that will be remembered as crimes against humanity.<br /><br />I have no doubt that history will reveal that the Epoch Times was right, and the mainstream media was wrong. (And, there is a death toll associated with the media silence on this matter.)<br /><br />It was very dismaying that Harry Wu chose to very quickly condemn the reporting, before the Kilgour-Matas report was even released. In fact, because his own Laogai Research Foundation was documenting other cases of prisoner organ harvesting, it would have been smarter for Wu to "make hey" out of this story. It could have brought to light more of his own research about China's Laogai.<br /><br />This was dismaying, and I don't know whether there has ever been a meeting of the minds that heals the rift between Falun Gong and Harry Wu. For the China Support Network, we stood with the Epoch Times and still do so. Organ harvesting remains a strong story and a hideous atrocity of the Communist Party, comparable to Nazi medical experiments that were performed on unwilling prisoners in World War II.<br /><br />But now, a new matter has dismayed me -- in its English edition, a headline says, 'Jasmine Revolution in China a Trap, Say Analysts.'<br /><br />I believe that assessment is premature, unhelpful, and moot. The article under your hands presents 'The Dynamics of Jasmine.'<br /><br />Such a large number -- a wide array -- of dissident groups have been drawn in that, as noted above, "It no longer matters where the call came from, originally." Even on the short notice for Feb. 20, sympathy protests broke out in Hong Kong and New York. Endorsements or echoing or retweeting have come from many quarters, even the former ruling party in Taiwan, the DPP.<br /><br />This means that, regardless of where the first call came from, many many people are "all in" for having a Middle East-style Jasmine Revolution in China. As this matter escalates, the Epoch Times must either come around, or else begin to appear like the odd man out.<br /><br />As a matter of editorial judgment, I believe the China Support Network called it correctly when we supported the organ harvesting story. And at this time now, I believe that we are correct to be in alignment with those dissidents who are calling for a Jasmine Revolution to occur in China, now.<br /><br />Before there was an English Epoch Times (ET), the China Support Network was "the newsletter of record" for Chinese democracy. If ET is falling off the wagon, then that will prompt the CSN to increase its own publishing pace, to continue our best efforts of keeping the story straight for Chinese democracy.<br /><br />Perhaps the Epoch Times should issue an editorial to clarify where it stands.<br /><br /><div align="center"># # #</div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-10431030946696326972011-02-23T23:42:00.003+08:002011-02-24T00:00:29.545+08:00More calls for Jasmine protests in China(Repost:) While the Jasmine Revolution is making its way to China, the following open letter, ostensibly from the still-anonymous organizers, has been translated into English and republished by Human Rights In China.<br /><br />[Note: Elsewhere we have seen an internet posting that urges Beijingers to go to Tiananmen Square, and that expanded the list to 18 cities across China, and the days to include both Saturday and Sunday. The message below is closer to the earlier calls, naming McDonalds in Beijing, 13 cities across China, and protests to occur on Sundays.]<br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;"></span></strong><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Open Letter to the National People’s Congress</span></strong><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">from the Organizers of the Chinese Jasmine Rallies</span></strong><br /><br />[English Translation by Human Rights in China]<br /><br /><br />First, we would like to thank every participant of the Jasmine Rallies. Your participation has already made the authoritarian government very nervous. Your presence has made the Chinese government understand that they must choose between these two paths:<br /><br />The Chinese government will genuinely fight corruption and accept the supervision of the people.<br /><br />Suppress popular protest, continue corruption, and continue to refuse the supervision of the people.<br /><br />Every Chinese person with dreams hopes that China will become prosperous, rich, and powerful, that the people will not have to worry about food and clothing, that the government is upright and honest, and that the judiciary is impartial and just. But twenty years have passed [since the 1989 Democracy Movement], and what we are witnessing is a government that grows more corrupt by the day, government officials who collude with vested interests, and a citizenry that has not benefitted from the reform, opening up, and economic development. On the contrary, the people have to endure high goods and housing prices, and do not have health care, education, or benefits for the elderly. And what about ten years from now? Will we face a government even more corrupt? A judicial system even more opaque? Will vested interests give up their vested interest?<br /><br />Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: So much public housing has been sold to individuals, so many state-owned enterprises and so much land have been sold, and nearly all state-owned property has been sold off. But where has all the money from these sales gone? It goes without saying that state-owned property belongs to the entire people. But what did the people get? Led by an authoritarian regime, the opaque process of privatization has made a small number of people rich, but what did the vast number of ordinary people get?<br /><br />Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: When Japan, Korea, and Taiwan were in the process of industrializing, they were able to make the overwhelming majority of their people prosperous. Why is it that during China’s industrialization the ordinary people are becoming poorer? Why is it that in just the last few decades China has gone from being a country with the smallest gap between the rich and the poor to one with the largest? It is because the unfair system has made a small number of people incredibly wealthy, and the vast majority of people remain poor.<br /><br />Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: Every year the government uses public money to eat and drink, buy cars, visit foreign places, and raise salaries for officials; yet it doesn’t have money to spend on health care, education, benefits for the elderly, or other basic needs. The vast majority of Chinese people do not have basic health care, education, or benefits for the elderly. Not to mention Europe, America, Japan, or Korea; our welfare system is far behind those of India, Russia, or Brazil. When other countries use the majority of their tax money for the welfare of their people, where does our tax money go?<br /><br />Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: At present the renminbi ranks first among world currencies in terms of quantity in circulation. This serious “over-issuing” of currency has brought about a vicious cycle of inflation inside China. The excessive printing of currency is recklessly diluting the value of the people’s wealth. Because the renminbi is not an international currency, it is China’s ordinary citizens who are out of luck. The meager income of China’s ordinary people must support goods and housing prices similar to those in Europe and America. On the one hand the government excessively prints money, and on the other hand it uses administrative means to keep housing prices low is this some sort of mockery?<br /><br />Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: It is a matter of course that officials, when disclosing their wealth, should accept the supervision of the people, and that the government, when publishing details of tax revenues, should accept the supervision of the people. However, the Chinese people have no such power. We have been waiting for decades. Even if we wait for another ten years, we will not be able to get this kind of power. Should we keep on waiting? Are you willing to wait another 10 years, 20 years, 30 years?<br /><br />In short, without pressure from the people, absolutely no authoritarian government would take the initiative to respect the people or accept the people’s supervision. What we need to do now is to put pressure on the Chinese ruling party. If the party does not conscientiously fight corruption and accept the supervision of the people, then will it please exit the stage of history. We call upon each Chinese person who has a dream for China to bravely come out to take an afternoon stroll at two o’clock on Sundays to look around. Each person who joins in will make it clear to the Chinese ruling party that if it does not fight corruption, if the government does not accept their supervision, the Chinese people will not have the patience to wait any longer.<br /><br />We do not necessarily have to overthrow the current government. As long as the government fights corruption, the government and officials accept the people’s supervision, the government is sincere about solving the problems regarding judicial independence and freedom of expression and gives a timetable, we can give the ruling party time to solve the problems. We can call a stop to the strolling activities. We have been waiting for decades, if the government is sincere about solving the problem, we do not mind waiting a little longer. However, if the government is not sincere about solving the problems, but only wants to censor the Internet and block information to suppress the protests, the protests will only get stronger. As more and more people find out about “jasmine rallies,” there will definitely be more and more Chinese people joining in.<br /><br />We don’t care if we implement a one party system, a two party system, or even a three party system; but we are resolute in asking the government and the officials to accept the supervision of ordinary Chinese people, and we must have an independent judiciary. This is our fundamental demand.<br /><br />We do not support violent revolution; we continue to support non-violent non-cooperation. We invite every participant to stroll, watch, or even just pretend to pass by. As long as you are present, the authoritarian government will be shaking with fear.<br /><br />China belongs to every Chinese person, not to any political party. China’s future will be decided by every person. We ask that the government and officials accept the supervision of the people, that the details of tax collection be published, and that taxes are genuinely "collected from the people, and used for the people." These basic requests are not the least bit excessive. For our country’s future, for the fundamental rights of our children and future generations, please bravely come out. The Chinese people’s thirst for freedom and democracy is unstoppable (as Wen Jiabao said during an interview on CNN).<br /><br />If you are unable to participate in the strolls, please tell every Chinese person near you: We need an upright and honest government. We need the right to supervise government tax collection. We need the right to scrutinize officials’ wealth. We need the right to publicly criticize the government. These are the fundamental rights of every Chinese person. Please tell every Chinese person near you: Non-violent non-cooperation is the only path for Chinese democratization. Please use word-of-mouth to break through the news blackout and come show your support.<br /><br />The Chinese people rely on themselves to fight for their rights. We should not even dream that an authoritarian regime would take the initiative to award us these rights. Please join us in non-violent non-cooperation to make the Chinese government respect the basic rights of the Chinese people.<br /><br />Time: Every Sunday starting on February 20, 2011 at 2 pm. (If the Chinese government is sincere about solving problems such as corruption and public supervision, we will send out a notice stopping the action.)<br /><br />Rally Locations:<br /><br />Beijing: in front of the McDonald’s on Wangfujing Street<br /><br />Shanghai: in front of Peace Cinema at People’s Square<br /><br />Tianjin: below the Drum Tower<br /><br />Nanjing, (Jiangsu Province): the entrance of Silk Street Department Store at the Drum Tower Square<br /><br />Xi’an, (Shaanxi Province): the entrance of Carrefour on Beida Street<br /><br />Chengdu, (Sichuan Province): under the Statue of Chairman Mao at Tianfu Square<br /><br />Changsha, (Hunan Province): the entrance of Xindaxin Building at Wuyi Square<br /><br />Hangzhou, (Zhejiang Province): the entrance of Hangzhou Department Store at Wulin Square<br /><br />Guangzhou, (Guangdong Province): in front of the Starbucks at the People’s Park<br /><br />Shenyang, (Liaoning Province): in front of the KFC at North Nanjing Street<br /><br />Changchun, (Jilin Province): in front of Corogo Supermarket at Democratic Avenue of West Culture Square<br /><br />Harbin, (Heilongjiang Province): in front of Harbin Cinema<br /><br />Wuhan, (Hubei Province): in front of the McDonald’s at Jiefang Avenue and the World Trade Plaza<br /><br />People who are in cities not listed here, please go to the central square of your city.<br /><br />We ask websites to help spread this statement, thank you!<br /><br />One of the organizers of China Jasmine Rallies (Posted on Boxun by a friend on February 21, 2011.)John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-62885578033100946072011-02-21T17:03:00.001+08:002011-02-21T17:05:09.554+08:00Liberate Libya, Bahrain, China +<div style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:130%;">A call to liberate Libya, Bahrain,<br />China, and Mainstream journalism!<br /></span></div><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">By John Kusumi</span><br /><br />February 20, 2011 (Sunday) was not a slow news day. Uprisings and/or crackdowns were reported in Bahrain, Libya, China, Djibouti, Morocco, and Madison, Wisconsin. There may still be protest/uprising action happening in Algeria, Iran, and Yemen, but it didn't cross my desk Sunday. I did notice that sympathy protests happened in Hong Kong and New York.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Libya</span><br /><br />Libya must be liberated. Even by Washington standards, this is an easy call. Everybody should lean into giving the full measure of their support to the pro-democracy dissidents who are trying to change Libya for the better. They want to get out from under their despotic tyrant, Moammar Gadhafi.