China criticizes US double standards on terrorism

[TaiShang]

America is beyond a fascist regime. It's a terror regime that funds and arms terrorists all over the world for geopolitical purposes. The Nazi regime was a fascist regime, the American regime is far more evil than the Nazi regime.

China must ban ALL American NGOs and ban ALL American propaganda mouthpieces such as New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and others from Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau.

If any American company that refuses to obey Chinese laws, just ban them from China. It's very simple. You don't comply with Chinese law, you don't do business with China. Domestic companies will take over and protect Chinese national interests.

China has tolerated that despotic American regime far enough.

Well said.

US regime is ruthless and warmongering fascist state. It is not representative of the millions of US civilians that are directly (being sent to wars to pay, at times, college debt) or indirectly (economic repercussions, war syndromes) victims of this bloody regime whose history is a history of war, intervention and deception.

As a rule, China treats the US regime as at least suspects. There is no trust, believe me. Whatever there is, it is cold peace and business-mentality. China has shown various US companies the road to exit because they did not obey the law of nation. Hence the difference between Google and Bing China. The greater the national power, the greater capability to ensure absolute national sovereignty.

China will incrementally be more attentive to its most distant national interests.

The politically fascist (extreme right wing) regime in the US should firstly account for its own draconian anti-terrorism laws before criticizing China for finally taking steps to address the issue of terrorism. The general feeling is that China has already been late and more measures and stricter laws must be adopted. Why the US has the liberty to have the kinds of Trump, why would a basic introductory law be criticized.

@Chinese-Dragon

Nurturing political consciousness on this issue is important.

 

[Zsari]

Can someone point to the criticism the US supposedly made of this law?
I don't see anything mentioned about it.

China Legislature to Vote on Anti-Terror Law Criticized by U.S.
December 25, 2015 — 1:50 AM PST

China’s legislature is scheduled to vote Sunday on a new anti-terrorism law that has drawn criticism from the U.S. government on concerns it could give Chinese authorities surveillance access to users of American technologies.

The Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress will meet to vote on the anti-terrorism law along with other resolutions, according to a schedule posted on the legislature’s website. The first draft of the law, published last year, requires phone companies and Internet providers to submit encryption keys, the passcodes that help protect data, to Chinese authorities, and keep equipment and local user data inside China.

U.S. President Barack Obama said in a March interview with Reuters such requirements would let China install “back doors” in U.S. technology companies’ systems, and the Asian nation will “have to change” such provisions to be able to do business with the U.S.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei defended the law on Wednesday, calling related clauses “completely reasonable” and dismissing concerns about privacy and intellectual property rights. He also cited similar requirements in U.S. laws that ask companies to provide technical assistance to investigators, and urged the U.S. to refrain from using “double standards.”

...

China Legislature to Vote on Anti-Terror Law Criticized by U.S. - Bloomberg Business

 

[TaiShang]

U.S. President Barack Obama said in a March interview with Reuters such requirements would let China install “back doors” in U.S. technology companies’ systems, and the Asian nation will “have to change” such provisions to be able to do business with the U.S.

Why care? Just would simply kick those companies out of the country if they found non-compliant and would still be perfectly fine.

It is not 1990, Obama.

He also cited similar requirements in U.S. laws that ask companies to provide technical assistance to investigators, and urged the U.S. to refrain from using “double standards.”

Being historical is a major strength of China's diplomacy. It is good that the US regime, being extreme right wing and anti-historical, is not equipped with such intellectual tool.

 

[TaiShang]

***

Extreme rightism is not only a US regime thing; it is widespread across the Western media, which, for their ulterior motives, can go as low as orividing emotional support for the terrorism inside China.

These must be known, noted and ignored.

I hope the person in question will never be allowed to take a single breath in China's sovereign lands. Do not let her in or anything affiliated with that journal, in.



L’Obs’ China articles biased, unprofessional
2015-12-26 0:58:01

French newsmagazine L'Obs published an editorial on Tuesday saying its Beijing-based journalist Ursula Gauthier has been threatened.

It all started after Gauthier wrote an article in November in the wake of the Paris terror attacks. The article said the Chinese government had attempted to make use of Chinese people's sympathy toward the Paris victims for its own "ulterior motives," namely, to justify China's crackdown on violence in its western region of Xinjiang as a fight against terrorism.

The article slammed China's Xinjiang policies, claiming that the Uyghurs have been suffering from ruthless repression. She said that the recent deadly attacks by Uyghurs on a coal mine in Xinjiang were "probably in revenge for an abuse, an injustice or an expropriation."

