I Grew Up in Communist China, Here’s My Warning to America

Commentary by Diana Zhang. November 24, 2020 Updated: November 25, 2020

This year’s election had a historically high turnout.

Recently, many Americans haven’t cared so much about elections, thinking there ultimately wasn’t much difference between Republicans and Democrats, or between specific candidates.

However, with the approach of the 2020 election, many people became alarmed. They realized how far our country had strayed from its foundations. If we don’t take ownership now, they thought, it will be beyond repair.

The whole world is watching this election closely. Some Chinese have commented: “We thought China was going to become America. Instead, America is becoming China!”

It is so true. At this point, there are a lot of things we cannot say in America. Political correctness is not a matter of choice; it is a survival skill. If you say one word wrong, you can lose your job. If you don’t follow the mainstream narrative, you will get attacked by the mainstream media. It has reached such an extent that we should ask, do we still have freedom of speech?

This reminds me of China. Fifty years ago in communist China, if you made casual comments about the communists, you would end up in jail or a labor camp.

Someone who was at home and made one comment not in line with the CCP would be punished. A son would report on his father, a daughter on her mother, and a husband and wife on each other. Fear of the Communist Party, and indoctrination by it, had become a second human nature, pushing out natural feelings.

I immigrated to America more than 30 years ago. I always tell people, “America is the least discriminatory country in the whole world.” Yet we hear “discrimination” and “racism” daily in news reports. “Discrimination” and “racism” have become political weapons. They are no longer a matter of moral principle.

With so many protests and riots being organized in the name of fighting racism, the issue of race is now purposefully used to divide our society. In communist countries such as China and the former Soviet Union, the communists created division based on social class.

Communists always talk about class struggle. They claim that any inequality of wealth is because the wealthy exploit the working class. Communists use the working class to take down the middle and upper classes, until the country’s whole economy is destroyed.

By turning one group against another, they cause chaos in society and open the door for seizing power. Ruling with communism is always the real goal.

Just as the communists have never been for the working classes, here in America, their real concern is not racism or discrimination. By fostering division among the races, they create an opportunity to seize power. Again, communism is the goal.

America has been a beacon of freedom for the world. My friends in China used to hide under their bed covers to listen to Voice of America. Listening to VOA was a crime that could land you in jail. People living under communist regimes used to take great risks to listen to a voice from America.

And America has been the envy of the world. I have traveled to around 20 countries, and everywhere I hear people talking about immigrating to America.

To people in Europe, America means more opportunity. To people in other areas, America is a place to have a better life. Even those who look down on America are jealous of America, and those who fight with America want to come to America. They know America respects individual rights. America has always been the home of freedom lovers.

But America has changed. Today, VOA is no longer a radio station the Chinese think is worth risking their safety to listen to. America has become more and more like the socialist country they are trying to flee.

America is still wealthy, still has some freedom in lifestyle and the economy, and still is an open society compared to many other countries. However, we have long been on a slow, steady track heading for the same communist society that I once knew.

This is why so many came out to vote. This is why they are fighting voter fraud. It is now or never. This train is heading for a cliff. If we don’t stop it now, it will be too late.

Diana Zhang, Ph.D., is a staff writer with 20 years’ experience in the study of China. Based in the United States, she uses a pen name to protect her family members in China.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hammer and Scorecard vote sabotage software

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What the Covid Vaccine Hype Fails to Mention

2 hours ago Gilbert Berdine, MD

Pfizer recently announced that its covid vaccine was more than 90 percent “effective” at preventing covid-19. Shortly after this announcement, Moderna announced that its covid vaccine was 94.5 percent “effective” at preventing covid-19. Unlike the flu vaccine, which is one shot, both covid vaccines require two shots given three to four weeks apart. Hidden toward the end of both announcements, were the definitions of “effective.”