<br /><br />Recent days have included the news of protest/uprising action and the brutal, deadly crackdown that the tyrant meted out in reply. To me, however, the kicker is this headline:<br /><br />"Libyan security forces open fire on mourners at funeral for anti-gov't protesters in Benghazi again."<br /><br />Think of that! In Libya, they can't mourn their dead. They can't go to a funeral, because government thugs are there to mow down any bereaved friends and relatives who have the temerity to think that their deceased loved one deserves recognition.<br /><br />This is inhuman by any standard. Now reiterating my point, Libya must be liberated.<br /><br />With my point already made, it remains to note that Sunday's action in Benghazi, Libya was more than a crackdown: it was a massacre. The following tweet, seen Sunday, was poignant and should pull at anyone's heart strings:<br /><br />"Massacre in Benghazi, Gaddafi is using missiles, killing libyans, help us, help us, help us "<br /><br />Once again, this is inhuman by any standard.<br /><br />A group of the Chinese democracy movement, 'Coalition for Citizens Rights' plans to hold a sympathy protest for Libya, condemning that massacre, outside the United Nations (in New York) on Tuesday at 2p.m. (The China Support Network will co-sponsor. All are welcome. It's at the Dag Hamarskjold Park location: 47th St./1st Av.)<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Bahrain</span><br /><br />Bahrain had its own massacre two days earlier. It filled the hospitals to overflowing, according to the voice of a Dr. Ghassan at Salmaniya Hospital, as heard in this clip from Al Jazeera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaYvy8CPxwU<br /><br />Once again, this is inhuman by any standard. That's not the end of it. Today on Facebook, there appeared a message which says:<br /><br />"I'm a 16 year old teanager.. We live in fear and pain in bahrain<br />Our peaceful protest of more than 50,000 if not more got attacked at<br />night by the bahrain army..<br />70 people have been missing.. No one knows about them but one<br />was found brutaly killed and cut into pieces<br />Also women and children went missing<br />There was over 600 casualties and 8 martyrs..<br />The minister of health is covering it up, and not allowing to send<br />ambulances.. And even if sent it isn't allow to help people<br />Instead they get beaten up<br />Its a msacre wats happening here.. The bahrain media wants to have<br />a media blockout.. 14 reporters r still at the airport..<br />Also.. The bahrain tv r spreading wrong facts.. And covering up the<br />masacre and creating plays<br />I wish you could help us because we really do need help.."<br /><br />There is something else to say about Bahrain and U.S. foreign policy. Rumors say that the Saudis are ready to dispatch troops "to help" the regime in Bahrain. Frankly, that would never happen unless it was green lighted from Washington, DC. If the Saudis move into Bahrain, that will be as proxies. It's really Washington moving into Bahrain, but letting the dirty work be done by Saudis, who are a puppet state of Washington.<br /><br />Is the United States, via proxy, about to stomp into Bahrain to further harm these injured people?<br /><br />As a human rights group, the China Support Network calls upon Obama, Biden, and Clinton to refrain from any assistance to the Bahrain regime and indeed to veto any Saudi move to back up that regime. With fresh blood on its hands, the Bahrain regime has crimes against humanity for which it must answer.<br /><br />Once again, this is inhuman by any standard. The al-Khalifa ruling family must go. Bahrain must overcome its tyranny. Freedom is the order of the day, and as mentioned in the headline, this is a call to liberate Bahrain.<br /><br />If the Obama group actually reads this tract, I would repeat words from a former CIA analyst: "Globalisation and improved communications now make possible what once was easily silenced. If regimes are to survive, they must draw a new contract with their peoples."<br /><br />In light of that, you [Obama folks] might want to dial back or dial down on your own crimes against humanity. Take that as a tip from a human rights group and member of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Together with the ICC, the China Support Network frowns on genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">China</span><br /><br />Speaking of genocide and crimes against humanity, let's talk about Communist China. The revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt have certainly encouraged hope in the community of Chinese dissidents, and illuminated a way in which people power (plus online connectivity) was able to organize in the face of a tyrant; overcame fear; and was victorious in 18 days without a Tiananmen-style massacre perpetrated by the army.<br /><br />This is absolutely a pattern and model for Chinese dissidents to follow. Over the weekend just now, some dissidents indeed tried to follow just that formula.<br /><br />The efforts to organize a Jasmine Revolution for China are the subject of conflicting reports. This first appeared either ten days ago, or else Thursday Feb. 17, depending upon the news source you read. In any case, on Saturday Feb. 19, organizers released a very specific plan for Feb. 20.<br /><br />The plan named 13 Chinese cities and gathering places, directed participants to appear at 2p.m. on Sunday, and to shout specific slogans, namely: "We want food, we want work, we want housing, we want fairness, we want justice, start political reform, end one-party dictatorship, bring in freedom of the press, long live freedom, long live democracy."<br /><br />This was bold on the part of dissidents, but the regime was swift in its pre-emptive suppression. Indeed, much is learned from the Chinese government's over-reaction.<br /><br />A synopsis by Bloomberg News said, "The Chinese authorities responded by arresting some human rights lawyers, shutting university students in their campuses, banning the use of keywords on mobile phone messages and with an overwhelming security presence, according to reports in foreign media.<br /><br />"Television footage yesterday showed police clashing with small numbers of demonstrators in Beijing and Shanghai, with several protesters struggling as they were bundled away into custody."<br /><br />The Bloomberg synopsis doesn't do justice to this story, but here at the China Support Network, we'll fill in some more.<br /><br />They swooped in with a pre-emptive dragnet. Some dissidents were taken away; others were kept under house arrest. The total receiving such treatment exceeded 100, according to the Hong Kong Information Center for Human Rights and Democracy. In still other cases, dissidents were warned against attending, or questioned about it.<br /><br />The word "jasmine" was blocked by internet filters. Service was suspended in Beijing for multi-recipient text messages, according to the AP. Reports say that a heavy police presence cordoned off the 13 protest sites.<br /><br />Twitter users and the activist Wan Yanhai also reported that university students were told to stay on campuses and away from trouble.<br /><br />With all of the above as prelude, Sunday's protests were sparsely attended and anti-climactic. Activity was reported in Beijing and Shanghai, but in the other cities the police presence seemed the only response to the internet calls, which used these hashtags:<br /><br />#cn220, #jasmine, #freeChina, #cnJasmine<br /><br />Sympathy protests broke out in Hong Kong and New York. How to take this news, and analysis thereof, can be debated. My group, the China Support Network, did not organize these protests, but we declare solidarity with China's Jasmine Revolution. We call for the liberation of mainland China from its Communist Party oppressors.<br /><br />Furthermore, we demand the release of all of the Jasmine detainees who were rounded up in the pre-emptive sweep. This echoes the same demand that was made at the Hong Kong protest on Sunday.<br /><br />The hardline dissident group, China Interim Government, is demanding that Chinese president Hu Jintao step down. China Support Network declares its solidarity and repeats the call: Hu Jintao, step down!<br /><br />How to spin the news can always be debated. I've noticed that the snarkiest journalists are the fastest ones to file their stories. We don't yet have large crowds marching in the streets, and for that some journalists are already writing off China's Jasmine Revolution. Who's side are they on? Clearly, they are on one side of the battle, and it is the anti-democracy side.<br /><br />There is a cautionary tale to be told about Richard Spencer of the UK Telegraph. On Jan. 16, his headline said, "Tunisia: Why the Jasmine Revolution won't bloom."<br /><br />His subheadline said, "Friday's coup in Tunisia sent shockwaves throughout the Arab world. But don't expect it to herald an era of democratic reform."<br /><br />Spencer said that "It is easy to laugh now," because Tunisian dictator Ben Ali had predicted the demise of Hosni Mubarak, and now instead of Mubarak it was Ben Ali who had just been driven out of power.<br /><br />We could ask the question, "Who is laughing now?" Is it Ben Ali who has egg on his face, or is it Richard Spencer, who reported with near-metaphysical certitude that the Jasmine Revolution would not spread to Egypt?<br /><br />My cautionary tale reveals that "the Jasmine Revolution" has been written off as dead before; but, simply because a journalist files such a story does not mean that the story will stick. Journalists should think long and hard before trying to pronounce the demise, or the end, of the Chinese pro-democracy movement.<br /><br />This movement has people who are "still here" from 1989. The China Support Network was a response group to the atrocity at Tiananmen Square.<br /><br />Tiananmen Square student leader Wang Dan remains on the scene. Interviewed in Taiwan, he can spin this story like a pro. (Perhaps, with over 20 years' experience in the field, we should allow that he is a pro.)<br /><br />His interview published by Taiwan's CNA news wire allowed that the revolution did not materialize on Sunday. But, Wang is quoted saying, "The Chinese Communists were indeed frightened this time... Why does a government, which has more information than its people do, believe more than its people that mass protests are likely in China these days?"<br /><br />He assessed Sunday's campaign as "a very successful 'test and drill' for the future gathering of 'true people power.'"<br /><br />Writing in the Australian, Leo Lewis said that some people "hailed the day's activities as a useful dry run and suggested that protesters should meet every Sunday."<br /><br />The New York Times found a Beijinger named Cui, who said that he was not disappointed by the outcome:<br /><br />"He predicted that many people, emboldened by the fact that an impromptu gathering had coalesced at all, would use social networking technology to stage similar events in the future.<br /><br />"'It's very difficult to do this in China, but this is a good start,' he said. 'I'm thankful to be able to participate in this moment in history.'"<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Mainstream journalism</span><br /><br />Above, I wrote a cautionary tale with the example of Richard Spencer, who didn't expect to see a post-Mubarak world when he filed his story on Jan. 16. Journalists can be caught out by their near-metaphysical certitude that received wisdom and outdated rules of thumb can never fail them.<br /><br />Today, Melissa K. Chan was heedless of my cautionary tale. With her feet on the desk, she tapped out an article titled, "Call me if there's a revolution." She explained that her friend, another journalist, was headed out to central Beijing, but she decided not to go. "Pretty certain nothing would happen," she explained, she didn't want "a waste of my Sunday afternoon."<br /><br />If that isn't bad enough, within her article Ms. Chan proceeds to telegraph her attitude. An entire section begins, "Here's why I think China won't be having a revolution anytime soon." She then proceeds to regurgitate some hackneyed cliches of received wisdom, faulty rules of thumb, and flawed interpretation of history.<br /><br />I believe that Al-Jazeera should recall or reassign Ms. Chan, or that she should recuse herself from any future reporting on the Chinese democracy movement.<br /><br />It is exceedingly clear, in advance of future pro-democracy coverage, that Ms. Chan is biased against the movement. Her absence is not to be missed. For all I care, she can stay in a nail salon for the duration of the revolution. In between pedicures, perhaps she can try some more of her feet-on-the-desk journalism.<br /><br />When I consider the Melissa Chans of the news world, I wonder, "How much does the Communist Party pay you to ignore the human rights abuse of the Chinese democracy movement? Is that amount more, or less, than what they pay you to ignore the human rights abuse of the Falun Gong on a weekly basis?"<br /><br />There is a Beiijing Foreign Correspondents' Club, and all of them ignore the human rights abuse of the Falun Gong on a weekly basis. If the long arc of history bends toward justice, then at some point they will be exposed for being tacitly complicit, and silent accessories to the crimes against humanity that have been committed by the Chinese Communist Party in twelve years of the Falun Gong crackdown.<br /><br />Are they journalists? Or are they press release rewrite analysts? In order to report from Beijing and preserve their access in the Beijing power structure, they have made a pact with the devil. Sold out and soulless, they have abdicated a fuller version of journalism. They have kept Western audiences in the dark about the full extent and scale of the genocide against Falun Gong.<br /><br />They have served their Communist masters in Beijing. (And the home office overseas never thinks to ask after the Falun Gong.) But they have not served the right side of history, nor the public's right to know. What is the final epithet that I can write in this space? Perhaps I will let them choose from two alterate endings. They may be "filthy sub-human scum." Or they may be "paragons of moral cowardice and trite reporting."<br /><br />Either way, there is something profoundly foul at the Beijing Foreign Correspondents' Club, and I wouldn't want to be them; nor within smelling distance of that abominable hell hole. I would challenge them simply to tell me: What is the current death toll in the Falun Gong crackdown? And how many people died while you were withholding that number from the public?