The Global Times published an editorial on December 20 criticizing Gauthier's biased report, pointing out that as the Chinese media condemned the IS terror attacks in Paris, the French magazine's story was repaying kindness with insult.

The L'Obs' Tuesday editorial said Gauthier's Facebook account was saturated with hateful comments and even death threats, and this is a serious threat to freedom of the press.

If Gauthier did receive death threats on the Internet, we recommend she call the police.

But what Gauthier has written in effect showed support to terrorism in Xinjiang. The international community has shown consensus in the fight against terrorism. Gauthier must pay the price for her mistake in taking the wrong side of moral principle.

However, Gauthier and the magazine are not admitting their problems. They complained that she still has not received renewed press credentials from the Chinese government. She told the AFP that this is "a pretext to intimidate foreign correspondents in China, particularly on issues concerning minorities."

We do not know if this is a show of heroism or incredible shallowness. Reading Gauthier's articles, a professional journalist can easily find them full of emotional speculation and short of professionalism. Gauthier's reports do not seem to have come from a person who has been living in China for years. Ignorant of what is really taking place in China, she writes articles out of stubborn Western stereotypes.

Gauthier and the L'Obs stood out this time, not because how fierce the criticism is, but because their articles have crossed the red lines of ethics and professionalism.

We hope future L'Obs journalists can really look deep into Chinese society. We also wish the magazine stop making arrogant and sweeping judgments about China, as if they always know what is right.

@Economic superpower , @cnleio , @Chinese-Dragon , @AndrewJin , @Shotgunner51 et al.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

***

Extreme rightism is not only a US regime thing; it is widespread across the Western media, which, for their ulterior motives, can go as low as orividing emotional support for the terrorism inside China.

These must be known, noted and ignored.

I hope the person in question will never be allowed to take a single breath in China's sovereign lands. Do not let her in or anything affiliated with that journal, in.



L’Obs’ China articles biased, unprofessional
2015-12-26 0:58:01

French newsmagazine L'Obs published an editorial on Tuesday saying its Beijing-based journalist Ursula Gauthier has been threatened.

It all started after Gauthier wrote an article in November in the wake of the Paris terror attacks. The article said the Chinese government had attempted to make use of Chinese people's sympathy toward the Paris victims for its own "ulterior motives," namely, to justify China's crackdown on violence in its western region of Xinjiang as a fight against terrorism.

The article slammed China's Xinjiang policies, claiming that the Uyghurs have been suffering from ruthless repression. She said that the recent deadly attacks by Uyghurs on a coal mine in Xinjiang were "probably in revenge for an abuse, an injustice or an expropriation."

The Global Times published an editorial on December 20 criticizing Gauthier's biased report, pointing out that as the Chinese media condemned the IS terror attacks in Paris, the French magazine's story was repaying kindness with insult.

The L'Obs' Tuesday editorial said Gauthier's Facebook account was saturated with hateful comments and even death threats, and this is a serious threat to freedom of the press.

If Gauthier did receive death threats on the Internet, we recommend she call the police.

But what Gauthier has written in effect showed support to terrorism in Xinjiang. The international community has shown consensus in the fight against terrorism. Gauthier must pay the price for her mistake in taking the wrong side of moral principle.

However, Gauthier and the magazine are not admitting their problems. They complained that she still has not received renewed press credentials from the Chinese government. She told the AFP that this is "a pretext to intimidate foreign correspondents in China, particularly on issues concerning minorities."

We do not know if this is a show of heroism or incredible shallowness. Reading Gauthier's articles, a professional journalist can easily find them full of emotional speculation and short of professionalism. Gauthier's reports do not seem to have come from a person who has been living in China for years. Ignorant of what is really taking place in China, she writes articles out of stubborn Western stereotypes.

Gauthier and the L'Obs stood out this time, not because how fierce the criticism is, but because their articles have crossed the red lines of ethics and professionalism.

We hope future L'Obs journalists can really look deep into Chinese society. We also wish the magazine stop making arrogant and sweeping judgments about China, as if they always know what is right.

@Economic superpower , @cnleio , @Chinese-Dragon , @AndrewJin , @Shotgunner51 et al.

I love how America keeps reinforcing the fact that they are the enemies of all 1.3 billion Chinese people.

 

[Economic superpower]

***

Extreme rightism is not only a US regime thing; it is widespread across the Western media, which, for their ulterior motives, can go as low as orividing emotional support for the terrorism inside China.