Both trials have a treatment group that received the vaccine and a control group that did not. All the trial subjects were covid negative prior to the start of the trial. The analysis for both trials was performed when a target number of “cases” were reached. “Cases” were defined by positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. There was no information about the cycle number for the PCR tests. There was no information about whether the “cases” had symptoms or not. There was no information about hospitalizations or deaths. The Pfizer study had 43,538 participants and was analyzed after 164 cases. So, roughly 150 out 21,750 participants (less than 0.7 percent) became PCR positive in the control group and about one-tenth that number in the vaccine group became PCR positive. The Moderna trial had 30,000 participants. There were 95 “cases” in the 15,000 control participants (about 0.6 percent) and 5 “cases” in the 15,000 vaccine participants (about one-twentieth of 0.6 percent). The “efficacy” figures quoted in these announcements are odds ratios.

There is no evidence, yet, that the vaccine prevented any hospitalizations or any deaths. The Moderna announcement claimed that eleven cases in the control group were “severe” disease, but “severe” was not defined. If there were any hospitalizations or deaths in either group, the public has not been told. When the risks of an event are small, odds ratios can be misleading about absolute risk. A more meaningful measure of efficacy would be the number to vaccinate to prevent one hospitalization or one death. Those numbers are not available. An estimate of the number to treat from the Moderna trial to prevent a single “case” would be fifteen thousand vaccinations to prevent ninety “cases” or 167 vaccinations per “case” prevented which does not sound nearly as good as 94.5 percent effective. The publicists working for pharmaceutical companies are very smart people. If there were a reduction in mortality from these vaccines, that information would be in the first paragraph of the announcement.

There is no information about how long any protective benefit from the vaccine would persist. Antibody response following covid-19 appears to be short lived. Based on what we know, the covid vaccine may require two shots every three to six months to be protective. The more shots required, the greater the risk of side effects from sensitization to the vaccine.

There is no information about safety. None. Government agencies like the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) appear to have two completely different standards for attributing deaths to covid-19 and attributing side effects to covid vaccines. If these vaccines are approved, as they likely will be, the first group to be vaccinated will be the beta testers. I am employed by a university-based medical center that is a referral center for the West Texas region. My colleagues include resident physicians and faculty physicians who work with covid patients on a daily basis. I have asked a number of my colleagues whether they will be first in line for the new vaccine. I have yet to hear any of my colleagues respond affirmatively. The reasons for hesitancy are that the uncertainties about safety exceed what they perceive to be a small benefit. In other words, my colleagues would prefer to take their chances with covid rather than beta test the vaccine. Many of my colleagues want to see the safety data after a year of use before getting vaccinated; these colleagues are concerned about possible autoimmune side effects that may not appear for months after vaccination.

These announcements by Pfizer and Moderna are encouraging. I certainly hope that these vaccines protect people from the harm of covid-19. I certainly hope that these vaccines are safe. If both of these conditions are true, nobody will need to be coerced into taking the vaccine. However, you should pay even more attention about what is left out of an announcement than about what is stated. The pharmaceutical companies are more than happy for patients to misunderstand what is meant by efficacy. Caveat emptor (buyer beware)! Author:

Gilbert Berdine, MD

Gilbert Berdine is an associate professor of medicine at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center and an affiliate of the Free Market Institute at Texas Tech University.

https://mises.org/wire/what-covid-vaccine-hype-fails-mention

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

47 years

“For 47 years, Joe Biden took the donations of blue collar workers,‬

‪gave them hugs — & maybe even kisses —‬

‪and told them he felt their pain…and then he flew back to Washington to ship our jobs to China.”‬

‪-@realDonaldTrump ‬
#RNC2020

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Dear friends and family: be prepared

Image | Posted on by | 2 Comments

How to fix justice

About one hour video lecture by appellate attorney Sidney Powell

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Wait for it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Exactly and well said statement of condition.

100% agreed

https://parler.com/post/bd1314e764a041349c84d3eddc4b035b

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

FBI Buried Hunter Biden Laptop

Lee Smith November 24, 2020 Updated: November 24, 2020

Commentary

News reports last month claimed that in late 2019 the FBI had opened an investigation of matters related to information found on a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden. Would the bureau continue its probe under a Biden administration? Doubtful. In fact, it’s unlikely there was ever any investigation at all.

In July 2019, after Hunter Biden failed to reclaim his laptop from a computer repair shop in Delaware, the shop owner and his father grew concerned about information they found on the device and reached out to the FBI’s Albuquerque field office. They were turned away. In mid-October the bureau contacted the shop owner and two months later, an Assistant U.S. Attorney from Delaware issued a grand jury subpoena to retrieve it.