<br /><br />If the revolution succeeds, we will soon learn the answers to these interesting questions.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"># # #<br /></div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-66331776558615555522011-01-15T08:28:00.002+08:002011-01-15T08:31:15.984+08:00China Policy Ossified, Wishful, Ruinous<span style="font-weight: bold;">By John Kusumi and Ning Ye</span><br />Jan. 14, 2011<br /><br />As Barack Obama prepares to welcome Hu Jintao to a White House state dinner, Zbigniew Brzezinski launched a message offensive to frame U.S.-China relations. Regrettably, the policy prescriptions are flawed, faulty, and wishful rather than realistic. They were of arguable merit in the 1970s (the decade when the policy began); they overlook geopolitical changes in the 30 years since then; and in the twenty-teen decade, they are fully divorced from reality.<br /><br />During forty recent years, U.S.-China policy can be summarized by five words: getting cozy with Communist China. It is against our better interests; it is economically ruinous; and by building up a nuclear-armed, communist superpower, it directly threatens the U.S.' own national security. It is a risky scheme to have a hasty rush to Maoism.<br /><br />Where does this policy come from? In large part, it comes from Zbigniew Brzezinski. He was the National Security Advisor to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. During that term of office, the U.S. threw Taiwan under the bus and normalized relations with Beijing.<br /><br />Writing in the New York Times on January 2, Brzezinski waxed nostalgic about former dictator Deng Xiaoping's historic trip more than 30 years ago, as Deng visited the Carter administration to begin collecting China's winnings. It is as though China held a winning lottery ticket. Brzezinski notes that it "marked the beginning of China's three-decades-long economic transformation – one facilitated by its new diplomatic ties to the United States."<br /><br />Brzezinski's policy advice is old wine in an old bottle. It is as though nothing has changed since November 1969, when the Cohen memo reached the desk of former U.S. President Richard Nixon and hatched the idea of getting cozy with Communist China. Because actual policy then moved in the direction suggested by Jerome Cohen's memo, subsequent pronouncements have all been oriented to reinforce and defend the indefensible policy.<br /><br />The issue now is that China has risen to being the world's number two superpower, from being the poorest one among the Communist ranks 40 years ago, when U.S. policy made its strategic U-turn to enable the "younger nephew" to fight against the "big brother."<br /><br />It is always fair to note that the Communist Party is not China – and, China is not the Communist Party. U.S. policymakers have chosen to be cozy with China's government, but not with the wider aspirations of its people, best expressed in its pro-democracy, labor, and religious movements such as Falun Gong. Therefore we are really discussing U.S.-CCP relations, because the CCP is the one party, dictatorial government that stands in for China while victimizing its people, suppressing these movements, and enabling diabolical corruption.<br /><br />Lip service notwithstanding, the appeasement policy of recent decades has bet against popular aspirations and against the emergence of Chinese democracy. Certainly, the U.S. would be better served with a hedging strategy. What if the CCP is on the wrong side of history? Will the U.S. be remembered for aiding and abetting some of history's worst oppressors?<br /><br />If we look at policy outcomes on the ground, that's what we're doing: The U.S. is aiding and abetting some of history's worst oppressors. If we include its victims under Chairman Mao, the CCP has killed 80 million Chinese people, in addition to approximately 58,000 U.S. soldiers in the battlefields of Korea. Adding to the death toll, the brutal Falun Gong crackdown (still in progress) may be larger than the Tiananmen crackdown, the Uighur crackdown, and the Tibetan crackdown combined. For the CCP, crimes against humanity are business as usual.<br /><br />In the worst case, U.S. policy is now analogous to that of Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister of the 1930s who refused to believe the worst of Nazi Germany. Unwilling to treat the Nazi threat as the strategic, lethal adversary that it was, Chamberlain followed policies of appeasement and began to sound like Baghdad Bob, in denial of the actual military situation on the ground. It took a different British prime minister, Winston Churchill, to have a clear eyed view and to exhibit strength against Nazi Germany.<br /><br />Brzezinski argues for continued, Chamberlain-esque appeasement with complete disregard to a completely changed geopolitical landscape more than 40 years after the Cohen memo. Naturally since the policy is his brainchild, he defends it with this old wine in an old bottle.<br /><br />In Brzezinski's time as National Security Advisor, this policy weakened the Soviet bloc. But in the decades since then, changes of circumstance now indicate that this policy is weakening the free world.<br /><br />Absent the Soviet Union, U.S.-China relations have been of, by, and for business, even while the balance of payments has tipped heavily in favor of China and against the U.S. economy. U.S. rhetoric about liberty and rights has been hollow window dressing. The stale policy benefits two groups and hurts two others. The benefit has been for U.S. and CCP elites. The harm has been for U.S. and Chinese laobaixing (a term that means "ordinary citizens").<br /><br />Brzezinski has failed to justify why the U.S. should be out of step with liberty, itself. He can no longer fall back on the Soviet Union to justify the appeasement of Communist China.<br /><br />Many Chinese are themselves astonished at the winning lottery ticket that was handed to the CCP in the 1970s. Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng has celebrated the emergence of the Tea Party in U.S. politics. If there is any hope, however slim, that America will move in a different direction, that is to be welcomed.<br /><br />It is to be admitted that Zbigniew Brzezinski had his day. But now, it is time for the U.S. to dial back on its provision of aid and comfort to a nuclear armed, communist superpower.<hr /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:85%;" >John Kusumi is President of the China Support Network. Ning Ye is a Chinese dissident and attorney.</span>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-14521456563107920222010-12-08T23:32:00.000+08:002010-12-08T23:33:49.592+08:00CSN Demands Media Apology<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:donotoptimizeforbrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:donotoptimizeforbrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapedefaults ext="edit" spidmax="1026"> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:shapelayout ext="edit"> <o:idmap ext="edit" data="1"> </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><b><span style="font-family: Arial;">Right on schedule, here is our Op-Ed on the eve of<br />Liu Xiaobo's Nobel Peace Prize</span></b></p> <b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">By John Kusumi</span></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial;">, CSN President</span><p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">December 8, 2010 (CSN) -- This week has the world-notable occasion of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">The entire Chinese democracy movement should be demanding an apology of Western policy makers and media Managing Editors.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">This Op-Ed could be submitted to the mainstream 'news' outlets, but we already know how those outlets have been with CSN and with the Chinese dissidents for the past decade. I have described the relationship between U.S. media and U.S. politicians as the corrupt, flacking for the corrupt.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Legacy news media are on the ropes, and desperately need a 'reset moment.' That, for more reasons than just the Chinese democracy movement. (The current Wikileaks episode reveals both the corruption and the flacking, which serves to validate that my observation holds true, even in matters away from the Free China cause. Meanwhile on national leadership, the U.S. President has painted himself into a corner and the media has climbed ever further out on a limb.)</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">The China Support Network can say to the MSM: We don't believe in you any more. There is more to be expected of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy than from the high and mighty figures who (mis) manage their narratives in the public discourse, while posing as "objective journalists."</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">The tragic and bloody massacre at Tiananmen Square of 1989 -- ordered by China's government, conducted by the army -- tore at the heart strings of the public and policy makers alike, while inspiring other freedom fighters such as those in Eastern Europe (where the Berlin Wall came down later in 1989). Chinese students could feel short changed because they pushed and yet it was East Germans who got freedom that year.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Did the news media report the massacre? Yes, definitely. In fact, they had coverage of the inspiring, student-led uprising for seven weeks before that massacre. Because the uprising was that lengthy, there was lots of time for word to reach the West, and for all talking heads of the news media to digest and analyze the movement. Television coverage was so riveting that Pew Research reported 45% of Americans were "closely following" the political turmoil in China.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">When the army killed some 3,000 people and finally reached the square, this jaw dropping atrocity was a tragedy on television. Similar to Asia's tsunami, or Hurricane Katrina, or Haiti's earthquake -- tragedies motivate the kind hearted to respond. My fellow Americans and I launched the China Support Network. Soon, we were working shoulder-to-shoulder with leading Chinese dissidents.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Think tanks, and the Senate Joint Leadership, and the Republican National Committee all reached out to the newly-exiled dissidents. One, Wu'er Kaixi, was mobbed by women. The China Support Network co-managed his first week in Washington, along with other dissidents. And when news reporters wanted the daybook, or scheduling requests, they called the China Support Network, as a "go-to" organization. I know these stories because I personally accompanied Wu'er Kaixi; I wrote releases, alerts, and advisories; and I fielded those phone calls with media requests. In that week, we got the ear of former Senators Bob Dole and George Mitchell, but not the U.S. President and executive branch.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">In fact, the Chinese dissidents had a presence in the news media throughout the 1990s. America's Managing Editors have played a trick. "Now you see them, now you don't" is the trick specifically. One decade the democracy movement had a voice; and the next decade, there was no voice for the pro-democracy people; the true heroes of freedom and human rights.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">The 2000s were a time of stories getting squashed. A time of the media's blind eye for human rights abuse. Even while China ramped up its Falun Gong crackdown and added new ones: the Tibetan crackdown of 2008, and the Uighur crackdown of 2009. Squashed stories include dissident opposition to the PNTR free trade deal between the U.S. and China; all word of the Falun Gong crackdown that is still going today; and, the hideous story that China uses Falun Gong prisoners as the unwilling source for organ harvesting and transplant surgery.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">Oh, was this supposed to be an Op-Ed about Liu Xiaobo? --Well, in a way, it is. This is an Op-Ed about what became of his cause. This is an Op-Ed about the cause of freedom, democracy, and human rights -- and, how it is received in the U.S. news media.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style=""><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Arial;">It is as though U.S. Managing Editors have a message for Chinese people: Death for you is fine by them.</span></p>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-5741193741754340532010-11-26T17:58:00.001+08:002010-11-29T02:00:05.016+08:00World War, Korean War, or Close Shave?<span style="font-weight: bold;">Notes written from the brink of war</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">By John Kusumi</span><br /><br />Wars can easily start from miscalculation, and as I look at the Korean peninsula, I believe that somebody miscalculated.<br /><br />News brings word of two matters- - (a.) On November 23, 2010, North and South Korea had an exchange of artillery fire. Who fired first is immaterial, but a South Korean military official said, "We were conducting usual military drills and our test shots were aimed toward the west, not the north." Irrespective of that detail, North Korea took it upon themselves to shell the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong, killing at least two civilians and two military personnel. It is also believed that South Korea returned fire.<br /><br />As reported in Australian news (ABC News),<br /><br />"According to North Korean media the country's leader Kim Jong-il visited the artillery base which attacked the South just hours before this week's shelling started.<br /><br />"The report said he was accompanied by his son and heir Kim Jong-un.<br /><br />"If true, it would suggest that orders for the artillery attack came right from the top.<br /><br />"Even if not true, the report shows that North Korea's propaganda machine is placing the country's leader and his son at the front line and in command."<br /><br />ABC News also reported the number of shells: 50 fired by the North, 80 fired by the South. And, it indicated that the North is demanding a redraw of the maritime border between the two nations.<br /><br />--On Tuesday evening, Chinese dissidents were speculating that there is political maneuvering in the North. Yet, let's continue onwards to the second news item- - (b.) On November 24, 2010, it was publicized that the U.S. Pentagon / Obama administration is sending the USS George Washington, a Navy aircraft carrier, to join wargames with South Korea in the Yellow Sea (which is west of the Korean peninsula and coastal for China), with its arrival and commencement of exercises slated for Sunday, November 28.