These must be known, noted and ignored.

I hope the person in question will never be allowed to take a single breath in China's sovereign lands. Do not let her in or anything affiliated with that journal, in.



L’Obs’ China articles biased, unprofessional
2015-12-26 0:58:01

French newsmagazine L'Obs published an editorial on Tuesday saying its Beijing-based journalist Ursula Gauthier has been threatened.

It all started after Gauthier wrote an article in November in the wake of the Paris terror attacks. The article said the Chinese government had attempted to make use of Chinese people's sympathy toward the Paris victims for its own "ulterior motives," namely, to justify China's crackdown on violence in its western region of Xinjiang as a fight against terrorism.

The article slammed China's Xinjiang policies, claiming that the Uyghurs have been suffering from ruthless repression. She said that the recent deadly attacks by Uyghurs on a coal mine in Xinjiang were "probably in revenge for an abuse, an injustice or an expropriation."

The Global Times published an editorial on December 20 criticizing Gauthier's biased report, pointing out that as the Chinese media condemned the IS terror attacks in Paris, the French magazine's story was repaying kindness with insult.

The L'Obs' Tuesday editorial said Gauthier's Facebook account was saturated with hateful comments and even death threats, and this is a serious threat to freedom of the press.

If Gauthier did receive death threats on the Internet, we recommend she call the police.

But what Gauthier has written in effect showed support to terrorism in Xinjiang. The international community has shown consensus in the fight against terrorism. Gauthier must pay the price for her mistake in taking the wrong side of moral principle.

However, Gauthier and the magazine are not admitting their problems. They complained that she still has not received renewed press credentials from the Chinese government. She told the AFP that this is "a pretext to intimidate foreign correspondents in China, particularly on issues concerning minorities."

We do not know if this is a show of heroism or incredible shallowness. Reading Gauthier's articles, a professional journalist can easily find them full of emotional speculation and short of professionalism. Gauthier's reports do not seem to have come from a person who has been living in China for years. Ignorant of what is really taking place in China, she writes articles out of stubborn Western stereotypes.

Gauthier and the L'Obs stood out this time, not because how fierce the criticism is, but because their articles have crossed the red lines of ethics and professionalism.

We hope future L'Obs journalists can really look deep into Chinese society. We also wish the magazine stop making arrogant and sweeping judgments about China, as if they always know what is right.

@Economic superpower , @cnleio , @Chinese-Dragon , @AndrewJin , @Shotgunner51 et al.

Find this evil witch, at a minimum deport her, maximum punishment is to give life in prison or execute her for supporting terrorist activities inside China.

Make an example out of one and everyone will get in line.

 

[oprih]

I always find it ironic when China talks about human rights .

More ironic is an indian talking about human rights.

 

[JSCh]

French reporter's press card declined for speaking for terrorism
2015-12-26 16:41:34

BEIJING, Dec. 26 (Xinhua) -- A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson on Saturday confirmed that China has refused to renew press credentials for a French journalist for her comments regarding terrorism.

Spokesman Lu Kang said Ursula Gauthier had offended the Chinese people with an article published on Nov. 18 in which she overtly voiced support for terrorist activities.

In the article, she blamed government policy in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region for terrorist attacks.

Gauthier is a Beijing-based correspondent for French news magazine L'Obs.

Lu said Gauthier failed to apologize to the Chinese people for her wrong words and it is no longer suitable for her to work in China.

China ensures the legal rights of foreign media organizations and journalists covering China stories, but will never tolerate the "freedom" of speaking for terrorism, said the spokesman.

 

[ahojunk]

:
It is not 1990, Obama.

.
In 1990, the world's biggest Internet market was the US. Today, the biggest Internet market is China.

Google withdrew from China a few years ago when it didn't want to comply with China's regulations. I sense that it is now trying very hard to crawl back into China. No company can ignore the Chinese market if they want to be the number one.

I hope the person in question will never be allowed to take a single breath in China's sovereign lands. Do not let her in or anything affiliated with that journal, in.

We do not know if this is a show of heroism or incredible shallowness.

IMHO, it is both shallowness and stupidity. News coming out from any major economy/country is important. Now, she is out and can never get back into China. Isn't that stupid?

 

[Sasquatch]

Update that french terror sympathizer will be expelled from China soon. Wish the government would take the same action Russia did with Chechen sympathizers who had short life expectancy. Next stop for all Western and Chinese terrorist sympathizers in China should be Raqqa, Syria.

 

[Hyperion]

About time China took a stance. Someone needs to teach the self righteous Yanks about what's in CISA & Patriot Act and Indian's need not get their panties in a twist either, does TADA/POTA ring a bell?

Patriot Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
NORTH: Congress quietly passes a second Patriot Act - starherald.com: Opinion
Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Nan Yang]

at least India allows people to talk without throwing them into prison camps .^

A country that practice caste system, throwing acid at women, "macho" man collecting dowry from women lectures China on human rights.

A long article but interesting take on terrorism.

Hersh, Gauthier, and the coming of terror in Xinjiang
BY PETER LEE on DECEMBER 26, 2015 in CHINA, CENTRAL ASIA, AT OPINION

Seymour Hersh created a stir with his most recent piece in the London Review of Books, Military to Military .



Hersh reported that the Joint Chiefs of Staff under General Dempsey had actively sabotaged President Obama’s Syria policy in 2013, when they took issue with the White House’s apparent acquiescence to Turkey secretly funneling support to unvetted Islamist militants.


Seymour Hersh

The anti-Hersh forces have been in full cry but his claims appears credible. Quite possibly, the Pentagon has fallen out of love with wonk-warrior COIN fetish for the umpteenth time, and has returned to the reassuring “massive use of conventional forces in pursuit of explicit US goals” Powell Doctrine. Anyway, plenty of grist for the mill.

My interest, naturally, was attracted to Hersh’s description of a “Uyghur rat-line” organized by Turkey to funnel militants from the PRC’s Xinjiang Autonomous Region into Syria:

The analyst, whose views are routinely sought by senior government officials, told me that ‘Erdoğan has been bringing Uyghurs into Syria by special transport while his government has been agitating in favor of their struggle in China. Uyghur and Burmese Muslim terrorists who escape into Thailand somehow get Turkish passports and are then flown to Turkey for transit into Syria.’ He added that there was also what amounted to another ‘rat line’ that was funnelling Uyghurs – estimates range from a few hundred to many thousands over the years – from China into Kazakhstan for eventual relay to Turkey, and then to IS territory in Syria.

Hersh also quoted Syria’s ambassador to the PRC:

‘China is concerned that the Turkish role of supporting the Uyghur fighters in Syria may be extended in the future to support Turkey’s agenda in Xinjiang. We are already providing the Chinese intelligence service with information regarding these terrorists and the routes they crossed from on travelling into Syria.’

Hersh also consulted analyst Christina Lin (who quotes me! In her pieces) on the Uyghur issue.

So the Uyghur angle in the LRB article leans on “the analyst”, a source Hersh has relied on since 9/11 and whose conspicuous single-sourciness has been a constant complaint of critics seeking to impugn Hersh’s reporting; a Syrian official perhaps happy to add to Erdogan’s woes by hanging the Uyghur issue around his neck; and an analyst dealing to a certain extent in open source information.

Therefore, I paid attention to a statement Hersh made during an interview with Democracy Now!, describing a study by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2013:

The third major finding [in the study] was about Turkey. It said we simply have to deal with the problem. The Turkish government, led by Erdogan, was—had opened—basically, his borders were open, arms were flying. I had written about that earlier for the London Review, the rat line. There were arms flying since 2012, covertly, with the CIA’s support and the support of the American government. Arms were coming from Tripoli and other places in Benghazi, in Libya, going into Turkey and then being moved across the line. And another interesting point is that a lot of Chinese dissidents, the Uyghurs, the Muslim Chinese that are being pretty much hounded by the Chinese, were also—another rat line existed. They were coming from China into Kazakhstan, into Turkey and into Syria. So, this was a serious finding.

Unless Hersh is carelessly interpolating a non-sequitur about the Uyghurs in his remarks, it looks like his source told him there was a JCS/DIA finding, based on classified sigint/humint, about Erdogan playing footsie with Uyghur militants.

This is something I am inclined to believe, given the public record concerning the Turkey-Uyghur special relationship, and also the bizarre role of illicit Turkish passports in the travel of Uyghur refugees from Xinjiang, through Southeast Asia, and to their publicly acknowledged safe haven in Turkey. I’vewritten about the Turkey/Uyghur issue several times in 2015 including my July piece Uyghurs Move Edge Closer to Center of Turkish Diplomacy, Politics, and Geostrategic Calculation .


French journalist Ursula Gauthier

The other Uyghur related furor in the news concerns Ursula Gauthier, the Beijing correspondent forL’Obs. China said on Dec. 25 that it’s expelling Gauthier because of an article she wrote pouring scorn on the PRC’s attempts to invoke a massacre of ethnic-Han security personnel and miners, apparently by Uyghurs, at Baicheng in Xinjiang, to claim “war on terror” parity with the Nov. 13 Paris attack. Authorities have refused to renew her visa and she must leave China by Dec. 31.

Details of the Baicheng case don’t quite support Gauthier’s indignation:

The attack occurred on Sept. 18, when a group of knife-wielding suspects set upon security guards at the gate of the Sogan Colliery in Aksu (in Chinese, Akesu) prefecture’s Bay (Baicheng) county, before targeting the mine owner’s residence and a dormitory for workers.

When police officers arrived at the mine in Terek township to control the situation, the attackers rammed their vehicles using trucks loaded down with coal, sources said.

…

Ekber Hashim, a police officer who inspected the mine’s dormitory following the incident, told RFA that “nearly all the workers who were not on shift at the time were killed or injured.”

“Some workers were sleeping while others were preparing to work when the attackers raided the building after killing the security guards,” he said.

…

Terek township deputy police chief Kurbanjan and his assistant “survived the incident by throwing themselves into the river next to the colliery.”

“They went [to the mine] as part of a second team after five police officers, including police chief Wu Feng, were killed,” said the officer, who also declined to provide his name.

“The second team had no idea everyone in the first team had been killed when they left the station. They turned their motorcycles around and fled when they saw the dead and injured, but the attackers pursued them in trucks and they were forced to drive the bikes into the river to escape.”

…

Another officer from Bulung named Tursun Hezim said police had received a notice from higher level authorities warning them to keep a lookout for a group of people wearing “camouflage”—a tactic allegedly employed by suspects in other recent attacks in the Uyghur region.

“Based on this guidance, I assume the suspects attacked while wearing uniforms, which allowed them to catch the guards at the colliery and police on the road when they were unaware and successfully make their escape,” he said.

One can’t believe everything one hears in the paper or on RFA, but the Baicheng attack, though executed with primitive implements, does not appear to have been the “Hulk Smash!” explosion of righteous rage by innocent Uyghurs driven to vent their grievances against their oppressors. It was a careful, pre-meditated attack that involved gulling mine security with the use of fake uniforms, murdering dozens of peasant miners, then setting an ambush for two sets of cops as they rushed to the scene.

Understandably, the PRC was keen to label this outrage terrorism. The Western media, apparently led by Gauthier, not so much.

Beleaguered journalists in the PRC may not appreciate my opinion, but I considered Gauthier’s framing quite wrong-headed. Baicheng and Paris are, in my view, strikingly similar in ways that Gauthier appeared unable to appreciate, as blowback against ham-fisted government policies, as I wrote here.

Fact is, the Baicheng outrage appears to come uncomfortably close to a very particular kind of “terrorism-that-we-don’t-want-to-call-terrorism”: political violence committed as part of a decolonization/national liberation struggle.

There is a sizable list of ethnic groups getting brutalized by central government cum occupying forces: Palestinians, Chechens, Kashmiris, Uyghurs…to name a few. Resistance by local ethnic/national/religious movements may involve acts of violence intended to bring attention to the cause, demoralize the occupiers, chip away at the resolve of the central government and, in a rather less savory aspect, elicit a violent crackdown that will escalate and spread the violence so local unrest is transformed into a pervasive security and political crisis.

The history of efforts to define “terrorism” is darkly amusing but a consistent theme has been attempts to carve out exemptions for national liberation struggles, not just to soothe the consciences of conflicted liberals, but also to protect overseas supporters from legal sanction.

But openly claiming “national liberation struggle” classification for Uyghurs violence (instead of “localized inchoate fury”) would involve acknowledging that some sort of movement with separatist aims exists and poses a security threat to the PRC and its rule in Xinjiang. This would buttress PRC state propaganda, contribute to the idea that there is something to all the ETIM talk, highlight the existence of Uyghur militants embedded in Islamist groups in Afghanistan and western Pakistan, and direct more professional interest to the efforts of Turkey to exploit refugee Uyghurs as a paramilitary resource in Syria—as described in Hersh’s article– and potentially across Central Asia and into Xinjiang.


Uyghur protest in Xinjiang

And it would involve Western media outlets giving up on the “PRC is just making up ‘terrorism’/we can’t credence these reports until our reporters can investigate freely” dodge, which is exemplified by a recurring phrase in RFA reporting on Uyghur-related violence that slides along the explaining/excusing/condoning spectrum in reminding the reader that the Uyghurs of Xinjiang suffer under continual, grinding repression:

“…experts outside China say Beijing has exaggerated the threat from Uyghur “separatists” and that domestic policies are responsible for an upsurge in violence that has left hundreds dead since 2012.”

It would also make life awkward for the World Uyghur Congress and the Uyghur American Association which have carefully positioned themselves as “not separatists” in order to obtain a platform in the West as the voices of peaceful civil society and human rights aspirations of the Uyghur people, for which they received grants of $275,000 and $295,000, respectively from the National Endowment for Democracy in 2014 (the NED classifies this area of activity as “Xinjiang/East Turkistan” which is, given the supposed non-existence of the “East Turkistan Independence Movement”, somewhat interesting).

Fact is, the PRC is not interested in creating a Palestine-type situation in Xinjiang, with a non-violent/democracy inclined opposition attracting sympathy and some diplomatic and material support from the West. That’s probably why Ilham Tothi, who had aspirations to serve as a secular/democratic voice of Uyghurs within the autonomous region, is in jail. The PRC, relying on its military and economic power and, most importantly, the demographic advantage it gains from submerging Uyghurs under a tide of Han immigration (something the Baicheng attack was perhaps meant to discourage), is probably willing to polarize the situation in Xinjiang through oppressive policies and deal with whatever militancy its brutality throws up. In my opinion, the CCP sees Chechnya as the worst-case template/resolution: a national liberation struggle co-opted and discredited by an influx of Islamist-tinged terrorists who are, in turn, destroyed by the state in a brutal, prolonged war, shattering the secular/moderate independence movement in the process.

I expect this scenario will drive PRC diplomacy and security policy throughout Central and South Asia in the foreseeable future; and the politically-inflected debate over the existence of “terrorism” in the western reaches of the PRC will be remembered with bitter nostalgia.

Peter Lee runs the China Matters blog. He writes on the intersection of US policy with Asian and world affairs.

Source
Hersh, Gauthier, and the coming of terror in Xinjiang – Asia Times

 

[TaiShang]

I love how America keeps reinforcing the fact that they are the enemies of all 1.3 billion Chinese people.

I like that, too. This forces people to remain historical and politically conscious. I do not like the moments when they commit cheap stunts either by the regime itself or the regime's good men, like that FB founder's cutish speech in Chinese.

Especially young people of China must be reminded of the historical fact that what the US (-led) government(s) wants for China is no less than what they brought to the peoples of Libya, Syria and Iraq.

Hence, this sort of misplaced steps on part of the Western media provides the required empirical data to verify the real nature of the US-led West (regimes, not necessarily peoples).

Find this evil witch, at a minimum deport her, maximum punishment is to give life in prison or execute her for supporting terrorist activities inside China.

Make an example out of one and everyone will get in line.

It is official. She will leave the country by the end of this year and her visa will never be renewed. She will never set foot on the Mainland China a second time in her life.

In 1990, the world's biggest Internet market was the US. Today, the biggest Internet market is China.

Google withdrew from China a few years ago when it didn't want to comply with China's regulations. I sense that it is now trying very hard to crawl back into China. No company can ignore the Chinese market if they want to be the number one.

Yet they have no chance under the sun to be successful. Thanks to their own misplaced business conduct, they provided the room for development to China's own national champions. Now the playing field is leveled and they will face stiff competition should they ever try to do so.

IMHO, it is both shallowness and stupidity. News coming out from any major economy/country is important. Now, she is out and can never get back into China. Isn't that stupid?

Some people never learn, or, perhaps, she was used as a suicide troll by the newspaper/magazine to create trouble for China. Maybe she got personally emotional and carried away. At the end of the day, she is to be kicked out of China.

Update that french terror sympathizer will be expelled from China soon. Wish the government would take the same action Russia did with Chechen sympathizers who had short life expectancy. Next stop for all Western and Chinese terrorist sympathizers in China should be Raqqa, Syria.

LOL, my friend, very well said. ISIS is now surrounded by two fronts, the remaining is the one via Jarablus to Turkey. Once the Kurdish fighters (and the alliance led by them） takes control of the city, the entire ISIS gang will be sitting in Raqqa to be fried by Russian bombers.

At the moment, Russia is more busy with cleaning off the militia supported largely by Turkey. This is significant because most of the Uighur elements are resent inside these Turkey-affiliated groups. The more of them being killed, the better for China.