Last month, word circulated through Washington that FBI Deputy Director David Bowdich told Trump administration officials about its Hunter Biden investigation. Anonymous Department of Justice officials confirmed its existence to reporters. As further evidence of a serious probe, conservative media pointed to the fact that former Biden family business associate Tony Bobulinski was interviewed in late October by six FBI agents.

So doesn’t all that mean it’s a real investigation? It’s worth remembering that in June, 15 FBI agents were sent to Alabama to investigate whether a knot tied like a noose in NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace’s garage was evidence of a race crime. It wasn’t. One agent with a smartphone would have quickly discerned the truth—that the knot had been there for more than a year—but because race is a third rail in American politics and culture, the FBI was determined to prove they were on the job. The investigation was performative, designed to show that the FBI was taking the matter seriously, even though it wasn’t.

The FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server was also performative. There was never any chance the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate was going to be charged with mishandling classified information—not least because scores of other Obama officials, including the president himself, had communicated with her on what they knew was an unsecure server.

During his three-year tenure, FBI Director Christopher Wray has allegedly made a habit of covering up for Obama administration officials. He kept documents from Rep. Devin Nunes’s (R-Calif.) probe of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Wray also allegedly withheld records from Michael Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell that showed how Obama’s bureau had framed her client, including the notes of an FBI agent documenting Joe Biden’s involvement. It’s improbable that Wray would greenlight an investigation of the former vice president’s son.

The Hunter Biden case appears to fall into the performative category. After the New York Post published damning excerpts from correspondence found on the laptop, the bureau needed to show it was in hot pursuit. But it wasn’t. Otherwise, the FBI would have interviewed Bobulinski, whose name is on correspondence found on the laptop, long before last month’s kabuki show.

So, if there was no real investigation, why did the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware, a state dominated by Joe Biden for nearly half a century, issue a grand jury subpoena for the laptop? As grand jury material, it could be kept under wraps.

The FBI and other agencies have known about Hunter Biden’s relationships with allegedly corrupt foreign entities for quite some time. In 2015, State Department officials warned then Vice President Biden about Hunter taking a seat on the board of a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma, which was under various corruption investigations. Nonetheless, Hunter continued to draw a monthly salary of more than $50,000 from a company whose owner was on Ukraine’s most-wanted list. In January 2016, Obama officials, including a Biden aide, reportedly met with Ukrainian prosecutors and told them to drop their Burisma investigation and allow the FBI to take it over.

If the FBI had really been investigating the Burisma case, Trump wouldn’t have had to ask the Ukrainian president for help investigating potential Biden family corruption in Ukraine because the bureau would have found it. But because the FBI wasn’t investigating the risk to U.S. national security that Hunter Biden’s work for an allegedly corrupt foreign enterprise entailed, House Democrats impeached the president to protect the Bidens. What was the FBI doing instead of its job? When the impeachment process began, the bureau came back around and asked the Delaware computer repair shop owner about the Biden laptop, and when the House was formulating articles of impeachment, it hid the device.

It’s not hard to see why so many want to believe the FBI is really investigating Hunter Biden. It would come as evidence that after the scandals of the last four years in which the FBI played a lead role, U.S. law enforcement authorities are once again enforcing our laws without prejudice or favor.

Instead, the evidence shows that the FBI is one of many institutions that no longer belong to the American public. Rather, its job is to protect and advance the privileges and interests of an increasingly powerful class of elites who draw their wealth and prestige from their relationships with corrupt foreign entities. And that’s why it appears the FBI didn’t investigate Hunter Biden’s laptop, but buried it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

American grotesques

This was sent to me by my Russian friend Yuri in Gloucester.  Observations of America from a Russian, translated from the Russian language.

You probably recall that Romney, Kerry, Kissinger, Obama, etc and a myriad of Dems and RINOs claim that America’s reputation in the world has suffered under President Trump.  This tells a different story.