<br /><br />It may be an immaterial factoid to note that the exercises were pre-planned, in the pipeline prior to the island shelling incident, and that the exercises are due to end Wednesday, December 1. Factoids aside, it very much appears that the U.S. is flexing its muscle in the region. Whether welcome or not, those are the optics at hand. On Sunday, the aircraft carrier will be the hardware at hand. And by Wednesday, the "exercises" will have outcomes at hand.<br /><br />What can be said is, "Welcome to the brink of war." And, welcome to advice from the pro-democracy China Support Network, a very "Generation X*" group (*also known in China as the Tiananmen generation).<br /><br />At my CSN group, we are on the public record having zero tolerance for communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs. When I think of the governmental regimes of China and North Korea, I think, "A pox on both of their houses." At this time, it is worth reviewing some prior advocacy.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2003: Just say no to North Korea</span><br /><br />In 2003, "Just say no to North Korea" was an article jointly authored by Tiananmen dissident Zhou Yongjun and myself. At this time, my co-author is unavailable -- he's in a Chinese jail, serving his third term as a political prisoner. For a one line digression, the CSN demands that Communist China immediately release Zhou Yongjun, along with other high-profile prisoners Liu Xiaobo, Gao Zhisheng, and Wang Bingzhang.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2006: Treachery will get you nowhere</span><br /><br />Publishing in 2006, I wrote that "were I George W. Bush, I might now be enunciating five words for Kim Jong Il: 'Treachery will get you nowhere.' If any offers were on the table for North Korea, it is time to take those offers off the table." My 2006 advice included the words, "The imperative for freedom knows no exceptions. Efforts for freedom in Asia need to be more than just speeches and lip service."<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2006: Asian dictatorships are a bad thing, and we should oppose them</span><br /><br />My bottom line said, "We need a consistent policy about Asian dictatorships. Asian dictatorships are a bad thing, and we should oppose them!"<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2006: North Korea must be liberated</span><br /><br />We should oppose Asian dictatorships, and at the China Support Network, our narrative carries exactly that tune. My 2006 advice to the Bush administration was accompanied by another article from D.J. McGuire. His title? "North Korea must be liberated."<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">1989 - present: China must be liberated</span><br /><br />It is worth remembering the point and purpose of the China Support Network. While we do not advocate violence, we do advocate liberation: freedom, democracy, and human rights for mainland China. In addition to being pro-democracy, we are anti-communist human rights campaigners. We make common cause with the dissidents from those lands where a Communist Party still rules: China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos. Together with Cuba, they are the remaining Communist lands. In each case, the regime is a brutal, totalitarian dictatorship.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">2003: National security angles unmasked</span><br /><br />The Chinese democracy movement was very visible around the time of 1989's Tiananmen Square massacre - an occasion when Chinese college students had led an uprising for democracy, and Beijing used its army and live ammunition to storm and retake Tiananmen Square from peaceful, unarmed demonstrators. That brutal crackdown was on world TV at the time, and there is an iconic photograph of one lone man, stopping a line of tanks, that was one of the 20th century's most sensational moments captured on film. The Tiananmen crackdown was a hideous turn of history, by the hand of evil, and then it was swept under the rug by the George H. Bush administration (and then the Clinton administration, and then the George W. Bush administration).<br /><br />The China Support Network was a popular cause when it began, but we can understandably feel "swept under the rug" along with the balance of the Chinese democracy movement.<br /><br />When you are swept under the rug by the U.S. establishment, you get to see what else they are keeping hidden under the rug. With all of the friendliness that U.S. administrations have extended to Communist China in the past 20 years, items "swept under the rug" include U.S. national security and America's spine with communism. In 2003, CSN republished an article by the Chinese dissident Fang Jue. It comes from Harvard University's Fairbank Center for East Asian Research. Here is an overview of what "the news" has downplayed:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In Northeast Asia:</span> China is the main (if not sole) supporter of North Korea. China props up the North Korea regime to create a strategic front in Northeast Asia to tie up the forces of America and its allies.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In the Taiwan Strait:</span> China's military threatens Taiwan. This not only cows independence-minded Taiwanese, but also weakens American prestige in Asia. When tension grows in the Taiwan Strait, China uses this as a bargaining chip to persuade America to concede on other issues.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In Southeast Asia:</span> China's military encroaches upon disputed islands in the South China Sea in order to punish countries who would align themselves too closely with America. In Southeast Asia China also supports the military dictatorship in Burma. It thus uses aggression to create "allies" or buffers in Southeast Asia that will help it oppose democracy and the West.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In South Asia:</span> China supports the Pakistan military dictatorship in developing its nuclear and missile programs. The purpose is to encourage Pakistan to distance itself from the West and use Pakistan as a buffer against India, whose success with democracy creates a growing regional competition to China.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In Central Asia:</span> The new Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a consortium of China, Russia, and other former Soviet republics, wields influence to counterbalance the interests of democratic countries.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In the Middle East:</span> China supports theocracy and missile development in Iran and proliferates sensitive technology and goods through aid to Syria and Libya. China also supported Iraq's former dictatorship over a long period of time.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- In Russia:</span> China and Russia cooperate to restrain America from playing too large of a leading role in the world. This cooperation serves mutually to bolster the influence of Russia and China in the international community.<br /><br />We can thank the dissident Fang Jue for his research paper. Notably, he concludes that American leaders have been missing "an unprecedented historical opportunity to end communism and totalitarianism after the Cold War." He advocates a "global strategy to transform China into democracy." When America gets with the program, it will pressure Communist China until it is communist no more.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Let's return now to 2010...</span><br /><br />Welcome back to the brink of war. For the record, as the CSN has advocated pressure on Asia's communist regimes, we did not advocate a hot, shooting war. What we had in mind was more of a Cold War II. Communist China can and should be treated in likewise manner as Ronald Reagan treated the Soviet Union. Arguably, Beijing has been following a path that suggests they are already in Cold War II, because of the behaviors noted above in the section, "National security angles unmasked."<br /><br />But now, it's necessary to consider the present potential of a hot, shooting war. Make no mistake: the DMZ (demilitarized zone) between North and South Korea is a dividing line. It is the boundary between the free world, on the one hand, and the world of tyranny, on the other hand. That boundary should logically cleve (and hence obviate) the paradigm of globalization. This is where we must choose to stand with the free world and not be snookered by the world of tyranny, led by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party).<br /><br />Newbies, if reading this, may question why bring China into this, when the combatants on Tuesday were North and South Korea. The answer is that China already is in this. North Korea may be called a client state, or a puppet state, of Communist China. As noted by Fang Jue above, "China is the main (if not sole) supporter of North Korea. China props up the North Korea regime..." Behind the scenes of North Korea, there is China. And for that matter, we can note that South Korea is a client state of the US. Behind the scenes of South Korea, there is the US defense establishment.<br /><br />Informed sources are saying the same. From D.J. McGuire, "There's almost no way a move like this wouldn't get green-lighted by the CCP." The Epoch Times (ET) cited Chinese and Taiwanese analysts as indicating that Beijing is pulling strings from behind the scenes. Under their headline, "Attack on South Korea an Elaborate Ploy, Analysts Say," they note that, "A senior media person from Taiwan by the last name Zeng told The Epoch Times in a phone interview, he believes this provocative attack was a deceptive act jointly deployed by the Chinese and North Korean regimes." ET also quoted Sun Yanjun, a China affairs expert and former professor at Beijing Normal University, saying:<br /><br />"From my view of the relationship between China, North Korea, and South Korea, the regimes in China and North Korea are military partners, so it is very unlikely that this move came from the motive of North Korea alone.<br /><br />"The regimes in China and North Korea are currently going through very hard times; they have no other cards to play. They must maintain this tension so they can bargain with the international community.<br /><br />"The regime in China is currently under a lot of international pressure, including the exchange rate issue and also various internal pressures. It is looking for a way out, to divert the internal conflicts and international pressure.<br /><br />"The recent Diaoyu Island issue [with Japan] is also an attempt of looking for a way out. But the regimes in China and North Korea are not ready for a war, especially China is not ready."<br /><br />The speculation of the analysts is summed up in the Epoch Times' subheadline: Chinese and North Korean regimes seek to blackmail United States into concessions. The opening paragraph of this article included my view that somebody miscalculated. It wasn't the American side, and CCP tyrants may have expected an America that blinks and accomodates, rather than hangs tough.<br /><br />The news thus far tells that the US is hanging tough, and it is likely to remain in that posture because, as noted, it's the border of the free world and the stakes include the credibility of US military alliances.<br /><br />It may complicate matters that the new South Korean president is a militaristic hot head. At the same time, he knows the stakes -- the streets of Seoul -- better than we do.<br /><br />I kid you not that we are at the brink of war. Yes, in fact, matters have come to this. We will now sort out three possible paths that events may take: World War, Korean War, and Close Shave.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">World War</span><br /><br />A World War is now unlikely, because China would have to go it alone. The Obama administration has been on a charm offensive to "reset" its relationship with Russia, and has peeled Russia away from the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) military alliance with China. And, Obama recently went on a trip to Asia that was another charm offensive with such places as India and Indonesia. They have their own reasons to be wary of China, and they will not be joining China for the enlargement of a World War.<br /><br />Governments around the world have been unanimous in condemning North Korea for Tuesday's shelling. That includes Russia. Only China, in its state media, has refrained from condemning North Korea. As noted above, North Korea has no other friend but China. A geopolitical strategy has already isolated and encircled these two "friends."<br /><br />I conclude that a World War is not happening, but in some calculations, war on the Korean peninsula can still widen into a U.S.-China war. Those who know the history of the Korean War in the 1950s know that the Communist Chinese sent reinforcements to North Korea -- and that there was direct combat between troops of the U.S. and China.<br /><br />However, a repeat of this scenario is unlikely. One could recall that the U.S. won the arms race with the Soviet Union, and in recent years we have turned our military "up to 11." If there's an arms race with China -- we've already won that. China is the smaller military power.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Korean War</span><br /><br />It appears that if they want one, they can have it. We are about to "get up in their face" with an aircraft carrier, and we have more where that came from. However, there is vast risk associated with travelling this path, and it is not advisable. The bigger risk is for the Communist regimes, who may view this matter as existential, but there is also massive risk to South Korea and to Seoul in particular. Seoul is close to the border, and within range of North Korean guns. In addition, North Korea may be haboring nuclear weapons, with some missiles that could hit Tokyo and perhaps Hawaii.<br /><br />For the West, I think that we don't want to risk war, but that we are doing so now out of necessity. As for the Communist regimes, they know the drill. They are travelling this path of brinksmanship, and they are threatening the peace. They may have to take their lumps in consequence. In any war, the objective would be to disarm North Korea, and neutralize the threat, asap. Further Chinese assistance to the North would prolong the war.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Close Shave</span><br /><br />Restraint by all sides could result in this incident passing without war, only to be remembered as a close shave. However, we are contemplating militaries that are on high alert about each other. The various sides will be tempted to project a presence; to probe; to bird-dog; and to test out new weapons. And rules of engagement suggest that if attacked, they may defend themselves. Restraint works when there is not a fight on. When there is a fight on, restraint has failed.<br /><br />Another challenge to restraint is the fact that North and South Korea are client states, hence they have their own fingers on various triggers. The patron states may not always have complete control over the triggers that may commence a war. In Tuesday's action, it was North and South Korea, not China and the U.S., who were shooting at each other.<br /><br />As I say, the Communist states know the drill. There are red lines and rules of engagement, and with their brinksmanship they know that they are pushing on those buttons.<br /><br />A close shave would preserve the status quo ante. But if matters move forward, then there are possible outcomes that are very bad and very good. A U.S.-China nuclear war is an awful outcome to contemplate. It should be unthinkable, and we should fervently hope that matters don't escalate to that point. On the other hand, imagine a reunified peninsula with a single Korea, free and whole. That is the good vision, and the outcome for which we should fervently hope.<br /><br />Elementary schools sometimes give grades to school children, for the category "works and plays well with other students." For North Korea, they have a grade of F in that column. They have been a menace to society for far too long, with erratic misbehavior that has been odd ball, eccentric, and dangerous to peace and security. If the fight is on, continued tenure of the North's regime should be unacceptable. In 2006, the China Support Network said that North Korea must be liberated. In the long run -- and perhaps the short run -- that is the right ultimate objective to pursue.<br /><br />One reason why North Korea became belligerent recently may be because of near-rebellion within its own ranks. Senior military leaders are being passed over in favor of Kim Jong-un, a 27 year old who was recently elevated to a four-star general's rank. Perhaps hereditary succession in North Korea is meeting with some resistance, and the Kims needed a foreign crisis to focus attention elsewhere and to compel patriotic loyalty. The regime may be as fragile as eggshells.<br /><br />I wonder how many North Koreans really want to proceed forward with a hereditary communist dictatorship? Discontent in North Korea may be an ace in the hole, and an interesting card for the West to play.<br /><br />Before concluding this article, here are two notes. (a.) Reports on Friday indicate that artillery was heard being fired within earshot of the same island that suffered damage on Tuesday. (b.) In any negotiations, my organization stands by the same advice, advanced in a 2003 article by Zhou Yongjun and myself: Just say 'no' to North Korea. We oppose concessions and appeasement, and the taxpayers of the free world should likewise object to any use of their money that props up the regime of Kim Jong-il.John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-59240426488655856022010-10-31T16:26:00.002+08:002010-10-31T16:31:02.866+08:00Martyr for Democracy: Hu Changxin<div style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:180%;">Martyr for Democracy:<br />Hu Changxin, 1968-2010</span><br /><br />- First of three stories in this update -<br /></div><br />October 31, 2010<br /><br />The China Support Network, and the pro-democracy cause more generally, has lost a much-loved friend and compatriot in the cause of freedom, democracy, and human rights. Hu Changxin was a student in Tiananmen Square during the 1989 uprising which led to the infamous June 4 massacre. Initially, he was a rank-in-file student, not recognized as a famous "student leader" of Tiananmen Square.<br /><br />Hu would often tell his story of being in the final group of students which left Tiananmen Square near dawn on June 4, after a tense standoff and negotiations with the army, which had reached Tiananmen earlier overnight. Hu was with those who stayed to the bitter end.<br /><br />After surviving Tiananmen and making his way to refuge in the United States, Hu had the opportunity to network his way to the center of the democracy movement in exile. He became a consistent and persistent advocate for the political reform of China, without elitism. As a supporter and booster of democracy, he became ubiquitous, assisting many different groups in the pro-democracy cause.<br /><br />Often, his was not a starring role at pro-democracy events. He would travel hundreds of miles simply to hold a sign, or to be in the audience. We can say that he had no "brand loyalty." His flag was democracy, not specifically the China Support Network, nor the World Chinese Federation, nor the Wei Jingsheng Foundation, nor the China Democracy Party, nor Falun Gong, nor the coalitions outside of Chinese embassies and consulates. Hu would and did help all of these groups, becoming everybody's friend and wing man.<br /><br />He may have published more often in Chinese, and less often in English. In English, he wrote fond personal remembrances when another dissident, Zhao Pinlu, died of cancer. (Published by the China Support Network in 2004.) There he said, "as a direct survivor of the great incident [June 4's Tiananmen massacre], I had cherished my sincerest hope that the Chinese government would last no longer than ten years after 1989."<br /><br />Networking with the democracy movement, he was seeking "genuine national heroes, able to sweep away the cruelest power in light of ultimate justice."<br /><br />In 2008, the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] caused disturbances on the streets of Flushing, New York. Falun Gong practitioners came under attack. Hu rose to their defense, and was quoted in The Epoch Times saying,<br /><br />"Please take a careful look at their banners—'The Gods bless the Chinese nation.' The Chinese nation includes all Chinese people. So everyone should take a look or they will be fooled again. It is sad for us, the common people, to be fighting each other again as if it was the Cultural Revolution. Our Chinese nation has gone through too many disasters. I hope everyone will finally live a happy life."<br /><br />Also in 2008, Hu was included in the recording of a new American rock song, 'Chinese Democracy (defiled).' The song is sung in English, but in the middle the musical instruments turn quiet, and for 12 seconds, the voice of Hu Changxin speaks in Mandarin. After the sound bite, the music returns to being louder. A rough translation of the sound bite says, "We students went to the Square extending an open hand to the government, which met us only with violence, tanks, and guns. It was then that we students realized -- the government is nothing but a wolf." As a result, the voice of Hu Changxin will live on in rock music from the China Support Network. (Hear the song at http://www.chinasupport.net/CSN/music.aspx)<br /><br />Hu Changxin spent a life doing right by the Chinese democracy movement. The life of Hu Changxin was a call to the world to heed the noble intentions of China's would-be reformers. It was ultimately a wish that the Chinese nation "will finally live a happy life," and a challenge to the pro-democracy leaders to be "genuine national heroes, able to sweep away the cruelest power in light of ultimate justice."<br /><br />We can only wish that the world, his nation, and dissident leaders will heed the final wishes of Hu Changxin.<hr /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Tang Baiqiao works on a high-octane project</span></span><br /><br />June 4 student leader Tang Baiqiao is teed up to reclaim prominence in the coming new year. Together with a co-author, Damon DiMarco, and publisher Prometheus Books, he is preparing to publish a new book in March, 2011. Tang was the top student leader in Hunan Province during the 1989 uprising, and was able to have 500,000 people go out to the streets to march and rally for democratic political reform. He was captured during the post-Tiananmen crackdown; spent time in prison; and subsequently escaped to exile through Hong Kong. In the early 1990s, he was covered by news outlets including Newsweek magazine and the Wall Street Journal.<br /><br />While the book is his personal memoir, it is also one part back story on a major world event, and one part follow up -- casting light on the Chinese democracy movement in exile, where the fight continues. The book will add yet another perspective on the Tiananmen story.<br /><br />The project becomes very high-octane in terms of the people lining up behind it. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is writing a foreword, and AP photographer Jeff Widener (famous for snapping the "tank man" photograph) is the author of a preface. Many noted China experts and high level dissidents are also contributing endorsements for this book.<br /><br />Even though the book is not released yet, it has already prompted rumblings about a possible movie adaptation to be made of it.<hr /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:130%;" >Wei Jingsheng likes the tone of U.S. elections this year</span><br /><br />The United States is experiencing a year of political attack ads, knocking Communist China. America's Mao-regime-friendly politicians and media have played out their hand, and they can no longer suppress the sound of American people, raising concerns about trade with Communist China.<br /><br />The emergence of the Tea Party in U.S. elections is inspiring new hope for leading Chinese dissidents, including Wei Jingsheng.<br /><br />Translated by the Wei Jingsheng Foundation, a recent article in the Chinese Epoch Times explored the newly vocal U.S. angst about Red China.<br /><br />In part, Wei said: "In the past, Chinese and some U.S. politicians have made a partnership of scheming together....average people of both countries did not get benefit in return. The scheme is the so-called 'China model' that rose [out of private interests]. Many U.S. politicians supported granting China permanent Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) status....But this situation is not bilateral, not free trade. In fact, the U.S. unilaterally offered China the preferential treatment. The CCP did not give the United States an open market."<br /><br />As Wei sees it, "The result is that American workers lost their jobs, while China is in serious inflation. Now, the Chinese workers get less and less [purchasing power]. Both Chinese people and American people are put at a disadvantage." He reiterated, "Capitalists can buy very cheap in China and sell high in the U.S. market, from which they earn large excess profits. The excess profits exploit the Chinese labor, while harming the American workers as well."<br /><br />"Then, the Communist regime uses these excess profits to buy Western politicians."<br /><br />The rise of the Tea Party matters. As Wei said, "the Chinese people cannot do much, they do not dare to speak. But the American people dare; they dare to say they that they do not believe in this gang of politicians anymore. So in this election, American politicians are trying to cleanse themselves."<br /><br />Wei expressed that, "Now people realize that this trade imbalance is the root cause of the depressed U.S. economy and American workers' unemployment....the politicians of both political parties in the USA are responsible. The rise of the Tea Party in the United States is the result. Though not formal, it has been important. After people realized the politicians' role, they began to organize a new faction."<br /><br />The situation at hand highlights the fact that U.S. and Chinese political systems are indeed different, even though under the 'China model', "the politics of Western countries increasingly lean toward the Chinese Communist Party." The whole point in this season of China-bashing advertising is that the 'China model' is fracturing and is no longer a consensus for America's powerful.<br /><br />The Tea Party teaches us that "In the United States, money cannot buy everything the politicians want when the people recognize and agree on the nature of the problem. When the politicians lose votes, they have nothing."<br /><br />Wei Jingsheng concluded with a hopeful prediction: "This election has publicly exposed this problem....Through this election, there will be a change in policy<br />about China. Now as this information propagates, starting from the White House politicians will become increasingly hard-line against the Chinese Communist Party."<br /><br />Also translated were some reader comments from the Chinese blogosphere. They included, "The free American people, go!! Go!!!!" and, "Support the people, wish the success of Tea Party election."<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"># # #<br /></div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-86148779907125856472010-10-08T19:58:00.001+08:002010-10-08T20:00:34.692+08:00Free Liu Xiaobo!<div style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:180%;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Demand to Chinese government:<br /></span><span style="font-weight: normal;">free Liu Xiaobo!</span><br /></span></div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="font-size:100%;">With Liu's win of Nobel Peace Prize, Chinese dissidents<br />gain a first down; Chinese government stands indicted</span><br /></span></div><br /><br />October 8, 2010 (CSN) -- The China Support Network today welcomed the announcement, made in Norway, that jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo has won the Nobel Peace Prize and reiterated its call for the Communist party government to release Liu.<br /><br />"This year, it is time to praise the wisdom of the Nobel prize committee," said the organization's founder John Kusumi. "They are highlighting a very revealing specific case of persecution which is egregious and timely for being yet-ongoing. This is a massive loss of face for Beijing. They were hoping that Liu and related issues would not come to world attention. Conversely, we were hoping for just such an occurrence."<br /><br />The China Support Network (CSN) has stood with the Chinese pro-democracy movement since 1989, when the infamous June 4 massacre, perpetrated by the Communist party government, forcibly cleared out Tiananmen Square and killed some 3,000 unarmed protestors. Since 2008, when it opposed the Beijing Olympics, CSN has highlighted four high-profile prisoner cases: those of Liu Xiaobo, Gao Zhisheng, Wang Bingzhang, and Zhou Yongjun.<br /><br />"I think that Liu would approve of CSN's use of today's occasion to remind the West that the Chinese democracy issue never went away; that Gao, Wang, and Zhou all have family members and children in the United States, which should escalate their cases at the State Department; and that these prisoners are patches in a wider tapestry that is the Chinese pro-democracy movement.<br /><br />Kusumi opined, "Further, because the Chinese democracy issue never went away, all that changed was the attitude of those in the U.S. news media, which used to accord valuable coverage to China's human rights abuses. As they jumped on a bandwagon called free trade--which gutted the U.S. economy--they decided that human rights issues inconvenienced free trade. They have now delivered 10 years of one-sided news; they've been largely silent about human rights abuses in China. Today's news makes it obvious that those abuses are still ongoing. Coverage is not. 'No film at 11!'<br /><br />He continued, "I bet that most Americans don't remember the 2009 crackdown against Uighurs in western China (alternately, in occupied East Turkestan). That crackdown got swept under the rug by the U.S. media just like the Falun Gong crackdown, and those crackdowns got less coverage than the 2008 crackdown against Tibet."<br /><br />He fumed, "If I were a communist, dictator, tyrant, or thug, I would want a DC Beltway managing editor in my corner, because they make the most trusty assistants for the work of oppression out of view of the American public. More specifically, they are <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">why</span> Beijing's oppression has been out of view of the American public."<br /><br />Elsewhere, the China Support Network blog has the full text of the Nobel Peace Prize citation. The committee correctly noted, "China is in breach of several international agreements to which it is a signatory, as well as of its own provisions concerning political rights." And it lamented, "freedoms have proved to be distinctly curtailed for China's citizens."<br /><br />It noted that on Christmas Day 2009, "Liu was sentenced to 11 years in prison and two years' deprivation of political rights for 'inciting subversion of state power'." His crime, of course, was no crime. He was the non-violent author of a political tract called Charter 08, which spoke of challenges and necessary reforms which China must face in the near future.<br /><br />For Americans in the home audience, it won't require deep reading into the issue, because here's the issue on the face of it: Liu Xiaobo, a good guy, is in jail. The immediate conclusion to draw is that China's government should free Liu Xiaobo, and today the China Support Network is demanding exactly that.<br /><br />Wonks and analysts can note that Charter 08 was criticized by hardline Chinese dissidents for being "way too moderate." (China's dissidents come in moderate and hardline camps. Charter 08 called for reform, not revolution. In theory, Chinese authorities could lead reform, simultaneously ameliorating the perceived need for revolution.)<br /><br />And yet, even for the hardline Chinese dissidents, there is a victory in today's announcement, which will reverberate in the halls of power around the world. Soviet dissidents once spoke of the relief they felt when U.S. President Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union "an evil empire." The external pressure was music to the ears of jailed dissidents. Today, the junior evil empire is getting its external wake up call. The China Support Network approves of this year's committee decision for Liu Xiaobo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-20461098952564328982010-09-25T12:30:00.002+08:002010-09-25T12:55:24.024+08:00While U.S. "gets tough" with China, it's not enough.<div align="center"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">While U.S. "gets tough" with China, it's not enough.</span></strong></div><br /><div align="center"><strong>Washington has now taken some first baby steps in the right direction.</strong></div><br /><strong>By John Kusumi</strong><br />President of the pro-democracy China Support Network<br /><br />To his credit, U.S. President Barack Obama is carving out a distinct profile on the matter of U.S.-China policy; different than that of his predecessors. The news of this week tells us that Obama is stiffening the spine of the United States in its dispute with Communist China about the matter of currency manipulation. China keeps its currency pegged to the dollar at an exchange rate which is artificially low when compared to where free-market forces would put that rate. The dispute impacts jobs and trade. In a free trade environment, China's behavior amounts to cheating and to gaining an artificial benefit (akin to subsidized exports) at the United States' expense.<br /><br />The United States has economic problems of its own, and should not be appeasing communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs to its own detriment. We have been carrying the costs associated with bad behavior on the part of China's regime, which is still led by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). To be very conservative in China is to be Maoist.<br /><br />The China Support Network (CSN) has existed throughout an era of U.S. corruption on steroids, ever since the June 4, 1989 massacre of innocents at Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China. There, the Chinese army used live ammunition on world TV to clear away the crowd of college students, who had occupied Tiananamen Square to demand freedom, democracy, and human rights in mainland China. The CSN arose from shocked Americans, who would care to help the students -- China's Generation Xers -- in the furtherance of the Chinese democracy movement.<br /><br />We have watched the U.S. government and news media become increasingly more corrupt. The U.S. government used the renewal of 'Most Favored Nation' trade status with China to add life support to the regime: to brace, buttress, stabilize, prop up, and enrich the communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs who continue to run the Chinese government to this day.<br /><br />In the meantime, on human rights, the Chinese government has become worse, worse, and worse. In addition to the unanswered Tiananmen crackdown, they have since then launched the unanswered Falun Gong crackdown; the unanswered Tibet crackdown; and the unanswered East Turkestan crackdown. This means that after killing Beijing college students, the CCP went on to kill many more innocents and prisoners of conscience, from among Falun Gong practitioners, Tibetans in occupied Tibet, and Uighur Muslims in occupied East Turkestan.<br /><br />How is it that government Chinese behavior on human rights could get worse and worse and worse, while U.S. rewards by way of a trade surplus got larger and larger and larger? There would be a public outcry, but for the stepped up corruption on the part of the U.S. news media, which has swept under the rug all objection and protest about Tiananmen, Falun Gong, Tibet, and East Turkestan.<br /><br />I have described the U.S. media as "the corrupt, flacking for the corrupt," and indeed the China human rights issue shows us the prime example of "one hand washing the other" in the U.S. establishment, as corrupt media protects corrupt political leaders and their ruinous decisions on such matters as free trade.<br /><br />So now, as news reports say that the U.S. is "getting tough" with China, how does CSN, the organization I lead, react? It becomes necessary to applaud the U.S. activity on the matter of currency manipulation, while deploring the silence and lack of activity on the matter of slave labor. We see a linkage here which is not reflected by U.S. leaders or media. These twin issues have the same net practical upshot. --China plays economic dirty pool, and as a result there is a tilted playing field which presents the United States with a competitive disadvantage.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>- We are boggling at the double standard! - </strong></span><br /><br />We are boggling at the double standard, and believe that the existence of this double standard may impugne the motives of the U.S. political leaders and pundits who support the move on currency manipulation. Why the silence on slave labor? Is that silence indicative of a guilty demeanor on the part of the U.S. power structure on this issue?<br /><br />The preceding two paragraphs already include the key observations that inform the CSN stance. We can conclude once again that the relationship between U.S. media and U.S. political leaders is that of "the corrupt, flacking for the corrupt."<br /><br />Perhaps, at this juncture, someone will say, "Wait -- I need a primer on the situation." The article might do well to slow down and to explain the underpinnings. That is well and good; let's go.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>Slavery abolished in America, not China </strong></span><br /><br />The United States, itself, abolished slavery in steps between 1862 and 1865. The first measure, in 1862, was called The Emancipation Proclamation. The last measure, in 1865, was the 13th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. At that time, China was ruled by the Qing dynasty, and authorities did not move to match the American measures.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>What does abolition of slavery mean? </strong></span><br /><br />What does abolition of slavery mean? School children may think, "This question is easy. A freed slave gains liberty, leaves behind chains, and becomes a free man." As far as it goes, that's a fine answer -- but, those of us who are not school children should note that slavery entails another dimension: economics. In an economic sense, the abolition of slavery means that henceforth, the value of labor will be "something" rather than "nothing."<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>Free trade is for the free world </strong></span><br /><br />In 2000, U.S. President Bill Clinton was pushing through the U.S. Congress a "free trade" agreement with Communist China. The China Support Network was against that measure, as were leading Chinese dissidents (including veteran campaigners of Tiananmen Square). We were also joined by America's labor unions, and by Congressional leaders such as David Bonior, Nancy Pelosi, and Dick Gephardt.<br /><br />The measure was called PNTR. The establishment says that means "Permanent Normal Trade Relations." CSN says that it means "Permanent Normal Tyranny Reward."<br /><br />Free trade would be less objectionable if it stayed within the free world. While America's unions have found all such arrangements to be odious, noxious, and objectionable, some measures - like NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA - stay within the Western Hemisphere, where the member nations are ostensibly countries of the free world. At least they are not nuclear-armed, communist superpowers.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong>Abrogating the Emancipation Proclamation and 13th Amendment </strong></span><br /><br />When free trade extends outside of the free world and in particular to China - a nuclear-armed, communist superpower with slave labor gulags - then it takes odious, noxious, and objectionable to a new level, because it is a way for U.S. corporations to bypass the 13th Amendment. By sourcing their production and procurement to China, U.S. corporate leaders are able to leverage dirt-cheap labor in China to replace American workers (exacerbating U.S. unemployment and trade deficit problems) to pad their profits handsomely. It undermines the economy while it also undermines freedom, democracy, human rights, and U.S. national security.<br /><br />This also throws U.S. workers into direct competition with the inmates of China's slave labor gulags, which are also known as Laogai concentration camps. In fact, if Washington's "name of the game" was democracy or nationhood, then we would not be implementing free trade with tyrannical regimes. The agenda to trade with China is Prime Example #1 or "the tell" which informs us that Washington's name of the game is not democracy or nationhood. Instead, their game is to enable kleptocracy and looting while turning away from any morals, scruples, values, or ethics.<br /><br />Discerning readers can already tell that the China Support Network finds the "free trade with China" policy--in toto--to be inexcusable, unforgivable, and morally indefensible, if not literally criminal. (And, on the latter point, one can certainly argue that a "crime against the American worker" has occurred. Unfortunately, there is no statute which criminalizes such manipulation of the economy.)<br /><br /><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Even free traders should object</span></strong><br /><br />However, if we put aside the CSN's objections to the entire package of China trade, and assume there is no objection to China trade in principle, then there is still room for supporters of free trade to be incensed at the present day circumstances with China.<br /><br />The employment of slave labor, as occurs in China, is economically just as objectionable as is the Chinese practice of currency manipulation. If the idea with China trade is to allow bidirectional trade on a level playing field for both sides, well then -- slave labor tilts the playing field, just as much as currency manipulation.<br /><br />In each case, the result is the same. Chinese exports are priced lower than would be the case on a level playing field, and U.S. exports are priced higher than would be the case on a level playing field. By these two means -- currency manipulation, and slave labor -- the Chinese government has tilted the playing field, and engages the U.S. with economic dirty pool. In other words, slave labor is not just a human rights abuse. It is an economic abuse.<br /><br />Right now, Washington is sounding self-righteous over the matter of currency manipulation, and silent over the matter of slave labor.<br /><br />The silence is very telling.John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-46616444625753928102010-07-31T17:07:00.000+08:002010-07-31T17:08:42.110+08:00Li Lu Recaptures Imaginations on Wall Street<span style="font-weight: bold;">By John Kusumi</span><br /><br />On Friday July 30, Dow Jones newswires and the Wall Street Journal reported that Li Lu, a former Tiananmen Square student leader, is likely to be hired as a successor to Warren Buffett, the legendary investor who runs Berkshire Hathaway and manages some $100 billion.<br /><br />Mere thoughts of a Buffett successor can fire the imaginations of many who watch the tycoon game of Wall Street. Combine that with two loaded words -- Tiananmen Square -- and there is yet another line of thought that fires the imagination.<br /><br />Those older than 40 will remember the occasion when it happened: College students of China led an uprising in favor of freedom, democracy, and human rights in mainland China. The CCP (Communist Party) sent in the army to remove demonstrators and clear the square, which was student-occupied territory for the seven weeks leading up to June 4, 1989. The oddly-named "People's Liberation Army" opened fire with live ammunition, and now June 4 is remembered as the Tiananmen Square massacre, which killed thousands of unarmed Beijing residents. A crackdown followed, along with many more human rights abuses.<br /><br />The government of China has still never changed, nor has it ever apologized to this day. In the West, to kill the protestors was seen as an outrage; an eye-popping atrocity; a crime against humanity. In China, to kill the protestors is a part of government policy, tacitly and explicitly. Those who praise Communist China today uphold that policy and that government action, whether or not they care to admit it. And a deeply flawed United States China policy has made every U.S. President from 1989 to the present into an accessory after the fact. One could wonder, what is worse -- the atrocity in China, or the atrocious policy from the U.S. Executive Branch which "extended the service life" of the Communist Party?<br /><br />I believe that communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs should not abuse with impunity; nor should they rule without accountability. In 1989, I had already studied and admired Thomas Jefferson, one of America's founding fathers who drafted the Declaration of Independence. It was evident to me that some Chinese students, who were running Tiananmen Square, had also studied such people as Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry. I knew what they were doing; I was down with it; and therefore I launched the China Support Network, together with other American students to support the effort of the Chinese students.<br /><br />Tiananmen Square was one of those occasions when world television broadcast the tragedy. Just like the Asian tsunami, or Hurricane Katrina, or the earthquake in Haiti, ordinary people mobilized to pitch in and lend a hand. The China Support Network vaulted ahead of most groups, perhaps due to its use of the early internet and the CompuServe Information Service.<br /><br />In Tiananmen Square, during the uprising, Li Lu was the vice-commander of Hunger Strike Headquarters. Hunger Strike Headquarters dominated one week out of the seven week demonstration in the square. In fact, by going on hunger strike, students had won the hearts and minds of ordinary Chinese citizens, who were jolted into joining the demonstrations. The hunger strike might have continued, but it was called off when Martial Law was declared by the Beijing government in advance of the army action.<br /><br />Less than two months after the massacre, my CSN organization was called in to Washington DC to help Chinese students host a visit by five Chinese dissidents. For the entire first week of August 1989, CSN worked shoulder-to-shoulder with Chinese student groups and with the five dissidents -- Li Lu was one of them. He had escaped from China by way of France, and the group was now about to reach Washington DC for the first time.<br /><br />My week had a list of things to do. Rent hotel rooms. Rent wheels. Rent cell phones. Relay scheduling requests. Arrange the daybook. Answer journalist calls. Write press releases. Upload things. Download things. Visit Congress. Rally on Capitol Hill. March to the Chinese embassy. In the evenings, there was also time to socialize and make Sino - U.S. friendships at the Generation X level. I had to struggle with chopsticks, which are unfamiliar if you are raised by an Irish Catholic mother.<br /><br />I guess that Hippies had the Summer of '69, and GenXers had the Summer of '89. They had Woodstock, and we had Tiananmen Square. (And we won't ever let you forget about it, either! :)<br /><br />Yet, the pace of CSN slowed after the Summer of '89. It seemed that everybody was returning to college. The Chinese democracy movement had been an extracurricular activity. Those student leaders who had escaped from China and arrived in America got scholarships. Li Lu went to Columbia University, where I visited him upon his invitation to go swimming there. But I myself returned to Arizona State University, and the Chinese democracy movement split into factions: hardline, moderate, and sold out former dissidents who quit the playing field.<br /><br />Li Lu may have signalled his future course of activity early in the game. Other student leaders, such as Shen Tong, previously advocated the use of "all available means" including sanctions, to put a stop to the Tiananmen crackdown. But, Li Lu articulated a view that "we want human rights, but we don't want sanctions." This remains the great schism in the middle of the Chinese democracy movement. Hardliners want sanctions, or what we'd now call economic pressure brought to bear to encourage human rights. Moderates want the rights, but not the pressure.<br /><br />By the first week in August, 1989, we were already seeing the divide of factionalism which came to hobble the democracy movement. Li Lu had already planted his feet in the moderate camp. This may be one reason why the Tiananmen crackdown still continues even now, 21 years after the massacre. Two dissidents -- Zhou Yongjun and Liu Xiaobo -- are now in prison, each for his third interval as a political prisoner, post-Tiananmen.<br /><br />Of course, dissident factionalism always gets the blame, but it is worth remembering that men such as George Bush Sr., Henry Kissinger, and Brent Scowcroft were running United States China policy. They rightly deserve blame for letting China get away with murder, with barely a slap on the wrist. In fact, many Americans were appalled at how President Bush handled (or failed to handle) the Tiananmen matter.<br /><br />As I put it, Bush (and later Presidents) "extended the service life" of the Communist Party, at a time when we were just out of the Reagan years. We were accustomed to staunch anti-communism coming from the U.S. Executive Branch. But about the Tiananmen matter, there was nobody home at the U.S. Executive Branch.<br /><br />U.S.-China policy even bothered Li Lu. I recall that he published an op-ed article, with headline "In China, I'd Be Dead." The subheadline said, "And Bush Wouldn't Care." Bush's China policy was so bad that Chinese dissidents lined up behind the challenger, Bill Clinton, in the next presidential election. Clinton promised a tougher China policy, and Americans voted for it.<br /><br />Americans voted for it (Bill Clinton won). But, U.S. presidential elections had already become fraudulent occasions of fakery. Americans do not get what they vote for. They vote for change, and what happens is more of the same. Bill Clinton reduced, and did not increase, pressure on China. But, Li Lu had given a speech at the Democratic National Convention where Clinton was nominated. Chinese dissidents were used as political props, then discarded. This was Clintonian duplicity.<br /><br />Li Lu continued at Columbia University until the late 1990s, when he dropped out of politics and started a Wall Street hedge fund, Himalaya Capital. He's been a Wall Street hedge fund manager ever since, and came to the attention of Warren Buffett, who is now reported to be hiring Li Lu for a superstar role in the investment world.<br /><br />A lot of Wall Street types will now react with sympathy to Li Lu. Does that mean a righteous aversion to the injustice of Tiananmen? Yes, it does. But, what is a trader to think next? Let's imagine filling in the blank: "Tiananmen was bad. ________ " Tiananmen was bad, and we still trade with that same regime -- the politically un-reformed Communist Party. The one that continues to jail, torture, and kill dissidents even right now, today.<br /><br />Here at the China Support Network, we believe that everyone should be agitating to "cut off the Communists." Mainland China should be on the receiving end of a tariff for tyranny, a tariff for currency manipulation, a tariff for slave labor, a tariff for recklessness with the environment, a tariff for recklessness with consumer safety, and perhaps also a tariff for their disrespect of U.S. intellectual property. In fact, these tariffs are 21 years overdue. Washington still "owes us" a fitting response to Tiananmen Square.<br /><br />The recent publishing about Li Lu exposes that there has been no justice for the atrocity at Tiananmen Square. There is no closure for victims or their families. The wound of history is still an open sore. The Communist Party and the U.S. Executive Branch both deserve pushback. CSN wants to congratulate Li Lu and invite everyone else to visit us at www.chinasupport.net.John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-1340784827682282232010-06-22T23:49:00.003+08:002010-06-23T00:07:27.045+08:00Obama's best is not good enough<div align="center"><strong>The China Support Network is not impressed by U.S.-China policy, despite revaluation of the RMB currency</strong><br /></div><br /><br /><div align="left"><strong>By John Kusumi</strong><br /><br />In America these days, public opinion polling consistently finds Jobs to be the top concern of Americans, and it very much seems that U.S. President Barack Obama has delayed his long-promised move to "pivot and focus on jobs."<br /><br />The pivot and focus seemed to be delayed first by health care as a big issue, and then by financial regulation as a big issue, and then by the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Perhaps Obama doesn't want to focus squarely on jobs, because then he would see the failure of NAFTA, WTO, PNTR, and the like -- the neo-liberal trade agenda. To regain American industrial jobs, Obama needs to reverse that trade policy, and he is clearly in no hurry to do so.<br /><br />Or perhaps, in focusing on jobs, Obama would see the failure of his own stimulus. The 2009 stimulus did little to stimulate aggregate demand in America, but Obama succeeded in one thing -- he stimulated the economy of Communist China, where exports have recently surged by nearly 50%.<br /><br />Due to the neo-liberal trade program, consumption leaks out to Communist China.<br /><br /><strong>Currency adjustment announced</strong><br /><br />It has long been an objective of U.S. politicians to get the Chinese government to raise the value of its currency, which was artificially pegged to the U.S. dollar -- ensuring that imports would be cheap in the U.S., and that the export sector of China would grow larger than it otherwise would have in the absence of the currency peg.<br /><br />This past weekend, China announced that it would permit the value of its Yuan / RMB currency to rise. The U.S. side had fostered a consistent drum beat of criticism for China that served to brow beat its leaders about this issue.<br /><br />This week, Toronto Canada is hosting a summit meeting for leaders of the G-20, a group which represents 42 nations in world economics. China's move permits it to escape criticism at the G-20, which otherwise would have continued the drum beat that was critical of China on this matter.<br /><br />However, the currency will not be freely floating; it is going to rise slowly with a collar, or trading band, that will serve to slow down the appreciation of the currency.<br /><br /><strong>China Support Network takes exception with both East and West</strong><br /><br />I too have denounced Chinese currency manipulation, from my perch at the China Support Network, a human rights group which was formed to stand in support of China's pro-democracy dissidents. In <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De47i4oo9Dc">this video</a>, I said,</div><blockquote>The simple fact is that the manipulation of the currency is economic dirty pool. It tilts the playing field. And I believe that any U.S. President ought to care to have a level playing field for the business concerns here vis-a-vis the business concerns in China.<br /><br />And so to level the playing field, the currency corrective tariff is important, but so too is that labor tariff which I spoke about, simply because the employment of slave labor is another means of tilting the playing field.</blockquote>American leaders would do well to review the video I quoted, and in particular to study my line above -- "so too is that labor tariff which I spoke about...the employment of slave labor is another means of tilting the playing field." It is factually true that speaking in economic terms, China's labor practices are similar to currency manipulation in that both are economic dirty pool. Both practices result in unnaturally low prices of Chinese exports that become U.S. imports. Both practices add to the U.S. trade deficit, and delete U.S. jobs. It's flatly true.<br /><br />It's flatly true, but the recent drum beat about Beijing's currency manipulation revealed that something is wrong with U.S. policy makers and opinion leaders. I would really like to confront President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Senator Chuck Schumer, and even Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner about this. I'd like to hear how they excuse their lack of concern about the issue of slave labor in China.<br /><br />I am given to believing that in that case, I would be confronting four sociopaths. Why did they fight currency manipulation? --Because it is economic dirty pool. What is slavery in economic terms? --It is economic dirty pool. Just as much so -- both practices are equally vulnerable to criticism on economic grounds. Why, then, make an issue out of one, and treat the other as a non-issue?<br /><br />I believe that it is entirely due to the evil natures of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Tim Geithner, and for that matter all of the talking heads, chattering class, and analysts in U.S. journalism.<br /><br />American leaders share an ingrained snooty outlook. They respect white collar jobs, and ONLY white collar jobs. Those jobs are outposts within Corporate America, jobs held by people. Conversely, other kinds of jobs are only held by "unpeople." "Unpeople" are never talked about, except at election time when politicians want the votes of those "unpeople."<br /><br />Currency manipulation is an issue surrounding foreign exchange (forex). Forex is a white collar job, a job held by people. On the other hand, slave labor in China involves the slaves themselves -- performing work that is blue collar, rather than white collar, in nature. The work involved is performed by "unpeople." U.S. politicians don't even need votes from those "unpeople" in other lands, and (e.g.) CNBC anchors would never lower themselves to talk sympathetically about "unpeople."<br /><br />So, they'll talk the currency issue and ignore the labor issue. To my eyes, they thereby reveal themselves for being the evil sociopaths that they are. Shame on them.<br /><br />Before concluding this article, let me restate: The China Support Network demands that Beijing immediately abolish the systems of Laogai (labor/slavery camps) and Laojiao (administrative detention). We will continue to brow beat the powerful on this issue, because we know that currency revaluation is only half the battle. Indeed, China also needs to raise its environmental standards, its consumer protection (including product safety!) standards, and its intellectual property standards. In that light, currency revaluation is LESS than half the battle.<br /><br />With half or more of the battle still ahead of us, it is too early for U.S. leaders to declare victory and go home. It would be good of them if they would step up and escalate the Chinese labor/slavery issue to equal urgency and prominence as the Chinese currency issue.<br /><br />If they step up and actually do so, then I would revise my assessment of these U.S. establishment figures. Was it premature for me to call them evil? --Time will tell.<br /><br />I hope that they prove me wrong by way of deeds. I hope they stand with the China Support Network against Beijing's systems of Laogai and Laojiao.John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-35805776052867950072010-06-03T11:31:00.002+08:002010-06-03T11:41:03.800+08:00<div style="text-align: center; font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:180%;">Goddess-gate Update<br /></span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">Authorities in Hong Kong test the patience<br />of the pro-democracy movement</span><br /></div><br />The Goddess of Democracy, herself, is the main character in this year's activities surrounding the 21st anniversary of China's Tiananmen crackdown. The Goddess of Democracy was originally created by students at Beijing's Central Academy of Fine Arts, and installed during the "June 4" uprising at Tiananmen Square. It stood from May 30, 1989 - June 4, 1989, when the army demolished the statue upon reaching Tiananmen Square after shooting their way through the streets of Beijing, killing at least 3,000 innocent civilians.<br /><br />What is at hand is a developing story based in Hong Kong. Something new has occurred each day since Saturday, May 29. This update simply repeats the news in chronological sequence, for a timeline or reference of events to date.<br /><br />Translation note: The China Support Network, in this report, is applying the "gate" suffix to indicate a scandal. It is not standard formal English to do so, but ever after the Watergate scandal brought down the U.S. President Richard Nixon in 1974, it became a conventional practice of American journalists to append "gate" as a suffix onto words, for a shorthand way to indicate that a political scandal exists in connection with a word.<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Goddess-gate, Day 1</span>, Saturday May 29, 2010:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">First Goddess Captured</span><br /><br />Hong Kong police arrest 13 and seize the first (6.4 meter) Goddess of Democracy Statue and another piece of artwork. The 13 activists of the Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China were at the Times Square shopping mall of Causeway Bay, to diseminate information about the pro-democracy cause and this year's activities for the 21st anniversary of the June 4 crackdown. The activists were freed on bail later on Saturday. Via a Facebook group, Alliance members threatened to surround North Point police station - where the art was kept - if the items were not returned by Thursday evening, in time for annual June 4th commemoration in Victoria Park.<br /><br />The official justification for the action named the Food and Environmental Hygiene department as the department objecting to the unlicensed display of the Goddess. However, it's not just that department. If one looks ahead in the story to “Goddess-gate Day 5,” one can see the Hong Kong immigration department also participating in this episode of political suppression.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Goddess-gate, Day 2</span>, Sunday May 30, 2010:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Second Goddess Captured</span><br /><br />Defiant demonstrators paraded a smaller (2.2 meter) Goddess of Democracy Statue through the streets of Hong Kong. This, too, was seized by police. Several protesters tried to prevent the removal by lying on the road. Two activists, Alliance vice chairman Lee Cheuk-yan and member Leung Kwok-wah, were arrested. A group of at least 20 sympathizers gathered outside the North Point police station calling for their immediate release. Some even tried to force their way into the station. Lee and Leung were released on bail at 10:30pm.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Goddess-gate, Day 3</span>, Monday May 31, 2010:<br /><br />A defiant demonstrator dressed up as the Goddess of Democracy for another march in the streets of Hong Kong. The police could not confiscate the live demonstrator.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Goddess-gate, Day 4</span>, Tuesday June 1, 2010:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Two Goddesses Released</span><br /><br />After a two hour negotiation with Alliance activists at the North Point police station, Hong Kong police “free” the two statues. According to the Hong Kong Standard, “Acting Chief Superintendent Anna Tsang Yim- sheung of the Police Public Relations Branch said the statues were released early as a goodwill gesture. Tsang added: ’We understand the organizers had an urgent need to set up the statues for the vigil on June 4. So we made an appropriate arrangement.’”<br /><br />The Standard also noted that “Alliance officials refused to sign a document in which they would have acknowledged violating the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance with their Times Square activities and pledging to make applications in future.”<br /><br />The Goddesses were moved to Victoria Park for the upcoming June 4 memorial vigil.<br /><br />Sculptor Chen Weiming flew to Hong Kong from Los Angeles to inspect his statue for damage.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Goddess-gate, Day 5</span>, Wednesday June 2, 2010:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Chen Weiming Deported; Nancy Pelosi Issues Statement</span><br /><br />The government of Hong Kong refuses entry to Chen Weiming and deports him. The Associated Press quoted opposition lawmaker James To as saying, “We are very annoyed. Why is Hong Kong denying him entry for political reasons? He is a very humble sculptor.”<br /><br />Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, issued a statement for the 21st anniversary of Tiananmen, and noted the Goddess-gate controversy in Hong Kong.<br /><br />She said, “This year for the first time [in Hong Kong], police arrested activists and confiscated the Goddess of Democracy replica statue that is the symbol of the Tiananmen movement. This crackdown on freedom of expression will only succeed in shining a spotlight on the courage of Hong Kong’s democratic movement. The United States must stand solidly with the people of Hong Kong in their desire for democracy and freedom of speech and assembly.”<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"># # #<br /></div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3750481416495553150.post-91710324399627041822010-06-02T09:01:00.001+08:002010-06-02T09:04:11.736+08:002010 June 4 Events<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-weight: bold;font-size:180%;" >Events to commemorate<br />21 years since Tiananmen Square</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">- Hong Kong police have seized two Goddess of Democracy</span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">statues in advance of June 4, 2010 -</span><br /></div><br /><br />For the Chinese democracy movement, it's the biggest day of the year. For seven weeks in the spring of 1989, the pro-democracy uprising--led by Beijing college students--was in control of Tiananmen Square. On June 3-4, 1989, Chinese troops of the oddly-named 'People's Liberation Army' shot their way into Beijing and retook Tiananmen Square, killing over 3,000 peaceful unarmed civilians in the process. It is famous as the "June 4" massacre. Here are events happening this week around the world to commemorate the 21st anniversary of that bloody June 4:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">SLOGANS FOR 2010:</span><br />Remember June 4, Pass On The Flame Vindicate June 4, Persist To The End<br />Free/Release Wang Bingzhang Free/Release Zhou Yongjun<br />Free/Release Liu Xiaobo, Support Charter 08 Free/Release Gao Zhisheng<br />Oppose Political Persecution, Protest Political Suppression<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Hong Kong, June 4</span><br />Who: Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China<br />What: Candlelight Vigil<br />Where: Victoria Park, football fields<br />Date: Friday, June 4, 2010<br />Tiime: 8:00pm<br /><br />This event continues the annual tradition of observances for the June 4 anniversary. In 2009, some 150,000 people attended this event to mark the 20th anniversary of the June 4 massacre.<br /><br />Note: Police in Hong Kong broke up a demonstration and arrested activists on May 29 as they tried to commemorate the 21st anniversary of Tiananmen Square, outside Times Square shopping mall in Causeway Bay. Because the police also <span style="font-weight: bold;">confiscated a statue, the Goddess of Democracy</span> (a replica of the statue which students erected in Tiananmen Square), there is a Facebook group that is threatening to march on the police station, if they do not return the statue by June 3.<br /><br />From here at CSN, it looks like marching on the police station is not officially on the program of the Alliance. It appears that the Alliance and the Facebook group are two unrelated entities. Because we do not know otherwise, we would suggest that to march on the police station is a separate and distinct matter, "extracurricular" to the Candlelight Vigil. The vigil is the yearly ritual of the Alliance.<br /><br />Who: Stage64<br />What: "Edelweiss," a theatrical play in Cantonese (love story centers in Tiananmen Square, '89)<br />Where: Auditorium of HKICC Lee Shau Kee School of Creativity<br />Date: Five shows on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, June 5, 6, and 7, 2010<br />Time: 3:00pm and 8:00pm<br />Tickets: HK$80 through the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union<br />More: Discounts for students, seniors, disabled, and social security recipients; the first show on June 5 is a "special show for students" at half price.<br />URL: http://stage64.hk/eng/<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">New York, June 4</span><br />Who: New York area China Democracy Party, China Support Network, and other groups<br />What: Street protest<br />Where: Chinese Consulate on the west side of Manhattan, 42nd St/12th Ave<br />Date: Friday, June 4, 2010<br />Time: 6:00pm-9:00pm<br />More: Speakers may include Wang Juntao, Wang Youcai, and other leading dissidents; event to include musicians playing acoustically<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Washington, June 2 and 3</span><br />Who: Initiatives for China<br />What: "A Peek Behind The Wall" open mic forum<br />Where: "Bus Boys & Poets," 5th and K Street, NW, Washington DC<br />Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010<br />Time: 6:00pm-8:00pm<br />More: Chinese citizens from the mainland and abroad will speak of what it's like to be a citizen of China today. The open question: "How Has China Changed For Ordinary Citizens Since Tiananmen, 1989?"<br />Contact: Jim Geheran at 202.290.1423<br /><br />Who: Initiatives for China, The Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS), and co-sponsoring groups<br />What: Events at the <span style="font-weight: bold;">Victims of Communism Memorial</span><br />(A.:) From 3:00-6:00, Initiatives for China continues "A Peek Behind The Wall" open mic forum (see above).<br />(B.:) From 6:00-9:00, IFCSS conducts the Candlelight Vigil in Washington -- an annual tradition to observe the June 4 anniversary.<br />Where: New Jersey Avenue/G Street, NW, Washington DC<br />Date: Thursday, June 3, 2010<br />Time: (A.:) 3:00-6:00pm; (B.:) 6:00-9:00pm<br />More: The Victims of Communism Memorial includes a statue of the Goddess of Democracy. It is found two blocks west of Union Station in downtown Washington, DC.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Mainland China</span><br /><br />The activist, Yang Jianli, is known for his "Gong Min Walk" of 2008 in which he walked 500 miles from Boston to Washington, DC. He thanked Americans for their support (he had been a political prisoner, 2002-2007) and raised awareness of China's human rights abuses in advance of the anniversary of the June 4 massacre -- and in advance of the Beijing Olympics that year. Gong Min Walks have been replicated around the world by other activists, and now one is occurring inside Mainland China.<br /><br />Yang Jianli says, "The idea of Gong Min walking as method of non violent protest is becoming recognized as an effective way for ordinary citizens to express dissatisfaction with government actions and policies while minimizing the threat of arrest....We do not expect a one shot success. We will take one step at a time. I believe citizens' rights have to be earned with patience and perseverance. Gradually China will change and advance towards democracy."<br /><br />Yang Jianli heads the group, Initiatives for China, where the contact person is Jim Geheran at 202.290.1423. Initiatives for China is withholding the names and locations of Gong Min walkers in China to avoid tipping off the Chinese authorities with these details. The group will release more information upon the completion of related actions.<br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"># # #<br /></div>John Kusumihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13932967259225447957noreply@blogger.com0