American grotesques

Boris Gulko

USA is a country of grotesques. The rains here easily turn into hurricanes, washing away the whole cities, strong winds – in tornadoes, blowing away villages. Fertilized by a powerful landing of emigrants from Europe during the period of WWII America in the second half of the 20th century gave mighty shoots in many fields of science and culture. Writers like Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Steinbeck, Updike, a succession of Jewish American writers – Salinger, Bashevis Singer, Bellow, Malamed, Azimov, Roth, Wouk have become a phenomenon of world culture. The world listened and danced all sorts of rock and rolls and twists, like America did, everyone watched American movies. The American democracy with its Constitution, freedom of speech and press has become the rule of law model of political life.

In the period after 2008, with the arrival of Obama in the White House, in a short period of time, American culture has disappeared, vanished into a thin air. Americanism – Jewish-Christian ideology and traditional morality — were replaced by the ideology of neo-Marxism and morality of postmodernism. In recent years, the realities of totalitarianism from 20th century appeared, such as: from the Chinese Cultural Revolution – kneeling as a sign of humiliation, intensified by the washing feet of the new hegemons by despicable white-skinned people; from the Third Reich – racial theories – in the United States they are called “critical race theory”, as well as the doctrine of the sin of “white privilege”. The terror of the storm troops of the Nazis reflected in the United States pogroms of gangs BLM and Antifa. The local “Kristallnacht” broke out after death in hospital from a drug overdose of the black giant Floyd – a repeat offender and drug addict detained by the police for counterfeiting. Smashed and burned, however, were not only the businesses of Jews, as in Germany, but everything that represents traditional America. Later, at one of the universities, they installed as a sign of culture change, the “George Floyd Fellowship”. I wonder which of the hero’s deeds one needs to repeat to deserve it?

The theme of “Kristallnacht” arose recently in the transformation of the American media, according to Lenin’s recipe, from a provider of information to a “collective propagandist”.

CNN’s most prominent journalist, Christiane Amanpour, once single-handedly won Bosnian Serb War – her reports from that war, full of sympathy for Muslims, were, though deceitful, highly effective, and prompted President Clinton to bomb Serbian militia. Now, on the anniversary of the terror of Kristallnacht, Amanpour likened the Trump presidency to the crime of “Kristallnacht”. Two Israeli ministries: foreign affairs and diaspora relations, protested CNN for such an outrage over the memory of the victims of the Holocaust.

Finally, from the repressive practices of the USSR, America has appropriated a “culture of canceling” according to which people who have not accepted the new dominant ideology are “canceled”.

Those on the blacklist are excluded from professional and social life.

This also applies to cultural and public figures who worked in the past, even a hundred or more years ago. The graphic image of the “canceling” of people in the United States – the destruction of their monuments.

Recently on the list of people to be “canceled”, was the English-speaking world-renowned writer: the creator of the Harry Potter epic Joan Rowling. She objected to the elimination of gender: “When you open doors bathrooms and changing rooms for any man who believes or feels that he is a woman … then you open doors in general for all men who want to enter”. In addition, Rowling noted that replacing the word “woman” with disgusting label “Menstruating person” is humiliating for many. Rowling acquired a mysterious label “trans- exclusionary radical feminist.”

These and other examples of the new culture look wild and, it seems, should soon disappear. But this culture was adopted as a compulsory by US educational system from cradle to academy, and anyone in the education system or in the corporate world who rejects it is subject to “cancellation” and is thrown out of a meaningful life.

Most of the youth indoctrinated in American education, absorbed this culture of dying American culture.

Harvard professor Ruth Weiss noted years ago that a health indicator of a democratic nation is its attitude towards Jews. The rise of anti-Semitism in America testifies to the corruption and decay that overtook its social institutions and values. Colleges and US universities, their Democratic Party is hostile to Israel. Not easy for a pro-Israel student to stay on a university campus. The more popular targets of aggression by BLM and Antifa are synagogues and Jewish businesses.

At the beginning of the essay, I hesitated, admitting that not everything dies. Of course, anti-Semitism is eternal, but this is because Jews are eternal. Leaving the dying Russian Empire, in the land of Israel they have implemented the Zionist project; they escaped from the decaying USSR and contributed to the flourishing of Israel. That’s why now American Jews who want to save their children from the indoctrination of the American educational system, have an opportunity to join their forever young people with their eternal values in a reborn Israel.

                                                                   Translated by Alla Axelrod 11/22/20

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment